kangaroo, new default

Are blacks misinterpreting normal defensive behavior as bigotry?

I break this silence to bring a special thought, one which I don't really want to place on my journals on an art site, it's a pretty intense concept that I find only Livejournal can really handle. Racial topics can always be somewhat contentious, there are a lot of wounds that come with it.

This mainly has to do with a question that came to mind after I had read the President's speech to his reaction on the Travon Martin case. I thought the speech was very thoughtful and a necessary dialog that needed to be said, and if the president can't say it how is anyone else going to? His timing was decent too as he waited for the jury to decide the case before coming forward.

However, as the words kind of sloshed around in my head for awhile as they always do a statement he made popped into my head. It made me laugh.

Why laugh?

Because I realized the President, while bearing his emotions may have revealed something that is absolutely necessary to understand for our racial dialog to take the next step forward.

That feelings can betray the facts.

What do I mean? Well this is the quote from Barack Obama on how blacks see the world around them:

"There are very few African-American men in this country who haven't had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me.

And there are very few African-American men who haven't had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me, at least before I was a senator. There are very few African Americans who haven't had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off. That happens often."

I realized something, I too have experienced these things. And I'm white.

The car door locking as you're crossing the street? Well you're approaching the vehicle, it's only common sense to lock the doors if someone is approaching the door, black or white. I mean, if you're going to learn anything from Grand Theft Auto games it should be to lock those freakin' doors. Most newer cars even go so far as to lock as soon as they start moving. It's a standard security procedure.

The elevator... that was the one that triggered this realization. Who HASN'T had that awkward elevator silence? When it's just you and some other person and you're both just holding your breath waiting for your floor. It's not just blacks that have experienced this, I as a white American have experienced many an awkward elevator ride.

In fact here's a tutorial on how to make those elevator rides less awkward... it seems it is a big enough problem for people to write articles on it: http://www.ehow.com/how_5190650_avoid-awkward-elevator-rides.html

So of course when the president says. "Very few African American haven't experienced the lady holding her breath until she gets off" it's going to ring true, because it happens to not only them but to all Americans, the problem is merely bigger than the President seems to realize.

And the department store thing? As I was perusing the pricing information and scanning the boxes on electronics in a Best Buy, an employee came up and asked if I needed help finding things. Now, many lay customers are going to interpret that as being helpful. However, as a cashier in a grocery store I was taught that if a customer is acting suspiciously and you think they're pocketing things to approach and ask if they need assistance. It reminds them they're being watched.

It seems to me a symbiosis of paranoia. You have people wanting to protect their things, and their property, and protecting their 'personal space'; in response others interpreting that everyone around them thinks they're a criminal as a result. I've sensed this in certain social situations, I'm sure every American has at some point felt that the stranger they coincidentally shared space with looked at them with an eye of suspicion. Say you both are walking along a side walk at a particular time and they step off the sidewalk onto the grass to keep you at arm's length... Yes that happened to me when I was walking around town at night once.

So I think the important message to send to the country right now is not only that we need to be less paranoid of blacks, but in effect less paranoid of EVERYONE. Or if we are to treat all strangers as dangerous, then to let everyone know to expect to be treated with distrust and it has nothing to do with how you're dressed, or your race, or your mannerisms. It's just human nature. It's just "STRANGER DANGER!"

In a world where we are paranoid of everyone equally, everyone will believe it's only their kind that people are paranoid of.
kangaroo, new default

Dying LJ

I don't post to this as often as I used to anymore. I still come by every once in awhile for communities and such, but it seems as if the posts are mostly automated twitter feeds or feeds from sites I go to anyway such as Flayrah. I only have 1 friend who posts with any regularity so as far as my own contibution to LJ I'll probably be ending this here. It's been a good 8 years since I started. LJ was probably the first online community I posted my thoughts to. Despite these ups and down the world moves on.

It's been three months since my last post here, I think that shows it's time to call it dead.

Remember to catch me on my other sites:

Flayrah: http://www.flayrah.com/u/sonious
FurAffinity: http://www.furaffinity.net/user/sonious/
SoFurry: https://sonious.sofurry.com/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Tantroo_McNally

I'll still be posting comments here and there, but for entries it's as good a time as any to sign off.

Getting the hop outta here,
Tantroo Sonious McNally
kangaroo, new default


So something did happen to me, and I had a manic episode. Long, interesting but long, story short I have had an interesting past few days, but now in a more calm state of mind I can tell you. I have bipolar disorder and I'm now taking medication to help calm the imbalance.

It took quite a bit go that to happen. During my manic episode the cops were called, I was tasered, I went nuts. Thankfully they were all smart enough to get me the help I need and my family was still there for me. Now I have collected my thoughts and the schizophrenia that had taken hold at its worst time is quashed. I started to believe it was me against the world, nothing is farther from the truth. People are good and fearful, not evil and conniving.

