Tagged: Writing

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.

On Musk’s Hype, On Authoritylessness, and On Homeschool; Or Marriage Advice from Pete

This gets old for me, but I am happy to do it. Here goes: Don’t believe the hype! Even when the world’s richest man is behind the hype, it is still hype. Do not believe it.

The world isn’t at some precarious moment. Democracy/America isn’t at a precipice. Do not believe the hype.

****

A friend and I who were in college (super small liberal arts college) together and had the pleasure of seeing Clarence Thomas speak were discussing the smear campaign the other day. Today my friend sent some WSJ op/ed about it. Let me be clear: there is no “authority” anymore. There is no news organization who can clear a name, nor one who can condemn a name. They have all lost all respect, and consequently lost all authority. You’re all suckers if you believe any of them or believe in any of them.

****

I have wanted to homeschool my children for around a decade now. First, my 14 yr old, H-. And now my two toddlers, A- and J-. Divorce ended the first marriage. And this second marriage is to an Ethiopian who quite literally cannot imagine homeschool. I didn’t quite think through the profound ignorance regarding the field of education which Ethiopians have when I married her, but even had I laid out the entire plan, I am certain she would have been agreeable until she changed her mind—like every other woman.

The charter school my step-son just enrolled in (pretty sure affirmative action on some level got him in) is actually one of the good ones—ie has a “classics” education. And so while I still believe homeschool—by me, for my kids—would best set them up for success in life, I can also see that in some twist of fate, the two toddlers will be able to easily bypass all normal gate guards into the desirable charter school since their “black” (not really, but whites can’t tell the difference) brother already attends.

When I mentioned this somewhat change of heart to my wife she was ecstatic. She was most ecstatic, I was most sad.

I bring things the kids into the world and all anyone wants to do is take them from me. I lose my first daughter to the first, worst person I have ever met. And now, even when I have met a regular woman and married her and made babies with her, she cannot wait to give them away to strangers. It’s fucking messed up. And makes me sad. I have this goofy schedule where I am home every other week for the entire week. In other words, I am gone half the year for work. The flip-side is I am home, no work, half the year. If the kids are in school full-time, the amazing schedule I have is of no value. And it actually is a shitty schedule because now I am gone half the year and additionally miss my kids while I am home.

I didn’t have kids to be alone. I had kids to raise kids. Fuck. It is not that complicated. Why else would anyone have kids?

With everything we are watching in the news, with every event from the bullshit pandemic (can’t be worldwide if most of the world is too stupid to know it is sick with a new disease), to the wars, to the election, to the faggots, to those who want to let children cut off their dicks, to the childless cat ladies who think they should have a say regarding someone else’s kids’ education, to the women who want to kill their children, I just wouldn’t have guessed there was anyone still around who thinks, “less time with our children” is the answer. I just wouldn’t have guessed the selfishness (get the kids away from me so I can shop!) and belief in groupthink had spread to all corners of the globe.

So here’s the lesson, for any young readers. Selfishness is everywhere because selfishness is childish. It is immature. Don’t be selfish. And don’t marry selfish people.

Groupthink is everywhere because groupthink is childish. It is immature. Think for yourself. And don’t marry people who can’t think for themselves.

Puppet vs. Man, Two Doozies—You Decide

Ladies first:

“That’s how — that’s how we came into being, because the people before us understood that one of the greatest expressions for the love of our country, one of the greatest expressions of patriotism, is to fight for the ideals of who we are, which includes freedom to make decisions about your own body; freedom to be safe from gun violence; freedom to have access to the ballot box; freedom to be who you are and just be, to love who you love openly and with pride; freedom to just be.  And that’s who we are.  We believe in all that.”

(That’s from whitehouse.gov, by which I mean to highlight that they do not know how to punctuate her utterances. The semi-colon is for sentences, equivalent to periods and conjunctions. They should have been commas. But that would make it seem like a long sentence. Or that’s the best reason I can figure besides incompetence.)

****

The Donald:

“They’re eating the dogs! The people that came in. They’re eating the cats! They’re eating, they’re eating the pets of the people that live there.”

