Who releases an incendiary grand jury verdict at 8:15pm (CST) on a Monday night? They practically had the decision in hand when they convened the grand jury, so why the prime time revelation? A smart prosecutor releases the verdict in the light of day, away from the metaphors of darkness.
This guy was not smart. He waited for prime time, I think, for his own self aggrandizement. "Fuck the night, common sense, and protesters- for I have a story to tell!"
Really it wasn't much of a story. The whole case seemed to befuddle him what with different people having different accounts of what happened and all. He's like a Legal Ken Doll declaring: "The law is HARD!" As someone on The Last Word with Laurence O'Donnell noted, with his approach as well as the grand jury's, we wouldn't be leading the world in incarcerated citizens. We would have empty prisons. He seemed to accept the "he said/she said" perspective of conflict. "Who's right? I have no fucking clue. But, we can't put a guy on trial if there's conflicting stories. How would we find out what happened?"
The thing is, better than 90% of criminal cases are plea bargained. A prosecutor decides- pretty much like Law And Order- if he can win a case in a trial. Most of the time he probably can but, whether he can or can't, a plea bargain is offered. "Plead guilty to this charge and do a year or we'll pursue this and you'll do life". No prosecutor is charged by the people with finding out "who did it". That's the job of the police. The prosecutor's job is to prove that the guy the cops picked up "did it". And that's whether he did it or not. The saying regarding grand juries is: "A prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich." In fact, in over 160,000 federal grand juries, only ELEVEN failed to return an indictment. Mind you, those, like the Ferguson case, were not trials as we think we know them. This was a question of "probable cause"- should they put Darren Wilson on trial? The no-brainer that probable cause is 160,000 other times....was suddenly a trial instead. And though there was conflicting testimony that should have prompted a trial in nearly 160,000 other cases, that conflicting information was somehow damning evidence in this one.
Well, another victory for persecuted white folks, I guess. How fitting that it happened during the 2014th installment of White History Year.
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
Sunday, November 23, 2014
Petulant people look back and lament
The current republican party seems to be a cross between a terrorist organization and a mafia family. It seems they have an attitude of elements of both with their activities suggesting that, if you the people only go along with what they do, they won't do it anymore. Maybe I could add petulant child to terrorist and mafia-like. Read the following in Jon Stewart's 'wiseguy voice:
"Hey, America, We've been noticing that you're having a little trouble with your government these day. Capiche? Things aren't getting done like they're supposed to. A lot of lawsuits, tears and angry talk. And that's just from us! Bet you'd like to make that, uh, disappear, wouldn't you? Well, if something were to happen to your president, like an impeachment or a fire at the Capitol- an accident, mind you, probably set by communists- we could take over and make things run, you know, "kinda smooth". Capiche? I'm saying we can make all this go away. Union troubles? We've been working on that. Tired of whiny, do-nothing congressmen? We can put those mooks to work...if they've got the right guy to answer too, that is. We get one of our guys in The White House (I'm sayin' maybe a Bush again...) and you the pigeons- and by that I mean "people"- will see some serious shit get done. All this "obstruction" goes away if you people come in line. You put that Clinton broad in and- well, you think we were hard on the moolie, wait until the old bitch gets in. We will curb-stomp the political process like it's Billy Batts. Not that I know anything about his unfortunate disappearance, that is. What are you lookin' at? So, I'm just sayin' that, it's up to you, America. Things can go a lot easier if you play ball with us. By the way...we know where you live and where you work. Capiche?"
Ayyyyup. It sure seems that way, doesn't it? These assholes were seriously talking of impeaching him the moment he won in '08, months before he took the oath of the presidency. The actual process of impeachment is lost on them, most thinking that it means taking him outside for eyeballing a white woman and replacing him with Sarah Palin. It's actually not that at all. An actual impeachment would be quite boring and (so far) not even include any talk about blow jobs.
Now, after fifty-plus votes in the House against healthcare, congress is actually suing the president. Who does that? Assholes, that's who. Terrorists and gangsters maybe. Certainly petulant children with lawyers.
I remember one of the many times Sublime1 wanted to sue me and Hegel. Or is it, "Hegel and I"? Anyway, he consulted a real lawyer who looked at him like my German Shepard used to when I spoke Japanese to him, and probably said something like: "You want your imaginary persona to sue imaginary people? Are you some kind of fucking idiot?"
Sub probably mulled that over for a few days before deciding that, though he couldn't win, he could force Ferrerman and Hegel to fly to North Carolina- at our own expense! And, we'd have to pay for his lawyer to sue us, win or lose. Because that's the way that works? I don't have a law license but then, neither does he.
It's similar with the GOP plan of governing by litigation. Except instead of forcing Obama to fly to the senate at his own expense (airline travel was affected, BTW and, he could actually catch a ride with the Secret Service), thus causing him extreme financial hardship, the repubs plan is to wear out the American people instead. That causes US extreme financial hardship.The last time they shut down the government, for example, it cost US @ $28 billion dollars. We the people paid for that. Within seconds of closing the government, Ted Cruz and others were on camera asking people how they felt about "Obama forcing a government shutdown". Huh what? That's like your big sister grabbing your arm, smacking your face with your hand and asking "Why are you hitting yourself???" Congress is that petulant child.
Maybe the GOP isn't consciously trying to wear the US down but, they are wearing US down, out and sideways. The perception might be that turning complete control over to them is the 'obvious' recourse to making things smoother in Washington. The reality is that having control of both houses just means they can double-down on obstruction, and get nothing done, soullessly in the hopes of ruining the legacy of the first black president of the United States of America. History will not be kind. There is no reason to be kind in the moment either as these litigious bastards don't deserve it.
"Hey, America, We've been noticing that you're having a little trouble with your government these day. Capiche? Things aren't getting done like they're supposed to. A lot of lawsuits, tears and angry talk. And that's just from us! Bet you'd like to make that, uh, disappear, wouldn't you? Well, if something were to happen to your president, like an impeachment or a fire at the Capitol- an accident, mind you, probably set by communists- we could take over and make things run, you know, "kinda smooth". Capiche? I'm saying we can make all this go away. Union troubles? We've been working on that. Tired of whiny, do-nothing congressmen? We can put those mooks to work...if they've got the right guy to answer too, that is. We get one of our guys in The White House (I'm sayin' maybe a Bush again...) and you the pigeons- and by that I mean "people"- will see some serious shit get done. All this "obstruction" goes away if you people come in line. You put that Clinton broad in and- well, you think we were hard on the moolie, wait until the old bitch gets in. We will curb-stomp the political process like it's Billy Batts. Not that I know anything about his unfortunate disappearance, that is. What are you lookin' at? So, I'm just sayin' that, it's up to you, America. Things can go a lot easier if you play ball with us. By the way...we know where you live and where you work. Capiche?"
Ayyyyup. It sure seems that way, doesn't it? These assholes were seriously talking of impeaching him the moment he won in '08, months before he took the oath of the presidency. The actual process of impeachment is lost on them, most thinking that it means taking him outside for eyeballing a white woman and replacing him with Sarah Palin. It's actually not that at all. An actual impeachment would be quite boring and (so far) not even include any talk about blow jobs.
Now, after fifty-plus votes in the House against healthcare, congress is actually suing the president. Who does that? Assholes, that's who. Terrorists and gangsters maybe. Certainly petulant children with lawyers.
I remember one of the many times Sublime1 wanted to sue me and Hegel. Or is it, "Hegel and I"? Anyway, he consulted a real lawyer who looked at him like my German Shepard used to when I spoke Japanese to him, and probably said something like: "You want your imaginary persona to sue imaginary people? Are you some kind of fucking idiot?"
Sub probably mulled that over for a few days before deciding that, though he couldn't win, he could force Ferrerman and Hegel to fly to North Carolina- at our own expense! And, we'd have to pay for his lawyer to sue us, win or lose. Because that's the way that works? I don't have a law license but then, neither does he.
It's similar with the GOP plan of governing by litigation. Except instead of forcing Obama to fly to the senate at his own expense (airline travel was affected, BTW and, he could actually catch a ride with the Secret Service), thus causing him extreme financial hardship, the repubs plan is to wear out the American people instead. That causes US extreme financial hardship.The last time they shut down the government, for example, it cost US @ $28 billion dollars. We the people paid for that. Within seconds of closing the government, Ted Cruz and others were on camera asking people how they felt about "Obama forcing a government shutdown". Huh what? That's like your big sister grabbing your arm, smacking your face with your hand and asking "Why are you hitting yourself???" Congress is that petulant child.
Maybe the GOP isn't consciously trying to wear the US down but, they are wearing US down, out and sideways. The perception might be that turning complete control over to them is the 'obvious' recourse to making things smoother in Washington. The reality is that having control of both houses just means they can double-down on obstruction, and get nothing done, soullessly in the hopes of ruining the legacy of the first black president of the United States of America. History will not be kind. There is no reason to be kind in the moment either as these litigious bastards don't deserve it.
