Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated, 'If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon."
In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release stating: If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics:
1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash........Twice a day.
2.. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car.
3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.
4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would run on only five percent of the roads.
6. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single 'This Car Has Performed An Illegal Operation' warning light.
7. The airbag system would ask 'Are you sure?' before deploying.
8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.
9. Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.
10. You'd have to press the 'Start' button to turn the engine off.
PS - I'd like to add that when all else fails, you could call 'customer service' in some foreign country and be instructed in some foreign language how to fix your car yourself!
Of the thousands of people who rake in the dollars because of their psychic ability, not one is on the public record before the fact in predicting this.
Is it you think all psychics suck and are fake because you didn't find one so far that predicted this bridge collapse ?
No. I think all self-proclaimed psychics suck because they haven't predicted ***anything*** with any specificity that can help anyone else. After 9/11, all kinds of psychics claimed they predicted the event. Fine. Where were they before the event? What so-called psychics do usually is either one of two things. First they predict with such little specificity that their predictions will as a matter of unfolding national events come true. Hey, I can play that silly game. I will right now predict that a plane with crash in the Western United States in the next month; I see the letter "K" and the number "4", and I sense anguish in Dallas. Time will tell whether Dallas is a person or a city or if the plane is a Boeing 737 or a Piper Cub. Secondly, they predict the same thing with such regularity that the prediction will come true in the same way that the clock must strike 12 at least once a day.
I certainly allow that there is much in life that cannot be explained and may be beyond what science can ever tell us. I also happen to think that there is something to be said for karma-- that one's past behavior or wiring leads to predestined events. You see this on the highways everyday where choleric people had car accidents more so than others who take it easy.
Other than that, I would have to disagree that there is anything predestined about the bridge falling, for example. In a parallel universe, if there were better contractors and better inspectors and money available for timely maintenance, it would not have fallen. The laws of nature are implacable. So, all things been equal, gravity, rust, the vibration of a 100,00o cars will take its toll and bad things in the absence of human intervention will happen.
The basic difference philosophically between you and me is that you think the future is "real"-- that we are riding on a ribbon of time to encounter a future that was witten in the stars a thousand years before the ocean's rolled. My view is that we live in the subjunctive-- if I do this, that not this will happen-- and that there is no future-- there is only now. The future is created in real time as we make choices, and since those choices I make multiplied by four billion are infinitely variable, the futures we can encounter are also infinitely variable.
None of this is provable, of course, but I think my theory makes more sense and also forces me to assume that I can take responsibility for myself much more so than by presupposing fatalism.
I am open to be persuaded by a simple test. Predict an event that will save at least one person's life, making sure that your prediction is publicably verifiably before the event.
Feel free to post your prediction on this thread, answering the standard journalistic questions of who, what, when, and how.
So, yes, I don't need this bridge collapse to prove to me that psychics are frauds that play of people's credulity. Their own track record has established that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
There are certainly people that are highly intutional and animals like Oscar, the fuzzy feline of death,
that have senses outside the ranges of other people or animals, even. But this has nothing to do with the paranormal. It is merely people or animals with refined senses sensing what is happening in the present. I am talking about sensing what hasn't happened at all. I haven't seen any proof of that.
Yikes. I can understand a skeptical point of view, but skepticism without understanding the scientific method leads to sheer silliness.First of all, there is no such thing as "proof" except in math and alcohol. There is evidence, evidence, and more evidence. An inability to predict a large disaster is evidence, not proof, that people aren't good at predicting large disasters.(The same thing applies to believers, too. You can't present smoking-gun PROOF that psychic phenomena exist, either - you can only present what you believe is evidence.)As you can see from other peoples' posts, not everyone believes that psychic abilities should predict disasters (or at least, not large-scale disasters that won't directly put them in harm). To them, your position that an inability to predict a large-scale disaster disproves psychic ability is a straw man.Now, that said, I believe people who claim that they can predict a major disaster before it happens should put up or shut up, so to speak, if they want to be taken seriously. The hits should not be explainable by chance nor by simply having a keen sense of the obvious, nor by being so vague that any number of events that were bound to happen could "fulfill" them.
I can respond on two levels. First is that in studies of non-locality (Google it or YouTube it) science has indeed proven that psychic connections exist between people whether they are aware of it or not. This was a first. Second, psychism has little to do with predictions. Psychism has to do with being sensitive to a person's aura or "vibes" and understanding something about their condition. The impressions that come through may or may not deal with conditions in what we call the future. What the future "is" is still a mystery.
Even Einstein remarked, "Time and distance are not conditions in which we live, they are modes in which we think."
Psychism is not to be confused with mediumship which may also deal with a person's condition, but the source in mediumship is a celestial one -- perhaps the person's guides and teachers or loved ones. In this, mediumship can be far superior to psychic impressions.
Just because I have a right, does it always make sense to exercise that right?
Here is what I do understand.
1. Owning a gun to kill Chip, Dale, and Bambi-- so long as you eat them. 2. Owning guns as part of an antique collection. 3. Owning a gun as a tribal statement. Just as Indians used to carry tomahawks and Sikhs today carry daggers, neo-nazis and hillbillies may own guns as a statement of affiliation. I get that. 4. Owning a gun as a professional requirement, for example, as an abortion provider. 5. Owning a gun for sentimental reasons-- to bring back fond memories of storming the beaches of Normardy.
I understand all of that. I also don't dispute the traditional right to bear arms under the constitution.
But what I don't understand is the need to own a gun on the premise that you will need it to protect yourself or your family.
When you do that, you firstly surrender to fear and often bigotry. You secondly assume that you have the clarity of mind to not mistake a halloween prankster or a tardy mailman for a murderer. You thirdly assume that a jury of your peers will exonerate you should you make a mistake that leads to manslaughter and that you won't be charged by the estate for civil remedies, as happened to OJ-- to say nothing about the $200-$400 per hour lawyers now charge. You finally assume that a curious or a a suicidal youngster won't blow her head off, or that such rationality prevails in your household to the extent that you in a moment of passion won't blow off their heads.
These are a lot of dubious assumptions that make it not worthwhile for me to pack heat. There are better ways.
The Bill of Rights grants you the right to march through Skokie carrying a Nazi flag. The Bill of Rights also grants you the right to drink Jonestown joy juice if that is your religious bliss. But it doesn't follow that the exercise of these rights are wise. So, yes, you have the right to be stupid-- and silent forever.
They'll have to pry my gun from my cold, dead, stiff fingers.
Quoted from Men in Black. Your proposal is acceptable.
Because of Obie. Because of ACORN. Because of lesser criminals. PEOPLE ASK WHY I CARRY A GUN~~ author unknown
My old grandpa said to me son, "There comes a time in every man's life when he stops bustin' knuckles and starts bustin' caps and usually it's when he becomes too old to take an ass whoopin."
