text:
byDavid NirFollowforDaily Kos Elections
As we've perused last week's election returns, we'd noticed a number of races where Libertarian candidates appear to have played spoiler for Republicans—certainly, more than we're accustomed to. While we haven't run a comparison with prior cycles, we've identified no fewer than nine contests in 2012 where the Libertarian received more votes than the difference between the Democratic and Republican candidates. What's more, none of these involved the typical 1 or maybe 2 percent you ordinarily expect a Lib to garner: Looking at the three-way vote, all but one were over 3 percent, and three took 6 percent or more, with a high of 6.5 percent in the Montana Senate race. These definitely seem like unusually high figures.
So what's going on here? I wouldn't want to speculate too much based on this limited data set. But I could easily believe that a growing proportion of conservative-leaning voters are too disgusted with the GOP to pull the Republican lever, but who won't vote for Democrats either, are choosing a third option and going Libertarian instead. This thesis dovetails with something else we saw this year: independents generally leaning more rightward simply because at least some former Republicans are now refusing to identify with their old party. It's not much of a stretch to imagine that some folks like that don't want to vote for their old party either.
The chart above summarizes our findings, based on preliminary data from the AP, with a big hat-tip to my colleague Jed Lewison. (Note that MI-11 refers to the unexpired term for ex-Rep. Thad McCotter's seat, not the full-two year term that starts in January.) It's too facile to say that without the Lib, every Democrat would have lost. But some very likely would have, so it's reasonable to conclude that the Libertarian Party gifted quite a few seats to Team Blue this year. Thanks, friends!
2:51 PM PT: Incidentally, here's a list of other races where a third party also played a possible role in the opposite direction. The party or parties taking more votes than the difference between the first- and second-place finishers are listed after each race. First up, Republican wins:
AZ-Sen: LibertarianNV-Sen: "None of the above" and Independent American PartyIN-Gov: LibertarianCO-06: Libertarian and an independentIL-13: An independentIN-02: LibertarianMI-01: Libertarian and Green
MI-11: U.S. Taxpayers (in addition to Libertarian in chart above)NY-24: Green
How Much Did I Accomplish?
In many ways, according to conventional wisdom, my off-and-on career in Congress, from 1976 to 2012, accomplished very little. No named legislation, no named federal buildings or highways – thank goodness. In spite of my efforts, the government has grown exponentially, taxes remain excessive, and the prolific increase of incomprehensible regulations continues. Wars are constant and pursued without Congressional declaration, deficits rise to the sky, poverty is rampant and dependency on the federal government is now worse than any time in our history.
All this with minimal concerns for the deficits and unfunded liabilities that common sense tells us cannot go on much longer. A grand, but never mentioned, bipartisan agreement allows for the well-kept secret that keeps the spending going. One side doesn't give up one penny on military spending, the other side doesn't give up one penny on welfare spending, while both sides support the bailouts and subsidies for the banking and corporate elite. And the spending continues as the economy weakens and the downward spiral continues. As the government continues fiddling around, our liberties and our wealth burn in the flames of a foreign policy that makes us less safe.
The major stumbling block to real change in Washington is the total resistance to admitting that the country is broke. This has made compromising, just to agree to increase spending, inevitable since neither side has any intention of cutting spending.
The country and the Congress will remain divisive since there's no "loot left to divvy up."
Without this recognition the spenders in Washington will continue the march toward a fiscal cliff much bigger than the one anticipated this coming January.
I have thought a lot about why those of us who believe in liberty, as a solution, have done so poorly in convincing others of its benefits. If liberty is what we claim it is- the principle that protects all personal, social and economic decisions necessary for maximum prosperity and the best chance for peace- it should be an easy sell. Yet, history has shown that the masses have been quite receptive to the promises of authoritarians which are rarely if ever fulfilled.
Authoritarianism vs. Liberty
If authoritarianism leads to poverty and war and less freedom for all individuals and is controlled by rich special interests, the people should be begging for liberty. There certainly was a strong enough sentiment for more freedom at the time of our founding that motivated those who were willing to fight in the revolution against the powerful British government.
During my time in Congress the appetite for liberty has been quite weak; the understanding of its significance negligible. Yet the good news is that compared to 1976 when I first came to Congress, the desire for more freedom and less government in 2012 is much greater and growing, especially in grassroots America. Tens of thousands of teenagers and college age students are, with great enthusiasm, welcoming the message of liberty.
I have a few thoughts as to why the people of a country like ours, once the freest and most prosperous, allowed the conditions to deteriorate to the degree that they have.
Freedom, private property, and enforceable voluntary contracts, generate wealth. In our early history we were very much aware of this. But in the early part of the 20th century our politicians promoted the notion that the tax and monetary systems had to change if we were to involve ourselves in excessive domestic and military spending. That is why Congress gave us the Federal Reserve and the income tax. The majority of Americans and many government officials agreed that sacrificing some liberty was necessary to carry out what some claimed to be "progressive" ideas. Pure democracy became acceptable.
They failed to recognized that what they were doing was exactly opposite of what the colonists were seeking when they broke away from the British.
Some complain that my arguments makes no sense, since great wealth and the standard of living improved for many Americans over the last 100 years, even with these new policies.
But the damage to the market economy, and the currency, has been insidious and steady. It took a long time to consume our wealth, destroy the currency and undermine productivity and get our financial obligations to a point of no return. Confidence sometimes lasts longer than deserved. Most of our wealth today depends on debt.
The wealth that we enjoyed and seemed to be endless, allowed concern for the principle of a free society to be neglected. As long as most people believed the material abundance would last forever, worrying about protecting a competitive productive economy and individual liberty seemed unnecessary.
The Age of Redistribution
This neglect ushered in an age of redistribution of wealth by government kowtowing to any and all special interests, except for those who just wanted to left alone. That is why today money in politics far surpasses money currently going into research and development and productive entrepreneurial efforts.
The material benefits became more important than the understanding and promoting the principles of liberty and a free market. It is good that material abundance is a result of liberty but if materialism is all that we care about, problems are guaranteed.
The crisis arrived because the illusion that wealth and prosperity would last forever has ended. Since it was based on debt and a pretense that debt can be papered over by an out-of-control fiat monetary system, it was doomed to fail. We have ended up with a system that doesn't produce enough even to finance the debt and no fundamental understanding of why a free society is crucial to reversing these trends.
If this is not recognized, the recovery will linger for a long time. Bigger government, more spending, more debt, more poverty for the middle class, and a more intense scramble by the elite special interests will continue.
We Need an Intellectual Awakening
Without an intellectual awakening, the turning point will be driven by economic law. A dollar crisis will bring the current out-of-control system to its knees.
If it's not accepted that big government, fiat money, ignoring liberty, central economic planning, welfarism, and warfarism caused our crisis we can expect a continuous and dangerous march toward corporatism and even fascism with even more loss of our liberties. Prosperity for a large middle class though will become an abstract dream.
This continuous move is no different than what we have seen in how our financial crisis of 2008 was handled. Congress first directed, with bipartisan support, bailouts for the wealthy. Then it was the Federal Reserve with its endless quantitative easing. If at first it doesn't succeed try again; QE1, QE2, and QE3 and with no results we try QE indefinitely – that is until it too fails. There's a cost to all of this and let me assure you delaying the payment is no longer an option. The rules of the market will extract its pound of flesh and it won't be pretty.
The current crisis elicits a lot of pessimism. And the pessimism adds to less confidence in the future. The two feed on themselves, making our situation worse.
If the underlying cause of the crisis is not understood we cannot solve our problems. The issues of warfare, welfare, deficits, inflationism, corporatism, bailouts and authoritarianism cannot be ignored. By only expanding these policies we cannot expect good results.
Everyone claims support for freedom. But too often it's for one's own freedom and not for others. Too many believe that there must be limits on freedom. They argue that freedom must be directed and managed to achieve fairness and equality thus making it acceptable to curtail, through force, certain liberties.
Some decide what and whose freedoms are to be limited. These are the politicians whose goal in life is power. Their success depends on gaining support from special interests.
No More 'isms'
The great news is the answer is not to be found in more "isms." The answers are to be found in more liberty which cost so much less. Under these circumstances spending goes down, wealth production goes up, and the quality of life improves.
Just this recognition – especially if we move in this direction – increases optimism which in itself is beneficial. The follow through with sound policies are required which must be understood and supported by the people.
But there is good evidence that the generation coming of age at the present time is supportive of moving in the direction of more liberty and self-reliance. The more this change in direction and the solutions become known, the quicker will be the return of optimism.
