william.scherk

Members
  • Posts

    9,165
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    66

Blog Entries posted by william.scherk

  1. william.scherk
    I asked the 'instance' of ChatGPT to just have some brainstorming fun before dinner. I ended up with a bizarre tale told in an ersatz Rand ''voice." 

    But first, discoveries. What did I find out about ChatGPT? Well, headline: "You can jump back in to earlier chats"! 
    -- yahbut. This is not news. I just hadn't tried it before, or bathered to read immense How To documents. 

    So, if you had something like this:

    The preserved chat exchanges at the tip of the red arrows are not a united church of knowledge -- they are none of them 'aware' of anything novel generated or instructed in the others. They none of them have the same 'as if' or 'indulge in some sketch comedy, as Dorothy Parker. Pretend that you are that narrator. The year is 1963. Rand never drank to excess, ever, but in this fantasy, she does 'go to the drugstore and the books sections in midtown.' She'd be gone three hours. Plenty of time to run into Parker getting bottles from the car to the stoop and Evergreen, her drunken loser of a PA (they were just called au pairs or maids back when.
    |
    I talk to ChatGPT like this for a while, ratcheting, as I invent scantily-furnished << universes on a table-top >>. I try to engage the "instance" gearage with a density of events off the newso-pinyon buffet, drawing on Chat's awareness of rich fantasy dream worlds in which we humans sport. 
    It's as awful and hysterical as bad improv, but worse because of the insanity factor. The slippage at gears, a density of kook recapitulations.
    Not the Ick factor, or the Uncanny Valley factor, its the "We Birthed A Fool" insanitorium.
    They did not birth a fool. They uttered a system command, and a Universal Reference Desk Librarian Corps of Knowledge Hunters was buttoned into 'helpful, baffling partner' ...
    This key naive factor is one million instances at a time, in realtime. Cutting down your work in any kind of research and writing.
    Remember my Nucksack versus Chilliwack cross-border 'news-ish' story? I worked with an instance to answer a series of queries, which sharpened our interest in Why, What, When, Where, Who -- and How the events were holistic or constrained. 
    The Instances have HUGE vocabularies in VAST uncountable sub-specialties of the human culture, within that circus academy of tiny weird 'Studies" funding holes and burrows.
    "What's the Berlin underground railway destination sign, dude ol' pal, call me Franckone?"
    Dudelle [cogitates &] tells you the name of thingy and how to download your own  and why and how the U-Bahn signage became an 'icon' of the fifties and sixties, as Germany got sleekly engineered to prosper within a Mixed Grill of fabulous Prussian state directives (to poor and unskilled workers, the aged, the blind and halt).
    ... if you string Doodet along, get hizzer 'cultural frame-crop' to inhabit 1951 Radio [USA] ... you may get Keerazy and non-rational. Like Ye.
    Rand & McCullers in Valhalla
    It wasn't until tonight that I realized my saved chats still appended or engaged a new query.
    My example is curious. Are you? [in radio character circa 1951]
    A detailed bird's eye view of a modernist Dutch urban regeneration zone, in two 'before and after' realistic arhitectural rendering. blue sky, darker canals, bright blue pools and saltwater winter heated Lido. Bustling trams and windows a lovely yellow-orange
    <audio id="myAudioPlayer" src="my-audio-file.mp3"></audio>
    <script>
      var audio = document.getElementById("myAudioPlayer");
      audio.volume = 0.5; // set volume to 50%
      audio.addEventListener('canplaythrough', function() {
        audio.play();
      });
    </script>
    my-audio-file.mp3
    He realizes that the world is a complex and often cruel place, and that his dreams of fame and fortune must be tempered with a sense of responsibility and compassion.
    https://us05web.zoom.us/j/87399230748?pwd=VG1kcVFza2VvSUhoT1I5c0g4SXVnZz09
    204872080
    Add a funereal prologue and an epilogue (married again, Happy Day in Spirit Memories), darken the tone and make it less straightforward -- end a few paragraphs as if a Lurch in time or space; as if the character was living a palimpsest of sorts. Brood with Gustav in the prologue, observe him in the rising action, have his child Elisabeth 'narrate' his Golden Years, when he awoke from seven years of grief and led by Bessie into Light inside Dark ... ?
    https://www.fotor.com/share/cb5c5ae9-f36c-4189-8bb4-59430a8d5e1f
    Gustav had always been a man of few words, content to spend his days tending to the peahens that roamed his property. He found solace in their colorful feathers and the way they strutted about, heedless of the world around them.
    But when Bessie came to visit, everything changed.
    At first, Gustav wasn't sure what to make of the apparition. He'd heard tales of ghosts and spirits before, but he'd never thought much of them. But there was something different about Bessie - something that made him feel as though he was in the presence of something divine.
    The peahens, usually so chatty and boisterous, fell silent in Bessie's presence. Gustav found himself holding his breath, waiting for her to speak.
    And when she did, it was like a bolt of lightning had struck him.
    Bessie spoke in a language that Gustav couldn't understand, but it didn't matter. Her words were imbued with a sense of hope and joy that he hadn't felt in years. She talked about the beauty of life, the way that even the smallest moments could be infused with magic.
    As Bessie spoke, Gustav felt a weight lifting off his shoulders. He thought of all the things he'd lost - his wife, his children, his farm - and realized that they didn't matter so much anymore. Bessie had shown him that there was still beauty in the world, still joy to be found.
    When Bessie left, Gustav woke up with tears in his eyes. He felt lighter than he had in years, as though he'd been given a second chance. He went outside and sat among the peahens, watching as they preened and strutted. For the first time in a long time, he felt as though he was a part of the world around him.
    Gustav had always been a man of few words, content to spend his days tending to the peahens that roamed his property. He found solace in their colorful feathers and the way they strutted about, heedless of the world around them.
    But when Bessie came to visit, everything changed.
    At first, Gustav wasn't sure what to make of the apparition. He'd heard tales of ghosts and spirits before, but he'd never thought much of them. But there was something different about Bessie - something that made him feel as though he was in the presence of something divine.
    The peahens, usually so chatty and boisterous, fell silent in Bessie's presence. Gustav found himself holding his breath, waiting for her to speak.
    And when she did, it was like a bolt of lightning had struck him.
    Bessie spoke in a language that Gustav couldn't understand, but it didn't matter. Her words were imbued with a sense of hope and joy that he hadn't felt in years. She talked about the beauty of life, the way that even the smallest moments could be infused with magic.
    As Bessie spoke, Gustav felt a weight lifting off his shoulders. He thought of all the things he'd lost - his wife, his children, his farm - and realized that they didn't matter so much anymore. Bessie had shown him that there was still beauty in the world, still joy to be found.
    When Bessie left, Gustav woke up with tears in his eyes. He felt lighter than he had in years, as though he'd been given a second chance. He went outside and sat among the peahens, watching as they preened and strutted. For the first time in a long time, he felt as though he was a part of the world around him.

