HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » PufPuf23 » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Home country: USA
Member since: Thu Jul 26, 2007, 05:26 PM
Number of posts: 4,875

Journal Archives

Sort of OT but about Stanton and Lincoln

Philip K Dick wrote a novel, "We Can Build You", published in 1972 about a simulacra of Stanton and Lincoln. The book is back in print published by Vintage.

from wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_Can_Build_You


"We Can Build You is set in the then-future year of 1982. It centers on Louis Rosen, a small businessman whose company produces spinets and electronic organs. Rosen's partner wants to begin production of simulacra, or androids, based on famous Civil War figures. The firm completes two prototypes, one of Edwin M. Stanton and one of Abraham Lincoln. Rosen then attempts to sell the robot patents to Sam K. Barrows, an influential businessman who is opening up lunar real estate for purchase and colonization. Unfortunately, while the Stanton simulacrum proves able to adapt to contemporary U.S. society, the Lincoln simulacrum proves unable to do so, possibly due to the fact that the original experienced schizophrenia. At the same time, Louis begins a relationship with Pris Frauenzimmer, the schizophrenic daughter of his business partner, who has designed both simulacra. This becomes an obsession and Louis himself begins to hallucinate about Pris."


My recollections of last read:

The Stanton (first product) and Lincoln androids are so real as to go out in public and have incongruent and independent minds of their own. Lincoln is depressive and unwilling to be on any message for an agenda. Stanton is aggressive and goes off the reservation to work with the "real" competitor.

From Vintage book jacket:

"Louis Rosen and his partners used to sell spinets. Now they are selling people -- or, to be more precise, ingeniously designed, historically authentic simulacra of Edwin M Stanton and Abraham Lincoln ......... And there's the added complication that someone -- or something -- like Abraham Lincoln may not want to be sold."

"Is an electronic Abraham Lincoln any less alive than his creators? Is a machine that cares and suffers inferior to the woman Louis love --a borderline psychopath that does neither?

My note: That the Stanton simulacra who bullies and is a traitor dominates the Lincoln simulacra before getting into the human emotion and Mars-Earth corporate colonization parts of the tale.

Not a shill, just a PKD reader since my teens in the 60s SF area. The book as aged well and is structured as relatively linear and finished story.

Thanks Catherina for the translation(s).

Many posters at DU blow me away.

Jingoism lives at DU.

"Jingoism is extreme patriotism in the form of aggressive foreign policy. In practice, it is a country's advocation of the use of threats or actual force against other countries in order to safeguard what it perceives as its national interests. Colloquially, it refers to excessive bias in judging one's own country as superior to others—an extreme type of nationalism."


Important thread.

I feel ill over what has occurred regards to Morales and Snowden and the reaction of the "Good -Democratic- Americans" at DU.

Recall the international support back when POTUS received the Nobel Peace prize, look at now (and we know things would be worse with more war and loss of credibility under the GOP) ?

But look at the loss of international credibility regardless.

My intuition is not anti-Obama. POTUS Obama is a small cog / large icon.

The Golden Rule: Do unto others as you wish they do unto you.

But also those who have the gold, make the rules.

Anti-imperialism and neo-liberalism.

Edward Snowden is an opportunist and I am glad.

Snowden as a personality is irrelevant.

My heart hurts at how far off the rails of kindness my home, from USA to neighborhood, has jolted since my youth.

We are not living in a moral, legal, nor just system and the situation is getting worse.

Read your OP and be realistic with manners and humble.

Denial is not perceiving the pathologies between humanity and Earth and within humanity.

Do you know what it is to put your existence on the line for principal?

Do you know what it is to put your existence on the line for principal and lose?

Russell Brand on Morning Joe MSNBC

I'm voting and will vote for Democratic candidates

I live in an area of California that is safely D at state and federal level. I would rather see more liberal candidates for Congress than Pelosi, Feinstein, and Mike Thompson. Thompson is a Blue Dog / DLC type. Feinstein is a corrupt war profiter. Pelosi took impeachment off the table when there was more reason for impeachment than ever in my life. I'd like to see all three replaced with individuals that are more representitive of the wants and needs of the People and do not tolerate war and financial criminals.

I blame the Obama Administration and D Congressional leaders for the midterm disaster in 2012; most specifically ACA, treatment of banks, and economy.

I expect another midterm disaster in 2014 because of the Obama Administration; most specifically the SS/Medicare and economy.

2012 was not the fault of those on the left and neither will be 2014.

I will vote for HRC (if I am alive) in 2016 but she will also be my last choice as she was in 2012 primaries.

I have lost respect for Obama nor does he retain my trust. He has proven to not give a fuck about most of us and coddles war and financial criminals. Obama has been a disaster for enacting ACA that is a gift to corporate interests. Obama's education and environmental policies are retrograde. The DOJ under Holder is a cruel joke. . When Obama won in 2012, I cried for the first time over an election in my 60 years. I expect the USA and my own personal situation to continue to decline in my older years.

The GOP will campaign in 2014 on SS/Medicare and the existence faux liberal Obama and the corporatists that have taken over the Democratic Party will have continuing cover for trade agreements, war, and other policies contrary to the needs and wishes of most American, particularly the poor, elderly, and young.

