Tube heading slingshot

 

Tube Power

 

Screen Shot 2012-07-21 at 11.55.56 PM

Advertisements
Comments
  1. Michael Fuhrig says:

    It comes from British historian Lord Acton

    Like

    • tubularsock says:

      Well Mike you passed the quiz. With that information Tubularsock found the entire quote, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.” Now you got to admit that the last part, “Great men are almost always bad men” has a different meaning today for the fact that we no longer have any “great” men in the political arena. However psychopaths seem to have found a place in the sun!

      Thanks for your comment.

      Like

  2. sojourner says:

    “Now you got to admit that the last part, “Great men are almost always bad men” has a different meaning today for the fact that we no longer have any “great” men in the political arena. However psychopaths seem to have found a place in the sun!”

    Absolutely! There are no ‘great men’ left to rescue us, except you, of course, Capitan!

    And this is most certainly the day, the rise, of the psychopath!

    You look rather judgmental in this shot!

    Like

    • tubularsock says:

      Tubularsock may be the last of the “Great men”if you ask Tubularsock ……. few ask.

      Yes, sitting up high is a psychology trick …… you notice judges use it. So of course Tubularsock looked judgemental. It goes with being ahh … high.

      Like

      • sojourner says:

        That’s funny, I was always less judgmental when I was ahh…high?

        Yes, Psycho-logistics indeed. The ‘superior’ being raised up above the ‘subservient inferior’.

        Or…. “Here comes the judge, Here comes the judge…”

        Speaking of ‘high’, I keep having these flashbacks to 1968

        Like

      • tubularsock says:

        “Here comes the judge . . .” Tubularsock doesn’t even like jury duty because of the “respect for the court” crap. Like they’d pick Tubularsock for a jury anyway, not in this world. Maybe a couple of hits before sitting in the court room next jury call ….. no, would start laughing too much!

        Like

      • sojourner says:

        “Maybe a couple of hits before sitting in the court room next jury call ….. no, would start laughing too much!”

        Wow! Far out, man!

        Like

  3. I agree with Leonard Cohen (and the Lakota nation) that we need to bring back the matriarchy.

    Like

    • tubularsock says:

      Well, how could Tubularsock disagree with Leonard and the Lakota? However they may be a little out of date. It seems to Tubularsock that Polysexuality is the up and coming trend and much more democratic, don’t you think?

      Like

      • The debate around matriarchy centers around the view that the most important segment of society is the children, as they represent the future survival of the society. Historically it was the role of the matriarchy to protect children’s interests. We’ve tried turning it over to men (to protect the interests of children) for the last 10,000 years. They seem to have done a really piss poor job. Of course, that’s just my opinion.

        Like

      • tubularsock says:

        Well, the “piss poor job” part does have validity without question. But when Tubularsock looks at the likes of Hillary, Condi, and Feinstein Tubularsock doesn’t see a direction of enlightenment.

        Like

      • As for Hillary, Condi and Feinstein, Tubularsock seems to have committed a logical fallacy which is actually quite rare for him. All three women operate under a rigidly patriarchal system in which middle age white men exert absolute power. The 3 women can be compared to lab rats in this respect, as their behavior is strictly controlled by rewards and punishments. Would they behave differently under a matriarchal system built on different contingencies? A century of behavioral science research clearly indicates they would.

        Like

      • tubularsock says:

        Now DrB., you are NOT going to try to blame those three lab RATS (Hillary, Condi,and Feinstein) on MEN! That would be faulty science indeed! Tubularsock will not buy that argument at all. There are men and women who have integrity and men and women that don’t. The system may be controlled by middle age white men who exert absolute power but there are people that are not intimidated. Elizabeth Warren stands up and speaks the truth. Ralph Nader stands up and speaks the truth. Didn’t Elizabeth Warren grow up under the same patriarchal system as the RATS?

        So if those rewards and punishments that have strictly controlled the RATS don’t control Warren then what’s the missing link? Tubularsock says, INTEGRITY.

