From Around the Blogroll

Donald Douglas referenced this story from the San José Mercury News, which had this as the money line:

“Of course, I want people to have health care,” (Cindy) Vinson said. “I just didn’t realize I would be the one who was going to pay for it personally.”

A lot more at the link. The story references the winners and losers from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Yes, there are absolutely some winners, mainly people who had expensive insurance because they had chronic health problems, but there are many losers as well, people who had much more moderately priced insurance plans, who must now pay a lot more, because their insurance plans must now cover things that they didn’t choose to have covered in the past, and because the insurance companies must now spread the costs of care for previously uninsurable people, whom they must now cover at no additional cost, over the mass of people who don’t have such conditions.

One of the lessons liberal economists — a term which is almost an oxymoron — never seem to have learned is that nothing is free: for a person to receive something, someone must pay for it. Under the PP&ACA, the people who are getting things they didn’t have before are having those things paid for by other people.

Phineas, writing on Sister Toldjah, asks if You want to know why Obamacare will collapse? Then he tells you.

From The Pirate’s Cove:

Bummer: D.C. Climate Will Hit Tipping Point In 2047
By William Teach October 10, 2013 – 11:03 am

Are you ready for yet another climate tipping point article fable?

(Washington Post) Locations around the globe will soon reach climatic tipping points, with some in tropical regions — home to most of the world’s biodiversity — feeling the first impacts of unprecedented eras of elevated temperatures as soon as seven years from now, according to a study released Wednesday.

On average, locations worldwide will leave behind the climates that have existed from the middle of the 19th century through the beginning of the 21st century by 2047 if no progress is made in curbing emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases, said researchers at the University of Hawaii at Manoa who sought to project the timing of that event for 54,000 locations.

More at the link, but Mr Teach noted that we’ve heard these projections before, and they haven’t exactly panned out.

From Karen, the Lonely Conservative:

Call The Waaaaambulance, Furloughed Federal Workers Are Bored
by  •  •

Somebody call a waaaaambulance! Some furloughed federal workers are bored during their paid vacation. One even “resorted” to cleaning out her own garage, the poor dear.

More at the link.

In every previous shutdown, the furloughed workers have received back pay for the days they were off. Perhaps the feds will simply count these days as the regular furlough days caused by that horrible, draconian, absolutely unlivable sequester we have somehow, miraculously, managed to survive . . . though just barely, I’m sure.

From Le*gal In*sur*rec*tion:

Healthcare.gov — The bad, the bad, and the ugly
Posted by    Thursday, October 10, 2013 at 6:23pm

Remember, we had to pass the law to find out what was in it.

I’ve been covering the ongoing issues with the Obamacare website in the days since its glitch-filled launch, which you can read here, here and here.  From day one, the Obama administration has spun the problems as a good thing, blaming all the site’s technical misfires entirely on high traffic volume – demand that it claims was beyond its expectations.

As I’ve written in all of my posts on the subject, I’ve been highly skeptical of that claim and have provided numerous citations, as well as some of my own commentary, to support such skepticism.  I ended one of those posts by writing, “While some media outlets have focused on the long wait times, very few are actually breaking down the glitches and testing the administration’s claims that volume is solely to blame.”

Well, that has certainly changed since I wrote it.

More at the link.

From Political Realities:

Liberalism vs. Conservatism – What Difference Does It Make?
By LD Jackson

There is a great divide in America. On one side, you have liberalism, voiced by a group of progressive Democrats that believe in greater government control of almost every aspect of our daily lives. On the other, there is conservatism. More and more, conservatism is being voiced by the people who lean more to the libertarian side of the political spectrum. Many of us want nothing more than to be simply left alone. We do not desire the government to be in our homes or in our lives and we see much of the federal government as an unneeded and unwanted intrusion into our personal lives. The differences between the two sides of this divide could be no greater. My question is this. To borrow the words from Hillary Clinton, what difference does it make, as long as we are all still Americans? My answer to that question may also be simple, but I would contend that it makes a great deal of difference in the direction America is going.

Liberalism vs. Conservatism: Stop and think about this for a moment. Have you ever seen a time when so many things you do are controlled by the federal government? I was talking to a gentleman yesterday about his car. He had a tire pressure monitor (TPMS) light on because the sensor itself was bad. He didn’t want to spend the money to fix the problem and voiced this question. He wanted to know why the vehicles were required to have the TPMS systems. I informed him it was because of federal regulations and he wanted to know what business it was of the federal government if his car had the system or not. He went on to mention numerous items that the federal government requires, but in reality were none of their business.

The sentiment expressed by this gentleman is the same sentiment I see in action all across the area where I live and work. There is a battle going on that we may or may not be aware of. Most of us want nothing to do with the federal government. We desire to go back to the foundations laid down by the Founding Fathers. The federal government is supposed to be small and not so strong. They are supposed to be focused on national defense and other enumerated powers. Instead, we find them creeping into every aspect of our daily lives. We are told what safety systems our vehicles will have, what kind of light bulbs our houses will have, what kind of food we should eat, etc. This list could go on for a few paragraphs.