Saturday, November 22, 2014
The Audacity Of Dopes
Jesus Christ! Wait- can I say that? Do I have the right, from the right? Evidently the President Of The United States doesn't, at least according to these fuckwads. Golly- quoting the Bible? Is he not aware that, for the purposes of this *news* segment, at least, that there is a thing called THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE in that Constitution he uses after taking his morning constitutional? Or is he a newbie to church? He claims he has gone to church "for years" and he maybe just found out about that one? My goodness, there is much gnashing of teeth from these people. You'd think they'd have gnashed their teeth down to the gums by now.
Friday, November 21, 2014
Driving all The Old Trolls Crazier
Let's review. This Ferrerman has been on the internet for a bit over six years now. In this time I have won Topix, been inducted into the Hall Of Fame, and brought joy to millions of dedicated non-readers with this blog. Pretty neat, eh? I could rest on my laurels, but that's not me. And I didn't do this by myself. I co-won Topix with the help of my wonderful friend, Hegel- who is also in the Hall Of Fame and extremely talented in her own right.
Long time dedicated non-readers of this blog know that the initial impetus for writing was to address bogus charges by the then-named troll, Angelique770, whose actual fake name at the time was Angelique De Sauissn. Now that's a stripper or drag queen name if you've ever heard one. *She* was trying to be French at the time and I suppose that sounded French enough. For the record and by the by, I'll refer to this troll with feminine pronouns just for clarity rather than any gynecological assessment I would never care to make..
I've learned since then that the best way to handle false, ridiculous and malevolent charges from imaginary people on the internet is to ignore them. It literally drives them crazier! It's like how Sublime1 and Crunchy Bacon habitchually harp on me to confirm their positions on past visitation problems I might have had. They desperately need my help there. I don't give it to them. They get angry. They are left with no choice but to continue to fluff their own nuts by aggressively pursuing homely women who are not their wives on Topix, thus somehow honoring their own children. Go and figure that! The fluffer nutters....
Anyway, I was informed long ago that A770 initially was angered by my decision to not join her little band of misfit 'writers' in their insipid stories about the sexual hijinx at a mental hospital. Aside from being a grade school attempt at sophomoric writing, it seemed like the whole point was to delineate which of the then-Chicago Regulars were in favor and which were not. If you were a doctor or a nurse and having virtual sex in the bushes with someone, you were at the right lunch table. If you were a patient, you were in the hall. So, all that aside, the writing just sucked. I did not participate. It was the beginning of the end.
I know I write well. I get better all the time. I could not have helped those stories at all. They couldn't help themselves. Sure, I busted her on her bullshit about being a "therapist studying Topix" and for the way she treated others who were supposedly her friends and was indeed a factor as well. As a Ferrerman who grew up with younger siblings and raised on cowboy movies, it was my destiny to stand against the bullies. It's part of my charm. Here's Steinbeck's take on Ferrerman:
Damn. That's pretty heavy responsibility. I'm just glad it wasn't the thing with the rabbits.
Anyway, unfortunately, I can't be there. This bitch is either a mod or exchanging panties and dresses with one. I got banned whenever and so did Hegel. So, Ferrerman and Hegel have long since been unable to post on Topix due to an IP ban. If you can't beat 'em, cheat 'em must be the Topix motto. Mine is: "Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke and joke 'em if they can't take a fuck." But then, I'm a writer. It's a gift.
In the time we were able to post there, we whupped the dogshit out of her and her minions. She's actually quite the Manson770 in that she manipulates others- not just the voices in her head- to do her dirty work. This is why she can get a college-educated LAWYER like Sublime1 to do her dirty work. He believes in her and every word of her ever-changing story and profile incarnations. Why? Because she would not lie to him. I bet she told him so...
I often look back (as I am now) and marvel at the fact that I am dealing with an actual guy that talks about his own wife as a piece of meat, openly fantasizing a fairly obvious lie about the two of them being swinging spouse swappers. And another guy who calls himself "Crunchy Bacon", who plays video games, has a wonderful, beautiful wife and chases chubby women on a message board. Then, of course, there is the all too ubiquitous "Sam" who would seem to have his own personal vendetta against Ferrerman but is really just a voice in A770's head, one that specializes in posting about sucking dicks, men's cum and bad things to do with gerbils. Early on I suspected that A770 was a gay dude impersonating a woman. Her Sam persona proved that. Think about the women you know in life. Unless they are street whores or porn stars, they just don't talk like that.
So, it's not that I am fighting with imaginary people. They are still fighting with me and anyone they suspect is me, even if they made the posts themselves! Who does that? These people and their multiple personalities, that's who. And who took a troll from the relative heights of convincing people she was a well to do, French born, professional therapist with 6th grade schoolgirl writing skills, all the way down to a cum-obsessed scumbag who stalks an old man in Florida by showing his home address- because he supports Ferrerman? Well, me, of course. And Hegel, too. You know who helped the most? Angelique De Saussin. That dude just had to fall apart on her own. The rest was just me and Hegel being ourselves. Now that drives the trolls crazier....
Long time dedicated non-readers of this blog know that the initial impetus for writing was to address bogus charges by the then-named troll, Angelique770, whose actual fake name at the time was Angelique De Sauissn. Now that's a stripper or drag queen name if you've ever heard one. *She* was trying to be French at the time and I suppose that sounded French enough. For the record and by the by, I'll refer to this troll with feminine pronouns just for clarity rather than any gynecological assessment I would never care to make..
I've learned since then that the best way to handle false, ridiculous and malevolent charges from imaginary people on the internet is to ignore them. It literally drives them crazier! It's like how Sublime1 and Crunchy Bacon habitchually harp on me to confirm their positions on past visitation problems I might have had. They desperately need my help there. I don't give it to them. They get angry. They are left with no choice but to continue to fluff their own nuts by aggressively pursuing homely women who are not their wives on Topix, thus somehow honoring their own children. Go and figure that! The fluffer nutters....
Anyway, I was informed long ago that A770 initially was angered by my decision to not join her little band of misfit 'writers' in their insipid stories about the sexual hijinx at a mental hospital. Aside from being a grade school attempt at sophomoric writing, it seemed like the whole point was to delineate which of the then-Chicago Regulars were in favor and which were not. If you were a doctor or a nurse and having virtual sex in the bushes with someone, you were at the right lunch table. If you were a patient, you were in the hall. So, all that aside, the writing just sucked. I did not participate. It was the beginning of the end.
I know I write well. I get better all the time. I could not have helped those stories at all. They couldn't help themselves. Sure, I busted her on her bullshit about being a "therapist studying Topix" and for the way she treated others who were supposedly her friends and was indeed a factor as well. As a Ferrerman who grew up with younger siblings and raised on cowboy movies, it was my destiny to stand against the bullies. It's part of my charm. Here's Steinbeck's take on Ferrerman:
Then I'll be all around in the dark - I'll be ever'where—wherever you look. Wherever they's a fight so good people can post, I'll be there. Wherever they's a mod beatin' up a guy, I'll be there... I'll be in the way guys yell when they're mad an'—I'll be in the way kids laugh when they're hungry and they know supper's ready. An' when our folk post the stuff they believe an' live in the threads they build—why, I'll be there
Damn. That's pretty heavy responsibility. I'm just glad it wasn't the thing with the rabbits.
Anyway, unfortunately, I can't be there. This bitch is either a mod or exchanging panties and dresses with one. I got banned whenever and so did Hegel. So, Ferrerman and Hegel have long since been unable to post on Topix due to an IP ban. If you can't beat 'em, cheat 'em must be the Topix motto. Mine is: "Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke and joke 'em if they can't take a fuck." But then, I'm a writer. It's a gift.
In the time we were able to post there, we whupped the dogshit out of her and her minions. She's actually quite the Manson770 in that she manipulates others- not just the voices in her head- to do her dirty work. This is why she can get a college-educated LAWYER like Sublime1 to do her dirty work. He believes in her and every word of her ever-changing story and profile incarnations. Why? Because she would not lie to him. I bet she told him so...
I often look back (as I am now) and marvel at the fact that I am dealing with an actual guy that talks about his own wife as a piece of meat, openly fantasizing a fairly obvious lie about the two of them being swinging spouse swappers. And another guy who calls himself "Crunchy Bacon", who plays video games, has a wonderful, beautiful wife and chases chubby women on a message board. Then, of course, there is the all too ubiquitous "Sam" who would seem to have his own personal vendetta against Ferrerman but is really just a voice in A770's head, one that specializes in posting about sucking dicks, men's cum and bad things to do with gerbils. Early on I suspected that A770 was a gay dude impersonating a woman. Her Sam persona proved that. Think about the women you know in life. Unless they are street whores or porn stars, they just don't talk like that.
So, it's not that I am fighting with imaginary people. They are still fighting with me and anyone they suspect is me, even if they made the posts themselves! Who does that? These people and their multiple personalities, that's who. And who took a troll from the relative heights of convincing people she was a well to do, French born, professional therapist with 6th grade schoolgirl writing skills, all the way down to a cum-obsessed scumbag who stalks an old man in Florida by showing his home address- because he supports Ferrerman? Well, me, of course. And Hegel, too. You know who helped the most? Angelique De Saussin. That dude just had to fall apart on her own. The rest was just me and Hegel being ourselves. Now that drives the trolls crazier....
