Evidently the Hobby Lobby lobbies more as a habit than as a hobby. I've been reading that they contribute a lot of money to religious political causes. It mightcould be that they seriously envision a Christian America in our not too distant future. They are not alone in that vision.
Frankly, all of the major religions think that they are THE religion and that their manifest destiny is to convert the world to their faith. So, America would be a huge coup for Muslims....or Baptists...Catholics...Mormons... Pretty much everybody but Shakers, Quakers or the Amish want to rule the world.
There's a lot of money involved and, of course power. It really has nothing to do with saving souls no matter what the brochures say.
Our founders saw fit to create a separation of church and state here while ensuring that everyone would have a right to practice their religion. They didn't have to get it right and they didn't even have to practice. They could totally suck at it. The idea was that there would be no state religion- ever.
Well, some people- no matter how much they profess to love the constitution- love Jesus more. Evidently he promises Heaven whereas the constitution does not. There is no proof of deliverance on that promise so you have to take that on faith. We the people have to deal with the Constitution while here on earth. It should be enough that our country allows everyone the freedom of religion but, religion seeks to disallow the freedom of everyone.
We're not a theocracy. We're supposed to hate and fear theocracies when they are Talibangelical. Why embrace them when they're Christian? The recent nonsense in Arizona showed religious law fanatics that, what's good for the Christians is also good for the Muslims and all other religions. Until Christians can change the Constitution of the United States and declare a state religion, laws can't be written that promote one religion over another. Muslims are why the law was denied in Arizona and why Hobby Lobby will be denied in this round of religious legal wrangling.
I don't know if I'm giving credit where credit is due here but, thank God for Muslims guaranteeing our religious freedom, just by existing. Or is that Allah?
Saturday, March 29, 2014
Sunday, March 23, 2014
Oh? So?
I didn't much care when Fred Phelps died because I didn't much care that he lived. I was amused at some of the jokes and cartoons though. The one where he's at The Pearly Gates and St. Peter introduces Phelps to his roommates, "Adam and Steve" was pretty funny! Even atheists must have thought for a moment that, by all rights, there should be a God to greet Phelps just so the hateful bastard could get his comeuppance. And Heaven or Hell too. Maybe the Hell for Phelps would have been those roommates?
The guy was just a generic, psycho hater. There are untold numbers of such obnoxious idiots all over the world and the internet. Big deal. He was famous for taking his hatred of gays to military funerals. Why? Who the fuck knows. It *worked* if his goal was just to offend pretty much everyone. It was offensive. So?
He was no worse than an internet troll. But, he got on TV. His words made no sense and were only meant to provoke. That's a troll. Believe me- I've know a few. He got on TV. He was crazy enough to put himself out there rather than hide his craziness behind a keyboard. Big deal.
He was famous for being a hateful idiot. To that I say: "Oh."
Oh, that guy? So?
The guy was just a generic, psycho hater. There are untold numbers of such obnoxious idiots all over the world and the internet. Big deal. He was famous for taking his hatred of gays to military funerals. Why? Who the fuck knows. It *worked* if his goal was just to offend pretty much everyone. It was offensive. So?
He was no worse than an internet troll. But, he got on TV. His words made no sense and were only meant to provoke. That's a troll. Believe me- I've know a few. He got on TV. He was crazy enough to put himself out there rather than hide his craziness behind a keyboard. Big deal.
He was famous for being a hateful idiot. To that I say: "Oh."
Oh, that guy? So?
Saturday, March 22, 2014
Jim Crow Logic
You know, I'm no fake, internet therapist/psychologist (and no one in their right mind should be) but, I am a student of life. I've been at this for several decades and, I pay attention. The other day amidst the usual fight with the loyal minions of the fake therapist, the subject of Susanne Atanus, republican candidate for representative of an Illinois district came up. She's an awful woman who looks like a man who looks like a Silverback gorilla. I don't mean to be catty but, it's true. Worse though, she's running for public office and she believes God's punishments for marriage equality and abortions, are tornadoes, autism and dementia. That's awful but, it gets worse.
One of the fake therapist's minions stated that people should be able to look past that opinion of Atanus's and judge her on her other beliefs. In short, don't hold that against her. Insane homophobia is just a quirk for some people, I guess. It's not at all a deal breaker. Like, say what you will about Mussolini- he made the trains run on time!
Republican's are forgiving, quite often to a fault. Republican senator, David Vitter, is in the news today because he thinks the Koch brothers are "two of the finest American patriots in the history of the earth"! Wow. How old does he think America is? The whole earth, eh? Anyway, Vitter is yet another GOP family values republican. He's one who just happened to have been a client of the notorious "DC Madame" a couple years back. He, um, liked to have the prostitutes dress him in, um, diapers. Yeah.....family values...
Is it just me being an unforgiving, godless liberal, that I judge these people by the freak flags they so proudly wave? Is that so wrong? Is it my bad? Because, ya know, they've all be so good and understanding of our president.....
Poster Sublime- yeah him again- is very forgiving of republicans as well. I think he can relate because though a self-described happily married man and father of three, he and his wife like to swap partners with other couples. He openly flirts with other women on the internet. He's probably going to be Senator Sublime someday. Freak flags flying sure don't stop men from getting into politics. It seems to be a prerequisite.
It just seems to me that if someone is an adulterer, maybe he shouldn't be in charge of things? Marital multi-tasking is not a virtue.
I haven't seen it yet but scientist Neil deGrasse Tyson (the heavyweight champion of the Science World) has a show called "Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey." I'm assuming it's the history of the creation of the universe and earth as seen by intelligent people. Creationists are demanding he allow them equal time to portray their Biblical tales.
I thought they had Sundays for that?
Sigh. What is it with Jim Crow Laws extending to science as well as elsewhere in politics? Separate but equal didn't exactly work with racial laws in this country. I don't see good application with science or history past or current. The same people (it seems) who complain about Black History Month want deGrasse Tyson to give equal time to the fairy tale of Noah's Ark just like the Sunday morning shows give attention to fairy tales of BENGHAZ!!!!! by teapublicans.
You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.
That's a common refrain on the internet, where the Jim Crow Laws of debate are nearly impossible to overturn. Know why? Because the people who invoke them are impossible themselves! Thanks to the anonymity of the internet (at least where the threads are concerned) no one really knows how much of an idiot you are. You don't have to answer for your idiocy. Sublime and race are two fine examples, from the Chicago Regulars thread. Both are documented minions of stalker-troll, Angelique770 (currently doing business as Annabella) and both can deny her existence and proclaim it in the same post and not even blush despite a preponderance of evidence of over-familiarity. That both are republican is not the least bit surprising to me.
All in all it reminds me of convicts who, despite incarceration, never admit guilt. Despite facts, evidence, judges and juries, they feel as long as they hold out maybe someone will believe their proclamations of not-so-guiltyness....and they wish it had been one person their jury....
Too bad the Constitution doesn't promise a separation of fact from fiction.
One of the fake therapist's minions stated that people should be able to look past that opinion of Atanus's and judge her on her other beliefs. In short, don't hold that against her. Insane homophobia is just a quirk for some people, I guess. It's not at all a deal breaker. Like, say what you will about Mussolini- he made the trains run on time!
Republican's are forgiving, quite often to a fault. Republican senator, David Vitter, is in the news today because he thinks the Koch brothers are "two of the finest American patriots in the history of the earth"! Wow. How old does he think America is? The whole earth, eh? Anyway, Vitter is yet another GOP family values republican. He's one who just happened to have been a client of the notorious "DC Madame" a couple years back. He, um, liked to have the prostitutes dress him in, um, diapers. Yeah.....family values...
Is it just me being an unforgiving, godless liberal, that I judge these people by the freak flags they so proudly wave? Is that so wrong? Is it my bad? Because, ya know, they've all be so good and understanding of our president.....