Those few more paragraphs can be found at the original. As for me, I found the illustration pretty profound, because it summarizes modern liberalism perfectly. Of course, it’s all for our own good, don’t you know?

Jeff Goldstein noted that one of the Framers anticipated the possibility of a government shutdown:

“James Madison Anticipates the Possibility of Government Shutdown–and Predicts that the House of Representatives Can and Should Prevail”
– Which is one reason why writers in Slate, Salon, the WaPo, the NYT, and elsewhere, have started pushing the meme that the “shutdown” is the “Constitution’s fault.”  In fact, one writer blamed James Madison particularly, citing as a flaw what he here notes in Federalist 58:

The House of Representatives cannot only refuse, but they alone can propose, the supplies requisite for the support of government. They, in a word, hold the purse that powerful instrument by which we behold, in the history of the British Constitution, an infant and humble representation of the people gradually enlarging the sphere of its activity and importance, and finally reducing, as far as it seems to have wished, all the overgrown prerogatives of the other branches of the government. This power over the purse may, in fact, be regarded as the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect every just and salutary measure.

Much more at the link. But it seems that our 4th President, one much wiser than our 44th, was very much a supporter of the concept that Parliament had the power to stop the excesses of the King by denying him the revenues to act beyond their consent. It’s a slightly different situation with the shutdown and the debt ceiling here, but the concept is the same.

Dejah Thoris from the film John Carter.

On the Victory Girls, Dejah Thoris writes about feminism.

Feminism’s ultimate lie is that you have to be like man to be more like a woman. I fail to understand how this is even possible. I thought we were supposed to still be women? We have certainly made great strides in our liberation. We have control of our bodies (except Sandra Fluke, who needs the patriarchal, male dominated government to stay out of her uterus, but pay for her birth control), we hold political office (although that even leads me to believe that some women should have stayed home), we run corporations, we serve and lead in the military (but in order to be fair, evidently we are going to have to sign up for the draft and be subjected to serving in the Infantry).

But the most important thing we women do is teach our sons how to interact with the women in their lives, and what is expected of them by us. The next most important thing we do is teach the young women in our lives the importance of men in their own lives and how to expect to be treated by them.

But an ideology that hates and marginalizes men can’t be reasonably expected to teach them about the importance and necessity of men, and an ideology that fails to recognize the inherent differences between men and women, despite the massive amount of evidence in this regard, is doomed to failure. In today’s society, the constant marginalization of men has created a backlash, among both men and women about our roles.

More at the link.

Finally, Robert Stacey Stacy McCain asks:

What happened to the Democrat Party? When and how did the psychological impulses of radical alienation seize control of a large segment of our society, infusing them with the anti-religious, anti-family, anti-capitalist, anti-American spirit that dominates the souls of Democrats today?

More at the link. But it wasn’t so very long ago that we had a Democratic Party which represented the working man rather than the non-working welfare leech, that represented freedom and individual liberty and opposed communism, and which said that all men are created equal, and ought to be treated equally by their government, regardless of the color of their skin. It was a Democratic Party of which America could be proud. I don’t know where that Democratic Party went, but it sure isn’t around here anymore.

That’s it for this week!

59 Comments

  1. A lot more at the link. The story references the winners and losers from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Yes, there are absolutely some winners, mainly people who had expensive insurance because they had chronic health problems, but there are many losers as well, people who had much more moderately priced insurance plans, who must now pay a lot more, because their insurance plans must now cover things that they didn’t choose to have covered in the past, and because the insurance companies must now spread the costs of care for previously uninsurable people, whom they must now cover at no additional cost, over the mass of people who don’t have such conditions.

    Meanwhile, back in the real world where people actually look at numbers

    —–
    Last night, I saw a tweet from Sarah Kliff on how healthcare.gov had opened a place to do “window-shopping” in the exchanges. I was excited about this, as I’ve been trying to look at options in Indiana for informational purposes only. While I’ve been able to get an account in the Indiana exchange, I’ve still be unable to see any actual offerings in the exchange. I’m as frustrated by this as many of you.

    So I wandered over to this information-only area, and what do you know! It worked! I was able to see offerings from three insurance companies for catastrophic, bronze, gold, and silver plans. There were more than I expected, to be honest. There wasn’t any information about deductibles, co-pays, and co-insurance (or networks), but at least I could see premiums.

    Silver plans for an individual range from $278 to $301 a month (before subsidies). This is far less than what the state released a while ago. For a family like mine, silver plans range from $938 to $1018 a month (before subsidies). What’s more, even the gold plans range from only $1175 to $1329 a month.

    Since we know that the average employer sponsored health insurance plan for a family in the US is $16,351, that means the most expensive gold plan on the exchange, at $15,948, is cheaper. Let me say that again: The most expensive plan I could find for a family line mine on the Indiana Health Insurance Exchange is less expensive than the average employer sponsored health insurance plan in the US.
    —–

  2. And, in a further dispatch from the real world

    —–
    NBC/WSJ poll: Shutdown debate damages GOP

    The Republican Party has been badly damaged in the ongoing government shutdown and debt limit standoff, with a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finding that a majority of Americans blame the GOP for the shutdown, and with the party’s popularity declining to its lowest level.