Our job, for those of us who believe that a different system than the one that we have had for the last 100 years, has driven us to this unsustainable crisis, is to be more convincing that there is a wonderful, uncomplicated, and moral system that provides the answers. We had a taste of it in our early history. We need not give up on the notion of advancing this cause.
It worked, but we allowed our leaders to concentrate on the material abundance that freedom generates, while ignoring freedom itself. Now we have neither, but the door is open, out of necessity, for an answer. The answer available is based on the Constitution, individual liberty and prohibiting the use of government force to provide privileges and benefits to all special interests.
After over 100 years we face a society quite different from the one that was intended by the Founders. In many ways their efforts to protect future generations with the Constitution from this danger has failed. Skeptics, at the time the Constitution was written in 1787, warned us of today's possible outcome. The insidious nature of the erosion of our liberties and the reassurance our great abundance gave us, allowed the process to evolve into the dangerous period in which we now live.
Dependency on Government Largesse
Today we face a dependency on government largesse for almost every need. Our liberties are restricted and government operates outside the rule of law, protecting and rewarding those who buy or coerce government into satisfying their demands. Here are a few examples:
Excessive government has created such a mess it prompts many questions:
Trust Yourself, Not the Government
Too many people have for too long placed too much confidence and trust in government and not enough in themselves. Fortunately, many are now becoming aware of the seriousness of the gross mistakes of the past several decades. The blame is shared by both political parties. Many Americans now are demanding to hear the plain truth of things and want the demagoguing to stop. Without this first step, solutions are impossible.
Seeking the truth and finding the answers in liberty and self-reliance promotes the optimism necessary for restoring prosperity. The task is not that difficult if politics doesn't get in the way.
We have allowed ourselves to get into such a mess for various reasons.
Politicians deceive themselves as to how wealth is produced. Excessive confidence is placed in the judgment of politicians and bureaucrats. This replaces the confidence in a free society. Too many in high places of authority became convinced that only they, armed with arbitrary government power, can bring about fairness, while facilitating wealth production. This always proves to be a utopian dream and destroys wealth and liberty. It impoverishes the people and rewards the special interests who end up controlling both political parties.
It's no surprise then that much of what goes on in Washington is driven by aggressive partisanship and power seeking, with philosophic differences being minor.
Economic Ignorance
Economic ignorance is commonplace. Keynesianism continues to thrive, although today it is facing healthy and enthusiastic rebuttals. Believers in military Keynesianism and domestic Keynesianism continue to desperately promote their failed policies, as the economy languishes in a deep slumber.
Supporters of all government edicts use humanitarian arguments to justify them.
Humanitarian arguments are always used to justify government mandates related to the economy, monetary policy, foreign policy, and personal liberty. This is on purpose to make it more difficult to challenge. But, initiating violence for humanitarian reasons is still violence. Good intentions are no excuse and are just as harmful as when people use force with bad intentions. The results are always negative.
The immoral use of force is the source of man's political problems. Sadly, many religious groups, secular organizations, and psychopathic authoritarians endorse government initiated force to change the world. Even when the desired goals are well-intentioned – or especially when well-intentioned – the results are dismal. The good results sought never materialize. The new problems created require even more government force as a solution. The net result is institutionalizing government initiated violence and morally justifying it on humanitarian grounds.
This is the same fundamental reason our government uses force for invading other countries at will, central economic planning at home, and the regulation of personal liberty and habits of our citizens.
It is rather strange, that unless one has a criminal mind and no respect for other people and their property, no one claims it's permissible to go into one's neighbor's house and tell them how to behave, what they can eat, smoke and drink or how to spend their money.
Yet, rarely is it asked why it is morally acceptable that a stranger with a badge and a gun can do the same thing in the name of law and order. Any resistance is met with brute force, fines, taxes, arrests, and even imprisonment. This is done more frequently every day without a proper search warrant.
No Government Monopoly over Initiating Violence
Restraining aggressive behavior is one thing, but legalizing a government monopoly for initiating aggression can only lead to exhausting liberty associated with chaos, anger and the breakdown of civil society. Permitting such authority and expecting saintly behavior from the bureaucrats and the politicians is a pipe dream. We now have a standing army of armed bureaucrats in the TSA, CIA, FBI, Fish and Wildlife, FEMA, IRS, Corp of Engineers, etc. numbering over 100,000. Citizens are guilty until proven innocent in the unconstitutional administrative courts.
Government in a free society should have no authority to meddle in social activities or the economic transactions of individuals. Nor should government meddle in the affairs of other nations. All things peaceful, even when controversial, should be permitted.
We must reject the notion of prior restraint in economic activity just we do in the area of free speech and religious liberty. But even in these areas government is starting to use a backdoor approach of political correctness to regulate speech-a dangerous trend. Since 9/11 monitoring speech on the internet is now a problem since warrants are no longer required.
The Proliferation of Federal Crimes
The Constitution established four federal crimes. Today the experts can't even agree on how many federal crimes are now on the books – they number into the thousands. No one person can comprehend the enormity of the legal system – especially the tax code. Due to the ill-advised drug war and the endless federal expansion of the criminal code we have over 6 million people under correctional suspension, more than the Soviets ever had, and more than any other nation today, including China. I don't understand the complacency of the Congress and the willingness to continue their obsession with passing more Federal laws. Mandatory sentencing laws associated with drug laws have compounded our prison problems.
The federal register is now 75,000 pages long and the tax code has 72,000 pages, and expands every year. When will the people start shouting, "enough is enough," and demand Congress cease and desist.
Achieving Liberty
Liberty can only be achieved when government is denied the aggressive use of force. If one seeks liberty, a precise type of government is needed. To achieve it, more than lip service is required.
Two choices are available.
Once government gets a limited concession for the use of force to mold people habits and plan the economy, it causes a steady move toward tyrannical government. Only a revolutionary spirit can reverse the process and deny to the government this arbitrary use of aggression. There's no in-between. Sacrificing a little liberty for imaginary safety always ends badly.
Today's mess is a result of Americans accepting option #2, even though the Founders attempted to give us Option #1.
The results are not good. As our liberties have been eroded our wealth has been consumed. The wealth we see today is based on debt and a foolish willingness on the part of foreigners to take our dollars for goods and services. They then loan them back to us to perpetuate our debt system. It's amazing that it has worked for this long but the impasse in Washington, in solving our problems indicate that many are starting to understand the seriousness of the world -wide debt crisis and the dangers we face. The longer this process continues the harsher the outcome will be.
The Financial Crisis Is a Moral Crisis
Many are now acknowledging that a financial crisis looms but few understand it's, in reality, a moral crisis. It's the moral crisis that has allowed our liberties to be undermined and permits the exponential growth of illegal government power. Without a clear understanding of the nature of the crisis it will be difficult to prevent a steady march toward tyranny and the poverty that will accompany it.
Ultimately, the people have to decide which form of government they want; option #1 or option #2. There is no other choice. Claiming there is a choice of a "little" tyranny is like describing pregnancy as a "touch of pregnancy." It is a myth to believe that a mixture of free markets and government central economic planning is a worthy compromise. What we see today is a result of that type of thinking. And the results speak for themselves.
A Culture of Violence
America now suffers from a culture of violence. It's easy to reject the initiation of violence against one's neighbor but it's ironic that the people arbitrarily and freely anoint government officials with monopoly power to initiate violence against the American people – practically at will.
Because it's the government that initiates force, most people accept it as being legitimate. Those who exert the force have no sense of guilt. It is believed by too many that governments are morally justified in initiating force supposedly to "do good." They incorrectly believe that this authority has come from the "consent of the people." The minority, or victims of government violence never consented to suffer the abuse of government mandates, even when dictated by the majority. Victims of TSA excesses never consented to this abuse.
This attitude has given us a policy of initiating war to "do good," as well. It is claimed that war, to prevent war for noble purposes, is justified. This is similar to what we were once told that: "destroying a village to save a village" was justified. It was said by a US Secretary of State that the loss of 500,000 Iraqis, mostly children, in the 1990s, as a result of American bombs and sanctions, was "worth it" to achieve the "good" we brought to the Iraqi people. And look at the mess that Iraq is in today.
Government use of force to mold social and economic behavior at home and abroad has justified individuals using force on their own terms. The fact that violence by government is seen as morally justified, is the reason why violence will increase when the big financial crisis hits and becomes a political crisis as well.
First, we recognize that individuals shouldn't initiate violence, then we give the authority to government. Eventually, the immoral use of government violence, when things goes badly, will be used to justify an individual's "right" to do the same thing. Neither the government nor individuals have the moral right to initiate violence against another yet we are moving toward the day when both will claim this authority. If this cycle is not reversed society will break down.