****

The question is not, “Which of these quotes is true and which is false?”

The question is, “Which lie (they are both lies) is the BIGGER lie?”

I have already indicated that eating wild animals that Americans typically don’t eat, like geese from the local hangout spot lake, is okay by me. But that isn’t what makes Trumps claim a lie. It is that no one in Springfield, OH (or anywhere else likely) has eaten someone else’s pet. So that’s a doozy for sure, on account of scale.

But! But, but, but! Kamala’s lie contains many, many lies and confusions and deceptions. I have time and so have listed them.

  1. The antecedent to “we” slips from “Harris/Walz” to “Americans” without comment. Which “we” does she mean, for example, when she says “that’s who we are” at the end? That’s who “Harris/Walz” is? Or that’s who populates America?
  2. “The people who came before us” could mean “previous democrats” or “founding fathers”.
  3. Abortion, as the issue it is today, wasn’t on the minds of either early Democrats or the Founding Fathers.
  4. Gun violence, in the contemporary sense, wasn’t on the minds of either early Democrats or the Founding Fathers.
  5. Access to ballot box, in the contemporary sense, wasn’t on the minds of either early Democrats or the Founding Fathers.
  6. Sodomy (“love who you love”) was definitely on the minds and deemed immoral by early Democrats and the Founding Fathers.
  7. Vagrancy (“just be”) was also definitely on the minds and deemed immoral by early Democrats and the Founding Fathers.

Taken together, what began as a history lesson turned into a party paper and yet no one can say for sure what Kamala said or meant. This actually undermines the lies she told, and yet she is the winner, in my book.

Kamala, puppet that she is, told the bigger doozy. What do you think?

Brief Excerpt from Victor Hugo’s Les Misérables from which to Compare Personal Experience with Children

“That Cosette continue to love him! That God would not prevent the heart of his child from turning to him, and remaining his! Loved by Cosette, he felt healed, refreshed, soothed, satisfied, rewarded, crowned. Loved by Cosette, he was content! He asked nothing more. Had anybody said to him, “Do you wish for anything better?” he would have answered, “No.” Had God said to him, “Do you want heaven?” he would have answered, “I would be the loser.”

****

Before H- was born, we chose not to know the sex of the baby. As a military man, I feared a son, because he would naturally want to follow in his dad’s footsteps and leave home for war. So when H- came into the world, I said, “Good! She can live with us forever!”

Then divorce; essentially weekends only; moving away for work, which was sold to H- by her vindictive mother (and gee-ma and gee-pa??) as her father abandoning her (to full applause of society, including professional counseling sessions for problem of “abandoned by father”); moving back, only to be ghosted by H- since last December.

It may seem that one could reasonably conclude that my “she can live with us forever” was uttered in the same manner as Jean Valjean’s sentiment.

It was not.

As I explained above, my sentiment was about being frustrated with the result of my war-seeking and not wanting it to define the rest of my time on earth, ie, I didn’t want to pass on military service to my son as if it was a genetic disease. The better option seemed to have a girl, since obviously war is for boys.

To conclude, unlike Jean Valjean, noble hero that he is, I am not made content or discontent by one of my child’s feelings toward me—especially while they are a child. There’s really no one on earth who affects my “contentment”, let alone is sufficient for it. I regard the idea as a character flaw. But in a romantic novel of novels, it is perfect and Jean Valjean is perfect.

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.

Trump Is the Content that Knocked “50 Shades” Off The Charts. What Will Displace Trump?

Trump has this thing in the bag and has had it in the bag since 2020. Naturally, the question follows, “How do we reconcile the headlines with this fact?” Answer: His base, his fans eat worry like it’s Wheaties. Trump’s loyalists are like America’s Mom. All worry—no peace. They always have been. They always will be. So no, there will never be “Trump has 10pt Lead in Every Single Swing State, and 30pt Lead in Wyoming!!” doozies on any legacy or otherwise sites.

Instead, the newspaper men and algorithms will continue to “sell” (hear: feed) headlines that there is a close race—maybe the closest ever!!—which necessarily implies both that Trump may lose (eek!!) and that it will be simpler for the Left to cheat (double eek!!!).

