https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/22/...

This is starting to get serious.>

Levels of concern:

Mild: Most US manufacturing moves to China

Concerning: China releases a pandemic and lies about it.

But my job situation there was intolerably awful, and I quit the company. Eventually I got a job all the way across the country, back East.

I am grateful to God now. At the time, I was angry about the job situation, but now I realize it was a blessing. I almost bought a condo in downtown Portland, which is now a liberal @#$% hole.

Click the links in Ann's article if you want to see the truth, what CNN won't tell you:

https://anncoulter.com/2020/07/22/d...

https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo

Isn't it the earlier the better?
It takes time for regulations/tax code/laws.

So best "freedom" would probably be right when the revolutionary war ended.

That said, is "free" really best?

Man had no oppression from government
in the days of the caveman, but what was your life expectancy?

So I would imagine right at the end of WW2 was the actual best time to live. A good mix of freedom, but still having "modern" medicine/technology.>

Post WW2 America does seem pretty ideal judging from what my grandparents told me and my great grandparents when they were alive, as well as all the movies I've seen. The culture was certainly more wholesome and the crime was much lower. Overall, the country was filled with a different and better kind of people.

In the late 60s, my uncle could take his shot gun to school and keep it in the truck. He belonged to some outdoors-man kind of after school group. The shop teacher would walk out to the parking lot and check out his guns.

Nowadays you can't do that. We have lost freedom and that kind of freedom is a bad one to lose.

Could we go back to some time in the 1800s where the average American was really free? He could do all kinds of things without needing permits and just live like a free man?

Maybe it was freer in the 1800s but lawless too like on the frontier which was very dangerous.

Let's take a year like, say, 1834 and time travel a person from then to 2020. Aside from the culture shock of seeing cars, planes, tv, electricity and all else, would that man be shocked at a loss of liberty?

What if we took a guy from 1810?

How about 1875?

1918?

Would men from any of those years be shocked at the loss of liberty?

I purposely tried to skip the 1800 thru reconstruction era. Even though Democrats started in about 1826. I wouldn't want to be living thru slavery/civil war/reconstruction. Democrats were as disgusting as they are today. The only difference? Unlike Hillary, a Mary Surratt would actually see justice for breaking the law.

<In the late 60s, my uncle could take his shot gun to school and keep it in the truck. He belonged to some outdoors-man kind of after school group. The shop teacher would walk out to the parking lot and check out his guns.

Nowadays you can't do that. We have lost freedom and that kind of freedom is a bad one to lose. >

Of course, a Blue state problem.
It's funny, some of the folks I know with the largest gun arsenals left blue states for red states. (and not necessarily for that reason) It's almost like freedom starts to flourish once you actually have it.

<Maybe it was freer in the 1800s but lawless too like on the frontier which was very dangerous>

My sister-in-law's family has a farm house in Pennsylvania. Every time we went up there, I felt like we were going to wind up like the Clutter family in, "In Cold Blood."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVR...

A lot of people in the Southern states were pretty irate about the Tariff of Abominations (1828). They didn't feel free under that Yankee oppression.

“Lawless people are shooting up the towns. That’s not the fault of the police“:>

<Lawless people are shooting up the towns. That isn’t the fault of the police. Lawless people are assaulting innocents in public places and on public transportation. That isn’t the fault of the police. Boys as young as 12, maybe younger, have guns and are using them to commit robberies. That is not the fault of the police. Gangs of youth are systematically pulling off car hijackings all over both cities. That is not the fault of the police.

Young criminals with no moral or ethical clarity are ruining Minneapolis, not the police department. The police department needs reform and that will get accomplished, but the police cannot be scapegoated to hide the real problem, miserable heartless behavior.

That is never addressed by elected officials. Never. Not once has a mayor or city council member wagged a finger at a kid arrested for a gun crime and demanded of that young person an accounting of his behavior. No, the gun gets blamed, or the police get blamed, or the young person is called a victim of racism and on and on and on.

I just noticed virtually our entire conversation on Rogoff has disappeared!?

I don't think anything we said breached any of the guidelines, do you?

It seems Nozzle's crying has achieved his desired result.

It's a little disappointing for the Rogoff page, so perhaps we can continue our discussions here from now on?

Just keep Nozzle on "ignore" so we don't have to deal with him over here.>

We are fine to continue it here. I won't be moderating the page much though, as I have little time for it. Feel free to post away.

Related to our discussion on the old rogoff page.

