It's already here! We just have to make it official.
Trump's been impeached and he needs to be removed. Now, that's not likely to happen given the fact it's a Moscow Mitch led senate that would do the deciding and they've already stated the fix is in, but he can be beat in November even though Moscow Mitch is working on keeping that from happening too. They definitely need Trump to get a second term for them, but after that they really don't need him.
I'll say it again that Trump was the only republican that could get close enough to Hillary Clinton to make an Electoral College *victory* look legit. Cruz or Kasich could not have pulled that off. Remember: She beat Trump by THREE MILLION votes in the popular vote. Ours is the only nation on earth that would let him be leader by finishing second- via a leftover relic of the founding days of slavery. All this fucking mope has to do again is place again and- if he *wins* the Electoral College, Moscow Mitch and Putin get four more years... I think Trump wants a landslide like Putin gets whenever he holds a vote so, it could get weirder this time. I mean- we don't know his opponent yet but we know who it isn't. It isn't Hillary, who- in case you did know this- BEAT HIM BY THREE MILLION VOTES LAST TIME- but fuckheads keep insisting was the lesser of two evils and they had to hold their noses while voting for her, and stupid shit like that.
So, no HRC this time. And no- if he ever really had it- new car smell about Trump. All that punditry about him being a businessman and an outsider who can clean up the DC Swamp can't be said with a straight face by anyone but the most reichtarded idiots on the internet, and in congress.
People are on to Trump now. He's never had 50% approval. Not even on Day 1. In my estimation, *the media* did more to elect him than Putin did. Since then he's done nothing but heap abuse upon them. They could have- and should have- Gary Hart-ed him for his obvious sex crimes but I think they kinda held hope that there was no real chance that he'd win, but if he did...what a ratings bonanza that would be... So, he's not exactly got them in his corner.
He's done nothing to expand his minority base by winning new friends and influencing people. There's that not getting near 50% again. Even to cheat you need numbers to make it look good. He's acting like he knows the numbers don't matter.
But, I digress. This is about Royalty, isn't it? Sixty two million of the nations dumbest motherfuckers voted for Trump and those 62 millions love him more today than yesterday, but, darling, not as much as tomorrow. Those still aren't leader numbers though. We shouldn't accept second best as president. Once was bad enough. Twice would be the death of us.
So, let's make Trump King! Titular, of course. Make it like Great Britain with their Royal Family- just for show and tourism. And I mean the entire Trump family. Ivanka could be a princess and the boys can be princesses. Barron could maybe be a Baron.
From the day Trump got the EC, his minions have been plotting the family's ascension to the presidency and that's not really how this country does things. I assume they were talking about legitimate 2nd place finishes resulting in an Electoral College victory- no, who are we kidding? These un-American fucking assholes were talking about Trump kids being appointed to the presidency. They don't think we need elections anymore- if we are to remain free, that is... That's the way they *think*.
Give them a Trump monarchy. Let them pretend the Trump's are the royalty they already pretend they are. Just put them out there for show like Britain does with their royals. Let the minions worship them. Just don't let our royals have any say in our government. It's a win/win for all! Blimey! What a jolly good idea! Give the stupid cunts something to do that won't hurt us.
Friday, January 10, 2020
Monday, September 23, 2019
Twitmo
Well, damn. I got a week's suspension from Twitter. Know what I did? Evidently I mocked the Saudi Kingdom. In a post to Tim O'Brien, I said that the Saudis should get all their suicide pilots and bone saws ready for war with Iran. That was pretty much it, verbatim. I had previously done about 12 hours in Twitmo for insulting Tomi Lahren, something tens of thousands of people do to that stupid cunt. Twitter is kinda Catholic in it's punishments, rapping you on the knuckles and making you remove the post so you take a proactive role in your punishment. Yeah, sure, fuck whatever. They did the same this time and advised me that bullying would not be tolerated- wait- bullying Saudi Arabia? Is Iran banned too? They attacked Saudi oil fields. All I did was point out (in my own way) that most of the 9/11 hijackers were suicidal Saudis and they murdered an American journalist with a motherfucking bone saw. Well, not in those words. I merely implied and referenced those two incidents.
Tim O'Brien, by the way, probably had nothing to do with this. He's a good guy, very anti-Trump and you've probably seen him on MSNBC talking about Trump. He was sued by this president* for a book he wrote about him. He did not lose. Like most people who are blue-checked on Twitter, it's doubtful Tim ever saw my post. I imagine most are like Chris Hayes. He has his settings adjusted so that he only sees the replies to his posts from the few hundred people he follows on Twitter. Know how I know this? A couple years ago he posted on Twitter that that is how he avoids trolls or any troublesome commenters. He never sees the posts. He's got like a million followers, I think. I never cared for the guy and rarely watched his show back then. I found him to be smug and pretentious. But, one day I was on Twitter and saw that he was a Cubs fan. He was tweeting while watching a Cubs playoff game, complaining about the calls and fan stuff, in real-time. I joined in. I think I posted the pic of me with Ernie Banks. Anybody who calls themselves a Cubs fan would appreciate such a photo and probably be jealous. Didn't even get a like from Hayes! I thought that was odd until 6-7 weeks later I saw his post explaining his settings policy.
So, that explanation not only absolves Tim O'Brien of any possible tattle-telling on me, it also absolves that dumb cunt, Tomi. I don't think for a minute that Tomi read my post and got hurt. I completely get that anyone who is Twitter famous cannot possibly find the time to read even 1% of the comments to them. I've got no problem with that. I only mention Hayes because he's dickish enough to have publicly boasted about how he ignores fans. He proved me right about my initial assessment of him.
The thing is, the people getting offended when you insult or taunt a celebrity- or a kingdom- are not the actual victims. They are minions. Proxy complainers. Evidently there's A LOT of that on Twitter and Facebook. I don't know why I posted that as if it were a surprise to me, as if social media being tribal was something new. Boy, you'd think a Ferrerman who defeated Dregs, Cliques and Unspankables in immortal combat would know that... Gang-reporting is nothing new. One of the more offensive aspects of Twitter is the "Twitter- Do Your Thang" lynch mobs where someone outs someone for being a dick to minorities or something socially wrong. Those people are often kinda deserving but, who is some random Twitterer to be organizing a lynch mob for anyone? I saw "The Ox-Bow Incident" in grade school and it helped mold me into the Ferrerman I am today. Doxxing people on the 'net is not a thang I want to be a part of. Truth be told, I rarely ever participate in the less sinister gang reporting of anyone either. I figure there's usually plenty of other folks up to doing that. I prefer to block or deal with people as I see fit. If somebody annoys me, I block them. Subsequently, I don't mind if someone blocks me. Chris Hayes has effectively blocked me and 7 billion other people. OK. An apparent liberal site- LOLGOP- blocked me long ago. Though I'm decidedly in favor of gun control, Shannon Watts blocked me several weeks ago. She was complaining about mansplaining and I jokingly suggested that she was womansplaining mansplaining. Only cause she was. Kinda knew she'd bounce me for that but, it had to be said. She does good work but, she's wrapped pretty tight. I followed her but, frankly I muted her a lot. On my Twitter bio I noted the irony of being blocked by both Shannon Watts and Dana Loesch. I might be alone in that spectrum.
I don't know if I'll return to Twitter when allowed. The @Jack fuckhead that owns it might deem me OK (as if he cares...) but, what about the offended minions of all things Trump? I'm not a people-pleaser and those are not really people, or people I need to please, at least. They are like Chris Hayes's followers are to, um, Chris Hayes- just sorta there, whether he sees them ot not.
Tim O'Brien, by the way, probably had nothing to do with this. He's a good guy, very anti-Trump and you've probably seen him on MSNBC talking about Trump. He was sued by this president* for a book he wrote about him. He did not lose. Like most people who are blue-checked on Twitter, it's doubtful Tim ever saw my post. I imagine most are like Chris Hayes. He has his settings adjusted so that he only sees the replies to his posts from the few hundred people he follows on Twitter. Know how I know this? A couple years ago he posted on Twitter that that is how he avoids trolls or any troublesome commenters. He never sees the posts. He's got like a million followers, I think. I never cared for the guy and rarely watched his show back then. I found him to be smug and pretentious. But, one day I was on Twitter and saw that he was a Cubs fan. He was tweeting while watching a Cubs playoff game, complaining about the calls and fan stuff, in real-time. I joined in. I think I posted the pic of me with Ernie Banks. Anybody who calls themselves a Cubs fan would appreciate such a photo and probably be jealous. Didn't even get a like from Hayes! I thought that was odd until 6-7 weeks later I saw his post explaining his settings policy.
So, that explanation not only absolves Tim O'Brien of any possible tattle-telling on me, it also absolves that dumb cunt, Tomi. I don't think for a minute that Tomi read my post and got hurt. I completely get that anyone who is Twitter famous cannot possibly find the time to read even 1% of the comments to them. I've got no problem with that. I only mention Hayes because he's dickish enough to have publicly boasted about how he ignores fans. He proved me right about my initial assessment of him.
The thing is, the people getting offended when you insult or taunt a celebrity- or a kingdom- are not the actual victims. They are minions. Proxy complainers. Evidently there's A LOT of that on Twitter and Facebook. I don't know why I posted that as if it were a surprise to me, as if social media being tribal was something new. Boy, you'd think a Ferrerman who defeated Dregs, Cliques and Unspankables in immortal combat would know that... Gang-reporting is nothing new. One of the more offensive aspects of Twitter is the "Twitter- Do Your Thang" lynch mobs where someone outs someone for being a dick to minorities or something socially wrong. Those people are often kinda deserving but, who is some random Twitterer to be organizing a lynch mob for anyone? I saw "The Ox-Bow Incident" in grade school and it helped mold me into the Ferrerman I am today. Doxxing people on the 'net is not a thang I want to be a part of. Truth be told, I rarely ever participate in the less sinister gang reporting of anyone either. I figure there's usually plenty of other folks up to doing that. I prefer to block or deal with people as I see fit. If somebody annoys me, I block them. Subsequently, I don't mind if someone blocks me. Chris Hayes has effectively blocked me and 7 billion other people. OK. An apparent liberal site- LOLGOP- blocked me long ago. Though I'm decidedly in favor of gun control, Shannon Watts blocked me several weeks ago. She was complaining about mansplaining and I jokingly suggested that she was womansplaining mansplaining. Only cause she was. Kinda knew she'd bounce me for that but, it had to be said. She does good work but, she's wrapped pretty tight. I followed her but, frankly I muted her a lot. On my Twitter bio I noted the irony of being blocked by both Shannon Watts and Dana Loesch. I might be alone in that spectrum.
I don't know if I'll return to Twitter when allowed. The @Jack fuckhead that owns it might deem me OK (as if he cares...) but, what about the offended minions of all things Trump? I'm not a people-pleaser and those are not really people, or people I need to please, at least. They are like Chris Hayes's followers are to, um, Chris Hayes- just sorta there, whether he sees them ot not.