I'd like to see a woman POTUS in 2016, just not HRC or any other corporatist.

POTUS Obama could have vetoed the spending spill

a waited for a clean bill without extraneous and over-reaching bull shit legislation as rider.

I find Bonobo one of the more objective posters at DU.

I posted this in another thread this evening:


I support marriage equality.

Regulatory capture is a issue of more overall import is greater to those that marriage equality (like inheritance, job benefits, kids, etc -- the real - for a non-traditional marriage based on love or convenience) as the impact is huge and across most people and less mitigated case by case as marriage inequality. Regulatory capture is heavy duty and realistic poop. The "experts" usually are selected ideologues rather than the mathematically and empathetic intuitive with like experience and education.

We need to clean up the Democratic Party. The GOP is a nightmare on its own trajectory.

DU, oasis that it is, does not have the intestinal fortitude to clean our own Party.

A major blind spot at DU is that "we", the Democratic Party, have the most control over our own Party.

Because of this constructive and accurrately descriptive of the current actions, ommissions, and stances of our political tribe is the individual' most effective and natural role once joining a Party is not popular; specifically, to criticize the policies, appointments, and acclaimed political "wins" under a Democratic Party administration makes one a minority, sometimes mocked, at DU. Democratic Party malacontents are the canaries in Party politics and, if one looks at DU, often tend to those with some age, experience, and less vested interest.

Your contribution to DU is smart, clever, and heroic in my perception.

Montsanto example:

Michael R. Taylor


Michael R. Taylor is the Deputy Commissioner for Foods at the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA).


He received a B.A. degree in political science from Davidson College and a law degree from the University of Virginia. In 1976, after passing the bar examination, Taylor became a staff attorney for the FDA, where he was executive assistant to the Commissioner.

In 1981 he went into private practice at King & Spalding, a law firm, one client of which was the biotechnology company Monsanto, where he established and led the firm's food and drug law practice.


On July 17, 1991, Michael Taylor left King & Spalding, returning to the FDA to fill the newly created post of Deputy Commissioner for Policy. During that time, he signed the Federal Register notice stating that milk from cows treated with BGH did not have to be labeled as such. His name is not on the FDA’s 1992 policy statement on genetically engineered plant foods, but he is said to have been a co-author. Both of these documents grew out of, and fall within, the regulatory policy framework that was developed starting in the mid 1980s under the Reagan and Bush Administrations to ensure safety of the public and to ensure the continuing development of the fledgling biotechnology industry without overly burdensome regulation. The policy had three tenets: "(1) U.S. policy would focus on the product of GM techniques, not the process itself, (2) only regulation grounded in verifiable scientific risks would be tolerated, and (3) GM products are on a continuum with existing products and, therefore, existing statutes are sufficient to review the products."


Between 1994 and 1996 he moved to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), where he was Administrator of the Food Safety & Inspection Service. During that term he implemented a science-based approach ( called Hazard analysis and critical control points (HACCP)) to raising safety standards for meat and poultry production over the protests from industry, which has been called by food safety advocates "a truly heroic accomplishment".

Between 1996 and 2000, after briefly returning to King & Spalding, he then returned to Monsanto to become Vice President for Public Policy.

In 1999, a lawsuit (Alliance For Bio-Integrity v. Shalala) and GAO report revealed considerable disagreement within the FDA concerning decisions about biotechnology products made during Taylor's tenure there. The lawsuit and report also revealed that Mr. Taylor had recused himself from matters related to Monsanto’s BGH and had “never sought to influence the thrust or content” of the agency’s policies on Monsanto’s products.


On July 7, 2009, Taylor once again returned to government as Senior Advisor to the FDA Commissioner. And on January 13, 2010, he was appointed to another newly created post at the FDA, this time as Deputy Commissioner for Foods.

Taylor is featured in the documentaries The Future of Food and The World According to Monsanto as a pertinent example of revolving door since he is a lawyer who has spent the last few decades moving between Monsanto and the FDA and USDA.


How Monsanto outfoxed the Obama administration

The inside story of how the government let one company squash biotech innovation, and dominate an entire industry

By Lina Khan

Last November, the U.S. Department of Justice quietly closed a three-year antitrust investigation into Monsanto, the biotech giant whose genetic traits are embedded in over 90 percent of America’s soybean crop and more than 80 percent of corn. Despite a splash of press coverage when the investigation was initially announced, its termination went mostly unreported. The DOJ released no written public statement. Only a brief press release from Monsanto conveyed the news.

The lack of attention belies the significance of the decision, both for food consumers around the world and for U.S. businesses. Experts who have examined Monsanto’s conduct say the Justice Department’s decision not to act all but officially establishes the firm’s sovereignty over the U.S. seed industry. Many of them also say the decision ratifies aggressive practices Monsanto used to entrench its dominance and deter competition. This includes highly restrictive contractual agreements that excluded rivals, alongside a multibillion-dollar spree to buy up seed companies.

When the administration first launched its investigation, many antitrust and agriculture experts believed it was still possible to imagine an industry characterized by greater competition in the marketplace and greater diversity in seeds. That future may now be foreclosed.



I would no longer exist. nt.

Blue Cheer live B&W on American Band Stand in 1968 YouTube

Blast from the past.

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next »