Still carrying a torch for President Obama?
Woo boy, the villagers are angry! They've had torches and pitchforks at the ready since November 5, 2008 but this time they are really pissed! This time, they believe, the man they call "Obummer" and "Odumya" (among others) the man who is at once a brutal dictator and one who does NOTHING, has really pissed them off. Now he's done given citizenship to millions of illegal Mexicans! All they have to do is cross the Rio Grande, collect their free stuff (lap tops, Playstations, etc.) and they are now hyphenated-Americans like the rest of us...as long as they vote democrat...
Not quite. A leisurely stroll around the internet would give you that impression though. Mitt Romney's 47% are living up to Jonathon Gruber's assessment of their mental faculties.
Dedicated non-readers, I'm no expert. But, I can open up Facebook and Google and I can seek out those who are experts and learn what is going down. I can figure shit out. When Ferrerman accidentally clicks the wrong channel on the remote and hears "The A Team" en Espanol, Ferrerman does not immediately presume Mexicans have hijacked our television and, of course, the country. You see folks, Spanish-speaking people are already here and have been for a few hundred years. That's why they get their own channels!
What President Obama did was acknowledge that and address, via executive action, something that the House of Representatives had refused to vote on for the last 18 months. If congress refuses to do their job, someone has to act. That someone is President Obama. Sue me if I'm right about that. They want to sue him for this and, well, everything else. The whole Sue Nation has risen!
President Obama didn't create millions of new citizens overnight as if they were Keystone Pipeline jobs that actually existed. If you came here 5 or more years ago and can prove it, you no longer have to fear deportation. Your children who were born here and are citizens no longer have to tearfully wave addios to mom and dad as they get deported. If you have made a life here, you are safe from deportation and can go to the back of the line for the long and arduous process of attaining citizenship. And, by the way, if you are a gang member or criminal, you will be arrested and deported. That's not ever going to change. Same with if you got here last week or intend to join us next week or next year. If you can't prove you've been here at least five years, you'll be deported. No president has deported more illegals than President Obama. You can look it up.
I would respect the fear and outrage from the right a bit more if they didn't express the same vitriolic, violent outrage over his playing golf. Did republicans really believe it was feasible to deport what might be 11 million people? That was their plan? Who pays for that, fiscal conservatives? My own plan- The Ferrerman Plan- for years has been to enforce the laws on the books that are against businesses hiring illegals. No job opportunities means no waves of illegals seeking jobs. Guess who is against that. Congress and the corporations who employ them. They like the cheap, unorganized labor. They don't like paying fines either. I haven't heard anybody else say this but, legalizing these people might enhance wages a bit more as these people become more assimilated and less fearful of the authorities. We'll see about that.
As far as border enforcement goes, it looks like it will get better. ICE and the Border Patrol can now concentrate more on protecting the border itself, rather than separating families. There are still people being exploited and literally dying to get here and that's got to stop. We're a nation of immigrants and there should be a legal way to become a citizen. No one got a five year head start last night. They got to breathe a little easier was all. They can breathe the hot air of our teapublican politicians and their minions but, it's still American freedom.
Not quite. A leisurely stroll around the internet would give you that impression though. Mitt Romney's 47% are living up to Jonathon Gruber's assessment of their mental faculties.
Dedicated non-readers, I'm no expert. But, I can open up Facebook and Google and I can seek out those who are experts and learn what is going down. I can figure shit out. When Ferrerman accidentally clicks the wrong channel on the remote and hears "The A Team" en Espanol, Ferrerman does not immediately presume Mexicans have hijacked our television and, of course, the country. You see folks, Spanish-speaking people are already here and have been for a few hundred years. That's why they get their own channels!
What President Obama did was acknowledge that and address, via executive action, something that the House of Representatives had refused to vote on for the last 18 months. If congress refuses to do their job, someone has to act. That someone is President Obama. Sue me if I'm right about that. They want to sue him for this and, well, everything else. The whole Sue Nation has risen!
President Obama didn't create millions of new citizens overnight as if they were Keystone Pipeline jobs that actually existed. If you came here 5 or more years ago and can prove it, you no longer have to fear deportation. Your children who were born here and are citizens no longer have to tearfully wave addios to mom and dad as they get deported. If you have made a life here, you are safe from deportation and can go to the back of the line for the long and arduous process of attaining citizenship. And, by the way, if you are a gang member or criminal, you will be arrested and deported. That's not ever going to change. Same with if you got here last week or intend to join us next week or next year. If you can't prove you've been here at least five years, you'll be deported. No president has deported more illegals than President Obama. You can look it up.
I would respect the fear and outrage from the right a bit more if they didn't express the same vitriolic, violent outrage over his playing golf. Did republicans really believe it was feasible to deport what might be 11 million people? That was their plan? Who pays for that, fiscal conservatives? My own plan- The Ferrerman Plan- for years has been to enforce the laws on the books that are against businesses hiring illegals. No job opportunities means no waves of illegals seeking jobs. Guess who is against that. Congress and the corporations who employ them. They like the cheap, unorganized labor. They don't like paying fines either. I haven't heard anybody else say this but, legalizing these people might enhance wages a bit more as these people become more assimilated and less fearful of the authorities. We'll see about that.
As far as border enforcement goes, it looks like it will get better. ICE and the Border Patrol can now concentrate more on protecting the border itself, rather than separating families. There are still people being exploited and literally dying to get here and that's got to stop. We're a nation of immigrants and there should be a legal way to become a citizen. No one got a five year head start last night. They got to breathe a little easier was all. They can breathe the hot air of our teapublican politicians and their minions but, it's still American freedom.
Thursday, November 20, 2014
An exercise in stupidity
I'm following "Grubergate" as closely as I follow any non-story that come out of The Teapublican House of Non-Issues. Evidently he was one of the guys who put together parts of the Affordable Care Act that republicans were complicit in passing but have had some remorse about, of late. A year ago it seems, the Jonathon Gruber guy called Americans "stupid". A year ago.... He should have added "slow". I have to admire the man's honesty.
If you have read the comments on ANY internet site, watched "Jay-walking" when Leno was on "The Tonight Show", been on Topix or vote republican, you know that Americans are stupid. Duh!
Ted Cruz knows people are stupid, at least his constituents are. He recently declared that "net neutrality is Obamacare for the internet". Millions of stupid people who don't understand "Obamacare" then went on the internet to not understand net neutrality. He pulled his pants down in public, got spanked for it by Sen. Al Franken and a host of others, and doubled down on his assessment. Know why? Because people are stupid, that's why. Cruz knows this and counts on it. He's an asshole, but he's not stupid.
Though some of the wisest people on earth pass through the doors of the Ferrerman blog- my most dedicated non-readers- there are also several idiots who stumble through these doors- the trolls from Topix. So, I'll explain net neutrality for their misunderstanding.
Do you want the internet to remain as free and open as it is now, or do you want what Obama wants? He wants- LOOK!!! A BENGHAZI SQUIRREL!!!!- and, in conclusion, free laptops and internet for illegal ISIS immigrants and FEMA camps for patriots.
Fuck. Who let Rick Perry in?
Net neutrality is just keeping the internet as it is at this very moment in time. Defeating it means tiered access with varying speeds, based on not only how much you pay, but how much every site you visit pays. I think it was Stewart (or Colbert?) that called it "the fast lane for assholes". The thing is, you could be a very rich asshole with all the premium speed that money can buy, but if sites you like do not pay ransom to Comcast, you get slooooooooooooooooooooooed down access whether you like it or not. That's stupid, but Ted won't tell you that because, that would be stupid.
Sometimes I wonder if I am stupid...because if I'm in the dark on an issue, I can pretty much make up my mind by checking to see if republicans are for or against it. You could put Obama's prints on anything and millions of republicans would be against it based solely on that. So, it's very tempting to just base my own views on an issue simply by going 180 degrees from the republican stance. That would be stupid though, no matter how accurate it truly is. And it is. It makes me feel like Nate Silver. Taller though. AND, not stupid.
Aside from willful, politically inspired stupidity, some people are just not smart. Making the internet rounds of late is a clip about college students on a campus in Texas who don't know much about history. These kids didn't know who won the Civil War. Not even the black students whose ancestors benefited from it or the white, Texas kids whose great great grandaddies mighta fought in it . They also didn't know the name of our current VP, Joe Biden. These kids are going into debt for the rest of their lives and they aren't as smart as a fifth grader? That's stupid.
The other day I wrote about lawyers. You buy them books and send them to school and they can be stupid too. Maybe they are in the bracket of willfully stupid- stupid for pay, like politicians. Like a Ted Cruz or a Rick Perry, Sublime in the threads is stupid with a purpose. He's led around by the nose by an imaginary person he's never met but defends with all his might. She is beautiful, he says. She is good to him, he says. She is honest, he says. Do you know how he knows this? She (or HE) told him...
Now that's stupid for free. I know it's imaginary people on the internet, but calling yourself a lawyer and blindly defending a made up person based on what some of their characters post to you is pretty fucking stupid. I hope he doesn't put that on his resume'. He's a good example of stupid is as stupid does.