Saturday, June 8, 2019
Stolen Valor
I went down a rabbit hole of Stolen Valor videos on Youtube the other night. Even I, after all my experiences at work and on Topix, am surprised at how prevalent it seems to be. One ex-Navy SEAL seems to have devoted his retirement to busting fake SEAL's. In the segment I watched he busted three current used car salesmen for trying to pass themselves off as former SEAL's. These three just happened to be used car salesman and that's just the way the complaints came in that week so, that profession isn't necessarily rife with phony SEAL's but, come on...it's used car sales...
There's a boatload of these videos out there though and most are really just pathetic people cos-playing soldier. Mental illness seems to be a major factor and I, at least, find myself feeling very sorry for the offenders. Their stories unravel very quickly as they are confronted by veterans with cell phones while going about their daily business. These poor bastards are Army Rangers and Marines and made captain out of boot camp and yada yada. I'm amazed at how, when confronted, they double and quadruple down on their bullshit rather than hightail it before the actual vet gets angry and maybe whups their ass. Maybe I shouldn't be amazed but, as seen every minute on the internet, the George Costanza line rings true:
"Remember, Jerry- it's not a lie if YOU believe it."
That's why I think it's generally mental illness afoot. You see these sad sacks on the internet and you wonder if they don't have mirrors in their homes. They're active duty Force Recon and 30-40 pounds overweight? Some guys have scammed the VA for benefits, even without ever having served. That, of course, is a crime as is stolen valor itself. It's one thing to fib a little to puff yourself up and quite another to be getting benefits you have to right to. Some guys seem to be doing it for a military discount at Starbucks or any store offering one but, I gotta believe those discounts are hinged on a valid military ID rather than showing up in fatigues or dress blues. I mean- what about hunters and hillbillies that just wear camo because they think it's stylish?
At work and at play on the late, not-so-great Topix, claiming military service was basically a way to intimidate other people. Don't fuck with me...I've been in combat and killed before... In the case of a used car salesman, I'd guess the idea is to impress car buyers more than intimidate but these guys are usually turned in by coworkers who find holes in their stories. Or maybe find them obnoxious. There were two guys on Topix that I can think of that claimed Marine service in Vietnam- before and after actual US involvement in 'Nam. Quite likely they were Marines, just nowhere near 'Nam and bullets flying. Some embellish actual service but most of these guys just seem to be winging it based on things they saw on TV or movies. Actual veterans on the street know the right questions and answers involved in drawing these men (and women!) out. What's your MOS? What's your pay grade? Most of these guys unravel at that. And, they almost always get the uniform wrong. Dress Blues and...crocs? One guy was in fatigues and wearing sneakers. He said it was "Casual Friday..." On the internet and in real life they ask for DD214's. Those are discharge papers. I don't know all that's on them but I bet it's not info anyone wants public. I'll bet like one's SS number is on there. I don't know. But it was comical on Topix when one phony would demand of another that they post their DD214. The first liar doesn't have a chance.
I shouldn't be surprised there are so many liars- and I'm not. I guess I'm surprised that so many are so bad at it.
There's a boatload of these videos out there though and most are really just pathetic people cos-playing soldier. Mental illness seems to be a major factor and I, at least, find myself feeling very sorry for the offenders. Their stories unravel very quickly as they are confronted by veterans with cell phones while going about their daily business. These poor bastards are Army Rangers and Marines and made captain out of boot camp and yada yada. I'm amazed at how, when confronted, they double and quadruple down on their bullshit rather than hightail it before the actual vet gets angry and maybe whups their ass. Maybe I shouldn't be amazed but, as seen every minute on the internet, the George Costanza line rings true:
"Remember, Jerry- it's not a lie if YOU believe it."
That's why I think it's generally mental illness afoot. You see these sad sacks on the internet and you wonder if they don't have mirrors in their homes. They're active duty Force Recon and 30-40 pounds overweight? Some guys have scammed the VA for benefits, even without ever having served. That, of course, is a crime as is stolen valor itself. It's one thing to fib a little to puff yourself up and quite another to be getting benefits you have to right to. Some guys seem to be doing it for a military discount at Starbucks or any store offering one but, I gotta believe those discounts are hinged on a valid military ID rather than showing up in fatigues or dress blues. I mean- what about hunters and hillbillies that just wear camo because they think it's stylish?
At work and at play on the late, not-so-great Topix, claiming military service was basically a way to intimidate other people. Don't fuck with me...I've been in combat and killed before... In the case of a used car salesman, I'd guess the idea is to impress car buyers more than intimidate but these guys are usually turned in by coworkers who find holes in their stories. Or maybe find them obnoxious. There were two guys on Topix that I can think of that claimed Marine service in Vietnam- before and after actual US involvement in 'Nam. Quite likely they were Marines, just nowhere near 'Nam and bullets flying. Some embellish actual service but most of these guys just seem to be winging it based on things they saw on TV or movies. Actual veterans on the street know the right questions and answers involved in drawing these men (and women!) out. What's your MOS? What's your pay grade? Most of these guys unravel at that. And, they almost always get the uniform wrong. Dress Blues and...crocs? One guy was in fatigues and wearing sneakers. He said it was "Casual Friday..." On the internet and in real life they ask for DD214's. Those are discharge papers. I don't know all that's on them but I bet it's not info anyone wants public. I'll bet like one's SS number is on there. I don't know. But it was comical on Topix when one phony would demand of another that they post their DD214. The first liar doesn't have a chance.
I shouldn't be surprised there are so many liars- and I'm not. I guess I'm surprised that so many are so bad at it.
Saturday, December 22, 2018
Hegel And I Win Topix! AGAIN!!!!!
Yesterday brought news from an unindicted co-conspirator that Topix shut down it's threads for good. It was done unceremoniously, in the middle of the day, I gather. My first thought was how funny it would be if Sublime had been thwarted mid-masturbatory post! Last I knew he was still feeling the need to share his wonderfulness with whatever was left of the Offbeat/Weird crowd.
I had left two years ago November, I believe, and Hegel had left before me. Her departure was as quiet as mine. We just didn't make a big to-do about it. It simply wasn't worth it to do so. Topix could have turned off the lights several years ago. The place had gone steadily downhill since the Tribune left in '09. It was actually quite a bit of fun then, especially the Chicago Forum where I first posted. The original dregs on the 'Regulars' thread were pretty much fun. Longtime dedicated non-readers know what happened there! I think a week or two ago I looked in there and at the Offbeat/Weird Forum. The dregs hadn't been touched since summer and had only suffered occasional visits by Sub and other trolls in the past year.
Offbeat was far more popular but, that's not saying much. In my opinion it had been a troll-fest for years but, the last year looks to have been almost exclusively trolls fighting with each other and themselves (of course). My name was still getting mentioned though I hadn't posted in two years. Eh, I'm a brand. There were no other charming bottomspankers. Certain people felt like they were actually somebody by trolling me. A five/ten minute perusal of the site showed the usual suspects were still running amok. I'd say that was sad but, I would say that, wouldn't I?
I gotta say it was probably just deserts for the trolls that were left. They know who they are. Whatever good folks left (like Luke/Deer Whisperer) probably weren't too upset if they were even more than mildly surprised. They know who they are too. I'm guessing it was a surprise too and that all the troll mods who could spill the beans were let go before the axe fell.
When Hegel and I discussed this, we were both surprised at how many names we had forgotten. Well, not so much names as the alleged people behind them. That's to be expected after a couple of years removed from anything. We had caught so many people forgetting to look up that even in real time some people forgot who they were at times!
I'm sure it was a financial decision. They couldn't have been making much money the last several years and, at some point, I don't imagine yo can write off the losses anymore. I don't think it was lawsuits or anything like that but, I don't know. I don't think kids today were at all interested in Topix so, like Fox, they had to accept an elderly, dying audience to draw from. I'd venture that the average Topix age was 50 or so. They're still making old people, of course, but those folks might be more into Facebook or Twitter. Topix was once upon a time "a news aggregate" but they quit kidding about that post-Tribune days.
So, like the Ferrerman said: Forget it, Jake...it's Topixtown. Topixtown no more. I guess that clears that up.
I had left two years ago November, I believe, and Hegel had left before me. Her departure was as quiet as mine. We just didn't make a big to-do about it. It simply wasn't worth it to do so. Topix could have turned off the lights several years ago. The place had gone steadily downhill since the Tribune left in '09. It was actually quite a bit of fun then, especially the Chicago Forum where I first posted. The original dregs on the 'Regulars' thread were pretty much fun. Longtime dedicated non-readers know what happened there! I think a week or two ago I looked in there and at the Offbeat/Weird Forum. The dregs hadn't been touched since summer and had only suffered occasional visits by Sub and other trolls in the past year.
Offbeat was far more popular but, that's not saying much. In my opinion it had been a troll-fest for years but, the last year looks to have been almost exclusively trolls fighting with each other and themselves (of course). My name was still getting mentioned though I hadn't posted in two years. Eh, I'm a brand. There were no other charming bottomspankers. Certain people felt like they were actually somebody by trolling me. A five/ten minute perusal of the site showed the usual suspects were still running amok. I'd say that was sad but, I would say that, wouldn't I?
I gotta say it was probably just deserts for the trolls that were left. They know who they are. Whatever good folks left (like Luke/Deer Whisperer) probably weren't too upset if they were even more than mildly surprised. They know who they are too. I'm guessing it was a surprise too and that all the troll mods who could spill the beans were let go before the axe fell.
When Hegel and I discussed this, we were both surprised at how many names we had forgotten. Well, not so much names as the alleged people behind them. That's to be expected after a couple of years removed from anything. We had caught so many people forgetting to look up that even in real time some people forgot who they were at times!
I'm sure it was a financial decision. They couldn't have been making much money the last several years and, at some point, I don't imagine yo can write off the losses anymore. I don't think it was lawsuits or anything like that but, I don't know. I don't think kids today were at all interested in Topix so, like Fox, they had to accept an elderly, dying audience to draw from. I'd venture that the average Topix age was 50 or so. They're still making old people, of course, but those folks might be more into Facebook or Twitter. Topix was once upon a time "a news aggregate" but they quit kidding about that post-Tribune days.
So, like the Ferrerman said: Forget it, Jake...it's Topixtown. Topixtown no more. I guess that clears that up.
Friday, April 6, 2018
Don't Man-up, Ladies!
Watched a clip about Dana Loesch (NRA spokesperson) where her husband described her as being a better man than most men he knows. Is that damning with faint praise or, is it a left-handed compliment?
If you've seen her videos, she's pretty angry for a woman with such a spankable bottom. I know it's the 21st century and women are asserting themselves, and I think that is a very good thing but, women asserting themselves as men is not a good thing. Manhood, as all too often thought of in the John Wayne-wrapped-in-a-corporate raider skin is nothing to aspire too. Acting like a dick, whether you have one or not, is never an admirable trait. I get that people think it is but, do they really feel it is?