Poster Sublime- yeah him again- is very forgiving of republicans as well. I think he can relate because though a self-described happily married man and father of three, he and his wife like to swap partners with other couples. He openly flirts with other women on the internet. He's probably going to be Senator Sublime someday. Freak flags flying sure don't stop men from getting into politics. It seems to be a prerequisite.
It just seems to me that if someone is an adulterer, maybe he shouldn't be in charge of things? Marital multi-tasking is not a virtue.
I haven't seen it yet but scientist Neil deGrasse Tyson (the heavyweight champion of the Science World) has a show called "Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey." I'm assuming it's the history of the creation of the universe and earth as seen by intelligent people. Creationists are demanding he allow them equal time to portray their Biblical tales.
I thought they had Sundays for that?
Sigh. What is it with Jim Crow Laws extending to science as well as elsewhere in politics? Separate but equal didn't exactly work with racial laws in this country. I don't see good application with science or history past or current. The same people (it seems) who complain about Black History Month want deGrasse Tyson to give equal time to the fairy tale of Noah's Ark just like the Sunday morning shows give attention to fairy tales of BENGHAZ!!!!! by teapublicans.
You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.
That's a common refrain on the internet, where the Jim Crow Laws of debate are nearly impossible to overturn. Know why? Because the people who invoke them are impossible themselves! Thanks to the anonymity of the internet (at least where the threads are concerned) no one really knows how much of an idiot you are. You don't have to answer for your idiocy. Sublime and race are two fine examples, from the Chicago Regulars thread. Both are documented minions of stalker-troll, Angelique770 (currently doing business as Annabella) and both can deny her existence and proclaim it in the same post and not even blush despite a preponderance of evidence of over-familiarity. That both are republican is not the least bit surprising to me.
All in all it reminds me of convicts who, despite incarceration, never admit guilt. Despite facts, evidence, judges and juries, they feel as long as they hold out maybe someone will believe their proclamations of not-so-guiltyness....and they wish it had been one person their jury....
Too bad the Constitution doesn't promise a separation of fact from fiction.
Thursday, March 20, 2014
Google THIS Ferrerman!
Recently, Topix poster and one-time blogger, Sublime1, questioned my use of the Statcounter service I use here. I say "one-time blogger" by the way, because Sublime blogged just one time and then he quit because he sucked. It was some over-wrought piece about the virtues of smoking weed. Dedicated non-readers know that Those who can, blog. Those who can't, write boring posts on Topix instead. The blogging biz isn't for everyone.
However, probably every serious blogger in the blogosphere uses Statcounter to accurately account for their audience's tastes. Aside from a more accurate accounting of blog hits, it will tell the blogger what posts people are reading and how much time readers are spending on the blog. It's pretty useful info...to a blogger. I like knowing who is reading and where in the world they are reading from. For example, one of my more viscious trolls has a Marysville, Ohio IP address- among others. When I first began using Statcounter I noticed I'd be getting around a hundred hits a day and 50-60 were from Marysville. The whole town didn't read me, just one obsessive dickhead. This asshole was habitchually (sic) checking my blog all day and night. I wanted a fair count so, I blocked the IP to keep things kosher. Mind you, the slug could still read obsessively, but MLB (Major League Blogging) wouldn't suspect I had been juicing! When I enter the Blogging Hall Of Fame, I don't want an asterisk by the Ferrerman name on my special day and people whispering any more than they should.
I have a general curiosity as to who my audience is and where they hail from. Statcounter gives you the readers name, address, phone number, Social Security number, penis size (where applicable) mother's maiden name and installs a camera in their shower and bedroom. I gotta tell ya- i've got some of the nakedest non-readers ever! Very limber too! I wish they'd wash their hands more though. But hey- the blogs I read say the same about me!
Well, I kid, mostly because as soon as I say or post things like that, certain people set fire to their hair and start running around screaming that their hair is on fire. The Statcounter shows that too. I'll link it later. The IP address does tell you where a person's Internet Service Provider is. And that's pretty much it. Everywhere you go on the internet, your IP address goes with you. That's the way it is. I would have thought I was the last person to know that but, evidently Sublime is.
Other websites do track your every move but- admittedly- Google and Facebook and a few hundred thousand(?) other sites are a tad more sophisticated than the Ferrerman blog. We're kinda bare bones here. It's enough to get me to put on pants when I blog. I don't care where you shop, for example, because I'm not trying to sell you anything.
The IP's, by the way, simply display the location designated by the Internet Service Provider. I gather that for most people in in the general area of their home. I was getting hounded by some idiot calling itself "ITK Cubsfan" who I suspected was the Marysville asshole because he'd try and comment "sup, pie" a couple times a day, every day. A google search showed the fuckhead was posting from Wichita, Kansas rather than Pekin, Indiana like it showed on the Statcounter. Over time two more ITK locations showed (ultimately) in Wichita. Whoever it was, they've been having a proxy fail. I've been meaning to tell them that but, I don't know who they are...
By the way, Clackamas, Oregon, you are my number one dedicated non-reader according to Statcounter! Number two is when you read from Portland....A LOT!
However, probably every serious blogger in the blogosphere uses Statcounter to accurately account for their audience's tastes. Aside from a more accurate accounting of blog hits, it will tell the blogger what posts people are reading and how much time readers are spending on the blog. It's pretty useful info...to a blogger. I like knowing who is reading and where in the world they are reading from. For example, one of my more viscious trolls has a Marysville, Ohio IP address- among others. When I first began using Statcounter I noticed I'd be getting around a hundred hits a day and 50-60 were from Marysville. The whole town didn't read me, just one obsessive dickhead. This asshole was habitchually (sic) checking my blog all day and night. I wanted a fair count so, I blocked the IP to keep things kosher. Mind you, the slug could still read obsessively, but MLB (Major League Blogging) wouldn't suspect I had been juicing! When I enter the Blogging Hall Of Fame, I don't want an asterisk by the Ferrerman name on my special day and people whispering any more than they should.
I have a general curiosity as to who my audience is and where they hail from. Statcounter gives you the readers name, address, phone number, Social Security number, penis size (where applicable) mother's maiden name and installs a camera in their shower and bedroom. I gotta tell ya- i've got some of the nakedest non-readers ever! Very limber too! I wish they'd wash their hands more though. But hey- the blogs I read say the same about me!
Well, I kid, mostly because as soon as I say or post things like that, certain people set fire to their hair and start running around screaming that their hair is on fire. The Statcounter shows that too. I'll link it later. The IP address does tell you where a person's Internet Service Provider is. And that's pretty much it. Everywhere you go on the internet, your IP address goes with you. That's the way it is. I would have thought I was the last person to know that but, evidently Sublime is.
Other websites do track your every move but- admittedly- Google and Facebook and a few hundred thousand(?) other sites are a tad more sophisticated than the Ferrerman blog. We're kinda bare bones here. It's enough to get me to put on pants when I blog. I don't care where you shop, for example, because I'm not trying to sell you anything.
The IP's, by the way, simply display the location designated by the Internet Service Provider. I gather that for most people in in the general area of their home. I was getting hounded by some idiot calling itself "ITK Cubsfan" who I suspected was the Marysville asshole because he'd try and comment "sup, pie" a couple times a day, every day. A google search showed the fuckhead was posting from Wichita, Kansas rather than Pekin, Indiana like it showed on the Statcounter. Over time two more ITK locations showed (ultimately) in Wichita. Whoever it was, they've been having a proxy fail. I've been meaning to tell them that but, I don't know who they are...
By the way, Clackamas, Oregon, you are my number one dedicated non-reader according to Statcounter! Number two is when you read from Portland....A LOT!