Because I understand this I have hope, and that's what it takes to get past mental illness. Thank you all, and thanks goes to all who have shown me love and support over the years
kangaroo, new default

End of the Tax War

So this idea just popped in there, it won't go away, and I think it's effecting my ability to sleep because I was reading over fiscal policies and it just clicked for some reason, and that is how to end the Fiscal cliff stand off.

Obama will get his repeal of Bush Tax cuts for over 500,000 (I think it was that number's gone up and down), but then what do the Republicans get? Don't they have to worry about Norquist's pledge of never raising taxes EVER or get kicked out of office?

Here's the thing, Norquist and people like him aren't fools, they know that a signing statement is only as good as the people who are alive to sign it. I doesn't reassure that our children's politicians can't raise taxes, Democrat or Republican. So how about making Norquist's constitutional amendment? If that won't earn forgiveness I don't know what will.


- Federal income tax and payroll tax may never again be increased nor decreased. Tax brackets may be changed but ONLY for the purposes of inflation and deflation of currency.

Wait... not decreased? Why? To prevent a Bushism from happening again and being permanent. It is a double line in the sand. There are going to be some Republicans who have the pipe dream of no income tax that will hate it, but there are also going to be some Democrats who have the pipe dream of taxing all corporate profits that also hate it. It's time to remove the pipe from both of these mouths and send this message. We want a government that works, so if Obama is sure that this tax increase will fix these problems, then fine but this will be the last time taxes are on the table.

But there are many other reasons Republicans should love this Amendment:

There will be other tax fights in the future, what deductions you get and sales taxes on particular items. However Americans will sleep soundly knowing this is the rate you'll be taxed, forever and ever, Amen. Small businesses won't worry about increases on the federal level they can concentrate on running their businesses, the tax of fighting about taxes will be alleviated at the federal level.

The amendment will assure that the only way to effectively increase income tax in the future at the federal level will be fiscal responsibility in the form of deflation. It's important that the government help people understand this as it could get people upset that their taxes are effectively "going up" when they really aren't.

There, financial crisis solved, yawn, next.
kangaroo, new default

Libertarians could make a killing in NY District 24

I looked over a hotly contested battle for congress in our district. Ann Marie Beurkle VS Dan Maffei.

If there was any symbolic battle which shows the one version of evil versus another it is this one. If you take the stereotypes both positive and negative for both parties you'll see these two. The major irony of this election is that both have served in congress once before. In fact the last battle was against the same two people.

So who is running against these two? Just one, the Green Party. On the news there is already a report of a Republican supported making a large contribution to the Green candidate. The Green party candidate responded by giving the money to progressive charities with the claim she didn't want to be used in that way. As a move I find that admirable, the problem is that unlike the President election which I plan on voting Gary Johnson to help his party achieve 5% needed to become a new party, the battle between the two is too close.

On the other hand... When looking between the two, I can't choose:

Beurkle is the incumbent, she has a history of being staunchly socially conservative, however during her tenure things like gay marriage passed in the state, she's certainly not Bachmann like and seems to hold that under her sleeve in the present, her personal voting record doesn't include any gay rights (for or against). In fact one of the abortion bill she did co-sponsor which makes "fetal discrimination" illegal could possibly be amended in the future to protect fetus's from being aborted because of sexual orientation once we are able to do it (currently only for physical gender and race). This willingness to not obsess over such social believes is something which I feel should be rewarded when a Republican does it.

Dan Maffei, during his tenure there was a lot of economic problems in the area, we lost alot of jobs, add to that when he was voted out (losing to Buerkle) he gave bonuses to his staff up to 200K. He did do alot of pro-GLBT votes. However there is another problem and that is there is no opportunity to see him debate his opponent because he chose not to show up citing that it will be a free style format. In fact the debate will be between the Republican and the Green party candidate, the democrat will not show up. This is extremely unusual, and even if the free-style format isn't something Maffei may like, I'm sure Beurkle wouldn't like it either but she has the courage to show up despite it being equally unfair.

So I think I'll watch this debate between the Green Party candidate and the Republican Candidate. Depending on what I'll be probably be picking them, but Maffei has really low chances. It'll also be interesting to see a Green party candidate go mono a mono with a Republican Candidate in a debate. That's really a rare treat.

I feel the reason this election is so close is because either person elected will go against half of what Syracuse stands for. It's a city which is industrious and believe in fiscal responsibility our cost of living is low which attracts people who spend practically on where they live, even if it's not as ascetically pleasing as other cities, and sometimes snowy. We are socially democratic, we are pro-GLBT, and stand by treating people equally.

I have seen Ron Paul stickers and poster signs in the nearby area during the primaries. If the Libertarian Party is looking for a good place where they might gain some ground, I think they would find my district very welcoming in the future. I have no doubt this race is tight because of the "good pieces" of the Democrats and Republican has left this as nothing more then a party match. If you attack with the best of both worlds you'll succeed. I think Libertarians would do well for themselves to get involved in upstate districts, I wouldn't doubt you'd go pretty far.
kangaroo, new default

How much in Diamonds?