Sure, some do. We're supposed to respect and fear alpha males so it follows that one day we should do the same for alpha females. It's a stupid but, predictable route to success. It's worked for so many men in so many levels in the public eye for all of time, whether they be warrior kings or high school jocks. I get that. It does work. I just don't get why women do it. I've been led to believe that they are better than that.
Now, I might have been misinformed. There was probably some womansplaining involved. You know that old drill about "Why is it that when a man is aggressive he's a *stud* and a *leader* but, when a woman is aggressive, she's a *bitch* or a *cunt*?" Well, I'll tell you with another question: "Who's saying that the guy isn't a bitch or cunt too?"
It's great to have a dick but, why be one? Dana Loesch, Tomi Lahren and other (mostly conservative women) act like they've got dicks. They might. If you've ever poked around on Tumbler, you'll come across some very female-looking people that have dicks. Yikes. I'm not casting aspersions on their gender bonafides but, again- Yikes!
Who is the better man: The late Fred Rogers or the current Alex Jones? I can't say I'm a fan of either really but, Mr. Rogers presented himself as the gentle, man that he was. Mr. Jones presents himself as the crazed banshee he wants you to believe he is. One was himself and the other is a persona. Be yourself, not the self you think you should be. If you're going to educate people, teach them values, not vitriol and fear. Simple enough. If you're a woman, you don't have to be Mrs. Rogers but neither do you have to be Mrs. Jones. Frankly, somewhere in the middle, a bit north of Rogers but way south of Jones is better regardless of gender.
Dana or Tomi being vitriolic and tough is not a good look for a woman, nothing to aspire to. If they were men, they might not even get noticed in the sea of *conservative*, equally obnoxious men. Admittedly, they do standout so, that's probably why they went the tough guy route despite street-fighting not actually being in their background. Kinda Trumpy. Just like Trump wants you to think he's Donny from the block in Queens, these ladies want you to think they will fuck you up, though I doubt any of these three ever actually did fuck anybody up. Over maybe but, that's not the same.
Do better ladies. Be strong women rather than weak men. But, if you have to be a man, be a good man. Look around and you'll see fine examples of strong women and men to emulate. Don't settle for the obvious. Too many of us fellas already do that.
If you've seen her videos, she's pretty angry for a woman with such a spankable bottom. I know it's the 21st century and women are asserting themselves, and I think that is a very good thing but, women asserting themselves as men is not a good thing. Manhood, as all too often thought of in the John Wayne-wrapped-in-a-corporate raider skin is nothing to aspire too. Acting like a dick, whether you have one or not, is never an admirable trait. I get that people think it is but, do they really feel it is?
Sure, some do. We're supposed to respect and fear alpha males so it follows that one day we should do the same for alpha females. It's a stupid but, predictable route to success. It's worked for so many men in so many levels in the public eye for all of time, whether they be warrior kings or high school jocks. I get that. It does work. I just don't get why women do it. I've been led to believe that they are better than that.
Now, I might have been misinformed. There was probably some womansplaining involved. You know that old drill about "Why is it that when a man is aggressive he's a *stud* and a *leader* but, when a woman is aggressive, she's a *bitch* or a *cunt*?" Well, I'll tell you with another question: "Who's saying that the guy isn't a bitch or cunt too?"
It's great to have a dick but, why be one? Dana Loesch, Tomi Lahren and other (mostly conservative women) act like they've got dicks. They might. If you've ever poked around on Tumbler, you'll come across some very female-looking people that have dicks. Yikes. I'm not casting aspersions on their gender bonafides but, again- Yikes!
Who is the better man: The late Fred Rogers or the current Alex Jones? I can't say I'm a fan of either really but, Mr. Rogers presented himself as the gentle, man that he was. Mr. Jones presents himself as the crazed banshee he wants you to believe he is. One was himself and the other is a persona. Be yourself, not the self you think you should be. If you're going to educate people, teach them values, not vitriol and fear. Simple enough. If you're a woman, you don't have to be Mrs. Rogers but neither do you have to be Mrs. Jones. Frankly, somewhere in the middle, a bit north of Rogers but way south of Jones is better regardless of gender.
Dana or Tomi being vitriolic and tough is not a good look for a woman, nothing to aspire to. If they were men, they might not even get noticed in the sea of *conservative*, equally obnoxious men. Admittedly, they do standout so, that's probably why they went the tough guy route despite street-fighting not actually being in their background. Kinda Trumpy. Just like Trump wants you to think he's Donny from the block in Queens, these ladies want you to think they will fuck you up, though I doubt any of these three ever actually did fuck anybody up. Over maybe but, that's not the same.
Do better ladies. Be strong women rather than weak men. But, if you have to be a man, be a good man. Look around and you'll see fine examples of strong women and men to emulate. Don't settle for the obvious. Too many of us fellas already do that.
Saturday, March 3, 2018
Armed With Semantics
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Well, shit, if you put it that way...
I'm in the camp with many historians (and good-looking handsome people) who believe that the Second Amendment was nothing more than an assurance from the new found government of the United States that, in time of war, the southern slave states would be allowed to hold back militia to put down slave rebellions and to hunt runaway slaves and bring them back to injustice. Slavery was a bigly business before, during and after the founding of this country. In many southern states, slaves out-numbered white folks. If you are white and have ever been surrounded by Negroes, you can understand the paranoia, especially if you are enslaving them. These people were snatched up from their homes and forced to work for free in another country. Despite what the folks on Fox & Friends have said, they were not happy about it, were not well cared for and were not better off than they had been back home on the African continent. As you go on in life, always ask yourself if you would like to be treated the way someone else is being treated. I mean in the bad ways, not the "Queen For A Day" ways or today's Kardashians. If you think slavery was "OK", volunteer yourself or sell your kids into slavery. Walk the talk. You'll be fine.
These days everyone who owns a gun is an expert on the 2A. Facebook and Twitter are overrun with experts on guns- and semantics. Untold numbers of people swear, for example, that the 2A expressly gives them the right to revolt against the government "if it gets too big for its britches". Well, no. That's not mentioned at all. In fact, where in the history of the world have the winners in any revolution ever said, "If you don't like the way we're running things- kill us!"? That's never the way it works. Even now, with Trump as president and republican majorities in both houses of congress, you still have people working off of that old, Obama-era script. This may be sheer laziness but it may also be due to the knowledge that Trump may not be long for the presidency. This could create ironic second amendment remedies of folks defending an oppressive government from another (seemingly) oppressive government inside that oppressive government that doesn't want the current oppressive government to oppress anyone, anymore. If you're going to choose a hill to die on, Capitol Hill run by the current grifters is a very odd choice. So, no, revolution is not an option in the 2A and neither the Bill Of Rights or the Constitution is supposed to be interpreted as if it were the Bible.
Now, am I interpreting the 2A as if it were the Bible? Am I relying on Constitutional scholars? Yep. I'll always go with the scholars rather than the drunk at the end of the bar whether it's religion or revolution. You should too but, yeah, you don't have to. Ain't nobody putting a gun at your head- even if they think the 2A gives them that right.
Nor will I count on the drunk at the end of the bar to teach me semantics as it relates to guns. Sorry but, someone calling a magazine a "clip" does not end an argument and make you the winner. Same with someone thinking that the AR in AR15 means "assault rifle". Most people probably do not think it does but most every script available on the 'net for gun trolls probably says: "You win the argument when you post that AR DOES NOT mean Assault Rifle!" I see these two assertions all day, every day. The ambiguously worded 2A makes NO distinctions regarding the exact verbiage of the nomenclature of weaponry. You can look it up. Or refer to the exact words that begin this post.
That's the whole fucking thing right there. There's no mention of slave rebellions either. That's probably with good reason though. Many of the founders owned slaves but, being smart guys, they probably knew that slavery was wrong and that leaving a paper trail about it on a historical document was not a good idea. I think the founders knew what they meant about militias and slave patrols and left it ambiguous for obvious reasons, the primary reason being that they didn't think it was ambiguous at all. These guys didn't know the difference between a clip and a magazine! They were simply assuring the slave states that, yeah, they could hold back some fellas in time of war to keep the slaves from rising up and killing the white folks. Duh.
Really now, was their any question at the time whether settlers could have guns when hunting was THE way of putting meat on the family table? There was no question of allowing the people to have guns for hunting or for defense. Ninety percent of what would become the US was hostile frontier crawling with Indians, many of which did not adhere to the white people's manifest destiny of killing all the Indians to take their land. Thus, settlers having firearms was not up for debate. Ours was perhaps the only revolution ever where the revolutionaries were not disarmed when the hostilities were over. And that wasn't because the winners felt like the people would need those arms to kill them if they got too big for their britches or elected a Black president. (The founders clearly never saw that coming).
I seriously doubt they ever saw a Second Amendment debate coming either any more than they saw 100 round clips (or magazines, if you must) or atomic bombs or planes to drop them. No less a republican that the late Chief Justice, Warren Burger, called the 2A the "greatest fraud ever perpetrated upon the American public". He was talking about the NRA's interpretation of it rather than the amendment itself. It was not intended to give all Americans the right to bear arms. Just militia/slave patrols at the time of it's inception. It wasn't until 2008 when no less a republican than Antonin Scalia decided in DC v. Heller that citizens did have a right to bear arms but that that right was not "unlimited". What part of "...shall not be infringed" did that guy not understand?
Well, maybe it is time to repeal the 2A? The Civil War, Emancipation Proclamation and the 14th Amendment wiped out slavery so, in effect, overrode the 2A in the process. Even DC v. Heller actually only determined that a retired DC cop (Heller) could keep a gun in his house for home defense. I'm no expert but, it said nothing explicit about assault rifles, RPG's, tanks or other weapons of war being allowable. Remember: even Scalia said gun ownership was not unlimited. That sounds to me like it can be limited. Lets stop interpreting the 2a by either interpreting it for the 21st century or smooth dumping it. Lets have a national gun debate. And, lets do it without gun play because, you know, YOU don't have THAT right just because you think you do. It's long past time we got that shit straight.
Well, shit, if you put it that way...
I'm in the camp with many historians (and good-looking handsome people) who believe that the Second Amendment was nothing more than an assurance from the new found government of the United States that, in time of war, the southern slave states would be allowed to hold back militia to put down slave rebellions and to hunt runaway slaves and bring them back to injustice. Slavery was a bigly business before, during and after the founding of this country. In many southern states, slaves out-numbered white folks. If you are white and have ever been surrounded by Negroes, you can understand the paranoia, especially if you are enslaving them. These people were snatched up from their homes and forced to work for free in another country. Despite what the folks on Fox & Friends have said, they were not happy about it, were not well cared for and were not better off than they had been back home on the African continent. As you go on in life, always ask yourself if you would like to be treated the way someone else is being treated. I mean in the bad ways, not the "Queen For A Day" ways or today's Kardashians. If you think slavery was "OK", volunteer yourself or sell your kids into slavery. Walk the talk. You'll be fine.