Tuesday, March 18, 2014
We already have small government
Bill Moyers had a nice piece about the myth of meritocracy. Bill Maher had a short piece about the recent CPAC meetings and how, despite the cable news for and against conservatism, we are not a conservative nation. In 5 of the last 6 elections, the GOP has failed to win the popular vote. They haven't even straight up won a presidential election since Bush senior, way back in the 20th century. And if you pay any attention at all to politics and if you are female, black or Hispanic, you know they are not even close to being muy popular with the ladies and the brown people. Women alone are a little better than half the population. Conservatives should be laying coats down over puddles for ladies everywhere but, they do not. It turns out life- especially as we know it in America- doesn't work that way. There is no meritocracy.
The Bills are both right. We are not conservative and there is no meritocracy. The country is run by the 1% that holds 50% of the wealth. To a degree it always has been this way. Money has always ruled the world. But- in my view- since the moment they murdered Kennedy, we the people lost our tenuous control of the government for good.
There is no way that the powers that be would roll the dice and turn the country over to one man (and/or his party) every 4 to 8 years. Really, if you think about it, would you? There's probably no need to murder me in my sleep here because I don't have the details or any Illuminati tales or name and addresses or any of the usual junk politics. I'm just going by what I know of human nature and greed. Someone always has to be in charge, ALWAYS!
It's that simple. At work or at play, someone is going to try and run things. Someone else will try and take that power away from them. Rarely is the one in charge, in charge, because he is the bestest, smartest guy for the job. Nor does he represent anything near the majority of the people. Politics is all about the Benjamins rather than the Benjamin of Franklin fame. You get control of the country and you keep it or someone will take it from you.
The best way to do this so far has been the American way. Yay US! We the people think we are running the show because we think we change leaders every 4-8 years because that's just the way we do things here in THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD!
Well, it's smoke and mirrors and a dog and pony show. Not to pick on GW Bush but, he was appointed by the USSC for his first term and it only sorta/almost was nearly close because his brother happened to be governor of Florida and voting there has often been more interesting than it should be. Then in '04, Ohio took it's turn sorta electing him with their own brand of shenanigans. My point is that, even though we actually do have a history of changing parties in the White House every 4 to 8 years by vote, no republican conservative has been popularly elected since 1988 and he only made it one term. That and Mitt Romney losing by some 5 million votes in '12 tells me that we're not a conservative country.
But, do you know who is conservative? The 1%. I think they're tired of the illusion of democracy but, in a country with about as many guns as people, you just can't make the big changes over night. You have to ease people into things and make them think it's their idea. More importantly, you have to make them think it is a popular idea. This can be tough to do when you're pushing conservative agendas in a non-conservative nation.
Look what they're doing now SNAP and welfare programs. They're telling us that we don't want them. We don't want Social Security either. And not only do we not want the minimum wage raised, we don't want the minimum wage at all. It's not that we are cold and heartless. Fuck no- we're a Christian Nation and we're not communist and those things I mentioned are all communist and make people lazy and, we can't have that.
So, take away welfare and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance and Program and people either get jobs or they die. OK, they don't talk about that in polite company even on FOX but, do the math. They'll get jobs as long as the minimum stays the same or, better yet, is eliminated. When employers can afford to hire is when they do hire. Forget all that nonsense about supply and demand you might have learned in college. If employers have cash laying around from tax breaks and the price is right, they hire people to work, out of the goodness of their hearts. For example, up until 1861, black people in the south had full employment. Yes, you may call it slavery but, the largest concentration of wealth was in Vicksburg, Mississippi and not fancy-pants New York. What does that tell you?
I digress but it tells me that there was big money in slavery. While that peculiar institution is frowned upon these days, paying people next to nothing is as en vogue as ever. And, it's legal and getting more legal every day....
The Bills are both right. We are not conservative and there is no meritocracy. The country is run by the 1% that holds 50% of the wealth. To a degree it always has been this way. Money has always ruled the world. But- in my view- since the moment they murdered Kennedy, we the people lost our tenuous control of the government for good.
There is no way that the powers that be would roll the dice and turn the country over to one man (and/or his party) every 4 to 8 years. Really, if you think about it, would you? There's probably no need to murder me in my sleep here because I don't have the details or any Illuminati tales or name and addresses or any of the usual junk politics. I'm just going by what I know of human nature and greed. Someone always has to be in charge, ALWAYS!
It's that simple. At work or at play, someone is going to try and run things. Someone else will try and take that power away from them. Rarely is the one in charge, in charge, because he is the bestest, smartest guy for the job. Nor does he represent anything near the majority of the people. Politics is all about the Benjamins rather than the Benjamin of Franklin fame. You get control of the country and you keep it or someone will take it from you.
The best way to do this so far has been the American way. Yay US! We the people think we are running the show because we think we change leaders every 4-8 years because that's just the way we do things here in THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD!
Well, it's smoke and mirrors and a dog and pony show. Not to pick on GW Bush but, he was appointed by the USSC for his first term and it only sorta/almost was nearly close because his brother happened to be governor of Florida and voting there has often been more interesting than it should be. Then in '04, Ohio took it's turn sorta electing him with their own brand of shenanigans. My point is that, even though we actually do have a history of changing parties in the White House every 4 to 8 years by vote, no republican conservative has been popularly elected since 1988 and he only made it one term. That and Mitt Romney losing by some 5 million votes in '12 tells me that we're not a conservative country.
But, do you know who is conservative? The 1%. I think they're tired of the illusion of democracy but, in a country with about as many guns as people, you just can't make the big changes over night. You have to ease people into things and make them think it's their idea. More importantly, you have to make them think it is a popular idea. This can be tough to do when you're pushing conservative agendas in a non-conservative nation.
Look what they're doing now SNAP and welfare programs. They're telling us that we don't want them. We don't want Social Security either. And not only do we not want the minimum wage raised, we don't want the minimum wage at all. It's not that we are cold and heartless. Fuck no- we're a Christian Nation and we're not communist and those things I mentioned are all communist and make people lazy and, we can't have that.
So, take away welfare and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance and Program and people either get jobs or they die. OK, they don't talk about that in polite company even on FOX but, do the math. They'll get jobs as long as the minimum stays the same or, better yet, is eliminated. When employers can afford to hire is when they do hire. Forget all that nonsense about supply and demand you might have learned in college. If employers have cash laying around from tax breaks and the price is right, they hire people to work, out of the goodness of their hearts. For example, up until 1861, black people in the south had full employment. Yes, you may call it slavery but, the largest concentration of wealth was in Vicksburg, Mississippi and not fancy-pants New York. What does that tell you?
I digress but it tells me that there was big money in slavery. While that peculiar institution is frowned upon these days, paying people next to nothing is as en vogue as ever. And, it's legal and getting more legal every day....
Saturday, March 15, 2014
Ju Ju Ninja Stuntz
Remember that incident in New York City last year when a gang of bikers terrorized a young family and then chased and beat up the father after he kinda freaked out and ran over one of the gang when they surrounded him because he didn't know how to handle himself when surrounded by assholes on ninja motorcycles? Whatever happened with that story? I'm asking you because I don't know.
And I'm asking because I just saw JuJu Chang of ABC News do a piece on a loose-knit gang of ninja motorcyclists whose goal so far in life was to shutdown a bridge in Charleston, South Carolina. These guys are really talented riders and can do wheelies and can stand up while riding and brake with the front wheel without flipping over. All neat tricks. No doubt. These guys aren't even professionals so they don't have to give the usual disclaimer about not trying these stuntz at home but, don't try these stunts at home!
Or, on the fucking expressway. The leader explained- in pure idiot savant logic- that the riders were better on their bikes than the car drivers who are poorly trained, texting, applying make up, etc. Well, OK. Since you put it that way, may I ask what the fuck difference that makes? For extra credit, what kind of sense does that make? Take your time.
You can be the couple that won the Gold in Pairs Figure Skating but if you do your routine in the middle of the Hawks/Wings game or open skate at the Ice Chalet, people are going to get hurt. Duh.