When needs are pressing, conditions deteriorate and rights become relative to the demands and the whims of the majority. It's then not a great leap for individuals to take it upon themselves to use violence to get what they claim is theirs. As the economy deteriorates and the wealth discrepancies increase – as are already occurring – violence increases as those in need take it in their own hands to get what they believe is theirs. They will not wait for a government rescue program.
When government officials wield power over others to bail out the special interests, even with disastrous results to the average citizen, they feel no guilt for the harm they do. Those who take us into undeclared wars with many casualties resulting, never lose sleep over the death and destruction their bad decisions caused. They are convinced that what they do is morally justified, and the fact that many suffer just can't be helped.
When the street criminals do the same thing, they too have no remorse, believing they are only taking what is rightfully theirs. All moral standards become relative. Whether it's bailouts, privileges, government subsidies or benefits for some from inflating a currency, it's all part of a process justified by a philosophy of forced redistribution of wealth. Violence, or a threat of such, is the instrument required and unfortunately is of little concern of most members of Congress.
Some argue it's only a matter of "fairness" that those in need are cared for. There are two problems with this. First, the principle is used to provide a greater amount of benefits to the rich than the poor. Second, no one seems to be concerned about whether or not it's fair to those who end up paying for the benefits. The costs are usually placed on the backs of the middle class and are hidden from the public eye. Too many people believe government handouts are free, like printing money out of thin air, and there is no cost. That deception is coming to an end. The bills are coming due and that's what the economic slowdown is all about.
Sadly, we have become accustomed to living with the illegitimate use of force by government. It is the tool for telling the people how to live, what to eat and drink, what to read and how to spend their money.
To develop a truly free society, the issue of initiating force must be understood and rejected. Granting to government even a small amount of force is a dangerous concession.
Limiting Government Excesses vs. a Virtuous Moral People
Our Constitution, which was intended to limit government power and abuse, has failed. The Founders warned that a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people. The current crisis reflects that their concerns were justified.
Most politicians and pundits are aware of the problems we face but spend all their time in trying to reform government. The sad part is that the suggested reforms almost always lead to less freedom and the importance of a virtuous and moral people is either ignored, or not understood. The new reforms serve only to further undermine liberty. The compounding effect has given us this steady erosion of liberty and the massive expansion of debt. The real question is: if it is liberty we seek, should most of the emphasis be placed on government reform or trying to understand what "a virtuous and moral people" means and how to promote it. The Constitution has not prevented the people from demanding handouts for both rich and poor in their efforts to reform the government, while ignoring the principles of a free society. All branches of our government today are controlled by individuals who use their power to undermine liberty and enhance the welfare/warfare state-and frequently their own wealth and power.
If the people are unhappy with the government performance it must be recognized that government is merely a reflection of an immoral society that rejected a moral government of constitutional limitations of power and love of freedom.
If this is the problem all the tinkering with thousands of pages of new laws and regulations will do nothing to solve the problem.
It is self-evident that our freedoms have been severely limited and the apparent prosperity we still have, is nothing more than leftover wealth from a previous time. This fictitious wealth based on debt and benefits from a false trust in our currency and credit, will play havoc with our society when the bills come due. This means that the full consequence of our lost liberties is yet to be felt.
But that illusion is now ending. Reversing a downward spiral depends on accepting a new approach.
Expect the rapidly expanding homeschooling movement to play a significant role in the revolutionary reforms needed to build a free society with Constitutional protections. We cannot expect a Federal government controlled school system to provide the intellectual ammunition to combat the dangerous growth of government that threatens our liberties.
The internet will provide the alternative to the government/media complex that controls the news and most political propaganda. This is why it's essential that the internet remains free of government regulation.
Many of our religious institutions and secular organizations support greater dependency on the state by supporting war, welfare and corporatism and ignore the need for a virtuous people.
I never believed that the world or our country could be made more free by politicians, if the people had no desire for freedom.
Under the current circumstances the most we can hope to achieve in the political process is to use it as a podium to reach the people to alert them of the nature of the crisis and the importance of their need to assume responsibility for themselves, if it is liberty that they truly seek. Without this, a constitutionally protected free society is impossible.
If this is true, our individual goal in life ought to be for us to seek virtue and excellence and recognize that self-esteem and happiness only comes from using one's natural ability, in the most productive manner possible, according to one's own talents.
Productivity and creativity are the true source of personal satisfaction. Freedom, and not dependency, provides the environment needed to achieve these goals. Government cannot do this for us; it only gets in the way. When the government gets involved, the goal becomes a bailout or a subsidy and these cannot provide a sense of personal achievement.
Achieving legislative power and political influence should not be our goal. Most of the change, if it is to come, will not come from the politicians, but rather from individuals, family, friends, intellectual leaders and our religious institutions. The solution can only come from rejecting the use of coercion, compulsion, government commands, and aggressive force, to mold social and economic behavior. Without accepting these restraints, inevitably the consensus will be to allow the government to mandate economic equality and obedience to the politicians who gain power and promote an environment that smothers the freedoms of everyone. It is then that the responsible individuals who seek excellence and self-esteem by being self-reliance and productive, become the true victims.
What are the greatest dangers that the American people face today and impede the goal of a free society? There are five.
1. The continuous attack on our civil liberties, which threatens the rule of law and our ability to resist the onrush of tyranny.
2. Violent anti-Americanism that has engulfed the world. Because the phenomenon of "blow-back" is not understood or denied, our foreign policy is destined to keep us involved in many wars that we have no business being in. National bankruptcy and a greater threat to our national security will result.
3. The ease in which we go to war, without a declaration by Congress, but accepting international authority from the UN or NATO even for preemptive wars, otherwise known as aggression.
4. A financial political crisis as a consequence of excessive debt, unfunded liabilities, spending, bailouts, and gross discrepancy in wealth distribution going from the middle class to the rich. The danger of central economic planning, by the Federal Reserve must be understood.
5. World government taking over local and US sovereignty by getting involved in the issues of war, welfare, trade, banking, a world currency, taxes, property ownership, and private ownership of guns.
Happily, there is an answer for these very dangerous trends.
What a wonderful world it would be if everyone accepted the simple moral premise of rejecting all acts of aggression. The retort to such a suggestion is always: it's too simplistic, too idealistic, impractical, naïve, utopian, dangerous, and unrealistic to strive for such an ideal.
The answer to that is that for thousands of years the acceptance of government force, to rule over the people, at the sacrifice of liberty, was considered moral and the only available option for achieving peace and prosperity.
What could be more utopian than that myth – considering the results especially looking at the state sponsored killing, by nearly every government during the 20th Century, estimated to be in the hundreds of millions. It's time to reconsider this grant of authority to the state.
No good has ever come from granting monopoly power to the state to use aggression against the people to arbitrarily mold human behavior. Such power, when left unchecked, becomes the seed of an ugly tyranny. This method of governance has been adequately tested, and the results are in: reality dictates we try liberty.
The idealism of non-aggression and rejecting all offensive use of force should be tried. The idealism of government sanctioned violence has been abused throughout history and is the primary source of poverty and war. The theory of a society being based on individual freedom has been around for a long time. It's time to take a bold step and actually permit it by advancing this cause, rather than taking a step backwards as some would like us to do.
Today the principle of habeas corpus, established when King John signed the Magna Carta in 1215, is under attack. There's every reason to believe that a renewed effort with the use of the internet that we can instead advance the cause of liberty by spreading an uncensored message that will serve to rein in government authority and challenge the obsession with war and welfare.
What I'm talking about is a system of government guided by the moral principles of peace and tolerance.
The Founders were convinced that a free society could not exist without a moral people. Just writing rules won't work if the people choose to ignore them. Today the rule of law written in the Constitution has little meaning for most Americans, especially those who work in Washington DC.
Benjamin Franklin claimed "only a virtuous people are capable of freedom." John Adams concurred: "Our Constitution was made for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
A moral people must reject all violence in an effort to mold people's beliefs or habits.
A society that boos or ridicules the Golden Rule is not a moral society. All great religions endorse the Golden Rule. The same moral standards that individuals are required to follow should apply to all government officials. They cannot be exempt.
The ultimate solution is not in the hands of the government.
The solution falls on each and every individual, with guidance from family, friends and community.
The #1 responsibility for each of us is to change ourselves with hope that others will follow. This is of greater importance than working on changing the government; that is secondary to promoting a virtuous society. If we can achieve this, then the government will change.
It doesn't mean that political action or holding office has no value. At times it does nudge policy in the right direction. But what is true is that when seeking office is done for personal aggrandizement, money or power, it becomes useless if not harmful. When political action is taken for the right reasons it's easy to understand why compromise should be avoided. It also becomes clear why progress is best achieved by working with coalitions, which bring people together, without anyone sacrificing his principles.