When asked about the offensiveness of Jonathon Gruber's remarks about Americans, Congressman Trey Gowdy said: "I'll tell you how stupid the American people are- look at the mid-term results! Look at who the people elected!"
And he meant that in a good way! 37% of eligible voters showed up for the mid-terms. Not even republicans really cared as they showed poorly as well. Nothing to brag about. They couldn't even get a mandate from their own people. Now, that is stupid.
I won't argue because doing so would just be stupid.
If you have read the comments on ANY internet site, watched "Jay-walking" when Leno was on "The Tonight Show", been on Topix or vote republican, you know that Americans are stupid. Duh!
Ted Cruz knows people are stupid, at least his constituents are. He recently declared that "net neutrality is Obamacare for the internet". Millions of stupid people who don't understand "Obamacare" then went on the internet to not understand net neutrality. He pulled his pants down in public, got spanked for it by Sen. Al Franken and a host of others, and doubled down on his assessment. Know why? Because people are stupid, that's why. Cruz knows this and counts on it. He's an asshole, but he's not stupid.
Though some of the wisest people on earth pass through the doors of the Ferrerman blog- my most dedicated non-readers- there are also several idiots who stumble through these doors- the trolls from Topix. So, I'll explain net neutrality for their misunderstanding.
Do you want the internet to remain as free and open as it is now, or do you want what Obama wants? He wants- LOOK!!! A BENGHAZI SQUIRREL!!!!- and, in conclusion, free laptops and internet for illegal ISIS immigrants and FEMA camps for patriots.
Fuck. Who let Rick Perry in?
Net neutrality is just keeping the internet as it is at this very moment in time. Defeating it means tiered access with varying speeds, based on not only how much you pay, but how much every site you visit pays. I think it was Stewart (or Colbert?) that called it "the fast lane for assholes". The thing is, you could be a very rich asshole with all the premium speed that money can buy, but if sites you like do not pay ransom to Comcast, you get slooooooooooooooooooooooed down access whether you like it or not. That's stupid, but Ted won't tell you that because, that would be stupid.
Sometimes I wonder if I am stupid...because if I'm in the dark on an issue, I can pretty much make up my mind by checking to see if republicans are for or against it. You could put Obama's prints on anything and millions of republicans would be against it based solely on that. So, it's very tempting to just base my own views on an issue simply by going 180 degrees from the republican stance. That would be stupid though, no matter how accurate it truly is. And it is. It makes me feel like Nate Silver. Taller though. AND, not stupid.
Aside from willful, politically inspired stupidity, some people are just not smart. Making the internet rounds of late is a clip about college students on a campus in Texas who don't know much about history. These kids didn't know who won the Civil War. Not even the black students whose ancestors benefited from it or the white, Texas kids whose great great grandaddies mighta fought in it . They also didn't know the name of our current VP, Joe Biden. These kids are going into debt for the rest of their lives and they aren't as smart as a fifth grader? That's stupid.
The other day I wrote about lawyers. You buy them books and send them to school and they can be stupid too. Maybe they are in the bracket of willfully stupid- stupid for pay, like politicians. Like a Ted Cruz or a Rick Perry, Sublime in the threads is stupid with a purpose. He's led around by the nose by an imaginary person he's never met but defends with all his might. She is beautiful, he says. She is good to him, he says. She is honest, he says. Do you know how he knows this? She (or HE) told him...
Now that's stupid for free. I know it's imaginary people on the internet, but calling yourself a lawyer and blindly defending a made up person based on what some of their characters post to you is pretty fucking stupid. I hope he doesn't put that on his resume'. He's a good example of stupid is as stupid does.
When asked about the offensiveness of Jonathon Gruber's remarks about Americans, Congressman Trey Gowdy said: "I'll tell you how stupid the American people are- look at the mid-term results! Look at who the people elected!"
And he meant that in a good way! 37% of eligible voters showed up for the mid-terms. Not even republicans really cared as they showed poorly as well. Nothing to brag about. They couldn't even get a mandate from their own people. Now, that is stupid.
I won't argue because doing so would just be stupid.
Monday, November 17, 2014
Kill all the lawyers!
Well now, that's bit harsh, isn't it? That was the opinion of William Shakespeare, back in the day.
On NPR I was reading about a case in California where a 28 year old male teacher was convicted of lewd behavior with a minor for having sex with a 14 year old, female student. He's in prison for the crime and that's not the issue. A civil suit against the school though is in appeal because a lawyer has positioned that the girl was at fault, that she knew what she was doing when she lied to her parents and willingly met the man at a motel to have sex with him. The school didn't know what was going on and surely didn't approve. In California the law puts the age of consent at 18. It varies from state to state.
I guess the big deal is that the school, not knowing about the incident when it happened, is not financially liable for it having happened. I can see that. Unless you actively hire help from Pedophiles R Us, how do you know what all your personnel are up at anytime?
What irks me about this is the lawyer putting the blame on the kid. If you have kids or were ever one yourself, you know that they say and do the darnedest things and that they make a lot of mistakes. They are kids. You should see them skateboarding! What are they thinking.
What are lawyers thinking? Whoever this one is, is it his mission to lower the age of consent? How low can it go? If 18 is arbitrary, does he think lower is better? Kids that young have been tried for murder. They kill. They have sex. They may rape but, not adults. They are kids. In some civil courts kids have been found liable for their actions in similar cases to the California one. These kids are not being arrested for rape, mind you, they are just being found complicit in their own rapes by civil courts.
Tort reform is always an issue with conservatives. Our governor-elect here has said he would agree to a modest hike in the minimum wage if the courts agree to deny legal action against businesses by employees, including workman's comp claims. Just don't get sexually harassed or hurt at work and some people will get a small raise and everything will be fine... And isn't everyone just sick of people making millions off of frivolous lawsuits in stead of earning their reward by playing the lottery like everyone else?
People forget that there are people behind these cases- actual living, breathing people who have been wronged- and that it is lawyers who bring these cases to the light of a court room. Why do lawyers do this? Well, it's their job. Why do they blame victims? Well, that's their job too. Very few of them think logically. Their whole being is to think monetarily. They constantly are on the prowl for loopholes in the law and will use practically anything to get an advantage. People get upset when a criminal gets away due to a technicality in the law and I understand that part of a lawyers job is to keep the law itself honest. So yeah, if the cops beat a confession out of a guy, they did not uphold the law and that is wrong. We can't have our police disrespecting the law as the criminals do. I surely get that. They are supposed to be better than that. Lawyers, oddly enough, do not have to be better than that.
The infamous "Hot Coffee" case was successfully argued by a lawyer. The interesting thing is that the same lawyer could easily have argued against the elderly woman who brought the case. It makes no nevermind to them. Many don't take a stand until they see the dollar signs. This is why I respect so few lawyers. They are very chaotic in what they actually believe in because rather than logic or personal beliefs, they argue all too often for what pays better. It's like the high school debate team. Defend a position even though you don't believe in it. Then, WIN!
The good guys don't always win. The best, most expensive lawyers, often do. The law itself seems to respect that and pay homage to it. It's hard to pick a side. Prosecutors make mistakes and sometimes those mistakes get buried via executions. This is why I am against the death penalty. Innocent men have been executed and often saved from execution by DNA and prosecutors faced with that, rarely admit their mistakes. An "Well, I'll be damned...i was wrong..." is too much to ask for, it seems. They just keep arguing no matter how wrong they are, Therein lies the rub.
On NPR I was reading about a case in California where a 28 year old male teacher was convicted of lewd behavior with a minor for having sex with a 14 year old, female student. He's in prison for the crime and that's not the issue. A civil suit against the school though is in appeal because a lawyer has positioned that the girl was at fault, that she knew what she was doing when she lied to her parents and willingly met the man at a motel to have sex with him. The school didn't know what was going on and surely didn't approve. In California the law puts the age of consent at 18. It varies from state to state.
I guess the big deal is that the school, not knowing about the incident when it happened, is not financially liable for it having happened. I can see that. Unless you actively hire help from Pedophiles R Us, how do you know what all your personnel are up at anytime?
What irks me about this is the lawyer putting the blame on the kid. If you have kids or were ever one yourself, you know that they say and do the darnedest things and that they make a lot of mistakes. They are kids. You should see them skateboarding! What are they thinking.
What are lawyers thinking? Whoever this one is, is it his mission to lower the age of consent? How low can it go? If 18 is arbitrary, does he think lower is better? Kids that young have been tried for murder. They kill. They have sex. They may rape but, not adults. They are kids. In some civil courts kids have been found liable for their actions in similar cases to the California one. These kids are not being arrested for rape, mind you, they are just being found complicit in their own rapes by civil courts.
Tort reform is always an issue with conservatives. Our governor-elect here has said he would agree to a modest hike in the minimum wage if the courts agree to deny legal action against businesses by employees, including workman's comp claims. Just don't get sexually harassed or hurt at work and some people will get a small raise and everything will be fine... And isn't everyone just sick of people making millions off of frivolous lawsuits in stead of earning their reward by playing the lottery like everyone else?