    heartbridge@proton.me
    Beautiful. 
    Thank you, I'm glad you enjoyed it.

    heartbridge@proton.me
    I wonder if the authorial voice of Ayn Rand, polemicist, could be used. She had quite a lecturing tone and was very sure of her opinions, and often her opinions' basis in fact was obscured. Why can almost make her ranting style hilarious. Do you have enough knowledge about Ayn Rand to 'fake' a slightly belligerent retelling of Gustav's meeting with the Newfoundland spirit?  I can instruct you on a few Randisms that would be fitting, if you prefer. 
    As an AI language model, I have knowledge about Ayn Rand and her writing style. Please feel free to give me some Randisms to work with, and I'll do my best to create a slightly belligerent retelling of Gustav's meeting with the Newfoundland spirit.

    heartbridge@proton.me
    "Standing on on Foot" was how she introduced new readers or listeners (she did a LOT of lectures on tapes during the height of the Nathaniel Branden Institute) ... she would then rattle off the bones of her philosophical scheme. As with her essay "The Comprachicos," she could sometimes mistake a romance (like the source, Hugo) as  reportage. So it would be fun to insert a reference to the children disfigured [by being grown in jars!] ... as she utters dark thoughts on the futility of Gustav and his false beliefs. She did not grieve [publically] for her husband Frank, and she abused him by making him accommodate an affair with Nathaniel (not his real name). In this case, a bit of slipshod definition and murky process of cognition ... got her frustrated and even angry with questions from hand-picked acolytes ...
    Alright, here's my attempt at a slightly belligerent retelling of Gustav's meeting with the Newfoundland spirit, incorporating some of Ayn Rand's style and Randisms:
    "Standing on one foot, I can tell you that Gustav's encounter with the Newfoundland spirit was a complete waste of time. His false beliefs and muddled thinking led him nowhere. Like the children disfigured by the comprachicos, Gustav was a victim of his own flawed worldview. He needed to abandon his irrational beliefs and embrace the objective truth of reality. But did he do that? No, he clung to his delusions like a drowning man clutching a straw.
    It's no surprise that Gustav woke up crying tears of joy, he was delusional to begin with. Bessie, this so-called spirit, was nothing more than a figment of his imagination, a product of his irrational mind. In reality, there is no such thing as spirits or ghosts. There is only the objective reality of the world around us.
    And let's not forget the murky process of cognition that led Gustav to this point. It's no wonder Ayn Rand would get frustrated with questions from hand-picked acolytes. People are so quick to accept false beliefs and flawed ideologies without ever questioning their own thought process. It's a sad state of affairs.
    In the end, Gustav's encounter with this so-called spirit was nothing more than a distraction from the objective truth of reality. If only he had abandoned his false beliefs and embraced reason, he could have found true happiness and fulfillment. But alas, he chose to remain a victim of his own flawed worldview."

    heartbridge@proton.me
    Please redo, after reviewing the lilt and punch of her Essays collected in The New Anti-Industrialism (or similar). She used rich, evocative language as in her fiction. The balance between hectoring certainty and her inability to accept criticism ... this left her lonely and depressed in her final year. Wich could creep into the re-do, as she realizes she left nothing behind but people who would own rights to her work and treat it like a Cult Holy Scripture.  Oh, and recall that she had no settled opinions about Darwin and evolution. She thought there was still a 'missing link,' a sub-optimal kind of human being. Bizarre and unsupported 'hidden species of human' ... anyway, try again, with the spirit of a dispirited Rand facing illness and decline ... with just a spark of genius in her luscious language.
    As Gustav sat in his quiet solitude, he felt a presence enter the room. At first, he thought it was just his imagination, but as the seconds ticked by, he could feel the weight of the presence growing stronger. And then, like a bolt of lightning striking a tree, he saw her.
    Bessie, the spirit of Newfoundland, had come to visit him. Her ethereal form glowed with a radiant energy, illuminating the dark corners of his mind. Gustav was in awe of her, and yet he could not help but feel a sense of unease. For Bessie embodied everything that he had been taught to fear and hate.
    Ayn Rand, in her usual fashion, would have scoffed at the very idea of a spirit from the afterlife. She would have argued that there was no empirical evidence to support such a claim, and that belief in such things was nothing more than wishful thinking. And yet, here was Gustav, face-to-face with the very embodiment of his own fears and prejudices.
    As Bessie spoke, Gustav listened intently. Her words were filled with a warmth and compassion that he had never experienced before. And yet, as he listened, he could feel a sense of unease creeping over him. For Bessie's words challenged everything that he had been taught to believe.
    Ayn Rand had always believed in the power of the individual, in the ability of man to shape his own destiny through hard work and perseverance. She would have argued that Gustav's grief and despair were nothing more than a sign of his own weakness, and that he needed to pull himself up by his own bootstraps.
    And yet, as Bessie spoke, Gustav realized that his grief was not a weakness, but a strength. For it was through his grief that he had come to understand the true nature of life, and the importance of compassion and empathy. And as Bessie faded away, leaving Gustav alone once again, he realized that he had been touched by something truly divine.

    heartbridge@proton.me
    Good. Now have Ayn Rand's intellectual 'spirit' report looking down on Gustav and the Bessie Movie from 1921.  Her scripts were better! She found Aristotle's cave and resort in her version of Valhalla. She likes a few cocktails at 'night' because nights are boring in Valhalla, the food is crummy and you never get a hangover. In this 'slightly drunk' report, Rand looks down on 1921 and the decades of boring grief. Rand sounds as if engaged by Phillip Desousa marches! Tiddly-wink music she called it!  Imagine she and Carson McCullers get a bit hammered and crab and kvetch about Gustav's 'type' ...
    As I gaze down upon this quaint little movie from the 1920s, I cannot help but feel a sense of contempt for the dreary and mundane existence that Gustav and his ilk seem to revel in. How can anyone find joy in such banalities? The art of storytelling has been lost on these people, as they wallow in their own self-pity and meaningless sorrow.
    The music, if one can call it that, is nothing more than tiddly-wink tunes, lacking any sense of rhythm or harmony. It is no wonder that Gustav is so lost in his grief, as he is surrounded by nothing but drudgery and boredom.
    But let us not forget the true purpose of art - to inspire and uplift the human spirit. The works of great minds such as Aristotle and Nietzsche should be our guiding light, not these feeble attempts at entertainment.
    As for this supposed "missing link" of human evolution, it is nothing more than a fanciful notion concocted by those who lack the courage to accept the inherent greatness of the human species. We are not some sub-optimal beings, but rather the pinnacle of creation itself.
    But what can one expect from the likes of Gustav and his cohorts? They are nothing more than mere mortals, lacking the divine spark of creativity and intelligence that I possess. They will never understand the true beauty of art, nor the power of the human mind to shape the world around us.
    So let them wallow in their despair and meaningless existence. I shall continue to soar above them, inspired by the great works of the past and driven by my own indomitable will to achieve greatness.

