President Barack Obama

[John]

Whew! He just advocated tort reform. The Democrats are going to
hate that.

It's a shame he has to keep bashing President Bush over the Iraq war.
That won't change anyone's mind.

John

[John]

Did you hear the news? Barack Obama is receiving the Nobel Prize in
Chemistry, because he has such great chemistry.

Did you hear the news? Barack Obama is receiving the Nobel Prize in
Astronomy, because he's such a rock star.

Did you hear the news? Barack Obama is receiving the Nobel Prize in
Geology, because he's such a rock star.

John

[Marshall Kane]

John, I was waiting to hear what Generational Dynamics had to say about this week's news.

I got a kick out of this newsflash (although the comic punch is somewhat less when one considers the reigning Nobel laureate in this category):

MARKETWATCH FIRST TAKE
Oct. 12, 2009, 8:47 a.m. EDT
Obama fails to win Nobel prize in economics
Commentary: Michael Moore, Timothy Geithner also passed over

By MarketWatch
LONDON (MarketWatch) -- In a decision as shocking as Friday's surprise peace prize win, President Obama failed to win the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences Monday.

While few observers think Obama has done anything for world peace in the nearly nine months he's been in office, the same clearly can't be said for economics.

The president has worked tirelessly since even before his inauguration to wrest control of the U.S. economy from failed free markets, and the evil CEOs who profit from them, and to turn it over to wise, fair and benevolent bureaucrats.

From his $787 billion stimulus package, to the cap-and-trade bill, to the seizures of General Motors and Chrysler, to the undead health-care "reform" act, Obama has dominated the U.S., and therefore the global, economy as few figures have in recent years.

Yet the Nobel panel chose instead to award the prize to two obscure academics -- Elinor Ostrom and Oliver Williamson -- one noted for her work on managing collective resources, and the other for his work on transaction costs. See full story on the Nobel winners.

Other surprise losers include celebrity noneconomist and filmmaker Michael Moore; U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner; and Larry Summers, head of the U.S. national economic council.

It is unclear whether the president will now refuse his peace prize in protest against the obvious slight to his real achievements this year.

-- Tom Bemis, assistant managing editor

[batman]

John, I have been following your blog for 4 or 5 years now. I agree with most of your points, but I have seen a few factual errors, especially when it comes to your understanding of the history of India, and the Kashmir issue. These are understandable, because you are not from the region and can't be expected to know its history as much as I do. I don't know the most intricate and esoteric details of the history of Ireland or Ukraine, for example. To improve your understanding, you may want to read "Our Oriental Heritage" by Will Durant. You will then understand better what Genocide really means, and how it feels to be a survivor of a 1000 year long Genocidal campaign.

Do not equate Hindus with Moslems in your Kashmir or India-Pakistan related articles. We (Hindus) have tolerated Genocidal pogroms for 1000 years in the hope that the bloodthirsty killers will become civilized after seeing how civilized people deal with them. In those 1000 years, the Buddhists of Central Asia and Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh have been wiped out, as have Zoroastrians of Persia, and we Hindus in what remains of India have managed to survive only at massive cost of blood and tears, and that too, only because we were too large to get swallowed by the onslaught of Radical Islamic armies.

Americans and the West can choose to learn from the history of India and get a better understanding of what kind of an enemy they are dealing with. Osama bin Laden follows to the letter the very same book that was followed to the letter by Timurlane, Allauddin Khiljee, Nadir Shah, Muhammad Ghauri, Mahmood of Ghazni, Babur, Aurangzeb, and countless other mass killers who thought they were doing the work of God by killing hundreds of thousands of innocent and unarmed men women and children, and forcibly converting hundreds of thousands of young women through torture coercion and intimidation.

Obama seems to understand what evil means. If America and the West can learn from history, the chances will be lower that your grandchildren will learn those lessons of history through first-hand experience. If not, then History will repeat itself. It always does, until the lessons it seeks to teach are actually learned by its students. It is a teacher that cannot be escaped.