    By a 22-point margin (53 percent to 31 percent), the public blames the Republican Party more for the shutdown than President Barack Obama – a wider margin of blame for the GOP than the party received during the poll during the last shutdown in 1995-96.
    [...]
    And one year until next fall’s midterm elections, American voters prefer a Democratic-controlled Congress to a Republican-controlled one by eight percentage points (47 percent to 39 percent), up from the Democrats’ three-point advantage last month (46 percent to 43 percent).

    What’s more, Obama’s political standing has remained relatively stable since the shutdown, with his approval rating ticking up two points since last month, and with the Democratic Party’s favorability rating declining just three points (from 42 percent to 39 percent)
    [...]
    A ‘boomerang’ effect for the GOP
    Yet what is perhaps even more worrisome for the GOP is the “boomerang” effect: As the party has used the shutdown and fiscal fight to campaign against the nation’s health-care law and for limited government, the poll shows those efforts have backfired.

    For one thing, the health-care law has become more popular since the shutdown began. Thirty-eight percent see the Affordable Care Act (or “Obamacare”) as a good idea, versus 43 percent who see it as a bad idea – up from 31 percent good idea, 44 percent bad idea last month.
    —–

    Now, Dana was fond of saying that the only opinion poll that counted was an election.

    Obama won the 2012 election, campaigning on health care. And Dana, hypocritical wingnut that he is, is still screaming that actually implementing such health care is “illegitimate”.

  3. Obama won the 2012 election, campaigning on health care. And Dana, hypocritical wingnut that he is, is still screaming that actually implementing such health care is “illegitimate”.

    Of course, in the real world, Boss Obama campaigned on a healthcare system that would LOWER everyone’s premiums by about $2500, and that if one wanted to keep their doctor they COULD. Since these have proved to be utter falsehoods, it certainly could be considered “illegitimate.” Not legally, mind you, but “legally” means the House can do whatever it is “legally” able to do to stop this boondoggle.

    And elections DO have consequences. The 2010 one which rivaled the 1994 mid-term in revolutionary scope. Y’know, the GOP being elected back into the majority of the House (and again in 2012) …. to stop ObamaCare.

    NBC/WSJ poll: Shutdown debate damages GOP

    14 months before the 2010 mid-terms Dems were polling on average double digits over the GOP in the generic ballots. Final result? GOP polled +7. And you know the elections results.

  4. The Phoenician, who is such a stickler for citations, wrote:

    Obama won the 2012 election, campaigning on health care. And Dana, hypocritical wingnut that he is, is still screaming that actually implementing such health care is “illegitimate”.

    Oddly enough, I don’t recall ever saying that it was “illegitimate” to enact health care legislation; perhaps you could provide a citation for that. Nor have I said that Barack Hussein Obama is an “illegitimate” President, having many times used the illustration that if the electoral college voted for a 17 year old Tibetian boy who spoke no English, said boy would be the next legal President of the United States, age and citizenship notwithstanding, because the Framers neglected to provide an enforcement mechanism in the Constitution. There are elements of this particular health care law I think are unconstitutional — unfortunately, the Supreme Court didn’t agree — but I don’t see it as beyond the government’s power to establish a universal health care system.

    I have said that both the PP&ACA and any other universal health insurance plan is a bad idea, because such are nothing more than yet another welfare system. It could be argued that single-payer would be a better way of providing universal coverage, if we are going to provide universal coverage, but I do not want to provide universal coverage at all. And I have been very blunt about it, stating directly that I would rather see people “die due to the lack of coverage” than have yet another fornicating welfare system taking money out of my pocket.

    Of course, single-payer ain’t very great either, as I have noted previously:

    NHS patients 45% more likely to die than in US
    Patients are 45% more likely to die in NHS hospitals than in US ones, according to figures revealing how badly England’s health service compares with those of other countries
    By Rosa Silverman

    Previously unpublished data collated by Professor Sir Brian Jarman over more than 10 years found NHS mortality rates were among the worst of those in seven developed countries.

    A patient in England was five times as likely to die of pneumonia and twice as likely to die of septicaemia compared to similar patients in the US, the leading country in the study, the data suggested.

    The elderly were found to be particularly at risk in English hospitals compared with those in the other countries.

    The figures showed that the situation had improved since 2004, when the death rate in English hospitals was 58% higher than that in the best performing country.

    But NHS institutions still lagged behind in the most recent data, from 2012, despite reforms of the health service and increased funding.

    Of the other six countries studied, only the US was named because of the sensitivity of the data.

    Heck, they’d probably make people wait a whole season with ingrown toenails before having them cut out!

  5. One of the lessons liberal economists — a term which is almost an oxymoron — never seem to have learned is that nothing is free: for a person to receive something, someone must pay for it. Under the PP&ACA, the people who are getting things they didn’t have before are having those things paid for by other people.

    And what makes you think this isn’t exactly what left wing economists wanted?

    Or, to use computer geek-speak: This isn’t a bug, but a feature.