People forget that there are people behind these cases- actual living, breathing people who have been wronged- and that it is lawyers who bring these cases to the light of a court room. Why do lawyers do this? Well, it's their job. Why do they blame victims? Well, that's their job too. Very few of them think logically. Their whole being is to think monetarily. They constantly are on the prowl for loopholes in the law and will use practically anything to get an advantage. People get upset when a criminal gets away due to a technicality in the law and I understand that part of a lawyers job is to keep the law itself honest. So yeah, if the cops beat a confession out of a guy, they did not uphold the law and that is wrong. We can't have our police disrespecting the law as the criminals do. I surely get that. They are supposed to be better than that. Lawyers, oddly enough, do not have to be better than that.
The infamous "Hot Coffee" case was successfully argued by a lawyer. The interesting thing is that the same lawyer could easily have argued against the elderly woman who brought the case. It makes no nevermind to them. Many don't take a stand until they see the dollar signs. This is why I respect so few lawyers. They are very chaotic in what they actually believe in because rather than logic or personal beliefs, they argue all too often for what pays better. It's like the high school debate team. Defend a position even though you don't believe in it. Then, WIN!
The good guys don't always win. The best, most expensive lawyers, often do. The law itself seems to respect that and pay homage to it. It's hard to pick a side. Prosecutors make mistakes and sometimes those mistakes get buried via executions. This is why I am against the death penalty. Innocent men have been executed and often saved from execution by DNA and prosecutors faced with that, rarely admit their mistakes. An "Well, I'll be damned...i was wrong..." is too much to ask for, it seems. They just keep arguing no matter how wrong they are, Therein lies the rub.
Sunday, November 16, 2014
We the people...those people
Why can't we have two Americas, one for them and one for us?
I don't necessarily mean north and south like The Civil War and a hundred some years after that (though it could break down as such) but instead, a "we the people" and "those others" that just don't get it.
We the people could, for example, retain the Affordable Care Act and have affordable care and the others could go back to sky-high premiums and getting stripped of coverage when they get sick. That seems to be what they want.
We the people could have our net neutrality and those people could pay waaaaaay more for less and for sloooooower connections. They seem to want that too.
We the people could marry whoever we want. Those others could continue to limit marriage to one man/one woman. Sisters would still be women.
We the people could enjoy a strong but slimmed down military and those others could have open carry and militias.
We the people could continue a separation of church and state, as well as welcoming all religions. Those others could battle to see which branch of Christianity would rule.
We the people could enjoy competitive wages with safety nets for the less-advantaged. Those people could fill prisons with debtors and put children to work. Target practice? Hunger games?
These and other discrepancies don't really make for coexistence among neighbors though so it might be best if those people move. They'd probably go south, the natural direction of thoughts and morals when people are so easily filled with hate and violence. I say go ahead. Seek your corporate, republican, Xtian paradise. Let us know how it works out for you. We should probably build a wall though and not bother to leave a light on for them. Those people are already gone in spirit and in thought.
I don't necessarily mean north and south like The Civil War and a hundred some years after that (though it could break down as such) but instead, a "we the people" and "those others" that just don't get it.
We the people could, for example, retain the Affordable Care Act and have affordable care and the others could go back to sky-high premiums and getting stripped of coverage when they get sick. That seems to be what they want.
We the people could have our net neutrality and those people could pay waaaaaay more for less and for sloooooower connections. They seem to want that too.
We the people could marry whoever we want. Those others could continue to limit marriage to one man/one woman. Sisters would still be women.
We the people could enjoy a strong but slimmed down military and those others could have open carry and militias.
We the people could continue a separation of church and state, as well as welcoming all religions. Those others could battle to see which branch of Christianity would rule.
We the people could enjoy competitive wages with safety nets for the less-advantaged. Those people could fill prisons with debtors and put children to work. Target practice? Hunger games?
These and other discrepancies don't really make for coexistence among neighbors though so it might be best if those people move. They'd probably go south, the natural direction of thoughts and morals when people are so easily filled with hate and violence. I say go ahead. Seek your corporate, republican, Xtian paradise. Let us know how it works out for you. We should probably build a wall though and not bother to leave a light on for them. Those people are already gone in spirit and in thought.
Thursday, November 13, 2014
Raping Posters- Is That A Thing Now?
I was perusing Topix last night and saw where Sublime was posting about going to Chicago to beat someone up. He seemed to figure that it would take awhile to beat that person up so, while he rested up for the next round of violent beating, he would force the guy to blow a yet to be determined guy.
"I guess I could alternate between beating you up and making you blow some dude (not crunchy) in between the beatings, but this isn't supposed to be an enjoyable experience for you. If I did that, you'd be asking me to fly to Chicago every weekend and beat you up."
He posted that to a poster calling them self, "Kevin" and of course, his dumbass probably doesn't know that the real object of his violent lust is one of his friends trolling him. His folks bought him books and sent him to law school and this is how his mind works? A married, father of three boys, a law school graduate and a republican who wants to beat people up and force them to perform sex acts? This is how some people fill their time at work.
Frankly, a lot of people think this way. Many believe- regardless of the crime, that criminals should be beaten and sodomized in prison. Not just child rapists either. Way too much of the population thinks prisoners should ultimately be society's avengers. This is why we can't have nice things- like a functioning congress, for example. People don't always think things through. I think Sublime did though. Yikes. What kind of freak would want to be any degree of party to that? Well...
Want proof that rape is a crime of violence and not passion? Prison rape is that proof. The men who commit it don't consider themselves gay. In fact, if you were to suggest they were gay, they'd likely beat you, fuck you in the ass and make you blow them. Sheesh- nothing gay about that!
And, of course, there isn't. It's about power. It's about imposing your will and your body onto and into someone without their consent. Old women get raped. So do nuns, children, animals and men. It's got nothing to do with what they were wearing, saying or doing at the time. It's all about horrible people seeking out victims to abuse. There is no rationale to it. There is no justice either.
I've always wary of men who go there, in conversation. These are not people you want to drink with or go camping in the woods. Even if it's someone you might figure is talking tough, it's an avenue of thinking that I cannot relate to. I know it seems like just desserts for child rapists but, so does execution for murderers until we get the rest of the story and learn that the prisoner executed wasn't actually at all guilty. If we can't depend on our justice system to always get it right, why should we rely on our armed robbers and murderers to delegate justice? Or, our unlicensed lawyers?
"I guess I could alternate between beating you up and making you blow some dude (not crunchy) in between the beatings, but this isn't supposed to be an enjoyable experience for you. If I did that, you'd be asking me to fly to Chicago every weekend and beat you up."
He posted that to a poster calling them self, "Kevin" and of course, his dumbass probably doesn't know that the real object of his violent lust is one of his friends trolling him. His folks bought him books and sent him to law school and this is how his mind works? A married, father of three boys, a law school graduate and a republican who wants to beat people up and force them to perform sex acts? This is how some people fill their time at work.
Frankly, a lot of people think this way. Many believe- regardless of the crime, that criminals should be beaten and sodomized in prison. Not just child rapists either. Way too much of the population thinks prisoners should ultimately be society's avengers. This is why we can't have nice things- like a functioning congress, for example. People don't always think things through. I think Sublime did though. Yikes. What kind of freak would want to be any degree of party to that? Well...
Want proof that rape is a crime of violence and not passion? Prison rape is that proof. The men who commit it don't consider themselves gay. In fact, if you were to suggest they were gay, they'd likely beat you, fuck you in the ass and make you blow them. Sheesh- nothing gay about that!
And, of course, there isn't. It's about power. It's about imposing your will and your body onto and into someone without their consent. Old women get raped. So do nuns, children, animals and men. It's got nothing to do with what they were wearing, saying or doing at the time. It's all about horrible people seeking out victims to abuse. There is no rationale to it. There is no justice either.
I've always wary of men who go there, in conversation. These are not people you want to drink with or go camping in the woods. Even if it's someone you might figure is talking tough, it's an avenue of thinking that I cannot relate to. I know it seems like just desserts for child rapists but, so does execution for murderers until we get the rest of the story and learn that the prisoner executed wasn't actually at all guilty. If we can't depend on our justice system to always get it right, why should we rely on our armed robbers and murderers to delegate justice? Or, our unlicensed lawyers?
Saturday, November 8, 2014
All About The Base and All that Jazz
It's always kinda disingenuous to compare anyone to Hitler. The teapublicans comparing Obama to him, for example, has so absurdly watered that down that analogy that it's become ridiculous. How can a man at once be both a "dictator" and "the worst president since Carter"- one of our all-time nicest presidents? As usual, the republicans are all over the map with mudslinging, but largely just preaching to the choir.
Are their any Hitler-wannabes on the teapublican horizon? Probably several hundred but none that really stand out and grab you by the throat and scream: "SEIG HEIL!" You have to remember though that Hitler wasn't elected to power. The guy just wasn't that popular at first. Germany gave him a position as chancellor pretty much to appease him. He seized power with the Reichstag fire, blaming it on communists and then went about his murderous plans for world domination. While he did campaign on "the Jewish question", he didn't provide his answers until after he seized power. Frankly, running on a platform of murder and working people to death wouldn't get a guy a lot of votes. Germany went along with it, but after the fact. There had been no polls pondering: Should Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, communists and various in sundry other undesirables be wiped from the face of the earth? He tipped his hand but not that much.
