Auld Land Syne – Freedom mix
An evening pause: This mix was apparently put together just after 9/11, and includes many of the most iconic sound-bites from the 20th century. One of the last lines however must speak to the new 21st century, as it appears many Americans have forgotten what it means to be an American.
“We’re not gonna be stopped! We’re not gonna be deterred! We’re not gonna stay at home! We’re not gonna be afraid!
“We’re gonna live our lives as Americans!”
God bless. Let us work to return freedom to America in 2021.
On Christmas Eve 1968 three Americans became the first humans to visit another world. What they did to celebrate was unexpected and profound, and will be remembered throughout all human history. Genesis: the Story of Apollo 8, Robert Zimmerman's classic history of humanity's first journey to another world, tells that story, and it is now available as both an ebook and an audiobook, both with a foreword by Valerie Anders and a new introduction by Robert Zimmerman.
The ebook is available everywhere for $5.99 (before discount) at amazon, or direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit. If you buy it from ebookit you don't support the big tech companies and the author gets a bigger cut much sooner.
The audiobook is also available at all these vendors, and is also free with a 30-day trial membership to Audible.
"Not simply about one mission, [Genesis] is also the history of America's quest for the moon... Zimmerman has done a masterful job of tying disparate events together into a solid account of one of America's greatest human triumphs."--San Antonio Express-News
“We’re not gonna be stopped! We’re not gonna be deterred! We’re not gonna stay at home! We’re not gonna be afraid!
Operative words:
Stopped.
Deterred.
Stay home.
Afraid.
Kinda like my beloved Dubya, whom I voted for gladly and now view sadly, signaled to the world what America would do after the World Trade Towers fell, when he said we wouldn’t waver, tire, falter, or fail. We did and now easy, convenient, spontaneous, dignified and fun air travel (no one under the age of 40 now remembers it well) is a wistful memory and people suffer crazy indignities to do what used to be a blast.
I don’t know about the rest of folks, but I am going to press on, embrace the future, with my personal goals (musical, which means it is now virtually illegal to pursue what I want, as playing acoustic instruments while sitting six feet away from each other is vanity unless in a specially designed amphi-space), I have the courage of truth at my back in the form of honest arithmetic and common sense … as for “stay home,” that is what I am doing a present because I cannot answer for my behavior when surrounded by people who are insane and homicidal — this is not economic societal suicide, it is homicide, and we are at this very moment living in a lawless society — the government is the lawless aggressor, though, so officially it is “lawful.” So at home, I’m steering as clear and wide as possible from crazy people.
WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE AND WATCH OTHERS’ LANGUAGE. It tells a lot.
Bob, I’ve been visiting your site nightly for at least a decade… since having heard you on John Batchelor’s show. THANK YOU for keeping us informed — in more ways than ‘space.’
This evening, I’m toasting to the much better year ahead, and looking forward to your take on all the events you find worthy. ‘Really appreciate your take on it all!
janyuary wrote: “. . . I’m steering as clear and wide as possible from crazy people.”
While that is a rational response; may need to rethink considering crazy people are directly influencing your life. I would advocate a more engaging approach: “Why do you think that?” The Mr. T addendum can go unspoken.
bkivey, there is zero “engaging” of crazy folks. If they were sane, they could be engaged in exploring their fear in a rational way and overcoming it. But alas they are crazy, temporarily but crazy just the same. The only “engaging” that brings a panicked person back to their senses is to slap them hard across the face.
Rethink “crazy” I guess until it’s sane and understandable … the way we rethink excessive abuse of alcohol to be a “disease” of which drinker is the victim, and it harms society as a whole. I speak from a wealth of personal experience. You’ll only annoy, trying to engage with an alcoholic the same as when you engage with a crazy person. You wait for them to come to their senses and stay out of their way as much as possible in the meantime.
The point of my post is to understand the power of language. Talking about what one is not going to do signals what one is afraid they’re going to end up doing, and the wrong words lead them straight to failure. A map of how not to get there will lead one astray, and that is what “don’t ___” and “not gonna ____” and “I won’t ______” end up doing. Watch you language if you want to lead yourself right.
bkivey, yes they are directly influencing my life because their fear has removed my household’s source of income on two fronts. When events are cancelled, it removes opportunity to earn money in our chosen careers. SOLELY because of crazy people. Of course they are directly influencing my life. Your point was … ???? To raise above it so they no longer influence my life? I need money to do that in this situation and their craziness prevents me from procuring it.
janyuary wrote: “The point of my post is to understand the power of language.”