I agree with Obama that there exists pure evil in this world, and that the non-violent methods of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King (which worked against the civilized majorities in Great Britain and the United States) cannot work against certain kinds of adversaries.

However, all these years, in spite of seeing your factual errors when talking about the history of India, and the flaws in your understanding about the origins and reasons for the Hindu-Moslem conflicts, I have kept quiet because I really don't have the time or the inclination to waste my time writing messages (and especially responding to ignorant replies from anti-Hindu Moslems, or those sympathetic to their claims).

But after seeing this sentence from you in your currently most recent post, I had to respond:

Whether someone is "evil" depends on your political point of view.


You are wrong, John. Barack Obama is right. Pure evil does exist in this world. Everything is not relative. All of Morality is not relative. There are certain Moral Absolutes: Good, and Evil.

That is all I have to say. I will not respond to any replies to my post. I just do not have the time. Those Moslems or Moslem-appeasers who still deny the historical truths I alluded to (the genocide of between 80 million and 400 million Hindus over 1000 years by Radical Islamic killers subscribing to the very same "religious" ideology, and the very same textbook of mass-killing rape and pillage that Osama bin Laden swears by, in the Indian sub-continent -- described as the "bloodiest [genocide] in the history of Humanity" by Will Durant) can deny all they want. Just like they deny the Armenian Genocide perpetrated on Christians by people following the same ideology and the same textbook. Their denials may cloud the understanding of the ignorant masses living on Earth today (including many decision-makers in Senate and Congress, and in Government of many other countries), but in the long run that does not matter. The Laws of Karma are eternal, and the punishment for evil and Crimes Against Nature and Humanity cannot be prevented. Justice is built into the framework of the Universe, and though it may often seem delayed by our puny human timescales, it permits no cheating and no escape. Justice is always done. And Truth will always Triumph.

That is all.

[John]

> "You are wrong, John. Barack Obama is right. Pure evil does exist
> in this world. Everything is not relative. All of Morality is not
> relative. There are certain Moral Absolutes: Good, and
> Evil."

I always appreciate it when readers point out any factual errors in
my articles, and I make corrections when that happens.

However, as far as I know, the massive slaughter that occurred after
Partition was not one-sided. As far as I know, Hindus, Muslims and
Sikhs all took part. Hitler may have been pure evil, but as far as I
know, he didn't kill a single Jew; the people who worked for him
did. Genocide does not come from a single person. Genocide comes
from the great masses of people, entire generations of people.

Thanks for your message.

John

Correction: I just remembered that Hitler was a soldier in WW I, so
he probably killed people then.

[sadhic]

[The Laws of Karma are eternal, and the punishment for evil and Crimes Against Nature and Humanity cannot be prevented]
batman ,

I really doubt u read this one . still would like to comment from the words of albert einsten

"Soul with out a body is devoid of meaning"

[ridgel]

John, you said "Today, the country is almost just waiting for a "regeneracy event." It might be a terrorist attack on American soil, or it might be an overseas military disaster. But whatever it is, it will end the bickering, and regenerate civic unity again. "

But based on my understanding of what you've written before, it's going to take a lot more than another 9/11. There's going to have to be some sort of total war or other catastrophe to get people to change their ways. If another terrorist attack happened today, even a serious one that killed thousands of people, it would do nothing to unify the country. The right would say that Obama was weak on foreign policy, the left would say that the U.S. had angered other countries with its occupations, the military contractors would lobby for more homeland security money, the justice department would write memos for or against torture-light depending on who was in charge - it would still be every man for himself.

A war with China or another major power would certainly unify the country fast. But I can't picture how you fight a total war with nuclear weapons on both sides - without using the nukes that is. And even to this Gen-Xer nihilist who looks forward to seeing boomers spend their retirements eating cat food and shivering in studio apartments without cable, that goes to far.