Before there was the internet, there were letters to the editor and a few decades ago, I remember reading a few from a guy who felt he was such an excellent driver that he and others like him should have special licenses where they could drive their European sports cars as fast as they wanted...on the highways...where other people drive while putting on their make up- but not texting at the time. See- people have always been selfish idiots. They've just never been sure where best to be selfish idiots. For the race car driver-wannabe, I was thinking the track! With other racers! Or do you like competing with drunks, little old ladies in Buicks, semis, families out to visit relatives, teens who just got that piece of paper and, in general, people not nearly as skilled as you?
Same with the crotch-rocket crowd. I don't ride mostly because I think of all the close calls I've had on 4 wheels and figure I'd be dead X-times over if I had been on a bike. Why put life and limb in the hands of the road companions I mentioned above? How 'bout that road less traveled?
These Charlestown ninjas had the bright idea that they should shut down the local bridge, pretty much because they could. Maybe. They're young and restless and looking for kicks and wanting to stick it to the man, brophus! The usual nonsense.
Word got out that they were going to close down the bridge and take it over on a certain date. That's where the very spankable Ju Ju Chang and Nightline came in. She interviewed the ninjas and the cops about their plans. Ju Ju has some brass ovaries on her- in her- because she put on a helmet and got on the back of some dude's bike and he went off and did some of his tricks. Not many news personalities could or would do that. She clearly liked it but she didn't make a big deal out of it. JuJu Chang does her own stunts! I appreciated that. She was just getting the story.
In the end it wasn't much of a story. The cops were out in full force with a helicopter, their own motorcycles and plenty of manpower in cars and the whole thing stalled when one of the lead ninjas was spotted sporting a firearm. He was legal to carry and pulled over for the cops when they lit him up. For some reason this took the wind out of the ninja sails and they were unable to shut the bridge down. They all just kinda gave up and drifted away, free to plot another day.
Why was the guy sporting a firearm at an event where he and his friends were going to break all sorts of traffic laws including evading arrest but not do any shooting? Well, I guess because he could. If not for that, maybe they pull it off. Who knows? Someone's always doing something they shouldn't, just because they can. Ain't that life?
And I'm asking because I just saw JuJu Chang of ABC News do a piece on a loose-knit gang of ninja motorcyclists whose goal so far in life was to shutdown a bridge in Charleston, South Carolina. These guys are really talented riders and can do wheelies and can stand up while riding and brake with the front wheel without flipping over. All neat tricks. No doubt. These guys aren't even professionals so they don't have to give the usual disclaimer about not trying these stuntz at home but, don't try these stunts at home!
Or, on the fucking expressway. The leader explained- in pure idiot savant logic- that the riders were better on their bikes than the car drivers who are poorly trained, texting, applying make up, etc. Well, OK. Since you put it that way, may I ask what the fuck difference that makes? For extra credit, what kind of sense does that make? Take your time.
You can be the couple that won the Gold in Pairs Figure Skating but if you do your routine in the middle of the Hawks/Wings game or open skate at the Ice Chalet, people are going to get hurt. Duh.
Before there was the internet, there were letters to the editor and a few decades ago, I remember reading a few from a guy who felt he was such an excellent driver that he and others like him should have special licenses where they could drive their European sports cars as fast as they wanted...on the highways...where other people drive while putting on their make up- but not texting at the time. See- people have always been selfish idiots. They've just never been sure where best to be selfish idiots. For the race car driver-wannabe, I was thinking the track! With other racers! Or do you like competing with drunks, little old ladies in Buicks, semis, families out to visit relatives, teens who just got that piece of paper and, in general, people not nearly as skilled as you?
Same with the crotch-rocket crowd. I don't ride mostly because I think of all the close calls I've had on 4 wheels and figure I'd be dead X-times over if I had been on a bike. Why put life and limb in the hands of the road companions I mentioned above? How 'bout that road less traveled?
These Charlestown ninjas had the bright idea that they should shut down the local bridge, pretty much because they could. Maybe. They're young and restless and looking for kicks and wanting to stick it to the man, brophus! The usual nonsense.
Word got out that they were going to close down the bridge and take it over on a certain date. That's where the very spankable Ju Ju Chang and Nightline came in. She interviewed the ninjas and the cops about their plans. Ju Ju has some brass ovaries on her- in her- because she put on a helmet and got on the back of some dude's bike and he went off and did some of his tricks. Not many news personalities could or would do that. She clearly liked it but she didn't make a big deal out of it. JuJu Chang does her own stunts! I appreciated that. She was just getting the story.
In the end it wasn't much of a story. The cops were out in full force with a helicopter, their own motorcycles and plenty of manpower in cars and the whole thing stalled when one of the lead ninjas was spotted sporting a firearm. He was legal to carry and pulled over for the cops when they lit him up. For some reason this took the wind out of the ninja sails and they were unable to shut the bridge down. They all just kinda gave up and drifted away, free to plot another day.
Why was the guy sporting a firearm at an event where he and his friends were going to break all sorts of traffic laws including evading arrest but not do any shooting? Well, I guess because he could. If not for that, maybe they pull it off. Who knows? Someone's always doing something they shouldn't, just because they can. Ain't that life?
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
An American Tragedy
Am I the only one who feels sorry for Adam Lanza?
His father (now) wishes he had never been born. Twenty other fathers might wish that too. That doesn't change anything. It's just pointless wishing.
It was an awful, awful thing Adam Lanza did that day. No doubt about that. But, his mother didn't know he was going to do that, nor did his father. There was no warning, no threat that he would kill his mom, 20 little children and six adults. No reason, prior to that, for his father to wish him dead?
Obviously Adam Lanza was mentally ill. No one knew that it would lead to the Sandy Hook tragedy. He didn't threaten to murder children or his mom or anyone, that I read. His mom seemed to have no fear of him having access to her weapons. I don't think that was a good call with an emotionally disturbed young man in the house or even normal teenagers but, evidently she had no reason to believe her son would do what he did. Teens live in the moment though. They all too often die there, as well. Bad grades...lost love...lock up your guns folks. Your Second Amendment 'rights' lead to a lot of children's wrongs.
You look at photos of this kid with the medieval haircut and the extra large, doe-like eyes and you would never suspect he'd be a mass murderer. He looks like the victim. He doesn't look like someone to hate.
Sheesh- there's plenty of people to hate in this world. Some haven't killed at all but talk about it all the time and for 'reasons' no 'better' than Adam Lanza's. These people are assholes and it's probably more readily apparent that they are mentally ill than Lanza was. You look at the blowhards on Topix and elsewhere- everywhere- on the internet, and you can't help but know that something will happen someday and their real life family/neighbors will say: "Oh yes, we all knew he would do this...."
After-the-fact, everybody knows. This kid was in horrible mental hell the depth of which, no one knew at the time. Now some people know. Others just hate. And his father wishes he had never been born. The sad lives of others, ya know? No, you don't know until it happens.
His father (now) wishes he had never been born. Twenty other fathers might wish that too. That doesn't change anything. It's just pointless wishing.
It was an awful, awful thing Adam Lanza did that day. No doubt about that. But, his mother didn't know he was going to do that, nor did his father. There was no warning, no threat that he would kill his mom, 20 little children and six adults. No reason, prior to that, for his father to wish him dead?
Obviously Adam Lanza was mentally ill. No one knew that it would lead to the Sandy Hook tragedy. He didn't threaten to murder children or his mom or anyone, that I read. His mom seemed to have no fear of him having access to her weapons. I don't think that was a good call with an emotionally disturbed young man in the house or even normal teenagers but, evidently she had no reason to believe her son would do what he did. Teens live in the moment though. They all too often die there, as well. Bad grades...lost love...lock up your guns folks. Your Second Amendment 'rights' lead to a lot of children's wrongs.