Political action, to be truly beneficial, must be directed toward changing the hearts and minds of the people, recognizing that it's the virtue and morality of the people that allow liberty to flourish.
The Constitution or more laws per se, have no value if the people's attitudes aren't changed.
To achieve liberty and peace, two powerful human emotions have to be overcome. Number one is "envy" which leads to hate and class warfare. Number two is "intolerance" which leads to bigoted and judgemental policies. These emotions must be replaced with a much better understanding of love, compassion, tolerance and free market economics. Freedom, when understood, brings people together. When tried, freedom is popular.
The problem we have faced over the years has been that economic interventionists are swayed by envy, whereas social interventionists are swayed by intolerance of habits and lifestyles. The misunderstanding that tolerance is an endorsement of certain activities, motivates many to legislate moral standards which should only be set by individuals making their own choices. Both sides use force to deal with these misplaced emotions. Both are authoritarians. Neither endorses voluntarism. Both views ought to be rejected.
I have come to one firm conviction after these many years of trying to figure out "the plain truth of things." The best chance for achieving peace and prosperity, for the maximum number of people world-wide, is to pursue the cause of LIBERTY.
If you find this to be a worthwhile message, spread it throughout the land.
Well, that 'story' about Obama privately orchestrating a kidnapping-gone-haywire in return for the 'blind sheik' is gaining traction. It has all the earmarks of a Watergate coverup, but worse.
You know I was a skeptic of this latest development, but the details are getting MUCH more interesting.
BTW, how many conspiracies is the official count to ignore, before this house of cards comes down? Just asking...
-Forged birth certificate. (Never mind)-No hard copy, soft copy of original BC (Never mind)-Used SS number off a dead guy from Connecticut. (Never mind)-No school records (Never mind)-No passport records (Never mind)-Kenyan BC with footprints on it. (Never mind)-Biographical claim of Indonesian birth. (Never mind)-Qualifying for foreign exchange student grants. (Never mind)-Death of two homosexuals from Obama's church with claims of sex from a survivor (Never mind)So, really a clandestine arrangement to get reelected using a kidnapping gimmick, at the expense of four Americans just fits the m.o. of this man. (Never mind)Sorry, but this person's a mess, and we're screwed.
Original Story:
Quote:Quote:I received this message yesterday. IF this proves to be true, it is impeachable grounds. It also may help explain why Petreaus was forced out a few days before the Benghazi hearings coming up. It explains a lot of behavior by Obama and his administration - the pulled security, the "stand down" orders, and blaming that stupid video. The fireworks are coming. It will be the first of many disasters ahead. Please share. According to sources in the State Department and the CIA, and intercepted communications from the Muslim Brotherhood, Obama "staged" the attack in Benghazi in order to create a monumental "October Surprise" that would guarantee him re-election. Yes, you read that right, and no, I'm not making this up. Obama, we now know, is and has been working with the Muslim Brotherhood secretly to engineer the release of the "Blind Sheik," Omar Abdel Rahman, the mastermind behind the 1993 World Trade Center attack. In Obama's October Surprise, he intentionally set up the consulate to have no security so that Chris Stevens could be kidnapped, and held for ransom by Al-Qaeda (and the Muslim Brotherhood). Then, several days before the election, the plan was to trade Chris Stevens for the Blind Sheik, making himself look like a hero, and all but guaranteeing re-election. This was one of the top reasons why Obama was so insistent on the Muslim Brotherhood getting $1.2 Billion in U.S. Aid. They were to have a primary role in getting Obama re-elected. That is why, even though they knew days before the attack that it was going to occur, no effort was made to bolster security. It was intended to be non-existent. The Libyan security forces were intended to quietly slip into the night when the attack began. And they did, just as planned. That is why, even though 2 C-130U gunships, which were built SPECIFICALLY for this kind of attack, and which could have saved the lives of our people there and were a mere 45 minutes away, were never scrambled at any time during the attack. There was to be no resistance whatsoever. That is why there were not one, but TWO armed drones flying over the consulate during the conflagration... our CIA operatives on the ground were painting targets because they knew air cover was available. That is why, even though requesting support and backup three times, their requests were NOT ignored, but were intentionally, specifically DENIED three times, and they were told to "stand down," which basically means to "surrender." That was part of Obama's plan. They were not to fight back. That would potentially undermine the kidnapping effort and cause unnecessary "complications." That is why, even though the CIA operatives and ex-Navy Seals were on the ground, providing real-time reports, and even though they were "lighting up" the source of the mortars attacking the compound with lasers, no gunships or support ever came. They weren't supposed to resist. That wasn't "part of the plan." It also wasn't part of the plan for one of the CIA operatives to intentionally defy Obama's orders, and who rescued the body of Sean Smith and then stood up again orders, and engaged the enemy who was attacking American soil. It was supposed to be "clean." Quick. Efficient. Kidnap the Ambassador and get out. Then Save The Day in the "nick of time." They didn't factor in a tiny group of highly trained ex-Navy Seals/CIA operatives... American Patriots and heroes. Even though they eventually lost their lives in the firefight, they managed to employ the full measure of their skills, and took out over 80 attackers in the process... which enraged the attackers, who were led to believe that they would encounter no resistance. THAT is why Ambassador Stevens was raped (sodomized), murdered, and dragged through the streets. In their warped minds, they believed that they had been betrayed by the U.S. yet again. They believed that Obama was their friend. They believed that they were going to get their beloved Blind Sheik back. And yet, here were 80 of their own... dead by American hands. Obama was asked directly in an interview if he denied their request for assistance, he refused to answer, and instead droned on with a canned response promising to "bring those responsible to justice." Former CIA and State Dept. personnel are coming out now with damning evidence that indicts President Obama, and reveals the truth about what is going on. Hillary Clinton, who is now openly laying the blame at the feet of the President, after falling on her sword in a premature show of loyalty for the Administration. The "Video" defense was carefully crafted WEEKS in advance, to explain the attack. If this doesn't outrage you, If you are not moved enough to contact your congressman about this, you are not worthy of your citizenship.
"Obstacles are those frightful things you see when you take your eyes off your goals." --- Henry Ford "
"149 Ways (Plus One) To Find Motivated Sellers and Get Them To Find You" >>>Click Here To Download
The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that in 59 Philadelphia precincts, Mitt Romney did not receive a single vote. So Ward Room decided to look at the results in the president's hometown, and see if he won as many shutouts here. The answer: no. Romney was rejected by every voter in only 37 Chicago precincts, an embarrassing result, given that segregation and Machine politics are two of our city's most notable qualities.
In critical swing states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Illinois there are a lot of precincts in Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Chicago which reported 100% of their votes cast for Obama. These add up to many 10's of thousands of votes for Obama and 0 for Romney. I repeat, 0 for Romney. I have read a number of articles about this and people knowlegable in Political Science and Statistics are starting to take notice of this.Statistically, even if among 10's of thousands of voters all wanted to vote for Obama, it would not be possible to receive 100% of the vote because at least a few would make a mistake and vote incorrectly for Romney. Not to mention the fact that a least a few of those 10's of thousands might actually disagree with Obama. These types of election returns are only seen in countries run by dictators.Here's the link to the above article:http://nalert.blogspot.com/2012/11/in-37-chicago-precincts-romney-received.html
Those wise and yet haunting words spoken by one of our nation's greatest presidents couldn't ring more true – especially today, as winter sets in on an estimated 130,000 of our fellow Americans who are still struggling without power. Many live without heat, hot water or inhabitable homes and question the government's efforts to alleviate their condition.
Amid the election frenzy, several mainstream media outlets instantly praised the Obama administration's response to the Hurricane Sandy devastation in the Northeast. But let's look beneath the congratulatory headlines to see the real and horrifying picture of what's happening.
Right now, homeless Americans are literally freezing, wrapped in blankets and trash bags as they struggle to survive in FEMA tent cities such as New Jersey's "Camp Freedom," which reportedly "resembles a prison camp."
"Sitting there last night you could see your breath," displaced resident Brian Sotelo told the Asbury Park Press. "At (Pine Belt) the Red Cross made an announcement that they were sending us to permanent structures up here that had just been redone, that had washing machines and hot showers and steady electric, and they sent us to tent city. We got (expletived)."
Sotelo said Blackhawk helicopters patrol the skies "all day and night" and a black car with tinted windows surveys the camp while the government moves heavy equipment past the tents at night. According to the story, reporters aren't even allowed in the fenced complex, where lines of displaced residents form outside portable toilets. Security guards are posted at every door, and residents can't even use the toilet or shower without first presenting I.D.
