Friday, July 29, 2005

Social Equity at New Ruskin College

Lecture Notes: 07-28-05

Trade Equity

Note: There are many things I had wanted to write about which will be left undone. This is one that I had wanted to use to challenge American trade unions when NAFTA was being discussed a decade ago . . . . .

Social Equity Trade Tariffs are theoretically possible but in practice political pressure would push them up to restrict competition and protect the politically powerful domestic pressure groups.

What are Social Equity Tariffs? In principle it can be seen that part of the reason Chinese or Mexican goods under price American goods is that the domestic goods carry in their price the cost of educating American children. And vaccinating them. And providing sewer plants, and sidewalks, and . . . You got the picture?

Regular visitors will recall previous Lectures in which we have explained how “information” is conveyed to the consumer in the “bottom line.” For example we have previously explained that the so called “progressive income tax” does not fall as the IRS tax tables “objectively” suggest, on the narrow income bands setout in the tables, but rather they, like all other taxes and in fact all other costs of any type, are redistributed by the dynamics of the market economy.

This is called the price mechanism tax transfer. All companies and individuals operating at a profit are operating in a tax free state, for the “profit” confirms that all costs have been accounted for in the price, the “bottom line”. Their so called “progressive income tax” along with their “property tax” and their special district “sidewalks and curbs” taxes, all taxes, and all other costs have been charged off to the consumers of the good or service.

(What has not yet been examined is how this never ending round of price increases results in the inflation or over pricing of American labor and goods. Note that as America is priced out of the world market the American elite can shift itself to world trade abandoning the American people. For example we have extensively examined how the Blue States of Massachusetts, New York, England, and California have used exclusionary zoning and building restrictions to force up the cost of housing. Owners of real estate have experienced price appreciation of their assets yet see how these economies now have higher costs without higher increases in productivity. This is called inflation. The workers in these states now must try to increase their wages in order to afford shelter, which if they are successful will further increase their prices relative to other nations to the extent these price increases do not arise out of increased productivity. Though Californian workers will become less productive on the world market the American elite can simply transfer its activities to the lower cost producers. This is true even if it was this very same elite who originally set off the rounds of inflation with its anti-growth and no growth construction policies. (And note this is true even when this very same elite follows an “open borders” policy in the form of Mr. Bush’s White House. Unlimited immigration while simultaneously down zoning and excluding may appear here as a contradiction yet this logical fact need not in anyway influence the policy makers, the elite, who are free to defy logic and justice. At one time the American elite felt duty bound to increase the opportunities for the American people, i.e. to lower the cost of food, housing, etc. etc. not increase these costs. But this was a very long time ago.)

In principle then the toaster imported from China sells for $10 and not $11 because the $1 tax needed to pay for the education of China’s children has not been charged to the Chinese toaster manufacturer. Had health care been charged: $11.25. Place antipollution scrubbers on the steel plant which made the steel for the toaster: $11.26.

A brief review of the cost of sewer plants, schools, roads, houses, vaccinations, pollution controls, etc., etc., would allow the computation of the Social Equity Tariff to be imposed.

What makes this Tariff a Social Equity Tariff and not simply a Trade Tariff in restriction of international trade is that the entirety of the tariff is then rebated to the country of origin. If after calculation of the Social Equity costs the toaster now costs $16.35 the full amount of the tariff, $6.35, is then rebated to China. (The administrative cost should be born by a neutral third party, the OECD for example, and could be paid out of the interest on the float prior to rebate.)

The principle of Social Equity is that the consumers in the First World should not be enriched by the failure of the nation of origin to provide education for its children. The products should bare the full price necessary for sustainable social development.

Of course, the nation of origin could in turn simply rebate the checks to the producers without spending the money on the social goods and services, i.e. subsidize its exports. Or take the money and spend it on other activities, the military, for example. Such diversions would have to be monitored and the tariffs modified accordingly to counteract these diversions.

However, though in principle these calculations are quite simple at a practical political level the added Social Equity Tariff would be raised until the trade ceased as politically powerful groups, trade unions, domestic manufacturers, pushed for ever higher tariffs to restrict trade not Social Equity.

So we see the ever greater exploitation of labor in developing countries as those governments oppress the workers so that goods can be produced without the costs of vaccines, school books, pollution controls.

We could every quarter meet with the governors of Mexico and hand them Tariff Checks for the millions of dollars raised in America on the goods imported into the USA to pay for the roads, hospitals and schools their growing country needs. But instead the American consumer enjoys a good produced at the cost of Social Equity.


First because as has been stated above, the difficulty is that the system of tariffs would soon be exploited by the political elite to protect the elite not to increase Social Equity.

But more fundamentally the reader will note his own lack of interest in a program which will increase the cost of goods here, while providing social goods to “foreigners” in Mexico or China. ‘What’s in it for me?’ is the question that has been knocking around in the back of the reader’s head and now, seeing that there is nothing for the reader, the reader is unsatisfied and the reader’s interest is rapidly waning.

So much for Social Equity.

Children in China will move through polluted streets to slave wages workshops to produce goods for the reader that do not include the cost of schools, houses, all the things that make society sustaining.

Think about that the next time you go to the store and reach for the box on the shelf.

About what?

About the fact that the reader is not interested.

Wednesday, July 27, 2005

Billionaire's Club at New Ruskin College

A Tale of Two Houses

From: (

Still another lawyer has parted with a D.C. property. Attorney William Green was assisted by Washington Fine Properties' listing agents Diane Fentress and Adaline Neely in the sale of 4875 Loughboro Road N.W. to John Reilly and Margaret Warner. Jean Smith of RE/MAX represented the buyers in the purchase of their new $1.2 million home which boasts five bedrooms and four fireplaces. Meanwhile, Weichert realtor Penny Yerks, who recently won a regional award for the "Highest Resale Dollar Volume," got John and Margaret $1,875,000 for their previous residence located at 175 River Park Drive in Great Falls, Virginia. Readers may recall that in 1984, John Reilly headed-up the Vice Presidential selection process for Walter Mondale. Margaret Warner is the chief Washington correspondent with PBS's "NewsHour with Jim Lehrer." The new owners of their former River Park Drive address are lawyer Terry Wingfield and his wife Fran.

June 27 - Tiburon If you've spent much time on the Sausalito side of the Bay, at Ayala Cove, or the dock at Sam's Anchor Cafe in Tiburon on Sundays, you've no doubt seen a loud and obnoxiously-operated red cigarette-type boat roaring around, often with topless women. . . . He was uncharacteristically down in the dumps one day at the pool, so we asked him why. He explained that he has a 200-unit or so apartment house in the South Bay with working class tenants. He said he was upset because the other person in the deal wanted to raise the rents just because they could. "We've got all these tenants busting their asses in low wage jobs just trying to pay their rent," he moaned, "and this other person wants us to squeeze another $250,000 a year out of them. It makes me sick." This was about five years ago.

Lecture Notes: 07-27-05

I just want to celebrate another day of living ----

Counselor: You are on.

The San Rafael Police were at it again last night. Not the sirens but that warning tone, sounds like a buzzer. What do you call that?

Counselor: And that too is my fault?

Well when Sedge Thomson or was it the Red Comedian over at KQED got you to betray me, I think part of your thinking was ---

Counselor: You know we are on.

Ah, fine this is part of the lecture.

Counselor: This is supposed to be The Tale of Two Houses?

That is what I am talking about. You live in Marin I live in Alameda. That was part of your thinking. And part of living in Marin is that you have these police departments which will carry out intel operations and photocopy the notebook and give it to Michael Weiner in less than 24 hours.

Or the Mill Valley Police trying to set up an incident with the school children. I have parked my car for years on the same street and they have never bothered it until the Mill Valley Police man is lurking near by. (Note O’Reilly, this is why I live my life like the “Groundhog Day”. (That way I can detect what is out of order.))

Did you know that the San Rafael Police would break into the Colonial Motel Suspect’s room and give the notebook to Michael Weiner? No, not exactly. Or that the Mill Valley Police would try to set me up for a felony? No.

But part of your calculation was that you knew you lived in the middle of this vast network of relations. Relations with the police and Sheriff of Marin and you knew that they are largely unregulated. They can do whatever they want. And you knew there were other relationships, with KQED and the Red Comedian and Sedge Thomson, and with Ron Owens at KGO, and on and on.

When I first moved to Marin I shared a townhouse in Mill Valley with Helga Lohr Bailey.

Counselor: No, first you had that apartment in San Rafael.

Yes! (Photographic memory.) You are right. I had forgotten. Then later I tried again to start over and rented in Marin. Yes I remember now. I have tried and tried.

Helga Lohr Bailey was an old Red from the 1930’s. A Jew who fled the NAZIs and married Mr. Bailey for the US citizenship she used to explain. He was a labor organizer as I recall. They were united in Red solidarity.

She worked at KPFA radio station in Berkeley. Some sort of “European News Report” or something like that. She was a difficult room mate.

Counselor: How is it that you end up in these relationships? I mean you are a conservative Republican and your roommate is an old Red, working at KPFA? Why do you think that is?