You look at photos of this kid with the medieval haircut and the extra large, doe-like eyes and you would never suspect he'd be a mass murderer. He looks like the victim. He doesn't look like someone to hate.
Sheesh- there's plenty of people to hate in this world. Some haven't killed at all but talk about it all the time and for 'reasons' no 'better' than Adam Lanza's. These people are assholes and it's probably more readily apparent that they are mentally ill than Lanza was. You look at the blowhards on Topix and elsewhere- everywhere- on the internet, and you can't help but know that something will happen someday and their real life family/neighbors will say: "Oh yes, we all knew he would do this...."
After-the-fact, everybody knows. This kid was in horrible mental hell the depth of which, no one knew at the time. Now some people know. Others just hate. And his father wishes he had never been born. The sad lives of others, ya know? No, you don't know until it happens.
Sunday, March 9, 2014
More Troll-fighting Tips!
In the strange and wonderful world of Topix and the internet, you're bound to make enemies. You usually don't even have to try. They'll just find you for no readily apparent reason.
Take Sublime, for example. He claims he battles me to defend the honor of Angelique770. He admits he doesn't know 'her'. So, why does he do this? Is he some kinda uber-gentleman who defends ladies sight unseen? Maybe. I'm kinda thinking that Sublime is probably about as 'real' as A770. He's a little over-the-top even by Topix standards.
It's very typical that a poster will use a picture of a pretty girl to present themselves as a pretty girl. I've never been a pretty girl but I know some and they generally get enough attention in real life that they don't need the extra, unwarranted attention of strangers on the 'net. You know what kinda woman puts up a pic of a pretty girl as an avatar on Topix? A man, that's who.
I think that's a safe bet. It's almost impossible to prove but the consensus tends to be it's usually a dude exploring his feminine side. The internet is a lot cheaper than surgery. And, less permanent.
Which brings us to Sub. He presents himself as a high-dollar, corporate patent attorney for a foreign car company. Well...
And, despite being 'happily married and a father of three', he's a ladies man. Well...
And, him and the wife are swingers. Well...
I'm not buying that. Oh, I believe they could be swingers because I've read about that stuff and seen the people who are involved and they are some of the most average looking people you could imagine and would not want to imagine having sex.
What I'm not buying is that a guy who claims to have all that on his plate, (a) bothers to spend any time posting on Topix, (b) would risk job and family like that and, (c) set the bar sooooo low in their life as to make a Ferrerman their arch enemy. It truly boggles the mind!
But, that's what Sub does. His dialogue concerning me is pretty much centered on my liberal politics with a very liberal slobbering of my alleged marital/family history thrown in, evidently for some sort of internet death blow. The thing is it's his dialogue, not mine.
That's Internet Trolling 101: make an accusation and make them defend it. Repeat as necessary. Beat it to fucking death. Then repeat again...
That brings us to today's Troll-fighting Tip.
Don't defend yourself against spurious accusations!
Troll-fighting bears remarkable resemblance to brawling with 6th grade school girls. If you deny the accusations and defend yourself, well...you would say that, wouldn't you....
If that's the kind of tactics they're teaching in law school these days, I'm glad I went to internet posting school on a painting scholarship.
This is Sublime's dialogue though. Whether it's mean-girl shit about me or self-fellating stuff about himself, I don't have to buy it. A troll has absolutely nothing to lose on the internet. They have no shame and nothing to be ashamed of. Whoever Sublime is, in real life, likely no one knows who he pretends to be on the internet. These worlds don't usually collide which is good because I don't want to know 99% of these people on the threads, never mind real life!
Take Sublime, for example. He claims he battles me to defend the honor of Angelique770. He admits he doesn't know 'her'. So, why does he do this? Is he some kinda uber-gentleman who defends ladies sight unseen? Maybe. I'm kinda thinking that Sublime is probably about as 'real' as A770. He's a little over-the-top even by Topix standards.
It's very typical that a poster will use a picture of a pretty girl to present themselves as a pretty girl. I've never been a pretty girl but I know some and they generally get enough attention in real life that they don't need the extra, unwarranted attention of strangers on the 'net. You know what kinda woman puts up a pic of a pretty girl as an avatar on Topix? A man, that's who.
I think that's a safe bet. It's almost impossible to prove but the consensus tends to be it's usually a dude exploring his feminine side. The internet is a lot cheaper than surgery. And, less permanent.
Which brings us to Sub. He presents himself as a high-dollar, corporate patent attorney for a foreign car company. Well...
And, despite being 'happily married and a father of three', he's a ladies man. Well...
And, him and the wife are swingers. Well...
I'm not buying that. Oh, I believe they could be swingers because I've read about that stuff and seen the people who are involved and they are some of the most average looking people you could imagine and would not want to imagine having sex.
What I'm not buying is that a guy who claims to have all that on his plate, (a) bothers to spend any time posting on Topix, (b) would risk job and family like that and, (c) set the bar sooooo low in their life as to make a Ferrerman their arch enemy. It truly boggles the mind!
But, that's what Sub does. His dialogue concerning me is pretty much centered on my liberal politics with a very liberal slobbering of my alleged marital/family history thrown in, evidently for some sort of internet death blow. The thing is it's his dialogue, not mine.
That's Internet Trolling 101: make an accusation and make them defend it. Repeat as necessary. Beat it to fucking death. Then repeat again...
That brings us to today's Troll-fighting Tip.
Don't defend yourself against spurious accusations!
Troll-fighting bears remarkable resemblance to brawling with 6th grade school girls. If you deny the accusations and defend yourself, well...you would say that, wouldn't you....
If that's the kind of tactics they're teaching in law school these days, I'm glad I went to internet posting school on a painting scholarship.
This is Sublime's dialogue though. Whether it's mean-girl shit about me or self-fellating stuff about himself, I don't have to buy it. A troll has absolutely nothing to lose on the internet. They have no shame and nothing to be ashamed of. Whoever Sublime is, in real life, likely no one knows who he pretends to be on the internet. These worlds don't usually collide which is good because I don't want to know 99% of these people on the threads, never mind real life!
Friday, March 7, 2014
LIP SERVICE!!!!!
From last night's Daily Show:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-march-6-2014/third-world-health-care---knoxville--tennessee-edition
Yep, we're in 37th place. That is "THE BEST HEALTHCARE IN THE WORLD!!!" There isn't even a 37th place in any professional sport. How do they pick a winner? Were the Seattle Seahawks really 37th best in the NFL?
We're leading the league in delusional people. There's no doubt about that. I have a cousin who is an actual lawyer (he doesn't play one on Topix) and he is one of the smartest people I've ever known. He's also quite kind and patient. On his Facebook page he has a childhood friend who is a crazed, hardcore teapublican. "David" stated yesterday that "...LIBERALS VETOED VETERANS BENEFITS TO PAY FOR HEALTHCARE FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS..." He posts in all-caps like that a lot. My cousin politely asks him to stop the all caps. It really is THE INTERNET VERSION OF SCREAMING AT THE TOP OF YOUR FUCKING LUNGS!!!!!!!!! Normal people know that it doesn't help make your point at all, in fact, it clouds your point.
So does declaring things in all caps, about America's healthcare supremacy that can be debunked in seconds via Google. I hate to pick on the teapublican party but THEY DO THIS ALL THE FUCKING TIME!!!!
Oops. Sorry. They do this all the time. They lie to their people (and to us) but mostly they lie to their people because their people MUST FUCKING LIKE IT!
Damn. Sorry.
For the record, it was republicans who voted against veterans benefits. You know why? Money, of course. It's cheaper to just say you support the troops. People think that covers the veterans too because the GOP loves creating veterans. They are not the least bit conservative about this. They can always find money for wars to create veterans but, when those veterans need help, it's way cheaper to vote against helping them and then telling people like David that the democrats did it. They know that he and others will scream it from the rooftops of the internet and maybe even add "free healthcare for illegals" on their own.