These days everyone who owns a gun is an expert on the 2A. Facebook and Twitter are overrun with experts on guns- and semantics. Untold numbers of people swear, for example, that the 2A expressly gives them the right to revolt against the government "if it gets too big for its britches". Well, no. That's not mentioned at all. In fact, where in the history of the world have the winners in any revolution ever said, "If you don't like the way we're running things- kill us!"? That's never the way it works. Even now, with Trump as president and republican majorities in both houses of congress, you still have people working off of that old, Obama-era script. This may be sheer laziness but it may also be due to the knowledge that Trump may not be long for the presidency. This could create ironic second amendment remedies of folks defending an oppressive government from another (seemingly) oppressive government inside that oppressive government that doesn't want the current oppressive government to oppress anyone, anymore. If you're going to choose a hill to die on, Capitol Hill run by the current grifters is a very odd choice. So, no, revolution is not an option in the 2A and neither the Bill Of Rights or the Constitution is supposed to be interpreted as if it were the Bible.
Now, am I interpreting the 2A as if it were the Bible? Am I relying on Constitutional scholars? Yep. I'll always go with the scholars rather than the drunk at the end of the bar whether it's religion or revolution. You should too but, yeah, you don't have to. Ain't nobody putting a gun at your head- even if they think the 2A gives them that right.
Nor will I count on the drunk at the end of the bar to teach me semantics as it relates to guns. Sorry but, someone calling a magazine a "clip" does not end an argument and make you the winner. Same with someone thinking that the AR in AR15 means "assault rifle". Most people probably do not think it does but most every script available on the 'net for gun trolls probably says: "You win the argument when you post that AR DOES NOT mean Assault Rifle!" I see these two assertions all day, every day. The ambiguously worded 2A makes NO distinctions regarding the exact verbiage of the nomenclature of weaponry. You can look it up. Or refer to the exact words that begin this post.
That's the whole fucking thing right there. There's no mention of slave rebellions either. That's probably with good reason though. Many of the founders owned slaves but, being smart guys, they probably knew that slavery was wrong and that leaving a paper trail about it on a historical document was not a good idea. I think the founders knew what they meant about militias and slave patrols and left it ambiguous for obvious reasons, the primary reason being that they didn't think it was ambiguous at all. These guys didn't know the difference between a clip and a magazine! They were simply assuring the slave states that, yeah, they could hold back some fellas in time of war to keep the slaves from rising up and killing the white folks. Duh.
Really now, was their any question at the time whether settlers could have guns when hunting was THE way of putting meat on the family table? There was no question of allowing the people to have guns for hunting or for defense. Ninety percent of what would become the US was hostile frontier crawling with Indians, many of which did not adhere to the white people's manifest destiny of killing all the Indians to take their land. Thus, settlers having firearms was not up for debate. Ours was perhaps the only revolution ever where the revolutionaries were not disarmed when the hostilities were over. And that wasn't because the winners felt like the people would need those arms to kill them if they got too big for their britches or elected a Black president. (The founders clearly never saw that coming).
I seriously doubt they ever saw a Second Amendment debate coming either any more than they saw 100 round clips (or magazines, if you must) or atomic bombs or planes to drop them. No less a republican that the late Chief Justice, Warren Burger, called the 2A the "greatest fraud ever perpetrated upon the American public". He was talking about the NRA's interpretation of it rather than the amendment itself. It was not intended to give all Americans the right to bear arms. Just militia/slave patrols at the time of it's inception. It wasn't until 2008 when no less a republican than Antonin Scalia decided in DC v. Heller that citizens did have a right to bear arms but that that right was not "unlimited". What part of "...shall not be infringed" did that guy not understand?
Well, maybe it is time to repeal the 2A? The Civil War, Emancipation Proclamation and the 14th Amendment wiped out slavery so, in effect, overrode the 2A in the process. Even DC v. Heller actually only determined that a retired DC cop (Heller) could keep a gun in his house for home defense. I'm no expert but, it said nothing explicit about assault rifles, RPG's, tanks or other weapons of war being allowable. Remember: even Scalia said gun ownership was not unlimited. That sounds to me like it can be limited. Lets stop interpreting the 2a by either interpreting it for the 21st century or smooth dumping it. Lets have a national gun debate. And, lets do it without gun play because, you know, YOU don't have THAT right just because you think you do. It's long past time we got that shit straight.
Wednesday, February 21, 2018
I will follow you...until you piss me off...
Chris Hayes has a show on MSNBC, 7pm Chicago time. (Full disclosure: I barely, rarely watch his show) He has 1.56 million Twitter followers and, until yesterday, I was one of them. He also follows 1,118 people there. I'm not one of them. I guess the reality of it all is that I could probably never be one, the way Hayes handles his Twitter.
He revealed yesterday that he has his settings adjusted to where he only sees replies from people he follows. I imagine many celebs and journos do the same and I kinda sorta get that. But, I also kinda sorta don't get that. What's the point of being on a very public venue of social media if you don't actually engage with the public? You don't even give them a chance. These people might as well email.
Fuller disclosure: I really only followed Hayes because he's a Cubs fan. On a promo for MSNBC, it showed Michael Moore pointing out that, on the screen on set, Hayes was interviewing Moore AND watching the Cubs playoff game! I decided then, I like this fucking guy! That's a fan! So, I gave him a follow on Twitter. No big effort on my part.
Last Fall, he tweeted a lot about the Cubs. I tweeted back a lot about the Cubs. I noticed I never got a single like from him about those Cubs tweets. I don't expect a lot of feedback from *famous people* but it struck me as odd that several supportive Cubs tweets would not get even one like. Well, now I know why. I wasn't one of the 1,118 people he calls "inners" so, he wasn't even seeing my tweets at all. It was like posting into a void. I wasn't blocked, mind you, as others could see my tweets, just not Chris. He couldn't be bothered because other peoples tweets bothered him. He's not interested in them no matter what they have to say or what team they love. To put it into perspective, if all 1.54 million of his followers tweeted him at once, only 1,118 of those tweets would be viewed by Chris. Quite a disparity.
Quite arrogant too. A few weeks ago I began following Rex Huppke, a clever columnist who writes for the Chicago Tribune. I bounced him when he posted a similar sentiment to the Hayes' one where he pointed out that he constantly blocked people who displeased him. I doubt I was one of those people but, maybe I never even got the chance? I never got a like from him no matter how clever I was and that leads me to believe his settings might have been like Chris Hayes'. I bounced him- even though I still think he's clever and funny- because I also think he's a dick for being so obnoxious about blocking people.
I've gotten at least one like from almost every other famous person I follow and there are a few I follow who do not follow me that are regularly appreciative of my tweets with likes and comments. I respect the hell out of that. They take the time to actually read some of the comments made to them! Imagine that! These people get the real purpose of social media- the social part. Hayes has both beat by more than a million followers each but, in my book (blog) he can't touch them.
So, am I a hypocrite? Eh... I block people who annoy me. The key is, I give them a chance to annoy me in the first fucking place.
He revealed yesterday that he has his settings adjusted to where he only sees replies from people he follows. I imagine many celebs and journos do the same and I kinda sorta get that. But, I also kinda sorta don't get that. What's the point of being on a very public venue of social media if you don't actually engage with the public? You don't even give them a chance. These people might as well email.
Fuller disclosure: I really only followed Hayes because he's a Cubs fan. On a promo for MSNBC, it showed Michael Moore pointing out that, on the screen on set, Hayes was interviewing Moore AND watching the Cubs playoff game! I decided then, I like this fucking guy! That's a fan! So, I gave him a follow on Twitter. No big effort on my part.
Last Fall, he tweeted a lot about the Cubs. I tweeted back a lot about the Cubs. I noticed I never got a single like from him about those Cubs tweets. I don't expect a lot of feedback from *famous people* but it struck me as odd that several supportive Cubs tweets would not get even one like. Well, now I know why. I wasn't one of the 1,118 people he calls "inners" so, he wasn't even seeing my tweets at all. It was like posting into a void. I wasn't blocked, mind you, as others could see my tweets, just not Chris. He couldn't be bothered because other peoples tweets bothered him. He's not interested in them no matter what they have to say or what team they love. To put it into perspective, if all 1.54 million of his followers tweeted him at once, only 1,118 of those tweets would be viewed by Chris. Quite a disparity.
Quite arrogant too. A few weeks ago I began following Rex Huppke, a clever columnist who writes for the Chicago Tribune. I bounced him when he posted a similar sentiment to the Hayes' one where he pointed out that he constantly blocked people who displeased him. I doubt I was one of those people but, maybe I never even got the chance? I never got a like from him no matter how clever I was and that leads me to believe his settings might have been like Chris Hayes'. I bounced him- even though I still think he's clever and funny- because I also think he's a dick for being so obnoxious about blocking people.
I've gotten at least one like from almost every other famous person I follow and there are a few I follow who do not follow me that are regularly appreciative of my tweets with likes and comments. I respect the hell out of that. They take the time to actually read some of the comments made to them! Imagine that! These people get the real purpose of social media- the social part. Hayes has both beat by more than a million followers each but, in my book (blog) he can't touch them.
So, am I a hypocrite? Eh... I block people who annoy me. The key is, I give them a chance to annoy me in the first fucking place.
Sunday, February 18, 2018
Troll Farming
Nice piece in the Washington Post about a Russian, former employee of a *troll factory* in St. Petersburg, Russia. The guy was an unemployed teacher who had taken the gig to make himself enough rubles to tide himself over until he got a teaching job. He speaks English but, not well enough to pass himself off as an American so, he worked the floor that concentrated on trolling local Russian sites. To make more money and work the American sites, one had to be better versed in American life than he was. You had to be able to speak American as an American would and be familiar with all things American to make the big money, influencing American elections.
It seems the Russians work sorta similar to how Topix trolls work. They worked the Russians in threes at least. One person would take a contrary stance and the other two would work to convince him of how wrong he was. After a number of posts, he'd be convinced of how wrong he was. A Moscow Miracle!
Topix trolls, though they do work in teams, were more streamlined and frugal than the Russians. On Topix it's usually one troll playing several roles. Yeah, basically one person talking to his or her selves, hoping someone else bites. They used to have teams- the original Chicago Regulars were an example of that- but, if that wasn't too expensive(?) it was a lot of trouble. I was invited to join the Yahoo group where they gathered to get their marching orders each day about what would be the topic of conversation but, I declined. I wasn't exactly sure what was going on then but, I knew I didn't want to be a part of any organization that would have a very thinly drawn out *therapist* as the head of it. I've got some writing talent and it's nice that folks notice that. I wasn't exactly honored to be nominated but, I definitely wasn't going to serve. Of course, someone wasn't happy about that.