  6. Obama won the 2012 election, campaigning on health care.

    Actually, he didn’t. He didn’t mention Obamacare much in 2012, because he knew it was unpopular. Of course, if you got your information other than sitting in the basement doing Google hour after hour, you might know that.

  7. Obama won the 2012 election, campaigning on health care.

    Dumbass in the time of Hoagie is a fucking moron. Obama won the 2012 election because the media covered his worthless ass. He campaigned on “jobs”, the economy and racial bigotry. What he stated about Obaminable care was lies (if you like your doctor, insurance company etc. you can keep it). All you leftist dumbasses are damn despots trying incessantly to tell others what to do, what to buy, how to eat, and how to live their lives. Leave us alone. We don’t want to be part of your Borg.

  8. “Leave us alone. We don’t want to be part of your Borg.”

    They can’t leave you alone. His kind cannot survive without you. And “he’d” rather die than try. That is why they inevitably push to the point of either totalitarianism or violence.

    It’s not about “reasons” within a framework of reciprocity, or some moral order with the leftist thing. It’s about their survival; whatever it is that “they” really are.

    Ask a leftist, as I have done a thousand tedious times, what entitles it to stake claims against your life, and they cannot answer anymore than a cow can answer what gives it the “right” to eat grass.

    And as they see it, and will even say if they are honest, there’s no real difference.

    Take Phoenician in a Time of Romans as an example since Phoenician is the one you’re referring to. It cannot say why anyone who accepts its own atheistic premise should care, annoyance that it is, if it withers and dies. It would be embarrassed to try.

    What’s Phoenician going to say on its own behalf?:
    - “I Phoenician etc. etc. am a man; and men have inherent, objective, and inalienable rights?” It doesn’t itself believe in that; and we know it.

    - That, “You should care about me because it can be shown to be in your best interest?” But, given specific cases of potential exclusion for cause, it really cannot be so shown. Therefore a distributive argument fails for lack of consistent class defining attributes.

    - That “You owe me?” How?

    - That, “I have a soul, and an infinite value as a person and deserve care.”? Pffft LOL

    - That it is needed, or has some irreplaceable utility that will be lost to you, if it is ignored and allowed to reap what it has itself sown? Obvious nonsense.

    All it and its kind, like Perry, have is emotion, and threats, and a hope that they can con us with pseudo moral claims or cynical references to established law.

    But they cannot con anyone anymore. We are used to the threats the leftists things make and know that:
    - submitting to an obnoxious parasite only breeds more parasites and more extreme demands by them for your submission,
    - that they cannot establish objective moral claims in a manner consistent with their own anthropology; and
    - that the liberty killing laws they pass are no more sacred nor deserving of respect than the laws they sought to overthrow in order to enable their regimes of coercion and appropriation in the first place.

    Imagine Phoenician in a Time of Romans here in the U.S., with you knowing exactly who and what it is, as you very well do, and demanding that you do for it what Obamacare demands we do for equally obnoxious others here in the U.S.

    That is, multiply the instances of Phoenician, and create a hypothetical social subclass of identically obnoxious beings. They would have no more morally valid claim on you, than he would have.

    Whatever might apply to poor little kids or grandmas would not apply to the Phoenician and its kind in any event.

    But that is what it, and other leftists pretend to be able to argue in millions of implied cases where the conditions would be virtually or effectively identical, with the recipients of your sacrifice being no more morally entitled to draw on you, than the familiarly dysfunctionally and obnoxious Phoenician is.

    All they really have when you come down to it is a want, and a threat of ultimate violence if you don’t satisfy it.

    “Borg”, is as good a term as any for them.

  9. Pingback: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup » Pirate's Cove

  10. Eric: “Obama won the 2012 election, campaigning on health care. ”

    Actually, he didn’t. He didn’t mention Obamacare much in 2012, because he knew it was unpopular.

    Uh-huh.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/78571.html

    ——
    President Obama highlights health care law on campaign trail

    By KATHRYN SMITH | 7/16/12 5:36 PM EDT

    President Barack Obama on Monday gave a strong defense of his health care law, weaving multiple mentions of health reform into answers at an Ohio town hall and saying he doesn’t mind the “Obamacare” label “because I really do care.”

    Drawing attention to the parallels between his controversial legislation and the Massachusetts reform signed into law by Mitt Romney, Obama said, “It’s working really well there. He should be proud of it instead of running away from it.”

    The president has mentioned the health law in his stump speech routinely since the Supreme Court upheld it last month, but he spoke about the controversial legislation more expansively in a town hall Monday. Several times, he worked health care into his answers to questions that weren’t specifically about health reform. For instance, he mentioned the health reform law when asked about supporting small business and again when asked about uniting the country in a second term. He used the forum to defend his law, critique Romney and mention his support for Planned Parenthood.
    —–

    You’re a friggin’ idiot, Eric.

  11. Sure. Someone who only knows how to Google, cut, and paste knows more about American politics than someone who actually lives here and who followed it in detail all of last year.

    Arrogance is generally a bad quality in any person. But arrogance in an idiot is just pathetic.

  12. Sure. Someone who only knows how to Google, cut, and paste knows more about American politics than someone who actually lives here and who followed it in detail all of last year.