Sweetheart, . . . we are in the middle of a lecture . . . I am sure our audience wants to hear about the Two Houses, zoning, tax, government regulation, you know there is a kind of conservatism to the recent opposition to the Kelo decision. They support exclusionary zoning and, (or that should be AND), they support abolition of redevelopment zones. They oppose all progress! They do not want the government to allow construction anywhere! (And what are they but Post Liberal also?)

But . . . I have been thinking that my arguments have had more appeal with the left with liberals than with conservatives. People like Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity just don’t get it. “What’s the big deal?” they ask.

My arguments are directed not to conservatives but to the center or left of center to get them to come closer to the line, or even cross over. This is why here in the Bay Area I got so much unwanted attention.

I challenged their thinking, there long held assumptions. They really believe they are helping “the poor” and when I show that the opposite is true they are not only surprised but actually angry.

For example, all those people in the South Bay apartment complex owned by the Tiburon resident, the billionaire, Richard ‘Rick’ Parasol, are forced to pay an extra $250,000 it is because as Mr. Parasol says, because he “can.” Just that. The market condition is that he can raise the price. And why can he? Because the liberal establishment, the Democrats, liberals like Bernie Ward, and people like your friend Ron Owen, and good Democrats like the Marin Senators Boxer and Feinstein, because all of you working in combination, have created the situation in which the people are subject to the predation of the Parasols of Marin.

Those people are victims of liberalism. (Though I should say victims of Post Liberalism, in deference to our old Magistor Ludi, Daniel Patrick Moynihan. For he would have understood the distinction. (If you want to criticize the Democrats do so because they never considered Moynihan as their Presidential candidate.))

But you and your liberal friends in Marin, Berkeley, San Francisco have lived very comfortably in your homes, smug in the belief that you are ‘good’ and when it is shown that you are elitist egotists, pursuing your own interests at the expense of the people your friends actually become angry. And alas angry not at themselves and their hypocrisy but at me.

This is why they used you. This is why the county police and sheriff are gunning for me. This is why they all rejoice in my pending death.

So no. I do not blame you for the San Rafael Police last night. You did not create this society of hate and greed and delusion. You are just part of it.

But, to answer your question, I do not know why I ended up living with the old Red, Helga Lohr Bailey. Do you . . .?

Counselor: Oh! Now I am going to get blamed for that too?

Thank you Yvonne.

Counselor: You are welcome.

Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Paul Duke at New Ruskin


This is a story of two houses.

You live in one house. I in the other.

Did you notice Sean Hannity, (Hey, Buddy!), hasn’t had anything more to say?

No more pokes? No more Jibes?

Give me one last smack before I go? Hey I know, I bet you a dinner at Ruth’s Chris Steak House . . . you don’t want to play? And I thought you were a player Sean. Buddy?

And this too is part of the story about the two houses. Hannity lives in one with the Tiburon billionaires, and I live in the other one.

But first I want to tell you how I came to see Yvonne again----

Counselor: You are rambling.

No, no, I will get back to the houses but first I want ----

Counselor: You are tired. Why don’t you get some sleep?

And I want to talk about those who condemn the Muslims for being violent while demanding we commit nuclear genocide. I want----

Counselor: Remember what your mother used to say?

What? . . . My mother? What do you ----

Counselor: She would say everything will look better in the morning. Remember?


Counselor: And she has been right so far hasn’t she?

Paul Duke in Memoriam

“We are no relations. Not that Clan.
Not that Clan!--- Paul Duke

After writing a number of letters to President Bush, (41), and the Senate, Mr. Bush and several Senators began responding to my letters with veiled references during press conferences or from the floor of the Senate. Over time as they learned of my letters and the interest shown, many members of the press started making references of there own to what I had written. It became a kind of game I think.

I took no particular interest for I had intended to write about laser disks in education, do what I could to promote technology in education, (I had promised myself when I was in school that I would “do something,” (for there seemed no reason to me, then or now, why we had to make education so miserable), and then I planned to kill myself. This was before I met Yvonne and came to think that there was any alternative.

(Now, after fifteen years of harassment and oppression I am again brought to the end. Ironically it is because of the attention the letters achieved that I was followed and persecuted, first by the “oh so cool liberals” at KQED, then the lunatic Michael Weiner, and then by everyone else, Ron Owens, Don Imus, Michael Krasney, Mrs. Jack Swanson. Envy? Was it Envy? God knows. After fifteen years they have ruined me and I am again forced to seek refuge from time.)

Unintentionally I contributed to the “game” by limiting the distribution of the letters. I started off sending copies to all Senators but gradually limited “membership” to those who responded. I would mail several dozen letters at a time but only to the select group of Senators who had made some covert reference. (For example, one Senator, who was not included on the distribution list made some statement about my most recent letter and in the next one, addressed to him, I congratulated him on his acceptance to the club.) Then as members of the press learned about the letters and came to understand the covert references they too started to play, making references of their own to what I had written. It became a kind of game I think.

Washington Week in Review became a venue. For example after mentioning Buddhism in several letters the regular correspondent Hanes Johnson, (I believe his brother is Chalmers Johnson one of whose books I had quoted, (Japans Public Policy Companies, as I recall, (all my books are in boxes, (I could not bring myself to give them away after all, (but when I’m dead what the diff?))))), commented “There are a lot of conservative Buddhists in Japan.”

Part of the joke here is that in America Buddhist are all liberals. But you have to figure that the reason people are attracted to foreign religions is because they are dissatisfied with their own religions, and if dissatisfied with their own religions you can expect that they will be dissatisfied with much else. Rebels.

So American Buddhism is colored by this fact that most of its members are liberals, Greens, radicals, i.e. misfits. Alan Watts and most teachers, (the good ones), are at pains to try and point out this misperception, to correct this misinterpretation. For example the Tao Te Ching comments than one should not “display weapons.” Watts commented to his young students, this was the 1960’s, that the word is “display” not own. But most Americans assume Buddhist are leftists because of the self selection process among the small group that control Buddhist centers in America, a situation not unlike that with our colleges, where a small group of radicals are also in control.

Paul Duke himself made several references to what I had written in a number of letters. I recall that I had had some success with one letter, after which a number of personages commented. (see July 30, 1991, Senator Bradley, in the New Ruskin Project Archives at the Moynihan Memorial Library) I had pointed out in that letter that the South had been settled by Celtic peoples whereas the North on the other hand had been settled by the English.

I pointed out that much of the North South difference is really Celtic English differences. For example, “Black Pride”, I claimed, could be traced back to “Southern Pride”, and I said , “Southern Pride” can in turn be traced back to “Scottish Pride.” One Senator appeared on the floor of the Senate and seemed to make a point of saying he had “pride” in his State, in his people, etc. (Senator Gore as I recall.)

Then later Senator Moynihan was appearing on TV with someone, (the former quarter back who was Secretary of HUD), who was as usual extolling Adam Smith and our “Anglo Saxon traditions----.” Senator Moynihan interrupted him, “Celtic sir, Celtic, Adam Smith was Scottish not Anglo Saxon; let’s have no more of your Anglo Saxons.”

Also in that letter I made a point to explain that in the South clan was an inherited form of social organization, and that Black Americans had themselves also formed extended family groups under the Celtic influence of the clan tradition. Eleanor Holmes Norton that week seemed to go out of her way to claim that Black Americans had inherited their extended relations from their African roots and not from their Celtic slave masters.

Then Paul Duke ended the week with a Friday broadcast of Washington Week, by saying that several letter writers to his show had asked if he was related to David Duke, the notorious David Duke who was at that time being used to attack conservatives, including me, (see Senator Hollings).

Said Paul Duke: “We are no relations. Not that Clan. Not that Clan!”

I was not amused.

Sunday, July 24, 2005

Sean Hannity at New Ruskin College

Lecture Notes: 07-21-05

Hannity Responds:

Sean Hannity 07-21-05 went on the air and announced that he was “married” to his show and his audience.

I think he has been cheating on us.

For example, when introducing Dr. Hammesfahr as a “Noble Prize Nominee.” Didn’t Sean Hannity first consider that his audience would be able to see how dishonest he was? He did not care about our opinion of him or his credibility. We do not count in his estimation of the power situation.

Or when discussing the Bush open borders policy he said to an irate caller, “they are introducing technology to police the border. . . .” a line right out of the White House briefing instructions to stooges. Even Rush Limbaugh will criticize the Bush open border policy. But not Sean.

Or in discussing the Kelo decision he repeatedly claimed that the Supreme Court was taking, or seizing property, etc., instead of telling the truth that the court had permitted, or deferred to the elected officials, allowed that they should first decide what is a public purpose. Does he want only judges to decide what is a public purpose? Of course he was not himself proposing anything he has no ideas of his own.

Sean Hannity has recommended Michael Weiner’s books (“a great read”) and had him on his TV show. Weiner for his part now refers to Hannity as “that Irishman” or “Pawn Hannity” or “Mr.” --- well you get the idea.

Hannity is a suck up. He sucks up and kicks down.

He knows that Weiner and Mrs. Jack Swanson have used their influence to ruin my life. He knows about the burglary, about the stalking me from place to place, job to job . . . he knows and does not care.

He goes out of his way to show that he does not care, or even to let it be known that he enjoys the spectacle of his radio colleagues destroying another.

He delights in cruelty.

Sham Hannity.

