Carborendum

And it appears that China has come to the negotiating table. I hope it turns out ok for everyone.

It wasn't. If. The fact that he did this 6 times over the course of days tells me that he was not remorseful. The CA just wanted to use some excuse to let him go. There was no court. When it was done completely at prosecutorial discretion means that it was all during an interview between the CA and the criminal. I envision that he just said "wink-wink" and the CA said, "Ok." If you don't believe me, consider the reactions from the police. I submit: This was not a "low-level offense". By statute $10,000 of property damage is considered a felony with minimum of 5 years prison. This guy did over $20,000 worth of damage. He should have gotten a lot more. Instead, he basically got nothing. He may not even have to pay the victims back. No financial restrictions, no garnishments, no payment schedule. The words they've said so far is just fluff -- no legal mechanism requiring him to do so. Let's see, the guy commits vandalism in a political cause against the Trump administration, and the CA already said was not going prosecute this crime. But you wonder if he might get fired as a DHS worker in a liberal state and city? You do know what the DHS does, right? I'd hope that the sane population of Minnesota begins to vote with their feet. Let them rot in their leftist terrorist juices. They wanted a world where all the wealth producers would no longer exist, a world where crimes against political opponents went unpunished, and allowing people to keep the fruits of their labor is considered hoarding. Fine, we'll give you that world by leaving. See how you do without us. Galt's Gulch.

I'm not an introvert. I don't understand how "not being allowed to do something good" is a kindess.

Dylan Bryan Adams will not be criminally charged for causing over $20,000 in property damage to Teslas in Minneapolis. The County Attorney claims this is common for property damage crimes, even though the felony level begins at $10,000 according to Minnesota Law. And it carries a minimum of 5 years in prison at that level. I wonder if they were letting him go because he was white.

I was just reading that Vin Diesel is looking for funding for his next Fast & Furious movie (#11). He's having trouble with that. I got curious about the budget of these films. Fast 10 went over budget to a final $340 Million. It grossed $714 Million worldwide. This meant that the investors/studios who put up the money didn't make a profit. They barely broke even. And with promotional costs, they probably netted a loss of at least $100 Million. With such big budgets, how on earth are they supposed to make money? Do they really expect to have a $1 Billion movie? How is Hollywood even surviving with returns like this?

I have thought that I was in the third category. But after pondering this thread, I believe I'm in a different category. I will try to volunteer, but things get in the way. e.g.: Church cleanup assignments. Some interesting things happened. They didn't expect me, so they sent me home since all the assignments were taken care of. I arrive only to find no one has a key to the doors. I arrive only to find that we're out of most of the regular cleaning supplies. I tell them that I can go to the store and get some for the week. They agree. When I get back from the store, everyone is gone and the building is locked. I arrive and find out that there was a major water main that had burst and was flooding a certain area of town. We have no water at the building. I really am cursed in this regard.

Men need to find a woman who will love him with all her heart. a woman who can cook. a woman who will rear wonderful children. a woman who is good ... ahem... a way to make sure these women never meet.

There is one social phenomenon that speaks to the bolded portion above. It is about the things that women "can't do". In many instances, it is about what women are not "allowed to do". For the most part, women have been both protected and limited in engagement in many aspects of society (feminists would cry "the Patriarchy"). As such, they have not had access to effect the world for evil like they do today. My favorite quote from Drew Carey: In today's world where women do have such access (to evils that were previously the domain of men) we see them doing things even worse evils than men have in the past. The one place where women are trailing men in evils of society is homicides. And most of that is due to physicality. So, again, it is really because they "can't" do the evils that men do more often. But where they "can" do the same evils, women are now doing them at a rate that is catching up to the men. And in some areas, more so -- because they can do some things that men can't do or are not allowed to do. I truly believe that if women had the physicality of men, they would be just as murderous and ruthless as men (on that end of the spectrum). With the societal controls as they have been in the past, it skewed statistics to favoring women. But as those boundaries are removed, women have now shown they can be just as evil or worse than men. How about that? You've fought so hard. You've won. You are no longer more virtuous than men. And now, you perform various evils more than men. You are now, no longer held in high regard. You are no more or less valuable than men. You gladly debauch yourselves at a worse rate than men, allowing 100 to 1000 men to *&^$ you in a single day. Then you can kill any babies that may be the fruit of such acts. Congratulations, you're free to set your own value so low that no one wants to be around you anymore (including yourself). Thank you, feminism.

Well, to be honest, I don't know all that much about minuets. So, I may not be the best person to talk about it. Howevever, I would be perfectly fine preparing and giving a 5 minute talk. What I don't like is being asked to prepare a 20 min talk and then being told at the last minute,"Hey, could you cut that down to 5 minutes?"

What the heck is happening? As Democrats rally around Abrego Garcia case, some worry a due process argument won’t land with voters | CNN Politics This was their #1 rally cry for a week about how Hitlerian Trump is becoming. Now they are admitting that it is a losing issue? We can only hope that people are finding out that the guy really was a violent gangbanger and was lawfully released to El Salvador's custody. Wait. What? They recognize that Trump didn't do anything wrong with the guy? They realize that the "mistaken" transfer was just a hoax? ... And... they're admitting their error? Let me go out the window to see if the Second Coming is about to begin.