And why? Because they are in the business of selling stories.

Surely all of us are actually kinda tired of Trump. Maybe it would have been better if he won in 2020, by any means, just so it would’ve been only 8 years of Trump. Now we’re stuck with 12. Oh well.

But can you imagine what will sell newspapers/clicks when Trump is gone? Like, engage in a thought experiment with me for a moment. What is more, or at least as equally, outrageous than airing a nation’s dirty laundry during a televised, ahem, “presidential” debate.

I mean, I met a man at a Black Church in Denver back in 2016ish. He was displaced to Denver from the backwoods, and backwards, state of Louisiana during Katrina. He freely told me that he killed a goose that he had grabbed from the park. He said, “Peedah, everyone was so shocked and upset when they saw me do it.” Then he knowingly smiled and added, “But you can bet they came a-knockin’ when they smelled me cookin’ ‘im up!”

Now would this man’s story have made national news? Absolutely not. And why not? Because it’s pitiful. (He also shared that his sister drove off without him because she chose to fill her vehicle with “stuff” instead of her brother.)

But the idea that immigrants, illegal at that, are doing the same? That is downright shocking. It is appalling. It is sub-human and brings all manner of uncomfortable truths to the surface (America is different and better than BIPOC countries). No one laughs at the idea like I did with my new friend. So the newspaper men run it. Trump runs it. And we all (you all—I’m no sucker) eat it up. In a sense, Trump is like the EL James of American News—our guilty pleasure. What can follow him? Maybe we should ask, What followed 50 Shades?” Nothing.

Or Trump.

Mom’s read BDSM at the park on their Nooks and Kindle’s. Now everyone reads Trump on every screen, all day long.

What comes next? Something just as laughable, I suspect.

Much Ado About Guns, Much Ado About Safety, Much Ado About First Responders

“As a veteran military interrogator…”

“From an ER nurse married to an LEO…”

“As a retired sheriff’s deputy…”

“As a physician…”

“As a retired federal agent…”

Dear Reader, care to make a guess as to the title or content of the YouTube video which had such opening lines to the comments?

****

Last week was a busy week for me.

For a myriad of reasons, we just don’t fly as much at night, so most of my night hitches grow long and I run out of things to do. Sure, I read diligently. You remember I dabble in learning ASL. I exercise. But if you are able to rest all night and then have 12hrs before work, that is a lot of time to fill.

With that in mind, I had resolved a while ago to get my concealed carry permit again (I had one while active duty, but never kept it when I moved). Rather than take up time when home with the kids, I figured, “Why not find some training while away at work?” So I did.

I had the training scheduled for last Fri/Sat. It made for a bit of stress, because Thursday night and Friday night now became “I hope we don’t fly” instead of “Let’s see what the shift brings.” But it was a good plan.

Then the school shooting happened. This go-around, the unique part was that the kid was already known to be uncommon, to put it mildly. For all the talk about guns, this fact was the most depressing to me because it makes one feel the most helpless. We simply are not safe.

Then I had some time at the beginning of a shift to catch up on any company mandated CBT and saw that I had to do the annual “workplace violence” one before October. So I did it.

To summarize the week thus far, I knew I had concealed carry training (implies self-defense on the brain), there was a school shooting (I have two high schoolers), the shooter was known beforehand to law enforcement (we are not safe), and even at work I had to contemplate how to survive, as a first responder, to any violence while responding to a scene of violence.

That was all before Friday and the first part of the concealed carry training.

Sidebar: There is an actual shooting/accuracy test to the training, and I hadn’t shot in over a decade, so I was a bit nervous. I reviewed some videos which seemed to have good authority and called to mind what the Air Force had taught me. Suffice it to say, I will never watch another. Nor will I ever “train” or consider “training” as anything other than live fire. The recoil and overall physicality endured while firing a weapon cannot be replicated by any amount of anything. This is different from flying, for example, and many other activities in which simulation is highly beneficial. I’m writing this more for me than you, but if you don’t shoot much and have fallen prey to YouTube charisma, then feel free to use this confession to motivate you to get off your duff and go to the range.