I don't carry a gun to kill people.I carry a gun to keep from being killed. I don't carry a gun to scare people. I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place. I don't carry a gun to impress women. I carry a gun to protect my woman. I don't carry a gun because I'm paranoid. I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world. I don't carry a gun because I'm evil. I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world. I don't carry a gun because I hate the government. I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government. I don't carry a gun because I'm angry. I carry a gun so that I don't have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared, including from angry people seeking to harm. I don't carry a gun because I want to shoot someone. I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon. I don't carry a gun because I'm a cowboy. I carry a gun because, when I die and go to heaven, I want to be a cowboy. I don't carry a gun to make me feel like a man. I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love. I don't carry a gun because I feel inadequate. I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate. I don't carry a gun because I love it. I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me. Police Protection is an oxymoron. Free citizens must protect themselves. Police do not protect you from crime, they usually just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.
Personally, I carry a gun because I'm too young to die and too old to take an ass whoopin'. if you break into my house in the middle of the night, you'll know for sure. or if you try to hijack my car. plus i like the feeling i get when i shoot at targets, power.
I'm thinking Viagara is cheaper.
You might look at Zero's latest Czar, the Czar of Social Philosophy, then go read 1984 by George Orwell. A gun is to protect oneself's personal liberty, this takeover will be stopped.
Come the the end of days, I would rather be rampaging with the mob than huddled in a bomb shelter. Takeover will bes topped? if there was a real civil emergency, the first thing the government will confiscate is the NRA's membership list. The second thing will be all those "private militia" guns. We saw this after Katrina struck.
I assume nothing, dead people tell nothing.
I can assure you that you are making a mistake that could put you behind bars. I speak from some experience, as we had a break in while we slept at night in our home. I once heard G. Gordon Liddy, the conservative commentator say that if you encounter a burgler in your home, you should blow his head off as you can always claim imminent harm. The policeman I talked to said this was terrible advice. You will be sued by both the state and the presumed criminal's estate, and there will be plenty of motivation to challenge your account/lies. What if, Iasked the policeman, I saw the burgler with my things in my child's room-- could I go with him with a knife or a gun? What if I saw him running out of my house with my stuff? Could I run him down with my car? Absolutely not to any of that, he said. There needs to be a demonstrable threat to your life or someone in your home-- he is lunging at you or your child, for example. And if he is unarmed, it is almost certain that you would be convicted of manslaughter. You don't have the right to act as an executioner no matter what the provocation. But, as I said before, you can certainly test your legal theory for tens of thousands of dollars by the time litigation wraps up.
Damn! Where do you live? It's sure not around here! Here, we take a more enlightened view of criminal vs. homeowner. If the DA wants to be re-elected, he won't try to indict you for killing some scumbag who breaks into your home. We kinda figure that anyone breaking into a home is looking to commit violence and that should be stopped -- permanently.
But the mere commission of a felony isn't reason enough for you to execute someone else. Depending on what state you live in, even pulling a gun on you is not enough for you to fire at the criminal.
The bigger point I'm trying to make is that there is a gap between what we think are our rights and what are our rights-- and it is a distinction that can get you killed. It is certainly your constitutional right to own a gun just as it is your right to walk any street you choose to walk in Chicago or New York City. But it doesn't mean it is the smart thing to do in either case. And nor is it the law that your home is your castle, as Harvard professor Gates found out last week, who was arrested for so far as I can tell for being mouthy while black in his own home.
I had a newborn baby, and the two of us were sleeping in the bedroom.I woke up to see flashlights scanning the living room, and heard two men walking about. I was terrified. I stayed as quiet as I could and hoped the baby didn't wake up.
The footsteps came closer and the flashlights shone into the bedroom. I was sure I was going to die.
Then I noticed their police uniforms. Only then did they apologise and explain. Prowlers with guns in your home? A lot of folks on this thread would have had no probem shooting these cops dead. Sometimes we don't know intentions until it is too late. The other day, someone knocked on my front door at three in the morning. It turned out he had the wrong address. But again, some people would have killed him for his crime of confusion.
"If there's a blue pill and a red pill, and the blue pill is half the price of the red pill and works just as well, why not pay half price for the thing that's going to make you well?" -- President Obama
Please let this notsound strange to you, for my family lawyer who would have handled this executor ship of my will on mybehalf, died early this year after a protracted illness. I prayed and got your email ID from your country's guest book. I am Mrs. Anita Williams from Oman, 58 years old. I am suffering from a protracted cancer of the lungs, which has also affected my braincells as a result of complications. From all indication my condition is really deteriorating and it is quite obvious that, according to my doctor I have been advised that I may not live for the nexttwo months, this is because the cancer stage hasgotten to a critical and life threatening stage.
I was brought up in an orphanage home as a child of circumstance, having been abandoned at birth by myteenage biological mother and taken to an orphanagehome by a Good Samaritan. I was married to my latehusband Mr. Gamal Williams for twenty years without a child. My husband was hypertensive and died ofcardiac arrest.
Since my husbands death I decided not to re-marry,when my ailment became terrible, I sold off all our choice properties and personal belongings including ashopping mall, an hotel, shares, bonds, jewelries andother valuable family treasures and deposited theproceeds amounting to USD$10.2 million dollars with First Inland Bank Plc. Presently, this money is stil llodged with the Bank, and the management and board ofdirectors of the bank just wrote me as the sole owner to come forward to receive the money after having kept it for so long a time in their coffers, or that I can issue a letter of authorization to somebody toreceive it on my behalf since I can not come over and claim the funds due largely to my illness or they get it confiscated.
Presently, I'm writing you with my laptop in a hospital in England, located at fulham road in west London. It is the leading cancer treatment hospitalin the world. I have been undergoing treatment forcancer of the lungs. My doctors like I said earliertold me that I have only two months to live. It is my last wish therefore to see that 70% of this moneywhich amounts to usd $7,140,000.00 (seven million onehundred and forty thousand dollars only) is investedto any organization of your choice and distributedeach year among charitable Organizations, the poorand the motherless babies homes.
You can also extend to churches and mosques, if you wish. 30% of the money which amounts to usd $3,060,000.00 (three millionsixty thousand dollars only) is for your personal use.
I want you as a God fearing person, to take it upon yourself and use this money for the aforementioned purposes, I took this decision in other to helphumanity in my little capacity, before I rest inpeace in the bosom of the almighty, because accordingto my physicians my time will soon be up.
As soon asI receive your reply I shall give you the officialcontact of the First Inland Bank plc officials, to enable you reach them without delays. I will alsoissue you a letter of authorization that will proveyou as the new beneficiary of my will. The funds havean open beneficiary mandate, and as such it is whom I authorize to act on my behalf that the bank will recognize and release the funds to. Please assure methat you will act accordingly as I stated herein.