    When that second someone is a lying idiot like you, obviously. One notices, for example, that you’re not able to actually deal with the facts in that article and have to try for a particularly weak ad hominem instead.

    Here it is again for you:


    President Obama highlights health care law on campaign trail

    By KATHRYN SMITH | 7/16/12 5:36 PM EDT

    President Barack Obama on Monday gave a strong defense of his health care law, weaving multiple mentions of health reform into answers at an Ohio town hall and saying he doesn’t mind the “Obamacare” label “because I really do care.”

    Drawing attention to the parallels between his controversial legislation and the Massachusetts reform signed into law by Mitt Romney, Obama said, “It’s working really well there. He should be proud of it instead of running away from it.”

    The president has mentioned the health law in his stump speech routinely since the Supreme Court upheld it last month, but he spoke about the controversial legislation more expansively in a town hall Monday. Several times, he worked health care into his answers to questions that weren’t specifically about health reform. For instance, he mentioned the health reform law when asked about supporting small business and again when asked about uniting the country in a second term. He used the forum to defend his law, critique Romney and mention his support for Planned Parenthood.
    —–

  13. Sure. Someone who only knows how to Google, cut, and paste knows more about American politics than someone who actually lives here and who followed it in detail all of last year.

    Ahem.

    http://www.journal14.com/2012/11/06/mitt-romney/

    —–
    Mitt Romney should be headed for a 40 state landslide. We would expect Obama to win the liberal states and his home state, but that’s about it. [...] As for the election, I wish I had the confidence of Dick Morris, who thinks it will be a Romney landslide. As it is, I will go with Charles Krauthammer, who also thinks Romney will win, but by a marrow margin. Let’s just hope and pray!
    —–

    Eric, 6 November 2012.

    And apart from this sterling example of your political wisdom, there was also a literary prediction, wasn’t there? How’s the Hollywood deal going, Eric?

  14. Oh, and lest we forget

    http://www.journal14.com/2012/10/31/total-war/

    —-
    Total War

    Posted by Eric on 31 October 2012, 12:46 am

    The Left has declared Total War on America. They hate our guts, and want to destroy the ideals this country was founded on. All they want is power, and have come up with various schemes to get it. Therefore we must fight back, or see our values destroyed. The best way to fight them is to attack their motives, after all, this is what they do to us. Once we expose them as evil and corrupt, the people will turn against them. Once their hatred and power mad ways have been gotten rid of entirely, this country can once again claim its ideals of low taxes and limited government.
    —–

    Haven’t seen much of this “Total War” yet – just online whining from a bunch of losers.

  15. One notices, for example, that you’re not able to actually deal with the facts in that article

    That’s ONE article. Out of thousands written that election year. Not to mention thousands of hours of commentary on the various TV news stations, plus the Internet, plus, well, etc.

    That’s the difference between you and me. I don’t think, just because I can Google up material on New Zealand politics, that I know more about your politics than someone who’s lived there all their life.

  16. Haven’t seen much of this “Total War” yet

    Then you missed the 2010 elections. The press likes to play it down, but Nancy Pelosi, former Speakess of the House, got spanked so badly it was like an NFL coach losing to a bunch of high school kids. And, much as the Dems like to think 2012 was a big win, it wasn’t. It was a status quo election, meaning almost all of those Tea Party guys elected in 2010 are still there.

    But that’s the problem when your only knowledge of our politics is you sitting in your basement 10,000 miles away, relying solely on Google for your information.

  17. How’s the Hollywood deal going, Eric?

    It’s funny how you obsess over this. A normal person might mention something once or twice, but you’ve brought this up dozens of times, clearly making it an obsession.

    But I’ll make a deal. You explain why you’re obsessed with this, and I’ll explain why this book would make an amazing movie.

  18. But I’ll make a deal. You explain why you’re obsessed with this, and I’ll explain why this book would make an amazing movie.

    But, Eric, that wasn’t what you boasted.

    Sold your novel off to Hollywood yet for a million dollars, Eric?

  19. Pingback: Call The Waaaaambulance, Furloughed Federal Workers Are Bored | The Lonely Conservative

  20. But, Eric, that wasn’t what you boasted.

    It is, in a way. Hollywood does not spend good money on boring stories. I wouldn’t be predicting success if I didn’t think I had something worthwhile to sell.

  21. It is, in a way.

    No, Eric – you predicted you would sell your novel to Hollywood for a million dollars.

    You didn’t say “In my opinion, this would make an amazing movie” – you made a boast about a fact not your opinion. Facts are real – opinions are like assholes; everyone has one and few are worth seeing.

    Have you SOLD your novel to Hollywood for a million dollars yet, like you boasted?

  22. Thing is, Eric’s prediction isn’t wrong yet, because he didn’t put a time limit on it.

    If it should turn out that Eric’s book is a great success, our Wewwington Wibwawian will probably urinate on his facility’s copy, yelling, “I showed you!

    Of course, Eric doesn’t have a Master’s degree in science!

  23. No, Eric – you predicted you would sell your novel to Hollywood for a million dollars.

    I explained why I thought such a prediction was not unrealistic.