Completely agree, and have written on this. Spells and incantations are Real Things, we just call them something else, now. You can, in fact, pull off the equivalent of “These aren’t the droids you’re looking for.” Look at political rhetoric, but especially that from the Left. It depends a lot on having people react in predictable ways to certain language.
janyuary wrote: “Your point was … ????”.
That however distasteful the current situation is, it *is* the current situation. I’m not a fan, but my challenge is to deal rationally with an irrational situation.
“Won’t that be fun.”
Simon Tam
‘Serenity’
Firefly (Mutant Enemy Productions/20th Century TV 2002)
Blair:
I went over to your web site and read this: “I’ve mentioned that one of the reasons I haven’t posted regularly the last couple of years is that I don’t like repeating myself. One and done. It’s in the archives. ”
If you have something of import to communicate then it is worth your while to say it and say it often. No one remembers what anyone said related to a subject 3 years ago, a month ago, hell, yesterday.
What have we witnessed in politics / PR / media through out our lives? Say it loud and say it often, in your own way, and in that repetition people understand that you are committed to what it is that you propose or observe and they are more likely to take you into their thinking process.
One and done? Is one and done.
Blair — thanks, that’s very good advice and well taken I promise, to accept what is and deal with it as rationally as possible.
In political rhetoric, the left is overt and the right is pretty well consistently chicken-hearted covert in how it uses language. “Never _____,” directions that tell you how not to get there. Vote “against” — an imaginary action where intent masquerades as accomplishment. Language transcends politics. Those who call themselves conservatives have agreed on a word that puts them on permanent defense by definition — it can only protect what is but never advance — and those who agree as I once did to the definition of grow-government politics as “progressive” are, naturally and understandably (it took me only 30 years to figure this stuff out, I’m a quick study) unaware that they are being manipulated in a major way.
Victory will come to those with the courage to take the approach that to be “progressive” politically now means progressing toward liberty by achieving and maintaining a slim, strictly limited government. Victory will come to those who understand that the real conservatives are those who want to keep deep-reach government and all its control mechanisms, in real language THEY are conservative but today they are labeled “progressive” possibly by design but perhaps not, no matter. Language is dynamic, but the concepts it describes are fixed.
We true lion-hearted literal progressives aim for liberty. In a world where liberty wins, today’s “progressives” will be tomorrow’s conservatives tasked with only protecting, never advancing. Defense is a position of disadvantage. Put them there and leave them there politically with language. It can be done because it HAS been done.
Chicken-hearted language is a “tell” in almost any game.
Blair — PS, I loved Serenity and Fire Fly!! LOVED them, the music, the stories, all of it!!! I remember that line.
Cotour — I hope Blair reads and takes seriously your excellent post — VERY WELL SAID and VERY TRUE. I hope Blair drinks your words in thoughtfully and sees the truth and sense in them.
PS: Plagiarism, what higher compliment is there?
(janyuary: You know its funny, I began reading Blair as being a female, and I began reading you as a male because of your general Conservative style. Blair reinstructed me noting that its “Blaire” not Blair that is female. It screws with your head a bit to have to rethink yourself, and now I read your posts in a gender adjusted manner. I see it now, all good :)
Cotour, I was instructed once by a woman editor, lefty, to be sure to ask a woman architect who had risen to a very high level in her profession at a time when female architects were few, what women’s groups she belonged to and how she approached mentoring more women into the profession. I would never have thought to ask the question, but it was in the context, a good one. Her answer was this, but I believe the quote was removed from the final story, don’t recall. It was quietly and thoughtfully said, and this is lightly paraphrased:
“I never had much use for women’s groups because I could never see what being a woman has to do with. The only thing that matters is, are you a professional?”
The word “ship” is one of the few English words that has gender, and it happens to be feminine. A ship can be named John Patrick Callahan and possess no more of a sex than a bucket of paint, but in the English language, that ship is referred to as a “she” and she carries “her” crew and skipper because the word “ship” has femine gender.
