Tagged: opinion
The Change in Tenor
Has anyone else noticed the change in tenor?
I’m talking about, of course, the reporting about the NOLA and LV attacks.
It’s obvious to everyone but the Democrats that MAGA is replete with conspiracy theorists. Of all folks who know this, law enforcement tops the list—because they’re heavily represented in the conspiracy-theorists-who-support-MAGA group. But what I want to bring to the fore is how the actual positions of power, the ones being interviewed—the four star guy in LV—seem to be interested first and foremost in debunking all the rapidly spreading new or furtherances of the classic conspiracy theories. An unintended result of this approach, if you happen to see the same world that I do, however, may be the best result we could ask for—the truth has become the emphasis.
The truth is the emphasis. Is that crazy? Am I crazy for seeing this? And for thinking, “This is great!”?
On the Biden/Harris side of things, Kamala just attempted to hoodwink everyone into thinking she celebrated Kwanzaa—despite not being African-American or providing a single photo or evidence of any kind. Why? Because someone thought that lie would be a good idea and further some agenda.
On the Trump/Vance side of things, the police are already showing the evidence from the truck that it wasn’t a lithium battery issue—and, in fact, the truck is still essentially intact. Drive on, Tesla Nerds.
Naturally, the age old proverbs, “Don’t walk around NOLA after dark” and “Don’t be anywhere at 3am” still hold. (Don’t take that to mean I abide—just that I know that I deserve what is coming.) So no need to revamp Wisdom.
There is one other thing that I need to say, though. What exactly is the symbolism of the Tesla in front of Trump’s hotel? For my part, I don’t see it.
People, listen up. The Captain has turned on the seatbelt sign.
There are no terrorist masterminds. Our culture needs to drop that concept. Instead, I only see mushy brains particularly crafted by generations and generations of unreasoned and limitless breeding in illiterate, ignorant filth faucets whose resultant, and singular, thought is, “I must destroy other people’s shiny things.” And, reader, if you’re not with me yet, time to catch-up. My assessment is spot-on. But I need help with the solution—nothing comes to mind.
I don’t know about you, but at these moments, my anger towards all non-Western peoples seethes—to the point of splashing a few non-Western acting Americans and Europeans—namely the woke. Physically, this manifests as a head-shaking to the rhythm of, “You were supposed to thank and learn from the demi-gods who granted you access their Eden, ya morons.”
Three Pointed Feelings On Political Violence in the USA, 2028 POTUS and Nuclear Bombs
Still riding the high of having correctly *felt* Trump was the clear winner long before election night, I want to share three more *feelings*.
****
First, I have already mentioned that the next bout of political violence will be at the public funeral of a certain folk savior. Nothing new to say; I am just collecting it in one post.
Second, in the exact same manner and for the exact same reason as America loved itself for electing Obama (both shameless fantasy), in 2028, America will once again engage in a shameless fantasy act of self-love as it elects a woman to the office of President of the United States. I have long chuckled that the most bluntly misogynistic man defeated the first two legitimate female candidates. But fate can only laugh for so long. The mood is changing and the next president will be a woman.
Third, you, me, our children—everyone—needs to be ready for the news cycle to breeze past the first use of nuclear weapons. The “breaking news” will move on to “developing story” and finally be replaced by celebrity gossip or palace intrigue in precisely the same manner with which it breezes past every story. To be clear, someone is going to use a nuke. The fact will be hyped beyond belief with a fever pitch rarely able to be achieved, but there will be no actual mutually assured destruction or end of nations or shift in power balance. And, again, the proof in the pudding of my *feeling* (the way you know you heard it hear first) will be when the news cycle drops the story within the same time period as Oct 7, or the invasion of Ukraine etc. Nuclear war is here to stay and the idea that it was a “one off” or “we learned from the first use” is childish.
Nothing Surprises
It’s all hype. There are no surprises.
I really want to say something about the content of Jack Smith’s “motion for immunity determinations”, but the truth is that the only thing that bothers me about it is that it is being hyped as “October Surprise!” I’m bothered because it isn’t a surprise! In fact, nothing surprises.
Nothing surprised because the news cycle is not 24/7, the cycle is perpetual. In fact, there is no cycle anymore. Also, there are no journalists. Instead, there are varying levels of paid hype-snitches.