  24. Have you SOLD your novel to Hollywood for a million dollars yet, like you boasted?

    Only an idiot asks (repeatedly) a question to which he already has an answer. But, in case you missed it, Dana provided the answer. It hasn’t happened YET. That’s the whole point of a PREDICTION. Do you know what a prediction is? If not, you can look it up in the dictionary. You work in a library, there should be a dictionary around.

  25. I explained why I thought such a prediction was not unrealistic.

    No, Eric, you didn’t. You may have realised how totally stupid the prediction was after I explained it to you using small words and diagrams, but at the time you made it in dead earnest.

    You moron.

  26. but at the time you made it in dead earnest.

    Yeah? So? What’s it to you if I did? What business of yours is it if I think I’m going to suceed at something?

    You know, there are three kinds of reactions to a prediction such as mine. A good person sees a prediction of success and wishes that person well. An average person might be indifferent. A rotten person openly hopes the other person fails.

    You are a rotten person.

  27. Yeah? So? What’s it to you if I did?

    Which part of me sneering at you for your Dunning-Kruger do you not get yet?

  28. Which part of me sneering at you for your Dunning-Kruger do you not get yet?

    Which part of me not caring do you not get? Do you really think that you sneering is going to have the slightest effect on my success in life?

    Anyway, like the coward you are, you simply ducked the rest of my message, so here it is again:

    You know, there are three kinds of reactions to a prediction such as mine. A good person sees a prediction of success and wishes that person well. An average person might be indifferent. A rotten person openly hopes the other person fails.

    You are a rotten person.

  29. Which part of me not caring do you not get?

    Your inability to face up to your problem is perhaps the defining symptom.

    You know, there are three kinds of reactions to a prediction such as mine.

    You forgot the fourth reaction – pointing and laughing at just how incredibly stupid it was. Just as people pointed and laughed at Comical Ali when he claimed Iraq would push the US into the sea.

  30. You forgot the fourth reaction – pointing and laughing at just how incredibly stupid it was.

    Except no one believes that for a second. This has nothing to do with humor on your part and everything to do with obsession. No one repeats the same damn “Joke” dozens of times and still thinks it’s funny. Never mind no one else on this blog thought it was ever funny to begin with.

    No, Pho, there’s something about my prediction of success that just eats you up inside. That’s why you can’t let go of it. And because you are a rotten person, you can’t just wish me well on my endeavours, but have to try to hope I fail instead. What a sorry, pathetic loser you are.

  31. Except no one believes that for a second.

    Once again, you show your Dunning-Kruger. Allow me to demonstrate…

    No, Pho, there’s something about my prediction of success that just eats you up inside. That’s why you can’t let go of it.

    Still you miss the point – ANYONE can make ANY predictions they want. It’s impossible to be jealous of a PREDICTION of success.

    But yours was so incredibly stupid and naive – you have no idea how bad your writing was, no idea how publishing works, and no idea how scripts are turned into movies.

    What I am doing, Eric, is rubbing your nose in your own craptitude. And I intend to keep on doing so until you get a clue. Every time you come up with something stupid, naive, or blindly ignorant, I’ll just keep reminding you of your boast – what was it, three or four years ago now? – to sell your novel to Hollywood for a million dollars.

    I happen to know a real author – I have my name down on the credits in a couple of his novels as an early reader and critic. He puts out about two books a year – it doesn’t take him three or four years. And he has a comfortably upper middle class lifestyle as a result – and he’s an award winning, best-selling novelist within his genre.

    Eric, you’re a fool. I think you’re starting to realise just how stupid your boast was, which is why you’re writhing on the hook here trying to get away from me reminding you of it.

    But, Eric – your mistake was not an anomaly – it is a direct result of your stupidity and your naivety. Until you face up to your Dunning-Kruger you simply can’t avoid it.

  32. Eric wrote:

    No, Pho, there’s something about my prediction of success that just eats you up inside. That’s why you can’t let go of it. And because you are a rotten person, you can’t just wish me well on my endeavours, but have to try to hope I fail instead. What a sorry, pathetic loser you are.

    Eric, he has to hope that you fail because he knows he already has. If you succeed, you will have proved yourself to have been better than he is.

    Now, you may not succeed; not everybody who tries to succeed does. But what the Phoenician secretly hopes is that, by constant harping on your not having made it yet, that you will give up, that you will stop trying. The successful person hopes that other people will succeed as well; it is only those who have already failed who can’t stand the thought of other people succeeding.

  33. But yours was so incredibly stupid and naive – you have no idea how bad your writing was

    Funny, you’re the only person who thinks so. Everyone else thinks it’s great, including one person who, unlike you, actually IS a writing/publishing professional.

    Now, when one person thinks they’re right and everyone else wrong, they are one of two things:

    1. A rare genius, like Albert Einstein, who really was right when everyone else was wrong, or
    2. Delusional.

    Since you’re no Einstein, I guess that makes you delusional. But, actually, it’s worse. Your attacks on my writing are not just based on delusion, but dishonesty driven by malice. Like I said, you’re a rotten person. Rotten people take pleasure at the notion of others failing, and even try to encourage people to fail, which is what you are doing here. Ironically, if a loser like yourself feels this way, it just gives me further encouragement that I will succeed.