Politics is a lot like what they say about jazz.- it's the notes you don't play that make the difference.
When the Tea Party came to be very early in 2009 when Barack Obama took the oath of office and taxes were suddenly discovered to be "too high" and "un=American", people were intrigued by this new party. What did they really have in mind? Taxes aren't pretty but they do pay for the roads, schools and military that we need here in the 21st century, but they tended to be more upset with taxes on rich than with the tax burden on the middle class. They wore tri-cornered hats, misquoted the founding fathers and pretty much preached against taxing the rich and proposed taxing the poor instead. Not so much a founding father's idea as it was the old Monty Python, Dennis Moore sketch. It made a lot of folks wonder whose idea it really was.
Turned out that the teaparty was more astroturf than grass roots as it was funded by the Koch brothers, a couple of billionaires. They took the usual republican notion of being fiscal conservative and injected it with the steroids of huge sums of cash. Suddenly, old people in revolutionary war attire wielding misspelled signs wasn't so humorous. Some of these assholes got elected to the House of Representatives. Yikes!
While I don't see the various tea parties as being Nazi party-like, there are a lot of parallels. They are crazy. They'll accept anyone into their parties that is any degree of crazy, but the crazier the better. It's a mix of extreme Christians, gun nuts, people who hate gubmint, more gun nuts, racists, Ted Nugent, even more gun nuts and (D) all of the above. Probably a few Nazi's too. The original Nazi's were not that exclusive either. Numbers. You got to have numbers.
And you've got to have people to hate. These Kochsuckers hate everybody. But, mostly they hate their fellow Americans who are not white or are white and liberal. That's a lot of Americans to hate! They diversify though. They also hate poor people. They hate them so much they want to make more of them! In the spirit of fiscal conservatism and tax savings, they think it's a brilliant idea to stop paying out welfare and also to end the minimum wage. The thinking is, get off welfare and go to college to learn to get a better job, lazy bastard! Sans wages and welfare, forage for berries in the woods while attending college classes. Oh- and pay more in taxes. I told you they were crazy. I'll add that they are idiots too.
The question is, how dangerous are they? We don't know yet. But, nothing good comes of hate combined with government. They hate "big government" but they desperately want to become part of it. They say they want to make it smaller but, who does that in a nation of 310 million people? You can't run the USofA as mom and pop candy store. They want to cut everything that smacks of socialism (which they almost exclusively confuse with communism) but they want to add to an already bloated military budget. Makes you wonder why. Goodness, think of all the wars we'd have going right now with a McCain or a Romney in the White House. Germany didn't really want war in Europe so soon after the First World War but, they went along with prepping for it and then Poland inexplicably attacked them.... Well, that's the way Germany made it look.
I've said all along that the GOP was smart to concentrate on getting into the senate and governor's mansions and state legislatures across the nation. With all that in your pocket, who needs 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? Look at the obstruction we just saw with them controlling the House. Now they have the Senate too. Yes, I know that they have had this before and we survived. It wasn't these Kochsuckers though. That's like comparing today's republicans to the Party Of Lincoln, formed to end slavery. Different times, different people. Just because they have Ben Carson doesn't mean they love Chris Rock. There were Jews, Swedes and other's in Hitler's SS. JEWS! Humans are a very unpredictable race.
Indeed. That's why it's hard not to wonder how this all will play out. How much hand-tipping have they done already? They still speak of FEMA work camps and death panels that aren't going to happen, six years into Obama's presidency. They have a penchant for saying things like "Well, you people were going to do that to US, so..." On a somewhat less foreboding note, a common refrain on the internet (regarding Congressional control) is: "You people had your chance- you blew it!" I take that to mean that democrats could have seized totalitarian control of the country but they were too busy feeding poor people.
Loose talk from a bunch of mentally ill posters on the internet, maybe. But, they get all this prodding from people they are putting into power. This can't end well. It will get worse before it gets worser.
Are their any Hitler-wannabes on the teapublican horizon? Probably several hundred but none that really stand out and grab you by the throat and scream: "SEIG HEIL!" You have to remember though that Hitler wasn't elected to power. The guy just wasn't that popular at first. Germany gave him a position as chancellor pretty much to appease him. He seized power with the Reichstag fire, blaming it on communists and then went about his murderous plans for world domination. While he did campaign on "the Jewish question", he didn't provide his answers until after he seized power. Frankly, running on a platform of murder and working people to death wouldn't get a guy a lot of votes. Germany went along with it, but after the fact. There had been no polls pondering: Should Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, communists and various in sundry other undesirables be wiped from the face of the earth? He tipped his hand but not that much.
Politics is a lot like what they say about jazz.- it's the notes you don't play that make the difference.
When the Tea Party came to be very early in 2009 when Barack Obama took the oath of office and taxes were suddenly discovered to be "too high" and "un=American", people were intrigued by this new party. What did they really have in mind? Taxes aren't pretty but they do pay for the roads, schools and military that we need here in the 21st century, but they tended to be more upset with taxes on rich than with the tax burden on the middle class. They wore tri-cornered hats, misquoted the founding fathers and pretty much preached against taxing the rich and proposed taxing the poor instead. Not so much a founding father's idea as it was the old Monty Python, Dennis Moore sketch. It made a lot of folks wonder whose idea it really was.
Turned out that the teaparty was more astroturf than grass roots as it was funded by the Koch brothers, a couple of billionaires. They took the usual republican notion of being fiscal conservative and injected it with the steroids of huge sums of cash. Suddenly, old people in revolutionary war attire wielding misspelled signs wasn't so humorous. Some of these assholes got elected to the House of Representatives. Yikes!
While I don't see the various tea parties as being Nazi party-like, there are a lot of parallels. They are crazy. They'll accept anyone into their parties that is any degree of crazy, but the crazier the better. It's a mix of extreme Christians, gun nuts, people who hate gubmint, more gun nuts, racists, Ted Nugent, even more gun nuts and (D) all of the above. Probably a few Nazi's too. The original Nazi's were not that exclusive either. Numbers. You got to have numbers.
And you've got to have people to hate. These Kochsuckers hate everybody. But, mostly they hate their fellow Americans who are not white or are white and liberal. That's a lot of Americans to hate! They diversify though. They also hate poor people. They hate them so much they want to make more of them! In the spirit of fiscal conservatism and tax savings, they think it's a brilliant idea to stop paying out welfare and also to end the minimum wage. The thinking is, get off welfare and go to college to learn to get a better job, lazy bastard! Sans wages and welfare, forage for berries in the woods while attending college classes. Oh- and pay more in taxes. I told you they were crazy. I'll add that they are idiots too.
The question is, how dangerous are they? We don't know yet. But, nothing good comes of hate combined with government. They hate "big government" but they desperately want to become part of it. They say they want to make it smaller but, who does that in a nation of 310 million people? You can't run the USofA as mom and pop candy store. They want to cut everything that smacks of socialism (which they almost exclusively confuse with communism) but they want to add to an already bloated military budget. Makes you wonder why. Goodness, think of all the wars we'd have going right now with a McCain or a Romney in the White House. Germany didn't really want war in Europe so soon after the First World War but, they went along with prepping for it and then Poland inexplicably attacked them.... Well, that's the way Germany made it look.
I've said all along that the GOP was smart to concentrate on getting into the senate and governor's mansions and state legislatures across the nation. With all that in your pocket, who needs 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? Look at the obstruction we just saw with them controlling the House. Now they have the Senate too. Yes, I know that they have had this before and we survived. It wasn't these Kochsuckers though. That's like comparing today's republicans to the Party Of Lincoln, formed to end slavery. Different times, different people. Just because they have Ben Carson doesn't mean they love Chris Rock. There were Jews, Swedes and other's in Hitler's SS. JEWS! Humans are a very unpredictable race.
Indeed. That's why it's hard not to wonder how this all will play out. How much hand-tipping have they done already? They still speak of FEMA work camps and death panels that aren't going to happen, six years into Obama's presidency. They have a penchant for saying things like "Well, you people were going to do that to US, so..." On a somewhat less foreboding note, a common refrain on the internet (regarding Congressional control) is: "You people had your chance- you blew it!" I take that to mean that democrats could have seized totalitarian control of the country but they were too busy feeding poor people.
Loose talk from a bunch of mentally ill posters on the internet, maybe. But, they get all this prodding from people they are putting into power. This can't end well. It will get worse before it gets worser.
Friday, November 7, 2014
A Super-sized Economy Where Hope Doesn't Float
I was looking at a republican site on Facebook where hundreds of people were angry about a proposed hike to $15 in the minimum wage that wasn't on any ballot anywhere in America this past Tuesday. I think five states did vote for an increased minimum, as Illinois did, but I'm not sure all were binding. Illinois' wasn't. The employees- I mean, citizens- may want it (and they do) but it still has to be run by corporate for final approval. Governor-elect Rauner has warned outgoing gov, Pat Quinn, that he doesn't want any surprises in the lame-duck period between now and January when he takes over. He knows where Quinn (and others) live....