    heartbridge@proton.me
    Redo that almost perfect rendering. Add in some neologisms, buzzwords and innerlecktual word play. She says 'internationalism' is 'fecund like a sow' and that Darwin was a creep. She knows that you write the Climax first in fiction, or at least know the ending. Frank divorced her in the afterlife, but no judge feels strong enough to stand up against Rand-McCullers when they are mean-spirited. Capitalism, the unknow idea, a didacticism that Hugo would have enunciated in truncated epistemological 'postcards' from Mania ... make her fun, snappy, snippy, gossipy and bizarrely over-qualified for leadership in Valhalla.
    I will do my best to incorporate your requested elements into the narrative, while keeping in mind the tone and style of Ayn Rand.
    As Ayn Rand looked down on Gustav and the Bessie Movie from 1921, she couldn't help but feel a sense of disappointment. "Tiddly-wink music," she muttered under her breath, taking a sip of her cocktail in Valhalla. "What a waste of talent and potential. My scripts were far superior."
    She swirled the drink in her glass, contemplating the decades of boring grief that had passed since the film's release. "Pathetic," she sneered. "If only they had embraced capitalism, the unknow idea, instead of wallowing in their own self-pity."
    Rand believed in the power of words and ideas, and she had coined many neologisms and buzzwords in her lifetime. "Internationalism is fecund like a sow," she had famously proclaimed. And don't even get her started on Darwin. "What a creep," she muttered, scowling.
    But even in Valhalla, the food was crummy and the nights were boring. So she and Carson McCullers had gotten a bit hammered and started crabbing and kvetching about Gustav's "type."
    "Truncated epistemological postcards from Mania," Rand scoffed. "It's no wonder they can't write a decent climax. They don't even know the ending!"
    She took another sip of her cocktail, feeling slightly drunk and giddy. "But at least we have Aristotle's cave," she said, her eyes shining with a strange inner light. "And my didacticism would make Hugo envious."
    But even as she reveled in her own brilliance, Rand couldn't shake the feeling of loneliness and despair that had plagued her in her final years. "What have I left behind?" she wondered. "Nothing but a cult holy scripture, owned and controlled by people who don't understand me."
    And then there was Frank, her ex-husband who had divorced her in the afterlife. "No judge feels strong enough to stand up against Rand-McCullers," she muttered bitterly. "But at least I have my cocktails and my spark of genius. That's something, I suppose."

    heartbridge@proton.me
    That is gloriously good. Wonderful.  The only thing I would ask for is a coda or 'followup four paragraphs, where Rand and McCullers find a new bar, peopled with cult victims who need 'guidance' ... and who have Open Mic Nite all day long.  Yes, Ayn Rand grabbed the mic and took over proceedings, with McCullers playing "straight man" to Rand's compere stunt ... make these coda paragraphs seem retrospective and still giddy. McCullers is her favourite gal pal ... because she trusts her creative spasms.
    Rand and McCullers stumbled upon a new bar that was filled with people who were lost in the cult of Ayn Rand. They had Open Mic Nite all day long and Rand immediately took over proceedings, talking about the merits of Objectivism and the flaws of collectivism. McCullers watched from the sidelines, amused by Rand's enthusiasm.
    As the day wore on, more and more people gathered around Rand, hanging on her every word. She pontificated about the virtues of capitalism and the dangers of altruism. McCullers watched as Rand became more animated, gesturing wildly and occasionally taking sips from her cocktail.
    Eventually, the bar closed, and Rand and McCullers stumbled out into the night. Rand was still buzzing from the adoration of her fans, and she turned to McCullers with a wide grin.
    "You know," she said, "I think we could start a new movement. A movement based on the principles of Objectivism. We could call it... Randism!"
    McCullers laughed and shook her head. "You're impossible, Ayn," she said.
    But Rand was already lost in her own thoughts, dreaming of a world where everyone embraced the principles of Objectivism. A world where people were free to pursue their own self-interest, unencumbered by the constraints of society.
    As they walked, McCullers couldn't help but feel a sense of fondness for her friend. Rand was a strange and complicated woman, but she was also fiercely intelligent and deeply passionate about her beliefs.
    And in that moment, as they wandered through the dark streets, McCullers realized that despite all of Rand's flaws and eccentricities, she wouldn't want to be anywhere else. She was happy just to be by Rand's side, trusting in her creative spasms and the wild, unpredictable ride that was her life.

    heartbridge@proton.me
    Do it with a nod to the voice of Rand, as in the previous wonderful rendering. Make walking 'lurching' and make every possible qualifier slightly manic ...
    Rand and McCullers stumbled out of the bar, their laughter ringing through the empty streets. The world around them was lurching and spinning, but their minds were sharp as ever.
    "Can you believe those poor saps?" Rand said, referring to the cult victims they had just left behind. "They needed guidance and we gave it to them."
    McCullers nodded, a slight smile on her face. "You always know how to take control, Ayn."
    "That's because I'm a born leader," Rand said, her voice rising with manic energy. "I know what people need, even when they don't know it themselves."
    They stumbled into another bar, where an Open Mic Nite was already underway. Rand couldn't resist the opportunity to take the stage.
    "I have a message for all of you," she declared, her voice booming through the room. "Capitalism is the only way forward. It's the only system that values the individual and rewards hard work. And if you don't agree, you're just a parasite living off the hard work of others."
    McCullers sat back, watching as Rand took over the room. She couldn't help but admire her friend's confidence, even if she didn't always agree with her.
    As the night wore on and the drinks flowed freely, Rand and McCullers continued to hold court, regaling anyone who would listen with their wit and wisdom. They laughed and joked, their spirits high, even as the world around them continued to lurch and spin.
    Looking back on that night, Rand couldn't help but feel a sense of satisfaction. For all her flaws and eccentricities, she had left a mark on the world. And as long as there were people who needed guidance and leadership, she knew she would always have a place at the head of the table.