I didn't know what they were trying to accomplish. With the Russians they were at least obviously trying to reinforce political harmony at home and sow discord in the US. Though Topix gets political and nearly every troll there is a misfit republican, there never seemed to be a political goal at all. Nothing clear. Even in it's heyday back up until '09, Topix never had that much of a following as to influence a good number of people. I can still only surmise that, in the case of the Chicago Regulars, the agenda was only to masturbate the *therapist*. Maybe help pad the post count for Topix itself. Not a very ambitious or even nefarious agenda. It's kinda like some of the celebrities who recently were caught buying Twitter followers. If you gotta cheat...
I haven't posted on Topix in like 14 months. I look at it from time to time though. It can move at the glacial pace of a soap opera. The same people are still fighting about the same stupid things they been fighting, some for more than ten years. As I mentioned previously, some are arguing with the voices in their head just as they always did. Mental illness is what keeps the lights on in that troll factory as the bulk of the very few posters there are decidedly mentally ill. I don't actually mean that malevolently like these people are school-shooters or anything like that. I just mean that they are idiots is all.
Topix was just not a good model for the Russians to follow. We can't even TROLL as good as our adversaries! Not even useful idiots...
It seems the Russians work sorta similar to how Topix trolls work. They worked the Russians in threes at least. One person would take a contrary stance and the other two would work to convince him of how wrong he was. After a number of posts, he'd be convinced of how wrong he was. A Moscow Miracle!
Topix trolls, though they do work in teams, were more streamlined and frugal than the Russians. On Topix it's usually one troll playing several roles. Yeah, basically one person talking to his or her selves, hoping someone else bites. They used to have teams- the original Chicago Regulars were an example of that- but, if that wasn't too expensive(?) it was a lot of trouble. I was invited to join the Yahoo group where they gathered to get their marching orders each day about what would be the topic of conversation but, I declined. I wasn't exactly sure what was going on then but, I knew I didn't want to be a part of any organization that would have a very thinly drawn out *therapist* as the head of it. I've got some writing talent and it's nice that folks notice that. I wasn't exactly honored to be nominated but, I definitely wasn't going to serve. Of course, someone wasn't happy about that.
I didn't know what they were trying to accomplish. With the Russians they were at least obviously trying to reinforce political harmony at home and sow discord in the US. Though Topix gets political and nearly every troll there is a misfit republican, there never seemed to be a political goal at all. Nothing clear. Even in it's heyday back up until '09, Topix never had that much of a following as to influence a good number of people. I can still only surmise that, in the case of the Chicago Regulars, the agenda was only to masturbate the *therapist*. Maybe help pad the post count for Topix itself. Not a very ambitious or even nefarious agenda. It's kinda like some of the celebrities who recently were caught buying Twitter followers. If you gotta cheat...
I haven't posted on Topix in like 14 months. I look at it from time to time though. It can move at the glacial pace of a soap opera. The same people are still fighting about the same stupid things they been fighting, some for more than ten years. As I mentioned previously, some are arguing with the voices in their head just as they always did. Mental illness is what keeps the lights on in that troll factory as the bulk of the very few posters there are decidedly mentally ill. I don't actually mean that malevolently like these people are school-shooters or anything like that. I just mean that they are idiots is all.
Topix was just not a good model for the Russians to follow. We can't even TROLL as good as our adversaries! Not even useful idiots...
Wednesday, December 6, 2017
Out Of The Closet, Assholes!
Why the fuck does anyone get into the bakery business only to fuck themselves out of an entire market of customers? How is it that conservative Christians- who are almost to a man- anti-government, petitioning that government for the right to discriminate? And why is it always bakeries?
Jeebus! These assholes get sillier every day! But, ya know, maybe we should let them go ahead with this, with one proviso. The bakery must prominently display a sign proclaiming their non-service to gays. And that sign must detail all the races, creeds and colors surely to be discriminated against should the US Supreme Court rule in favor of this asshole baker. The case isn't about gay wedding cakes. It's about bringing back the "separate but equal" Jim Crow laws of the recent American south and expanding them to include anybody today's white, male Christians would be against. Lay it all out there, white supremacists. Let US know where we should spend our money. Get out of the closet, assholes, and let us know who you are.
It's not easy being a Ferrerman, especially in these Trumpian times when stupidity has been injected with political and social steroids into a new ab-normalcy. Dedicated non-readers know how I've poked fun at the various real and imaginary dumbfucks of Topix, in the past. The reality is that for every dreg or cliquer on that site there are hundreds of thousands (millions?) of real-life assholes just like them- or worse. There are a buttload of them in the White House, both houses of congress- fuck it: everywhere. Donald J. Trump is POTUS. This means that a freak like Sublime really could be POTUS. Any malignant narcissist you may know could become president. Well, unless they pass a law against it, I suppose but, don't hold your breath.
I guess that Trump legitimizes them. If the USSC rules for the baker, that will do the same. So will the eventual passage of the current GOP Tax Scam. We've long been a nation of assholes in so many respects but, we've never been thisclose to it being official policy. Up is down. Right is wrong. Wrong, is right. There are good people on both sides of the Nazi issue. The earth is flat if you think it is. It's not only okay to be stupid, it's encouraged. It's damn near a birthright now.
Courage, good people. It's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. Just watch the signs and keep up with the changes.
Jeebus! These assholes get sillier every day! But, ya know, maybe we should let them go ahead with this, with one proviso. The bakery must prominently display a sign proclaiming their non-service to gays. And that sign must detail all the races, creeds and colors surely to be discriminated against should the US Supreme Court rule in favor of this asshole baker. The case isn't about gay wedding cakes. It's about bringing back the "separate but equal" Jim Crow laws of the recent American south and expanding them to include anybody today's white, male Christians would be against. Lay it all out there, white supremacists. Let US know where we should spend our money. Get out of the closet, assholes, and let us know who you are.
It's not easy being a Ferrerman, especially in these Trumpian times when stupidity has been injected with political and social steroids into a new ab-normalcy. Dedicated non-readers know how I've poked fun at the various real and imaginary dumbfucks of Topix, in the past. The reality is that for every dreg or cliquer on that site there are hundreds of thousands (millions?) of real-life assholes just like them- or worse. There are a buttload of them in the White House, both houses of congress- fuck it: everywhere. Donald J. Trump is POTUS. This means that a freak like Sublime really could be POTUS. Any malignant narcissist you may know could become president. Well, unless they pass a law against it, I suppose but, don't hold your breath.
I guess that Trump legitimizes them. If the USSC rules for the baker, that will do the same. So will the eventual passage of the current GOP Tax Scam. We've long been a nation of assholes in so many respects but, we've never been thisclose to it being official policy. Up is down. Right is wrong. Wrong, is right. There are good people on both sides of the Nazi issue. The earth is flat if you think it is. It's not only okay to be stupid, it's encouraged. It's damn near a birthright now.
Courage, good people. It's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. Just watch the signs and keep up with the changes.
Wednesday, November 22, 2017
Solar Neutrality
Let's talk about Solar Neutrality. What is Solar Neutrality? Well, it's a liberal, communist program where the Sun is shared with all people, whether they are deserving or not. Solar Neutrality was quite likely signed into law (probably via an illegal Executive Order) by disgraced former President, Barack Obama. That's exactly the kinda shit he did all the time, isn't it?
It's fairly true that the Sun can be useful as a source of power but, solar power has been virtually stymied by communist Barack Obama as he endeavored to share the wealth of the Sun by spreading it around in a somewhat equal fashion to as many undeserving people as possible. How, when the Sun is free to all, does an entrepreneur use his genius to develop the Sun for the betterment of mankind and to, perhaps, make a few dollars for his hard work? This is the problem with the development of solar power today.
My solution, to foment solar creativity, is to lease the developmental rights to the Sun to the good folks at (perhaps) Exxon. This must be done at a proactive, pro-business, capitalist, friendly avenue in it's approach. Let's say, one dollar a year for 100 years for complete AND total rights to the Sun and it's development as a useful tool in energy exploration and function. Pardon my French but, you'll see some shit get done under this program! Shit that couldn't get done under Obama's share the warmth nonsense.
Think about it. Haven't we all had a beautiful, sunny day ruined knowing that the same Sun you are enjoying is also being enjoyed by those people on the other side of town? Don't you hate that? I know I do.
Call your senator or favorite Fox News host and tell them that you want an end to Solar Neutrality! Ask them why- this November, for example, are we getting shafted with cold, shorter days while Australians are enjoying our summer. They'll be as flummoxed as you at this abomination and surely will take this ball and run with it.
It's fairly true that the Sun can be useful as a source of power but, solar power has been virtually stymied by communist Barack Obama as he endeavored to share the wealth of the Sun by spreading it around in a somewhat equal fashion to as many undeserving people as possible. How, when the Sun is free to all, does an entrepreneur use his genius to develop the Sun for the betterment of mankind and to, perhaps, make a few dollars for his hard work? This is the problem with the development of solar power today.
My solution, to foment solar creativity, is to lease the developmental rights to the Sun to the good folks at (perhaps) Exxon. This must be done at a proactive, pro-business, capitalist, friendly avenue in it's approach. Let's say, one dollar a year for 100 years for complete AND total rights to the Sun and it's development as a useful tool in energy exploration and function. Pardon my French but, you'll see some shit get done under this program! Shit that couldn't get done under Obama's share the warmth nonsense.
Think about it. Haven't we all had a beautiful, sunny day ruined knowing that the same Sun you are enjoying is also being enjoyed by those people on the other side of town? Don't you hate that? I know I do.
Call your senator or favorite Fox News host and tell them that you want an end to Solar Neutrality! Ask them why- this November, for example, are we getting shafted with cold, shorter days while Australians are enjoying our summer. They'll be as flummoxed as you at this abomination and surely will take this ball and run with it.
Thursday, November 2, 2017
Papa Don't Preach!
Looks like I picked a bad time to lose interest in the NFL. It's nothing personal and it has little to do with standing or kneeling or even how mediocre the Bears are. The timing is unfortunate because so many reichtards have followed in the goose steps of Hair Furor and condemned the NFL for employing uppity black players, and are protesting the league. I'm certainly no part of that. And this week, the douche bag that owns Papa John's (alleged) Pizza actually blamed the NFL for the drop in sales and stock value of his business. He, you may recall, previously blamed President Obama and the ACA for his then business failings. So, I'm not lumped in with these guys. Then, where's my beef?
Well, that's a rather personal question! Oh, I guess I meant my beef with the NFL. Well, it's a combination of the game devolving into a slow, predictable, non-spectacle 3 days a week and CTE head trauma literally bludgeoning the game to death.
The latter really did it for me as I saw old time players struggle with the effects of dementia after retiring from the game. It killed Dave Duerson and a few others. It became painful to watch a guy take or give a good hit knowing that they would pay dearly for that hit, early after the end of their career. Not necessarily that hit, but certainly a culmination of all the others. All the runs up the middle trying to break through the line for a big gain- that seem to only work 5% of the time anyway- seemed that much more senseless and brutal with the knowledge of brain injuries that would follow.