        Now it may be rare in the wild but it has been shown in domesticated urban environments that some RATS are actually RATS. And Hillary, Condi,and Feinstein fall into that species.

        Much of Dr. Henry Jekyll’s early work is based on (Hillary, Condi,and Feinstein). But he called them Mr. Edward Hyde for short. And yes, it is a little known scientific fact. Science works in magnificent ways.

        Cheerio.

        Like

  4. sojourner says:

    “We’ve tried turning it over to men (to protect the interests of children) for the last 10,000 years. They seem to have done a really piss poor job. Of course, that’s just my opinion.”

    Yes, Dr Bramall, we have!

    Could it be, then, that men and women do have separate and distinct rolls to play in life? Or perhaps, to put in another way, are women and men ‘endowed’, as they say, with certain attributes common to each particular gender, beyond the physical, of course? And when we mess with these attributes we unknowingly are messing with our selves and the natural?

    BTW, these are simply questions, not some kind of political manipulation. I just wonder sometimes. When I was a card carrying Christian, I would have preached to you that man is ‘head’ and other bs. But I still wonder about this issue of male and female ‘rolls’.

    Like

    • tubularsock says:

      Tubularsock will jump in here for a second …… “rolls”! That’s the problem. Fixed “rolls” were created by religion for control. People have different skill sets and besides the creation and delivery of children those skill sets seem to fit along personality types rather than gender.

      Thank the Gods you dropped your Christian card, sojourner. That is a no go direction. Some of their songs are good though.

      Like

      • sojourner says:

        Agree completely, my Captain! Absolutely, like much else we are enslaved to, today, gender roles were forced on us by religion.

        My question to Dr Bramhall was that, if men. instead of women, took control of children, over the last 10, 000 years, and did a ‘piss poor’ job, then was there something to be said, somehow, for women being more inclined, or however one would describe it, to rearing children than men.

        I think it begs the question? My personal belief is that gender has very little to do with the individual. It is religion and men who have made gender/sex roles a bigger than life ordeal. As I just stated in a post, we are individual human beings before we are male or female. And I believe this firmly.

        Also, just to clarify, I have no shame for once being a religionist. Life is a sojourn, and Christianity was part of my sojourn. I gathered some truth from the biblical Jesus, along with a shit load of Zionist lies and propaganda! If anything, that experience of being into Christianity, from a more intellectual approach than spiritual, has helped me to understand the faultiness in other esoteric ramblings. G H Pember and CS Lewis were no dummies, and both went to their graves still believing the lie, unfortunately

        I meant roles, of course. It must be lunchtime! Rolls is good!

        Like

    • sojourner says:

      Sorry, Dr Bramhall, as Tubular has so rudely pointed out;-), I meant roles not ‘rolls’!

      Me not too bright!

      Like

      • Sojourner, I definitely agree that religion and politics makes gender roles bigger than life. However women are clearly more biologically suited – due to pregnancy and lactation (WHO recommends breast feeding until age 4) – to assume responsibility for children’s welfare. In addition, neurophysiological research reveals that men’s brains tend to be different from women’s. They tend to have fewer receptors for social relatedness, which makes certain kinds of social interactions more difficult for them.

        Like

  5. sojourner says:

    Thanks, Dr Bramhall!

    This is what I was trying to get to. This is based on reality, science and evidence, as opposed to man-made superstition and manipulation!

    “They tend to have fewer receptors for social relatedness, which makes certain kinds of social interactions more difficult for them.”

    This is what I have always sensed and experienced. So many women I have known seem to be much better than I ever was at interactions with others. I can have the best of intentions, but I, quite often, still find myself with my foot in mouth!

    We each bring qualities to the table that are vital to all of us! Why can’t we come to this truth and stop all of the nonsense? I know, rhetorical!

    Thanks again!

    Like

  6. dougstuber says:

    what, not from Machiavelli? HEHE

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s