Well, that's what I do for a living. I remember an event. It may have been the Banqiao Dam or the Three Gorges Dam. But the effect on surrounding buildings was catastrophic. Many buildings were basically washed away. Some gigantic building (it was either an office building or an apartment complex) that was built on a hill. They did a decent job on the structure. But when the floods came, it washed away most of the hill. The building actually slid and tipped over without breaking (the entire building moved as a monolithic unit). Then just before it actually hit the ground at the bottom, it began breaking apart in mid-air. And great was the fall thereof. For the size of the building, there were remarkably few deaths. Then I found out that it was one of those government projects to house a bunch of people in an area where no one really lived. They just have no clue how populations work. That is the doom of almost all socialist/communist countries.

So, it seems the Panama Canal debacle is still up in the air. At the end of the day, "might makes right" may rule. China put forth the laughable suggestion that they could create the "Mexico Canal just west of the Yucatan. I just took a look at the terrain. Yeah, good luck with that. I'd really like to see China try that. It would bankrupt China and Mexico put together. And this one could be so expensive that it would be difficult for even the US to deal with it. BTW, China has a terrible track record for infrastructure projects. If they went through with such an endeavor, it would be fraught with debacle-after-debacle. China would eventually abandon the project, and Mexico would be stuck with a major disruption in the terrain that might take decades to work around or fix.

Point well made. But it wasn't exactly what I was getting at. Maybe, the following image may speak for itself. The image I attached above is done with an average level of skill for a well-trained artist (still a lot more than I could do). There is nothing outlandishly praiseworthy about the paints or the media used to create this. But when I first saw this image many years ago, the "message" of the painting immediately hit me. That message was what I praised. I still don't know the name of the artist. I have no idea how he got the paint to portray the reflection in black stone, which I can appreciate. Even with all that and more... I appreciate the message more than anything about the painting. I've never been to Italy. I've only seen images via media. What I tend to hear people say is that they love to be surrounded by the artistry. They overflow with praise for such "artistry" and the "skill of the artist". It was done with such precision. They drone on and on about the methodology (which as a scientist, has me curious). But I don't feel a religious experience by seeing such artwork. I just think that the Catholic artistry has gone so far over the other side that we appreciate the artists and the historicity more than the message. You may now pile on me about being too... whatever.

I wonder if it is a matter of the 2nd commandment: Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. We usually think this is only about idols. But why was it so important that Samuel dragged an un-hewn stone (the Ebenezer) to be the monument to the Lord? He didn't even make it smooth and shiny. It was completely natural. That rock showed nothing by the hand of man. All of it was done by God. While we do a lot more than that in our temples today, maybe it is a good thing (religiously) to NOT have such ornamentation and artistry at the level of Catholic Cathedrals and such. Maybe it is the ascetic in me. While I can certainly appreciate the beauty of man-made artistry, I tend to think that when it is done in a manner that makes one praise the artist more than the art, maybe it is just too much (for a religious setting). When we go somewhere that is a place of beauty (by the hand of man) are we really appreciating the Lord and all His creations? Or are we appreciating the work of man? Maybe I'm just being a kill-joy.

I was a ward clerk for a while. When they released me, it took a full year before my access went back to normal levels.

Funny story. I was introduced to Blue Bell when I first moved to Texas. I immediately disliked it. It had the "smell" of skim milk or dehydrated milk. I figured, oh well, no accounting for taste. I found it odd that several people I know also did not like skim milk or dehydrated milk for the same reason. But the had no problem with Blue Bell. Years later I was at a restaurant celebrating our anniversary. When the waiter heard, he offered us a free dessert. I wasn't even thinking about brand, but I asked if I could have one of those "sample spoons" of three flavors. I immediately noticed they were all Blue Bell. He was shocked to discover that I don't like Blue Bell. We ordered apple pie for our dessert.

I apologize. I shouldn't have been so condescending.

Do you know what the word means? Apparently not. The way you're using it (as an adjective) means that we break established rules of accepted beliefs. Well, that is kinda the point of a restoration. We don't accept the fallen state of things as they are, and we want to restore that promise the Savior gave us. If you're just talking about the lack of artwork in our churches, I've never heard the term "iconoclast" to mean that. The word often used is "spartan." Well, in our churches we are. Temples OTOH are all unique. The symbolism of temples requires that every temple have some significant feature that makes them different from any other temple. If you want to see some artwork, attend the temple more often.

I've been surprised at how little JWs know about our beliefs. And they have no curiosity about it either. At least, I read one of their books to get an idea of what sets them apart from other sects.