"They treat us like we're prisoners," Ashley Sabol told Reuters. "It's bad to say, but we honestly feel like we're in a concentration camp."
Snow and icy slush seep into living areas through the bottoms of the government tents.
Meanwhile, officials are said to be banning residents from taking pictures and even cutting off WiFi and power access.
"After everyone started complaining and they found out we were contacting the press, they brought people in," Sotelo said. "Every time we plugged in an iPhone or something, the cops would come and unplug them."
He added, "Everybody is angry over here. It's like being in prison."
In New York, residents of Gerritsen Beach have banded together to survive.
"With all due respect to the federal issue, we're used to taking care of ourselves," Doreen Garson, the acting volunteer fire chief, told the Washington Post as area residents received hot meals outside a trailer. "I don't know what FEMA is really doing for anyone."
Some citizens say FEMA has distributed checks to fix their homes, but bureaucratic hurdles mean relief amounts are determined inconsistently and may be insufficient to cover damage. In some cases, the rebuilding funds are distributed even when reconstruction doesn't make sense because the destroyed homes are located in high-risk areas.
FEMA's bureaucratic tape is such a mess that states have had to hire consulting firms just to navigate the paperwork, with consultants earning as much as $180 an hour – all of which is billed to American taxpayers.
Meanwhile, FEMA – which previously provided trailers to victims of Hurricane Katrina that made residents sick from toxic levels of formaldehyde – will now bring more temporary homes to New York and New Jersey. The government assures us that this time the homes have been approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
In the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, FEMA failed to have bottled water and other supplies ready for storm victims – a week after the storm hit – and was forced to seek help from private vendors to meet residents' needs.
While generous citizens fill trucks with donations and goods for hurricane survivors, FEMA is reportedly demanding they stop – because the federal agency has "strict rules on what can and can't be accepted."
To make matters worse, FEMA now expects Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to appear before Congress and request a taxpayer bailout for FEMA flood-insurance operations while it burns through $200 to $300 million a day.
Where did we go wrong? The moment we began looking to government to fill the role of caretaker, provider and savior.
What happened to the days when communities and churches were the places Americans turned to for help? We need to get back to basics where Americans care for our brothers and sisters and help them in times such as these.
In one brilliant example of communities banding together, Staten Island residents organized their own citizen-led team of volunteers and started a donation drive, bringing massive trucks of aid into their community from Virginia. They've worked with local churches, VFW posts and businesses to bring in needed supplies and help with clean-up efforts.
In yet another stunning example of private efforts, veterans of both the Israeli army and U.S. military descended on New York to help with rescue operations and relief assistance when the government was said to be absent.
Churches and businesses are reaching out to people who've been displaced, packing U-Haul trucks and 18-wheelers with food, diapers, blankets, toiletries and other needed goods.
"We decided that it wasn't enough for us to simply declare the gospel; we've got to demonstrate it," pastor Jerry Young declared from New Hope Baptist Church in Mississippi. "What we're trying to do now is demonstrate the gospel."
Just as these grassroots volunteers have been sacrificing so much to help displaced citizens and clean up storm-ravaged areas in the Northeast, I urge America's citizen volunteers, churches and businesses to follow their examples.
By Nile Gardiner World Last updated: November 19th, 2012
1316 Comments Comment on this article
Barack Obama: hardly off to a flying start
It is only two weeks since his re-election, and his second term remains two months away, but Barack Obama is already blundering again on the world stage, with the kind of gaffes that would have been plastered on the front page of The New York Times if they had been committed by George W. Bush when he was in the White House. Obama's first term was littered with foreign policy gaffes, and there is every chance the second term will be more of the same.
On his trip to Asia this week, President Obama struggled to pronounce the name of Aung San Suu Kyi, the most prominent human rights activist in the world. As The Associated Press reports (hat tip: Drudge Report):
As Obama stood next to the world's most recognized democracy icon, he mispronounced her name repeatedly.Ever gracious, Suu Kyi did not correct her American guest for calling her Aung YAN Suu Kyi multiple times during his statement to reporters after their meeting.Proper pronunciation for the Nobel laureate's name is Ahng Sahn Soo Chee.
As Obama stood next to the world's most recognized democracy icon, he mispronounced her name repeatedly.
Ever gracious, Suu Kyi did not correct her American guest for calling her Aung YAN Suu Kyi multiple times during his statement to reporters after their meeting.
Proper pronunciation for the Nobel laureate's name is Ahng Sahn Soo Chee.
Obama also "botched" his greeting of Burma's new president, according to the AP:
The meeting came after Obama met with Myanmar's reformist new President Thein Sein – a name he also botched.As the two addressed the media, Obama called his counterpart "President Sein," an awkward, slightly affectionate reference that would make most Burmese cringe.Note to presidential advisers: For future rounds of diplomacy, the president of Myanmar is President Thein Sein – on first and second reference.
The meeting came after Obama met with Myanmar's reformist new President Thein Sein – a name he also botched.
As the two addressed the media, Obama called his counterpart "President Sein," an awkward, slightly affectionate reference that would make most Burmese cringe.
Note to presidential advisers: For future rounds of diplomacy, the president of Myanmar is President Thein Sein – on first and second reference.
In addition, as The Weekly Standard notes, Obama was quick to use the Burmese regime's preferred word "Myanmar", to describe Burma, which is not the term officially used by the US government, or by Burma's opposition activists.
President Barack Obama called Burma 'Myanmar' after a bilateral meeting with Thein Sein, the president of that country. From the pool report:Obama used the word "Myanmar," the preferred terminology of the former military government and currently nominally civilian government, in a spray following the bilat, rather than use "Burma," the former name of the country, and the one preferred by Aung San Suu Kyi as well as the name the U.S. uses."I've shared with him the fact that I recognize this is just the first steps on what will be a long journey," Obama told reporters, with Thein Sein at his side. "But we think a process of democratic and economic reform here in Myanmar that has been begun by the president is one that can lead to incredible development opportunities.
President Barack Obama called Burma 'Myanmar' after a bilateral meeting with Thein Sein, the president of that country. From the pool report:
Obama used the word "Myanmar," the preferred terminology of the former military government and currently nominally civilian government, in a spray following the bilat, rather than use "Burma," the former name of the country, and the one preferred by Aung San Suu Kyi as well as the name the U.S. uses.
"I've shared with him the fact that I recognize this is just the first steps on what will be a long journey," Obama told reporters, with Thein Sein at his side. "But we think a process of democratic and economic reform here in Myanmar that has been begun by the president is one that can lead to incredible development opportunities.
It is rather embarrassing, as well as sad, that the leader of the free world can't even pronounce the name of the most famous human rights activist on the planet. Or that he is so quick to appease Burma's authoritarian regime by calling it "Myanmar". Barack Obama's gaffes demonstrate not only a marked lack of attention to detail and a high degree of amateurishness on the part of the White House, but also a disturbing willingness to curry favour with unsavoury regimes. Hardly a good omen for Obama's second term.
Image URL
Supported videos include:
Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.


text:
Our Express Checkout Tool – Your Way to Save Time When Buying a New Vehicle at AutoOne
- Auto One's Express Check Out allows customers to connect with us while on-the-go. You will be able to seamlessly shop for your new car throughout your busy days conveniently. We want our customers to be able to have control over shopping for a new vehicle, and with Express Check Out, it makes things easier. To ensure that you have a tailored time, making the connection from online to our dealership flows effortlessly whether you are using a desktop or mobile device. Merely navigate through the various selection of vehicles, and start looking for your custom deal.
See The Step By Step Process
View Inventory
1) Value my Trade-In With a Kelly Blue Book Instant Cash Offer
Avoid the frustrating negotiations you're accustomed to having over what your vehicle is worth and generate a trade-in value estimate that accounts for industry trends and what objective marketplace data says. This allows for a more fair and transparent process, delivering a trade-in offer that accounts for your vehicle's current condition and background. A cash or trade-in offer you can trust, redeemable today, based on Blue Book® Values.
Back To Top
2) Personalize my Payment
Configure custom payment options with the variables that may impact what you financially commit monthly. From trade-in value applications to cash down, term lengths, interest rates and more, this express checkout tool helps you determine what you can afford with necessary context accounted for.
Back To Top
3) Pre-Qualify for Credit
If you're uncertain about your current credit status and where you stand, submit a pre-qualification form using our express checkout tool. Our team will confirm what you qualify for and get back to you with these details promptly.
Back To Top
4) Apply For Credit
Submit an online credit application for your auto loan using this express checkout resource, helping you save time and complete a process that may otherwise take over an hour to wrap up. This important step doesn't require you to stop over and work on paperwork in person, as we can process this important financing information in our own time.
