Latest Threads
Greatest Threads
Home » Discuss » Journals » Ichingcarpenter Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
Ichingcarpenter's Journal
Posted by Ichingcarpenter in General Discussion
Sat Jul 23rd 2011, 07:23 AM

you want to wish me a happy sixtieth birthday

'Life is a moderately good play with a badly written third act'

I feel I'm starting my third act and so far I liked the first two acts much better,

Inside every older person is a younger person – wondering what the hell happened.'

Still don't feel old until my arthritis kicks in and I still am wondering what the hell happened to the USA and where the hell all the years go? Just remember, once you’re over the hill you begin to pick up speed.I read that 60 time moves 2.7 times faster than at 30 or something like that... I guess we are all time travelers.


I await some of my friends and my kids for a dinner this evening. My daughter is cooking it and bringing it over here so
I got to clean up my little place. I’m at an age when my back goes out more than I do. Then I will eat drink and try to be merry for tomorrow........

See its not all about Obama
its about I, ME, ME, MINE!
Read entry | Discuss (111 comments) | Recommend (+96 votes)
Posted by Ichingcarpenter in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Sat Jun 26th 2010, 06:26 AM
and is the most accurate calendar on the planet as we speak.
It is also a closed looped system and has the understanding of Zero.

Don't know what to make of what's going on ........ perhaps I need to look at crop circles that depict the Mayan Calendar.

Video here:

New Swirled Order by a group in Holland

The geometry which can be found in crop circles, included a lot of mathematics which can be also found in nature.

Documentary New Swirled Order deals with these questions and present some very extraordinary Crop circle formations in 2008, like the Pi-formation in Barbury Castle or the Crop Circle near Avebury Manor, which showed our solar system with the planetary constellation of December 21 of 2012.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Ichingcarpenter in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Wed May 12th 2010, 12:39 PM
The Gulf of Mexico didn't spill a damn thing!

Call it the BP oil spill in the Gulf.

That all I want to point out because words matter
Read entry | Discuss (13 comments) | Recommend (+21 votes)
Posted by Ichingcarpenter in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Sat Mar 27th 2010, 05:06 AM
Call it the Tea Party version of the “Whitey Tape,” if the “Whitey Tape” really existed. Dale Robertson, self-proclaimed founder of the Tea Party movement, was quoted in today’s Washington Times denying he had ever “seen any racial slurs” at Tea Party events. He was responding to the furor over nasty, sometimes violent reactions to the passage of health care reform.

There’s just one problem with Robertson’s claim: He was famously photographed at a Feb. 27, 2009 Tea Party event holding a sign that featured the n-word. (via FreakOutNation)
For a movement trying to shake accusations of racism, the Tea Partiers could not have found a worse spokesman. Not only did Robertson’s sign have the n-word written on it, he had also misspelled it. The image plays into the worst stereotypes about Tea Partiers.

Here’s Robertson’s full quote, in which he tries to deflect the blame onto the Democrats:

“These people could be anybody. I wouldn’t put it past the Democrats to plant somebody there,” Mr. Robertson said. “They’re trying to label the tea party, but I’ve never seen any racial slurs.”

I happen to be friends with a lot of conservatives, including many involved in the Tea Party movement, and while I disagree with them, I don’t think for a second that Robertson speaks for them, or for most Tea Partiers. The problem is that, after over a year of protests, the movement has still not succeeded in expelling this element.

On a larger scale, conservatives seem invested in the notion that accusations of racism are worse than actual racism, and refuse to acknowledge all but the most explicit examples of it. In this case, there’s no mistaking it, but when James O’Keefe, for example, shows surprise at being a convincing pimp by saying “I’m one of the whitest guys ever,” he remains a conservative hero.

He told the Washington Times yesterday:

But Dale Robertson, founder of, said no one knows who might have yelled out racial epithets during the Capitol Hill protest. He said a Democratic lawmaker refused to accompany Capitol Police officers to identify a white man accused of spitting.