And consider Al Franken recently going out of his way to show his enjoyment in another’s suffering, even suicide.

This is our society.

“Not bad for a homeless guy.”
---- Sean Hannity, 07-20-05, at the end of an “interview” with Senator McCain ( McCain see 4-28-05, Lecture Notes: 5-18-05, Lecture Notes: 07-18-05 Protest)

You see Sean, when you do things like this your business partners just don’t understand.

They are thinking: “We give him payola every week to mention Ruth's Chris Steakhouse, on the air, (how much do they give you Sean? all reported to the IRS is it Sean?), and now we have an IPO about to come out, an IPO for Christ sake! . . . and dis radio c___ s___ing dick is going ta screws it all up so he can f___ wit’ some guy in California? What a Long Island sack of s___.”

See Sean, your business partners have been working this scam for some time now. And you were just a part of it. To help with the buzz. Mention those delicious steaks, talk it up, get . . . what $10,000 a mention? Oh, $1,000? . . . cheap radio advertising . . . and this would help with the IPO, and God knows they need help with the IPO.

This pig needs a lot a lipstick: “debt load, which came in at $116 million as of March 27.”

They have not only cooked Sean Hannity some free steaks, they have cooked the books. They had to: “Revenue, which fell in 2001 and 2002, rose 14.6 percent last year and operating income climbed 50.6 percent from the year earlier.”

Sound impressive? How do you like that “.6%”? Not just “14%” but see that little something extra? Sean helped with that did you Sean?

Impressive? It is not until the end of the article that you will read: “Ruth's Chris didn't open any new restaurants last year and closed two locations, including one in Manhattan, as it overhauled its management, including hiring a new chief executive in March 2004.” (New chief executive? Gee I wonder why? Some problem with the books? Or . . .?)

Does ya sees? If you do not open any restaurants you do not have any of those “expenses.” Helps with the “balance sheet.” (Never mind that the business plan is to open 80 new restaurants with all those expenses.)

But the business “reporters” are all over the “trend in eating out” and how Sean’s favorite restaurant is free from any risk of a turn down in the economy. How so? Because it is so expensive! See? That is where the rich go to eat so, yas knows, the rich’s gota eat. Rich men like Sean, does ya sees?

But the reported did tell us who the players are, Sean Hannity’s business partners and why the IPO is so important to them: “Madison Dearborn could receive an additional payment from selling 1.7 million shares covered by the underwriters' over allotment option. . . . Other holders of junior and senior preferred stock are set to be paid a total of $20.6 million by Ruth's Chris.”

I wondered why Sean Hannity didn’t talk about how the IRS was auditing him. They even came to his studio to search for records. “I just never talk about it” is all he would say, on the air.

When I was targeted by the IRS (see The IRS and the Illegals from the North), I felt it was my duty to tell how, during the Clinton administration, the IRS revealed my name to the very people that they had asked me to help investigate, Crawford and Company, and told them that I had cooperated in the investigation. But not Sean Hannity: “I just never talk about it”. (Sees ya? Yas just gota dummy up. See? When das police are – ya know – questionings ya, you just gota dummy up. Right Sean?)

And for those of you who think the economy is an evenly rotating system of objective fixed relations here is an interesting example. Here at New Ruskin we have argued that, for example, the IRS tax tables do not accurately explain who actually pays the tax.

We have argued that the rich, (those who are making goods and services which are in high demand), pass on their taxes to their consumers in higher prices, (the price mechanism of tax transfer). This is why the poor have such a high “propensity to spend” they end up paying their own taxes, and all the other taxes, and all other expenses in the price of the goods they purchase. We have explained that both Democrats and Republicans misrepresent the situation, each for their own political calculation.

But let us now consider the true value of the payola paid by Ruth's Chris to Sean Hannity every time Sean mentions the steakhouse chain. How much is the under the table payment, (the tax free payment), worth to Sean given Sean’s tax bracket? For extra credit, Class, How much income must Ruth's Chris hide in order to pay Sean?

But now with the IPO, Sean, the stakes are much higher. How much is Sean getting out of the IPO? How much extra commission must the underwriters charge to pay Sean? (All reported is it, Sean?)

This is why yas “business partners” doesn’t understands yas Sean. Why would you mess with some guy in California right now, right when the IPO is coming out?

Now it is not just the IRS, and the FCC, but Sean wants to add the SEC!

See Sean? It is things like this that give good old boys from Long Island a bad reputation.

And “not bad for a homeless guy” didn’t even fit in the conversation with Senator McCain. You are supposed to at least try and work it into the conversation. See? That is what makes them covert.

Otherwise you just look like a dick.

ps Secrets and secrets. So many secrets. And this is the whole society. Top to bottom. Why didn’t socialism work. The economist say because it did not allow for “economic calculation” but really because people are so dishonest. My tormenters have stalked me for these fifteen years, brought me to the end, and Sean Hannity interviewing Senator McCain wanted to take a little poke. (In the middle of an IPO!) But this is just one small example. A world of hate, cruelty, . . .

Do but seriously consider how much more insupportable and painful an immortal life would be to man than what I have already given him. If you had not death, you would eternally curse me for having deprived you of it; I have mixed a little bitterness with it, to the end, that seeing of what convenience it is, you might not too greedily and indiscreetly seek and embrace it: and that you might be so established in this moderation, as neither to nauseate life, nor have any antipathy for dying, which I have decreed you shall once do, I have tempered the one and the other betwixt pleasure and pain. ----

LIBERAL ISLAM WEB SITES Collected by Charles Kurzman University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Islamic Statements Against Terrorism Collected by Charles Kurzman University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
International Tribunal For The Prosecution Of Terrorists Letter From Liberal Arabs & Muslims To The United Nations Security Council & The U.N. Secretary General

Friday, July 22, 2005

Warner Trades Down at New Ruskin College

Lecture Notes: 07-20-05

What is a bubble?

It occurs to me that despite my best efforts you still think that “housing bubble” is an objective question. That is why you consult economists, real estate experts, and the like.

Once again you fall back on the easy: “objective”. And again my sad friends you are wrong. A bubble is a subjective decision, an opinion.

When we say real estate prices are in a bubble what we mean is that we do not believe the prices are sustainable.

But what do we mean: sustainable?

For example, as only 16% of Californian households can afford the median priced home, (see
WSJ) then we might think that this is not sustainable. However, and to demonstrate the supremacy of the subjective, suppose now it is argued that in a world of 6 billion people, even if we focus only on the wealthiest ½ of 1 percent, that still leaves us 30 million people, 30 million potential customers, buyers, and many of these potential customers might consider purchasing a home in California?

Consider that in all of the United States we sell each year approximately 7.5 million homes.

That is less than ¼ of the top ½ of one percent of the world’s wealthiest! And what percent of the 7.5 sales need be bought to influence the price and keep it ever upward? If only a fraction of the world’s potential buyers were to decide to purchase a home in the USA, if only as a hedge against the world economy, all homes sold in that year could conceivably be sold to foreign buyers.

So this means that though only 16% of Californians can afford the median priced home, there were tens of millions of potential buyers around the world who could. As we have just seen if only a fraction of this small group were to buy in America not only could all California homes sales be bought up, but all homes sold for the entire year throughout America could be bought!

But now see the point, even though the price of homes could thereby be maintained one might nonetheless conclude that prices are still in a bubble.


Because one might conclude that the situation is not sustainable. One might consider what effect shutting out the bottom 84% of Californians from purchasing the median priced home would have on the California Republic? (see
SFGate ) Consider the China bid for Unocal.

Do you need a degree in Economics to see a bubble? No! Indeed the economist is more likely to think that the bubble is an objective question rather than seeing the deeper issues.

We might say the price is not sustainable because a society which excludes 84% of its members is not sustainable!

There is more to say. I want to go on about the oligarchy. I want to describe how the oligarchy hides its venality behind liberalism. I want to hold Ms. Warner up to ridicule as an example . . . The rats and the sinking ship . . . leaving the people in the dark . . . and Mr. Bush’s open borders policy, and his support of racial quotas as another example . . . how left and right, Democrat and Republican join together . . . the easy answers, the avoidance of the real issues . . .

And here I want to talk about all of this as examples of our failure to respond to changing situations because of our dishonesty in our appraisal, our unwillingness to be intellectually challenged, our preference for the easy answers which our politicians are all too willing to provide us . . .

And quote Thomas Friedmen: “You can not make it as a B+ student in Brooklyn anymore.” (I think quoting Bill Gates approvingly.) That the reader can not see in Friedmen’s words the same dishonesty proves the point. This intolerance for the B+ barely conceals the utter disdain for the B, and the C, and what of the others? To say, almost joyfully, “can not make it,” is dishonest because it is easy, because it avoids the really serious questions. Like the Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Glenn Beck, Michael Weiner, pap, and mental popcorn . . . with its focus on “excellence” and “success” and its repeated “this is what makes America great . . .” pomposity.

For example, California accepts the top 12% of its high school graduates into the UC system and the top 25% into the CSU system. Yet in a world of 6 billion people accepting only the top 3% would produce a potential entering freshman class of over 45 million students of college age, more than the total population of California. (
There are a little over 2 million students in California colleges.) Why reach all the way down to the twelfth percentile? Why not just the top 3%? Why not the best? (From around the world? Don’t you believe in meritocracy?) Indeed, due to Mr. Bush’s open border policy, and California’s rule never to ask the legal status of students at its universities, the only thing preventing the rush on the colleges is the cost of the air faire to get to California.