Back to the main point of this post.

While in the training, we learned about a concept that I had never considered before (or heard of): insurance for the legal aftermath of “self-defense” shootings. It seemed like a reasonable concept/product and I was about to purchase it.

Then today I was introduced to the fine print and dissuaded from ever purchasing such insurance, in favor of hiring an attorney on retainer. (I am not sure if that is the proper language, but you get my point.)

Then while down that rabbit hole, I discovered the rather unique video which garnered the comments above. Without further ado, the video was a recommendation (which I have taken to heart) to always have the police take you to the hospital after a shooting. Reasons given ranged from strategic, to physical, to financial. But what struck me was the overkill of “appeal to expertise” or “ethos” (recall from Aristotle “logos, pathos, ethos”) in the supportive YT comments. First responders and others in similar positions at hospitals etc certainly have a thankless job. What else can be the reason they so nakedly want respect?

In the end, I am a dad, not a warrior, not a gunslinger. America is a safe place to live and work. First responders are as guilty for their attitudes as the thankless public. And I will be happy for a nice break, and some camping in the mountains with the kids in two days.

****

So did you guess correctly? Let me know in the comments.

The Gays Will Save Us?

I discovered Douglas Murray by accident. He was openly and authoritatively denouncing Islam—and still breathing.

On the other hand, a friend shared a Bari Weiss piece with me. I assumed Bari was a man. Funny. She just started a new university—who does that?

Neither of them utter nonsense. They both seem to pick the most relevant fights. But they’re gay.

They’re not dead, so it’s possible that they see the light before too long. I don’t want to discourage anyone who fights for truth from fighting. So keep it up! Keep writing and podcasting. Please do.

But I have been thinking about these two figures for some time now and I just cannot conclude that being gay doesn’t matter. Sure it does. Of course it matters. All sorts of historical figures, so we’re told, were gay, and they may have even done good for Western civilization. But being gay isn’t a binder for us.

Something is amiss. The being gay is not going to work for the same reason that there eventually is just one straw that breaks the camel’s back. One cannot rebel in every instance, at every turn.

Put another way, why can’t we (sober, reasoning mankind) just have one celebrity level, A-lister who is married with kids and boring. Why is that so repulsive and stigmatized as inherently uncool and unintelligent?

In the end, my point is simply that the fact that that last question resonates tells me that no, no the gays (Murray and Weiss) will not save us. Whether this is because 1. We don’t need saving, or 2. They are not fit for the work of saving, I do not yet know. (I’m leaning towards option 1.)

I’m a Veteran and I’m Not Voting. (Trump Wins.) And What I Plan To Do If He Loses.

My acquaintances are disturbed when they encounter the fact that I am not voting. Here are my reasons for not voting, as plain as I can write them.

Firstly, I do not want Donald J. Trump or Kamala Harris to be the POTUS during the years 2025-2028.

Secondly, I do not support some higher principle on the issue of voting than that.

Got it? It’s not complicated.

On to the next question my acquaintances have often posed, “So you think life is fine and dandy and this election isn’t as meaningful as the general mood (which you confess to feel) suggests and that Kamala is a sacrificial lamb and the Dems are really just looking at 2028. I get it. But what does it mean if she wins? Like, what do you think it would mean since it would mean that you do not have your finger on the pulse, that you do not have accurate assumptions, and that you do not even know up from down? What then, Pete?”

Fair question. Firstly, action-wise, I plan to go to a store and buy an American flag and flag pole. Then I plan to return home and hang it upside down outside my door. One neighbor already does this. I have always liked and respected the silent power it holds. I also have always liked the idea of citizens silently solidifying through such tactics.

Then I will wait. I do not know for how long. What will I wait for? A hero. There are no heroes at the moment. It may be decades before one emerges. But one will come again. And on that day, I will support the hero—even so far as with violence against men who oppose the hero.

But, and mark my words, none of this is going to happen. My house will stay nondescript. Life is fine-and-dandy and you’re all suckers for believing the hype.