Say no to tyrants

... and house-elfves:


(source: NL, anti-Putin demonstration in Moscow)

If you’re wondering what Doby has to do with anything, look at this face:



Oh, sorry, wrong one. I meant this:



Oh no, sorry. I am really confusing my totalitarian right-wingers today. I meant this:

We always knew it

Mr. Claus is a Jew.



(source)

Why I support Ron Paul

1. Because my wife supports Ron Paul. Enough said.

2. I wanted to copy what I wrote on the Facebook in response to someone criticizing Ron Paul:


A. Realistically, he is the only politician that I know of (certainly, the only candidate) who shows any evidence of knowing what's going on with the economy. And, his changes seem reasonable to me: get rid of all the junk — departments in the government, FED, cut military spending (100 bases in Europe!.. against whom?.. Putin?), etc.

As to the "big guys", as my link about Bernanke shows, they are the last people who are willing to change the system. They are getting free money from FED. We need to bypass the big guys.

That is why Ron Paul is ridiculed in the media: because the big bankers want to keep getting bailed out (on a daily basis, as it happens) by Bernanke.


B. I think the biggest problem that faces us today is break-up of American society from within. Economic problems are only a sign of a greater stagnation and degradation of American society that had been happening since Woodrow Wilson took office. One can blame Wilsons, Carters, FDRs, Obamas, but these people would be unable to do what they did, had they lived in the 18th or 19th century.

So, yeah, I feel a little uncomfortable about Paul’s foreign policy. For the most part, not because I disagree with anything specific he says, but because I have been a Conservative Hawk for longer than I have been a libertarian.

I do think US needs presence abroad. I don’t necessarily think it must be done at the taxpayers’ expense. It must be done by private armies (competing with each other on free market) hired by international trading companies who have a direct stake in international stability. If those companies then want to include their "army" expenses in their bill to us (e.g., in the cost of gas), that’s fine. Let them all compete with each other on a free market to find the cheapest (and most acceptable from PR point of view) solution to the world stability. Much better than just giving an empty check to the Pentagon.

Otherwise, we’re getting a perpetual repeat of Barbary Wars. US merchants were being kidnapped by Barbary pirates, but instead of trading with another country instead or hiring their own protection, they got US Congress to build ships (using taxpayers’ money) to protect their trade.

But the bigger point is that whether one agrees with Paul on foreign policy or not, the problems we face at home are much-much greater than any potential, theoretical threat from Iran, N. Korea, or Russia.


C. Another point about economy is that it’s not just some numbers at the bottom of TV screen. It’s not just the price of tomatoes at local Shaw’s Market. Economy is the interaction between people of the society. It IS the society. Division of labor and successful exchange of goods and services are what makes up a civilization. So, "fixing economy" is fixing the society itself.

Reality is more awesome than Skyrim

Rough translation:

On July 13th, 1941, coming from Pesets district, Red Army soldier Ovcharenko was delivering ammunition for 3rd Machine-Gun Company, being four-five kilometres from the division.

Ovcharenko was attacked and surrounded by fifty German soldiers and three officers on two motor vehicles. 

A German officer left the car, ordered Ovcharenko to lift hands up, beat the rifle from his hands and began to interrogate him. In the vehicle's trunk, Ovcharenko had an ax. Without losing spirit, he beheaded the German officer with the ax and threw three grenades at the German car. 

Twenty one German soldiers were killed; others ran away in panic. Ovcharenko pursued a wounded officer with an ax in his hands. In the town Pesets, he caught up with the officer in a garden and decapitated him. Third officer managed to disappear. 

Without losing initiative, comrade Ovcharenko took documents from all the killed soldiers, maps from the officers, schematics and records and presented them to the regiment headquarters. 

The vehicle with supplies and products was delivered on time to his company. Comrade Ovcharenko continues his military life. He was raised to a machine gunner. 

— Commander of the Southern Front, General-Lieutenant Ryabyshev. Member of the Military Council, Korniets.