And I wanted to describe how all of this is part of the bubble economy, for the bubble is not just the price, it is all of this subjective evaluation, critical thinking, of what is and is not sustainable . . . You could be expanding opportunities, using laser disks in education, world wide, you could be building more houses, using modular construction, building nuclear power plants . . .

I used to think that racial and gender quotas caused the deterioration in relations, encouraged the VICTIMs to act out, confirmed them in their false belief of moral superiority, encouraged their hatred and arrogance, etc. , but now I see that a society capable of enacting such a spoils system already had so ruined its human relations, so objectified its prejudices . . .

But as I say, I had a great deal more to say about this and much else . . . here are some links . . .

July 18, 2005 , House prices drop 1%, says Rightmove,,9064-1698783,00.html
International investors play big role in S. Florida's housing boom,0,1483602.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines

Condo crazy at the heart of a boom

Europe buys more Florida homes

As the last hours unfold it all seems pointless . . ., keeps checking waiting for the end, and, and, and, . . .

And it changes nothing for me to point out that Farmers Insurance was about to fall to BBB rating. (Only AAA rated insurance companies can write insurance for mortgaged homes.) Only the transfer of $10 billion from the parent company, Zurich Financial, kept the rating. It means nothing to point out that they have made one bad decision after another. (Previously I reported the $130 million judgment for overtime pay for 2,000 adjusters in California.) But the failure to use computers to track the claims inventory in part resulted from their pushing work off onto their adjusters . . . why invest in computers when you can simply make your staff work an extra 15 hours a week? Free labor drives out technology. See also farming. Building trades. Do you not see this as another example? Don’t you see . . .

Well . . . it changes nothing.

Messages at New Ruskin College

Lecture Note: 07-19-05 Confirmation of Message

Al! Come on. You left out “brain matter.” That was the punch line wasn’t it?

What do you think folks? Al Franken? Comic genius?

You could try the vomiting into the metal trashcan. I think Glenn Beck podcasts . . . you could download it?

So there you are Dr. Pearson, Al Franken has given you the confirmation. What? Still not sure?

I know Al, you could do the Imus thing for Dr. Pearson. You know the one: “If you say you are going to do something you should do it.” That one.

O’Reilly used that line. Go ahead do the “if you say you are going to . . .”

Just a minute Dr. Pearson . . . . Go ahead Al . . .

Al? . . .

Al . . . go ahead do the Imus line for Dr. Pearson.

336. 1 12

Thursday, July 21, 2005

Protest at New Ruskin College

Lecture Notes: 07-18-05 Protest

Suicide can be funny! You think?

At least Al Franken thinks suicide is funny. Today he began his show with a skit of a character putting a gun to his head and killing himself on air. Franken after the gun shot asks, “What is this? . . . brain matter?” See? Brain matter! Oi! That’s funny! What a funny guy.

KQED staff has also started joking about “bullet proof glass” at their studio.

Several months ago Imus and Mrs. Jack Swanson, Beck, McGurk, also tried joking about suicide.

Previously I advised them that they were only confusing their audience. (Lecture Notes: 03-07-05 Suicide Club, Lecture Notes: 03-04-05 Landmines of Injustice?)

In fact Imus’ ratings have declined and some have suggested that he has seemed “distracted”. It is difficult to see how Beck’s ratings could go much lower. (And his vomiting into a trash can sound effect just does not seem to be working for him. His ridicule of convenience market clerks hasn’t worked either.)

You see the problem is, Al, that most listeners are not in on the “inside joke.” They don’t get the joke. They don’t think suicide is funny. See?

Most listeners think suicide is a serious problem: “Specifically, 10.6 out of every 100,000 persons died by suicide. The total number of suicides was 29,350, or 1.2 percent of all deaths. Suicide deaths outnumber homicide deaths by five to three. It has been estimated that there may be from 8 to 25 attempted suicides per every suicide death.” (see

And Al don’t try auto accident fatality humor either. Most listeners think that auto accident deaths also are a serious issue where 42,443 are killed each year. (see
Auto Accidents (I have previously explained how government control of our highways and roads has retarded development of electronic traffic controls. Tens of thousands die needlessly because government bureaucrats have not applied digital electronic technology to traffic controls.))

Most listeners think murder is a serious problem, however the number of people murdered each year, 16,889, is a little more than half the number of suicides every year. ( see
Murder) So Al, see, murder is less than half as funny as suicide. (Or is murder twice as funny as suicide? How does one calculate humor?) In other words it is more likely that I will be killed by suicide than an employee of KQED will be killed by murder. Or put differently, I am at greater risk than are they. (However because they are VICTIMs and I am just one of their victims my death will count for less than their fear.)

When Senator McCain went on the Imus show and made a reference to this web site he did so because, he also wanted me to know he took no account of my suicide. (see 4-28-05, Lecture Notes: 5-18-05) Nothing like having been a P.O.W. to give one a sense of entitlement, (“who has suffered more than me?!”), but even McCain would not think of joking about the plight of Blacks, or Women, or . . . any of the socially approved victims, the VICTIMS; for, ironically, even though he is a P.O.W. survivor, suffering due to military service counts for little in determining VICTIM status with the other contending VICTIMs.

So when I kill myself in front of the KQED building I will be protesting those who have harassed me these last fifteen years, and also in part my protest will be of Al Franken and his fellow gas bags in the media. And I will be protesting Senator McCain also.

And no, Al, I do not suppose that you or Weiner, Imus, or Owens, or any of them, and not Senator McCain either, will be changed by my death. Or rather if you will be changed is unknowable. Probably the same inflated egos which carry you and the others through your lives will continue to carry you over my bleeding corpse.

You are all thickly wadded with your ignorance. And therefore you will be protected. Or perhaps you will be driven insane. It is unknowable.

I protest you.

I have noticed how often Al makes reference to his Jewishness, or his loving wife and children, or to his two houses, i.e. to qualities of his person or being or status when he should be making his arguments. When he should be presenting his facts and reasons in support of his positions he is describing how he is loved by his wife, or his children, growing up in Minnesota, what he did last weekend, etc.

Then I realized that in the absence of reason how else are disputes to be resolved but by such qualities? If you have given up on rational argument then what else is to be done, how else to proceed but by comparing status? Since you have no rational basis upon which to persuade, the best that can be done is to assure your audience that you are a kind Jew, a loving father and husband, etc. etc. and hope that these qualities will win the audience to your side, due to admiration if not reason.

Who is the bigger VICTIM? Or, and this is apparently less convincing, who has the most or best things? Ron Owens once concluded an argument with Bernie Ward by pointing out that he, Ron Owens, had bigger ratings. That sealed the debate.

In the Bay Area arguments will begin with, “As a Jew . . .” or “As an African-American Female, I . . .” or “As a Gay, I think . . .” and so forth, with the debater apparently unaware that nothing logically follows from these opening statements. I have even heard the preamble, “As someone who has meditated every day for the last 30 years . . .” But again, without reason, how else to proceed?

Like military officers comparing records to establish seniority, the gay African-American with AIDS must be compared to his opponent not based on the arguments and facts he can marshal but on the quality of his being, his VICTIM status, and VICTIM ribbons have even been added to the VICTIM’s lapel in the military manner of campaign ribbons.

So just now Al Franken is introducing Hertzberg “ ‘the Jew’ from the New Yorker” to his audience in the complete confidence that his winning manner will propel is show into the next ratings book, which is all that counts, right? Because we are not going to judge Franken or Hertzberg on the merits of their facts and arguments right? This is only partisan radio. If you do not already agree --- then to hell with you . . . you . . . you NAZI bastard!

But do not try to reason with them.

Twelve years after I first urged the nation to overthrow Saddam Hussein, America finally did so in the Second Gulf War. Do you suppose that Franken and Imus and Weiner and McCain now say, ‘Gee, he was right about that . . .’? No.

After the death of Freda Wright-Sorce do you suppose that her husband, radio personality, Don Geronimo, will reflect on how advanced electronic traffic controls could have saved his wife’s life? No.

(The death occurred after a ten car pile up in the opposite direction. The eleventh car swerved into Freda’s lane. Had the cars been equipped with a twenty five dollar transponder, connected to the car’s sensors, red lights and audible warnings could have sounded in all the cars on the road (or even if in only 50% of them, the newer ones): “Warning, Warning, slow down! Slow Down!, There is an accident ahead.”

This warning could have been sounded after the first car in the chain reaction accident. The cars would have slowed and Freda Wright-Sorce would be alive. But none of these things happened because the government bureaucrats who run our roads are not paid to introduce safety electronics on our highways. So every year hundreds of thousands are injured 43,000 killed, year after year, and nothing is done even though the means are at hand and have been for 30 years.)

After the 9-11 attack did heads role at the FAA? No. Not withstanding the fact that the FAA had been specifically warned of the risk. And then, in March 2004, foreign jet liners were still flying US skies with the cockpit door open. And this was not corrected by the FAA, but rather only a passenger’s complaint made the FAA issue the order to foreign air lines to close the cockpit door.

