The Milwaukee and Wisconsin News: December 2024

Tuesday, December 3, 2024

One Level above Putin/Communism 12 03 2024

In true Communism there is only generalized wealth, there is no individual wealth?

So Putin would seem to be an advocate of Communism. And yet he is extremely wealthy. So his own behavior disproves his belief system! And that is what I would call a nut and something to watch out for! Someone who doesn't know that their behavior disproves their belief system.

In other words they are lying to themselves? And they lie to themselves out of necessity? The biggest losers lie to themselves out of necessity in hopes that lie takes hold and they strike it rich by it?

So in true communism there is only generalized wealth. That downplays the idea of the individual to nothing. All are equivalent. And yet they strive to prove themselves amongst themselves athletically and in the Olympics.

As if a generalized equal person is really going to beat one of individual freedom?

Keep all babies because they are all the same? That general equivalency is true communism.

Anything you say bad about someone else is hate speech because we are all the same?

Just put all your faith in Jesus Christ because it is futile to attempt to think through a problem yourself?

A person who believes themselves to be generally equal does not need to poison his political opponents unless he knows that his belief in himself isn't really true?

If you are all generalized equal what purpose is there to compete with anyone? And here is the real kicker, if you believe yourself to be generalized equal when it comes time for you to compete you won't be able to compete fairly? Why? Because competition results in one level above that!

Offering Solutions to Problems that Don't Exist 12 03 2024

How many gestalts of that can we see in our Country today?

And what does it indicate?

To offer a solution to a problem that doesn't exist really means that the person offering the solution is the problem?

It is a distraction from offering solutions to problems that do exist. Because those problems that do exist can be thought to contribute to the livlyhood of the individual or groups of individuals who would offer solutions to problems that don't exist.

And why would someone offer solutions to problems that don't exist? It is the science of psychology in business isn't it. It has to do with the prime method of marketing as being to create an urgent need in someone?

But is offering a solution to problems that don't exist really a way to hide unrecognized problems about yourself? Is there something about the individual or individuals who offer solutions that don't exist that can be stated to be “unrealized?” Unrealized meaning unknown to the general faithful public of a free democracy?

A Snoop would say it like this, “Look man this wine is the blood of Christ and you want to drink that!”

And Putins solution of War was a solution to what problem? He really couldn't articulate that could he. How many lives have been taken by a person who can't really articulate why he is going to war? Someone like that might be accurately labeled a mad man?

Again, you would offer solutions to problems that don't exist because you don't want to address the problems that do exist.

And why is it that you can't state what you specifically don't like? Because you know that if you stated what it is that you specifically didn't like absolutely everyone would come to the same conclusion that you are greatly flawed, and you would not be liked? But you would be liked by those of that same weakness and deceit wouldn't you!

Yep, I am going to boldy state it. Psychiatry is offering a solution to a problem that doesn't exist? No Psychiatry is offering a solution that is actively being created by all of the above.

“Doctor do you mean to tell me that I am somehow insulting myself? That that voice that is insulting me is really someone me insulting myself. And therefore I am so stupid that I don't know that if I just stopped insulting myself I would be fine? If I would stop somehow saying those jealous things to myself I would be fine. If I would just no longer envy myself I would be fine? No you are implying that there is absolutely no way for me to stop envying myself. That I jealously envy myself and there is absolutely no way for me to stop that?”

“Look man this wine is the blood of Christ and you want to drink that! And you want ta takes thems pills too.”

******'

Ps. Off topic. Does anybody know what Scott Walker was talking about when he talked about Teachers union mob bosses? He is indeed comparing our Public School System to organized crime? What basis did he have for destroying teachers unions in the first place? And from all indications the private voucher indicative costs taxpayers more and is less effective at education?

If somebody came up to you and said, "I have a voucher to you but I have to give it to you in private?" You would be right to be suspicious? Unless you believe you might be able to get pregnant from that whereas you would otherwise have less than zero hope for ever getting pregnant in your entire life?

So the other night I read

So a man killed a Prostitute. And the lawyer states he found evidence on his phone that might prove him innocent?

Competition Philosophy 12 03 2024

Should the winners be hard to understand or should the losers be hard to understand?

It seems like the losers should be the hard ones to understand? They did something wrong that caused the loss. If they could really explain it then they might not have had the loss?

Perhaps the point of reference would be better stated like this, a losers behavior should be harder to understand? But if a winners behavior should be easy to understand then their would be more winners? Not necessarily for a loser can presume to be able to understand something fully and yet never be able to duplicate it. And perhaps that is the best definition of a loser?

But the winners should not be hard to understand. Now perhaps some winners are so practiced that their actions are "second nature" to them and therefore hard for them to explain, for they don't have to think about something in professionalism, and it is engrained in them. But what happens when they get distraction, do they still win, or if they lose can they then be more properly defined as really being a loser. "Why didn't you get that right?". Having to ask that question indicative of talking to a loser?

And what about what we might all agree to as being non winning behavior but instead of losing the non winning behavior is winning? And the winner can't explain it because they are really a loser?

In other words again, the real winners should be easy to understand. Either they can articulate professionalism or we understand it is unfaltering behavior in engraved in them.

Now I could digress and talk about the oddball that walked off the railroad tracks? Or perhaps start a paragraph about how non-deserving winners create an unsustainable democracy of the free. But why ruin everyone's day with those....

Index finger poked out on my cell phone.

Auto complete really should be called Automatically Complete Incorrectly, ACI.

ACI gets the best of my one finger typing.