And most games seemed to drag too with TV time outs and the pandering to commercials and, like the NBA and NASCAR, you could tune in for the last 5 minutes and spend 30 minutes watching the end of the game. It got boring really.
I hear viewing is down. I think it's for a combination of all the factors above as well as the controversy over Colin Kaepernick's kneeling during the anthem, WHICH I will remind is a protest against police brutality and the systemic murder of black folks. You knew that, right?
The reichtards don't. X number of them have turned their flag-draped backsides on the NFL because their leaders claim the protests are anti- military, anti-US. Who knows how effective that has been? That the Papa John's scumbag has shamelessly volunteered his douchebaggery to the mix pretty much tells me the protest of the protest is yet another lost cause for the reich. Like they needed another one...
Well, that's a rather personal question! Oh, I guess I meant my beef with the NFL. Well, it's a combination of the game devolving into a slow, predictable, non-spectacle 3 days a week and CTE head trauma literally bludgeoning the game to death.
The latter really did it for me as I saw old time players struggle with the effects of dementia after retiring from the game. It killed Dave Duerson and a few others. It became painful to watch a guy take or give a good hit knowing that they would pay dearly for that hit, early after the end of their career. Not necessarily that hit, but certainly a culmination of all the others. All the runs up the middle trying to break through the line for a big gain- that seem to only work 5% of the time anyway- seemed that much more senseless and brutal with the knowledge of brain injuries that would follow.
And most games seemed to drag too with TV time outs and the pandering to commercials and, like the NBA and NASCAR, you could tune in for the last 5 minutes and spend 30 minutes watching the end of the game. It got boring really.
I hear viewing is down. I think it's for a combination of all the factors above as well as the controversy over Colin Kaepernick's kneeling during the anthem, WHICH I will remind is a protest against police brutality and the systemic murder of black folks. You knew that, right?
The reichtards don't. X number of them have turned their flag-draped backsides on the NFL because their leaders claim the protests are anti- military, anti-US. Who knows how effective that has been? That the Papa John's scumbag has shamelessly volunteered his douchebaggery to the mix pretty much tells me the protest of the protest is yet another lost cause for the reich. Like they needed another one...
Wednesday, October 11, 2017
America Gets Felt Up But- FREEDOM...
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/10/10/terry-crews-reveals-was-groped-by-unnamed-hollywood-executive-amid-harvey-weinstein-scandal.html
Would you sexually harass that man? Someone did. And that someone lived to not tell about it.
We don't know how prevalent the sexual harassment of men is in Hollywood (or the real world) but someone boldly grabbing the privates of Terry Crews makes you wonder and it absolutely highlights how prevalent and despicable the harassment of women in and out of Hollywood truly must be. That Crews didn't pound the creep- and why- is the story of every woman who has ever been felt up or raped in any work place.
It's about survival. It's about keeping your job and moving on, even if it means moving on from your dignity. It's also about America's future.
Nearly a year ago we elected (sorta) a scumbag who had a veritable Stop and Frisk policy regarding women. Even people who voted for Trump may have objected to his pussy-grabbing but, in these omelet-making times, many think that you gotta break a few eggs and, if the shells get in the mix, you gotta eat them too because, well, this is THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD and, if you don't like it, you can leave. If you want a Wall or a USSC court that will effect the change your minister wants, you got to have the Trumpy scumbag that can make that happen. Life's evidently about taking the bad with the worse.
Look at Trump and his NFL bashing. The common take on the internet and several news outlets is that black players who make damn good money in the NFL just better shut up and stand for the anthem because they earn a great living here. To me that idiotic sentiment overshadows the faux sentiment that these men are disrespecting the troops or the flag/country itself. They are not. Remember: Kaepernick and the other fellas are protesting racial injustice and the police murdering unarmed black men and women. It's not a slam at your dad who was in the Navy for two years. Not about him at all. And not about disrespecting the flag. If it was about the flag, there would be no beer sales or bathroom visits allowed during the anthem.
Ashley Judd, Rose McGowan, Terry Crews and untold numbers of famous and unknown actresses and actors have all found out the hard way that, if you want to work in this town, submit and move on. The country has been going on like this, hot and heavy, for the past few decades. The notion that being poor in America is better than being poor anywhere else seems thisclose to being policy. It's the same notion that, yeah- your people may be getting murdered by cops but, they probably deserved it and you make millions so, shut the fuck up!
That someone may get molested or even raped but, be rewarded with employment is normal for many people. I've seen this with waitresses in the restaurant business. You've probably seen it at your job. These women don't get their names in lights. They're just hoping to make rent and move on, another day. Maybe a better one than today or yesterday is on the calendar.
I don't know about that. The republicans have been training their people to survive with as little gubmint help as possible- and to like it. And to be proud of it! Your rights, wages and sensibilities may be eroding but- dammit- they are eroding in THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD! Accept it or leave it.
Saturday, October 7, 2017
For Republicans Who Find It Hard To Hate When Murder's Not Enough
Hey- remember that gun massacre last week? The worst in modern US history? That was soooo last week, I reckon. It seems to have devolved into a discussion of the guns used since no one yet knows why the motherfucker sought to kill all those people. One of the retards on Fox & Friends actually said it was hard to hate the guy because there was no obvious reason to hate him like being Bin Laden or a "mutant living in the basement" like the Sandy Hook kid. Other than him murdering 58 people and wounding nearly 500 more, he seemed so normal. Well, to them, I guess. He's dead so, we might never know.
Without any manifesto to read, and without brown skin or Islamic religious convictions, most of the media is going with usual "mentally ill" explanation given to just about every white scumbag mass-murderer. Republicans are especially big on that. So big, in fact, that earlier this year they rescinded an Obama edict that mentally ill people NOT be allowed to own guns. There's that mentally ill interpretation of the Second Amendment that is so prevalent on the internet. NRA republicans think every American should have guns... until they can find a way to deny guns to black, brown and liberal Americans, that is. That 2A really is a double edged sword when it comes down to it. Who knew a vaguely worded amendment could be so troublesome 240 some years later?
I'm not sure what part of ...shall not be infringed that the GOP/NRA is suddenly forgetting but, they are suggesting that "bump-stocks" be infringed. It's surprising, at first, until you realize that it's what pundits these days call a "nothing burger". The ATF allowed one version of bump-stocks during Obama's terms, largely because they didn't want to fight the powerful NRA on that issue. Bump-stocks attach to a semi-automatic rifle and allow it to fire as if it were a full-auto machine gun. Serious gun owners scoff at them, considering them to be toys for less serious gun nuts who don't mind wasting expensive ammo while sacrificing accuracy. They are for the "hold my beer" crowd.
But, now we know they are also for murder. This asshole in Vegas had 10 or 12 of them. They are inexpensive and not reliable so, he was prepared with extras when one jammed. But, 400 yards away from a thick crowd of people, from an elevated position, we now know how effective they can be at killing and wounding human beings.
The NRA acknowledges this and, since it was an opportunity to blame Obama, they've seemingly agreed to not fight legislation against bump-stocks. Only the dumbest republicans would believe that the guy who they still believe spent 8 years trying to confiscate their guns, was OK with converting semi's to full-auto but, they believe what they are told to believe. Besides, their big concern now is making gun silencers 50 state legal and easily accessible for ALL (white?) Americans. That's been temporarily shelved until the Vegas massacre is completely out of the news cycle.
Ever notice how on the news after pretty much every shooting, witnesses note how they at first thought they were hearing fireworks? Evidently the NRA is tired of hearing that. They want quieter murders/massacres. They claim it's in the interest of protecting shooters hearing but, that's what fucking wearing hearing protection is for! If you're going to shoot guns, wear the headgear made for that, snowflake. If you happen to shoot it out with ISIS or bank robbers and have your gun handy but no earmuffs, tough it out. You'll be fine. I promise you. Yes, guns are loud. Yes, they sound like some fireworks. Imagine though, how asshole in Vegas's guns would have sounded from 400 yards away, with a concert going on- if his weapons had been silenced? Guntards on the 'net are quick to point out that silencers are "not like in the movies..." Some even note that they don't even work that well. Yep, it's not like the "pfffttt" in a James Bond film. Yes, fucktard, I know that. My question then is why do you need one then? If they don't work like the movies and it's simple to put on some earmuffs when shooting, why the nationwide push for legalization? 'Cause freedom?
Imagine being in the crowd that night in Vegas and not hearing something that sounded like fireworks. People are dropping all around you but, you don't know why. You'll figure it out as the blood starts flowing but, how many precious moments will pass while you figure it out and, will a silenced bullet find you before you do? However ineffective guntards may ironically claim silencers to be, the Vegas massacre was a perfect example of how effective they could have been. The question in the warped minds of NRA staffers might be, why didn't the shooter use silencers? What can they do to make them more popular? Well, that's what their *hearing protection bill* is about.
You want to hate somebody? Hate the fucking NRA. They don't hate you but, they fight every day to make it easier for someone to kill you. They don't mind losing customers to the products they shill because each death promotes more sales. Does a cycle get more vicious than that?
Without any manifesto to read, and without brown skin or Islamic religious convictions, most of the media is going with usual "mentally ill" explanation given to just about every white scumbag mass-murderer. Republicans are especially big on that. So big, in fact, that earlier this year they rescinded an Obama edict that mentally ill people NOT be allowed to own guns. There's that mentally ill interpretation of the Second Amendment that is so prevalent on the internet. NRA republicans think every American should have guns... until they can find a way to deny guns to black, brown and liberal Americans, that is. That 2A really is a double edged sword when it comes down to it. Who knew a vaguely worded amendment could be so troublesome 240 some years later?
I'm not sure what part of ...shall not be infringed that the GOP/NRA is suddenly forgetting but, they are suggesting that "bump-stocks" be infringed. It's surprising, at first, until you realize that it's what pundits these days call a "nothing burger". The ATF allowed one version of bump-stocks during Obama's terms, largely because they didn't want to fight the powerful NRA on that issue. Bump-stocks attach to a semi-automatic rifle and allow it to fire as if it were a full-auto machine gun. Serious gun owners scoff at them, considering them to be toys for less serious gun nuts who don't mind wasting expensive ammo while sacrificing accuracy. They are for the "hold my beer" crowd.
But, now we know they are also for murder. This asshole in Vegas had 10 or 12 of them. They are inexpensive and not reliable so, he was prepared with extras when one jammed. But, 400 yards away from a thick crowd of people, from an elevated position, we now know how effective they can be at killing and wounding human beings.
The NRA acknowledges this and, since it was an opportunity to blame Obama, they've seemingly agreed to not fight legislation against bump-stocks. Only the dumbest republicans would believe that the guy who they still believe spent 8 years trying to confiscate their guns, was OK with converting semi's to full-auto but, they believe what they are told to believe. Besides, their big concern now is making gun silencers 50 state legal and easily accessible for ALL (white?) Americans. That's been temporarily shelved until the Vegas massacre is completely out of the news cycle.