Just now Franken has said to Pete Peterson, “I don’t know what that means.” Mr. Peterson had just suggested we establish “forced savings accounts” as an add on to Social Security. “Forced Savings Accounts”, this is a mysterious idea to the Harvard graduate Al Franken. He has been going on the air for over a year, has been putting out his idiotic ideas, (e.g. we will cash in the bonds to pay Social Security), and he has difficulty with the idea of forced savings accounts.

And it just goes on and on in big issues and small. $8 trillion national deficit. $35 trillion Medicare deficit. $11 trillion Social Security deficit. No one cares. Make us care. We do not care. We do not care about your suicide either. OK, then I guess that means you win!

The average home in California requires an income five times higher than the average income and yet this stark statistic seems to be unknown. ( I hear on air personalities talking about real estate as if they were barkers for a carnival game. They too, let it be known that they are the proud owners of one or more homes. Their whole real estate history is discussed. But that there are social, political, may I say moral? issues? goes un-remarked.

So when I put the muzzle in my mouth and squeeze the trigger part of my protest will be against the housing policies, the FAA, the budget, the absence of traffic safety electronics, nuclear power reactors, modular construction, laser disks, . . . you . . . and your uncaring.

In Judgment Day I related how after watching the twin towers fall I went into the office and told the claims supervisor, Dean Sotos what I had just watched. “Was it an accident?” was the reply. When I explained that the Pentagon was on fire from a third plane he said, “Well, they will figure out what happened.”

Who is they? The masters, the owners of the Republic. You have put these little men in charge. From top to bottom. Are you serious?

Do you suppose that the man who had so little comprehension of the destruction of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon does a better job understanding auto accidents? You think he missed the big issue but he does better on the small?

Believe me he does not.

I will kill myself in a few days. I now know that if I had a job I would not. I would try and make a go of it again as I have all these years.

I have held out, and held out, hope against hope and now I have come to the end.

And the desperate thing is that I know . . . I know that there are jobs available. There is work that needs to be done. House fires. Auto accidents. Etc. etc.

To know that they are there that I could be working only confirms me in my decision to end my life now. is a regular visitor to this site.

They check in every now and then to see if I am still alive. Dean Sotos or Scott Bobro I do not know. The irony that these two should be employed seems a joke . . . but you are serious?

It does not matter. Al Franken or Michael Weiner. McCain. Imus . . .

What the difference?

When I see all the mistakes you are making. Mistakes that cost you sometimes more dearly than they have cost me . . . I have gained this little perspective on you . . . not forgiveness so much as understanding.

There is a Buddhist expression, “one continuous mistake.” Like a tear in a scroll, that races along . . . one continuous mistake.

That is life.

I do not protest the tear.

I protest your misunderstanding.

I die to show you, Al Franken, Michael Weiner, all of you, . . . you have focused on me, targeted me, thought of new ways to get at me, at work at Farmers Insurance, break into my room and steal my notebook then read it on air, and today . . . a new comedy skit . . .

I protest this mistaken notion of yours.

All around you the real work that needs doing, the transponders mounted on the dash, the laser disks, the houses . . . you have been fixated on me instead of the work that needs to be done . . . this is my protest . . . I protest your mistaken understanding.

Wednesday, July 20, 2005

Blithering at New Ruskin College

This just in: 1941:

Blithering House (formerly the Royal Institute of Foreign Relations) has determined that Mr. Churchill’s opposition to the Wehrmacht’s entry into France has caused the air raids London is now experiencing.

The geniuses at Blithering found that German recruitment has increased as young Germans are joining the Wehrmacht in far greater numbers today than before because of Britain’s opposition to Germany’s foreign policy.

The Blithering Report continued that there is a direct relationship between the current spat of London bombings and Mr. Churchill’s failure to come to terms with Mr. Hitler. “The Prime Minister is just making peaceful relations more difficult for all of us,” says Blithering contributing author, Nigel Silverspoon, who added, “and the bombings are harder on our working class and minority party members, much harder on our . . . lower class . . . members . . .”

The Blithering Report also noted that the Jewish problem was a contributing factor and urged Mr. Churchill to adopt a policy of accommodation and reconciliation.

Iraq and al Qaeda: Saddam Hussein attempted to use his own intelligence service and terrorist surrogates against the United States during the first Gulf war. He assisted a fugitive from the 1993 World Trade Center attacks. He attempted to assassinate George H.W. Bush. He sought to blow up the U.S. government's Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty headquarters. He openly supported terrorist activity in the region. "From 1996 to 2003," according to the Senate Intelligence Committee report, "the IIS focused its terrorist activities on western interests, particularly against the U.S. and Israel." We know that in the context of a decade-long confrontation with the United States, Saddam reached out to al Qaeda on numerous occasions. We know that the leadership of al Qaeda reciprocated, requesting assistance in its endeavors. We know that reports of meetings, offers of safe haven, and collaboration persisted.

Secret Agent? Linda Chavez reported in Oct. 8, 2003: All political contributions require the donor to list his or her employer's name, which then becomes a matter of public record accessible instantly on the Internet. Plame listed her "employer's" name, all right. It just happened to be a company that apparently operated as a CIA front, which Plame's political contribution has now exposed to the world.

Turning plants such as corn, soybeans and sunflowers into fuel uses much more energy than the resulting ethanol or biodiesel generates, according to a new Cornell University and University of California-Berkeley study.In terms of energy output compared with energy input for ethanol production, the study found that: corn requires 29 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced; switch grass requires 45 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced; and wood biomass requires 57 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced. soybean plants requires 27 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced, and sunflower plants requires 118 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced.

Overall, just 16% of households in California can afford the median-priced home, according to the California Association of Realtors, the lowest level since 1989, when the average rate on a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage was 10.33%. Rates on 30-year fixed-rate loans currently average just 5.81%, according to HSH Associates in Pompton Plains, N.J. --------- I dont know why I bother . . . these are just numbers on paper . . . just statistics. That there are real people whose lives are really diminished by Post Liberal policy, exclusionary policy, does not register . . . just numbers . . . not even people anymore . . . were we ever? (RUTH SIMON Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal)

Very gratifying. Someone is burning the midnight oil, . . . suppose better late than never . . . every day I think I have accepted my fate and then some thing like this and my heart is back in my throat tears in my eyes . . . but then it came to me without a word just the thought . . . no one dies . . .

196. 3 9

Viacom’s second string grifters have arrived . . .

370. 1 1

Study up . . .

285. 2 66.5

Maybe someone will remember . . .

Friday, July 15, 2005

Surprise? at New Ruskin College

Lecture Notes: 07-14-05

Psychological Manipulation

Surprised? The Prime Minister is surprised?

Surprised that a group of people can manipulate the psychology of a target to cause him to kill himself? Or is it only because they can manipulate him to kill others along with himself which causes the surprise?

How can the British Prime Minister be surprised? It has been in all the newspapers. Doesn’t he read the newspapers? Stories about cults. Stories about cons. Stories about government agencies which carry out programs of deception. (Britain and the USA were themselves targets of Iraq’s deception campaign about its own support for terrorism.)

The British Prime Minister could probably tell us a story or two.

Every time one of hate radio’s gas bags releases steam about “Muslims”, speaking about Islam as if it were a hierarchical religion, as if it were similar to Catholicism, what are they doing but attempting to manipulate their targets otherwise known as the audience?

For of course Islam is more like Judaism than Catholicism. Each Imam, like a rabbi, is free to interpret, teach, preach as he likes. There are branches of thought, even schools, but no central hierarchy as with Catholicism.

But if you wanted to create hatred you would not report that this Imam said this, and that Imam did something else, no, you would say only that Islam preaches hate, and Islam manipulates the psychology of its adherents to murder etc. etc. For example, when the Peoples Temple group ended in murder and suicide you did not hear the condemnation of Christianity even though they espoused Christianity and used Christianity as a justification and explanation of their murders.

Indeed even after the Hutus, Catholics, murdered a million Tutsi victims, Protestants, and even now after many Catholic priests have been convicted of genocide, and incitement to genocide, even now, the “religious” aspect is not reported, the Catholics and Protestants are not identified, let alone using their religions as a way of explaining the genocide. Christianity is blameless while daily Imus, Weiner, O’Reilly, and locally Rodgers identify Islam as being responsible for every murder. The most obscure Imams are cited as if they were definitive sources while the sermons of the Catholic priests of Rwanda are never even mentioned.

And again at Waco Texas and the so called Branch Davidians, nothing about the murderous Christians and Christian extremists.

I recall that both my sister and Yvonne (another connection? Or coincidence, or cosmic consciousness?) quoted the Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh whose group carried out the first bio-attack in the United States. Though cults were fingered in that attack Hinduism was not singled out as a cause. Ironically the local media did refer to the Aum Shinri Kyo cult as a “Buddhist cult” but later “Buddhist” was mysteriously dropped as an identifier. (There are a lot of powerful Buddhist in the Bay Area. It pays to have influential friends.)

Regular College Visitors have themselves seen how I was the target of a wide ranging conspiracy of fanatics who sought to manipulate my psychology. (See Psy Ops and Intel Operations)

The difference is that when employees of KQED used their influence with the counselor Yvonne to betray her client they did not have a very well worked out scheme.