Oh my God! Barack Obama's running the old Kenyan Prince Birth Announcement scam! Here's how it goes: you want to destroy America from the inside but you can't because you're a foreigner. So first, you gotta find yourself a good ol' American to reproduce for you. Then, you have that child on foreign soil, while simultaneously placing the birth announcement of that child in one of our "fringe" state's local newspapers. ... And then, you wait until this baby is a middle-aged man. Now the trap is set---you just sit back and let that child go out and win the election for President of the United States.
Now here's where the scam gets tricky; they can't just win the popular vote. He or she must have a strategy to win the electoral vote---that's what trips up most grifters. But, if you pull it off, you and your puppet child can sit back and destroy the fabric of the country you both hate so much. It's almost too easy.
Actually, they are not. Some self-described rednecks are radical populists. But most are passively conservative or apolitical, voting for the party that best seems to reflect their social rather than their economic values. The paradox is that by doing so, they often vote against their own economic self-interest. Norman Thomas, the six time socialist presidential candidate, was reviled most bitterly and sometimes egged by those whose cause he supported, poor non-urban whites. Perhaps the reason is that such people see their lives with the attitude that it is what it is. They have their god and their guns and their grandparents. And newfangled notions such as social security and community colleges could only intrude on and upset the rhythms of their world. Thus, they chose conservatism and destitution over progressivism and hope.
Southern comedian Jeff Foxworthy defines "redneck" as "a glorious lack of sophistication," stating "that we are all guilty of [it] at one time or another." Redneck has two general uses: first, as a pejorative used by outsiders, and, second, as a term used by members within that group. To outsiders, it is generally a term for white people of Southern or Appalachian rural poor backgrounds — or more loosely, rural poor to working-class people of rural extraction. (Appalachia also includes large parts of Pennsylvania, New York, and Ohio.) In the West Coast, there are regionally specialized versions of the term, namely Okie and Arkie, for poor rural white migrants from respectively Oklahoma and Arkansas, displaced from the Great Plains by the Dust Bowl years of the 1930s. Poor economic conditions across the Southern US also pushed people to migrate to the farming valleys of California.
Lyndon Johnson kept the following rules on his desk on how to influence people around him.
1. Learn to remember names. Inefficiency at this point may indicate that your interest is no sufficiently outgoing. 2. Be a comfortable person so there is no strain in being with you. Be an old-shoe, old-hat kind of individual. 3. Acquire the quality of relaxed easy-going so that things do not ruffle you. 4. Don't be egotistical. Guard against the impression that you know it all. 5. Cultivate the quality of being interesting so people will get something of value from their association with you. 6. Study to get the "scratchy" elements out of your eprsonality, even those of which you may be unconscious. 7. Sincerely attempt to heal, on a honest Christian bsis, every misunderstanding you ahve had or now have. Drain off your grievances. 8. Practice liking people until you learn to do it genuinely. 9. Never miss an opportunity to say a word of congratulation upon any one's achievment or express sympathy in sorrow or disappointment. 10. Give spiritual strength to people and they will give genuine affection to you.
These rules may seem trite. But Johnson's ability to persuade came out of the relationships he formed with peers, and it took great self-discipline to keep his ego in check and control his own passions. It was this self-discipline that gave Johnson his intellectual flexibility and allowed him to be an effective politican.
"Put it before them briefly so that they read it, picturesquely so they will remember it, and, above all, accurately so that they will be guided by its light." Joseph Pulitzer
I liked Borat, portrayed by English comedian Sacha Baron Cohen, although there was one scene where my eyes went to the ceiling. Our kids, being teenagers, thought it was the greatest movie ever. Brüno is a different matter. We lasted about a half hour, leaving as a joke was being made about the abortion of a baby. The plot was thin-- a failed Austrian fashionista trying to be a professional celebrity in Los Angelas. Rather, the movie was a collection of skits with the intent of inciting homophobia in one way or another. The Harkins theater cautoned that this movie had "strong sexual content". What that meant was not pretty nudity or joyous love-making but visuals of ugly naked men and bodily fluids and mechanics. It wasn't funny or entertaining. So we swapped in our tickets for the romantic comedy "The Proposal".
In this movie, Sandra Bullock plays a ruthless book editor Margaret who faces deportation to her native Canada. She blackmails Andrew, her compliant excutive assistant, into a ruse of pretend engagement to avoid the wrath or the immigration authorities. They end up in Alaska where they battle wits with with his rich father, played by a Craig T. Nelson and his fiesty grandmother, played by Betty White. The plot was predictable but the characters were likable and it was an improvement over Bruno.
The Sunday New York Times interviewed Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, in which she made the following comments. Ginsberg: Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious. The states that had changed their abortion laws before Roe [to make abortion legal] are not going to change back. So we have a policy that affects only poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don't know why this hasn't been said more often. Question: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?Ginsburg: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae – in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn't really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong. Politicans and bloggers have pounced on these statements to suggest that Ginsburg supported eugenics, the theory that selective breeding can better the human race. For example, on July 17th, Rep. Joseph Pitts, a Republican from Pennsylvania, declared Ginsburg's "eugenics way of thinking debases all human life" and he expressed shock that a Supreme Court justice would suggest certain classes of people are not worthy of life and should have been aborted.
I agree that eugenics is a discredited notion that is empty of both science and ethics. I also concede that eugenics informed the population control movement that included the legalization of abortion. Margret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, for example, often asserted a racist, eugencist point of view. I think it is disingenuous, however, to associate either racisim or eugenics with those who are pro-choice. People arrive at policy conclusions in different ways, and an abortion-should-be-legal position need not be predicated on a hatred of other races or a desire to breed out inferior humans. But no where in that quote that Ginsberg suggest that she supports eugenics or wants to use eugenics to control certain groups of people.
I'm amaze that people can absorb the same words and those words can trigger interpretations that are diamentrical to what the writer or speaker intended. This is a good example of such a situation.
So what is Ginsberg saying? Let's break down the statements.
Ginsberg: Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. As a legal question, Ginsberg suggests, the question of reproductive choice remains unsettled. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious. And it is also obvious to me that women with money have choices that women without money do not have. Thus, before Roe v. Wade, a women could travel to a different state or country to get an abortion. The overturn of Roe would only put the question back to the states. The states that had changed their abortion laws before Roe [to make abortion legal] are not going to change back. So we have a policy that affects only poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don't know why this hasn't been said more often.
I disagree that the decision to abort or not abort is primarily financially driven. There are surely social and psyuchological factors at play as well. But I cannot disagree with her statement that states allowed abortions are going to repeal their laws to restrict abortions, and states that don't allow abortions clearly impact poor women and families.
Question: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?
Ginsburg: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae – in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.]
Ginsberg answers this question in the context of the prohibition of the use of Medicare.
Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of.
"There was concern." Ginsberg is making a statement about motivations behind Roe. She is not saying that she shares those motivations. The "we" as used in this sentence refers to prevailing sentiment and "that we don't want to have too many of" refers to people who could burden the state in one way or another-- the premise behind eugenics.