I had a group of friends in high school who began to distance themselves from me because they began doing drugs and other things that they knew I wouldn't approve of. The results were all over the place. One of my friends (Paul) who, bless his heart, wasn't the brightest of the bunch. But after drug use, he couldn't string two sentences together into a coherent thought. It was bad enough that the rest of the group was worried about him. He grew up hardly being able to do a manual labor job. He did the most drugs of the group -- both weed and cocaine. He became the textbook case of a failed person -- medically, socially, spiritually, personally... One friend (Mike) still grew up ok. But he had much more potential. And he lost some mental capacity. He went from high achiever to slightly above average. He did MJ from time to time. He may have used coke once or twice. Another "member of the group" (Tim) whom I never really got to know very well seemed unaffected. But I don't know if I was in a good position to make an accurate assessment. I don't know what he took. But he took something. The leader of the band (John) didn't seem to be affected. He grew up and established his own business. He sold it for a pretty penny and retired early. While he was above average intelligence, his strength was being a people person. He was a natural leader. And he had a great ability to deal with customers, sales, and management of subordinates. While he rarely partook, he did use from time to time. So, I don't know if it really affected him in the big picture. Apparently, the girls in the group were at the same parties. But I never heard if they took or not. At the very least, they would have had some side stream smoke. But I never noticed much of a change in them other than changing from God-fearing young ladies to being the sluts of the group (being "passed around"). So, like all drugs, the type of drug, level of usage, drug interactions, and personal traits all play a part. I don't really see a need to use any of this stuff. When I consider that an entire generation of boys have been told to take ADHD drugs from a doctor, and we see how few of them matured into responsible men... I'm not all too keen on medicine in general. So, for people to self-medicate with stuff that everyone KNOWS has bad side-effects... SMH. NOTE: I'm not saying these things as a way of criticizing the people I mentioned above. They were my friends whom I cared about. And to see this happen to them...

Up until this current ward, I had a remarkable 100% experience in my married life. I was asked to give a 15 to 20 min talk. I prepared a 15 to 20 min talk. I was given 5 minutes in which to deliver it. 100%. Notice that this was L-I-T-E-R-A-L. Not "most of the time." Not 90%. Not 99%. It was 100% of the time. One time my wife (who preceded me that Sunday) purposefully shortened her talk to be sure to give me more time because she was well aware of the curse. The youth speaker (who was actually one of the missionaries assigned to our ward at the time) didn't give a short talk. She gave a 35 min groan-a-thon about how terrible her life was and is and how difficult it is for her to be a missionary. Guess how long I had to give my talk? Zero, really. It was already the top of the hour. And the bishop asked me to keep my talk to 5 min. Good thing that's all I prepared for. When I gave my first talk in my current ward, I prepared a 5 min talk. But apparently, everything went on schedule. The youth speaker gave a 5 min talk. My wife gave a 10 min talk. And I had 25 min before 5 min to the hour (for closing the meeting). I gave my excuse and explained why I had only prepared a 5 min talk. I stretched it to about 8 min. The bishop had to get up and say a few words to fill in the extra time. The next time they called me to speak, they asked me to prepare a 25 to 30 min talk (referencing my previous talk). With some level of exasperation, I determined to prepare a 25 min talk and I also prepared a 5 min talk. It turned out that I had about 25 min to give the talk. So, I pulled out my notes for the longer talk and found out the hard way that it was really a 35 min talk. So, I had to rush through the end. People liked it.

Here's my review of "The King of Kings": First, we must acknowledge that this was an adaptation of a Dickens children's book "The Life of Our Lord". So, it is unfair to use the same rubrik as big film adaptations (e.g. The Greatest Story Ever Told). Second, if you're looking for strict scriptural accuracy, don't bother. It's supposed to be an entertaining story written by someone wanting to inspire a desire to learn more. It was not meant to teach all doctrine and bring all interpretations and meanings to the fore. I'd say that it was written as a telling of common Christian narrative, rather than a scriptural narrative. I noticed several common myths about the life of Jesus which reflect the common knowledge of Christians who "know the story" but have never actually read the scriptures. Third, it was really meant for children between 5 andd 10 years old. It is wonderful film for kids. As an adult, I was only mildly entertained by it. I saw the cat as comic relief. But I was more annoyed than amused. Kids would have found him entertaining and cute. Overall, it was a good family movie. It told the important parts of the story to "get people interested." I can't really grade it on doctrine or spirituality. That is obviously not what it was going for. It was really for children to get excited about the life of Jesus. And it did a good job of doing that. While I didn't consider the cost of two tickets a complete waste, I'm probably not going to see it again. And the only reason I might want to buy a copy is to show my grandchildren when they are in primary.

I dunno. I still laugh when I think of the line: "How is this only the second most incredible thing I've seen today?" Uhmm... yeah... That explains a lot.

It is beginning to look like yet another re-alignment of allies as portrayed by Orwell. SMH. The US and Russia are getting closer and China/Russia relations are cooling. They're still friendly with each other. But the feelings are not as warm as they used to be. It appears that Ukraine is beginning to come around. There was a point where many were saying that Ukraine is lost. They may yet prove right. But we see signs of them making deals with the US.