We are suckers when we insist that there is such a thing as news and journalists. There used to be news and journalists. But today there are only empty forms. There is no substance. Something new is occurring, some new kind of communication. And the way to keep the upper hand, the way to stay true to yourself, is to admit it. And then train yourself to be as discerning as possible.
Example:
“October surprise! October surprise!” says the news.
You think, “Next!”
Got it?
Power Vs. Acquiring Power
Trump is about to be the man who defeated the first female nominee and the first Black female nominee. I do not come across many, if any, comments on this fact of the election cycle.
It seems to me that there is a continuum of reasons why this is not discussed. On one end, there is the noble (and therefore extremely unlikely) notion that the formerly fun “men vs. woman” schtick is so abhorrent to us woke folks that it is unworthy of our time. On the other end, there is the sober fact that leadership in Republics has never been about sex.
Leadership, I propose, is about power. And while there are many different types of power, there is only one way to gain power: you must take it.
Hillary Clinton did not take the power. Kamala Harris’ entire political career seems to be defined by accepting power.
As for Trump? His career, his notoriety, and his very real power comes solely from his constant belief that there is a power vacuum and he is the man to fill it.
We’ve all seen the clip of 30-something Trump declare he just may have to run for president. And whatever he was thinking until 2008, by the time he saw Obama’s lack of power, Trump obviously convinced himself that there was more power for the taking—and he took it. Who can forget Obama’s smug, “At least I will go down as a president”? Would a powerful man say that?
So ladies, take note. In not having been president, it has never been about you being women. People care that you are weak, just like Obama was weak. And people want power in the presidency. That’s all it is about.
The Image of a Microscope which Accompanied the Science Article—That’s What Bothered Me Today
The Sunday paper had an interesting article about the current war with China. Interesting as it was, there was no call to action. Or at least not a memorable one. There certainly was nothing for citizens to do. I think what I’m suggesting about the op/ed was that the scale wasn’t appropriate.
On the other hand, there was an article suggesting two “Life Science” bills be voted down. One of the two stock “science-y” images the paper used was of a microscope. Of all the articles and opinions in today’s paper, this irked me the most. Why? Because unlike the other author’s claim that China is an existential threat to America (the sky is a-falling!), this image is one which an individual—likely an editor—can do something about.
“Science” is not merely tool use. If anything, science is to tool (science:tool) as man is to wheel (science:tool::man:wheel). Science invents tools; science is never the process of using tools.
And an editor should know this—could know this. And that editor would be doing a service to truth, and his bottom line, if they put a bit more reason into their product.
What image should the editor use to capture science?
There are many that would work. But an easy one would be of someone writing an excellently organized paper, with a title which sufficiently describes the paper’s purpose.
Black Women Need To Be Fired
Trump is going to win. The compelling reason after last week’s unbelievable DNC that I use to combat the media circle-jerk is the media does not lead with her “electoral college” path to victory. Instead, they run the headlines of her mere popularity.
This post and its content is not about “we need to follow the rules”. This post is about how there are rules and what the rules (which everybody does currently follow) show (Trump winning) is not being highlighted by the media. Instead, they are avoiding the topic. This, of course, is their prerogative. Who are any of us to insist someone to drop support of their free choice?
Trump wins. Done deal. Might as well write the history books now.
And yet, for as long as I can remember, there has passed a sort-of life-truth among Whites: Black women cannot be fired.
I do not remember the first time I heard of this notion, but it was early. It was probably in high school, ‘96-‘99.
I definitely remember that while in the Air Force I first heard about “Gee-Ess” employees and how they could never be fired. Worse, the rumor was held that the under or non-performer would actually get promoted.
Again, this was just rumor—zeitgeist.
It must have been around 2005, then, that I heard that beyond GS employees not being able to be fired, if it was a Black woman who worked as a GS, she was literally untouchable. In my mind, for over two decades, right or wrong, I have believed that the situation was such that if a black woman was fired from a federal job, it would prompt a Supreme Court Decision.
Do you hear me, people?
Trump has won. It is a done deal.
And yet I am not blind to the fact that the obstacle in his path is a federally employed Black woman.
Clash. Of. The. Titans.
(Or one more example of it.)