It's the same with declarations about the supremacy of American healthcare. It sounds true and it doesn't blame anybody so, there's that. However, 37th is not even close to "the best". It's beyond disingenuous. It's downright criminal. Naturally, the GOP has a vested interest in defeating Obamacare. They get to win politics! For them, that's even better that defeating Ferrerman and winning Topix would be for a troll! Defeating Barack Obama is their whole thing. If a Bush or- a God forbid- President McCain were promoting the ACA it would be THE GREATEST HEALTHCARE PLAN- EVER!!!!!! No lie. Don't change a word of the ACA and they love it... if it's theirs... If you don't think so, remember it was originally a republican idea and was implemented by Mitt Romney when he was governor of Massachusetts. This is clearly a case of it's the singer, not the song.
To declare our 37th place standing to be 'the best' embarrasses the whole country in front of the whole world. You see, they know. The 36 ahead of us know. And those behind us- striving to get ahead- they know too. If you don't know YOU"RE AS DUMB AS DAVID!!!!!!!
Ya know, the whole world really is watching. They're probably wondering what the hell is wrong with THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD?
Here's the folks ahead of us.
http://www.businessinsider.com/best-healthcare-systems-in-the-world-2012-6?op=1
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-march-6-2014/third-world-health-care---knoxville--tennessee-edition
Yep, we're in 37th place. That is "THE BEST HEALTHCARE IN THE WORLD!!!" There isn't even a 37th place in any professional sport. How do they pick a winner? Were the Seattle Seahawks really 37th best in the NFL?
We're leading the league in delusional people. There's no doubt about that. I have a cousin who is an actual lawyer (he doesn't play one on Topix) and he is one of the smartest people I've ever known. He's also quite kind and patient. On his Facebook page he has a childhood friend who is a crazed, hardcore teapublican. "David" stated yesterday that "...LIBERALS VETOED VETERANS BENEFITS TO PAY FOR HEALTHCARE FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS..." He posts in all-caps like that a lot. My cousin politely asks him to stop the all caps. It really is THE INTERNET VERSION OF SCREAMING AT THE TOP OF YOUR FUCKING LUNGS!!!!!!!!! Normal people know that it doesn't help make your point at all, in fact, it clouds your point.
So does declaring things in all caps, about America's healthcare supremacy that can be debunked in seconds via Google. I hate to pick on the teapublican party but THEY DO THIS ALL THE FUCKING TIME!!!!
Oops. Sorry. They do this all the time. They lie to their people (and to us) but mostly they lie to their people because their people MUST FUCKING LIKE IT!
Damn. Sorry.
For the record, it was republicans who voted against veterans benefits. You know why? Money, of course. It's cheaper to just say you support the troops. People think that covers the veterans too because the GOP loves creating veterans. They are not the least bit conservative about this. They can always find money for wars to create veterans but, when those veterans need help, it's way cheaper to vote against helping them and then telling people like David that the democrats did it. They know that he and others will scream it from the rooftops of the internet and maybe even add "free healthcare for illegals" on their own.
It's the same with declarations about the supremacy of American healthcare. It sounds true and it doesn't blame anybody so, there's that. However, 37th is not even close to "the best". It's beyond disingenuous. It's downright criminal. Naturally, the GOP has a vested interest in defeating Obamacare. They get to win politics! For them, that's even better that defeating Ferrerman and winning Topix would be for a troll! Defeating Barack Obama is their whole thing. If a Bush or- a God forbid- President McCain were promoting the ACA it would be THE GREATEST HEALTHCARE PLAN- EVER!!!!!! No lie. Don't change a word of the ACA and they love it... if it's theirs... If you don't think so, remember it was originally a republican idea and was implemented by Mitt Romney when he was governor of Massachusetts. This is clearly a case of it's the singer, not the song.
To declare our 37th place standing to be 'the best' embarrasses the whole country in front of the whole world. You see, they know. The 36 ahead of us know. And those behind us- striving to get ahead- they know too. If you don't know YOU"RE AS DUMB AS DAVID!!!!!!!
Ya know, the whole world really is watching. They're probably wondering what the hell is wrong with THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD?
Here's the folks ahead of us.
http://www.businessinsider.com/best-healthcare-systems-in-the-world-2012-6?op=1
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
This one's on The Ferrerman
Here's a curious piece from NPR.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2014/03/03/285307535/mens-drinking-isnt-the-driver-of-sexual-aggression-in-bars?utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=npr&utm_campaign=nprnews&utm_content=03032014
I understand what they found but I think it's still often a matter of men being liquored up that leads to their sexual aggressiveness. I base this on 15-some years of tending bar and being a dude. So, I think it's both.
MY policy when I tended bar was to ask the intendeds of gift round if they were receptive to the idea. This policy was in effect for men as well as women. Most of the time it was a formality since most people like free drinks no matter who is buying. However many women did not want to be beholding to just any guy who might buy them a cocktail so I asked and pointed out the suspects as a courtesy. More often than not, the lady or ladies were receptive of the freebies despite the guys being scumbags. Ya just never know but, some women just don't care. For some every night is ladies night. The first Mrs Ferrerman used to go to bars where, after every other drink, they'd take you out into the parking lot and fuck you! Free! Never on the nights when I went there though...
But, I digress... One of my early experiences tending bar was bringing a beer over to a drunk guy named Jerry from another regular at the other end of the bar. It was probably a set up. I was new but I knew Jerry was a drunk and I figured he liked beer, so.... What I didn't know was that Jerry was also an asshole who drew the line at anybody buying him a drink. I put a draft beer in front of him and announced that it was from whoever. Jerry lit in to me like nobody's business. I was quite taken aback. He was kind of aloof but had never been hostile before. How could a free beer set anyone off?
Like I said, he was a drunk. He always stood at the bar. Well, until he fell. That happened a couple of times. Over the years a several male customers would opt to stand at the bar. It's a macho thing and kind of old school drinking too. You never saw stools in the cowboy movies. You belly up to the bar. Jerry felt like as long as he could stand, he could drink. And he would buy his own drinks...His parents had bought him a transmission shop franchise across the street. Here's a business, son. Don't lose it!
We had words. I don't recall what those words were but the gist of mine probably were fuck you, you don't fucking talk to me like that, motherfucker, exclamation point. I was twenty. I was also new to the business. My boss advised me later that I needed to be more thick-skinned as a bartender. He understood and he was right. Jerry had half-assed apologized and explained himself not too long after it happened and that was that. No blood, no foul. My boss, Nick, was right and Jerry was an asshole and it WAS good policy to ask first. Of course, when Jerry bought rounds, he wasn't at all happy that I made a point of asking his intendeds if they were receptive to a round from Jerry but, ya know what- fuck Jerry. It wasn't his bar.
Liquid balls and stalwart alcoholic standards aside, common courtesy calls for the bartender to ask if someone wants another drink. Male or female, they may not have time for, or even want another drink. Believe it or not, many people know their limit. And they may not want to be beholden to strangers who may have ill intent. So, I always asked. Ninety percent of the time, even pretty girls accepted drinks from scumbags. And probably 99% of the time the buyers were OK with my having asked. Every once in awhile someone would want to go all Jerry on me and declare: I didn't ASK- I TOLD YOU..." I always calmly explained that it was my policy and my bar. That's just the way it was.
It's the way it should be. Yes, NPR, it's kind of a no-brainer that men buy women drinks to loosen their inhibitions up. It was part of my job to look after my customers. Better the wannabe drink buyer be angry at the asshole bartender who doesn't know his place than the stuck up bitches who are too good to have a drink with a couple of swell guys. The bartender can handle it. Someone has to be in control- otherwise it's chaos.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2014/03/03/285307535/mens-drinking-isnt-the-driver-of-sexual-aggression-in-bars?utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=npr&utm_campaign=nprnews&utm_content=03032014
I understand what they found but I think it's still often a matter of men being liquored up that leads to their sexual aggressiveness. I base this on 15-some years of tending bar and being a dude. So, I think it's both.