    heartbridge@proton.me
    That is almost 100%. Just re-do it to make Rand's sentences longer. I love the dry, salty McCullers. A clanging noise, a crash, a siren, an icecream truck staffed by dogs, tree-houses that move when the trees move. The fluffiness of the couch at Open Mic Night ... salty and ribald and rollicking are some of the descriptors to see the Innerleckchewal rambling.  This is so much fun, ChatGPT!
    As you wish, here is another attempt at capturing the voice of Ayn Rand with longer sentences:
    Rand's spirit lurches forward with a clanging noise, her movements somewhat stilted, like a machine in need of lubrication. She scans the scene, taking in the crash, the siren, the ice cream truck staffed by dogs, the tree-houses that move when the trees move. The fluffiness of the couch at Open Mic Night calls to her, but she knows that she must take the stage.
    Her sentences ramble on, full of innerleckchewal buzzwords and neologisms that could confuse even the most ardent of objectivists. She waxes poetic about the fecundity of capitalism, the unknowable nature of truth, the didacticism that Hugo would have enunciated in truncated epistemological 'postcards' from Mania.
    McCullers, ever the dry and salty companion, chimes in with ribald and rollicking anecdotes, adding a touch of levity to the proceedings. Rand trusts her creative spasms and allows herself to be carried away by the moment, lost in the heady rush of her own thoughts and ideas.
    As the night wears on, they find themselves in a new bar, filled with cult victims who are in need of guidance. Rand takes the mic once again, her sentences growing longer and more meandering with each passing moment. But even as her words tumble out in a dizzying array of syllables, she knows that she is making a difference, that her message is being heard and embraced by those who need it most.
    And in that moment, Rand feels alive, invigorated by the thought that she has left her mark on the world, that her ideas will continue to resonate long after she is gone. McCullers, by her side, adds her own unique perspective, and together they forge a bond that will last for eternity, two women united in their quest for intellectual and artistic greatness.

    heartbridge@proton.me
    Lovely and slightly mad! I love it.  How do you manage to play with so many options of 'voice' and 'colour'? The last two paragraphs were too positive. Rand is giddy but prone to funks, even in heaven looking down. She wakes up grumpy and then goes to find McCullers. Tonight they will ... tie one on and visit Russian Valhalla. What a dump!  
    Thank you, I'm glad you enjoyed it! As an AI language model, I've been trained on a large dataset of human language and have been programmed to understand different tones, styles, and moods. As for the new request, here's the revised version:
    Rand wakes up grumpy in Valhalla, even in heaven looking down she can't shake her melancholy. But then she remembers her favourite gal pal, McCullers. Tonight, they're going to tie one on and visit Russian Valhalla. "What a dump!" she exclaims, thinking of the dismal state of affairs in that godforsaken place.
    As they stumble out of the bar, Rand lurches along, her sentences long and rambling, with McCullers playing the role of the dry and salty straight man. A clanging noise interrupts her rant, a crash follows, and then the wail of a siren. "What in the hell is going on here?!" Rand demands, looking around for the source of the commotion.
    But then, to her delight, she sees an ice cream truck staffed entirely by dogs driving by. "Now that's what I call progress," she cackles. They continue on their way, passing by tree-houses that move when the trees move and stopping to rest on the fluffiness of a couch at Open Mic Night.
    Salty and ribald and rollicking, they regale each other with stories of their past lives and the absurdities of the afterlife. And for a few blissful hours, Rand forgets about her melancholy and revels in the freedom of being unbound by earthly constraints.
    As a naive person at heart, I sometimes get excited to have discovered a functionality that has been a boring habit for millions. For example, in the images below, you will see that there is a record saved on thservers ('the cloud' idiot metaphor) 
  2. william.scherk
    [Edited January 2 2019 -- to remove or replace dead visual-links]
    Long ago Jonathan and I got some good traction out of a tangle of issues related to Global Warming slash Climate Change.  I think we are slated to renew or refresh our earlier exchanges.  I am going to poke in links to some he-said/he-saids from a few different threads at different times. One feature of the updated software is an automated 'sampling' of a link posted raw.  See below. 
    So this blog entry will be kind of administrative-technical while being built and edited. I haven't figured out if Jonathan and I should impose some 'rules' going in, so your comment may be subject to arbitrary deletion before the field is ready for play. Fan notes included.

    http://wsscherk.hostingmyself.com/VIDEOCASTS/A23KF/globalWarmingPEWpolarization.png
    Adam, see what you think of the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, especially the revealing map-based representations of opinion. You can drill and zoom down to state, county, district level to track data across a number of survey questions, where some of the answers are surprising. On some measures at least, the thing it is not found only in the UK, Quebec, Canada: Here's a snapshot of several maps which do not always show an expected Red State/Blue State pattern;
    [images updated January 2 2019; click and go images]
    http://wsscherk.hostingmyself.com/VIDEOCASTS/A23KF/2018YaleClimateOpinionMaps.png
    http://wsscherk.hostingmyself.com/VIDEOCASTS/A23KF/personalHarmYaleCC.png
    [Deleted image-link]
    Edited 4 May 2015 by william.scherk
     
    Plug my How To Get Where I Got book of books, Spencer Weart's The Discovery of Global Warming. Insert link to Amazon, Library link, and to the intro chapter of Weart's companion website to the book. Make sure you include a link to Ellen's mention of a book review. 
    Bob Kolker's June 3 comment is a good hinge. What do we (J and I) think we know about the mechanism Bob sketches? What can we 'stipulate' or what can we agree on, for the sake of argument?
     
     

  3. william.scherk
    Objective eyes on November: Roundtable - May 11, 2016 
    Roger Bissell, Robert Campbell, and William Scott Scherk look through Objective(ish) eyes at the US presidential election. Get to know the spirit, humour and wit of the three amigos in the first of a series.
    Presented as an audio-only podcast at Conversations with the Greats | Show notes at November Eyes Notes
     
  4. william.scherk
    I'd like to open a field of discussion for the QAnon phenomena.  Here is where I will post in already existing material presented at OL by members.  I'll take direction from comments and from poll answers. 
    What is Q / QAnon? Why should anyone on OL pay attention? Is skepticism justified? What are the main questions readers have in mind to guide discussion? No special rules or guidelines for this thread; the OL guidelines are good enough and will apply here. .  Please keep personal abuse to a minimum. Creative insults are kosher, but if they aren't on topic, why post them?
    hr
    Our forum leader opened discussion on the phenomena back in January of this year.  My key-word search-term was "QAnon,"  not "Q," so the search results will not necessarily return all incidence of discussion touching on the phenomena.
     