The radical Imams on the other hand do. They know exactly what they want, and how to achieve it. They do not always succeed. Israel has a whole cell block of a prison filled with suicide bombers whose psychological programming was not perfected in their death.

In my case there was a great deal of randomness. Indeed this is why it is so difficult to know all that was done to me. Mrs. Jack Swanson had no clear aim other than to inflict suffering. Don Imus had no program beyond simply “fucking with your head.” Michael Weiner thought he was, lost in his hallucinations, defending the Jewish race.

But the network of radical Imams, (Robert Baer talks in his books not about al Qaeda so much as the Islamic Brotherhood, most of whom thought OBL was a showboater a PR man not a serious terrorist), do not waste their time as have my oppressors.

They identify vulnerable people, (mostly young men), manipulate them to become more vulnerable, religion here is a powerful tool, but not the only one, offer them a means of resolving their conflict, then strap on the bomb and done.

One, two, three . . . no wasted effort preening on the radio the way Ron Owens does, know hysterical attempts at self justification the way Michael Weiner does.

Yes, regular College Visitors can readily see how a network of rich powerful people can select a target, psychologically manipulate him to his suicidal death. We have been studying this for a number of years now.

We are not surprised.

Nor are we surprised that others cover up the truth. We are not surprised that many do not come forward and give evidence. Not surprised to hear others offer excuses. No. We are not surprised.

Thursday, July 14, 2005

Hate Radio at New Ruskin College Part II

Lecture Notes: 07-13-05

Oh, well . . . we can not shame them.

Catholic Hutus kill one million Protestant Tutsis but these are not reported as Christian killings . . . we hear nothing about Christian extremists.

No long hysterical haranguing about Christianity, the supposed religion of peace, . . . etc. etc.

The fact that the Hutus were Catholic and their victims Protestant is not even reported let alone used as a way of condemning Christianity.

But you can believe we do hear about how “those Moslems” do not turn in their neighbors, their presumed disloyalty, how they “breed” terrorists is daily, hourly contended by our networked hate radio shills.

I have only a few hundred hours left to live. I have to accept that the world will go on without me . . . I am not responsible for the work left undone.

It is galling though that the very same hypocrites who daily declaim on the dishonesty and lack of courage of “those Moslems” to speak out against “their” terrorist brethren are some of them the very same . . . who know what has been done to me, know about the burglary, the harassment, the oppression, and who have not themselves come forward . . . indeed some of them are themselves in fact my tormenters, these very same sons of bitches, these very same whores, these disgusting pieces of human garbage . . .

But I have to let go. We live in a floating world. Emptiness.

There is no reason . . .

They go on for hours about the Supreme Court, and how “those judges” took private property . . . seizure . . . “from A to B” . . . etc.

Just a series of the most flagrant lies. But have these half pints ever complained about the maze of zoning regulation? For what is exclusionary zoning but a taking? Not once. Never. And note that there is no question of just compensation when a city is down zoned.

They have nothing to say about the mass of regulation on housing, the litigation, the years delay in obtaining building permits. Nothing to say about how school districts are used in combination with zoning by the elite to exclude. Nothing to say about how building codes are similarly used to block innovation, e.g. modular building technology.

Hours of mindless yammering about the patient Schiavo yet not a mention of the CAT scan. Governor Bush will soon order an investigation of Mrs. Kennedy’s delay in reporting the death of the President. And Mrs. Lincoln? How is it she was not harmed? Seems suspicious.

Note that in both Schiavo and Kelo (KELO V. NEW LONDON (04-108) 268 Conn. 1, 843 A. 2d 500, affirmed) hate radio halfwits start out arguing from a pretended moral absolutism. They present the case, at first, (until challenged), as if it were their position that life support (feeding tubes) should never be removed, or that private property should never be taken.

Then upon examination when shown that this claimed “absolute” rule is contradicted by their own conduct, (sometimes they do agree to discontinue treatment in hopeless cases, they do agree that private property can be taken for a public university, but not a private one?, for a public utility but not a private one?), and so on, they back off their idiotic claims of “absolutism.” This reliance on absolutism is not conservatism.

Conservatism is a careful weighing of rights. Unlike liberals we do not automatically assume the rights of 15 homeowners outweigh the rights of the rest of the community. Should one hold out block the rail line, or the power line, or the highway (publicly owned or not)? Nor are we stupidly to favor “public” bureaucracies over private institutions. (Of course when confronted in this manner the gas bags say only, but we have to condemn property for a railroad line or a power line, how else will we be able to build? Not realizing how empty their argument. They claim necessity not realizing that they have just contradicted themselves. It turns out that their “absolute” “moral” position is highly malleable when confronted with “necessity.”) No, this method of argumentation is not Conservatism it is laziness, stupidity, it is Voinovichism.

None of these points interested the media gas bags, but taxes! They will yammer on about their taxes like drunks --- for they are drunk, drunk on their incomes, their power.

And all of this is but proof of the preeminence of the subjective and the ultimate alienation of the narrow intellect, the isolated ego from the world.

For they are mislead by the narrow way they perceive the world, bit by bit, idea by idea, they move by degrees further and further from the path.

Because they have a word Moslem and a word Christian they separate the people. A half degree off course. Then they think that Christian killings are one thing, “tribalism,” or just “foreigners,” or some other explanation, not seeing any of these excuses as pure rationalizations. More degrees off course.

Then their alienation from the Moslems leads them further away, into blind hatred. And then of course there are more rationalizations. Soon they are upon the rocks, and mystified how they came to such a bad end.

The West has been convulsed by wars, civil wars, revolutions, stock piles of weapons to destroy the world, yet the Moslem world is labeled: violent!

These hypocrites and liars refused to secure their cockpit doors, actually refused repeated requests, then are taken by surprise when four of these 50,000 gallon, 600 mph, gas tanks, they have had orbiting their cities is, in exactly the manner foreseen, hijacked and flown into an office block. They are mystified.

San Francisco is down zoned five times in 20 years. Not a word about private property rights. No compensation paid. But the former mayor, (and now Marin Senator Feinstein), bought up all the multi story buildings she could finance. (Would the owners have sold so low if they too knew that the City of San Francisco would continue to down zone?)

However, when the Supreme Court rules that the States are allowed, I will repeat that, “allowed”, to judge for themselves what is and what is not a public use, or public purpose, suddenly there is hysteria. For a hundred years the land was taken from A and sold to B, the railroads, and not so much as a whimper. Taken from A and sold to B, the coal companies, nothing. But from A to an office park, outrage!

For these rich, and all media gas bags are rich, bastards the State’s sovereignty is only theoretical. They really do not want to trust their fellow citizens with real sovereignty. They would leave the States as only toy republics, while holding all real powers in the Federal government where their control is greater, i.e. where their money can purchase control more easily.

Their dishonesty is here fundamental. They are literally blind to the world. They see it only in narrow little slices of rationalizations. The CAT scan reveals the brain is gone, literally gone, but they do not comprehend. Later it is reported that “she was blind.” Wrong! She was not blind. True the part of the brain that processes images was missing, but so was everything else. She was not blind she was gone had been gone for years but they kept her body animated because they can not see what they are doing.

They can turn on the switch and get power to their lights but how the energy was transported, how many ranchers and farmers were required by sovereign authority to sell their property, for just compensation, to allow the power line to transit to the city is all mysterious to them. They find the transportation system agreeable, but how it was built is unknown, they are inheritors not builders.

Then layered over this fundamental blindness of these gas bags, dishonesty. There is the daily dishonesty of their asserting limited egos, their bellies, their wallets. Yes, of course they know about the burglary but if they reported what they know their supervisor, Jack Swanson, would fire them, or he and his powerful friends who control the media would exert their influence to make sure “you never work in this industry again.” So they say nothing.

But this fact, in their minds, has nothing to do with their condemnation of Moslems for their supposed dishonesty . . . that they have concealed crimes, continue to conceal crimes right through the day of my death, that they are themselves liars and hypocrites . . . that is . . . is . . . different in their minds.

And I suspect that the manufactured outrage over the Schiavo and Kelo decisions was just more propaganda serving the interests of the political operatives who hope to influence the next Supreme Court vacancy. The mass manipulation of symbols in bad faith for the purpose of gaining state control and for no other purpose. Fascism. And so we end up again at our starting point for this was exactly the point I made in the Last Letter (see Last Letter at the Moynihan) and which made me the target of Weiner and Owens and then the others who joined in, Krasney, Imus, Mrs. Jack Swanson . . . and on and on . . .

I have to let go. Go on your own way now, bouncing along the stream of life, liars, killers, monsters, and lovers . . . go on . . . and on, and on, lost . . . God bless you too . . .

Wednesday, July 13, 2005

Imus, again, at New Ruskin College

From: PlinioDesignori @ newruskincollege
Reply To: PlinioDesignori @ newruskincollege
To: Dr. Howard Allen Pearson
Subject: Information about Don Imu
Date: Mon, 11 July 2005 18:26:55 -0400
CC: senate

Date: 07-11-05

To: Dr. Howard Allen Pearson
Professor Emeritus Pediatrics
Yale University

From: Plinio Designori, Magistor

Re. Imus Watch: 07-11-05

Dear Dr. Howard Allen Pearson;

You do not know me but for a number of years I have been targeted by Don Imus. Whenever I read how Don Imus has hurt someone else I write to them and offer what information I have about Don Imus in the hopes that his other victims will benefit from knowledge about my experience.