"These people could be anybody. I wouldn't put it past the Democrats to plant somebody there," Mr. Robertson said. "They're trying to label the tea party, but I've never seen any racial slurs." /



Read entry | Discuss (28 comments) | Recommend (+46 votes)
Posted by Ichingcarpenter in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Sat Mar 27th 2010, 02:44 AM
saw anger from a master of it. Nero was so brutal that he killed his own wife Poppća by kicking her to death in anger. Seneca tried to quit many times but Nero wouldn't let him and finally was forced to kill himself or be murdered by Nero.

Reason is the opposite of the passions. We cannot, says Sencea, allow reason to mingle with, and be contaminated by, the passions. Hence he argues against the usefulness of anger.
Seneca says that "there is nothing useful in anger, nor does it kindle the mind to warlike deeds; for virtue, being self-sufficient, never needs the help of vice.

Secondly, reason will never call to its help blind and violent impulses over which it will itself have no control, which it can never crush save by setting against them equally powerful and similar impulses, as fear against anger, anger against sloth, greed against fear.

Seneca, then deals with an objection that states that against the enemy anger is necessary. Anger, in other words is necessary for politics and warfare. Seneca responds:

"...what use is anger when the same end may be accomplished by reason? Anger is not expedient even in battle or in war; for it is prone to rashness, and while it seeks to bring about danger, does not guard against it."

Seneca's Book titled Anger online though I think you can find a better font and organization of the book:
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Ichingcarpenter in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Fri Mar 26th 2010, 11:24 AM
Philosophy – Guide to Happiness

We tend to accept that people in authority must be right. It’s this assumption that Socrates wanted us to challenge by urging us to think logically about the nonsense they often come out with, rather than being struck dumb by their aura of importance and air of suave certainty. This six part series on philosophy is presented by popular British philosopher Alain de Botton, featuring six thinkers who have influenced history, and their ideas about the pursuit of the happy life. The philosophers are

Socrates on Self-Confidence

Epicurus on Happiness

Seneca on Anger

Seneca argues that
. Anger is more properly viewed as an enemy of a life based on reason. He says that:
".. ..The enemy, I repeat, must be stopped at the very frontier; for if he has passed it, and advanced within the city-gates, he will not respect any bounds set by his captives."

Montaigne on Self-Esteem

Schopenhauer on Love

Nietzsche on Hardship

Watch for free here:
Read entry | Discuss (2 comments)
Posted by Ichingcarpenter in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Tue Mar 23rd 2010, 02:14 PM
The obvious types of American fascists are dealt with on the air and in the press. These demagogues and stooges are fronts for others. Dangerous as these people may be, they are not so significant as thousands of other people who have never been mentioned. The really dangerous American fascists are not those who are hooked up directly or indirectly with the Axis.

The FBI has its finger on those. The dangerous American fascist is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way.

The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power.

Still another danger is represented by those who, paying lip service to democracy and the common welfare, in their insatiable greed for money and the power which money gives, do not hesitate surreptitiously to evade the laws designed to safeguard the public from monopolistic extortion.

The symptoms of fascist thinking are colored by environment and adapted to immediate circumstances. But always and everywhere they can be identified by their appeal to prejudice and by the desire to play upon the fears and vanities of different groups in order to gain power. It is no coincidence that the growth of modern tyrants has in every case been heralded by the growth of prejudice. It may be shocking to some people in this country to realize that, without meaning to do so, they hold views in common with Hitler when they preach discrimination against other religious, racial or economic groups. Likewise, many people whose patriotism is their proudest boast play Hitler's game by retailing distrust of our Allies and by giving currency to snide suspicions without foundation in fact.

The American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact. Their newspapers and propaganda carefully cultivate every fissure of disunity, every crack in the common front against fascism. They use every opportunity to impugn democracy. They use isolationism as a slogan to conceal their own selfish imperialism

. T They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest.

Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.