Until the early 1990s, the word “gender” in general use served the purpose of describing the function of referring to a “he” or “she” when the subject is a thing of zero sex. In Spanish, the hand (la mano) has feminine gender, the word “beach” (la playa) has feminine gender, a dishwasher (el lavaplatos) and a corner (el rincon) have masculine gender. However, only the hand has a sex, and that is determined by the biology of the owner of the hand. That was until recently the meaning of “gender.” Language is dynamic.
And that agreed upon usage of language, those established cultural conventions that you have laid out here is exactly what the Left is focused on and attempting to undermine and destroy in order to, “Build Back Better”.
The Marxists / Socialists / Communists and now the Democrats are the best at it, pure psy ops.
“Politics and the English Language,”
George Orwell 1946
https://youtu.be/fBu0yPaGpsU
35:44
janyuary–
tangentially
…speaking of “crazy people,’–I spent 25 years as a mental-health caseworker, you may (or maybe not, you’re in California, correct) be surprised at the shear number of ‘crazy people’ walking around.
janyuary wrote: “. . . that to be “progressive” politically now means progressing toward liberty by achieving and maintaining a slim, strictly limited government . . .”
Have you been reading my archives? I consider myself to be a liberal, which, these days, is a radical.
Cotour wrote: “PS: Plagiarism, what higher compliment is there?”
Getting paid? I considered the complimentary aspect, which is nice, but not looking to pad someone else’s, uh, effort.
Blair, no, I haven’t been reading your archives, but for the last 45 or 50 years have been around people who talk politics lustily and openly, from all points of the political spectrum, I grew up in that kind of environment. Many many a lecture I have endured from lefties and righties about the “correct” definition of “liberal.”
I have concluded that Democrats/liberals blame Republicans/conservatives for the very same things that Republicans and conservatives blame on Democrats/liberals. MANY a Democrat liberal has informed me with a straight face that Republicans and conservatives are the tyrants with government, how could I blame that on Democrats???
As for plagiarism … you can accomplish anything if you don’t care who gets the credit. That was one of Ronald Reagan’s favorite sayings, and he was one very smart dude.
wayne … time on my hands, thanks for the response. Yours must have been an interesting and tough job. I live fairly close to a nationally famous state mental hospital where they put the really sick heinous murderers and abusers. Born-and-raised locals like me end up knowing as friends people who work at that hospital and YOU CONFIRM exactly what every single one has ever told me: that I’d be surprised at how many really crazy, as in dangerously crazy, folks are walking around free.
*shivver*
janyuary wrote: “you can accomplish anything if you don’t care who gets the credit.”
Depends on propriety and intellectual property, Happy to continue this discussion on PM.
blairkivey@gmail.com
janyuary-
At one point I managed 3 (private, for-profit) Adult Foster Care homes for a year, wherein we specialized in folks (18 of them) who were all adjudicated ‘not-guilty by reason of insanity.’ [Michigan later changed to “guilty but mentally-ill.”] That, was extremely interesting. (extremely!)
At the time (early 90’s), it cost the responsible-County $500/day to keep them in a locked psychiatric unit, in contrast, we provided a residential-setting in a nice neighborhood, with 24 hour staffing, for $225/day, and we had a waiting list. We did everything in-house, including therapy and a self-contained work-program.)
–I must add however— the incidence of violence amongst people with ‘ordinary’ mental-illness is lower than the general population.
Blair: “‘… you can accomplish anything if you don’t care who gets the credit.’ Depends on propriety and intellectual property.”
We have in this household directly experienced seeing someone else earn income on copyrighted images created in this house, and were only able to prevent it with limited success once. I have also seen my words a half dozen times, (twice including typos, it’s how I was certain it was cut and pasted from my original copy, not just someone with the same thinking) directly plagiarized. I am not talking about accomplishing income. I am talking about accomplishing the mission at hand of informing or persuading.
Reagan understood plagiarism and proprietary and intellectual property rights. He liked the incredibly humble saying “You can accomplish anything if you don’t care who gets the credit” because he understood that it was referring to something a lot more important than proprietary and intellectual property rights.
wayne — good reading, thanks for the insight. “Mental illness” covers a LOT of territory, doesn’t it!