So a diamond planet was discovered, but just how much bank are we talking here? Well I'm going to do my best and get my dusty math brain clicking again to attempt to calculate how much in diamonds could be harvested if at all possible (which it's not... so...)

Reports say it's "twice as big as earth." which is pretty ambiguous. 2x the diameter? Surface area? in what statistic is it twice as big? Well, the easiest would be to double the surface area, Earth is about 510,000,000 square km. So the new planet would be 1,020,000,000 square km. Easy enough.

So how much diamonds per square km of surface area? That's a variable that's unknown so we'll call it X for now.

How much is a diamond worth? 1 carat of pure diamond is 200 milligrams (but that's weight not worth) unfortunately this is another variable depending on the quality of diamonds you harvest ranging from $700.00 - $4,000.00. Seeings as diamonds occur rather natural here I'm thinking we're going to get some rather big ones, so we'll go with an estimate of $3,000/carret.

Now how BIG does a diamond have to be in volume to reach 1 caret? Someone fortunately did all that math for me and estimated 2/35 cm³. that's 2/35 a cubic centimeter. So for every one of the there's 3K bucks.

So how do we calculate this? Well we have the surface area, however, that is an area not a volume to have a volume we need depth, that's where "X" comes in. how much of the depth diamond? How much is other things? So many variables.

Let's make X REALLY simple for now. Let us say that for every square KM there is only one caret of diamond. Now obviously this isn't the case, you wouldn't be able to see such a thing from SPACE. Think about that, they can see these diamonds from SPACE. But let's be all gloomy about it and say only one caret per square KM. That's really simple 3K dollars times 1,020,000,000 = 3.06 trillion dollars.

Okay, so lets not be so stingy, I mean come on the earth certainly has more the one caret per square KM so a freaking DIAMOND planet?

Alright, lets say that the crust of the planet had a layer of diamonds 1 cm thick, to put a little on the top and because I'm lazy I'm not going to account for narrowing of the sphere size difference 1 cm deep... I mean that's just being geekily asinine, let's keep it simple. Lets first convert the KM to centemeters to make it easier to work with 1,020,000,000 square km is 10,200,000,000,000 square cm, now with it being 1 cm deep it's simply that 10.2 trillion cubic cms.

And now we have our X where X is depth/square mile. 10.2cm^2 * (x)cm = Total diamonds on planet

Okay so now we can calculate total diamonds for all values x so where my money?

Well divide the total diamonds by the size of a caret to get total carets

10,200,000,000,000cm^2 * Xcm
------------------------------ = Total Carets

So with x being 1 we get 178 trillion carrots. Multiply that by our money and... 535 quadrillion dollars.

That's a little better. We could pay off the debt it took for us to get there... maybe. These pickaxes aren't going to pay for themselves.

Of course with all that diamond now in your hands... it'll probably inflate the value of diamonds by quite a bit so... yeah, there's that (utility theory after all, we have LOTs of diamonds, so they aren't rare, so aren't as valuable). Guess I just wasted your time, :) aw well.

Don't tell the private corps that though, there's DIAMONDS on there planets! DIAMONDS pitch up, move out "west" go pioneerin'!

Oh, what if the entire planet were made of the stuff? Just for other extremes. 8.9 octillion dollars. What's an octillion mean? It means fuck you your diamonds are worthless now, that's what it means.
kangaroo, new default

The Worst Political Inquiry Ever

Romney really just breaks under pressure. No doubt I've never been under as much stress, but holy cow. I've never seen so many mistakes that just appear rookie to me coming out of Romney's mouth in this video

For 1, just by talking with the press about the video he has authenticated it. It's an ironic move by someone who has kept his tax returns a secret despite the press hounding him over it because it would make him look bad. You would think he would have consistency in that regard.

And then there's what he did say when he decided to legitimize it:

Probably the worst offense comes right away: "I don't remember the question that was asked." is not a nice thing to say because it alienates the person/people who asked the question. Can you imagine if you asked the president a question and then he goes: "Well I don't remember who are what the question was."? It shows someone who doesn't see people, someone who's more impulsive then genuinely caring, even to the people who are his allies.

The "I also have a lot of people who will vote for me no matter what... at least I hope so..." does not ensure confidence in your faith that there are people loyal to you. How are the people going to feel they should vote for you if you're not sure there are people going to vote for you? It shows a bit of lack of faith in oneself that isn't attractive to voters.

And by the way, the whole "no matter what" thing is a bit of a stretch. If Obama suddenly sent in the army to detain as many Americans as he could and detained them via the NDAA of 2012 (going back on his signing statement) I'm sure that "no matter what" would be quickly disproven.