So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn't really want them.
Ginsberg is clearly troubled about the potential abuses of public funding of abortions, and that some states could use Roe to coerce women into having tubal ligations or abortions.
But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong.
And so here she disassociates herself from the eugenics premise and implies consideration for pro-lifers who are appalled at the notion that some women are predestined to have their fetuses aborted. Ginsberg has clearly wrestled with this issue, and she is far from the feminist ideologue that some have painted her.
A federal judge in Santa Ana, Calif., ruled Thursday that former Boeing Co. engineer Dongfan "Greg" Chung stole 300,000 pages of sensitive documents that included information about the U.S. space shuttle and a booster rocket.
(Scarecrow) I could wile away the hours Conferrin' with the flowers Consultin' with the rain And my head I'd be scratchin' While my thoughts were busy hatchin' If I only had a brain
I'd unravel any riddle For any individ'le In trouble or in pain
(Dorothy) With the thoughts you'd be thinkin' You could be another Lincoln If you only had a brain
(Scarecrow) Oh, I would tell you why The ocean's near the shore I could think of things I never thunk before And then I'd sit and think some more
I would not be just a nuffin' My head all full of stuffin' My heart all full of pain I would dance and be merry Life would be a ding-a-derry If I only had a brain
Says a reader: "Perfection, I believe, is a state of being."
Actually, wouldn't perfection be a state of non-being? A biography of Walt Disney ended with his death and the ironic remark that finally he (or at least his body) had found perfection. If something is inert, it is devoid of possibility-- anything more than what it can be, which would have to be an atom. Perhaps the reducability of that atom through fission or fusion into a mushroom cloud is the apotheosis of perfection. It is a grim throught that perhaps mankind will only reach perfection by being finally consumed in a sea of fire from a thousand mushroom clouds.
Another reader opines: "In reality, God is Perfect, so is His Law, so is His Book, so is His Envoy, so are His Law Enforcement Officers."
I'm not sure what your theology is, but it cannot be Christian. No such canonical claim is made that God is "perfect". To the contrary, we see an evolution of God from the polytheism of Genesis to the monothesism of the Old Testament to (what many Christians believe) is the Triniterianism of the New Testament and from an anthromorphic God that walks with some humans and smites others to a redemptive God that is the spirit or logos of the Greek testaments. That God's "law enforcement officers" (I assume you mean the clergy) are perfect makes no historical sense to me.
"You are right. It's not christian. I am a Muslim."
My apologies. Granting however that Allah, The Koran, and The Prophet are perfect, what is your warrant this "His Law Enforcement Officers" are perfect? Does perfection mean dogmatic correctness? And if so how does that differ from the perfection of the gods, holy writs, and officers of the Hindus?
"God said He perfected them and then ordered their utmost love and respect. His Law Enforcement Officers are perfect in that they never go against God's will. They have perfect knowledge of the Divine Law, and they implement it perfectly. If Hindus system has similiar perfection, then it is the same. Although I don't hear Hindus making such claims."
You haven't talked to enough Hindus. I grew up in Asia where I saw rampaging Hindus battle rampaging Buddhists, burning to the ground entire city blocks, because they claimed the perfection of their respective theisms. True believers-- fanatics-- populate and drive all mass movements be they religious or political. Those Hindus and those Buddhists along with the Christian crusaders of the Middle Ages and the 21st century and the Islamists that drove jets into skycrapers and strap dynamite to thir daughters are all brothers under the skin in that they have a cast of mind that cannot allow for the possibility that all value systems and god conceptions including their own are imperfect and defective and thus are subject to challenge and reformation.
Fanaticism will be the death of our planet, and, as I said in a previous post, perhaps the annhilation of humanity in a sea of nuclear fire will be a kind of ironic perfection.
"Let there be spaces in your togetherness, And let the winds of the heavens dance between you. Love one another but make not a bond of love: Let it rather be a moving sea between the shores of your souls. Fill each other's cup but drink not from one cup. Give one another of your bread but eat not from the same loaf. Sing and dance together and be joyous, but let each one of you be alone, Even as the strings of a lute are alone though they quiver with the same music. Give your hearts, but not into each other's keeping. For only the hand of Life can contain your hearts. And stand together, yet not too near together: For the pillars of the temple stand apart, And the oak tree and the cypress grow not in each other's shadow." — Khail Gibran
I never dated in high school and, while I had some friendships in college, I never “coupled up.” Part of the reason was that I was motivated to make something of myself, and love and marriage weren’t a part of my plans until well after college. That I was poor and didn’t have a car until I was 25 didn’t help me in the pursuit of love. But, overtime, I began to understand the inner logic of dating that culminates in the “greasy spoon test.” (If your date agrees to spend time with you at a less then posh restaurant, say a Wendys, you know that she is a keeper.) It was during my Willow Creek days when I came alive socially. Nancy thinks I’m too jaded in these generalizations, but they were for me hard lessons learned, as there are few decisions that are more critical to your lifelong happiness than who you will marry. Most of your happiness or our misery that we will experience for the remainder of our life comes from the singular decision as to who you will marry.
Girls judge boys on first appearances and on how well you meet their immediate emotional needs. They are impressed by neatness, cleanliness, boldness, fun, and affluence, although they may claim that they do not. They don’t care for religion, politics, or talk about work, although they may claim that they do. (This insight disappointed me as I enjoy talking about religion, politics, and work.)
It’s always better to end an undesirable relationship quickly than to let it fester on. An undesirable relationship is when you are constantly giving more emotionally or in other ways than you are getting. It’s also when she has severe emotional, financial, or family-related problems. It never pays to help a woman with significant problems. These problems are deep-seated and beyond your capability. Don’t try to rescue her. Your love cannot save her. There are times when you should be a hero, but this is not one of those times.
Avoid fanatics-- someone given to extremes, be it in politics, religion, or work. Not all that glistens is gold, and women to the manor born may have expectations that you can never meet. On the other hand, a woman from poverty might have other needs or aspirations that are incompatible with you. While I don’t think that the income her parents make is an important factor, you should take that into consideration. How she handles money is a significant window to her soul. She should fill some of the gaps in your life, but also at the same time you would be wise to look for core compatibilities, especially in terms of values and life goals. She should be your complement, but not your mirror.
Love is thin ice. And, while that is true, and while the desire to possess and be possessed is intoxicating, it is also important to remain true to your beliefs. One such example is the question of marrying across faiths, such as, for example, a Mormon or a Catholic. I admire that members of the Church of the Latter Day Saints for their strong family ethics and I credit the Catholic church for preserving the Bible through the Dark Ages. Many good Christians populate both churches. Such people will be your neighbors, friends, employers, and colleagues. However, I think it is compromising to walk away from core values and principles of belief for reasons of emotion.
