THE PAVILION ANNEX

General discussions of interest to readers and fans of Harlan Ellison.

Moderator: Moderator

User avatar
Ezra Lb.
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:02 am
Location: Washington, DC

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Ezra Lb. » Tue Jan 25, 2011 8:12 pm

Yeah I can see where seeing a seagull would just kill your desire to read books.

Calfornia is a huge place with many mexican immigrants. Many of them are not literate and they tend not to be counted in these surveys.

huh?

If you're not counting the illiterate population wouldn't that cause your standing to higher rather than lower?
“We must not always talk in the marketplace,” Hester Prynne said, “of what happens to us in the forest.”
-Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter

paul
Posts: 877
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:04 pm
Location: ATX
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby paul » Wed Jan 26, 2011 11:51 am

Am I the only one who can't understand why the news would give airtime to Michele Bachmann's unnecessary extra response to the SOTU? Can any of us get some of that primetime after a political event if we pretend to be the leaders of a quasi-grassroots neo-revolutionary political party?
The medium is the message.

cynic
Posts: 2684
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 3:55 am
Location: chicago

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby cynic » Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:14 pm

"But here’s the thing we found surprising: There were also things on which it seemed that Bachmann and Obama agree.

First of all, she complained that America has the highest corporate income tax in the world. Obama brought that up, too! Well, kind of. He said taxes on corporations should be lowered as part of comprehensive tax reform.

Second, Bachmann said she believed in American exceptionalism – the United States is No. 1, and so forth. “I believe America is the indispensable nation of the world,” she said.

Obama talked about that, too. US innovation drives the world economy, he said. He hailed the US as the nation of Edison and Facebook and Google.

Third, both Bachmann and Obama think the nation is at a crucial moment. The Minnesota lawmaker said, “We are in the early days of a history-making turn in America.” Obama said we are at a “Sputnik moment” in which the US needs to redouble efforts to teach math and science to its kids."
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/T ... -may-agree


his suggestion of lowering corporate taxes was a bit of a surprise to me; that's gonna piss off a lot of people .
follow your bliss,mike

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby FrankChurch » Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:59 pm

Come on Keeney, low blow in the pav.

User avatar
Rick Keeney
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 4:40 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Rick Keeney » Wed Jan 26, 2011 3:09 pm

It's not your fault that you're clueless, Paul; that's the nature of cluelessness. But it is obvious to the most casual observer that your writing could benefit from remediation.

Seek help.

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Moderator » Wed Jan 26, 2011 6:55 pm

Take it to email or PMs, guys.
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby FrankChurch » Thu Jan 27, 2011 12:05 pm

I have always liked the Green Bay Packers. I grew up on the Minnesota Vikings, thought they were the greatest. For some reason, losing four Superbowls sours one to a team, then we find out later how right wing Fran Tarkenton was. What I found out about the Packers was that they are the only team that is owned by the fans. You can almost call them a collective.

The cheeseheads are still silly.

User avatar
Lori Koonce
Posts: 3538
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: San Francisco California
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Lori Koonce » Thu Jan 27, 2011 1:32 pm

http://tinyurl.com/4dyvyr3

Could someone, anyone, please explain to me why the hell this woman is looking like a contender for the Presidency?

cynic
Posts: 2684
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 3:55 am
Location: chicago

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby cynic » Thu Jan 27, 2011 2:06 pm

Lori Koonce wrote:Could someone, anyone, please explain to me why the hell this woman is looking like a contender for the Presidency?
because there are those who are prone to hallucinations ?
but as to sputnik:
1. i do not know or particularly care what is, was, or will be on palin's mind.
2. sputnik represented the developement of capacity for soviet ICBMs to deliver an atomic payload anywhere on the planet, a capacity our developement lagged behind .
it was a concern of the military, first and foremost, to both nations.
it has been suggested that the competition to match military strength was the economic downfall of the soviets.
follow your bliss,mike

User avatar
Lori Koonce
Posts: 3538
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: San Francisco California
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Lori Koonce » Thu Jan 27, 2011 2:27 pm

Cynic

While what you say is true, that doesn't belittle the fact that they had over 30 years of chasing American ass before they fell, and I it a little disingenuous of both you and Ms. Palin to suggest that military problems are the only things that caused the Soviet Collapse.