  34. What I am doing, Eric, is rubbing your nose in your own craptitude

    Pho, you can tell these lies to yourself if you want, but don’t tell them to me. I’m not that stupid.

    Like I said, when someone repeats the same thing dozens of times, it’s obvious that they are obsessed. Something about that prediction of mine just drives you crazy. But that’s your problem, not mine.

  35. I happen to know a real author

    Author of what? The New Zealand phone book?

    As for “Upper middle class lifestyle”, that impresses me not. Dentists have an upper middle class lifestyle. My definition of success is walking into a Ferrari dealer, checkbook in hand, and being able to write a check for any car on the lot and drive off in the thing without it putting a serious dent in your net worth.

    And, speaking of “Driving off”, it is time for me to leave you to wallow in your own loserdom. Hoagie was right – you could become a decent person if you really wanted to. But apparently you don’t want to. So there’s no further point in my wasting time on your worthless existence. This will be my last communication with you. Have a … whatever.

  36. “And, speaking of “Driving off”, it is time for me to leave you to wallow in your own loserdom. Hoagie was right – you could become a decent person if you really wanted to.”

    Sorry to disagree with you, but he is what he is, as they say equivocally but perceptively say.

    Let’s assume that your first book is, for the sake of argument, “crap”. So what? Authors write how many books or other works before achieving either critical recognition, or financial success?

    Often it is only one or the other.

    Sometimes it is the crap that translates into financial success.

    Jacqueline Susann, merely to pick an historically infamous name to apply to a genre, seems to have had tremendous financial success while writing pure garbage, apparently intended to titillate bored Hausfraus. Certainly tons of “Romance novels” have since been published which adopt some of her pretensions to social commentary, and many of the authors have made plenty of money, peddling witless trash.

    On the other hand outstanding authors sometimes have only one or two of their novels reach a widespread audience despite repeat critical acclaim. William Peter Blatty might be one example. While William Golding had a number of outstanding works to his credit apart from Lord of the Flies, that remains what he is best known for. John Gardner (the American author) is I think another example.

    As I think about it, all three of these men wrote moral themed novels dealing with the clash between the forces and persons embracing the psychology of entropy, and those on the side of human life. You might throw Walker Percy in there too.

    I don’t know where one would put Michael Crichton, who probably represents more the approach you envision.

  37. Eric wrote:

    As for “Upper middle class lifestyle”, that impresses me not. Dentists have an upper middle class lifestyle. My definition of success is walking into a Ferrari dealer, checkbook in hand, and being able to write a check for any car on the lot and drive off in the thing without it putting a serious dent in your net worth.

    Well, it does impress me, because it tells me that someone is actually working for a living. To me, all (legal) work is honest and honorable, and I salute the people who do work.

    “Twasn’t so long ago that working was simply expected, was part of adulthood and responsibility. Alas! Our friends on the left have, in their oh-so-great sympathy for those who can’t work, created a culture in which those who could work but will not can still survive, and more than a few (supposed) adults have taken exactly that option. Working seems to be no longer quite as expected as it used to be.

    To me, the guy who drives the truck that cleans out the porta-johns on construction sites is an honorable man and a credit to society; the guy with the PhD or Masters degree who won’t work because no one will give him the right job is just a waste case in my book.

  38. Funny, you’re the only person who thinks so. Everyone else thinks it’s great, including one person who, unlike you, actually IS a writing/publishing professional.

    How much have they paid you for the novel, Eric?

    When are they publishing the novel, Eric?

    Have you sold it to Hollywood for a million dollars like you boasted you would, Eric?

  39. To me, the guy who drives the truck that cleans out the porta-johns on construction sites is an honorable man and a credit to society; the guy with the PhD or Masters degree who won’t work because no one will give him the right job is just a waste case in my book.

    Well, I half agree with you and half don’t. On the one hand, I can respect pretty much any honest job, no matter how lowly, because I’ve done some of them myself. I’ve cashiered at Target and been the shovel man on an environmental drilling crew. At no point did I consider such work “Beneath” me. OTOH, as soon as “Good” work came along, such as being a flight test engineer on an exotic business jet, I took it.

    And that is my point. People should always work to the best of their abilities. A person who drives a truck because he has to, has my respect. But the person who has the talent and the opportunity to do much more and still drives a truck, doesn’t. Hoagie has the talent to run restaurants, but if he squandered that talent and washed dishes instead, that would not have my respect. If the members of Led Zeppelin had all chosen to drive London cabs instead of becoming the greatest rock band of all time, I would scream with despair at the waste of talent.

    So, yeah, on one level, all honest work deserves respect. But if you have the talent to do more and you refuse to do so, out of timidity or whatever, then THAT deserves no respect at all.

  40. Certainly tons of “Romance novels” have since been published which adopt some of her pretensions to social commentary, and many of the authors have made plenty of money, peddling witless trash.

    Well, my story is, in part, a romance. It is far better than most romances ever written, and that’s because it is original. Nothing like this has ever been written before. But that’s only part of the story, since the rest of the novel involves something else entirely. It’s an unusual novel that features a young couple kissing in a sailboat in the middle of a lake in Minneapolis and, somewhat later, features B-1 bombers loaded with nuclear weapons getting ready to take off.