Several leaders of industry in this country who have gained a new vision of the meaning of opportunity through co-operation with government have warned the public openly that there are some selfish groups in industry who are willing to jeopardize the structure of American liberty to gain some temporary advantage. We all know the part that the cartels played in bringing Hitler to power, and the rule the giant German trusts have played in Nazi conquests.

Monopolists who fear competition and who distrust democracy because it stands for equal opportunity would like to secure their position against small and energetic enterprise. In an effort to eliminate the possibility of any rival growing up, some monopolists would sacrifice democracy itself.

It has been claimed at times that our modern age of technology facilitates dictatorship. What we must understand is that the industries, processes, and inventions created by modern science can be used either to subjugate or liberate.

The choice is up to us. It must put human beings first and dollars second. It must appeal to reason and decency and not to violence and deceit. We must not tolerate oppressive government or industrial oligarchy in the form of monopolies and cartels.

As long as scientific research and inventive ingenuity outran our ability to devise social mechanisms to raise the living standards of the people, we may expect the liberal potential of the United States to increase. If this liberal potential is properly channeled, we may expect the area of freedom of the United States to increase. The problem is to spend up our rate of social invention in the service of the welfare of all the people.

It should also be evident that exhibitions of the native brand of fascism are not confined to any single section, class or religion. Happily, it can be said that as yet fascism has not captured a predominant place in the outlook of any American section, class or religion. It may be encountered in Wall Street, Main Street or Tobacco Road

. Some even suspect that they can detect incipient traces of it along the Potomac. It is an infectious disease, and we must all be on our guard against intolerance, bigotry and the pretension of invidious distinction.

But if we put our trust in the common sense of common men and "with malice toward none and charity for all" go forward on the great adventure of making political, economic and social democracy a practical reality, we shall not fail.

Selected Works of Henry A. Wallace

Read entry | Discuss (9 comments) | Recommend (+11 votes)
Posted by Ichingcarpenter in Science
Tue Jan 19th 2010, 05:49 AM
Oceans of liquid diamond, filled with solid diamond icebergs, could be floating on Neptune and Uranus, according to a recent article in the journal Nature Physics.

The research, based on first detailed measurements of the melting point of diamond, found diamond behaves like water during freezing and melting, with solid forms floating atop liquid forms. The surprising revelation gives scientists a new understanding about diamonds and some of the most distant planets in our solar system.

"Diamond is a relatively common material on Earth, but its melting point has never been measured," said Eggert. "You can't just raise the temperature and have it melt, you have to also go to high pressures, which makes it very difficult to measure the temperature."


When the pressure dropped to about 11 million times the atmospheric pressure at sea level on Earth and the temperature dropped to about 50,000 degrees solid chunks of diamond began to appear. The pressure kept dropping, but the temperature of the diamond remained the same, with more and more chunks of diamond forming.

Then the diamond did something unexpected. The chunks of diamond didn't sink. They floated. Microscopic diamond ice burgs floating in a tiny sea of liquid diamond. The diamond was behaving like water.


Up to 10 percent of Uranus and Neptune is estimated to be made from carbon. A huge ocean of liquid diamond in the right place could deflect or tilt the magnetic field out of alignment with the rotation of the planet.
Read entry | Discuss (10 comments) | Recommend (+12 votes)
Posted by Ichingcarpenter in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Mon Jan 04th 2010, 01:49 PM
I wonder?....

Anyway, until these War Criminals, Corporate Criminals and saboteurs
of America are brought to Justice

until then matter how much change
you might think you are getting

everything will remain as fucked up
as you know it is

and are asked
once again

to roll over and take it and
compromise everything you stand for.

Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by Ichingcarpenter in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Mon Jan 04th 2010, 01:28 PM
One of the Best documented books I've read lately.
Yes, the nightmare is true, yes there is a shadow government.

And your fears about JFK's death just took a new turn.