The approved hike in Illinois is $10. This is a figure that Rauner feels will kill business. Every business in Illinois, when they put their business plan together, evidently didn't figure payroll. Oops! Hey- you make mistakes too! It happens. Ten bucks an hour!? Why did billionaire Bruce Rauner even ever go into business when he could get a $10 handout for an easy job at McDonalds? It's bad enough that business has to pay people, which cuts deeply into profits, now they have to pay them more! Ex-governor Quinn may well compound things by pushing the minimum hike thing through a democrat- controlled state legislature. Well, it is what the people voted for. Say all you want about this recent republican tidal wave of a tsunami mandate but, the people in those five states did vote for it. That's supposed to count for something, right?
Well, this Ferrerman has written quite a bit about the minimum and dedicated non-readers know where I stand. Let's make this about the dipshits that are against the minimum.
A lot of the people on the aforementioned site said in so many words that they would quit their current job and seek a minimum wage position if that $15 wage transpired. Evidently, it would be a step up from their current rate. Yikes. Yet they are still against the raise, even though a rising tide tends to lift all boats. Are they afraid of success? Getting into a higher tax bracket? Fearful that they'd just blow it all buying new appliances or putting the kids through school? People on welfare, as we know from the Foxy Party news, get lobster for dinner, and free phones and computers from the government. They could go that route but, they have pride. Maybe they are happy where they are? Why mess with the status quo?
Some of the most brilliant minds on the threads and on Facebook have pointed out the folly of paying fast food workers what liberals call "a living wage". Why, because we'd be paying $20 for a Big Mac, they exclaim. Well, no. Australia has a minimum of @ $16 an hour and they pay 40 cents more for a Big Mac than we do. Now maybe that in "wallabies" or whatever they call their money and the 40 cents there is like $30 dollars here. I mean, a buck's a buck, right? Maybe their cents are different?
These same brilliant minds think that there should be no minimum wage at all. That the free market should set wages- not the gubmint. They also believe that, though you might less, you could make more. It's up to the free market- not the gubmint. Of course they want to pay you more! They just want it to be their idea, not the gubmint.
Well, what if there was no minimum? How would it effect the price of a Big Mac, in a Big Mac economy if there were were no minimum and the loser behind the counter was paid $2 an hour as the free market dictated? They would cut the price of that burger to reflect the HUGE savings in payroll, right? Maybe make it 49 cents like in 1973 like when the Mac was introduced? Naw, that's extreme. Costs have gone up since then...but just for business... Maybe they'd halve it though, considering they'd be saving millions on labor? I'm sure they would. They would still be making huge profits and surely they'd pass the payroll savings along to the rest of us. It's good business!
Alright, dedicated non-readers, stop laughing. Stupid kochsuckers really believe that shit! The price of a Big Mac would go up because up is profit. Duh. When illegals started to flood the construction business, no builder or developer advertised that he could sell you a home for tens of thousands less because, unlike his competitor, he used far cheaper immigrant labor- and passed the savings onto you! Business doesn't work that way. He charged the same for the house with cheap labor learning on the job and bought a bigger boat with the windfall profits. I don't want to make homeowners cry but, the motherfucker probably charged you more for his lowered payroll. Don't bitch. It's capitalism. You have to admire it or you're a Muslim socialist. That's the worst kind, by the way.
A rising tide and "the smart ones" are in leaky boats trying to sink the little boats still afloat. That's your free market. Well, that's the one you get.
The approved hike in Illinois is $10. This is a figure that Rauner feels will kill business. Every business in Illinois, when they put their business plan together, evidently didn't figure payroll. Oops! Hey- you make mistakes too! It happens. Ten bucks an hour!? Why did billionaire Bruce Rauner even ever go into business when he could get a $10 handout for an easy job at McDonalds? It's bad enough that business has to pay people, which cuts deeply into profits, now they have to pay them more! Ex-governor Quinn may well compound things by pushing the minimum hike thing through a democrat- controlled state legislature. Well, it is what the people voted for. Say all you want about this recent republican tidal wave of a tsunami mandate but, the people in those five states did vote for it. That's supposed to count for something, right?
Well, this Ferrerman has written quite a bit about the minimum and dedicated non-readers know where I stand. Let's make this about the dipshits that are against the minimum.
A lot of the people on the aforementioned site said in so many words that they would quit their current job and seek a minimum wage position if that $15 wage transpired. Evidently, it would be a step up from their current rate. Yikes. Yet they are still against the raise, even though a rising tide tends to lift all boats. Are they afraid of success? Getting into a higher tax bracket? Fearful that they'd just blow it all buying new appliances or putting the kids through school? People on welfare, as we know from the Foxy Party news, get lobster for dinner, and free phones and computers from the government. They could go that route but, they have pride. Maybe they are happy where they are? Why mess with the status quo?
Some of the most brilliant minds on the threads and on Facebook have pointed out the folly of paying fast food workers what liberals call "a living wage". Why, because we'd be paying $20 for a Big Mac, they exclaim. Well, no. Australia has a minimum of @ $16 an hour and they pay 40 cents more for a Big Mac than we do. Now maybe that in "wallabies" or whatever they call their money and the 40 cents there is like $30 dollars here. I mean, a buck's a buck, right? Maybe their cents are different?
These same brilliant minds think that there should be no minimum wage at all. That the free market should set wages- not the gubmint. They also believe that, though you might less, you could make more. It's up to the free market- not the gubmint. Of course they want to pay you more! They just want it to be their idea, not the gubmint.
Well, what if there was no minimum? How would it effect the price of a Big Mac, in a Big Mac economy if there were were no minimum and the loser behind the counter was paid $2 an hour as the free market dictated? They would cut the price of that burger to reflect the HUGE savings in payroll, right? Maybe make it 49 cents like in 1973 like when the Mac was introduced? Naw, that's extreme. Costs have gone up since then...but just for business... Maybe they'd halve it though, considering they'd be saving millions on labor? I'm sure they would. They would still be making huge profits and surely they'd pass the payroll savings along to the rest of us. It's good business!
Alright, dedicated non-readers, stop laughing. Stupid kochsuckers really believe that shit! The price of a Big Mac would go up because up is profit. Duh. When illegals started to flood the construction business, no builder or developer advertised that he could sell you a home for tens of thousands less because, unlike his competitor, he used far cheaper immigrant labor- and passed the savings onto you! Business doesn't work that way. He charged the same for the house with cheap labor learning on the job and bought a bigger boat with the windfall profits. I don't want to make homeowners cry but, the motherfucker probably charged you more for his lowered payroll. Don't bitch. It's capitalism. You have to admire it or you're a Muslim socialist. That's the worst kind, by the way.
A rising tide and "the smart ones" are in leaky boats trying to sink the little boats still afloat. That's your free market. Well, that's the one you get.
Thursday, November 6, 2014
Chuck and Buck
First you cry...
Well, no, not really. I was a little pissed at my fellow Americans this morning. What were these people thinking, making Chuck Todd look smart?
Chuck is a pretty smart guy and he knows more about the ins and outs of politics than I do so, I'll give him that. He looks like a woodchuck though. Maybe that's why I don't like him much. It can't be that he's always talking bad about the democrats because I have been around this game long enough to know that, as a talking head, he has to keep people interested and watching. It's no different than sports analysis. You've got to keep people watching. It's good for your ratings and for the companies ratings. It's like Joe Buck doing football or baseball. When the game is over, win or lose, fans of both teams will tell you that Buck favored the other team. When one team is down by 3 touchdowns in the fourth quarter with ten minutes left, but breaks out a long run, it's his job to get excited to get you excited. Sports is all about what could happen as much as what is happening. So is politics. Chuck and Buck have to keep you from changing the channel. It's that simple.
The rest of the population is a bit more complex. These people do have agendas. Thousands of them. Millions of them are idiots. You might already know this if you have been anywhere on the internet or out in public. Lot's of jerks on the roads, offices, TV, radio- everywhere. Many of them vote. And as Chuck Todd (and others) repeatedly reminded us, republicans tend to vote in mid-terms because their people push them to vote. Historically many democrats vote only in presidential races. Doesn't it seem like, well, those are the one's that count?
The mid term elections are important though because these are the clowns that actually make the laws. They also have the ability to obstruct law-making which is what they do best, of late. This congress had an 8% approval rating yet 96% of those in this race were reelected. Now, how the fuck does that happen? Well, people are stupid.
We are looking at two more years of gridlock. When the tea part swept in with all their anti-hope and anti-change, start the insanity in 2010, a lot of those weirdos were gone by '12- a presidential election cycle. Now they come back in in this off year and you can begin to see the pattern. They haven't gotten anything really done in the past six years because their goal was making Obama but a one term president. This, of course, goes on in his second term. Now they hope to ruin his legacy. That's not going to happen either. Many of these people were deeming him "the worst president since Carter!" and wanting to impeach him...moments after his first election, before he had taken the oath of office. History is not kind to assholes who *think* like that. When you make a statement like that about someone, they can't help but live up to your expectations in the little world inside your head, no matter what they do in the real world.