    This novel is extraordinarily creative, but I do not claim the credit for myself. The credit, the inspiration, for the most part belongs to God. In essence, God said “Go forth and change the world” and I said “Okay”.

    And that is why I no longer care what The Thing has to say any more. Driven by malice, it only rejoices when people fail. And that’s the last I have to say ABOUT it, having now committed to no longer speak TO it.

  41. It is far better than most romances ever written, and that’s because it is original. Nothing like this has ever been written before. [...] This novel is extraordinarily creative, but I do not claim the credit for myself. The credit, the inspiration, for the most part belongs to God. In essence, God said “Go forth and change the world” and I said “Okay”.

    Doubling down on the Dunning-Kruger, I see.

    Your “friend” in “the publishing business” – how much have they paid you for the novel, Eric?

    When are they publishing the novel, Eric?

    Have you sold it to Hollywood for a million dollars like you boasted you would, Eric?

  42. Eric wrote:

    If the members of Led Zeppelin had all chosen to drive London cabs instead of becoming the greatest rock band of all time, I would scream with despair at the waste of talent.

    So, yeah, on one level, all honest work deserves respect. But if you have the talent to do more and you refuse to do so, out of timidity or whatever, then THAT deserves no respect at all.

    And how would you ever know about something like that? You’d never have known about Messrs Page, Plant, Bonham and Jones had they been driving cabs.

    There have been a few cases of people who had tremendous talent, demonstrated talent, at something, simply walking away and doing something else, because they just weren’t enjoying what they had been doing. Barry Sanders, the great running back for the Detroit Lions, comes to mind: he retired early, and at the top of his game, because he wanted to.

  43. Hube wrote:

    Oh good grief, Eric is arrogant and making a total fool of himself here. (commenter#1)

    F*** you, Perry.

    The IP address from which that comment was sent tracks back to Virginia Beach, Virginia, not Delaware or Philadelphia, from which Perry’s comments originated. That does not mean that Perry could not have been the author, but I have no evidence of such so far. It was, however, a totally useless comment.

  44. Oh good grief, Eric is arrogant and making a total fool of himself here.

    Really, Commenter #1? Is that what you glean from their exchange? Eric, who is writing a novel and trying with his heart and soul to achieve a dream and to use his efforts to create wealth for himself and I assume his family is an arrogant fool. But the Dumbass who belittles and ridicules him and his work is A-Okay with you. My, my how the left strangles peoples souls and destroys their ability to cheer the success of others. Envy, the worst sin.

  45. Well (Perry, commenter, dumbass, whatever) giving credit to God is not arrogant. Arrogant is a left wing atheist who would hog up all the credit for himself.

  46. The IP address from which that comment was sent tracks back to Virginia Beach, Virginia, not Delaware or Philadelphia, from which Perry’s comments originated. That does not mean that Perry could not have been the author, but I have no evidence of such so far.

    Remember, he pulled the same stunt when he was Rebus. He had us fooled, but only for a little while when his posting style made it obvious who he was.

  47. My, my how the left strangles peoples souls and destroys their ability to cheer the success of others. Envy, the worst sin.

    Tom Wolfe, in his novel I Am Charlotte Simmons, refers to such people as tarantulas, people who exist to suck the life energy out of others. Their driving emotions are envy, resentment, fear, and hatred. These are also the emotions that drive left wingers. As I pointed out, they are rotten people and, at some level, they know it.

    Of course, the day will come when each and every one of these losers is on their deathbed, and when they do, they will realize they spent a lifetime sneering at others instead of helping others and being happy for their successes. And that, after they’ve turned into dirt and worm food, they won’t be missed and no one will care that they had lived at all.

  48. And how would you ever know about something like that? You’d never have known about Messrs Page, Plant, Bonham and Jones had they been driving cabs.

    Well, several of them were famous before Led Zeppelin, so it was already known by then they had talent.

    But regardless of that, I do think talent is at least partways a gift from God and thus not entirely yours to use or throw away. It is both a blessing and an obligation. To give another example – if you had the talent to be a great surgeon and settled for being a grocery clerk instead, it’s not just your life that’s affected but all the lives you could have saved had you gone into medicine.

  49. ropelight
    Saturday, 19 October 2013 at 11:49

    It’s like deja vu all over again for yet another time. You all must be so proud of yourselves.”

    Thanks for the reminder. Bad habits die hard.

  50. Eric, who is writing a novel and trying with his heart and soul to achieve a dream and to use his efforts to create wealth for himself and I assume his family is an arrogant fool.

    Yes – because he lacks the talent, and his efforts are vainglory. Just because you dream of being a famous author, or an Olympic champion, or a supermodel does not mean you have the capability to do so. And boasting that you will do so in the absence of any track record of having that potential is worse than foolish – it is arrogant.

    Further, Eric displays his complete lack of understanding on how the publishing business works.

    He suffers from Dunning-Kruger. He is too ignorant to know how ignorant he is.

Comments are closed.