Back To Top
5) Reserve my Vehicle
- Are you happy with the deal you created? You can easily accept the offer for the vehicle you are interested in buying by calling one of our Trusted Advisors, and reserve it today! They will have your vehicle gassed, cleaned and in your Express marked parking spot insuring a fast delivery.
Back To Top
6) Arrange my Protection Plans
For peace of mind with varying components and elements of your vehicle, choose a protection plan. This lasting coverage is essential for long-term ownership plans, as options are easy to sort through and submit for a quick selection.
Back To Top
Contact us to learn more about these Express Checkout options and get started on structuring a deal for your dream vehicle today!
See for Yourself!
Get Started Now!
Back To Top

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Joseph Marvin: Assistant Sports Information Director
Photo Credit: Tori Brayman '22
BREVARD, N.C. – The Brevard College Tornados Softball team (12-15) earned a doubleheader sweep over NCAA DII Converse College (6-28) on a sunny Wednesday afternoon at Ives-Lemel Family Field.
The Tornados took the first game, 5-2, before exploding for 11 runs in the second game for a comfortable victory, 11-2.
Brevard built off of the success that it enjoyed last weekend when it collected a doubleheader sweep over USA South opponent Agnes Scott College on Saturday in Decatur, Georgia.
Sophomores Marissa Henson and Emily White highlighted a stout offensive performance for the Tornados. Henson went 2-for-3 in game one, including a crucial RBI triple in the bottom of the sixth inning to add insurance to the Tornados' slim lead. White went a perfect 3-for-3 in the second game of Wednesday's twin bill, coming across twice to score in addition to a season-high four RBI performance.
All told, the Tornado offense racked up 18 hits in Wednesday's action, with six being of the extra base variety.
Junior RHP Micayla McCoy (8-7) earned the starting nod for Head Coach Bob Lowe in the first game, going the distance. The victory marked McCoy's eighth of the season, and the 11th time in 2019 that she has pitched a complete game for Brevard.
McCoy allowed seven hits and two runs in her seven innings of work. She struck out five batters in the contest, while not walking a single Valkyrie.
Brevard's offense got started early, as the Tornados put its two baserunners on in the top of the first inning. White moved the runners over to second and third base before Mari Cook stepped in and sent a sacrifice line drive to left-center field, scoring Summer Wilson for the game's first run. McCoy then helped herself out, doubling to left field to plate Sara Lallier, which gave the Tornados a 2-0 lead.
After both sides went down quietly in the second inning, the Valkyries put together their biggest offensive threat of the afternoon. Utilizing a leadoff double in the top of the third inning, Converse utilized small ball, sacrificing the runner over before plating her via a Marissa Martin RBI bunt single, cutting the BC advantage to 2-1. The Valkyries would draw even after a Martin stolen base when the pitcher Hailey Spitler (2-9) singled through the right side to even the contest at 2-2. The Tornado defense had McCoy's back, however, as a ground ball to White turned into a 5-3-2 double play, with Cook gunning down Spitler at the plate.
The tie game wouldn't last long, as back-to-back triples by White and Cook put Brevard on top, 3-2. McCoy took advantage of a Converse fielding miscue, plating BC's fourth run on the next at-bat.
McCoy caught fire in the fourth and fifth innings, retiring six-straight Valkyries, with two coming via strikeout.
The Tornados erased a Converse leadoff single in the top of the sixth inning with a line out double play on a bunt attempt, as McCoy fielded her position well to get out of the jam.
After an Ali Grace Hartman pinch-hit double down the left field line, Henson hit a critical RBI triple to give Brevard some more cushion, 5-2.
The Tornado defense turned its third double play of the game in the top of the seventh inning, helping wrap up a 5-2 victory over the NCAA DII opponent.
Freshman RHP Hartman (2-2) earned her fourth-career start in the pitching circle in the second game of the afternoon. Hartman worked three and two-thirds innings, allowing two runs on seven hits while striking out three batters. Hartman was relieved in the fourth inning by Breana Allen, who worked an inning and a third of one-hit ball to finish the contest, which was decided in five innings by run-rule.
White and McCoy both had multi-hit performances for the Tornados, while White (4 RBI's) and Cook (3 RBI's) led Tornado hitters in runs-batted-in. Hartman and freshman outfielder Jocelyn Folkers each recorded two RBI's in the second game.
Converse struck first offensively, bringing a one-out double around to score via a sacrifice bunt. However, the Valkyries advantage didn't last long as the Tornados chased Converse starting pitcher Martin (2-11) in the first inning after giving up three runs without any outs. After a Converse pitching change, the Tornados scored two more runs to extend their advantage, 5-1.
The Valkyries cut into BC's early lead in the top half of the second frame with an RBI single, cutting BC's margin to 5-2.
White added to her impressive day in the bottom of the second inning, tripling to right-center field to score two Tornados. Folkers singled to extend BC's lead to a commanding 8-2 advantage.
BC's offensive explosion wasn't done there, as the Tornados struck for three more runs in the bottom of the third inning to push its advantage to 11-2.
The Tornado defense turned a key double play in the top of the fifth inning to ensure BC's doubleheader sweep over Converse, taking game two by a final of 11-2.
Brevard will return to USA South Conference action on Saturday, March 30 as Covenant College (7-15, 2-3 USAS) visits Ives-Lemel Family Field for a doubleheader at 1 and 3 p.m.
To follow along with all the latest news and updates surrounding Brevard College Athletics, please follow the Tornados on Twitter and Instagram @bctornados, subscribe to 'Brevard College Tornados'' on YouTube, follow 'Brevard College Tornados' on SoundCloud, or like Brevard College Athletics on Facebook.


text:
Leaf Hauler
Leaf Hauler
A 26-inch-wide head pulls in a big pile all at once, and double the usual number of tines means less clogging while raking 45% faster. The durable plastic head and steel handle keep the heft down to a lightweight 3 pounds.
Dual Tine Poly Leaf Rake, $25; Ames.
The Dual Tine's 8-inch-wide clip-on rake gets under shrubs when the larger rake can't.


text: JasonLA+ 2 Report post Posted August 20, 2013 Hey guys, I can not seem to figure this out. I finally have got my entire new site built on DMS which I have to say is freaking EPIC once I figured out how to use it. Very well done! That being said, I'm now trying to redirect all the traffic from my old site, https://zoxstraps.com to my new one, http://zox.la. I used the "Redirection" plugin on Wordpress and everything seemed to be fine other than when I searched for Zox Straps on google and clicked on the link. I've since taken off the forwarding as I'd like to figure this out before I make it official. From what I've read, doing a 301 from a secure site to an unsecure is a little bit tougher? Anything else I should know? Thanks Jason Share this post Link to post Share on other sites


text:
Blog Archive
10 000 hour rule debunked again
This 5-minute article suggests a few simple but powerful mental tools for getting more out of life and investment research efforts, avoiding waste and suboptimization
Some become world champions in just 1 000 hours, some never
First you must realize, there is no
spoon 10 000 hour rule
The 10 000 hour rule was debunked a long time ago, specifically when Donald Thomas, who commenced high-jumping in 2006, won the world championship in Osaka just a year later in 2007 (clearing 2.35m), without proper high-jumping shoes. The first time he ever tried high-jumping, on a bet, in January 2006, he cleared 2.13m in ordinary tennis shoes.
Actually, the 10 000 hour rule was a deliberate misinterpretation of data. The original research only showed the following:
- if you have the genes
- and the ambition
- you may become a master in your area of expertise
- if you practice between 3 000 and 30 000 hours
- and then there are outliers, like Donald, who shows you could train even less, given a certain set of genes
i.e. a completely meaningless and useless result.
Don't be that guy throwing the 10k hour rule around as if it meant something.
If Donald had, he might not even have bothered with the high jump, and this little man would have been world champion instead:
Stefan Holm (181cm, 5"11 1/4) trained more and better than any other high jumper in the noughties and jumped 2.30m or more 119 times, but, e.g., never 2.42m like Patrik Sjöberg in the middle of the photo above did.
Sure, you'll get better, the more you practice, but there is nothing guaranteeing becoming a master, no matter how much you practice. And, if lucky, you could get there much faster.
There is no 10 000 hour rule
The opposite of spending your life on just one endeavour
-I'm a trysexual, I'll try anything once
Okay, I wouldn't go that far, not in horizontal hip-hop, and not as a general rule either.
However, there is a 20-hour 'rule' that is immensely more useful than both the 1-hour and the 10 000-hour dogmas:
If you focus and practice intelligently for 20 hours on learning a new skill, you will become "quite proficient"
In 20 hours you can become good enough to enjoy your new skill, good enough to keep learning more on your own and good enough to know if it's something you have a talent for and would enjoy developing even more.