I do have one question. I know it probably did not escape other people's attention, but I just have to ask it. What happened between the "hands up, beat the rifle out of hands, interrogation" part and "got an ax from the trunk of the car and decapitated the German officer"? Is it just me, or is there a step missing there? Like: "Umm... Headquarters? Wait a second. Umm. I actually have a map to Stalin's headquarters in my trunk. Yeah. Just one sec... just stand there... just... whatchuhgot!.. slash..."

Anyway, I have no idea whether any of what the article describes actually happened, and if it did, what actually took place, but it's obvious that some Soviet newspapers had more action packed in them than some Skyrim let's-plays (hide annotations and skip to 2:00):

What's with the high prices?

And as a small bonus:

Defending hedge funds

Hugh Hendry, a manager of hedge funds, against a socialist bastard.



I find what he says at the end especially powerful.

It's really amazing how a socialist face just invites a punch.

I want the other half of the pile

In this post I wrote:

On the other hand, the situation is the same as in Republican primaries: all of the candidates suck, with the exception of Ron Paul. Choosing between these parties is like choosing between two weevils. 

I remember how my rabbi's father explained the difference between Catholic and Protestant church: when you're riding in a horse-driven cart, sometimes the horse does its business on the road. And sometimes the wheel drives through the horse's present and divides it in two. Now, what's the difference between the right half and the left half? That's basically the difference between Newt and Romney, between Communists and Putin in Russia, and between Democrats and Republicans in the US.

An illustration of this concept:


(source)

The poster says: "I did not vote for these bastards. I voted for different bastards! I demand a recount of votes!"

Point being: vote for Ron Paul.

Extra-extra-extra

An update to the previous post about Russian parliamentary elections.

This is an snapshot of the results in Rostov region displayed on Russian TV. Add up the percentages.

Crystal-clear

I actually oftentimes hear the examples of such logic from people around me.

If slavery wasn’t abolished, women wouldn’t be able to vote, we wouldn’t have things such as the refrigerator, and women wouldn’t be able to work.

(source)

Zero here, one there

Dmitri Surnin writes:

According to the official results of the Regional Voting Commission 1701 (where he worked as an observer), these were the local results of Russian elections (party names are loosely translated):

1. KPRF (Communists): 285
2. United Russia (Putin's party): 271
3. Just Russia: 218
4. Apple*: 167
5. LDPR (ultra-nationalists):  133
6. Right Path: 16
7. Patriots of Russia: 15

The above are the results that the local commission signed and sealed.

These are the results that were officially posted:

1. United Russia: 662
2. KPRF (Communists): 295
3. LDPR (ultra-nationalists):  133
4. Just Russia: 118
5. Apple*: 67
6. Right Path: 16
7. Patriots of Russia: 15

Apple (Yabloko), by the way, is the only party that is even worth mentioning (it's probably as bad as American Democrats, but at least it's not as bad as Hitler or Mao, represented by the top two choices). As we can see, Apple was the one at whose expense Putin's United Russia (I know, sounds like an airplane company) rose to the top (plus, some "dead souls").

On the other hand, the situation is the same as in Republican primaries: all of the candidates suck, with the exception of Ron Paul. Choosing between these parties is like choosing between two weevils.

I remember how my rabbi's father explained the difference between Catholic and Protestant church: when you're riding in a horse-driven cart, sometimes the horse does its business on the road. And sometimes the wheel drives through the horse's present and divides it in two. Now, what's the difference between the right half and the left half? That's basically the difference between Newt and Romney, between Communists and Putin in Russia, and between Democrats and Republicans in the US.

How anyone can even consider anyone besides Ron Paul as a serious choice for the president of this country boggles my mind. How do you choose between one sleazeball and another? I am not even talking about the ideas: just look at the people themselves.

Jacob's stones

Talmudic tradition teaches us that a bunch of stones were quarreling on top of which of them Yakov Avinu was going to sleep. In the end, they joined into one stone. This teaches us about unity and bittul: that in order for a group of people (two or more) to become one, they need to nullify themselves to a common goal and purpose.

What most people do not realize is that this is how the game of Go was invented: Yakov took a bunch of separate stones and connected them into a living group.

Purum-pum...