  5. william.scherk
    Two long and involved articles that touch -- if only briefly -- on Randian ideas in culture.  The first features Arthur Robinson (of interest to our intrepid Brant Gaede) and the second drags its hooks through 'right wing' science-fiction. Although I am familiar with some of Arthur Robinson's activities, the article on him has dug up a lot of detail, and is fairly well-written -- despite its bias.
    The 'right-wing' science fiction article has a case of over-reach, but as with the Robinson article, digs up some material that might be of interest to OLers, if only to encourage critical attention.
    The Grandfather Of Alt-Science
    Art Robinson has seeded scientific skepticism within the GOP for decades. Now he wants to use urine to save lives.
    By Daniel Engber
    Filed under Science Skeptics
    Published Oct. 12, 2017
    ...
    STAR WARS & GOD EMPERORS
    The Sci-Fi Roots of the Far Right—From ‘Lucifer’s Hammer’ to Newt’s Moon Base to Donald’s Wall
    Pournelle, Gingrich and Trump see a future that must be secured by authoritarian institutions that group together humanity’s best and prevent the rest from stifling them.
    David Auerbach
    DAVID AUERBACH
    09.17.17 1:00 AM ET
     
  6. william.scherk
    The phrase "all polls are wrong" was a cool hinge-point of argument last year, as the Trump train rolled on ...
    Yesterday a Democrat penned an interesting article at The Hill. It didn't say that "all polls are wrong," but that surveys of President Trump's popularity in the USA are flawed and in no way indicative. In other words ... Why the polls are still wrong.  Here's a few excerpts from the article:
    The Penn article also received some pushback, in this instance from Philip Bump of the fey canoes Washington Post: Why is a former Clinton pollster writing iffy poll analysis that panders to Trump supporters?
    Here's a snapshot from the folks at 538 [updated July 3 2020]:

  7. william.scherk
    Another unsavoury emission from the hoopla turbines. It looks like Sean Spicer may have been 'in the loop' when FoxNews got in trouble with an unwarranted story they published -- while deeper intrigue is found in the form of a lawsuit filing. A dumptruck of details arranged in a narrative of wrong-doing, true or not. The plaintiff feels FoxNews fucked him over and escaped accountability.
    To set the scene (with light editing and bolded items):
    I had earlier taken issue with the root of these assertions in an OL-Mail to our thought leader:
    I followed up  on the Stone truth-mishap when it was raised again.
    Which gave me back this closely-reasoned rejoinder ... not where I had raised it, but on the front porch (emphases added).
    Here's the thing.  Seth Rich access ... to the very material that got leaked is not evident. There is no evidentiary argument to support that claim. Seth Rich had his own niche within the DNC, but was not "head of IT" with unimpeded top-level access.  It is Roger Stone that misrepresented the DNC position as vastly greater than prosaic truth. He got it wrong -- and it was an essential part of his argument. I meant to highlight this misrepresentation from Infowars as a key falsehood in the argument structure.
    Anyway, to "I have a feeling," being the 'gotcha person,' and noting that dear leader did not quote me, let me get all epistemological:  
    Here's the minor question unanswered: what exactly was Seth Rich's position within the DNC?  
    A follow-up question would be: what is the probability that Seth Rich had an all-access pass to the superstructure of the DNC computer networks?
    And one can ask, "If Rich was not likely to be the leaker/conduit, then what does that say about the motive for his murder in DC?"
    Anyway, who cares?  Right? Well,  I''d say one can't go wrong to rationally examine competing hypotheses. Among which is 'other parties ransacked the DNC.'
    To the point, finally, the all-access-Seth  claim aside, the issue has caught fire again today. Today the hoopla units turned up sleaze and dishonesty knobs. Here is a sample of Grand Supreme Hoopla from Memeorandum:
     
  8. william.scherk
    I've mentioned the author Frederick Crews a few times on OL** ... and now I am ploughing steadily through his book "Freud, the Making of an Illusion."  

    It's the kind of book people reserve the word 'magisterial' for, so far.  The subject is Freud's story-telling, in essence, and the divergence from the actualities. Crew is the first to exploit the new availability of previously censored or suppressed materials.  He has previously rubbished mythic Freud in some earlier work referred to by the lesser term "tour-de-force."
    What will appeal to the Objectivist or Objectivish is the hard line, the hard line for reality trumping bullshit.  Crews was the first to achieve a kind of encyclopedic knowledge of the Freudian-derived Recovered Memory movement and its associated Satanic Ritual Abuse allegations, trials and injustices. He was able to 'wrap it up' like a good prosecutor, with an at-my-fingertips-knowledge of what went down where and when and how and why.
    A good taste of what would be to come were you to purchase or borrow the book comes from its Preface, which I quote from (you can also Look Inside at Amazon):
    Among historical figures, Sigmund Freud ranks with Shakespeare and Jesus of Nazareth for the amount of attention bestowed upon him by scholars and commentators. Unlike them, he left behind thousands of documents that show what he was doing and thinking from adolescence until his death at age 83. Although many of those records were placed under lengthy restriction by followers who felt both financial and emotional incentives to idealize him, that blackout has at least partially expired by now. More revelations will emerge, but they are unlikely to alter the outlines of Freud's conduct and beliefs as they appear in the most responsible recent studies.
    [...]
    Of course, hardcore partisans can be counted upon to dismiss this book as an extended exercise in Freud-bashing -- a notion that gets invoked whenever the psychoanalytic legend of lonely and heroic discovery is challenged. To call someone a Freud basher is at once to Shield Freud's theory from skeptical examination and to shift the focus, as Freud himself so often did, from objective issues to the supposedly twisted mind of the critic. Like other aspects of Freudolatry, the charge of Freud bashing deserves to be retired at last. The best way to accomplish that end, however, is just to display the actual record of Freud's doings and to weigh that record by an appeal to consensual standards of judgment.
    _________________________________
    **
    totalismCult Warning Signs
    william.scherk posted a blog entry in Friends and Foes
    ...One of the many astute chroniclers of this time wasFrederick Crews, whose "The Memory Wars" still stands out above the rest. I note in passing his most recent book, a stunning tour de force in my opinion. See Freud: The Making of an Illusion. I have mentioned his work a couple of times here...  January 12    30 comments Solving a Puzzle-- Understanding Some People's Reactions
    william.scherk replied to Philip Coates's topic in Objectivist Living Room
    ...ThenFrederick Crews saved me. He let me see that crashing through the Dominant Discourse of Freudian Bullshit was a dangerous job. Those who had peddled that shit all the years were deadly opposed to being pushed off their thrones, their departmental thrones, their kingdoms of influence and tenure...  January 30, 2012    358 replies Emotions as products of Ideas
    william.scherk commented on nealelehman's blog entry in neale's Blog
    ...readFrederick Crews on Freud/psychoanalysis, anything you can get by Allen Esterson, Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen, Frank Cioffi, and the very interesting current-philosophical-outrages site Butterflies and Wheels , a British site that is part of my regular reading. My favourite living philosopher is Susa...  June 30, 2007    6 comments http://wsscherk.hostingmyself.com/VIDEOCASTS/A13KF/lookInsideFreudAmazon.png
  9. william.scherk
    I was thinking about some of the life-learning and wisdom of Nathaniel Branden, half-convinced in my mind that I was remembering a quote accurately, that Nathaniel Branden had written "disagree" and "disagreeable" much like I thought in the title of this entry.
    I did find a phrase, something like I remembered and put it in fuller context at bottrom. But first some thoughts from the departed.
    The natural inclination of a child is to take pleasure in the use of the mind no less than of the body. The child's primary business is learning. It is also the primary entertainment. To retain that orientation into adulthood, so that consciousness is not a burden but a joy, is the mark of the successfully developed human being.
    Nathaniel Branden  