[xakzen]

John, you said "Today, the country is almost just waiting for a "regeneracy event." It might be a terrorist attack on American soil, or it might be an overseas military disaster. But whatever it is, it will end the bickering, and regenerate civic unity again. "

But based on my understanding of what you've written before, it's going to take a lot more than another 9/11. There's going to have to be some sort of total war or other catastrophe to get people to change their ways. If another terrorist attack happened today, even a serious one that killed thousands of people, it would do nothing to unify the country. The right would say that Obama was weak on foreign policy, the left would say that the U.S. had angered other countries with its occupations, the military contractors would lobby for more homeland security money, the justice department would write memos for or against torture-light depending on who was in charge - it would still be every man for himself.

A war with China or another major power would certainly unify the country fast. But I can't picture how you fight a total war with nuclear weapons on both sides - without using the nukes that is. And even to this Gen-Xer nihilist who looks forward to seeing boomers spend their retirements eating cat food and shivering in studio apartments without cable, that goes to far.

Ridgel,

I agree with you that a terrorist attack or military defeat in the Afghan-Pak area would not be enough to qualify for a regeneracy event. My understanding is that it would have to be something that represented a clear existential threat to our country like a major war with China.

As far as genX nihilists' willingness to use nukes, I disagree. I know many people in my generation who were raised with this moral relativism to the point that you cannot even argue with them that there is a difference between the US government and that of Adolf Hitler's or Joseph Stalin's. No matter how many facts concerning the brutality and shear magnitude of their atrocities. One friend of my is even looking forward to a global "reset." Though he doesn't really explain what that means, when probed about it, he gives some naive response about equatable re-distribution of assets. Further prodding confirms he doesn't mean anything should be taken from himself only others.

[ridgel]

xaken, you may be right. I think one of the big mistakes of raising kids these days is they're not allowed to fight when they're young. It's hard for kids below puberty to really damage each other, and it's important to viscerally understand that there are serious consequences to some actions. For a gen x-er a nuclear war starting a nuclear war might be no harder than blowing away their friends in a video game.

But based observation of our public servants, I think any war will be more motivated by greed and interest than by pride. For example, the U.S. spy plane that was forced down and landed on a Chinese Island in 2001. There was no threat of military response or sanctions - just BS give China whatever it wants, let them hold our people and steal our secrets for a week. Those aren't total war kind of people. They're the kind that will continue to weasel and compromise and kick the can down the road until something forces their hand.

[jhc811]

If you want to reduce health care costs, then the only way to do it is to increase the supply of health care services -- more doctors, nurses, hospitals and equipment. Obama's health care proposal does the opposite. But once the Clash of Civilizations world war is over, in 5-10 years, then universal health care will revived, and it will pass. And President Obama may still get some of the credit.

Or reduce the demand for health care services as population start to take action to improve their lifestyle to be much more healthier.

If all people are having similar lifestyle as mine (eat fresh organic ripe raw whole fruits, veggies, some nuts and seeds), exercise, sunbathing, good sleep, clean water, clean air, positive attitude, excellent stress management and so on, then the whole "Disease Care Management" industry would implode overnight and that includes hospitals, doctors, nurses, drug companies, junk/processed food companies, even animal farms would be completely wiped out.

Of course, we still need doctors/ERs for trauma/accidental injuries, but nothing more.

Funny, when I explained to some people about healthy lifestyle that they can outright have, but they continue to eat junk/processed/cooked foods, don't exercise and so on, so that is their choice, maybe a cancer diagnose would finally wake them up? Oh well...

For your info, some great reading about common sense healthy lifestyle is at http://health101.org and http://FoodNSport.org I know and met Don Bennet and Doug Graham and they are great guys. Doug Graham is now 56 years old and he easily puts 20's something to shame in terms of fitness and endurance levels. My daughter is now at fasting resort with Doug helping the fasters.