IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Hey, back in the day - My Gramma used to get reams of those
'statistics' to 3-decimal-point precision, out of Human Events - they're still around too: recycling the same stuff -- and it's the mothers milk of 'ol Bill Kristol and fiends. (Most of the present crowd are too young to recognize that whole passages are lifted out of the 50 yo originals. I thought many of those originals sounded a lot like a poor translation of G\ufffdbbels in full throat, during those heady book-burning days.)

Nobody could possibly vet 0.1% of the detailed BS arrayed in Times Roman - just as if it were real, and all.

Me? I remain 98.34% convinced that there are NO stats on homo saps which come closer than \ufffd 30% as All Humans are Vague - but {ssshhh} don't spoil some folks' largest experience of Participation. Yet more proof that, Boolean or no - Logic just ain't enough when it comes all the way down to 3-digit 'proofs'. And those who Believe in them.

New Reminds me of a passage in NDCC.
In 1973 or so, a friend of mine in middle school gave me a copy of NDCC when he was toying with membership in the John Birch Society.

[link|http://www.amazon.com/None-Dare-Call-Conspiracy-Allen/dp/0899666612|None Dare Call it Conspiracy] by Gary Allen (p.8-9 of the paperback edition) - from 1971:

Those who believe that major world events result from planning are laughed at for believing in the "conspiracy theory of history." Of course, no one in this modern day and age really believes in the conspiracy theory of history -- except those who have taken the time to study the subject. When you think about it, there are really only two theories of history. Either things happen by accident neither planned nor caused by anybody, or they happen because they are planned and somebody causes them to happen. In reality, it is the "accidental theory of history" preached in the unhallowed Halls of Ivy which should be ridiculed. Otherwise, why does every recent administration make the same mistakes as the previous ones? Why do they repeat the errors of the past which produce inflation, depressions and war? Why does our State Department "stumble" from one Communist-aiding "blunder" to another? If you believe it is all an accident or the result of mysterious and unexplainable tides of history, you will be regarded as an "intellectual" who understands that we live in a complex world. If you believe that something like 32,496 consecutive coincidences over the past forty years stretches the law of averages a bit, you're a kook!


(Emphasis added.)

Even as a young teenager I could see that this passage was a nonsensical rant - attaching a made-up number to it only makes it more clearly the case. (In case you're not familiar with the book - it gets worse. ;-)

The more things change...