Much of dating is to determine what those mutual goals are in a casual, non-judgmental way. For example, while I was walking with a woman through a park, we noticed some kids playing on the slides. Brittany made it clear that she had no interest in becoming a mother. My relationship to her soon came to an end as it was clear that we were on different pages on this key issue. You can also get insight into her soul by observing how she interacts with her parents, friends, children, and animals or pets. Cruelty of any kind is always a disqualifying red flag.
What you see if what you get. If you find yourself arguing with yourself or trying to justify her behavior, you need to listen to your feelings and trust yourself. Your intuition is telling you that she will be trouble with a capital T.
Selflessness is a virtue except when looking for the one you may marry. It’s the one time in your life when you must be utterly and ruthlessly selfish. There are few decisions in your life that will be more important to your happiness and even your sanity. If you find that she has smitten you, you need to hang on to your senses long enough to ask yourself this key question: Is she good for me? Only when you can answer with a strong, clear affirmative should you take your relationship to the next level.
Know what is negotiable and what isn’t negotiable. For me, for example, my love for my cat Rex was non-negotiable, who was a part of my life for a third of my life. Thus, if Nancy would have rejected Rex, the relationship would have collapsed. Also, I could have never married someone that smokes or someone who was irreligious. On the other hand, I don't think I could have married someone who was contemptuous of those who smoked or the irreligious. Since a child’s academic interests largely come from the mother, it was important to me that Nancy also had a curiosity about life and a love for learning. You can learn a lot about a woman in what kinds of friends she has and her relationship to her parents and siblings. Observe, listen, and process, but keep your opinions to yourself.
Some girls show a liking for “bad boys” and may want you to mistreat and dominate them. Perhaps they like the thrill of being on the edge of violence and the law. Such people have self-esteem issues that aren’t healthy to them-- or to you. My advice is to treat your date like a queen. If she doesn’t want to be treated like a queen, you can be sure that she will never treat your kids as princes and princesses. It’s a relationship that is doomed from the start.
Look for a kind heart, a strong mind, character, and love for conversation and children. Look for a woman who neither needs to be on a pedestal or treated like a doormat, but someone who can be your partner through richer or poorer, in sickness or in health, for better or for worse for the rest of your days. For a definition of the ideal woman, you cannot beat Proverbs 31:10-31. “Who can find a virtuous woman? For her price is far above rubies. The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her. She will do him good. She considereth a field and buyeth it; with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard. She is not afraid of the snow for her household; for all her household are clothed in scarlet. She openeth her mouth with wisdom, and in her tongue is the law of kindness. Her children rise up and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her. Give her of the fruit of her hands, and let her own works praise her in the gates.” It is your good fortune that your mother and my mother were as Solomon described.
But to get the ideal woman, you must try to be the ideal man. As you date, reflect on what you have learned, and if the relationship comes to an end that is not on your terms, don’t despair. These emotional disappointments are all part of making you a better, stronger person. Abraham Lincoln once said that just because a stove burned a cat, it doesn’t mean that a cat will never try to get warm again. Speaking of wounded hearts, I recall a ditty that we once used to try to console ourselves:
My heart that broke so many times And always in a different place Has mended been—as many times— Repaired without a trace And just because it looks so new Your fingers itch to break it too I don’t care greatly if you do— The next in line has mending glue.
The Bible advises, unenthusiastically, that “It is better to marry than to burn.” Marriage, it has been said, is reaching into a bag of snakes and hoping you grab an eel. “Needles and pins, needle and pins, when a man marries his trouble beings,” and for the half of the marriages that fail, that surely must be true. “Love is a folly of the mind, an unquenchable fire a hunger without surfeit,” wrote Richard de Fournival in the 13th century, “a sweet delight, a pleasing madness, a labor without repose and a repose without labor.” But after the marriage, the living begins—the hard work of finding a common round between two independent people. Marriage is a learned skill. While it is a natural relationship, it is not a natural condition. Nothing outside of the nuclear family provides the warmth, security, and guarantee of permanence that makes for mental health. It takes work, and if you find yourself falling out of love, take the effort to fall back into love again. It is good advice to “never get married until you have kissed the Blarney Stone,” and daily affirmation of your wife and children can go along way in making the remainder of your life pleasant. “A drop of honey catches more flies than a gallon of gall,” does another wise folk saying. Marriage is no place for candor, and words said in anger will linger above your heads long after you have forgotten why you argued.
There will be reasons why you find yourself falling in love. If you ever find yourself falling out of love, my most heart-felt suggestion is to re-discover those reasons why you fell in love in the first place. Nancy and I married in our middle thirties when we had established routines that worked for us. It hasn’t always been easy to find a middle ground, and there have been times when we have argued, sometimes long and loudly. But if there is one thing we have going for us, it is that when we fight we fight fairly and we can talk things out. A teacher once told me that I was “very dumb but very verbal”—and perhaps that’s my saving grace. On our honeymoon a couple that had been married for 50 years remarked that “Nancy is not just a good conversationalist but also a good listener” and said that we would someday celebrate 50 years of marriage. We both have strong communication skills and enjoy our Saturday morning pillow chats that let us translate frustrations into words and words into solutions. For us, divorce isn’t an option.
As the poet said, “let their be spaces in our togetherness . . . for the pillars of the temples stand apart and the oak tree and the cypress grow not in each other’s shadow.” We cherish our family time and our together time, especially our date nights. But there is also something refreshing about our times of separation. Just as we appreciate America more after we visit Mexico for a week, so too we appreciate each other more after a few days or a week a part. And Nancy and I enjoy our occasional separate vacations. I’m expecting Nancy and the boys back from Chicago on Monday evening.
"Man can will nothing unless he has first understood that he must count on no one but himself; that he is alone, abandoned on earth in the midst of his infinite responsibilities, without help, with no other aim than the one he sets himself, with no other destiny than the one he forges for himself on this earth.” -Jean-Paul Sartre
"The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.” -Albert Camus
“You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.” - Friedrich Nietzsche
"Where am I? Who am I? How did I come to be here? What is this thing called the world? How did I come into the world? Why was I not consulted? And If I am compelled to take part in it, Where is the director? I want to see him.” - Soren Kierkegaard
"Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it." -Andre Gide
"Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.
"Surely some revelation is at hand; Surely the Second Coming is at hand. The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert A shape with lion body and the head of a man, A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun, Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds. The darkness drops again; but now I know That twenty centuries of stony sleep Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle, And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?" - William Butler Yates
John Calvin's 500th birthday is on July 10. Here, perhaps, he anticipates social networking.
"It is the common habit of mankind that the more closely men are bound together by the ties of kinship, of acquaintanceship, or of neighborhood, the more responsibilities for one another they share. This does not offend God; for his providence, as it were, leads us to it. But I say: we ought to embrace the whole human race without exception in a single feeling of love; here there is no distinction between barbarian and Greek, worthy and unworthy, friend and enemy, since all should be contemplated in God, not in themselves. When we turn aside from such contemplation, it is no wonder we become entangled in many errors. Therefore, if we rightly direct our love, we must first turn our eyes not to man, the sight of whom would more often engender hate than love,but to God, who bids us extend to all men the love we bear to him, that this may be an unchanging principle: Whatever the character of the man,we must yet love him because we love God."