Therefore, I invite you to visit my web site, , where I have described how Imus has harassed and oppressed me for these many years.

My troubles began when I inadvertently came to the attention of Don Imus and a number of other figures in the mass media. Starting in 1988 I wrote some letters to the U. S. Senate about the importance of technology in education. (These letters are available for review at my web site just follow the links to the Math Project Archives and the New Ruskin College Project Archives which are located in the Moynihan Memorial Library

My letter writing campaign was a success only in the sense that I did manage to attract public notice. Unfortunately not for or in the way I had intended. Rather than focusing on the use of laser disk technology in education many people, including Don Imus, focused their attention on me. On me as an individual.

I will not here bore you with the details but is suffices to say that over the following fifteen years, even though I stopped my letter writing campaign, years ago, these people, including Don Imus, have followed me from place to place, job to job, harassing me, oppressing me, in short they have driven me to ruin and despair.

In 2003 I set up my web site in the hopes that they would leave me alone. They have not.

My hope was that by making their actions public people would come forward and testify against them. No one ever came forward. I am all alone.

I wish you good luck with your law suit against Don Imus.

Srebrenica at New Ruskin College

Lecture Notes: 07-11-05


Do you recall how moving, how prophetic Don Imus was in the months leading up to the massacre at Srebrenica? Remember? Day after day one man and his microphone as he used all his powers of persuasion to get the Clinton administration to move. And Michael Weiner? Remember how he rallied the nation?


That is because it never happened. Neither of them cared.

I remember seeing Yvonne (I had gone back to seeing her after the Last Letter) and telling her what a disgrace the Clintons were. Recall that at first they had claimed they could do nothing because they did not want to interfere with the Russian election. “But now the Russian elections have come and gone,” I said, almost shouting, “and still they do nothing!”

That was a day after a rocket exploded in a market killing 75 people.

No, Don Imus and Michael Weiner did not care about the people of Srebrenica. Surprise!

For the next ten years these two would harasse me from job to job, place to place. Burglary. Electronic eavesdropping. Vandalism. Sabotage. Public humiliation. Oppression for me.

But nothing for Srebrenica. (Later during the idiotic Kosovo campaign, (Clinton would not allow ground troops so the killing continued for months), Weiner championed the cause of the killers, the Serbs, such is his hatred for the Moslems. (The VICTIM rejoiced in the killing of the innocent. (And what is this but another denial of the Holocaust?)))

And Sedge Thomson and the Red Comedian? All these creeps who worked so hard to torment and oppress me? Do you think these Post Liberals at KQED pushed the Clintons to do something about Srebrenica?


They did their best to destroy me, but they did not themselves have anything to offer. No recommendations. No insights. No thoughts at all.

Nothing to say about the first World Trade Center attack.

Nothing to say about the attempted assassination of Mr. Bush.

Nothing to say about Srebrenica. Nor would they have anything to say about Kosovo, or Somalia, or Rwanda, . . . or Iraq . . .

But do you not believe that they feel morally superior? Of course they do. They let a million die, be hacked to death in Rwanda, just as they let them die in Srebrenica . . . but hey, they are liberals, of course they feel morally superior.

And Weiner? He is a VICTIM it goes without saying that he is morally superior no matter what he does.

And Imus? Yes of course, the egotist, never a moments doubt because never a moments thought, never a moment of reflection . . . Imus, Imus, Imus is the only thought in his soulless emptiness.

Ironically Ron Owens did support the action in Kosovo, from the air, at 30,000 feet, of course. Many callers called to complain. One caller kept saying “you are a warmonger, you are a warmonger, you are a warmonger . . .;” this is what passes for discussion of the “issues” in the Bay Area. They are liberals so they are not expected to argue, reason, persuade.

Finally after another round of “you are a warmonger” Owens hung up the phone and said, “What next, the anti-Semites?” See? Ron Owens is a VICTIM. His grand parents were killed in the Holocaust so anyone who disagrees with him is an anti-Semite, or very nearly.

A lot of American families lost family members in World War II but they are only victims of the war, they are not VICTIMS in Owens’ or Weiner’s eyes.

And the people of Srebrenica? I mean the survivors? According to Michael Weiner “only the survivors of the Holocaust can be called survivors.” See? No? Because only those survivors are VICTIMS.

Ten years on the survivors of Srebrenica are still only Moslems they do not count they can not be VICTIMS.

And for Imus they do not count because they do not summer in the Hamptons, they do not negotiate his next contract, they do not even select the items for page six; they are nobodies.

Imus, Weiner, Thomson, the Red Comedian, Ron Owens, and the Post Liberal Bay Area, the egotistical, selfish, . . . these are the people who have harassed and oppressed me, driven me to my death.

I go to join the people of Srebrenica, Rwanda, Iraq who were abandoned to their graves by the Post Liberals. The lefties continue to report the terror strikes in London and Iraq as if they were the result of Mr. Bush’s policy and not the result of their own decades of selfishness and cowardice.

The Iraqis have now been saved from their oppression no thanks to Imus or Weiner or the Post Liberals.
The hysteric Weiner and the egotist Imus and the Post Liberal Bay Area would have abandoned them too, but they have been saved. (Of course the cowardly and hysterical Imus and Weiner are all for cutting and running. Cowards!)

But the people of Iraq have been saved from their oppression no thanks to the egotists and cowards and hysterics. Good for them. I do not begrudge them their good fortune. God Bless them.

Tuesday, July 12, 2005

Voinovichism at New Ruskin College

Reply To:
To: Senator Voinovich
Subject: Death at KQED
Date: Sat, 09 July 2005 10:16:35 -0400
CC: senate

Date: 07-08-05

To: Senator Voinovich
U. S. Senate
Washington, D.C.

Note: This is your copy.
Please send Senator Voinovich
a copy his email is not working.

From: Plinio Designori

Subject: I protest Voinovichism

“I have heard what you do to some of your listeners.”
--- Senator Hatch, on the Don Imus radio show.

Dear Senator Voinovich;

Mr. Bolton has given years of his life to the service of this country. Have you ever asked yourself why he spent his time in public service? Do you think he was in it for the money? Do you not think he has made sacrifices for this country?

Why did he spend so much time for us? Do you suppose it was for a bigger bank account? A bigger home? How many minutes of YOUR time did you spare him?

After hearing how he “chased” a woman through the lobby of a Moscow hotel you said, “I have heard enough.” That was twenty minutes of histrionics by Senator Dodd, (who received more contributions from accountants than any other member of the Congress), and you said you had heard enough.

One question. Why did he have to “chase.” Why didn’t the woman, the USAID bureaucrat, stand and talk to Mr. Bolton, as we say ‘man to man?’

Why indeed was he reduced to putting notes under the door of her hotel room? And note that this, just putting written notes under her door, this has been cited as another “offense.”

How about this: Because the woman was a VICTIM. VICTIMS are not expected to stand and answer questions, make arguments, defend their reasons and positions. Why even to expect them to is itself just another imposition and domination.

And further, because the Democrats know that they can count on Voinovich to see her as the VICTIM, they used it to destroy the career of a man who has faithfully served his country for these many years.

The fact that the woman VICTIM is herself a Democrat operative, founder of Housewives against Bush, (note: not FOR Kerry), does in no way diminish her standing as a VICTIM. For it is the controversy itself, the mere fact that she alleges being “chased” (because she would not stand and talk, man to man), the mere fact of controversy, is enough to sink Mr. Bolton’s career.

This is Voinovichism.

For the longest time for over a decade I held on to hope that as more people learned about what Michael Weiner and Don Imus and Mrs. Jack Swanson and Ron Owens and Michael Krasney and Sedge Thomson had done to me, were doing to me, are still doing, I held on to hope that finally, some day justice would be done.

But I did not know how many adherents you had, how powerful your philosophy had become. Had I known I would never have written a word but shot myself straight away.

In a few days I will protest Voinovichism, in front of the KQED building in San Francisco. I will sit on the sidewalk, wait ten minutes, and kill myself by blowing the back of my scull off.

I have written you and your colleagues before. I first wrote you and your colleagues in 1989 about laser disks in education. At that time I was warned by the late Rob Robinson that, like Rosencrans and Guildenstern, I would be destroyed by the powerful people who control the country. “No, this is America!” I bravely said.

Yet time has proven him right and me wrong. Simply writing letters to the Senate has been my downfall. I attracted the attention of those powerful people, and as was predicted, they have over the intervening fifteen years used their influence to destroy me.

Senator Hatch heard what Don Imus had done and he thought it a good joke:

“I have heard what you do to some of your listeners.”
--- Senator Hatch, on the Don Imus radio show.

I have previously reported on all of this at my web site:

I am driven to my death, by years of harassment, and oppression. I could have fled my enemies, changed my name, tried to hide somewhere away from them. But I chose to stay here amongst them. I have deliberately spent down my savings so that I would in the end have no choice but death. I knew that if I had had some way out I would have taken it. I have backed myself into a corner, surrounded by my enemies, to kill myself.