If you're interested in how to acquire a new skill in 20 hours, check out Josh Kaufman's TED talk from March 2013.
Studio 50:1
Sport jocks sometimes claim to "give it 110%". Now that's just retarded.
And it's not due to a lack of education. They typically got the expression from their (gym) teachers. Anyway, never aim for 110%. You will be disappointed if you do.
Google famously (used to) let it's employees spend one day a week on any project they like. That's 20% goofing around to let creativity flow, and maybe come up with significant improvements and business ideas.
I think Google has restricted the extent of its experimentation hours lately. They are still hanging on to the principle though. And so should you. Just because you're grown up, doesn't mean you have nothing more to learn. Actually, it's quite the opposite. The older you get, the more you need to make a deliberate effort, to keep novelty and personal growth in your life.
1% effort for 50% of the outcome
Whereas 1 hour probably is more than enough for most of broadening your bedside horizons, and 20 hours is good for trying out what skills match up with your preferences and talent... I'd say, if you put in 100 hours (just 1% of the infamous 10 000 hours) you will leave most of mankind behind in that area, often achieving about half the level of a professional.
Call it the 1% effort system. People will keep referring to Gladwell's 10khr, and so can you. But rather than go for the full Monty, aim for just 1% of the 10k, i.e. 100 hours of focused and deliberate effort to kind of "master" a new discipline.
You won't win any championships but you'll become pretty good at most things you try; typically much, much better than any beginner. Languages, sports, programming, design, sales, psychology, you name it.
Since you have a lot of 100 hour chunks at your disposal, you can become an instant expert in hundreds of useful or entertaining skills. If nothing else, you can find out where your talents are and what satisfies you the most, rather than arbitrarily choosing chess, golf or tennis and end up wasting 10 000 hours on something you don't really enjoy and won't win at anyway.
In 100 hours you'll acquire most useful skills regarding long term value investing, but you'll still not be done by 10 000 hours
A sell-side analyst spends 10 000 hours per large cap company he covers during the course of his career. You could catch up on the essentials in just 5, and become somewhat of an expert in 20, not to mention a 100
Even more importantly, trying new things, practicing them wholeheartedly will increase your brain plasticity; hence future learning of other skills will be easier.
It's fun too. Being a beginner is fun. There are no expectations, no anxiety, just a steep learning curve and a lot of hilarious failed attempts.
Commit and quit. Give it your all (yes, 100%, or close to it, but not for long, not for 100% of your life). Focus! Be serious. Give it one hour, just one hour. Then one more, just one more.
If you're not completely hooked after 20 hours, try something else. The brilliant thing with the 20-hour system is that you can try so many things before deciding what should stick. If it's useful and enjoyable enough, keep going until you get to a 100 hours.
The 1:50 rule in practice
Last summer I read the unabridged 2400 page book The Count of Monte-Cristo in French to improve my French.
I spent about 100 hours on learning the basics of Portuguese on DuoLingo last spring.
For no other reason than exercising my brain.
However, if you want it to really stick, it's advisable to have a specific use for any skill you set out learning.
Commit and quit. Restart.
Fair disclosure: I quit both this year's handstanding and side split efforts after just a few hours, due to lack of interest and slight injuries. Perhaps next year.
I spent somewhere between 20 and 100 hours on Khan Academy's math section, but now I'm taking a pause. I'm not sure how much time I put into Python and Javascript on Codecademy and Khan but probably around 25.
What I really should focus my next 20-100 hours on is online marketing skills, such as web design, SEO and writing copy. There are always new things to learn, new skills to attempt.
Working out, the 1% turned into 2%
I've tried several martial arts, tennis, volley ball, football etc. Martial arts is the only thing that managed to keep me interested long term, but my work schedule forced me to quit.
I took up weight lifting (again) in 1996 to keep in shape "until I could get back to martial arts" but I never did, and now I'm hooked by the iron instead.
I've typically always spent 1-2% of my time working out (more before I turned 22), and since I retired I've stabilized at around 2%.
I work out 4 hours a week, in practice 2% of the available time, doing mostly heavy compound exercises with free weights. In fact, most of that time is resting between sets, which I spend reading and writing.
I don't do any specific cardio, except for a quick warm-up on the tread mill before working out.
I'm by no means a bodybuilder as such, but I am quite fit, despite sitting at an office desk for 20 years and eating whatever I like, including a lot of french fries, ice cream and drinking my fair share or more of alcohol.
Cooling down after a sauna:
The picture above is the result of a 1% effort that got me hooked and expanded to 2%. By focusing on the most effective exercises, I look and feel athletic at 43, despite only going to the gym for about 90 minutes every second day (including 5-10 minutes of mobility exercises every fourth day).
There are no 110%, 100% or such efforts in my diet either. I fast (16:8) and I drink fish oil. That's it. I still bench 300+ lbs, I haven't had a cold in 9 years and my Omega 6:3 balance is exceptionally low at 2.0.
Summary - Hard made easy:
- Forget about the 10 000 hour myth. There is no spoon.
- Try just one more skill, then one more, for a limited amount of time
- Commit and quit. Don't get stuck, don't force feed yourself skills you don't like or need
- Give it 1% and enjoy half of the master level - the Sprezzaturian way
- Even if you don't use the skill per se, your learning ability is improved or maintained
Did you like the article? Share it with a friend or your social network. Tweet about it. And if you haven't signed up for my newsletter and eBook, please do. There is a new eBook in the works - with hundreds of tips and tricks like the "1:50" and "Just one more" rules.
Tankeväckande artikel som vanligt. Synd att man är typen som skjuter saker framför sig hela tiden & sitter fast i bekvämlighetszonen. Mitt motto har alltid varit : "I morgon kanske..." :-(
Donkenstein: Tankeväckande artikel som vanligt. Synd att man är typen som skjuter saker framför sig hela tiden & sitter fast i bekvämlighetszonen. Mitt motto har alltid varit : "I morgon kanske..." :-(
Jo, fast jag lever också enligt devisen "Skjut inte upp till imorgon det som kan vänta till i övermorgon". Så skjut gärna upp saker som faktiskt inte är viktiga eller akuta.
Jag gillar tautologier också: Är det inte viktigt så är det inte viktigt :), det kanske är därför du låter dem vara.. De är inte viktiga eller skulle tillföra något. Man kan ju faktiskt bara ha det bra också.
Intressant läsning och det är mycket av det du skriver som är bra att ha till minnes. Inom naturvetenskap och teknik så är faktiskt de flesta kurser på runt ca 5 hp, vilket innebär 130 h studietid. Det är ganska lagom tid för att bli rätt så bra i det ämnet. Som forskare så kan jag säga att de 1000-tals timmar efter det ökar ens kunskap och prestation endast nämnvärt, bara för att ta sig den där extra biten till forskningsfronten. Har haft liknande upplevelse inom aktiehandel, där de första 100 timmarna gav klart mest kunskap och sedan dess har det varit svårt att ha samma takt i utvecklingen.
Investerarfysikern: Intressant läsning och det är mycket av det du skriver som är bra att ha till minnes. Inom naturvetenskap och teknik så är faktiskt de flesta kurser på runt ca 5 hp, vilket innebär 130 h studietid. Det är ganska lagom tid för att bli rätt så bra i det ämnet. Som forskare så kan jag säga att de 1000-tals timmar efter det ökar ens kunskap och prestation endast nämnvärt, bara för att ta sig den där extra biten till forskningsfronten. Har haft liknande upplevelse inom aktiehandel, där de första 100 timmarna gav klart mest kunskap och sedan dess har det varit svårt att ha samma takt i utvecklingen.
Bra att någon med rejäl erfarenhet av specialinriktad högre utbildning och forskning håller med :)
Framför allt tycker jag att det är en viktig poäng att man kan tillräckligt efter 100h för att kunna använda färdigheten med behållning och belöning. Samt att man då också känner om det är något man vill fokusera på på allvar under mångfalt längre tid eller om man kanske ska komplettera med andra färdigheter istället.


text:
Senior Manager, Analytics
OfferUp's mission is to build the largest, simplest and most trustworthy local marketplace. The free app for iOS and Android helps sellers quickly post items for sale with just a picture from their smartphones and lets buyers easily browse what's nearby. Now the largest mobile marketplace for local buyers and sellers in the U.S., OfferUp brings millions of people together to discover more value right where they are.At a Glance
- A top shopping app on iTunes and Google Play
- Geekwire App of Year
- 60+ Million Downloads
OfferUp is rapidly growing our Trust and Safety team in the Greater Seattle area and are seeking a dedicated, hardworking, risk leader with experience fighting abuse at scale.