If I'm misreading you again, please forgive.

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby FrankChurch » Thu Jan 27, 2011 4:22 pm

Lori, you are on to something. Russia's system was bound to run out, helped obviously by the Gorby reforms. The people there were just tired of what they had.

Empires fold. We see this all through history. Remember, Russia was a much smaller empire than ours.

RocRizzo
Posts: 129
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:19 pm
Location: Rosendale, NY

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby RocRizzo » Thu Jan 27, 2011 4:30 pm

Lori,
Palin is about as intelligent as a bag of rocks. She doesn't know squat about Sputnik. She wasn't born until 7 years after it was launched. The buildup of our military-industrial complex, along with the Russians, are part of what was their downfall. The other thing that we have in common with the former USSR, is... wait for it.... Afghanistan! We are now trying to do something that nobody, ever, in the history of humanity has ever done. That would be trying to win over Afghanistan. The Russians went broke trying to do it. THAT was the straw that broke their camel's back, and look what happened.

If the US had wise leadership, it would disarm, and retool the shops that make swords into shops that make plowshares. Back to where they were before WWII. If they want to make a security argument for it, they can say that by retooled the weapons factories into solar panel factories is economic and energy defense. If we could only convince them of the truth that there is really no need for the nukes that we, or the Russians have. If we could convince them that all this spending on planes, tanks, ships, and other war transport vehicles are pointless, and we should be building cheap, green maglev trains, to save our country's economy, we might get somewhere. But alas, the powers that be are simply too afraid of any change, and that leaves the rest of us getting screwed, while they can take champagne showers. Oh well, as Stan Laurel once said, "You can take a horse to water, but a pencil must be lead."

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Moderator » Thu Jan 27, 2011 4:40 pm

1) Sputnik scared the military and the common person with the fear of nuclear fire spilling from the heavens. The military realized they had to look up as well as to the horizon.

2) The theory that the Soviet Union collapsed economically as a result of trying to match American dollars is a legitimate one. But again, you need to think in three dimensions.

The costs to develop and deploy new weapons were a solid drain on the Soviet economy. For one thing, a socialist economy is not inherrently an efficient one. (Don't argue with this, Frank. In an ideal world with ideal humans it would be efficient, but human nature dictates that in a socialist system many people see no reason to excel.) This means that the actual true costs are inflated, not deflated. More errors mean more safeguards. Inefficiency leads to cost overruns, etc.

Then you have to see the world as a playing field. Not only was the USSR spending in their own territory, but they had become involved in a land war in Asia as well as providing the funding for the Eastern Bloc and Cuba. A lot of money going out, and not a huge amount coming back. The Soviet ruble was essentially worthless on the world market and was, itself, a false economy.

Many of the same economic factors which bankrupted the SU -- which opened the political door to Gorbachev's reforms -- were not the end result of American military spending, but they were a symptoom of it and the overextended Soviet military/political sphrere of influence.
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Moderator » Thu Jan 27, 2011 4:49 pm

I think to really try and understand Palin's comment you need to go back to Obama's speech. In my opinion, Palin missed the point entirely and simply reached her own conclusions.

president Obama wrote:"Half a century ago, when the Soviets beat us into space with the launch of a satellite called Sputnik, we had no idea how we'd beat them to the moon. The science wasn't there yet. NASA didn't even exist. But after investing in better research and education, we didn't just surpass the Soviets; we unleashed a wave of innovation that created new industries and millions of new jobs. This is our generation's Sputnik moment."


What the President said was clearly: "Sputnik was launched by the Soviets, which scared us into overdrive. We as a nation rose to the occasion and benefitted greatly as a result of that eye-opening moment in history, when we got caught with our pants down".

Sarah Palin evidently interpreted it as: "Gee, ain't Sputnik a cool thing? Look what the Soviets did."

Obama wasn't applauding Sputnik, he was applauding our nation's response to Sputnik.

Subtlety ain't her strong suit, izzit?
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby FrankChurch » Thu Jan 27, 2011 4:55 pm

I won't argue since the USSR wasn't socialist.


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests