Characteristics of the "Woke"

"We are virtuous", the woke shout, "look at what we are claiming to be!" Such a verbal claim to virtue is not based on any action, except maybe to put a bumper sticker on their cars, or an icon on their social media profiles. This does nothing positive or practical. The only thing it does is signal to the others in the mob that they are safe, of like mind, that they can be trusted and included.

They care nothing about true virtue, only in being perceived as virtuous by all the other fools who make up any mob. Their self-respect is dependent upon how others see them. They are lemmings, who will blindly follow anyone who validates their timidity and abdication of personal moral responsibility. This is why they hate those who speak the truth about anything contrary to their ideology. It is one thing to damage someone's self-respect, but quite another to damage someone's pretense of self-respect. To so do invites mindless hatred. To do so invites the mob to sever your head and parade it around town on a pole. 

Understand what you are up against. Any individual who thinks in this manner (if you could call it thinking) has pronounced a verdict of damnation upon his life, and upon life in general. They profess to be concerned about the plight of the poor, but condemn the one system (capitalism) that can, and does,  lift the poor out of poverty, and into prosperity. They profess to be concerned about the oppression of women, yet marginalize them by claiming there is no meaningful distinction between men and women, and any man who feels he's a woman may compete against women in athletics. They claim to be champions of social justice, but advocate policies that only serve to make the poor worse off than before. They say they are against racism, but in the final analysis of their actions and attitudes, they are the racists and fascists amongst us. They are about the elevation of vice to virtue, the hatred of the good for being the good, and the total destruction of what happiness is possible to human beings on Earth.

Notice their relatively recent trend of shouting down mostly conservative speakers, or anyone who says something opposed to their woke ideology. They also claim to be about "free speech", but most definitely not if they disagree with it. I've seen the videos of this happening, and what strikes me the most is how offensive and deliberately obnoxious those hecklers are. How is it that anyone on Earth could be so arrogant, as to feel justified in negating someone's right to speak? It's a totalitarian mindset, for sure. Their hysteria and shrillness is evidence of an existential fear so profound that they are actually trying to drown out their own inner voices, which condemn them. Since their self respect is based on what others think of them, upon membership in the mob, and successfully signaling to the world how virtuous they are, they will hate anyone who shines a light on their mediocrity. In reality, however, it is themselves and life that they hate. Death is the standard of all that they value. 

Is Global Warming a Problem?

It's a problem, but not nearly as bad as many make it out to be. The ice caps are not going to melt enough to flood somewhere thousands of miles away from the poles, or even close by-at least, not anytime soon, as many people rich enough to buy seafront property are well aware of. Temperatures are rising slightly on average, but it's not going to be tomorrow when people start dying en masse of heat exposure. Or next year. There is ample time to address these issues. Drastic measures are not necessary. In some cases, it might actually be beneficial to do nothing at all, as warmer climate brings many benefits. Realizing this, I find the actions of people like Greta Thunberg amusing, and a bit ridiculous. She speaks of imminent apocalypse, as have many others over the years, but none has come, and none will come. Given time-and there is plenty of it-humanity will solve the problems arising from warmer temps without pulling the plug on industry and technology.

On Societal Breakdown, and Chaos

Not so long ago, I was homeless, but managed to recover with the help of a local homeless shelter. I now live in a suburban apartment, and work full-time.  Everything's good now, but I wonder what I would have done if there were no shelters available back when I needed one. In the town I live in, there are at least three different shelters. Other places I've lived had them; only very small towns do not. So, wondering what I would have done had there been none, is moot.  I still wonder-how would I have showered? Slept? Kept neat and presentable, in order to work? It would have been incredibly difficult, but not impossible. Labor pools, labor camps, temporary agencies and the like are all good places to get a day job quickly. At the cost of sleeping outside for a day or two in order to save money, I would be able to get a motel room. Eating at the soup kitchens, missions, and various food pantries is possible, but often, these places are open only at certain times, and so a conflict with work arises. But what if none of these places were available, as well? Food must be bought, the first rent and key deposit must be paid, and then food and subsequent rent eats up the entirety of my earnings. At least I'm sleeping inside, and keeping clean. Obviously, this is a dead-end, with no hope of improving my life, unless I can work two jobs at the same time. If I can do this, I will escape poverty. That is the answer. 

But what if there were no shelters, day labor agencies, and food pantries? What would I do if I lived in a  country were there was no safety net? Not only that, but what if I'm living right in the middle of a societal breakdown, with violence and mayhem commonplace? Would I turn to begging, or thievery? Would I kill someone for a piece of meat? Dr. Jordan Peterson once asked a group of students to imagine that they were guards at a Nazi concentration camp. Most people immediately take the moral high ground when confronted with this question-"of course I wouldn't work as a Nazi prison guard!"-but how do they know what they would do were they really in such a position, a position where they have to chose evil in order to survive? "I'd rather die, and my family along with me, than torture prisoners!" said very few people in Nazi Germany, confronted with this reality. 

Human Males Cannot Get Pregnant

These days we are seeing more and more examples of grotesque perversity, of in-your-face depravity waved in front of the world as if it were some form of  moral superiority.  One of these is the assertion that men can get pregnant. How is this so? Well, some people believe that if you are a woman, but feel or think like a man, then you are a man (and vice versa). Imagine a woman feels like a man on the inside. She believes she's a man trapped in a woman's body. If she gets pregnant, she can then claim that since she feels like a man, she is a man, and therefore, men can get pregnant. (although it is somewhat comical to imagine how this could be so: obviously, this woman felt like a woman enough to get pregnant).

 If you feel like a man, but possess female parts, then you are a man. Despite the vagina. This is an attack on reason, in an effort to elevate one's feelings as supreme, as the source of all knowledge. It is a word game designed to convince confused people to undergo "sexual reassignment surgery", at considerable cost to the  patient, and at great profit to the practitioners of this brazen quackery. 

This is clearly absurd. There is no real escape from the law of identity: you get to have your own opinions and feelings, but not your own facts. If you don't feel like paying your rent, and don't, then it's only a matter of time before your landlord evicts you. If you don't feel like eating, then eventually you will starve to death. If you were born a male, but do not feel like a male, you're still a male-and always will be.

Some Thoughts About Good and Evil Policies

 The first lie the devil tells you is that he doesn't exist...

It's was never about Donald Trump, per se, although his leadership skills and character, in my opinion, are clearly admirable. It's about his platform, not his personality. 

Prosperity for all, individual liberty, America first (policies that benefit all Americans), and a common sense approach to governing-this is Donald Trumps' platform, but not just his (there are certainly others, Democrats and Republicans, who share this platform). Again, it's not about the man. 

Common sense conservatives and liberals alike agree on what is needed to maintain a peaceful, prosperous Nation: absolute respect for the rule of law, absolute respect for the Constitution as it was written (which includes free speech, the right to bear arms, et al), and policies that protect our country and way of life. We do not worship Donald Trump, we worship the God of our understanding, or no one at all, if we so choose. The undeniable fact that Trump is an effective leader (for one, he surrounds himself with brilliant people) and stands for America and Americans first, gets him my vote.

I was homeless and under-employed for most of Barack Obama's 8 year term. After Trump was elected, I immediately found gainful employment and continue to benefit from the economic boom Trump's policies brought about. Hatred of Donald Trump-and America-is merely hatred of the good, for being the good. 

And with that, we arrive at what has happened before in our history. Evil has been given a seemingly good appearance, as if it were just another choice, equally as valid as any other that human beings make. If you consider the fact that capitalism has advanced human prosperity, longevity, and individual self-actualization more so than any other system, you would think that anyone who claims to be pro-human and pro-life would advocate it. Collectivists-those who are sometimes called communists, socialists, Marxists, progressives, etc.-claim exactly that, that they desire a perfect society where everyone can prosper and be happy. If this were true-and it is most definitely not true-the collectivists would not advocate systems that are directly responsible for literally hundreds of millions of deaths in the 20th century, when these systems were actually tried. Despite this incontrovertible evidence, they continue to condemn capitalism and promote collectivism. Love of mankind is not their motive. Hatred of mankind, evil for the sake of evil, hatred of the good for being the good, is their actual motive. They are anti-life, anti-mind, and sometimes I think they actually worship death.

They're teaching toddlers about sex practices. They're trying to normalize pedophilia. They pass laws that demand we respect people's "pronouns", whatever they claim those to be. They kill unborn children. They demand we pay attention to their hysteria and wear masks, stay inside and go out only when they say it's OK.  Demanding that we all go back to pre-industrial times in the name of saving "the planet". They openly smirk when displaying their evil. And now, watch how they are all reacting to Elon Musk's attempt to take over Twitter and remake it in the name of free speech-the cat's out of the bag. The attempt to unjustly destroy Elon Musk is already underway. 

I hope they fail to destroy Musk, and learn not to play with people's lives. I hope that those who have embraced evil will turn away and embrace light and life. 

Please, God, let this be so.

Christian Leadership

Therefore, although in Christ I could be bold and order you to do what you ought to do, yet I prefer to appeal to you on the basis of love. (Philemon 1:8-9).

An excellent attitude for anyone who manages/supervises the work of others. Have your people do what you want them to do, because they want to, because they respect and love you. This, instead of issuing blunt orders, or leading by imposing fear in your subordinates. So how does one lead on the basis of love? Answer: by having genuine love and respect for the others who work with you. It sounds simple, and it is, but what does such an attitude look like in practical terms? For one, you never tell people to do something that you wouldn't do yourself. You demonstrate a willingness to do the work with them, and to help them in whatever manner is necessary to accomplish a task, or to achieve a goal. When people can see that you are genuinely interested in them and their work, when they see that you are not all talk and virtue signaling, they will not only do their best in appreciation, but reward you with their loyalty. 

The Cancellation of History

Why?

In New Orleans, statues of prominent Confederate era men were taken down in the name of removing the association of those men with the city of New Orleans. Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis were the most visible statues, and these men were believed to be nothing more than evil racists who represented a shameful era of American history. This is nonsense. (The picture at right is the statue of Robert E. Lee that was taken down).

If these statues were morally wrong and offensive to be publicly displayed, why weren't they removed long ago? Perhaps because New Orleans was dominated by white racists, until the enlightened, woke, evolved and mostly Leftist politicians took over the city? New Orleans politics has been dominated by such Leftists for at least fifty years; Earnest Morial, the first black mayor of New Orleans, was elected back in 1978. It is also relevant to note that New Orleans has not had a Republican mayor since 1870. It is also relevant to note that Democrat/Progressive-run New Orleans has one of the highest crime and poverty rates in America. I mention this only to point out that perhaps the removal of old statues that may or may not offend someone is a misplaced priority, to say the least.

It seems unlikely that the statues-and various street names-were removed simply because a better class of New Orleanians took over the city. "Better" meaning those people who have developed a strong hatred for racism, slavery, the Confederacy, and everything associated with it. So why has all this statue removal and street renaming taken place just now? Why have New Orleanians voluntarily erased a major portion of their history, as if in so doing, that history can be forgotten? Again, people don't want so-called evildoers like Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis to be celebrated with statues in their city, to be thusly honored and remembered. Many people would agree; yes, let's stop celebrating racists and slaveholders. Unfortunately, this completely ignores the fact that Lee and Davis were human beings, who were nothing more than the product of their times. Also, both men were accomplished professionals who achieved far more than just owning slaves. Lee graduated from West Point, was a military engineer, was the president of Washington College, and served honorably in the Mexican war. Davis, also a graduate of West Point, served in the cabinet of President Franklin Pierce as Secretary of War, and had attitudes about slavery that were very much common in the south during those unenlightened times.  By the way, if you feel strongly about the fact that both men owned slaves, human beings of all races and colors have been slaves, and have enslaved others for millennia, and it is still going on today. Slavery is by no means an experience unique to dark skinned people from Africa, and while none of these facts make slavery right, let's keep this issue in perspective and stop with the hysterics! Erasing history will not prevent human beings from acting badly again, it will not make the plight of the victims of racism any better, and serves only to alienate those who believe history should be preserved, and respected as part of our common culture.  Also, it seems obvious that erasing history will only make it harder to learn how not to make the same mistakes made by our ancestors. 

So again, why is this cancellation of history-and not just in New Orleans-happening now? Why are people judging historical figures by today's standards? Do they really believe that all the cancelling will do any real, positive good? Could it be, at least in New Orleans, that the ruling class believe that this would help attract people to the city? "Come to New Orleans, because we are woke!" I am grasping at straws in an effort to answer this totally bewildering question. There is no logical reason for it all. 

Perfect Skepticism

Why do most conservatives claim that morality without God is dangerous? Short answer: because Man is prone to error, imperfect, and capable of corruption.  To answer at length, let's look at the broad field of morality and moral codes.

All moral codes are based on some standard, answering the question: if an action is good, bad, or merely neutral, then why is it so? Good, by what standard? Bad, by what standard? Neutral, by what standard? There are only two, possibly three answers: something can be good, because someone other than man (God) declared it to be so. Or, something can be good because Man declared it to be so. The philosopher Ayn Rand proposed a third definition, or so she claimed: what is good or evil is dependent upon how an action affects human beings. What harms an individual is evil. What benefits him, is good. Ayn Rand's ideological dependence on the reliability of human rationality aside, in other words, what is good or bad is determined from the declarations of God, or from the feelings, laws, customs, etc., of humans. In other words, what actions are good or bad is determined either objectively, or subjectively, from the perspective of humans, who act. 

To claim an action is good merely because I said so, based solely on my feelings, is to claim that my words (and the feelings underneath those words) are sufficient to define what is good. If I were God, then this would be justified, but since neither I nor any individual is anything but human, such a claim is preposterous. No man created the world. No man is God. Even so, if all I do is simply live my life and act according to what I feel is good, that is one thing, perhaps a good thing, perhaps not. On the other hand, if I-or any other human- require by force others to act solely according to what I feel is good, that is to arrogate my identity as God. In other words, when morality comes from Man, it is subject to human imperfection and corruption. When morality comes from God, then and only then does it have any chance of being true, correct, and perfect. Notice the assumptions here: that humans normally wish to lead happy, flourishing lives, and the purpose of ethics is to answer the question how to live such a life. The answer is what we call a moral code, or in general, morality. 

Conservatives in general tend to think that human beings can be perfected only in a relation to God; liberals tend to think that we can be perfected by evolving into perfection. When you start talking about the specifics, however, the sparks fly. When you postulate the imperfections of Man, basing a moral code on Man's conscience, laws, culture,  on anything other than God, you are inviting the Holocaust. With Man, there is the possibility of injustice. With God, there is the inevitability of  justice. So the atheists can have their faith in human rationality and reason: I will have my faith in God. Just as America is a nation of laws and not men, morality is based on God, not men. 

It Is

 A brief pondering on the idea of  intelligent design

I looked up at the sky, and I saw a pinprick of light that was at least 700 years old. To put it in perspective, the photons of the light I was seeing started their journey at about the time Columbus was trying to convince the Queen of Spain to finance his expedition. This was before the English set up colonies in the New World, when Europe was undergoing a Renaissance, and Africa was but a dark mystery to the West. And so the farther out from Earth one sees, the older what one sees. There are galaxies that are so far away that the light that strikes our eyes is older than the Earth itself. It's strange the way we rattle such figures off, as if they were just another set of figures. "The Andromeda galaxy is about 2 and half million light years away". Wow, just like Siberia is on the other side of the world, right? The thing is, light travels at 186,000 miles per second, making this number so incomprehensibly vast as to be almost unintelligible.

There is in these insanely vast numbers a clue to something humans have contemplated for a long time. How did all this come to be? Somehow, the idea that the universe has always existed, a Totality with no origin and no end, seems mad. Our minds try to impose a background grid upon which to operate and focus; we postulate a beginning to the Universe, because if we did not, we'd be overwhelmed by the infinitude of it all. We impose order upon chaos, like God, who created us in his image.

Look now in the other direction. The "smaller" we focus, the more we find, including things which seem to contradict the various laws of physics. It turns out that atoms are not the smallest things in the universe, and there are living things that can be seen only under a powerful microscope. The process of protein formation is done in a manner similar to a machine process. T\here is no way for this process to have been randomly evolved, as it involves complex sequencing of genes. 

The more we look in both directions, the more we see tantalizing clues, outright evidence that someone or something created this space we live in. Evolution becomes more and more absurd as we understand the astonishing mechanisms of life, at least as a theory explaining the origin of life and it's infinite diversity. Darwin was partially right; organisms evolve structures and characteristics that increase their chances of survival into the future. To claim that a single cell, microscopic organism evolved into something as complex as an animal with it's many specialized organs is like saying that a billion monkeys hammering mindlessly away at a typewriter will eventually produce Shakespeare's Hamlet. Or the constitution of the United States.

As it turns out, the Earth is located in a very narrow space where temperatures and the resulting climate are suitable to sustain complex life forms. The presence of the moon, the atmosphere, the tilting of the north-south axis, the Earth's magnetic field, and the Earth's rotation all are in a perfect balance to create a cradle for the existence, and thriving, of complex life forms. All of the proportions are in perfect balance, and even the smallest deviation from them would make life impossible. 

Finally, I will refer you to a piece of scripture written over two thousand years ago, when it was apparent to people that someone or something built all this:

(Romans 1:18-20, NIV)...The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

The creator whom we sometimes call God exists. We see clues to existence all around us. 

The Only Thing We Have to Fear

is God....

 I’ve heard it said that the Russians (which Russians?) are nervous about having a NATO ally so close to it’s southern border. But…why? the member nations of NATO stand for democracy and non-aggression. What exactly does “Russia” have to fear from NATO, and the Ukrainians? Most every day Russians have more to fear from their own government than they do having NATO-allied Ukraine at it’s southern border.

Here in America, most people are busy working for a living, protecting their families and loved ones, pursuing personal interests and hobbies, etc., etc. The same goes for the Ukrainians, at least before Russian dictator Vladimir Putin decided to invade their country. A small group of people in Russia are willing to kill innocent people who don’t agree with their ideology. They have taken over Russian culture and society, and have the Russian people under their yoke. Now they propose to do the same to the Ukrainians. This is why I say the war mongers in Russia, and their supporters abroad, are criminals. Criminals who believe that they will get away with their crimes and their evil. This is the demon we humans let loose on Earth when we created governments long, long ago. The need for government unleashes psychopaths like Putin, like Hitler, Pol Pot, Che Guevara, Stalin, and any number of other tyrants who leap at the opportunity to kill and destroy with impunity and pseudo-moral justification.

So how will these criminals ever come to justice? They control nuclear weapons, capable of ending all life on Earth many times over. Do we slap economic sanctions on them, hoping to provoke the oppressed citizenry to rise up against their masters? How is this just? Ordinary citizens, desiring from others only to be left alone, will suffer from these sanctions. Many will starve, their lives destroyed by poverty. In such a condition, how will they fight against an armed government?

Meanwhile, here in this country, there are people debating how many genders we have; there are people so consumed by self-righteous hatred for Donald Trump and his supporters that they are willing to destroy everything Trump accomplished, out of spite. Here in America, people allow themselves to be obsessed with a person’s skin color, sexual identity and gender, when none of these things even matter to the actual worth of a human being. Loud, obnoxious people become shrill and scream “theocracy” or “white supremacy” when any attempt to defend Judeo-Christian ethics are made. You know, those pesky, oppressive life affirming and life sustaining ethics that Christians and Jews have been tyrannically imposing on the world, who only want the right to be self-loving narcissists, baby killers, and promiscuous fornicators.

The world is broken. Evil is abroad and at home, on the march, unchecked and unopposed in any meaningful way. The horrors we are seeing in Europe right now will soon come to our homes, our towns, our families and friends. The demons of war are loose, and they’re coming for all of us. Why did this happen? Because America basically gave up on it's position of leadership in the world, wracked by hand wringing self loathing. 

Fake News: Let Them Eat Cake

John Russell Turner, Sept. 21, 2019

Marie Antoinette was beheaded. Afterwards, one of the leftists attending the decapitation ceremony took her head and put it on a pole. Other leftists saw this, and a malicious, gleeful parade was formed on the streets of Paris. This, from people whose motto was "liberty, equality, and brotherhood".

So what was Marie Antoinette guilty of, to deserve such vicious cruelty? Murder? Factual treason? Child molester? None of these. She was guilty of no crime, no felony, nor misdemeanor, according to the legal codes. She was a victim of the fake news of her time-her entire family denounced as moral perverts (and criminally insane)by the propagandists, who thought they had everything to gain by the elimination of the French monarchy. Soon heads were snapping off French necks at such an alarming rate that some historians believe an infected wheat harvest (LSD producing fungus) caused the mass hysteria which was the French Revolution.

This is why the fake news media in America, and the rest of the world, is so dangerous. The mob that paraded Marie Antoinette's severed head through the streets believed every word from the propagandists/intellectuals of the time. They did the same thing then as the various news outlets do today: they appeal to humanity's darker emotions. They are literally attempting to make way for the mobs, so they may rule in the ruins.

Reflections From an Alleged Boomer

by John Russell Turner, July 3, 2019

Most of the sources I checked define the "Boomers" (short for "baby boomers") as anyone born in America between the years 1944-1964. That would make me a boomer.

Here is an excellent source of information on the subject of generational names.

As a matter of fact, most, if not all of the kids I grew up with would have told you that the baby boom generation was our parents, not us. My maternal grandfather came home from WW2 and almost immediately sired my mother, Karin, who was born in 1945. As for my paternal grandmother, Gertrude, she came from a line of Polish and European immigrants, along with my paternal grandfather, who was a skilled tradesman from a long Irish-European ancestry. They had my father Lawrence in 1943.

Noa Pothoven is Gone

by Sam Tobin, June 12, 2019

I read a Tweet the other day, from a prominent pro-life activist I greatly admire. The Tweet mentioned a Dutch girl who had been euthanized in The Netherlands. Here is Matt Valliere, from Fox News on this seemingly tragic story from Europe. To be fair, here is the New York Intelligencer's report, as well. It is interesting how divided this story has become, but as a week or so has passed, it is clear that Noa died from starvation...and no one at her family home, nor any doctors that knew Noa's history and what was going on, tried to stop it.

Abortion: The Real Issue

I can do what I want, because I am God

by John Russell Turner, June 4, 2019

Abortion is not the real issue (although a deadly serious one). I'll get to that later. But first, a definition recap:

There are essentially two basic questions in the abortion debate, and one basic premise:

Question One, "when does human life begin?" can be easily answered. It begins at the moment of conception, that is, at the moment when the sperm fertilizes the egg and cell division begins.

Question Two: "when do human rights begin?" can be easily answered, as well. Human rights begin at the moment a human being is conceived, again, at conception. Why? Because we are human. What are human rights? The right to live, which in this context means the right not to be killed, to continue on with his or her development until natural death occurs. Some would argue for other rights, but for the purposes of this argument, let's stick to the most fundamental of rights, the right to live, because without this right, no other rights can exist.

Basic premise: it is morally wrong to kill other people for any reason other than self-defense.

The Worst Betrayal of All

by John Russell Turner, May 27, 2019


The prevailing "argument" these days of pro-abortion people is to point to some other problem (usually children who are in orphanages, or going hungry), and then say something like "100,000 homeless babies, and you're worried about an embryo", etc., etc. Of course these are two very different issues: one is the problem of childhood poverty; the other, of killing defenseless unborn babies. I choose the abortion issue to worry about, because it is heinously cruel, and brutally evil to kill a defenseless unborn human being. I'll let others fight to help homeless and hungry born children, for I am only one person, as we all are, and I can't right all the wrongs in the world. I must, out of necessity, choose my battles. To say "how can you fight so passionately for the rights of the unborn when so many born children are suffering?" is in essence claiming that the unborn are not human-but they most certainly are! Science, reason, logic-and our consciences-says that human life begins at conception. Therefore, unborn babies have the right to live, and we all have the moral obligation not to kill them. They need someone to defend them.

You Owe Me, Brother

Pay Attention, and Get Busy

by John Russell Turner, May 22, 2019

OK, pal, I'm here to educate you on some basic realities. Listen up:

There is no objective reality; everything is subjective. Mankind is influenced solely by the culture he grew up in, the groups he belongs to, and ultimately, by the contents of his stomach.

I am convinced of the superiority of my moral views, because my professors at college told me so.

We'll Kill You if You Disagree

Power for the sake of power

by John Russell Turner, May 21, 2019

In this post, I am making no attempt to try to convince Leftists to change their minds about their beliefs. For many of them, their minds are made up. This post is like preaching to the choir, but in stark, explicit terms, so everyone understands what's really involved here. It's the battle between good and evil, and believe me, evil people are expert at posing as good. So let me define my terms. 1. SECULAR: Evil=the refusal to think. Good=the acceptance of thinking as a necessity. 2. RELIGIOUS: Evil=all that which is against the will of the Judeo-Christian God; 2. Good=all that which is in accordance with the will of the Judeo-Christian God.

The useful idiot Leftists have a plan that will benefit all of humanity, insure equality, and advance the evolution of humanity to new and better levels. Because Leftists proclaim to care about the plight of the poor, the oppressed, and the down-trodden, they believe their morals and characters are beyond question, debate, and reproach. And if you happen to disagree with any of their beliefs, they'll kill you, or silence you. If you point out that their Che Guevara T-shirts glorify a man who was a well documented killer of hundreds of innocent people, they will turn shrill in their denunciations of your own character and moral stature. If you point out that their ideology has led to literally millions of human corpses, they will attack you in whatever way they can hurt you-and silence you-the most. They are so sure of the moral superiority of their beliefs that they will listen to no debate, dismiss all disagreement, and proceed to destroy you in any way they can. They are like children who cover their ears and scream "la la la la" over and over to drown out their parents telling them "no". The video below is an excellent example of this mindset:

Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers

Best Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers videos

Goodbye to the Big Bang Theory

Just received news from my Facebook feed that after twelve seasons (a record), The Big Bang Theory was airing it's final episode.

What a great show, filled with laughs, good times, and great story lines. From the very beginning, I was hooked by the concept of the series: the trials and tribulations of the super bright and nerdy. Then there was the surprising array of celebrity guest appearances: Sara Gilbert, from Roseanne ; Summer Glau,the actress who played the Terminator Cameron on The Sarah Connor Chronicles; Laurie Metcalf, also from Roseanne; Charlie Sheen, from Two and a Half Men, Courtney Henggeller from Happy Endings; George Takei, from the original Star Trek; comic mogul Stan Lee;  Deadwood  actor Keith Carradine; Carrie Fisher, James Earl Jones from Star Wars, et al. 

10 Evil, Irrational, and Narcissistic Pro-Abortion Quotes

by John Russell Turner, May 16, 2019

TODAY I'M GOING TO GO OVER THE FAVORITE DEFENSES, RATIONALIZATIONS AND QUOTES of the pro-abortion crowd.  Let's get right into it.

1. It's my body, I can do with it as I please/Keep your politics off my uterus, etc.

Yes, princess, it's your body, but inside your body is another human being. Yes, the baby is dependent upon you, but also separate and distinct from you. Since your unborn baby is defenseless, your killing him or her is a particularly heinous, despicable evil made even worse by this lame rationalization.

There Is No Easy Answer

Reflection on the Illegal Immigration Issue


by John Russell Turner, May 11, 2019

Imagine if you will, a story about Ramon, Nora, and their child, Felipe. This family lived in Honduras, a country troubled by violence, poverty, and political corruption. Both Ramon and Nora lost their jobs because of lay offs in the manufacturing plant where they worked. Unemployed, neither one of them could find new jobs because the economy in Tegucigalpa (the capital city of Honduras) is bad. Soon their savings account was depleted, and the family was evicted from their apartment in the city. Desperate, they decided to flee their country and head to the United States, where they heard there is plenty of work. Some people in the city were organizing a caravan of other people who want to work; some for basic survival, others to keep their families together. They joined this caravan, and in due course, arrived at the US border. This is a typical story behind many of the people seen here in El Paso/Juarez, and at Laredo, Nogales, Tijuana, et al. They have no desire to hurt anyone; they only want to work and be with their beloved families. Such is not possible in their native countries, and this saddens them, for who likes to leave the land of their birth, their culture, and their ancestors?

Really Great Classical/Symphonic Music

My Favorite Classical/Symphonic Music Videos

Abortion? That's a Good Thing!

by John Russell Turner
May 9, 2019

Some women and girls who consider abortion do so because they are faced with extreme difficulties, should they carry their unborn babies to term. This does not justify aborting the unborn baby, because that would be murder. There are alternatives, however, and that's been briefly covered in another post in this blog. Today I am addressing another motive people have in choosing and or supporting abortion.

"We're proud to kill unborn babies!"

Some of you may have read the news story about Planned Parenthood supporters crashing a Students for Life event at The University of Texas in San Antonio. For those of you who haven't, very few mainstream news outlets carried the story, but here it is in a nutshell.  Also, here's the story from Breitbart.

Encore: Wolf Alice - Lisbon

Alright, just a few words on this one: the amazing contrast between the lyrics, and the subject of the video. This one is my personal favorite, a song so beautiful, so evocative of positive emotions...but at that same time, profoundly disturbing:



Feel like running, feel like crack
Feel like going out and smashing windows...I'm smashing windows.

And in a black, black hole deeper than death,
I would wait for you there just give me the breath to say it
Back together...

Click here for a great live performance of "Lisbon"

Click here for more info on Wolf Alice, in their own words

Dr. Jordan Peterson

Peterson interviewed by Cathy Newman

The Antidote to Chaos, and Psychobabble

by John Russell Turner

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson is a clinical psychologist, Professor of Psychology at the University of Toronto, author, lecturer, father and husband who has caused, and continues to cause, quite a stir on the Internet. His YouTube channel has over two million subscribers, and most of his videos have been viewed millions of times per day. He has written three books. His most popular book, 12 Rules For Life: An Antidote to Chaos has sold well over three million copies, but I haven't been able to get a more accurate number from my web research. Most of the figures I did find were around three million, and that seems plausible. Dr. Peterson has toured the world promoting this book, and there are numerous critiques of it available on-line.

I first heard about Dr. Peterson three years ago, when he was embroiled in controversy over his opposition to Canadian Bill C-16, which requires Canadians to use the "preferred pronouns" of transgendered (and other) individuals, or face legally imposed sanctions. This caused a firestorm of controversy, although Peterson's opposition was based solely on the fact that Bill C-16 was and is compelled speech, and as such, antithetical to the concept of free speech. In other words, if you refuse to use the pronouns people want you to use when referring to them, you could wind up in jail. Although jail time was not mentioned in the Bill, but fines were, what would happen if you refused to pay such fines? You'd go to jail.

Dr. Peterson reacting to protester

This infamous "Bill C-16 Incident" was how most people first heard of Dr. Peterson, and he was the subject of a whole hell of a lot of Google searches, and that is how people came to discover the fact that he had, long before the controversy over Bill C-16, posted hundreds of videos on-line about a variety of subjects: the psychology of totalitarianism/collectivism, his fascinating university lectures, the psychology, types, and origins of personality, the psychology of religion/spirituality, rational (common sensical) self-improvement, free speech, male/female relationships and male/female differences. Also, a book titled Maps of Meaning, The Architecture of Belief, which was, in effect, a rational attempt to explain human psychology in terms of ancient archetypes and myths. Suddenly, Dr. Peterson had a large number of people who were intensely interested in his ideas, and many people credit him for helping to vastly improve their lives. In fact, Dr. Peterson's work has been called the "gateway drug to Christianity' by many who were once agnostics or atheists.  I was not an atheist when I first encountered Dr. Peterson on the web, but his work did encourage me to quit being on the fence about it. Millions of people love this man for his incredible passion and intellectual honesty in covering the topics I listed above. The thing that really got me hooked was the point he made about evil living inside of all of us, so to speak, about everyone's ability to do heinous evil, and the peril one faces when this is ignored or not confronted. He asks his students and listeners: what would you have done if you lived  in Germany during the aftermath of World War I? If you were supporting a beloved family, but the only work you could find was working for the Nazis, would you? This thought gave me pause, and got me thinking about true humility and what it entails. As for the majority of his other

admirers, the free speech issues raised with Canadian Bill c-16 was the hook.

As you would expect, Dr. Peterson has many detractors on the Left, and the interesting thing about that is Peterson has become a mirror upon which you can clearly see the vile projections these Leftists unknowingly place on him. In other words, his ideas brilliantly illuminate the evil, twisted rationalizations of most Leftists, especially the post-Modernists. Dr. Peterson's work is sometimes shocking, even astounding, for he reveals the psychological nudity of Leftists who are so wrapped up in The Lie (malignant narcissism) that they cannot see it for themselves. Do you want to change the world? Make sure yours is in order first, the good Doctor advises. Clean your room. Pet a cat or dog whenever you encounter one. Always tell the truth, or at least, don't lie. Sound, solid advice. It's about time! His scathing excoriation of feminists who promote ideas such as rape culture and toxic masculinity is almost embarrassing to witness-many men have claimed that Peterson opened their eyes to the idea that it's OK to be male. Actually, Dr. Peterson's message is that it's OK to be a human being, and that's a message a lot of people need these days.

Watch this interview with Cathy Newman from England's Channel 4, and you will get an excellent overview of the Peterson phenomenon, along with the pathetic nature of his critics. This video was at one time the most viewed video on YouTube.

Featured Video: Wolf Alice, "Giant Peach"

Wolf Alice is a four piece band from London, England, fronted by mercurial lead singer/guitarist Ellie Rowsell. "Giant Peach" shows the band's expertise in musicianship, a classic jam-song sure to impress fans of any genre. For more info on the band, here is their official website.

To watch the video, which is the absolute best of the live performance videos out there, click here: Wolf Alice-Giant Peach

To watch the band's official video, click here: Wolf Alice/Vevo

New/Beginner Chess Videos

I've made a playlist of some of the better chess videos on the Web. If you are new or just beginning to play the game, these will help.

How to Play Chess, for New/Beginners

Lia Mills, Pro-Life Feminist

Lia Mills won over a lot of people when she made a speech defending the unborn-when she was 12 years old. Since then, she's continued her activism for the unborn, and has extended her interests to other issues concerning human life and the quality of human life. Intelligent, articulate, and well educated, Lia is worth listening to if you are interested in these subjects, from whatever side you are on.

Pro-Life Lia Mills YouTube Channel

Lia Mills web site

Abortion is Not Your Only Option

Yes, there are safe, sound alternatives to abortion if you find yourself with a troublesome pregnancy. Click on the link below for more information. These people will not shame you, judge you, criticize you, nor violate your confidentiality.

National Right to Life

Global Chess Festival Web Site

The link below will take you to the Global Chess Festival website. Chess grandmaster and legend Judit Polgár sponsors this event.

Global Chess Festival

Eric Burdon and The Animals - When I Was Young

For Erich Ferger

Hello, Erich, I am writing this to you in the hopes that one day you'll come across it, and read it. A shout-out across cyberspace, if you will.

First of all, I feel proud of you, a precise feeling that simply means I am pleased to know you are doing well, and have some awesome accomplishments to your credit. Two beautiful sons, a beautiful wife, a career in the Air Force-I heard that you just recently became a tech sergeant. Congratulations! Good job! Oh, and I also heard that you are teaching children how to play chess-nice! Chess is an excellent game to teach children, for it contains a lot of practical lessons for living life in the real world.

I wish you and your family the best, and I hope you continue to succeed and prosper. Maybe we can play a game of chess. You can find me on chess.com as "jrturner" and/or "johnrussellturner". I've learned how to play a much better game since last we played, and I bet we can have a good game or two. Wow, that would be great!

This is a recent picture of me; I took it last week while doing some on-line research (aka "YouTubing") at the local library here in Tucson. Right now, I'm about to go to chess.com and see if I can get my rating above 1500-I play blitz chess only. 10 minute games are the most fun, but sometimes I enjoy a five minute blitz.

Well, so long, dude. I'll always have a place in my heart for you. No matter what. I think of you from time to time, and I wonder what you are like, what you are into these days. I imagine you're quite busy raising your family! Don't ever be discouraged or doubtful that you are on the right path. God bless you, Erich Ferger, and keep you well!

Social Justice: A Null Term

Here is the Google dictionary's definition of social justice:

Justice in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society. "Distribution of wealth" is a phrase that has no part in any serious discussion of justice. Distribution of wealth is up to those who produce it. Then there's this, a typical bromide heard in social justice circles:

"Individuality gives way to the struggle for social justice"

"Individuality gives way to the struggle for social justice?". Excuse me, comrade? Then who acts? Whose struggle? Whose justice? Why should individuality give way?

Communists do not like to be specific when engaging in rhetoric or polemics. They prefer to intimidate you into becoming a true believer. That is the case with the null term "social justice", null, because it means nothing specific, relative to justice (in fact, it has nothing to do with justice at all). It carries a certain amount of clout, however. Everyone on the Left gives it lip service; it seems to be a noble goal, and besides, to argue against it would be like arguing against world peace, or puppies and kittens. There are problems here with specificity: who belongs to society? Answer: no one individual, and everyone in general (except yourself). If social justice pertained to individuals, then we all could lay a claim, based on justice, to a mansion in Bel Air. Or perhaps we could just lie around all day, smoking weed, and demand a house, electricity, food, clothing, and free Internet-in the name of "social" justice. What is just, who decides, and who passes out the goodies? And again, who is society? Everyone, except individuals? No, the collectivist answer is: the sum total of all the useful idiots, brainwashed automatons, and imprisoned captives who all believe, or pretend to believe, in the State as the benefactor of mankind.

On Inclusion and Social Justice

Inclusion? Social justice? What do these Leftist values mean, actually? Can I get a definition, please? I'm just wondering what a Leftist would say if I asked him for a definition.

Inclusion is, as far as I can tell,  the principle that no one, regardless of race, creed, color, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, or for whatever reason, should be excluded from... what? government programs? private businesses? an individual's free choice of association? I would imagine a Leftist would say "no one should be excluded from educational, economic, or social opportunities, because of who they are." Excluded, by whom? Everyone, but the elites? (there goes freedom of personal choice). And when a Leftist claims he wants to be inclusive, does that include Christians, who believe that Muslim radicals should definitely be excluded from civil society? Christians, who believe that homosexuals should be excluded from the institution of marriage? Conservatives, who believe tyranny should be excluded from the government? Or how about someone who simply disagrees with the Leftist agenda?

No, when it comes to disagreement with them, Leftists are amongst the most exclusive people in the world. Especially if you're a Christian. And tell me something, just exactly when did "inclusivity" become such a sacred principle? Also tell me, if someone doesn't want person type x into his business, the principle of inclusivity says he doesn't have that right, even if he is the owner of that business?

"Social justice" is another amorphous, vague, and  ultimately meaningless principal. Ask any liberal what it means, and you'll get a mishmash of Leftist bromides for an answer. Near as I can tell, it refers to the principal that no one should want for the basic necessities of life (as defined by lefties), which means: lefties want to take your shit and give it to a poor person. If no one should want for life's basic necessities, who then will give it to them, if they are needing it? What if some people would rather keep their shit for themselves? It's the Gulag for those selfish bastards, comrade. Or the firing squad.

Social justice destroys property rights; inclusion destroys property rights. To Hell with that, and with the lunatics who believe their fucking concern for the poor makes them morally superior, and entitles them to forcibly take the property of one man, and give it to another. Or to force their values on others.

Self-Honesty and Emotions

The most important thing in my inner life is not my feelings, but self-honesty. Many times I've acted as if my feelings were more important than my values, and suffered for it. All that's OK now, for I have learned to question every feeling I have, and to check the premises of the thoughts those feelings are based on. Self-honesty! Thoughts are at the basis of all emotions, and it is very beneficial ( although not always easy) to take a good, self-honest look at why I think what I think about something. This will help me (and you) deal with troublesome emotions, for often they're based on an irrational thought or  two. It's worked for me. Do I really value x, or am I just giving mental lip service to x? Or worse: pretending to value x in order to manipulate others.

Group Think

Some individuals value their ideals more than they do human lives. "You have to break a few eggs to make an omelet", they say, meaning that some will be sacrificed (or outright killed, in some historical cases) for the sake of their ideals. But human beings are not eggs, and at the precise moment whenever any idealist talks about such sacrifices, he has left the realm of rationality, reason, and good will towards ones fellow man. No ideal is greater than human life.

Furthermore, no ideal is greater than any one man.

It is necessary to be precise here. For example, if you claim that the rights of society trump the rights of the individual, the obvious questions are: what are the rights of society? Who determines what rights society has? If society's rights consists of whatever the majority in that society considers to be rights, then rights become a matter of vote, to be granted or taken away at the whim of whatever group is in the majority. But consider the implications of such a view:  individuals exist at the permission of the group; the right to life is granted by those who are living; no one man is of any importance by himself, but only as part of a group. If this is so, then men are not free. They are dependent upon society. They are, we are so often told, "social animals". Again, who decides what is in the best interests of society...if it is not the mob currently in majority, is it not some dictator who issues proclamations that all must obey (or become an omelet)?

I know what freedom is. It is independence. It is being alive and beholden to no one for one's right to be alive. It is independence from others, part of which is simple self-sufficiency. I need no one's permission to live, and in a perfect world, I would need no one's permission to keep whatever I earn or make.

Sacrifice for the greater good is one thing-but it is I, as an individual, who makes that decision and no one else has the right to tell me what or who I should sacrifice my life for. And besides, if I give my life for what I consider a greater good, that is not a sacrifice at all. But if I die for "society's" (i.e., someone else's) concept of a greater good, and I don't agree but do so out of a sense of duty, then that is a sacrifice. I am a slave when I make sacrifices of such a nature, at the mercy of society, a mere serf with a bought soul.

The US v. China?

A little while ago, I wrote a piece for my young son, Erich Ferger, about making a difference in the world. I was just re-reading it. What stood out this time around was the point I was trying to make about changing the world for the better. Make the world free!

Any form of collectivism/statism (socialism and its' variants, communism, totalitarianism) must ultimately fail, and often the result of this failure is massive human bloodshed, and/or massive human starvation.

The fact is that here in America, we shall soon see people dying of starvation on the streets, just like in Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. We  now have well over a century and a half of proof, the sordid results of the leftists insane dream to create a Utopia. The end result of socialism/collectivism is societal, governmental and cultural collapse.

But here's a thought: if the Chinese abandon their communist government and embrace freedom, meaning they drastically reduce taxation and regulation, remove burdensome restrictions, decriminalize specific human behavior, involve the population in electing legislatures and executives, and encourage the investment of capital-if the Chinese have the sense to do this, to embrace free market capitalism, then it would be only the Chinese who could prop up our leftist, socialist policies after we go broke. Wouldn't that be ironic?

Thoughts about New Orleans: A Rant Written While Drinking Coffee in New Orleans at Home

There is a feeling you get when coming in to New Orleans, either by car or by plane. It is the feeling of entering another world, or even another dimension of existence.

New Orleans Saints

The following is a re-post of an article I wrote some time ago, right before the Saints won the Super Bowl.

NEW ORLEANS SAINTS

I have been a New Orleans Saints football fan all my life. That hasn't always been easy. For many years, the Saints had losing season after losing season. There were times when fans in the Superdome wore bags over their heads, in mock shame over their team's poor performance. Of course, these bag-headed fans were at the game, cheering the Saints (the "Ain'ts") on anyway.

But this year has been differant. This year, I've been moved to strong emotion over this edition of the Saints, with guys like Drew Brees, Pierre Thomas, Robert Meacham, Reggie Bush, Mike Bell, Darren Sharper, Jonathan Vilma, Jeremy Shockey, hell, the whole team playing to an unprecedented 13-3 season.

By "strong emotion", I mean a curious mixture of pride, joy, and happiness that something so meaningless as a football game could make me cheer with unbridled passion. I was there with the rest of them, screaming like a lunatic, actually getting angry if the referee made a bad call, or the opposing team scored. I like what talk show host Limbaugh said when someone asked him why he liked football so much. He answered: "well, I'm like most guys in this. Most guys I know love to watch football, because it allows them to spend unlimited amounts of passion, with minimal or no consequences." That's me alright. Yeah, it's just a game, but it's the SAINTS! and I love 'em! And my! Was it a spectacular ride, or what? Who can forget the nail-biting win to the Redskins in OT?... being behind 24-3 to the Dolphins?... slugging it out with the Carolina Panthers in the Dome?... losing to Tampa Bay (!?!), also in the dome?... beating the Patriots on Monday night football, with the whole nation watching... The Saints offense rose to the top of the NFL, and our quarterback Drew Brees is or was the number one rated passer in the league. Yes, this season was great, far beyond my expectations, and if the Saints make the Super Bowl, that's just gravy...particularly tasty gravy.

But there's more to it than being a fan. The best way for me to illustrate this to you is to imagine the Superdome filled with proud Saints fans, all shouting their joy to the heavens, making a noise so loud that the sportscasters on the field cannot hear each other. Many outsiders have commented on the unique ferocity of our loyalty to "The Boys". Nowhere else, they say, have they found fans more vocal and more supportive. You can hear it if you watch them on TV. For some reason, when I see the Dome packed with thousands of fans, all or nearly all of them filled up with the team spirit in a collective voice like thunder at the end of the world, I feel an enormous uplifting in my own spirit, more proud than I've ever been to be a
New Orleanian.

Thank you, Sean Payton and team! And well, well done! Now, we're with you in the playoffs!

A Confederacy of Dunces

My story on the Ignatius J. Reilly statue yesterday had about seventy or so hits-much to my surprise. I forgot to tell you all why the hotel moved the statue in the first place: so the Mardi Gras people wouldn't kidnap him, or damage the statue in any way.

Ignatius J. Reilly is Back!

Ignatius J. Reilly

TODAY has been an interesting day today, so far. Let me tell you a story about why, but first, let's go back two weeks from today, OK?

Two weeks ago, I was walking up Canal Street, probably thinking about Mardi Gras, when I passed the Chateau Bourbon Hotel just past Bourbon and Canal. Some of you might remember what this place used to be-the old D. H. Holmes department store ("meet me under the clock by Holmses, baby").

Well, "Holmses" went away, the Chateau Bourbon filled the empty building, and some sweet soul put up a bronze statue of Ignatius J. Reilly (photo at left) in the veranda right there in front of the hotel entrance. For those of you who don't know who the heck is Ignatius J. Reilly, he's the central character in a fiction/satire novel about his life in New Orleans, A Confederacy of Dunces. This book, one of the funniest I've ever read, won the Pulitzer prize, and became required reading at UNO by the time I got there in 1982. And the reason why his statue is in front of the Chateau Bourbon/the Old D.H. Holmes is because of the first scene in the novel. Ignatius is supposed to meet his mom there, under the clock.

Bolero

I remember well the first time I heard Maurice Ravel's classic Bolero. As it so happened, I was at a coffee shop called "Rue de la Course" on Magazine Street in New Orleans, drinking espresso, and finishing up a story I was working on. The shop always used to play some type of classical music over their sound system, and that day was no differant. Although I usually ignore classical music whenever and wherever I hear it (except when I'm driving), I heard a gentle, lilting melody that sounded somewhat mysterious, even alluring.I barely even noticed that there was music playing in the background, but as I've said, the melody was good, kind of catchy even, not quite like a pop tune but more like an old folk melody. My attention was immediately drawn by the fact that there was a light, but somehow militaristic drumbeat in the background, a steady rhythm that beat relentlessly but unobtrusively on, with a light, deft touch that again reminded me of a pop song.
I became really engrossed as I slowly became aware that the song was steadily picking up in volume (and rhythm), but at a measured, controlled pace. I sat there at my table, my story forgotten, listening to this piece in delighted enjoyment. I am always thrilled to discover good new music, and this was indeed very good. At first, the melody and counter melody was played by the lighter wind instruments, i.e., the flute, clarinet and piccolo, but as the volume ever so slowly increased, differant instruments picked up the tune, and all the while, that same relentless drumbeat kept up a steady and precise rhythm. I was totally gone, lost in this orchestral tour de force. I could see pictures in my mind, and also, I got the sense that the music was heading to an inevitable violent climax, but in the meantime, the violins picked up the beautiful melody, and now, all was joy and unbridled passion. And then came the brass instruments...soon, the entire orchestra was thundering in an unbelievable frenzy, clear, precise, measured...and the drumbeat still beat on and on. I probably forgot to breathe, for when the music came to an abrupt climactic end at the crashing of a tympani-drum, I sat there breathless and stunned. Involuntarilly, I said, "what the hell was that?" I looked up, embarrassed, and saw the pretty countergirl smiling at me in understanding. "That was "Bolero", she said.

Mardi Gras in New Orleans

MARDI GRAS IN NEW ORLEANS is fast approaching-Mardi Gras day is Tuesday, February 21. Are you thinking of coming to town to see the world's greatest free show? There are all kinds of things for you to consider. Where will you stay? If you live close by, and are planning to drive here, where will you park?

Unfortunately, all the hotels, motels (including the flea bags), flophouses, bunkhouses and camp grounds are all filled up. And if you are lucky enough to find a parking spot, you'll wind up walking a good distance to the parade routes.

So are there alternatives? Yes. You might get lucky and find a room in town, but beware-you're going to pay a lot for it. Try New Orleans Craiglist.com, or contact a travel agent and ask her if she knows if any of the locals are offering their homes, or rooms within their homes-for rent.

Although Mardi Gras day is Tuesday, the serious partying starts the Friday preceding. It's a long weekend: Friday until Wednesday morning (Ash Wednesday), there are lots of parades and festivities. And all of them free!

I recommend finding a spot on St. Charles Avenue, between Louisiana and Jackson Avenues. Canal Street will be packed solid. If you get there early enough, you'll be able to stake out a claim. I usually go early in the morning the Sunday before Mardi Gras, find a spot on the "neutral ground" (median), and pitch a tent. I bring food (food along the parade routes is abundant, but not cheap), scaffolding (to better see the parades, and catch more beads), and plenty of cold beverages in the cooler. There are abundant Port-a-Potties along the parade route on St. Charles, especially between Louisiana and Jackson Avenues. Parking is usually available in the adjacent neighborhoods, but be careful of restrictions (just look for any signs that restrict or forbid parking).

Random Thoughts on New Orleans Over Morning Coffee

There is a feeling you get when coming in to New Orleans, either by car or by plane. It is the feeling of entering another world, or even another dimension of existence.

New Orleans Could Have Been Spared: The Consequences of Environmentalism

It's been almost six years since Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans-and the city is still recovering. The 2010 census for Orleans Parish shows 343,829 people; the 2000 census gave the number at 484,674, a drop of almost 141,000. That's about the size of Metairie, the largest suburb of New Orleans, or of Bridgeport, CT., Savannah, GA.,  Sunnyvale, CA., et al.

So it's not an exaggeration to say that Katrina was an apocalyptic event for New Orleans.