Russ Baker's Family of Secrets, a 600 page thriller that digs more deeply into the Bush Family than anyone has ever done. The paperback is now in its third edition and I've been urging Russ to work with someone on doing a synopsis that we could use to turn people on who are intimidated by books with hundreds of pages. Yesterday he finally sent me something that can be used here at DWT. He starts with the questions many of us have asked over and over again: "How did the spectacularly unqualified George W. Bush come to be the President of the United States, and arguably the most powerful person in the world? What lay behind his improbable rise and disastrous policies? Was there more to his controversial reign than the pundits’ standard bromides?"
These are the questions that launched Russ Baker into five years of research. The answers, based on hundreds of interviews, including with persons close to the Bush family who had never talked with reporters, proved astounding.

Not only, Baker found, had we missed the very essence of W., but also of his father and grandfather and in fact the entire clan. Moreover, behind the secrets of the Bushes and their circle lay larger ones that cast decades of American history in a new and revealing light.

The Bushes have been portrayed as everything from incompetents to ideologues to outright crooks. Many of their transgressions are now well known-- from grandfather Prescott’s involvement with Nazi-era financiers to W.’s initiatives that weakened Americans’ constitutional rights at every turn.

But Baker’s research took him to far deeper levels of insight into the American power machine, as it unearthed material of the sort more commonly identified with shady foreign regimes or Hollywood thrillers than with the still-hallowed U.S. presidency.

Baker explained this in a post-publication interview: “As I discovered, there was an entire hidden stratum of truth underlying the rise of the Bushes-- a truth that, if not reckoned with, threatens to derail the reforms we all hope are on the horizon.”

More here even chapters of the book.
Read entry | Discuss (145 comments) | Recommend (+211 votes)
Posted by Ichingcarpenter in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Thu Dec 31st 2009, 10:45 AM
Leaders who fail to provide true and proper command, inspiration and strategic vision for their followers leave a battered organization. I have
revolted against athletic coaches, principals and political leaders.

You and they need the flame you provide for their leadership. Hollow leadership is a failed leadership.
With all of these dire consequences hollow ship, why would they ever fail to fulfill their leadership responsibilities? The answer is often quite simple. Either they think they have the option of not changing, or they know that change should take place but somehow cannot execute it.

If you notice birds in flight the leadership is past back and forth, not so in mammals that much except with Cetacea family. I'm not in the "Top Dog" family concept of leadership even being a "silver back' aged primate that I am.

Socrates rejected the materialistic view of leadership as did others

"I was really too honest a man to be a politician and live."

I take Politicians with a grain of salt because they are a fish that need to
be salted in order to taste and digested for they all too human
just like us and I do not follow the "school"

I admire a few politicians but most are frontmen and don't follow
what leadership means which is having

... a high degree of self-knowledge.
....are willing to hear unpleasant messages.
..... Are able to tolerate uncertainty.
.....Maintain clear and logical thought under great pressure.
.....Know when to lead and when to recede.
....Pride themselves on operating at high standards of performance.
.....Have, and can create in others, a healthy sense of urgency.
.....Seek solution-oriented feedback with which to adjust performance.
......Do not have to be right all the time.

Very few politicians do this,
some CEOs do like Steven Jobs and others
but that is another kind of leadership vs political leadership
and you can't fire them like you can in a democracy which
levels they playing field.

So I guess I have to say ..... I still don't trust politicians
and vote.

Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Ichingcarpenter in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Thu Dec 31st 2009, 09:29 AM
Life giving you a comb after you are bald

At nearly 60 this coming year, and still somewhat a head of hair,
I count and experience each day more aware of what they mean

that my graduate degrees never adressed
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by Ichingcarpenter in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Wed Dec 16th 2009, 01:51 AM
They act like the old House of Lords back in the early 1800s
with the same powers, titles, wealth and privileges but now its corporate
with the exceptions of a few senators.

It took the English Civil Wars of the 1640s and the reform bill of the 1830s to get rid of its power.

