It can be done
Bookworm on Apr 19 2008 at 10:01 am | Filed under: Barack Obama
When have you known me not to pile on the Obama mash-up? He is a candidate I do not feel is deserving of the White House, and I will do everything in my power to weaken his candidacy. Having said that, I cannot insult Obama for being a lousy bowler. I especially will not join the chorus of people who believe that he intentionally looked incompetent.
I’ve bowled twice in my life. The first time, in high school, I scored a 29. Several years after that, being older and wiser, I achieved a 53. Since then, I’ve bowled several times on my Wii, and am happy to say that, when it comes to imaginary bowling, without the weight of that pesky ball, or the pinch of those nasty rental shoes, I do much, much better.
Email This Post To A Friend
7 Responses to “It can be done”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
The first time, in high school, I scored a 29. Several years after that, being older and wiser, I achieved a 53.
Was this an increase of skill from the previous time or was this an increase in wisdom gained through other activities?
I’ve noticed from replaying the Hand of Fate and Kyrandia that the logic and method of thinking I use is far superior to my earlier self. I doubt the natural intelligence has changed, just the amount of wisdom in figuring stuff out based upon other things in life not directly related to the problem at hand.
It was definitely an age and wisdom thing, Y. I had a better understand of cause (rolling the ball) and effect (actually hitting the pins), so was able to make smarter movements with my arms. Since it was only my second time, the movements were still ineffective, but still an improvement.
I think it is interesting that Obama is touted as the new change for America because of his youth and his energy. Conservatives, classical liberals, ancestor worshipers, and Jacksonians tend to value wisdom over a natural affinity for intelligence and brute force problem solving ability.
A person’s innate ability to solve problems or their thinking speed will never increase by any great amount, only decrease as they grow older. A child is far more adept at learning and making connections between new things than adults. And yet there is still an unqualified advantage to experience and age.
The Left seems to prefer the illusion that a child, just because it can look at things in a new light, means that all the age old wisdom that has been acquired beforehand about problems and human behavior suddenly now all goes out the window. The thinking outside the box quality of children and youths are no more a panacea to humanity’s woes than the old wisdom of the ancients.
Youthful recklessness tends to repeat the mistakes of their forefathers in a Darwinian attempt to find solutions to problems, regardless of the cost in lives or mistakes. This is compared to age old wisdom which prefers known solutions over progress or improvements. The age old wisdom oftentimes limits the ability to adapt to new situations with a high cost in the end. Just cause Soviet Russia accepted detente and deterrence, doesn’t mean the new enemies of today will. Acting as if the old will be new, is as disastrous as assuming the new will always replace the old.
Human corruption, human greed, human fallibility, and the Messiah complex have all been known in our history, Book. Yet the Democrats act as if Obama is something “new”. It is a prototypically gross distortion and abuse the hard earned wisdom of America’s founders and ancestors. What did they die for and fight for, if their descendants are so willingly to not only repeat the mistakes of the past but are also willing to reverse the gains made by older generations?
The difference between youthful enthusiasm and age old conservatism, is I believe, both ideological and genetic. Nature, in order to ensure species survival and maximum efficiency, used the newest generation of younglings as test subjects concerning new behavior, devices, tools, hunting methods, etc. Even if 90% of the new generation dies off, the 10% that survived and learned what worked through their youthful recklessness, would be worth it in the end for species survival in the long term.
The wisdom of the older generation, however, is naturally limiting. It is not a brute force method using random hysteria or impulses in order to find out, via the luck of the dice, what works or doesn’t. Wisdom is the ability to recognize reality and discover the inter-relationship between events in reality. Essentially, wisdom accomplishes much as philosophy seeks to do, in that it tries to explain the “why” of things. Not just the how, which intelligence can certainly accomplish, but the why. In order to do this, wisdom has to accept what has happened as a basic template and foundation. It cannot discard the past solely for a favored pet theory in the present. This allows people who are wise to be able to make decisions in new situations without having to resort to youthful recklessness and random chance. They have a working model of how and why things work, and they will keep on using it to help them create solutions to survival problems. If a working model is true and effective, then we say the authors of such models are wise. If it doesn’t work, we say they are foolish.
A person wise in the nature of human beings will also be wise in warfare, statecraft, intrigue, business, economy, and healthcare. They may not be “knowledgeable” but they will be far wiser in how they choose their decisions based upon a limited amount of information than their peers, who lack wisdom but tend to have a great amount of knowledge.
This is also, and not by coincidence, why university professors have much knowledge and are supposed to be “smart”, yet behave so retarded when it comes to being dupes to enemy propaganda.
A dog has a certain level of intelligence, but since human intelligence is at a higher state level than a dog’s, we can train dog’s and modify their behavior. The same is true for academics and useful idiots. They have intelligence and sentience, on par with average humanity, but there is an even higher level of sentience and intelligence. This meta-intelligence allows the possessors to train the lower orders of intelligence, just as man trains dogs.
Book says,
“When have you known me not to pile on the Obama mash-up? He is a candidate I do not feel is deserving of the White House, and I will do everything in my power to weaken his candidacy.”
I’ve long considered the Bill and Hillary show to be the most dangerous and corrupt show in politics.
Their unique brand of sell-out includes any USA government interest *and* also just about any foreign government interest as well, but most especially those involving conflicts of interest and economic adversaries. I’ve seen Obama as a *touch* more far-left than Hillary, and that must have taken some effort, believe me, for anyone to get to the left of the real Hillary! I thought Obama was likely to be just as incompetent and worthless as Jimmy Carter if he won the election, but that compared to endemic and widespread corruption, it was a risk I had to take to advocate voting against Evita Peron - I mean, Hillary Clinton. Nixon couldn’t hold a candle to these two.
I’d thought, a golden day will dawn when these two thoroughly malicious people, Bill and Hillary, and all the monstrous mafia they’ve assembled around them, are put out to pasture.
After this last debate I’m starting to wonder which of the two might be actually worse. The minutes spent on taxation, with Obama’s helpless muddling and thrashing about… was he trying to conceal what he really thought, or was he *that* clueless?
I wonder if Book’s continuous posts are beginning to take effect even on me?
Book, the correlation between bowling score and your unfitness to be an American leader is obvious.
You yourself say that you were an avid leftist. Probably even more so in college. Hence the crappy score.
You learned right, you leaned right, you began your (dare I say it) “escape from the belly of the beast” and presto. Almost double the score.
Now I would expect an easy 120 from you.
It probably also had something to do with the fact that Bookworm is left handed, unless I’m misremembering the whole group of neo-cons, like Neo Neo, that seem to be predominantly left handed.
You have a good memory, Y. I am left handed. I think, though, it was just youthful incompetence the first time. I like jlibson’s theory, too. I was a wussy leftie, and now I’m a macho rightie.