Risk analytics at OfferUp is fast-paced, high-energy, and forward thinking in identifying and diagnosing emerging fraud and disrupting risk and loss before they can happen. They conduct a thorough analysis of complex data sets, build multiple layers of rules, models, and other processes to prevent unwanted activity within our marketplace.
Reporting to the head of Trust and Safety, the role of the Sr. Manager, Analytics is to effectively lead and develop our risk analytics team and represent the team in communicating roadmaps, and champion infrastructure requirements for effective quantitative marketplace risk management. This role will also provide subject matter expertise for building models and automated decision strategies, monitoring effectiveness, and accurate reporting. Partner and work with teams throughout the organization to establish and drive towards the vision of the most trusted marketplace.
What you'll do
- Work with leaders throughout the organization to establish and drive toward the vision of the most trusted marketplace.
- Build the reporting needed to measure key performance indicators; present analyses and findings to management to steer and facilitate the Fraud team's strategic vision.
- Support, develop and mentor a growing analytics team in achieving a high level of technical excellence.
- Help drive the team's impact and communicate it effectively.
- Be deeply involved in understanding and operationalizing risk controls for new product and market launches
- Roll up your sleeves to help develop, augment and validate fraud identification and prevention solutions.
- Collaborate on the roadmap and priorities for the team, and help to unlock and unblock dependencies across the company.
- Work with the business and product teams to develop, implement and maintain effective risk management programs to align with the business needs
- Expertise in technical data tools and methods, including data engineering, descriptive and predictive statistics, experimentation, and data visualization
- A deep understanding of statistical analysis (e.g. hypothesis testing, experimentation, regressions)
- Proficiency in one or more analytics & visualization tools (e.g. Tableau, Looker)
- Knowledge of Fraud Risk systems and controls and their operating environments
- 6+ years of relevant work experience in analyzing large data sets and turning data insights into actionable recommendations
- 4+ years of experience managing analysts and/or developers
- Self-starter attitude to initiate and drive projects to completion with minimal guidance
- Lead with OfferUp values at the core, and set similar expectations of your team
- Excellent written and verbal communication skills on quantitative topics for non-technical and executive audiences
- Excellent problem-solving ability in high-pressure situations
OfferUp provides equal employment opportunities (EEO) to all employees and applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or genetics. In addition to federal law requirements, OfferUp complies with applicable state and local laws governing nondiscrimination in employment in every location in which the company has facilities. This policy applies to all terms and conditions of employment, including recruiting, hiring, placement, promotion, termination, layoff, transfer, leaves of absence, compensation, and training.
OfferUp expressly prohibits any form of workplace harassment based on race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, age, genetic information, disability, or veteran status. Improper interference with the ability of OfferUp's employees to perform their job duties may result in discipline up to and including discharge.


text:
Bowen v. Paisley et al., No. 3:13-cv-0414 (M.D. Tenn. filed Dec. 3, 2013) [Doc. 58]
Plaintiff alleged that the defendants, including popular country music singers Brad Paisley and Carrie
Underwood, violated her copyright interests in the song "Remind Me," a song that plaintiff
copyrighted and recorded. Defendants moved to dismiss. The Court denied defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, finding that under the Iqbal standard, plaintiff had plausibly shown that, taken in combination, her lyrics and associated melodies, intonations, and usage could be sufficiently original to constitute protectable material, and that based on the Court's own comparison of the two works that defendants' hooks which incorporate that potentially distinctive combination of elements, are "substantially similar".
December 4, 2013
Country Music Infringement Claim Survives Dismissal
Posted by On the Cover Songs at 12/04/2013
Labels: Copyright, Copyright Protectability, Country Music, Hook, Infringement, Lyrics, Motion to Dismiss, Pleading, Rule 12(b), Sixth Circuit, Substantial Similarity


text:
Duration: 10 ms, Number of Items: 10
On the Hunt
This is the perfect accessory for any Pokemon hunters out there. It features the word "GO" spelled out with Regaliz slider beads on a colorful flat leather base. The alphabet sliders make it easy to personalize your style for any occasion!
- BrandRegaliz, JBB
Alphabet slider beads from Regaliz allow you to personalize your leather designs! We used them as initials in this simple idea. Use them in men's and women's jewelry to make a splash in your style. You'll love the distinct style they bring to designs.
- BrandRegaliz
El Corazon
Add meaningful details to your style with this simple wrap bracelet. The bracelet is decorated with a cross and sacred heart charms from TierraCast, giving it subtle spiritual flair. When paired with rich brown leather from Regaliz, these charms evoke a sense of rustic Spanish romance.
- BrandTierraCast, Regaliz
Texture tells an enchanting story in this beautiful bracelet. Braided cork cord from Regaliz combines with gleaming silver chain and colorful tassels, for a look that shines in any style!
- BrandBeadalon, TOHO, Regaliz, TierraCast
Color Me Pretty
With Regaliz multi-cotton cord, your designs are sure to stand out. This colorful foundation is a great way to start your projects. This cord already displays beautiful colors without any embellishment, so you can let it shine in designs! Or, you can dress it up with simple charms and jump rings as Cheri did for an unforgettable look. Take a look at these fun examples and then start making colorful jewelry of your own.
- BrandWubbers, Nunn Design, Regaliz
Splash of Lemon
Add a Splash of Lemon to your style with this colorful wrap bracelet! Flecks of yellow in the Regaliz leather and the sparkling Yellow Opal Swarovski flatback give this bracelet the zest that it needs. Personalize it with an alphabet charm from TierraCast.
- BrandRegaliz, TierraCast
These bracelets are as trendy and fashion-forward as the New York City neighborhood they're named after. With the help of Artbeads Designer Wire and beautiful beads, they couldn't be easier to make. You'll love the way the soft Regaliz denim cord feels when you wear them, too!
- BrandRegaliz, Artbeads, Lillypilly Designs
Bae Okay
You can say it all in your style with this expressive bracelet. Emojicon slider beads from B&B Benbassat tell a story of love and approval. These sliders really pop against the dark Regaliz leather. Choose your favorite sliders to tell your own story within your jewelry designs.
- BrandRegaliz, B&B Benbassat
A scene of spring fills this bracelet design, from the grass green leather to the luminous Swarovski pearls and TierraCast lotus charm. It's sure to put you in mind of a snowberry shrub, filled with green leaves and the white, bulbous berries that give it its name.
- BrandTierraCast, Tandy Leather, Regaliz
Dress up a simple leather design with Regaliz alphabet slider beads! These beads are a fun way to make a statement in your style. Use them for cool phrases, adding names to designs, putting special initials into your looks, and more. They're great for adding a personalized touch.
- BrandJBB, Regaliz


text:
It took 72-year-old Garnett Levere Brome two attempts today to address the No. 2 Supreme Court in his manslaughter case.
Brome, a fisherman of Six Men's, St Peter pleaded guilty in July this year to killing Caroline Roberta Forde.
The 49-year-old fish vendor died at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital after she was brutally stabbed on August 19, 2013.
Dressed in a beige short-sleeved shirt and dark brown slacks, Brome, who walks with an aid, began addressing the court presided over by Madam Justice Michelle Weekes: "I am sorry to . . ."
But he was stopped by the judge as he began to cry and became incoherent.
On the second attempt, after wiping his face with a washcloth, he said: "I am very sorry to this court and to the family of Caroline Forde . . . about what took place . . . about the life that lost . . . [that] I had love. But things happen."
Brome went on to tell the judge, as several members of Forde's family listened from the upstairs section of the courtroom, that he was "a very sick man".
"I suffer with a number of illnesses [that] at any given moment can cause my death," he said as he sniffled, adding that he was on medication for a heart problem.
Asking the court for leniency, Brome added: "Give me the opportunity to get back out and help myself with my frailness, because in the institution we do not get the proper attention and medication that I have to use to help increase my health."
His pleas followed mitigation by his attorney, Verla Depeiza, last Friday. She had pleaded for the judge to impose a less than 10-year sentence on her client.
But today, Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Donna Babb-Agard, QC reiterated the call for the maximum sentence of life, starting at the 30-year mark.
The prosecutor noted that in the cases presented by Depeiza in her mitigation last week, all the convicted men got a jail term of 20 years or more and the cases never "contemplated . . . less than 10 years".
"We submit, as I did before, that Mr Brome is a danger to society, especially to women," Babb-Agard maintained.
Depeiza countered that Brome's age and "very poor health" were the "distinction" with regards to the other cases which she urged the court to consider when determining sentence.
Justice Weekes then adjourned the matter with no set date for sentencing.