It's a nice thought. But I cannot lose sight of his intolerence that led to the execution of Servetus. But nor should I forget his positive impact. From Wikipedia: "Calvin's writing and preaching provided the seeds for the branch of theology that bears his name. The Presbyterian and other Reformed churches, which look to Calvin as a chief expositor of their beliefs, have spread throughout the world. Calvin's thought exerted considerable influence over major religious figures and entire religious movements, such as Puritanism, and his ideas have been cited as contributing to the rise of capitalism, individualism, and representative democracy in the West."
A half millenium after Calvin's birth, I along with many others continue to dispute his Five Points. Perhaps that too reflects his legacy and his greatness.
I dusted off an essay I wrote about five years ago on how to do well on these miserable tests. This October, my boy will be taking the PSAT in California where we will be on fall break. I picked up Kaplan's 2010 prep book for $15.06. It seems solid, with a diagnostic test and three full-length practice tests. In places, I've updated the essay with comments in italics. Aptitude tests include such tests as the ACT, SAT, GRE, GMAT, LSAT, MCAT and others. They, of course, do not measure aptitude, if by aptitude we mean inherent intellectual ability and potential. I deny that there is such a thing as an “IQ”—a relatively constant numeral that represents your “intelligence.” Top grades were for me a grind. I aced Social Studies and English, but I struggled in Physics and Geometry. When I look at myself, it makes me question where the intelligence of someone can be reduced to a number or a couple of numbers, and I suspect there are as many kinds of mental capacity as there are people. I cannot carry a tune, catch a football, do calculus, or give a speech. To paraphrase Gilbert and Sullivan, in things arithmetical and mechanical, I’m far from the model of a modern Major General! But teachers liked me. I did my homework, enjoyed class discussions, took leadership roles when the opportunities arose, allied myself with brighter kids, and was highly motivated. All of that helped me to succeed in school.
What these tests do measure is your understanding of how to take the test—a meaningless skill in itself but an essential skill for differentiating yourself from others throughout your life. I’ve yet to go on a job interview where someone has quizzed me on the Binomial Theorem or has asked me to do analogies. And in all my years as a computer programmer, I’ve never used mathematics beyond that of what an eighth grader would know. I consider such tests a perversion of our meritocracy and yet another characteristic of our unfair society. It is a doorway that filters out talent. Economic advantage allows wealthier families to take the test prep courses and, more importantly, have a parental and peer ethos where high scores are respected. It is their kids that go on to the elite schools and careers. A child from a slum who has a SAT of 1000 and a child from a prep school with a SAT of 1000 don’t have the same intelligence, and it is the latter who is the dunce.
You're entering a never-never land where you must learn an artificial language, suspend common sense, and never use your knowledge and judgment. The premium is not on answering questions deeply but answering those questions with the answer that ETS wants—which isn’t always the correct or appropriate answer. To do well in these tests, it helps to understand how these tests are constructed, with what one prep course book calls Joe Bloggs answers-- superficially appealing but wrong answers that appeal to the credulous Joe Bloggs.
The most important thing you need to understand is that is possible and likely for you or anyone else to get a top score. The Educational Testing Service of Princeton, New Jersey, will deny that there is a system for getting high scores on these tests. Here is a typical nugget of misinformation from ETS about the GMAT, and it will be your loss if this is what you believe: “The GMAT is an aptitude test rather than a test of knowledge. It is not designed to test specific knowledge in business or other specialized subjects. Cramming, therefore, is neither advisable nor recommended.” The mere fact that test prep companies and publishers year after year make millions of dollars from students who want to get high scores is proof that ETS is mistaken. On that basis alone, I would say that cramming is both advised and recommended. I hasten however to define cramming as something more than memorizing lists of words and formulas the night before the test. The difference between my SAT and my GRE was 230 points and my MAT score was above the 98th percentile. My intelligence didn’t change. All that changed was that I didn’t took the SAT seriously whereas I did take the GRE and MAT seriously. For a few years in the late 1970s and early 1980s, I was in Mensa, the so-called high-IQ club. When I was at Manhatten’s Williams Club where the monthly meeting was held, I met F. Lee Bailey, Isaac Asimov, the Australian ambassador and other interesting people. In the five years that I was in the organization, I came to realize two somewhat contradictory things. First, that there is quite a gap from being smart and testing smart, especially after meeting many Mensans who believe in astrology and other such nonsense. Secondly, if you can test smart, door to opportunities will open for you. For example, I met my book agent through Mensa and not a few people met their spouses in Mensa as well.
Perhaps at the end of the day aptitude is nothing more than awareness, will, and effort. This essay will give you the awareness. It is up to you to marshal the will and effort. Whenever I find out that I have to take a test by ETS, my confidence soars, as I know that these tests have a common parentage and test-writing methodology.
Here is what I would do to get a top score on any aptitude test:
1. Get as many copies of the ETS test that you can get. ETS publishes these. It is important that you get old copies of the ETS test, not tests published by test prep companies, who for copyright reasons must write their own tests.
2. Survey the geography of the test. Deconstruct the test. What kinds of questions are they asking? What kind of knowledge do they require? Do you understand all the terms that they use? This is especially important in mathematics. For example, consider this question: If the radius of a circle is 33 feet, what is the area of the inscribed hexagon? We cannot begin to solve this problem until we first decode terms used in the question, such as radius, inscribed, and hexagon. What formulas or short-cuts are you expected to know? Take the time to thoroughly master all terms that you don’t understand. Commit all basic formulas to memory. Slowly, and without consideration to time and with all definitions and formulas available, work through all problems, trying to be as accurate as possible.
3. Search the internet for braindumps of questions posted by those who have taken the test.
4. I had a college friend who got into the Harvard MBA program after taking a prep course. However, some people have been disappointed by test prep companies. They can bring someone who was at 50 percent level to the 75 percent level. They are not quite so good at bringing someone at the 75 percent level to the 95 percent level. On the other hand, some people need the structure prep companies provide and appreciate the self-confidence they get from going through such companies. But they can be expensive—sometimes several thousands of dollars.
5. About two months before you take the test, put yourself on a disciplined schedule of taking one full-scale test each week. This will take between two and three hours to take the test and another hour or so to review the results. Take the first test without consideration to time. Try to logic out every question and note those questions that confound you. For all subsequent tests, put yourself under realistic test conditions—number two pencils, no distractions, candy bars, and an alarm clock. You may find that the first few tests are difficult. But before long, you will find that you are entering what athletes call the zone—a mental state when excellence is effortless.