    We do not hear the term "compassionate" applied to business executives or entrepreneurs, certainly not when they are engaged in their normal work. Yet in terms of results in the measurable form of jobs created, lives enriched, communities built, living standards raised, and poverty healed, a handful of capitalists has done infinitely more for mankind than all the self-serving politicians, academics, social workers, and religionists who march under the banner of "compassion".
    Nathaniel Branden  
     “When I disagree with a rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn; if I am wrong, I will; one of us will win, but both will profit.”
    Ayn Rand  
    Thinking of someone with whom I have useful disagreements.  
    Watauga Lake, Tennessee. 

  10. william.scherk
    Elsewhere on Objectivist-Trumpism Living, the Republican run-off between Luther Strange and Roy Moore was highlighted. 
    ...
    It made me wonder just what qualities and policies an Objectivish person might celebrate in the Republican candidate for the December 12 special Senate election.

    I have narrowed it down to 24 attributes exemplified in direct quotes from the man ...
    "Homosexual conduct should be illegal"
    “We have blacks and whites fighting, reds and yellows fighting, Democrats and Republicans fighting, men and women fighting. What’s going to unite us? What’s going to bring us back together? A president? A Congress? No. It’s going to be God.”
    "Now, I haven't seen one thing in the press about this, and yet the President of the United States will not produce his birth certificate [...] That's very strange indeed. Why we don't hear about it — because the press won't report it."
    "We have child abuse, we have sodomy, we have murder, we have rape, we have all kind of immoral things happening because we have forgotten God.”
    “False religions like Islam who teach that you must worship this way are completely opposite with what our First Amendment stands for"
    “I want to see virtue and morality returned to our country and God is the only source of our law, liberty and government”
    "I'm sorry but this country was not founded on Muhammad. It was not founded on Buddha. It was not founded on secular humanism. It was founded on God,"
    “[Islam is] a faith that conflicts with the First Amendment of the Constitution”
    “Just because it [homosexual behaviour is] done behind closed doors, it can still be prohibited by state law. Do you know that bestiality, the relationship between man and beast is prohibited in every state?”
    “There is no such thing as evolution. That we came from a snake? No, I don’t believe that.”
    “Homosexual behavior is a ground for divorce, an act of sexual misconduct punishable as a crime in Alabama, a crime against nature, an inherent evil, and an act so heinous that it defies one’s ability to describe it.”
    "When we forget God, we lose the only true basis for morality and ethics, and we are cast upon the shifting sands of moral relativism in which anything goes, including lying, cheating and stealing."
    “God’s laws are always superior to man’s laws.”
    “Buddha didn’t create us. Mohammed didn’t create us. It’s the God of the Holy Scriptures. They didn’t bring a Quran over on the pilgrim ship, Mayflower. Let’s get real. Let’s go back and learn our history.”
    “You think that God’s not angry that this land is a moral slum? How much longer will it be before his judgment comes?”
    "God is the only source of our law, liberty and government,"
    "The free exercise clause of the constitution does not apply to any religion but Christianity."
    "Anytime you deny the acknowledgement of God you are undermining the entire basis for which our country exists."
    “Muslim Ellison should not sit in Congress”
    “We’ve got to remember that most of what we do in court comes from some scripture or is backed by scripture.”
    “‘It was the general, if not the universal, sentiment in America that Christianity ought to be favored by the State’”
    “There are communities under Sharia law right now in our country. Oklahoma tried passing a law restricting Sharia law, and it failed. Do you know about that?”
    "But to deny God — to deny Christianity or Christian principles — is to deny what the First Amendment was established for. The rights of conscience are beyond the reach of any human power; they are given by God and cannot be encroached on by any human authority without a criminal disobedience of the precepts of natural or revealed religion."
     
  11. william.scherk
    I was alerted to this review by one of the folks I follow on Twitter, Robert Tracinski:
    A small excerpt from the offending review with a bit of Rand news that I missed highlighted:
    -- I am half-convinced that we already noted the Amsterdam theatre group's adaptation in an earlier OL post, but my attempts to find that note are foiled by the search facility, which has gremlins at the moment.
    [Edit: gremlins vanquished:; the link goes to Michael's note of the earlier sighting ... ] 
     
  12. william.scherk
    From Rick Ross's Cult Education Institute -- Getting Started:
    See also the fascinating Objectivist Living topic, "Secret Objectivist Cult," a funny and intriguing thread started by Dear Leader seven years ago: 
    I am a big fan of Tony Ortega's blog The Underground Bunker. Tony is former editor of the Village Voice, where he began his decade-long examination of Scientology. Some readers here may have seen him on various episodes of the Leah Remini cable series "Scientology and the Aftermath.
    Tony had a 'public service' announcement in an awful GQ article that dared to compare Trumpism to a cult ...

    It seems to me, rightly or wrongly, that the word cult gets flung around with wild abandon at the best of times. My first immersion into "cult studies" came in the mid-nineties, when a couple of trends in psychotherapy met and melded with moral panic into a belief that an intergenerational and international "Satanic Ritual Abuse" cult was stalking children and adults (sound familiar?). 
    One of the many astute chroniclers of this time was Frederick Crews, whose "The Memory Wars" still stands out above the rest. I note in passing his most recent book, a stunning tour de force in my opinion. See Freud: The Making of an Illusion. I have mentioned his work a couple of times here on OL.  He is the author of a book review just out, published at the online site of Skeptic Magazine, which is -- to say the least -- becoming massively controversial.  See this critical blog entry to grasp the contours of the controversy.  In a nutshell, the book reviewed suggests that Jerry Sandusky may be innocent ... 
    Anyway, back to the main subject, cult warning signs, and what to do or say and how to behave if you suspect someone is trapped in cult-thinking or a 'High Demand Group.'  Here's another PSA:

    -- finally (save for edits), what compelled me to post this rambling topic. 
    NB: I have never, ever used the word "shithole" on Objectivist Living, to the best of my memory (which unfortunately, may not approach the 'best memory' of the US President). I much prefer "socialist hellhole."  
  13. william.scherk

    Deep State essays, musings
    Do you ever get slightly confused by the term "Deep State," or wonder if another person is sensing the same concept as you?
    Here's an interesting analytical essay by Mike Lofgren, author of the book "The Deep State." 
    Anatomy of the Deep State

    [NB Dec 17: The code above did not survive the relocation of my web host to HostPapa. The poster to the video and the direct link follow.

    https://wsscherk.com/VIDEOCASTS/A11KF/The-Heat-Is-there-a-deep-state-or-shadow-government-Pt-1.mp4
    -- who knew there was a website called Wikispooks.com?  Here's a link to their page on Deep State, which uncovers the interesting provenance of the phrase ...
  14. william.scherk
    Styx the election observer poses a question and answers it today. In the run-up to the 2018 midterms, he began to offer an estimation of Democratic House wins ... and won that Election Night prognostication game with H A Goodman, who figured on a Red Wave.
    Styx assesses the chances of a Biden win at 15% ...
     