Ever notice how on the news after pretty much every shooting, witnesses note how they at first thought they were hearing fireworks? Evidently the NRA is tired of hearing that. They want quieter murders/massacres. They claim it's in the interest of protecting shooters hearing but, that's what fucking wearing hearing protection is for! If you're going to shoot guns, wear the headgear made for that, snowflake. If you happen to shoot it out with ISIS or bank robbers and have your gun handy but no earmuffs, tough it out. You'll be fine. I promise you. Yes, guns are loud. Yes, they sound like some fireworks. Imagine though, how asshole in Vegas's guns would have sounded from 400 yards away, with a concert going on- if his weapons had been silenced? Guntards on the 'net are quick to point out that silencers are "not like in the movies..." Some even note that they don't even work that well. Yep, it's not like the "pfffttt" in a James Bond film. Yes, fucktard, I know that. My question then is why do you need one then? If they don't work like the movies and it's simple to put on some earmuffs when shooting, why the nationwide push for legalization? 'Cause freedom?
Imagine being in the crowd that night in Vegas and not hearing something that sounded like fireworks. People are dropping all around you but, you don't know why. You'll figure it out as the blood starts flowing but, how many precious moments will pass while you figure it out and, will a silenced bullet find you before you do? However ineffective guntards may ironically claim silencers to be, the Vegas massacre was a perfect example of how effective they could have been. The question in the warped minds of NRA staffers might be, why didn't the shooter use silencers? What can they do to make them more popular? Well, that's what their *hearing protection bill* is about.
You want to hate somebody? Hate the fucking NRA. They don't hate you but, they fight every day to make it easier for someone to kill you. They don't mind losing customers to the products they shill because each death promotes more sales. Does a cycle get more vicious than that?
Thursday, September 21, 2017
Sunday Night Cumming Attractions
A couple Sundays back, I was looking to watch John Oliver and a show on HBO about attractive black woman caught my eye. I believe it's called Insecure. I could check on that, I suppose. Anyway, on the show one of the gals wanted to surprise her new fella with a blowjob. FTR, Ladies- that's always a good surprise! You can't go wrong with that.
However, evidently he can. The happy ending didn't turn out so happy when the guy ejaculated on her face and in her eyes. Unless you are Sublime's wife, most women don't like that.
What caught my eye though, (see what I did there?) was how they managed to fake it so well without showing a boner. The actresses reaction was well done. I would imagine that even with rehearsals she was duly freaked out each time. Don't know what they used to simulate semen but, who really wants anything suddenly flung in their face?
This past Sunday I began watching The Deuce, also an HBO show. Set in the 70's in Manhattan, it's a story of pimps, whores and the beginnings of the NY mob's domination of the porn business. Good show! It's a tough look at life then as well as now. It will really make you reconsider the lives of those involved with prostitution and porn. Anybody with a cameraphone and genitals can be a porno star now but, back in the day, it was little more than a suburb of prostitution.
This brings us to the next cumshot. Maggie Gyllenhaal plays a streetwise hooker who, in the scene, is filling in for a friend shooting a scene in a porno. The rules of pornography in NYC (and most of the country then, I believe) meant no penetration could be shown. Kinda like HBO and Skinamax now, I reckon. They would have had to edit the hardcore parts back then for mainstream purchase and viewing, but keeping the penetration for more select customers willing to pay more. In the scene, Maggie plays a Viking maiden. Since her Viking male counterpart was a bit of a premature ejaculator, they had to fake the shot. They used cream of potato soup, shot from a turkey baster! This may answer how HBO did the money shot in Insecure. In The Deuce however, since it was a sort of behind-the-scenes look at how porn was done then, we see the basters and we see Maggie getting creamed- or rather, souped. It's funny how these things all come together and, I don't think I need to alert you to what I did there. Vichyssoise porn, I guess. But, served at room temperature.
However, evidently he can. The happy ending didn't turn out so happy when the guy ejaculated on her face and in her eyes. Unless you are Sublime's wife, most women don't like that.
What caught my eye though, (see what I did there?) was how they managed to fake it so well without showing a boner. The actresses reaction was well done. I would imagine that even with rehearsals she was duly freaked out each time. Don't know what they used to simulate semen but, who really wants anything suddenly flung in their face?
This past Sunday I began watching The Deuce, also an HBO show. Set in the 70's in Manhattan, it's a story of pimps, whores and the beginnings of the NY mob's domination of the porn business. Good show! It's a tough look at life then as well as now. It will really make you reconsider the lives of those involved with prostitution and porn. Anybody with a cameraphone and genitals can be a porno star now but, back in the day, it was little more than a suburb of prostitution.
This brings us to the next cumshot. Maggie Gyllenhaal plays a streetwise hooker who, in the scene, is filling in for a friend shooting a scene in a porno. The rules of pornography in NYC (and most of the country then, I believe) meant no penetration could be shown. Kinda like HBO and Skinamax now, I reckon. They would have had to edit the hardcore parts back then for mainstream purchase and viewing, but keeping the penetration for more select customers willing to pay more. In the scene, Maggie plays a Viking maiden. Since her Viking male counterpart was a bit of a premature ejaculator, they had to fake the shot. They used cream of potato soup, shot from a turkey baster! This may answer how HBO did the money shot in Insecure. In The Deuce however, since it was a sort of behind-the-scenes look at how porn was done then, we see the basters and we see Maggie getting creamed- or rather, souped. It's funny how these things all come together and, I don't think I need to alert you to what I did there. Vichyssoise porn, I guess. But, served at room temperature.
Friday, September 8, 2017
Perspanktive
To put Hurricane Irma into perspanktive, my spankings only go as high as Category 3 (moderate to severe). Irma is a Category 5 (as of this writing) and may only *weaken* to 4. So, keep that in mind.
Saturday, August 26, 2017
Now We Get The Rest Of The Story?
A little birdie alerted me to a thread on Topix where ol' punch, Sublime1, has been detailing the particulars of his on-going divorce. Kind of a surprise as, though he had highlighted trouble in paradise for years in the form of mutual adultery, he had never given a hint that either he or "Bambi" were unhappy in the marriage. Actually. he put their marriage on a pedestal atop a mountain, far above all other because of all that boot-knocking.
So, not too surprised that infidelity (however sanctioned) led to divorce but, kinda surprised that it happened when they seemed so content with the whole show.
We here at The Ferrerman blog always took Sublime's lurid sexploits with a grain of salt. Life's kinda 50/50 but Topix life is much less of a coin flip than reality. We tended to look at Sub's tales as more Letters To Penthouse than True Confessions. Yes, people do commit adultery and couples do have open marriages and all that yada-yada stuff but, they also have jerkoff fantasies a la' the letters that they like to annoy others with and that makes it 50/50. Stuff either happens or it doesn't. The realty though is that if you pretend you and your spouse are out catting around, it's about as bad to say it as to actually do it. Your wife either is a tramp or you like people to think she is. I can't see a real distinction there of good/not good.
This was a guy who delighted in reporting that the mother of his children liked him cumming in her face. Yikes. Never minding he'd go into possibly apocryphal stories of her (and his) trysts, that just seemed a bit more on the money. Or, on the money shot, as it were.
In all his stories though, there was never any gripes about her cooking, cleaning, child-raising or shopping habits. In fact, he was pretty damn laudatory of her wife and mother skills outside of the bedroom. Reading the current thread, I can hear the late Paul Harvey saying, "Now we get the rest of the story..."
Bambi evidently sucked at the wifely duties. Who knew? Aside from 24/7 shopping, she had recently left a used tampon in the shower. Yikes but, he left it there for a full week. Why? How is that better?
People break up and fuss about odd things but, usually you've seen those things coming as they've been telegraphed in advance. If they broke up and cited marital infidelity folks would say, 'of course". Maybe their real world friends saw all this coming as they actually know them. But, who is to say he shared those intimate details IRL and only shared the sex stuff with imaginary people on the Internet? The Internet in general and Topix in particular is a place to be all that you can't be in real life. On line, Sub is convinced that people are convinced that he is a 5'7" middle-aged bald guy, desired by ALL women and that that is just the way it is. If you don't believe it, it's because you're jealous. How sad for you.
I've long viewed Sub as Trump Lite. He's the poor man's Donald Trump and, just as Trump is the poor man's idea of a rich guy, Sub is his own idea of an idiots' idea of what awesome is. I don't know that anyone on Topix buys Sub's shit but, he seems quite convinced that they do. Fooling one's self is the first order of business for a malignant narcissist. Once you accomplish that, obviously everyone else buys in.
It's tough to find honesty on a place like Topix where nearly everyone is good-looking and wealthy- more than YOU- but, you can read between the lines. Several years ago some of the remaining cast members of the Chicago Regulars met in Florida to validate themselves and their on-line personas in real life. The takeaway from those in attendance was that Sub was extremely shy and not at all like he portrayed himself on the threads. They weren't being mean, I don't think. I believe they were pleased that he wasn't the Type A asshole he played on the threads, that that was all just an act. They said he just pretty much sat there quietly, barely making eye contact with the others. That's not very Sub-like. not very sublime. Very telling though.
So, as they divorce, Bambi is out of the house and living with a buddy of Sub's and his wife. Sub reports she has a very strong devotion to the friend's wife. Well now, maybe there was something to those sexcapades stories after all? Or is that just what the Sub wants folks to believe? In the world of imaginary people, one never knows, does one?
So, not too surprised that infidelity (however sanctioned) led to divorce but, kinda surprised that it happened when they seemed so content with the whole show.
We here at The Ferrerman blog always took Sublime's lurid sexploits with a grain of salt. Life's kinda 50/50 but Topix life is much less of a coin flip than reality. We tended to look at Sub's tales as more Letters To Penthouse than True Confessions. Yes, people do commit adultery and couples do have open marriages and all that yada-yada stuff but, they also have jerkoff fantasies a la' the letters that they like to annoy others with and that makes it 50/50. Stuff either happens or it doesn't. The realty though is that if you pretend you and your spouse are out catting around, it's about as bad to say it as to actually do it. Your wife either is a tramp or you like people to think she is. I can't see a real distinction there of good/not good.
This was a guy who delighted in reporting that the mother of his children liked him cumming in her face. Yikes. Never minding he'd go into possibly apocryphal stories of her (and his) trysts, that just seemed a bit more on the money. Or, on the money shot, as it were.
In all his stories though, there was never any gripes about her cooking, cleaning, child-raising or shopping habits. In fact, he was pretty damn laudatory of her wife and mother skills outside of the bedroom. Reading the current thread, I can hear the late Paul Harvey saying, "Now we get the rest of the story..."
Bambi evidently sucked at the wifely duties. Who knew? Aside from 24/7 shopping, she had recently left a used tampon in the shower. Yikes but, he left it there for a full week. Why? How is that better?