6. Keep track of your progress and remember that the good is the enemy of the best. Don’t settle for a mediocre performance. Keep pushing yourself to do better or to understand why you are not doing better. At the end of each test, evaluate what you did right and what you did wrong. If there are subject areas that need study, spend the week studying that area. Develop a personal strategy for answering different kinds of questions, such as chart or geometry questions. Think out loud if necessary. Ask yourself lots of questions. Don’t jump to conclusions. Break the problem down into sub-problems. Think step by step. Note fine distinctions. Be as mentally flexible as you can. Look out for distracters. Keep track of any new terms used within the problem. Develop a guessing strategy; despite what ETS may say, the evidence is that it pays to guess. Analyze your own thinking. Work systematically. Be meticulous. Answer every question. The approach in solving a question is as follows: decode terms à apply formulas à solve the problem à verify the solution. In the week before the test, summarize everything thing you learned and commit it to memory. Take two more tests under realistic test taking conditions.
7. Have a good sleep the night before the test and a light breakfast on the day of the test.
8. Arrive on time. Bring a water bottle and some snacks for energy bursts, a calculator and a handful of number two pencils, and everything else you need for the test. Put yourself into a mode of focused self-confidence, akin to a basketball layer at the top of his or her game. player
9. Take the test with utter confidence that you’ll get the highest score possible.
Some college aptitude tests will now include an essay section. This will test a number of qualities that the gatekeepers think are important, such as grammar, creativity, vocabulary, and possibly Palmer Method penmanship.
I’ve never taken an aptitude test that has an essay section, so you will need to pay attention to the instructions. An essay, a sally of the mind, is your effort to express a point of view. But facts and illustrations must buttress your opinion. Make sure you understand the question, and pay particular attention to such words as “explain” or “contrast.” Before you start writing, spend a few minutes organizing your thoughts by writing notes of the margin of test booklet. These can be nothing more than lists of facts or ideas. The construction of the essay should generally follow this format:
I. Strong introduction or opening topic sentence A. What I’m going to write about B. How I’m going to describe that II. Body with illustrations, facts, and anecdotes that support the topic sentence III. Strong conclusion or closing statement A. What I just wrote about B. How the facts, illustrations, and anecdotes have supported the topic sentence
Write carefully and concisely, with nouns and verbs. Avoid generalities or clichés. Try to express a clear point of view. Be careful about presentation. Make sure your pencils are sharp and that you write a neatly and as accurately as possible. If you must erase, be sure that you erase the mistake completely so that your don’t smear the paper. Leave yourself a few minutes so that you can review your essay before time has run out.
A reading comprehension test is a bit like an essay test, except that someone else has written the essay. Read the questions first. Underline the topic sentence, which is usually in the paragraph, and the conclusion, which is usually in the last paragraph. Circle key facts-- names of places or people, numbers, and statistics. Look for assumptions—what the author believes but doesn’t necessarily state—and implications—conclusions that we can infer but the author doesn’t necessarily state. Read slowly and try to comprehend the thrust of the essay before you answer any questions.
A good vocabulary starts with curiosity. If you encounter a word you don’t know, make an effort to find out what it means and then look for opportunities to use it yourself. Words you find in aptitude tests are words you would find in the New York Times or TIME. On occasion, read those publications. Be alert for any new words that you see. Try to figure out what they mean from the context. If you still don’t know what they mean, get out your dictionary and find out for yourself.
Mathematics is a staple of most aptitude tests. To do well on these tests, familiarize yourself with the kinds of questions that will be asked. Take as much algebra and geometry that you can get by tenth grade. The best approach is to master the mathematical principles that will allow you to solve an application of that principle by breaking down the resolution into logical steps.
Here are five typical examples.
Note the step-by-step process of logically moving from principles through resolution. Algebra
A coin collector has 1000 old coins. Some of them are worth $10 each, the rest are worth $5 each. If the total value of the 1000 coins is $6000, how many are worth $10 each?
1. X = the number of coins worth $10 each 2. 1000 – X = number of coins worth $5 each 3. 10x dollars = value of all the $10 coins 4. 5(1000 – X) = value of all the $5 coins 5. 6000 = 10X + 5(1000 – X) 6. 6000 = 10X + 5000 – 5X 7. 6000 = 5X + 5000 8. 5X = 1000 9. X = 200
The Pythagorean theorem
The legs of a right triangle are in the ratio 1:2 and its area is 36. What is the hypotenuse of the triangle?
1. X and 2X = legs of the triangle 2. 36 = area = ½(base X height) 3. 36 = ½(2x)(x) 4. x squared = 36 5. x = 6 6. 2x = 12 7. hypotenuse squared = 6 squared + 12 squared = 36 + 144 8. hypotenuse squared = 160 9. hypotenuse = square root of 180 = square root of (36)(5) = 6 square root of 5
Distance and Rate
A man drives a distance of 120 miles at an average speed of 40 MPH and then returns at an average speed of 60 MPH. What is his average spending in MPH for the entire trip?
1. 120/40 = 3 hours 2. 120/60 = 2 hours 3. 240 miles in five hours or 48 MPH If X = Y, then 2X = 2Y 2 + 1 + ½ + ¼ + 1/8 + 1/16 + … = X 1. 2X = 4 + 2 + 1 + ½ + ¼ + 1/8 + … 2. -X = -2 – 1 – ½ - ¼ - 1/8 - … 3. Add both equations 4. X = 4
Simplification
Simplify 7/y + y/7
1. 7y is the common denominator 2. y/7 = y squared/7y squared 3. 7/y = 7 squared/7y = 49/7y 4. y/7 + 7/y = y squared/7y + 49/7y = (y2 + 49)/7y
How can you ace a grammar test? You won’t be asked to parse a sentence. I don’t even know how to parse a sentence, despite my command of English. Rather, you will usually have to identify errors within a sentence. The best preparation for this is to read, so that you can distinguish a well-written sentence from a poorly written sentence. I don’t think knowledge of grammar in itself is as important as having a sensitive ear for words in sentences that just don’t sound right.
Here are some examples. I have put in parenthesis the correction. Read these sentences and try to understand what is wrong and why it is wrong.
1. There seem (seems) nowadays to be little of the optimism that imbued our ancestors with courage and hope.
2. The high school graduate, if he is eighteen or nineteen, has these alternatives: attending college, finding a job, or (joining) the army.
3. Since it was an unusually warm day, the dog laid (lay) under the tree all afternoon.
4. There was (were) only an apple and three pears in the refrigerator.
5. The Chairman of the Board made it clear that that meet that he will (would) not step down from his position as chairman.
6. I have no doubt about my being able to run faster that him (he) today.
7. These kind (kinds) of people are not the type I wish to associate with.
8. After the critics see the two plays, they will, as a result of their experience and background, be able to judge which is the most (more) effective and moving.