MY policy when I tended bar was to ask the intendeds of gift round if they were receptive to the idea. This policy was in effect for men as well as women. Most of the time it was a formality since most people like free drinks no matter who is buying. However many women did not want to be beholding to just any guy who might buy them a cocktail so I asked and pointed out the suspects as a courtesy. More often than not, the lady or ladies were receptive of the freebies despite the guys being scumbags. Ya just never know but, some women just don't care. For some every night is ladies night. The first Mrs Ferrerman used to go to bars where, after every other drink, they'd take you out into the parking lot and fuck you! Free! Never on the nights when I went there though...
But, I digress... One of my early experiences tending bar was bringing a beer over to a drunk guy named Jerry from another regular at the other end of the bar. It was probably a set up. I was new but I knew Jerry was a drunk and I figured he liked beer, so.... What I didn't know was that Jerry was also an asshole who drew the line at anybody buying him a drink. I put a draft beer in front of him and announced that it was from whoever. Jerry lit in to me like nobody's business. I was quite taken aback. He was kind of aloof but had never been hostile before. How could a free beer set anyone off?
Like I said, he was a drunk. He always stood at the bar. Well, until he fell. That happened a couple of times. Over the years a several male customers would opt to stand at the bar. It's a macho thing and kind of old school drinking too. You never saw stools in the cowboy movies. You belly up to the bar. Jerry felt like as long as he could stand, he could drink. And he would buy his own drinks...His parents had bought him a transmission shop franchise across the street. Here's a business, son. Don't lose it!
We had words. I don't recall what those words were but the gist of mine probably were fuck you, you don't fucking talk to me like that, motherfucker, exclamation point. I was twenty. I was also new to the business. My boss advised me later that I needed to be more thick-skinned as a bartender. He understood and he was right. Jerry had half-assed apologized and explained himself not too long after it happened and that was that. No blood, no foul. My boss, Nick, was right and Jerry was an asshole and it WAS good policy to ask first. Of course, when Jerry bought rounds, he wasn't at all happy that I made a point of asking his intendeds if they were receptive to a round from Jerry but, ya know what- fuck Jerry. It wasn't his bar.
Liquid balls and stalwart alcoholic standards aside, common courtesy calls for the bartender to ask if someone wants another drink. Male or female, they may not have time for, or even want another drink. Believe it or not, many people know their limit. And they may not want to be beholden to strangers who may have ill intent. So, I always asked. Ninety percent of the time, even pretty girls accepted drinks from scumbags. And probably 99% of the time the buyers were OK with my having asked. Every once in awhile someone would want to go all Jerry on me and declare: I didn't ASK- I TOLD YOU..." I always calmly explained that it was my policy and my bar. That's just the way it was.
It's the way it should be. Yes, NPR, it's kind of a no-brainer that men buy women drinks to loosen their inhibitions up. It was part of my job to look after my customers. Better the wannabe drink buyer be angry at the asshole bartender who doesn't know his place than the stuck up bitches who are too good to have a drink with a couple of swell guys. The bartender can handle it. Someone has to be in control- otherwise it's chaos.
Sunday, March 2, 2014
X's and O's
Famous former NFL coach and SNL punchline, Mike Ditka was asked about Northwestern college football players intent to unionize college football players. He's against it.
Ya know, I don't know if I am for or against it either because I haven't considered it all that much. I'm inclined to go against Da Coach because I think he's a vainglorious idiot, for a variety of reasons, many of which I will now go into.
The '85 Bears were arguably the best team ever to take the field in the NFL. Da Coach led them to the Super Bowl. Big fucking deal. I could have coached that team to the Super Bowl. Anybody could have. The trick was in repeating or even getting to the SB again.That was a team that should have had a few Super Bowls. Other teams do it. Da Coach was one and done. Ditka was one of only two coaches in Super Bowl XX to hold Walter Payton scoreless. The other was Raymond Berry of New England, whose job it was to stop him from scoring. Loveable cartoon character, Refrigerator Perry got to score for the Bears but not Hall of Famer, Walter Payton. That was Da Coach's call. Ditka is a cartoon character himself. It pays well, I guess. He seems to be a republican troll- for free. Recently he declared that, had he run for the senate against Barack Obama back in the day, he would have beat him and, thus, saved the world from an Obama presidency and the horror of the Affordable Care Act.
OK, so Ditka is an asshole. Secretly or not so, everybody knows that. What else have I got?
Well, back to the Union thing with the college players. He makes a fair point that most college football players are rewarded with a free education for their play and that that should be good enough. He might be right. I'll have to look into that. He went on to say though that "...while Unions were a good thing in the 20's, 30's and 40's, they overstepped their boundaries..."
Really? In the 50's I guess, since that's when he began laying off decades of union worthiness. I think that up through the 70's more than 30% of American workers were members of a Union. It's about 11% now. I don't think that is overstepping boundaries. I'm pretty sure it's the opposite.
Ditka is an asshole. He's not running for office that I know of and needing to repeat talking points so as to attract a certain type of idiot. He's a rich guy and though I don't know what his business is aside from being an ex-NFL coach who only won one fucking Super Bowl with the best team ever, it's usually enough to be anti-labor if you're simply rich. (Ferrerman note: If I- your Ferrerman- won like $400 million in the Powerball, I- your Ferrerman- would do a total 180 politically. This whole blog would suddenly be about how persecuted us 1%'ers are. Why are the democrats putting us in ovens??!! Shit like that. You better hope I never win because I could write some insane shit that would make even the best reichtards blush. Why, yes, I have a dark side. Would you like to see it?)
He's a goofball. A Hall Of Fame goofball at that. Any generic idiot can make stupid statements about unions outliving their usefulness. He's as smart as a Topix troll saying that. Like one, he probably thinks that the myriad of benefits that we all enjoy today- that men and women literally fought, bled and died for back in the day- would have evolved out of the good hearts of management anyway, if we had just been patient. I don't know about Ditka but, other idiots 'believe' this. Da Coach strikes me as the generic reichtard that simply thinks unions "...got too big for their britches...". A CEO earns an $8 million bonus but you pussies think you should just be given a cost of living adjustment! Doesn't anybody just rub dirt on it and take a lap any more?
Da Coach has never been a union man that I know of. When he wants to be in a commercial or a movie or on a Sunday football show, he doesn't just get hired at the going rate that some union dictates he should make like a schlub! Nope, he and his agent go in there and negotiate like men do! Well, men who have agents, that is. Agents are like...personal unions...The agent goes in their and fights for the client, making sure he or she gets the best deal, the most money possible! Now how is that different from a union? I'm not so sure it is.
One way it differs though is that Mike Ditka doesn't think agents have out-lived their usefulness. He probably hates having to pay his agent 10% but, probably he's smart enough to realize that he couldn't make anywhere near what he's making now...without representation....someone blocking for him...
Get the picture, coach? Or do I have to draw you a diagram? Ya know, sometimes management won't let you score. Can you imagine that?
Ya know, I don't know if I am for or against it either because I haven't considered it all that much. I'm inclined to go against Da Coach because I think he's a vainglorious idiot, for a variety of reasons, many of which I will now go into.
