here we go again...

[flowerseverywhere]

Rodger, fill us in on your message.

Anyone see this today?

http://news.yahoo.com/papers-debate-...214114722.html the doonsbury cartoon about the anti-abortion legislation, they call the transvaginal ultrasound probe the "shaming wand"

"Texas' law does not specify the type of sonogram a woman must receive, but an invasive transvaginal ultrasound is necessary to meet requirements that the doctor show the woman an image of the fetus, describe its features and make the fetal heartbeat audible in the first trimester. The procedure uses a wand inserted in the vagina to yield an image instead of a wand rubbed over a woman's belly."

[morris_rl]

Rodger, I am confused! Please say more about your post...

Dr. Pournelle is a paleo-conservative. He is also a Roman Catholic who disagrees with the stance of the Roman Catholic church vis a vis contraception and reproductive issues.

I believe that what he said is clear enough, if you take some time to think through the ramifications of what he said. Suggest you read his blog and draw your own conclusions:

http://www.jerrypournelle.com

While Dr. Pournelle is certainly not infallible, he has made some remarkable predictions and observations that have subsequently proved to be correct. Examples:

1) 1983 - Personal computers by the year 2000 would have the computational power of a multi-million dollar 1983 Cray supercomputer for less than $10,000 (he was right, but the cost was about $2000)

2) 1983 - By the year 2000, there will be a worldwide network more or less similar to the ARPANET (Internet/World Wide Web)

3) 1983 - By the year 2000, a person willing to pay for it will be able to find an answer on this network for any question for which the answer is known or can be computed

4) 1985 - The Soviet Union has passed its peak and its economy will most likely fall apart suddenly, followed by the demise of the Soviet Union itself (Dr. Pournelle did not expect it to happen for several decades at the earliest rather than 6 years later, however)

5) 1983 - Pournelle's Law: One user, at least one CPU (predicted multi-core processors and networked CPUs)

6) 1980 - Pournelle's Dictum: The prime purpose of any government program is to pay government workers & their friends

7) 1984 - Pournelle's Dictum: Apple either makes things very, very simple, or impossible

8) (Murphy's Law) Pournelle's Law of Costs and Schedules: Everything costs more and takes longer

9) Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy: In any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: those who work to further the actual goals of the organization, and those who work for the organization itself. Examples in education would be teachers who work and sacrifice to teach children, vs. union representatives who work to protect any teacher including the most incompetent. The Iron Law states that in all cases, the second type of person will always gain control of the organization, and will always write the rules under which the organization functions.

10) "Freedom is not free. Free men are not equal. Equal men are not free. And Democracy is not liberty. Sometimes democracy is the best protection for liberty, but that is not always so; there can be and often are conflicts between liberty and democracy."

11) 1963 - Pournelle Political Axes Chart: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pournelle_chart


Whether one agrees with Dr. Pournelle on any given issue or not, he does cause one to think about why one believes as one does.


Best,


Rodger

[morris_rl]

Sounds like Pat Buchanan's stuff, poorly paraphrased. European values in decline, sky is falling, etc.

"Be of good cheer. The demographics are favorable..." equals "European values in decline, sky is falling, etc."????



Really?


Best,


Rodger

[redfox]

Thanks, Rodger. I am more interested in why & what you find significant about Dr. Pournelle. I can read his writings; you are a member of this community! Therefore, for me, your thinking is what I care about. Sorry I was more explicit about that the first time 'round.
~Rebecca

[morris_rl]

Thanks, Rodger. I am more interested in why & what you find significant about Dr. Pournelle. I can read his writings; you are a member of this community! Therefore, for me, your thinking is what I care about. Sorry I was more explicit about that the first time 'round.
~Rebecca

If those of a liberal political bent are failing to even replace their numbers and those of a more conservative political bent are increasing in numbers and many of them are not being indoctrinated in the public school system, what implications do you think this will have over the next 30 to 40 years in the social and political spheres?

Consider that the majority of immigrants to this country seem to have much more conservative social values than the norm for those who are born in this country. What effects will the confluence of immigrants and the rising number of home schooled adults of a conservative social bent have?


Best,


Rodger

[JaneV2.0]

Of course we could end up like Romania, where abortion was illegal and orphanages overflowed, but children don't necessarily reflect their parents' politics, so I guess we'll have to wait and see. There are certainly those (Buchanan being one) who see imminent decline in the idea of non-European immigrants having large families, while the rest of slack off, so to speak. According to recent polls, President Obama leads six to one over any Republican candidate with Hispanic Americans, for what it's worth.

[ApatheticNoMore]

If those of a liberal political bent are failing to even replace their numbers and those of a more conservative political bent are increasing in numbers and many of them are not being indoctrinated in the public school system, what implications do you think this will have over the next 30 to 40 years in the social and political spheres?

Probably perish in a massive famine caused by overpopulation, dwindling resources, and global warming caused droughts and crop failures. And they *still* won't believe that global warming is real!

[Zoebird]

*ahem* most of my friends are liberal, and most of them homeschool, and several of them have 3 or more children, and several of them are adopting as well.

likewise, most of my conservative friends have fewer children (and more stuff) and send their kids to public or catholic schools. Most of them have 3 or fewer children, and most of them are not even considering adoption. Only one of them is considering adoption.

"just saying!" lol

[flowerseverywhere]

Interesting perspective Rodger.

Perhaps women who are educated in public schools and are liberal minded and independent will be the ones to turn out to the polls, start to run for offices and support their politics, whereas those women who are raised to become mothers and continue to multiply will be too busy to take a role in politics. None of us know for sure.

There are a certain amount of men and women who are raised to be one way or the other yet rebel and take on values unlike those they are raised with.

[JaneV2.0]

*ahem* most of my friends are liberal, and most of them homeschool, and several of them have 3 or more children, and several of them are adopting as well.

likewise, most of my conservative friends have fewer children (and more stuff) and send their kids to public or catholic schools. Most of them have 3 or fewer children, and most of them are not even considering adoption. Only one of them is considering adoption.

"just saying!" lol

Yeah, a friend of mine who labels herself a "hippie anarchist" home schooled her partner's child for a number of years. No conservatives in that bunch!