9. Each of the hotel’s 500 rooms were (was) equipped with high quality air conditioning and television.
10. The lilacs smell sweetly (sweet) at this time of the year.
Some Miscellaneous Advice
1. Think clearly. Work systematically. Be meticulous and focused.
2. Don't get bogged down. Be aware of the CATS-- correct answer to time spent ratio. This is especially import on essay questions, where perfectionism can be costly. (In essays, there is research that suggests a positive relationship between the word count and a favorable score. In other words, it pays to write as long an essay as you can.)
3. If you can definitely eliminate even one of the multiple choices, it is better to guess on the remaining answers than to leave it blank.
4. When four relatively simple answer choices appear together with a large or complex fifth choice, you want to avoid the latter. The complex choice is almost always a distractor.
5. Try to backsolve. When in doubt about selecting from two or more answers, try each answer out experimentally. Attempt trial solutions by plugging in arbitrary values.
6. For reading comprehension, read the question before reading the passage. Circle crucial information requirements in the question and corrspond that to circles in the passage. Answer the factual questions first and the inferential questions later. Frame the reading of the passage by asking: what is the premise or theme; and what are the implications of the passage.
7. Generally, questions are weighted the same. Math questions are ranked from the simplest to the most complex. If you have time, review your answers. If there is time remaining in the test, stay with the test until the procter calls STOP!
I think Palin will be indicted before the month is out-- the upshot of an investigation into the Palin Crime Family's use of state money for private contracting work. Her motive is her family? Hardly. Where was this motive when she was running for the White House? Her lila feeewings were hurt from Mr. Lettermen's naughty words? Will her lila feeewings be hurt from naughty words coming from Iran or North Korea? If she cannot stand the heat, she should go back to the kitchen, where she makes great moose.
I think she may have made a good director of publicity for Coca Cola, but, as Andrew Sullivan notes in the video below, it is frightening that anyone considers this person a credible potential leader of the free world.
"If she cannot stand the heat, she should go back to the kitchen, where she makes great moose."
As I mentioned in another post, the blatant sexism in our country is pathetic.
What is sexist is the elevation of this (ahem) person to a position where she was seriously considered as a potential president, devoid as she was of any foreign policy expertise and even the ability to speak a simple and coherent declarative sentence. If she were twenty pounds heavier and twenty years older, do you think for a second that anyone would consider Palin for the presidency? You have your own blinders of bigotry on, especially the blinder that places ideological purity over endurance, integrity, common sense, and competence.
I had no idea that conservatives were so sensitive to "sexism". Could it be that you are grasping for a way to defend the indefensible?
"Sarah Palin's friends say they are worried about her because she looks frail and her hair is thinning. It's all part of her plan to run for president in 2012 as John McCain."
"Folks say that if you listen real close at the height of the full moon, when the wind is blowin' off Nantucket Sound from the nor' east and the dogs are howlin' for no earthly reason, you can hear the awful screams of the crew of the "Ellie May," a sturdy whaler Captained by John McTavish; for it was on just such a night when the rum was flowin' and, Davey Jones be damned, big John brought his men on deck for the first of several screaming contests."
These turds are incredible. They wage an absolute unprovoked character assassination on all political enemies with little or no evidence, but demand their politicial and cultural heros be proven guilty in a court before admitting the obvious. These double standard laden morons are so completely twisted, so hypocritical and so sick I have reached the conclusion they are all mentally ill - seriously.
How is it these sickos get up in the morning and manage well enough to get through the day? Surely they must be locked up somewhere and given computer access only as a gesture of good will by their keepers....sick...sick...sick
Me:
Well, aren't you the one who is typing furiously from your mother's basement with you baseball cap on backwards and your jaw somewhat slack? Isn't it time to wrap up your homeschool assignment-- perhaps the Color the Ducky page? You do realize that political thought and discourse is an adult custom, and you still have a few years to go.
He:
I so enjoy these lame efforts at humor - all of which have been scribbled out before by your breathren....face it moron - you can;t defend yourself so you project your own lifestyle on others inhopes that it matters. You're just a case of empties, a phony and a wannabee charlatan who doesn't pack the gear to offer anything factual or at least original in your own defense...
Me:
Republican Whine List
Obama was not born in the US. His birth certificate is a fake. Obama is a muslim Obama is an arab Obama is a terrorist Obama uses drugs Obama bought the election The 2008 election was rigged Obama is trying to sell his Senate seat He smokes cigarettes. Remember when senators represented the public for state, national and international issues and were qualified to do that? Seems they were elected by the public, not appointed by some bureaucrat. It appears we now have acquired a "royalty" who believe in divine entitlement. Obama fathered two black children in wedlock! Obama is a fraud. Obama will say anything and align himself with the lowest scum job Earth to get ahead. Obama has dual citizenship and is disqualified of being president! Obama is racist. Obama asked for spicy mustard on his hamburger. Obama's wife insults the poor with her choice of shoes. Obama habitually thinks before he speaks. Very annoying.
He:
ZERo The Nothing is failing and N Korea would hate to loose him. Yeah, every one of the leftist trash are sick and twisted, unfit to be called Americans as far as I can tell...
ZERo The Nothing, lying leftard ghetto trash crack head POS communist filth and the single greatest danger to America and freedom ever in the history of this nation.
Me:
I think you're foaming.
He:
I think that you are stupid, but than, stupidity is a prerequisite for being a leftard POS, isn't it?
ZERo The Nothing, lying leftist ghetto trash POS communist filth and the single greatest danger to America and freedom ever in the history of this country. Me:
Isn't it time to launder your sheets and return to your kkk klavern?
He:
Seems like its time for you to get on back to your ghetto and business on your corner, crack head.
I think that you are stupid, but than, stupidity is a prerequisite for being a leftard POS, isn't it?
ZERo The Nothing, lying leftist ghetto trash POS communist filth and the single greatest danger to America and freedom ever in the history of this country. Me:
What is POS?
He:
Are you a foreigner?
POS = Leftist = piece of shit..
Me:
Ah, so that what POS means. As a well-educated, church-going liberal, I find there is no need to resort to such gutter crudities to communicate. Naturally, our political superiority is in sync with our moral superiority.
He:
ROTFLMFAO.................know any more funny jokes? Thanks for the comedy.....lol
Me:
I think it puzzles and then destroys you when you realize the simple fact that Obama-- a black man-- is your intellectual, moral, and spiritual superior.
He:
ROTFLMFAO, again, your comedy is funny as it can be. Also full of untruths, first of which is the fact that ZERo is not a 'black man', his mother was a caucasian making him a zebra, bi racial, a halfrican-American, a mullato.ZERo, the Affirmative Action stooge is no ones 'intellectual, moral, and spiritual' superior, except for the stupid leftards that think that he is their 'Messiah'. You fools got snookered and all of America lost big time.
(Mercy! In the land of GOP, the man with one brain cell is king. So, at this point, I tip toe quietly, stage left, from this lovely thread.)