Cheers,
Scott.
     More betrayus.... - (Simon_Jester) - (108)
         Is he calling our generals traitors? - (Seamus)
         a little long on hyperbole - (boxley) - (96)
             I don't usually agree with you - (Seamus) - (95)
                 petraus like macnamara - (boxley) - (94)
                     What duties are those, Box? - (jb4)
                     Talk about chicken shit - (Seamus)
                     Your "will do what his boss tells him" kind of chicken... - (CRConrad) - (91)
                         so, they are loading iraqis into ovens now? -NT - (boxley) - (90)
                             No, not as far as I know. Why, does that somehow make... - (CRConrad) - (89)
                                 try reading my original post - (boxley) - (88)
                                     SIGH...It gets more and more wrong. - (CRConrad) - (87)
                                         naw, the germans were cheering all the way thru 1941 - (boxley) - (86)
                                             Uuh... Yes. Logic much, mr Sequitur Strawman? - (CRConrad) - (85)
                                                 were you not comparing a point in time? if not - (boxley) - (84)
                                                     Two, actually: Germany, 1932, and USA, 2007. - (CRConrad) - (83)
                                                         long as we dont invade russia in winter - (boxley) - (82)
                                                             WTF is WRONG with you? Are you stoned out of your... - (CRConrad) - (81)
                                                                 Now THERE is a funny non-seq -NT - (bepatient) - (80)
                                                                     Non? Seemed to follow pretty directly, dinnit? How not? -NT - (CRConrad)
                                                                     Nah - (crazy) - (78)
                                                                         the lady's penchant for petty revenge with all the - (boxley) - (77)
                                                                             Nope, that still doesn't explain WHY you're so mad. - (CRConrad) - (17)
                                                                                 isnt isnt 28 years of clinton bush enuff? - (boxley) - (3)
                                                                                     Re: isnt isnt 28 years of clinton bush enuff? - (Seamus) - (2)
                                                                                         yer right, it just seemed like 28 years -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                                                                                             It will seem like alot longer, heaven forbid. -NT - (bepatient)
                                                                                 It's because of the pronoun - (Silverlock) - (1)
                                                                                     bullcrap - (boxley)
                                                                                 ms I dont know in charge of the gummint? - (boxley) - (10)
                                                                                     Um, her senior thesis isn't sealed any more. - (Another Scott)
                                                                                     Bravo! Yeah, that's *exactly* what I mean. - (CRConrad) - (8)
                                                                                         Hey, back in the day - My Gramma used to get reams of those - (Ashton) - (1)
                                                                                             Reminds me of a passage in NDCC. - (Another Scott)
                                                                                         funny, you seem ready to convict the current - (boxley) - (5)
                                                                                             When was she named an unindicted co-conspirator? -NT - (Seamus)
                                                                                             Uhh... "slim evidence" for the lies that got you into Iraq? - (CRConrad) - (3)
                                                                                                 you gargle yer koolaid this am? - (boxley) - (2)
                                                                                                     You're wrong AGAIN! - (CRConrad) - (1)
                                                                                                         :-) -NT - (boxley)
                                                                             As opposed to shrub's penchant for major revenge? - (crazy) - (54)
                                                                                 Fred still says Saddam had WMDs and a nuke program. - (Another Scott) - (53)
                                                                                     box doesn't care - (crazy) - (3)
                                                                                         Perhaps boxley is like me. - (Another Scott) - (1)
                                                                                             I did, once :-) - (imqwerky)
                                                                                         exactly -NT - (boxley)
                                                                                     Heck, alot of folks said that - (bepatient) - (48)
                                                                                         she's a whatever it takes kind of guy - (boxley)
                                                                                         He said it *two days* ago. He hasn't been paying attention. - (Another Scott) - (46)
                                                                                             the same she who admits she didnt read the intel report? -NT - (boxley) - (35)
                                                                                                 How many did? - (Another Scott) - (34)
                                                                                                     a lazy dimbulb is what we need - (boxley) - (33)
                                                                                                         Yeah look at what Reagan did for the country - (Seamus) - (32)
                                                                                                             dot com era, end of cold war yup all bad things -NT - (boxley) - (31)
                                                                                                                 Like the other Bill(Hmm,has anyone seen them both together?) - (CRConrad)
                                                                                                                 Reagan had nothing to do with the dot com era - (Seamus) - (29)
                                                                                                                     of course lowering taxes hurt the economy...right -NT - (boxley) - (28)
                                                                                                                         Reading for comprehension - try it some time - (Seamus) - (7)
                                                                                                                             Macroeconomics - study it sometime. -NT - (bepatient) - (1)
                                                                                                                                 Wasn't the issue -NT - (Seamus)
                                                                                                                             reagan had nothing to do with the collapse of the sovs - (boxley) - (4)
                                                                                                                                 Did you even read the paper by Yegor Gaidar? - (Seamus) - (3)
                                                                                                                                     You must have something against - (bepatient) - (2)
                                                                                                                                         No, its believing that you can cut taxes, increase spending - (Seamus)
                                                                                                                                         HOW ROBUST IS THE CURRENT ECONOMIC EXPANSION? (new thread) - (Seamus)
                                                                                                                         The issue was did Reagan cause the collapse of the USSR - (Seamus) - (8)
                                                                                                                             can you say disinformatsya? probably not -NT - (boxley) - (7)
                                                                                                                                 I forgot the AEI is all about spreading Russian - (Seamus) - (6)
                                                                                                                                     if they are trying not to repeat past mistakes - (boxley) - (5)
                                                                                                                                         A fear of Soviet control of the middle east wasn't a - (Seamus) - (4)
                                                                                                                                             not for the saudis - (boxley) - (3)
                                                                                                                                                 Yeah the huge loss of oil revenue - (Seamus) - (2)
                                                                                                                                                     hate to break it to you - (boxley) - (1)
                                                                                                                                                         The idea is that the fall of oil prices - (Seamus)
                                                                                                                         The other issue was that Reagan caused the dot com era - (Seamus) - (10)
                                                                                                                             Maybe a more neutral source - (Seamus) - (9)
                                                                                                                                 Wow, a complete ignorance of globalization - (bepatient) - (8)
                                                                                                                                     So, what is it you're saying here? - (CRConrad) - (2)
                                                                                                                                         Re: So, what is it you're saying here? - (bepatient) - (1)
                                                                                                                                             The claim was that the Reagan deficits produced the - (Seamus)
                                                                                                                                     A chaired professor and former Dept chairman - (Seamus) - (4)
                                                                                                                                         dunno, alternate theories by walter williams are offered - (boxley) - (3)
                                                                                                                                             Yes, a supply-sider. There the only ones left who - (Seamus) - (2)
                                                                                                                                                 well listening to hillary giving away money - (boxley) - (1)
                                                                                                                                                     A supply sider is someone who thinks stimulating - (Seamus)
                                                                                             Yes. - (bepatient) - (5)
                                                                                                 Not hardly. Fred's an out of touch lightweight. -NT - (Another Scott) - (3)
                                                                                                     We'll see if the party machinery can mold him - (bepatient) - (2)
                                                                                                         I think the R machinery knows that none of them can win. ;-) -NT - (Another Scott)
                                                                                                         They won't get a chance to mold him - (Seamus)
                                                                                                 Apparently - (Simon_Jester)
                                                                                             In his defense, from all the transcripts I've seen, he... - (CRConrad) - (3)
                                                                                                 Hmmm... - (Another Scott) - (2)
                                                                                                     Ok, yup, in *that* sense he was wrong. - (CRConrad) - (1)
                                                                                                         I'm not willing to give him a break. - (Another Scott)
                                                                             Thank youm thank you, thank you! :) - (a6l6e6x) - (3)
                                                                                 Are you sure it wouldn't be...? - (CRConrad) - (2)
                                                                                     It's a legacy of the "Song Title Game". It's not recent. -NT - (Another Scott)
                                                                                     I'm a native European. - (a6l6e6x)
         Main difference - (bepatient) - (9)
             How much of a difference is this? Not much. -NT - (Seamus)
             Actually, I don't believe that... - (Simon_Jester) - (7)
                 You don't believe an easily recognizable fact? - (bepatient) - (6)
                     <man type=straw /> - (jb4)
                     Re: You don't believe an easily recognizable fact? - (Simon_Jester) - (4)
                         You know... - (bepatient) - (3)
                             And you determined that how? - (hnick) - (2)
                                 Simple really - (bepatient) - (1)
                                     I do think some of your analysis is correct (new thread) - (Simon_Jester)

Ooops, I'm ranting again... time to get more coffee.
193 ms