The US will not diminish the Senate's powers in the foreseeable future
because it is not a parliamentary system but a federalist system

States have to be treated equally, or else the little ones will lose out. But who cares if they lose out? States don't vote. People do!

in Thomas Geoghegan's 1998 book, The Secret Lives of Citizens. Because each state is granted equal representation in the Senate regardless of population, Geoghegan writes, "a man who might own a gas station in Idaho might have more say in foreign policy than the whole Trilateral Commission."

Mindful that a filibuster can only be stopped by a vote of three-fifths of the Senate, Geoghegan calculates that 41 senators representing about 10 percent of the population can block a bill favored by 60 senators representing about 90 percent of the population.

A 90 percent majority in favor still doesn't guarantee that a law can be passed! OK, so we'll get rid of the filibuster. Given the practical difficulties of abolishing the Senate, that's a respectable fallback position. But even if the filibuster were scuttled, Geoghegan figures, 50 senators representing the 25 smallest states, and hence a mere 16 percent of the population, could still block passage of a bill favored by the other 84 percent of the population.

(Assuming, of course, the tie-breaking vice president abstained or went along with the naysayers; with 50 senators, the vice president wouldn't be a factor.) Similarly, he points out, 51 senators representing "16 percent and a bit more" could pass any bill they wished, even if 84 percent of the population opposed it. (Of course, the president, who has veto power, would have to favor the bill, too.)

Howie Hawkins, a Green Party USA candidate for Congress in New York, has slightly different numbers--the way he's figured it, 20 percent of the population, acting through its senators, can block legislation favored by 80 percent of the population--but the point remains the same.

Nebraska, the only state in the United States that has a unicameral legislature, can hardly be described as a hotbed of radicalism. Jesse Ventura wants the same thing in Minnesota. Why can't we have one in Washington, too?

In addition to being more democratic, it would also be loads more efficient. No conference committees! No duplicative hearings! And think of the office space you'd save on Capitol Hill!

This portion of my rant is from another poster:

The founding fathers and in particular james madison wrote about why they wanted this particular form of govt. They wrote about this in the federalist papers, madison's notes from the constitutional convention and in a letter to jefferson from madison.

Here is a basic summary of what they said:

They did not want democracy. In fact the primary reason the founding fathers installed our present constitution was that under the articles of confederation, the people were beginning to assert their will because under the articles of confederation, some of the several states were developing parliamentarian demcracies. That meant that the majority of working class citizens in those states were raising taxes on the rich and were allowing debt relief for people who were broke. The founding fathers, being rich, did not like that. So Madison created a type of govt that would give the appearance of democracy, but that in practice would prevent the will of the people from being exerted via the vote.

Let me tell you what madison said was the primary purpose of his new constitution: to preserve wealth inequality, to "protect the minority of the opulent against the majority," in his words. In fact, in that same paragraph he wrote that the Senate was the primary way that his constitution would achieve that goal.

Madison's new gov't would fragment the will of the people by increasing faction by increasing the size of the voting districts that elected politicians. He noted that politicians from small voting districts had to more or less follow the will of the people because in small districts the people were more able to "unite and discover their common interest" and thus force the politicians to do as the people wanted.

In larger districts that would be created under his new constitution (e.g., the office of the president and the senate), the districts were so large that there naturally existed more FACTIONS in these larger districts. More factions meant that the people were more diviided and could not thus unite and discover their common intererst and thereby make the politicians obey the will of the people.

Large districts like the entire nation (the president) and each state (the senate) were so fragmented by the factions in them that the voters would be divided and not united.

Divide et impera, wrote madison to jefferson, was how the USA should be ruled. Divide and conquer by fragment the people by increasing the number of factions in voting districts.

Madison and founding fathers created factions in voting districts by enlarging them.

In the quasi-parliamentarian governments that were growing under the articles of confederation before 1791 when the new constitution was installed, the politicians were elected from small disticts. Small meaning fewer factions and therefore more unity among voters.

OK..... Rant over but you know the Senate is the problem with our government and not the house.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Random Journal
Random Journal
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.