Here’s my thought, my underlying not-distasteful philosophy: I want Black women to live abundantly. I want Black women to achieve beyond their highest aspirations. I wouldn’t care one iota if some super-power nation promoting and securing peace and prosperity for all mankind came to be and was led by Black women.
But I do not believe any of those things will ever happen until Black women are fired.
So, I say again, Black women need to be fired.
Ben Shapiro’s “Authoritarian Joy” Piece Misses the Point
He’s a busy man. I get it. But he missed the point.
We don’t need someone to clarify to Americans that joy is an emotion and not policy. We don’t need someone to clarify that appeals to emotion have been used by bad guys in the past.
Instead, we need some event to prove that government isn’t the answer to our problems.
When you listen to DNC speeches, even if you only lend one ear, the content is chock full of the idea that government can solve problems.
Ben Shapiro disagrees. I disagree.
But he and I have different understandings of where Kamala and the DNC err in their thinking.
He thinks their error is being inconsistent.
I think their error is theft.
The DNC is advocating (besides the actual theft its administration commits today) that the government (schmucks built no different than you and I) should be able to rob us as they tell us “We’re here to help!”
I am not ready to revolt. I can’t imagine how that would work. For now, I rest assured that Trump has this one in the bag. And while he is as guilty as the DNC of robbing us, he doesn’t make it hard for me to teach my kids that government cannot solve your problems.
A Trumpian Troll
Still need more ways to discover precisely who the Left are? Troll them. Or as the Black preachers say, “When you throw a stick at dogs, the one who whelps got hit.”
All I want to know is if Trump wrote the troll beforehand or came up with it on the spot.
“Won’t have to vote again.” So funny. So many possible (dark?) meanings.
Is he implying the Second Coming is imminent? Is he implying the end of democracy and the beginning of dictatorship as the Left wet dreams?
Hard to say, no?
It surely can’t mean that the supposedly unmotivated Christian non-voters will be able to go back to their unmotivated-not-voting after this election because the ship will have been so firmly righted by Trump over the intervening years that the morons who might again vote Left in 2028 will not, by virtue of their being incapable of blocking the beautiful light of prosperous peace (the only kind) that he will have brought, a light which consequently will end the Left’s resistance to life-giving truth.
The Level My Grandma and Brother Are Complicit
The level my grandma and brother (her a democrat and he a smarty-pants lefty) are complicit in the attempted assassination is directly related to how they defend President Biden’s response to Mr. Holt.
Headlines across news outlets use the words “Biden”, “Mistake”, and “Bullseye” in close proximity and suggest the president admitted erring. But here is the transcript.
****
Biden: “I didn’t say crosshairs (inaudible) focus on look the truth of the matter was I guess what I was talking about at the time was there’s very little focus on Trump’s agenda-”
Holt: “-Yeah the term was bullseye.”
Biden: “It was a mistake to use the word I didn’t mean I didn’t say crosshairs I meant bullseye I meant focus on him focus on what he is doing…”
****
(That took an inordinate amount of effort to transcribe, btw. You’re welcome.)
The question remains. What do my grandma and my brother do with this?
How they speak of it determines as accurately as any other measure we could develop how complicit they are. The range being
1. NOT competent to stand trial and NOT complicit. This would be the case if they change the subject and unashamedly suggest they had no idea guns existed, let alone would be used on any one of the several billion good-to-the-core fellow men.
2. Competent to stand trial and complicit. They are complicit according to their level of earnestly believing it is not their role to monitor Pennsylvanian young adults’ or elected officials’ integrity. Make no mistake, this option is the more depressed one, at least to those of us happy-go-lucky bible readers and our “Am I my brother’s keeper?” story. This second option would be the case if they actually attempt an on-point answer, but its content indicates they will never concede that Biden did not admit erring.
The Element Peggy Noonan Missed and Why The Dems Will Never Embrace Chaos
Risk.
That’s it. Miss Noonan doesn’t address how “risk averse” or “safety first and at all costs” our society has become.
A better analogy to the Dem’s problem is Hollywood’s problem.
Movies have become so costly to make that the easy/obvious/safe choice is prequels and sequels of winners (or even mere known quantities) rather than tell a new story that might bomb.
So, no, Miss Noonan, the same people who brought us safety (the government) will not act with daring.
Captain’s Log 