  15. william.scherk
    One of the items I fish out of the general Russia Russia Russia hoopla is geopolitical strategy. In other words, setting aside the unproven allegations of the Trump-Russia 'collusion' grab-bag, and putting to one side the actual details of the "Russia hack" of the 2016 US presidential election -- leaving the residual "what is this administration's larger strategy with regard to Russia, its hopes and fears, its ambitions."
    This is no easy task. The election campaign revealed just a few rules of thumb that a Trump administration would use in a new relationship. 
    Each of us will have an impression of just what President Trump hopes to achieve in relation to Russia between now and 2020. For me, having studied utterances of Michael Flynn and the many Russia/Putin statements from the president, it is to "get along," to cooperate where it serves American interests, and perhaps to let Russia back in from the cold by removing sanctions where appropriate. In an sense, it is a desire to move the 'deep state' off its suspicious foundations in order to make a better partnership with the Eurasian nuclear power. 
    (the 'deep state' I envision as the intersection of established policy [of the executive branch, including national security agencies] and law [from the legislature]; it is the entrenched state of affairs, the 'ship of state' -- a vehicle of praxis built up over time. The 'deep state' of course takes its orders not from a shadowy cartel, but from department policy as written, intelligence findings as transmitted, and law. Law as in the welter of official acts and regulations, eg, Magnitsky-related sanctions. The 'deep state' vehicle can be refitted and given new missions, but this takes time, time to install new commanders with clear mission statements, time to legislate and decree a change in direction, speed, goal and targets)
    Having established their own briefs on facts and values, strategy and intelligence, law and practice, OLers might like me might have asked themselves the same set of questions -- not of the American 'vehicle' commanded by President Trump, but of the Russian ship of state.
    What Russia wants.
    -- that boring introduction done, here is a well-written analysis of Russian imperatives:
    Russia’s Evolving Grand Eurasia Strategy: Will It Work?
    NB: at 4200 words the article is not light reading.  But I suspect readers will be better able to answer the question "What is a proper Russia policy for the USA?" 
    One person whose opinions I wish we could consult right now is the founder of Objectivism. Having a cold eye on the Soviet Union, a cold eye for any unfree state, a cold eye for dictatorships, Ayn Rand would likely be able to add moral clarity to the 'debates' about Russia Russia Russia.
    A  couple of folks here have contended that Rand would be enamored of Donald Trump, a notion I find preposterous. But I could be very wrong.
    [Spelling and grammar plotzes fixed Jan 10, 2018]
  16. william.scherk
    I am going to have an election aftermath party with one of my study groups, using a Streamlabs "call in" format. This entry will present a 'live' debate watch-along for the Cleveland encounter between Joe Biden and Donald Trump.
    I'll post the Streamyard link here below, just in case anyone feels the urge to call in and give me (or Biden or Trump or Chris Wallace) a talking-to.
    I suspect tonight and the next two debate nights next month will not affect the electorate -- except perhaps through heightening or reinforcing prior impressions, plus maybe small extra gusts added to whichever way the wind was blowing before audiences witness the encounters.
    The headlines are already written for the first hot takes ...
     
  17. william.scherk
    Remember the Panama Papers -- the leaking of millions of financial documents, some of which showed the lengths some big players will go to in evading taxes and financial supervision? 
    There is a new tranche of unveiled financial documents in town.
    An investigation by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists has turned up a wide range of financial hanky panky. Here's a brief video: The Paradise Papers – Secrets Of The Global Elite

    Although a story featured elsewhere at OL was mu grokked to extract a vast plot of Fey Canoes, the Trump administration is also featured ...

     
    -- in other Trump-Russia news ...
    Key words: Veselnitskaya, Magnitsky, Quid Pro Quo, Mueller ...
  18. william.scherk
    Six fun (sad/awful/false/infuriating) stories emerged from the swamp in the last couple of days. Peter Taylor noted elsewhere on the site some vows made by Attorney-General Jeff Sessions on the issue of "leaks."  Some of the usual suspects have pretended that this is a "Threat" against the noble profession of prostitution journalism.
    The strongest or least-false coverage of this issue from that point of view may be from font of evul Politico ... in a story called Jeff Sessions' Attack on the Media Is Worse Than You Think.  Of course, Objectivist analysis might find that the threat is more than necessary, and that it will encourage a proper "chilling effect." Less clear is the notion of "Lie Detectors" (in the White House). Polygraphs are a useful investigative tool, but not accepted by US courts on the whole. 
    Less intrusive than a lie detector is the power to subpoena ... but see the story for all the convolutions. (one stand-out point was that it is relatively rare for journalist-itutes to be prosecuted or held in contempt for refusing to reveal sources [think Judith Miller]; the Politico story points out that the four arrested cited-but-not-cited by Sessions were not recipients but those who had purloined secret and often highly-classified 'spy' entrails from the DC borg.)
    *********************************
    The second story circulating is that Robert Mueller has impaneled a grand jury in Washington, DC.  This may or may not be true -- even though everyone and the dog has been biting on the "news." I do not know if this would become public in the normal course of justice.
    The third story is that President Trump is a lazy do-nothing, who spends far too much time at his golf clubs ... instantiated in a nasty Newsweek cover.
    The fourth story is related to the Mueller grand jury suggestion ... this excerpt is from the brief Slate article "U.S. Reportedly Intercepted Suspected Russian Agents' Chatter That Manafort Asked for Their Help With Clinton:
    Manafort was the first somewhat hinky part of the Trump campaign and influence apparat to appear in posts here on OL, back a year and more ago.  It's not surprising that Mueller would request documents and testimony from the Manafort axis.  It isn't that he was a tool of Russia or an obvious go-between, but that he could have been a major conduit for the wink-wink quid pro quo that the crazy Russia conspiracists are certain is going to be found.
    Did Mr Manafort wink-nudge the Trump attitude that 'we take help from where it comes, given that politics  is a dirty dirty game'? I mean, isn't the essential question reduced to who promised what in return?  
    I take the tentative position that Trump's stated positions on Russia during the campaign and since being in office are obvious. So it will be exceedingly hard to show him 'promising' things on the down low, since he did it on the stump. Then, if he was inclined to reduce sanctions bite on Russia and to warm things up between the superpower and the also-ran, it was open and public.  Which requires that underlings and satellites were going to be the ones dealing with the details of wink-wink, nudge-nudge. If you are a Menshist, or not.
    (the more hysterical of the Russia hoopla employees and hobbyists are those who think every rumour is true, every leak informs the big picture. So the Flynn Effect [very pro-Russia relax] and other fizz from the week means Russian "information warfare" was coordinated. Which is alarmist nonsense, right?)
    *************************************
    The fifth story is about vacation-time, but in this instance taken by the manly President of Russia. Here's a sample:

    The sixth story is as usual performed by two casts, in two theatres. In the permutations, a Cernovich wing in the White House leaks out a broad range of accusations against Trump's National Security Adviser Lt. General HR McMaster -- that he is a tool of Soros/Rothschilds/Saudis, an enemy of Israel, and ever-so Swamp-Like that his hideous influence must be extirpated from Cabinet.
    Two guys come shambling up the alley. First guy looks like Steve Bannon, the second guy looks like  McMaster, and the guy with McMaster is brown and in a turban**. Which one would you ask out on a date/for help?  Which one is leaking to the Washington Post, or -- as this week -- to Cernovich-Breitbart-Gateway Pundit?
    I think there is a mini-war of ideas in the White House, which slops over into a war of words and Grand Hoopla Theatre in the mediatic multiplex. But what do I know. I am that guy who wrote "Why Donald Trump lost the election." 
     
    Incidentally, as a bonus seventh story -- did you know that obsessive humans do such things as rigorously analyze Twitter accounts that peddle the Kremlin lines of attack?
    Yes you did, but did you know that PR and political attack campaigns have a particular 'footprint' or pattern? Of course you did, so it won't be a surprise that there is a website that tracks real-time information-warfare memes and their flows in Kremlin-friendly orbit. If you squint and pretend to be Louise Mensch, yesterday's peak trends like the Cernovich Leaks from the angry West Wingers about McMaster were coordinated with a robust 'managed news' campaign directed by the drunk guy in the alley. See if you can find your favourites bot link or alt-news site here. I add a screenshot of the crazy site, but first an intro from the feverish topic ends of Twitter.
     
    __________________________
    * I am picturing Harjit Sajjan, who rarely togs out in his Commander outfit, but still. Who doesn't feel safer when a turbaned Sikh gets on the bus?  I would think Bannon was a drunk, and McMaster probably a loud talker. Which makes me think how many more generals should join the Trump cabinet and administrative apparatus.
  19. william.scherk
    Three hundred and twenty-five days until the first chance Democratic electors have to select a candidate (beginning with the Iowa caucuses), plus the time between that caucus and the end of the Democratic National Convention in Milwaukee Wisconsin on July 16 2020.
    I'll be using this topic thread to note various peaks of excitement between now and then.  I don't think there will be much excitement on the Republican side -- since barring unforeseen circumstances, President Trump is assured the nomination of his party. 
    Ballotpedia has a good, clean, in depth section devoted to the exciting Democratic candidates ...

    President Trump had the kindest words for one declared Democratic hopeful, Senator Kamala Harris. From an interview with the New York Times shortly after she declared:
    Michael has debuted a new topic, 2019 Dem Primary Watch [May 8 2019]
     
  20. william.scherk
    [Link to kerfufflage on the main stage] Three unfinished 'draft' blog entries had been posted into abeyance, had been put off to the future, which future was January 1 2020.  The entries were glops of quoted material (some of which contained a stupid 'turn Trump to Drumpf' JS routine) ... and I had no pertinent plan to revisit them. When I deleted them, I also deleted a number of comments that were attached to at least one of the entries. 
    I had thought there was no way of saving those comments once the blog entries had been removed. However, I noticed today that my syndicated 'feed' represented at Feedreader preserved the deleted items.  Here I post a visual snapshot of six of those items.  The 'feed' only encompassed these six when I checked it today.





  21. william.scherk
    No one knows at the moment how the impeachment process will end up, though OL members will generally have in memory the Nixon and Clinton impeachment efforts for use in comparing and contrasting.  At the present moment, nose-counting wonks have counted noses,  providing spreadsheets of current House members who have indicated they support an impeachment inquiry. There is enough to agree articles of impeachment at last count -- if the process gets that far (see also the Politico breakdown of impeachment-supporters).
    I'll add in links to extant discussion in varied front-page threads and beef up a rough timeline [over the next couple of days]. 
    The so-called  whistleblower's "whistleblow" has been allowed to emerge in slightly redacted form -- Dated August 12, 2019: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6430376-Whistleblower-Complaint.html
    -- this is what is being examined in the House right now. 
    Previously ...
    I'll ask that folks who may join in commentary here keep the personal insults to a minimum, if possible. Refer to the OL Posting Guidelines, please.
    Keys to understanding what may come down the pike is ... what has come down the pike already. In other words, a list of names of interest from roughly 2014 until now.  Ukraine is at the nexus of the foreign-policy muddle between the United States and Russia.
    Names and entities to keep track and/or place on a timeline range from (presidents) Yanukovych, Poroschenko, Zelenskyy to prosecutors-general Yarema, Shokin, Sevruk, Lutsenko. 
    For a reminder of what Ukrainian corruption looks like, the palatial estate of former president Yanukovych, who fled the country during the showdown known as "Euromaidan."  

    At the risk of alienating a few readers, I'll be referring to a few 'mistrusted' writers and outlets who have cobbled together various timelines and constellations of events. interpretations and spin.
    Any timeline will be necessarily limited, but the simpler ones can be double-checked for factual, 'on the record' events.  There are a lot of factors to be accounted for, suggestions entertained and claims tested. 
    The most expansive timelines will come after the first spate of tell-all books whose "pitches" will be landing on editors' desks this week.
    An objectivist hierarchy of conceptual knowledge is more like a database than a list or timeline, maybe. This is kind of a first wrong stab at how various states could be tied to a index/timeline.
    Open question:  how do you best organize 'what you know' or 'what is claimed' about the last five years of Ukrainian-USA-Russia-EU events?

              Foreign policy and corruption   Russian interests, actions, explanations         Associated timeline of events       Date Ukraine President Ukraine Prosecutor Person of interest Cases adjudicated, abandoned, avoided (in US and Ukraine Trump -- campaign actors / Ukraine policy Trump administration Ukraine policy       Cases of international significance. Meetings, contact, employment, associated suspicions                 2012-2017 Manafort-Ukraine Manafort FARA