So, crazy people *won*. What does it mean? Not much. Tea party republicans will not carry this alleged tsunami into the White House in '16. There will be no FEMA concentration camps for democrats- "'cause that's what they were gonna do to US...." no end to taxes or open season on immigrants. Barack Obama holds the power of veto and over-riding that takes 2/3 of both houses so, probably nothing too crazy is going to get that far. Crazy people won like fans think they won when their team beat the other team. You're still not invited into the locker room to shower with the team. You just get to buy the over-priced jerseys. Buck and Chuck know that. More people should.
Well, no, not really. I was a little pissed at my fellow Americans this morning. What were these people thinking, making Chuck Todd look smart?
Chuck is a pretty smart guy and he knows more about the ins and outs of politics than I do so, I'll give him that. He looks like a woodchuck though. Maybe that's why I don't like him much. It can't be that he's always talking bad about the democrats because I have been around this game long enough to know that, as a talking head, he has to keep people interested and watching. It's no different than sports analysis. You've got to keep people watching. It's good for your ratings and for the companies ratings. It's like Joe Buck doing football or baseball. When the game is over, win or lose, fans of both teams will tell you that Buck favored the other team. When one team is down by 3 touchdowns in the fourth quarter with ten minutes left, but breaks out a long run, it's his job to get excited to get you excited. Sports is all about what could happen as much as what is happening. So is politics. Chuck and Buck have to keep you from changing the channel. It's that simple.
The rest of the population is a bit more complex. These people do have agendas. Thousands of them. Millions of them are idiots. You might already know this if you have been anywhere on the internet or out in public. Lot's of jerks on the roads, offices, TV, radio- everywhere. Many of them vote. And as Chuck Todd (and others) repeatedly reminded us, republicans tend to vote in mid-terms because their people push them to vote. Historically many democrats vote only in presidential races. Doesn't it seem like, well, those are the one's that count?
The mid term elections are important though because these are the clowns that actually make the laws. They also have the ability to obstruct law-making which is what they do best, of late. This congress had an 8% approval rating yet 96% of those in this race were reelected. Now, how the fuck does that happen? Well, people are stupid.
We are looking at two more years of gridlock. When the tea part swept in with all their anti-hope and anti-change, start the insanity in 2010, a lot of those weirdos were gone by '12- a presidential election cycle. Now they come back in in this off year and you can begin to see the pattern. They haven't gotten anything really done in the past six years because their goal was making Obama but a one term president. This, of course, goes on in his second term. Now they hope to ruin his legacy. That's not going to happen either. Many of these people were deeming him "the worst president since Carter!" and wanting to impeach him...moments after his first election, before he had taken the oath of office. History is not kind to assholes who *think* like that. When you make a statement like that about someone, they can't help but live up to your expectations in the little world inside your head, no matter what they do in the real world.
So, crazy people *won*. What does it mean? Not much. Tea party republicans will not carry this alleged tsunami into the White House in '16. There will be no FEMA concentration camps for democrats- "'cause that's what they were gonna do to US...." no end to taxes or open season on immigrants. Barack Obama holds the power of veto and over-riding that takes 2/3 of both houses so, probably nothing too crazy is going to get that far. Crazy people won like fans think they won when their team beat the other team. You're still not invited into the locker room to shower with the team. You just get to buy the over-priced jerseys. Buck and Chuck know that. More people should.
Saturday, November 1, 2014
How YOU doin'?
There is a video making the internet rounds where an attractive woman walks around NYC while a camera surreptitiously records the visual and oral responses of the men she encounters.The video is called: "Ten Hours Of Walking in NYC As A Woman." It does a great job of illustrating what it can be like for a woman in the big city and gives a pretty good indication of what hopeless jerks most men are and why it's so hard to get laid when you are an idiot. The woman in the video is silent throughout so it's just her walking and all the fellas doing the talking.
I don't think that for most men that catcalling is a means to the seductive end. I see it as a backlash to the lifetime of cumulative rejection that most men experience. Most guys know that the attractive woman passing by likely has zero interest in them. No chatting. No quickie in the alley. No church and children, 'til death do we part. So, with all that off the table, why not compliment a woman on dat booty?
I worked with a guy named Earl who was like that. He was a waiter and I was a bartender at the PCNO club in New Orleans and we were between shifts and asked the boss if we could go around the corner and catch a couple beers. In New Orleans this is perfectly acceptable behavior. We had the bosses blessing and his admonition to not get drunk.
Earl wasn't a catcaller but, I learned quickly that he had a very annoying, stupid habit of stopping every reasonably attractive woman on the street to chat her up. He'd compliment them on their blouse or their eyes and yada-yada and I quickly determined that it could take the rest of the fucking day to get around the corner if I waited on Earl so, I abandoned him. He knew where to find me. And when he did, I asked him if his technique had ever worked.
No, it had not. However, he added, if it were to work one time in a thousand, it would be worth it!
Sheesh, them's some odds.... And yes, he said, even if that one success was a rather unattractive woman it would still be victory.
Earl was about my young age and also had a full beard as I did at the time. I remember a few times chatting up new waitresses at the Club and having them stop me and ask if I were Earl or Ferrerman. I'd introduce my Ferrerman self and they would smile. There was a big difference between myself and Earl and after that, I shaved off the beard to make that difference even more noticeable.
It wasn't that I was more successful with the ladies than Earl (of course, I was) than it was about our different approaches to women, regardless of the circumstances. Guys like Earl- guys on the streets of NYC- have a volume-Volume-VOLUME approach to women and it shows. In a sense, they really let themselves be picked by the woman in that they throw themselves out there like buckshot, hoping one pellet hits the target. When it does- BULLS EYE! It's really the lottery approach in that you understand you can't win if you don't play so, you buy lots and lots of tickets. And maybe you match three numbers and *win* $3. I've known Greeks and other eastern Europeans who feel that they are just not doing their jobs as men unless they proposition every woman they meet. They think they are being charming and, if it works...OOPA!
So, there is an element of nothing ventured, nothing gained but I think it's more of a lack of respect for women in general and their own manhood in particular. There's a lot of fear at work there and it's being passed on to random women on the street. These are fellas who have given up. They just don't know it yet.
The last time I saw Earl, girlfriend and I were on the streetcar and Earl and his buddy were with their dates. Earl acknowledged us but looked as if he wished he were anywhere else in the world. His friend was with a lovely, age-appropriate young lady and Earl seemed to be with her mom. I guessed his approach had finally worked.
I don't think that for most men that catcalling is a means to the seductive end. I see it as a backlash to the lifetime of cumulative rejection that most men experience. Most guys know that the attractive woman passing by likely has zero interest in them. No chatting. No quickie in the alley. No church and children, 'til death do we part. So, with all that off the table, why not compliment a woman on dat booty?
I worked with a guy named Earl who was like that. He was a waiter and I was a bartender at the PCNO club in New Orleans and we were between shifts and asked the boss if we could go around the corner and catch a couple beers. In New Orleans this is perfectly acceptable behavior. We had the bosses blessing and his admonition to not get drunk.
Earl wasn't a catcaller but, I learned quickly that he had a very annoying, stupid habit of stopping every reasonably attractive woman on the street to chat her up. He'd compliment them on their blouse or their eyes and yada-yada and I quickly determined that it could take the rest of the fucking day to get around the corner if I waited on Earl so, I abandoned him. He knew where to find me. And when he did, I asked him if his technique had ever worked.
No, it had not. However, he added, if it were to work one time in a thousand, it would be worth it!
Sheesh, them's some odds.... And yes, he said, even if that one success was a rather unattractive woman it would still be victory.
Earl was about my young age and also had a full beard as I did at the time. I remember a few times chatting up new waitresses at the Club and having them stop me and ask if I were Earl or Ferrerman. I'd introduce my Ferrerman self and they would smile. There was a big difference between myself and Earl and after that, I shaved off the beard to make that difference even more noticeable.
It wasn't that I was more successful with the ladies than Earl (of course, I was) than it was about our different approaches to women, regardless of the circumstances. Guys like Earl- guys on the streets of NYC- have a volume-Volume-VOLUME approach to women and it shows. In a sense, they really let themselves be picked by the woman in that they throw themselves out there like buckshot, hoping one pellet hits the target. When it does- BULLS EYE! It's really the lottery approach in that you understand you can't win if you don't play so, you buy lots and lots of tickets. And maybe you match three numbers and *win* $3. I've known Greeks and other eastern Europeans who feel that they are just not doing their jobs as men unless they proposition every woman they meet. They think they are being charming and, if it works...OOPA!
So, there is an element of nothing ventured, nothing gained but I think it's more of a lack of respect for women in general and their own manhood in particular. There's a lot of fear at work there and it's being passed on to random women on the street. These are fellas who have given up. They just don't know it yet.
The last time I saw Earl, girlfriend and I were on the streetcar and Earl and his buddy were with their dates. Earl acknowledged us but looked as if he wished he were anywhere else in the world. His friend was with a lovely, age-appropriate young lady and Earl seemed to be with her mom. I guessed his approach had finally worked.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)