<Spies in Academic Clothing: The Untold History of MKULTRA and the Counterculture – And How the Intelligence Community Misleads the 99%>

https://logosmedia.com/SpiesinAcade... >

I replied to you in the old Rogoff forum:

Kenneth S Rogoff (kibitz #440278)

Past is prologue

For years, a certain <LIFE Master> was the biggest problem on the site, annoying many with his personal attacks and abrasive style. His infamy included being one of The Seven banned for a week in February 2012, along with a "bad business" complaint against this operation for their Moderating policies, then he continued to visit here anyway. After he left, a certain career criminal became the biggest problem on the site, annoying many with his personal attacks and abrasive style. plus cyberstalking and social media mischief. He was also one of The Seven (<Nemesistic>), and his infamy included calling the late Webmaster "liar" and "coward" over and over and over again from April 2016 to August 2016, then he drove away <Nigel Shot> in November 2017. He used his chessfurum as open season to break the rules (<DR TONY PALMER WEIGHS 300lbs> along with his friends, despite being disciplined many times and changing usernames many times. When the Webmaster died, he formed a coalition to drive away six posters, with mixed results. After he left, the worst repeat offender ever is now the biggest problem, breaking the rules thousands of times - yes I said thousands - over thirteen years, in his quest to find enemies and cause controversy. Like the first two, violating the Posting Guidelines is never his fault, as *someone* provoked him into acting out. Unlike the first two, he has zero chess ability or interest, preferring to tell us how intellectual and enlightened he is. All three remind me of children so desperate to make friends that they go about it in exactly the wrong way. Many have wondered why the site shows such incredible patience and tolerance toward individuals who keep hurting their business model, and maybe there is no answer to that question.

I propose a two week moratorium where the cool kids make no mention of him, not even his handle, on the Kenneth Rogoff page. Let him fade back into the anonymity he so richly deserves, and avoid the temptation to answer his threats and challenges. His friends can deal with his damage for now, until they learn the hard way.

Rogoff has not been a Left-Right debate page for some time. Instead it represents the Far Left with their TDS and progressive agenda telling everyone else how to live through cheap shot target practice. At least these radical liberals aren't toppling statues or vandalizing property when they post here.

300lb?? C'mon.

My interaction with AJ was limited. I found him okay although somewhat touchy.

Mark was troubled. I think you saw the worst of him. He was the type of guy who would be great mates with you one minute and your worst enemy the next. Definitely someone to avoid. I think my imaginary post about him attending the late webmaster's funeral gave a bit of an insight into his personality.

I think the third individual in your analysis is by far the worst.

I was not aware he has been here for thirteen years and did not know he has operated under previous usernames.

I made the mistake of trying to help him. He was babbling on about pantheism, utterly confused and muddled, so I explained the concept of panentheism to him. He seemed appreciative but when I finally realised he was just a blowhard and wouldn't play his silly games, his derangement became manifest.

His essential problem, like that of the other two, is that he is obsessive and has no life outside of chessgames. In this regard, chessgames must bear some responsiblity for all three of these troubled individuals.

It seems in all three cases, chessgames enabled their behaviour by continually indulging them, thereby reinforcing their bad conduct.

The third and current offender is now completely out of control. He has taken over the Rogoff forum, a place I will no longer frequent, and is carrying on like a crazy man.

It's just so sad. I genuinely feel sorry for him, but instead of chessgames restraining his activity on this site for his own good, they seem to be encouraging it.

As you pointed out, he seems to have no interest in chess whatsoever, only coming here to post incomprehensible pigeon-English gibberish on the Rogoff page and stir up as much trouble and animosity as possible.

A few points:

1) There is a 1 hour video of Jordan and his
daughter discussing this.

2) I don't know anything about the guy in this video. He could be wrong/biased/or even dislike Peterson. My guess: He's in the mental health field defending his profession.

3) I posted this video simply because he gives a much quicker summary of the events.

Jordan Peterson / Mikhaila Interview Analysis

Rogoff has not been a Left-Right debate page for some time. Instead it represents the Far Left with their TDS and progressive agenda telling everyone else how to live through cheap shot target practice. At least these radical liberals aren't toppling statues or vandalizing property when they post here.>

The left never can debate, they support lies, criminals, failure. If you notice, the biggest "debates" BP has had relate to God. (Libs must feel safe, when you can't grab God by the hand, and bring him into the courtroom as Exhibit A)

<optimal play: Excellent analysis Tony!

My interaction with AJ was limited. I found him okay although somewhat touchy.>

I had no problem with him.
Sure, I once tried to tell him something about chess and he wouldn't listen, but so what? I think the reason most libs didn't like him is he made references to God. He'd say things like "Bless my son" or "Bless my children."

As I understand it, his wife died of cancer, and he was raising his kids as a single parent.

Unlike most players here, he was showing his games from recent events, and displaying crosstables, so there was
no reason to doubt his chess abilities.