In your expert estimation, are Americans temporarily weathering mental illness right now? I figure so when they believe in a bogeyman that 4th grade arithmetic would make disappear, if they only stopped freaking out and started thinking calmly instead, but you know a lot more about mental illness realities than I do. We are starting to see more news reports of deaths unattributed to any cause except overdose (in which cases I have long assumed then that it likely suicide) in younger folks. I wonder if from your point of view, you are watching more and more people fulfill the definition of “mentally ill,” or if you are reassured perhaps at how many are remaining sane?
janyuary wrote: “you can accomplish anything if you don’t care who gets the credit.”
That may be true for politics (although I don’t know how you get reelected if you look like you didn’t do anything worthwhile), but it can be career-ending in science.
The principal investigator, the one who obtained the funding for the research, needs to get credit for the resulting paper, otherwise for the next scientific examination the financier will go to the person who got the credit. Why fund someone who doesn’t get the job done?
Let’s say that NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory does a lot of impressive planetary science, but other science labs get the credit. Congress will fund those other labs for the next planetary missions, but they won’t know how to do it successfully. They may go way over budget and take much longer than expected, like some space telescopes are doing now. The expected science does not get done (e.g. in coordination with Hubble) and the extra cost prevents other science from getting done (I can’t list them, because they were never proposed, due to the lack of funds).
In science, you want the competent people to get the credit so that more can be accomplished the next time.
Should I use a medical analogy, such as having competent people running the fight against a flu outbreak?
Edward, it is true in LIFE.
If you want to accomplish success, you can do so by taking credit for what others have achieved in science or any other endeavor. What is it that one wants to accomplish? If it is, for example, getting this item from here to there and you must manipulate others into doing it for you, they get the credit but the mission is accomplished. If you want to accomplish funding, then label it as the mission goal.
Women do it all the time — the guy thinks it was his idea and is never the wiser (he thinks he spotted her first, unaware that she very skillfully made it look that way, best example). Girls learn it if they are smart when they are teens.
Again, one can accomplish anything if one doesn’t care who gets the credit, and Reagan had a full understanding of it, including when and even perhaps why to spot a fake credit-taker. Including success in science, at least temporarily until the guy who got the credit wrongly, fails to produce anything more.
Edward, one other thing about achieving something and getting credit.
The artist whose copyrighted image is used for profit by someone else and he receives no royalties …
is not receiving royalties or credit in that regard.
But he ACCOMPLISHED what he set out to do, which was to move people with his art. He just didn’t get paid for it.
Payment of money and “credit” are a lot different from each other.
“Including success in science, at least temporarily until the guy who got the credit wrongly, fails to produce anything more.”
And there’s the rub. Now both scientists are discredited, and you don’t get anything more accomplished. Funny thing, though, is that the principal investigator, who didn’t get credit, would have accomplished the same thing if the other guy hadn’t taken shortcuts. So, if you want to sacrifice the future for the present, then sacrifice away, but I would rather keep the goose laying those golden eggs rather than go for the one not yet laid.
“But he ACCOMPLISHED what he set out to do, which was to move people with his art.”
Assuming that he didn’t want to eat that night, which is presumably why he copyrighted his work. Why couldn’t his work move people without having been stolen? If his work continues to be stolen then he eventually won’t even have a roof over his bed, although he may have a bridge over it.
So, really, you can accomplish many things once, but most of them would have been accomplished anyway.
Edward, you confuse “enhancing reputation” and “getting paid” with with “accomplishing” something you wanted to do. If enhanced reputation and/or $ are what you aim to accomplish, you can do it if you don’t care who gets the credit either way, thievery or honesty.
Surely you grasp the profound wisdom in the saying Reagan admired so much (“You can accomplish anything if you don’t’ care who gets the credit”) …..?? I have SEEN things that others enjoy knowing that they are there solely because of me, and I receive zero credit, indeed someone else claimed it and lied. SO WHAT? I accomplished what I wanted and I am good with that, delighted, actually. Had I tried to do it while getting credit for it, it would never have been accomplished.
janyuary: “you confuse “enhancing reputation” and “getting paid” with with “accomplishing” something you wanted to do. ”
Not at all. That is why I said you can get most things done once. Your personal example is one of the not “most” things.