Why? I protest my enemies. I protest your colleague Senator Hatch. I protest you and your Voinovichism: pusillanimity, disloyalty, imbecility.

I wrote some letters to the Senate fifteen years ago and . . . what? . . . Oh, You think I deserve what has happened to me? I must have done something? It must be my fault?

Don’t you see? This is Voinovichism!

Micael Weiner followed me for years, spied on me, organized a burglary, used his influence to interfere with my employment, hectored, harassed and oppressed me ---- but according to Voinovichism, (where there is smoke there must be fire), it must be my fault!

And Weiner, why isn’t he also a VICTIM?

(He used to play the sound of empty box cars rolling over a siding, but tried to conceal his childish grasping at VICTIM status by talking about the forlorn sound as if it were the mighty Edinburgh Express chugging out of Waterloo. More recently he started hysterically shouting that the “Jews were burned alive in the ovens during the Holocaust.” (This being another example of Weiner’s Holocaust denial. For he denies truth.) And then just yesterday he has explained that only survivors of the Holocaust are entitled to use that word: survivor. If you are still living after a plane crash or shipwreck you are not a survivor according to Weiner. And Voinovichism stands in perpetual accord with this and any other insanity shouted out by the VICTIM.)

For we can not expect the VICTIM to reason, to be rational, to merely abide by the truth, to stand up ‘man to man.’ Why sure the VICTIM has to lash out at others that is to be expected. According to Voinovichism we deserve it? Those poor VICTIMS. (Weiner has been agitated by my approaching death and so as expected, he has been returning to wild rants about the Holocaust as self justification for his wrong doing.)

Voinovichism is just this fear of controversy, examination, thought. Just the fact that I and Mr. Bolton have enemies, especially VICTIM enemies, that bare fact, according to Voinovichism is itself proof and confirmation of . . . of what? . . . why, proof and confirmation of controversy itself. In Voinovichism the VICTIM is always in the right; that way it avoids controversy, and can roll over and not be disturbed in its bald slumbers.

Why Don Imus and Michael Weiner and the others harassed me all these years is not the point. Voinovichism is simply the fact that I have been targeted, there must be something wrong. It is not simple minded, for there is no mind there, no thinking at all. Just an empty headed shallowness.

No? Then why did you not contradict your committee chairman Mr. Lugar at the time? He read his answers to all the allegations. But you, you coward, did not dare say a word in reply. Then too, coward, why did you not vote against Mr. Bolton then and there. Too much of a coward to do it! That is the reason. And that too is Voinovichism.

In your world is there nothing that is not Voinovich? Voinovich bank accounts. Voinovich homes. Voinovich children and Voinovich families. Voinovich is hungry. Or Voinovich is sleepy. But that Your President assigned Mr. Bolton to State which is notoriously hostile to Republicans, specifically to confront the State Department Bureaucrats in their lair, that in doing so he might create some “controversy” all of this is mysterious to you, well outside your little solar system with Voinovich at its center, Voinovich planets circling the Voinovich sun. That there should be a whole universe beyond Voinovich, with ideas, and principles, is beyond the comprehension of Voinovichism.

I am sent to my death by cowards, harassed by dogs; yes, cowards and dogs: Voinovichites. I kill myself to protest you and Senator Hatch. I protest your Voinovichism.

cc: Senate

Monday, July 11, 2005

Senator Hatch at New Ruskin College

To: Senator Hatch
Su bject: My Death
Date: Fri, 08 July 2005 13:27:37 -0400
CC: Senate

Subject: My death

“We'll all have to trust each other," said U. S. Senator Richard Lugar, R-Ind., the committee chairman.

Dear Senator Hatch;

If you are reading this then I am already dead.

I would guess that you were not shown this email until after the coroner’s inquest. And further I can assume that the only reason you would then be given this email is because the coroner determined that I was in fact hectored and oppressed and driven to my death by the people I have previously reported at my web site:

Therefore, I can assume that you were then given this email because you were one of the people named:

“I have heard what you do to some of your listeners.”
--- Senator Hatch, on the Don Imus radio show.

Not only did you know about what was done to me but you were one of those who joined in; thought it a bit of good fun, to drive a man to his death. And so I suppose that your staff recovered this email and have given it to you because the coroner made it public in San Francisco after I shot myself in the head, sitting on the sidewalk, in front of the KQED building in San Francisco, several months ago.

I have written you and your colleagues before. But my emails never seemed to reach you; there was a connection problem.

I first wrote you and your colleagues in 1989 about laser disks in education. Because I am a conservative I believe that single issue politics is immoral so I also addressed the other issues of the day in order to attract the attention of the readers. But I always sought to return the subject to the importance of technology in education, self paced computer assisted education, and choice in education.

For example I had argued that government monopoly in education had stifled technical innovation in education and that Federal assistance was needed to compensate for this lack of innovation. President Bush (41) commented at the time, “ . . . I have heard that sophisticated argument . . .” when asked about this point at a press conference. (Yet he had no answer.) Then another time your colleague Senator Hollings launched into a tirade about conservatives “goose stepping with David Duke . . . all this talk about innovation in education, innovation in education, what we need is preparation in those northern GHET-tos. (Later when I quoted him back to himself with the appropriate punctuation he commented that “I stepped on that syllable pretty hard.”)

I wrote a great many letters (see the Math Project Archives and the New Ruskin College Project Archives at the Moynihan Memorial Library @ New Ruskin College) but I always tried to avoid repeating arguments. But after many months of letter writing I repeated an argument I had made in an earlier letter. Then U. S. Senator Moynihan appeared on the floor of the Senate two days after posting, (I think Senate mail moves faster than normal mail), and while speaking interrupted himself and said, “ . . . I know I have made this point before, . . . but nothing wrong with that, repetition, repetition, every good school master knows that only through repetition and drill can we hope to get the lesson across . . .”

Once I mailed a long letter on which I had had to hand correct a word on each Senator’s copy to avoid the expense of re doing them. Again a few days later U. S. Senator Moynihan appeared on the floor of the Senate and was reading from typed notes, then stopped, pulled out a pen, leaned forward and paused studying the page, made a correction, and continued speaking, then paused and said, “just a simple correction, . . . nothing wrong with that.” (I loved U. S. Senator Moynihan.)

The last time I heard him speak was at the announcement of Mrs. Billy Clinton’s candidacy. He said, after her run for the primary was announced, “All comers . . . are welcome.” (I thought there might be a message there.)

Forgive me, I have digressed.

I wanted to tell you something. It seemed important when I started. What was it?

I am dead, driven to my death, oh, that’s it. I wanted to tell you about how unjust it all was. The years of harassment. The oppression.

Even though I say I am probably already dead if you are reading this the truth is that in these last few hours before I die this letter is like an appeal for stay of execution. My mind has no dignity. If you think that it is evidence of a lack of resolve you are mistaken. The difference between a suicide and someone who only has thoughts of suicide is that the suicide actually squeezed the trigger. Suicide is an act. And in my case suicide is my protest. I protest my enemies. I protest you.

For example I could have fled my enemies, changed my name, tried to hide somewhere. But I chose to stay here amongst them. I have deliberately spent down my savings. I have engineered this catastrophe. I knew that if I had had some way out I would have taken it. I have backed myself into a corner, surrounded by my enemies, to kill myself.

And yet, if someone took mercy on me and offered me a job I am sure that I would take it and put off my death for another day. So in my mind is the fantasy that someone will in reading this final appeal will relent and help me.

“I have heard what you do to some of your listeners.”
--- Senator Hatch, on the Don Imus radio show.

I know perfectly well that you are yourself one of my enemies. You “heard” how Imus had oppressed me these many years and you not only did nothing to stop him, but you actually encouraged him! Oh, I know this last minute appeal is useless. But that is the point don’t you see? It is an appeal for the record; to show that every avenue has been exhausted. My mind wildly fantasizes about moving away to some place of refuge.

Unemployment is 5%. There are adds for employment. I have 25 years of experience. Yet my applications are not accepted. My phone does not ring. Black balled. Shut out. (Michael Krasney and the former Mrs. Dr. Dean Edel at AAA. Mrs. Jack Swanson at CENCAL. Don Imus at State Farm, (Mengus), and GAB Robins. Ron Owens (at several places) and with Michael Weiner at Farmers with Scott Bobro and Dean Sotos. The IRS at Crawford and Company.) I want to prove to myself that it is utterly hopeless, that there is no chance, there is nothing else that can be done.

I watch as the months have turned to weeks, then days, and now only hours are left. I do not dare count them. Are there 1,000 hours? No, less, I don’t want to know. When the day comes I will go over to the KQED building, sit down, wait ten minutes, and then blow the back of my head off, a little fountain of blood.

I want to live, but I choose to die, in protest of Senator Hatch and his “I have heard what you do to some of your listeners.” When you said that to Imus did you think about what he did? Did you think about how what he did destroyed another man’s life? Did you care?

It was one thing to be surrounded by my enemies here . . . but you are a Senator. If justice means nothing to you, the law, honor; if you think it a good joke . . . don’t you see that?

. . . But all that is in the past now.

I am dead. I protest Senator Hatch.

cc: Senate