The '85 Bears were arguably the best team ever to take the field in the NFL. Da Coach led them to the Super Bowl. Big fucking deal. I could have coached that team to the Super Bowl. Anybody could have. The trick was in repeating or even getting to the SB again.That was a team that should have had a few Super Bowls. Other teams do it. Da Coach was one and done. Ditka was one of only two coaches in Super Bowl XX to hold Walter Payton scoreless. The other was Raymond Berry of New England, whose job it was to stop him from scoring. Loveable cartoon character, Refrigerator Perry got to score for the Bears but not Hall of Famer, Walter Payton. That was Da Coach's call. Ditka is a cartoon character himself. It pays well, I guess. He seems to be a republican troll- for free. Recently he declared that, had he run for the senate against Barack Obama back in the day, he would have beat him and, thus, saved the world from an Obama presidency and the horror of the Affordable Care Act.
OK, so Ditka is an asshole. Secretly or not so, everybody knows that. What else have I got?
Well, back to the Union thing with the college players. He makes a fair point that most college football players are rewarded with a free education for their play and that that should be good enough. He might be right. I'll have to look into that. He went on to say though that "...while Unions were a good thing in the 20's, 30's and 40's, they overstepped their boundaries..."
Really? In the 50's I guess, since that's when he began laying off decades of union worthiness. I think that up through the 70's more than 30% of American workers were members of a Union. It's about 11% now. I don't think that is overstepping boundaries. I'm pretty sure it's the opposite.
Ditka is an asshole. He's not running for office that I know of and needing to repeat talking points so as to attract a certain type of idiot. He's a rich guy and though I don't know what his business is aside from being an ex-NFL coach who only won one fucking Super Bowl with the best team ever, it's usually enough to be anti-labor if you're simply rich. (Ferrerman note: If I- your Ferrerman- won like $400 million in the Powerball, I- your Ferrerman- would do a total 180 politically. This whole blog would suddenly be about how persecuted us 1%'ers are. Why are the democrats putting us in ovens??!! Shit like that. You better hope I never win because I could write some insane shit that would make even the best reichtards blush. Why, yes, I have a dark side. Would you like to see it?)
He's a goofball. A Hall Of Fame goofball at that. Any generic idiot can make stupid statements about unions outliving their usefulness. He's as smart as a Topix troll saying that. Like one, he probably thinks that the myriad of benefits that we all enjoy today- that men and women literally fought, bled and died for back in the day- would have evolved out of the good hearts of management anyway, if we had just been patient. I don't know about Ditka but, other idiots 'believe' this. Da Coach strikes me as the generic reichtard that simply thinks unions "...got too big for their britches...". A CEO earns an $8 million bonus but you pussies think you should just be given a cost of living adjustment! Doesn't anybody just rub dirt on it and take a lap any more?
Da Coach has never been a union man that I know of. When he wants to be in a commercial or a movie or on a Sunday football show, he doesn't just get hired at the going rate that some union dictates he should make like a schlub! Nope, he and his agent go in there and negotiate like men do! Well, men who have agents, that is. Agents are like...personal unions...The agent goes in their and fights for the client, making sure he or she gets the best deal, the most money possible! Now how is that different from a union? I'm not so sure it is.
One way it differs though is that Mike Ditka doesn't think agents have out-lived their usefulness. He probably hates having to pay his agent 10% but, probably he's smart enough to realize that he couldn't make anywhere near what he's making now...without representation....someone blocking for him...
Get the picture, coach? Or do I have to draw you a diagram? Ya know, sometimes management won't let you score. Can you imagine that?
Taxman Mr. Ferrerman
It's tax season! Don't panic and rush off to file an extension, there's still plenty of time for that. It's just that I have seen commercials for tax services (Like H&R Block) that promise you huge refunds and I was thinking of how that contrasted with teapublicans who insist that Americans are "Taxed...Enough....Already.... One commercial says that Americans who do their own taxes are leaving something like $500 million on every seat, in every stadium, in the NFL. Well, something ridiculous like that. I've been to NFL games. You leave any money there it is property of the NFL and you will NEVER see it again! And, the NFL won't pay taxes on it because- somehow- they are a non-profit organization. Story for another day, I guess. They play on Sundays so, maybe they are a church? I'll look into that.
The thing is, Americans getting refunds is as common as ever, even with Benevolent Dictator Until 2017 Barack Obama running roughshod over the country. The majority of people who are not billionaires or the NFL, are eligible for refunds. It still is a matter of how you do your taxes and deductions and yada yada despite what people in tri-corner hats might tell you. It isn't the "Fuck you- PAY ME!" like the FOX says. That's not likely to change. Unless republicans get in the White House...
The various tea parties are quite disingenuous when it comes to taxes. They're all over the place really, even saying with straight faces that millionaires should not be taxed and poor people should.
They think taxation of the rich punishes success but don't mind taxation if it's punishing the poors. That boggles the mind. If it were a philosophy it would read like: "From those who have the least to those who have more than can be imagined or spent in a fucking lifetime!"
Wait a minute- I think that's "The Capitalist Manifesto"! It sounds familiar.
That's not quite our system but, it could be if the Koch brothers and other one percenters ever came out of the revolutionary closet and owned up to the bullshit rhetoric they finance. If they don't pay, you do. It's that simple. Poor people have nothing to give. This is because they are poor. Next in line is you. Then the line ends.
And, ya know, broke-ass, allegedly middle-class teapublican assholes would go for a plutocracy where they (and the poors) support the wealthy "if it would get rid of that Obama!!!"
They can't wait until 2017 when someone else takes the oath of office because they can't take the chance that their party could be bothered with running somebody that 51% of the voting might like to put in as president. Fat chance of that, even if Christie does slim down.
Ya know what? No matter what you hear, think, feel about taxes it's the only way a nation of 310+ million people maintains itself. Taxes are not going away. Nor will they 'get lower' if Congress stops spending money on welfare or any other entitlements. You can kid yourself about that. Your teapublican Congressman can kid you about that. Sean Hannity can kid his viewers about that. But it's never going to happen. EVER! So, don't kid me. They'll just spend your money somewhere else.
I'm beginning to think they've also been lying about Obama "...coming for all our guns...any day now..." Perhaps other things too....
The thing is, Americans getting refunds is as common as ever, even with Benevolent Dictator Until 2017 Barack Obama running roughshod over the country. The majority of people who are not billionaires or the NFL, are eligible for refunds. It still is a matter of how you do your taxes and deductions and yada yada despite what people in tri-corner hats might tell you. It isn't the "Fuck you- PAY ME!" like the FOX says. That's not likely to change. Unless republicans get in the White House...
The various tea parties are quite disingenuous when it comes to taxes. They're all over the place really, even saying with straight faces that millionaires should not be taxed and poor people should.
They think taxation of the rich punishes success but don't mind taxation if it's punishing the poors. That boggles the mind. If it were a philosophy it would read like: "From those who have the least to those who have more than can be imagined or spent in a fucking lifetime!"
Wait a minute- I think that's "The Capitalist Manifesto"! It sounds familiar.
That's not quite our system but, it could be if the Koch brothers and other one percenters ever came out of the revolutionary closet and owned up to the bullshit rhetoric they finance. If they don't pay, you do. It's that simple. Poor people have nothing to give. This is because they are poor. Next in line is you. Then the line ends.
And, ya know, broke-ass, allegedly middle-class teapublican assholes would go for a plutocracy where they (and the poors) support the wealthy "if it would get rid of that Obama!!!"
They can't wait until 2017 when someone else takes the oath of office because they can't take the chance that their party could be bothered with running somebody that 51% of the voting might like to put in as president. Fat chance of that, even if Christie does slim down.
Ya know what? No matter what you hear, think, feel about taxes it's the only way a nation of 310+ million people maintains itself. Taxes are not going away. Nor will they 'get lower' if Congress stops spending money on welfare or any other entitlements. You can kid yourself about that. Your teapublican Congressman can kid you about that. Sean Hannity can kid his viewers about that. But it's never going to happen. EVER! So, don't kid me. They'll just spend your money somewhere else.
I'm beginning to think they've also been lying about Obama "...coming for all our guns...any day now..." Perhaps other things too....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)