People break up and fuss about odd things but, usually you've seen those things coming as they've been telegraphed in advance. If they broke up and cited marital infidelity folks would say, 'of course". Maybe their real world friends saw all this coming as they actually know them. But, who is to say he shared those intimate details IRL and only shared the sex stuff with imaginary people on the Internet? The Internet in general and Topix in particular is a place to be all that you can't be in real life. On line, Sub is convinced that people are convinced that he is a 5'7" middle-aged bald guy, desired by ALL women and that that is just the way it is. If you don't believe it, it's because you're jealous. How sad for you.
I've long viewed Sub as Trump Lite. He's the poor man's Donald Trump and, just as Trump is the poor man's idea of a rich guy, Sub is his own idea of an idiots' idea of what awesome is. I don't know that anyone on Topix buys Sub's shit but, he seems quite convinced that they do. Fooling one's self is the first order of business for a malignant narcissist. Once you accomplish that, obviously everyone else buys in.
It's tough to find honesty on a place like Topix where nearly everyone is good-looking and wealthy- more than YOU- but, you can read between the lines. Several years ago some of the remaining cast members of the Chicago Regulars met in Florida to validate themselves and their on-line personas in real life. The takeaway from those in attendance was that Sub was extremely shy and not at all like he portrayed himself on the threads. They weren't being mean, I don't think. I believe they were pleased that he wasn't the Type A asshole he played on the threads, that that was all just an act. They said he just pretty much sat there quietly, barely making eye contact with the others. That's not very Sub-like. not very sublime. Very telling though.
So, as they divorce, Bambi is out of the house and living with a buddy of Sub's and his wife. Sub reports she has a very strong devotion to the friend's wife. Well now, maybe there was something to those sexcapades stories after all? Or is that just what the Sub wants folks to believe? In the world of imaginary people, one never knows, does one?
Thursday, July 13, 2017
Gullible-Americans
Well, this will Make America Great Again:
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/41209-republicans-in-several-states-are-lowering-the-minimum-wage-yes-you-read-that-right#14999532706841&action=collapse_widget&id=0&data=
Sigh. For the millionth time... If you can't afford to pay your employees even $10 an hour, you do not deserve to be in business! The difference between $10 per hour and $7.25 per hour (aside from being $2.75) is food on the motherfucking table and rent for shelter to workers. If you think your fucked up little company or your Walmart is operating on a thin margin, try working for $7.25 an hour knowing that *your* reps in your state house are plotting to take that away too. The GOP hates the Federal minimum too. They claim it "kills jobs". While eliminating the minimum wouldn't legalize slavery, you could sure see it from there. They are a few state legislatures away from calling for a constitutional convention. The kochsuckers that call themselves "strict constitutionalists" have a lot more problems with the constitution than anybody else. These are the same assholes who want to take away health insurance from 23 million Americans. The repeal and replace crowd is mostly going for tax cuts for the 400 or so wealthiest but, a huge selling point for this is destroying the legacy of the nation's first black president. Yeah, it's that but, don't kid yourself- it's the money. It is always the money. There are upwards of 330 million people in this country. By volume alone, this allows for tens of millions of idiots. Lots of just plain assholes too.
Whether it's Russian trolls, paid trolls or just the whores on Facebook, Twitter or Topix who give away despair and hatred for free, there is no shortage of Gullible-Americans willing to put party over country. I haven't worked for the minimum in decades so, no, it doesn't affect me. But, it effects me in that I have to live in a country that won't pay it's citizens a livable wage, uses government to enforce it, and works night and day to cut social services to AMERICANS because that "saves money"...
Saves who money? Well, the folks who already have the bulk of it. I say that because, as a non-attorney spokesferrer who knows a bit about math, when they cut taxes on the rich and increase military spending they have to get that money from someone else. That someone else is the rest of us. You may *save* several dollars off your federal tax bill when they cut off social services (hungry kids/old folks/etc.) but that means you now have several more dollars to spend on the military. That's fucking exactly how that works. Millions of Americans are too fucking stupid to figure that out and some of those are also just angry enough to feel: "Whatever- as long as loser poors are getting fucked hard, I don't care!"
We are not the greatest country in the world, despite what the brochures say. The country that claims that wouldn't exploit it's citizens like that or lie to them as ours does. In the six months that Trump has been in *power* our standing in the world has plummeted like never before. Even if you don't think he's Putin's bitch, much of the world does. Every civilized nation that has healthcare for it's peoples is aghast we don't have universal care and that we're working to eliminate the ACA. The richest/greatest country can't afford it? We're not smart enough to pull it off? If you buy that, you deserve to be Putin's bitch too. I don't. Do any of us?
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/41209-republicans-in-several-states-are-lowering-the-minimum-wage-yes-you-read-that-right#14999532706841&action=collapse_widget&id=0&data=
Sigh. For the millionth time... If you can't afford to pay your employees even $10 an hour, you do not deserve to be in business! The difference between $10 per hour and $7.25 per hour (aside from being $2.75) is food on the motherfucking table and rent for shelter to workers. If you think your fucked up little company or your Walmart is operating on a thin margin, try working for $7.25 an hour knowing that *your* reps in your state house are plotting to take that away too. The GOP hates the Federal minimum too. They claim it "kills jobs". While eliminating the minimum wouldn't legalize slavery, you could sure see it from there. They are a few state legislatures away from calling for a constitutional convention. The kochsuckers that call themselves "strict constitutionalists" have a lot more problems with the constitution than anybody else. These are the same assholes who want to take away health insurance from 23 million Americans. The repeal and replace crowd is mostly going for tax cuts for the 400 or so wealthiest but, a huge selling point for this is destroying the legacy of the nation's first black president. Yeah, it's that but, don't kid yourself- it's the money. It is always the money. There are upwards of 330 million people in this country. By volume alone, this allows for tens of millions of idiots. Lots of just plain assholes too.
Whether it's Russian trolls, paid trolls or just the whores on Facebook, Twitter or Topix who give away despair and hatred for free, there is no shortage of Gullible-Americans willing to put party over country. I haven't worked for the minimum in decades so, no, it doesn't affect me. But, it effects me in that I have to live in a country that won't pay it's citizens a livable wage, uses government to enforce it, and works night and day to cut social services to AMERICANS because that "saves money"...
Saves who money? Well, the folks who already have the bulk of it. I say that because, as a non-attorney spokesferrer who knows a bit about math, when they cut taxes on the rich and increase military spending they have to get that money from someone else. That someone else is the rest of us. You may *save* several dollars off your federal tax bill when they cut off social services (hungry kids/old folks/etc.) but that means you now have several more dollars to spend on the military. That's fucking exactly how that works. Millions of Americans are too fucking stupid to figure that out and some of those are also just angry enough to feel: "Whatever- as long as loser poors are getting fucked hard, I don't care!"
We are not the greatest country in the world, despite what the brochures say. The country that claims that wouldn't exploit it's citizens like that or lie to them as ours does. In the six months that Trump has been in *power* our standing in the world has plummeted like never before. Even if you don't think he's Putin's bitch, much of the world does. Every civilized nation that has healthcare for it's peoples is aghast we don't have universal care and that we're working to eliminate the ACA. The richest/greatest country can't afford it? We're not smart enough to pull it off? If you buy that, you deserve to be Putin's bitch too. I don't. Do any of us?
Monday, March 6, 2017
Celebrity Apprentices In Politics
Been poking around in Twitterland and I noticed that actress, Alyssa Milano has been getting some grief for having political opinions. You may recall her from films and the TV show Who's The Boss? She went on from being a cute child star to being a lovely, talented actress. While it's arguably true that her IMBD profile means nothing to her portfolio as a political pundit, I gotta argue that the same argument can be made against actors Scott Baio and James Woods. I'll further argue that it's very arguable that certain politicians should not be taken seriously for their political opinions. Think Steve King or Louie Gohmert. Hundreds more if you want to think further.
Think anybody really. The folks who devalue Alyssa for her opinions likely value Scott Baio for his. I'm just a poor, humble Ferrerman and my own opinions on politics are discounted all the time. Shocking. And I was a pretty cute kid myself.
It's not just her though. It's pretty much any celebrity and even political reporters- believe it or not. I've heard celebrities and pundits say that- with straight faces- about other celebrities and pundits who happen to disagree with them. Are you sensing a pattern? A lot of people swear an Oath of Hypocrisy when they enter the political boards. I've had my moments too.
The reality of politics is that absolutely everyone is entitled to their opinion and that's irrespective of their work history. We currently have a reality TV star in The White House. He's got a SAG card just like Reagan did and like Milano has. Tell me who is more qualified. I look at Alyssa on TV and I'm quite taken by her obvious spankability but, I'm more impressed with her opinions on Trump's travel ban EO's. (She's against both of them) Like anyone else, I'm a fan of certain celebrities for their films, music or athletic accomplishments. For their politics to complement my own is an added bonus. It's probably that way for you too. But, a celebrity's politics are not always a deal breaker for me. I like most of Clint Eastwood's films, for example, and don't let his confused politics taint that. He's still Dirty Harry to me despite his chair-talking foolishness.
Politics- to me- is simply about right and wrong. It's about money to most folks though, so when you find people who get the right/wrong aspect of it, you need to cherish them whether they are famous or not. The anti-Hollywood sentiment of the right is troubling however. When you get people talking about remaking America you have to stop and think about how most sequels and remakes this side of Godfather II just really suck. You have to question why they have to always so wrongly revisit success, without success. Well, money, of course. There's big bucks in re-doing stuff that was pretty much fine in the first place.
Trump can't Make America Great Again anymore than he could make Casablanca a great film again with Scott Baio in the lead. Alyssa Milano as as Ilsa Lund wouldn't even work. I gotta be honest here. And that's no reflection on her or him.
You don't remake the classics. You love them and hold them in your heart with all the other good memories of your life. We all get old and want our childhoods back. That's a natural feeling but, it doesn't work that way in the real world any more than it does in politics or film. America is a continuing drama. Any notion of a conservative cultural revolution is just a plot twist that must be dealt with by we the people rather than those that fancy themselves to be the "executive producers". We all have a voice in this. We should all be heard.
Think anybody really. The folks who devalue Alyssa for her opinions likely value Scott Baio for his. I'm just a poor, humble Ferrerman and my own opinions on politics are discounted all the time. Shocking. And I was a pretty cute kid myself.
It's not just her though. It's pretty much any celebrity and even political reporters- believe it or not. I've heard celebrities and pundits say that- with straight faces- about other celebrities and pundits who happen to disagree with them. Are you sensing a pattern? A lot of people swear an Oath of Hypocrisy when they enter the political boards. I've had my moments too.
The reality of politics is that absolutely everyone is entitled to their opinion and that's irrespective of their work history. We currently have a reality TV star in The White House. He's got a SAG card just like Reagan did and like Milano has. Tell me who is more qualified. I look at Alyssa on TV and I'm quite taken by her obvious spankability but, I'm more impressed with her opinions on Trump's travel ban EO's. (She's against both of them) Like anyone else, I'm a fan of certain celebrities for their films, music or athletic accomplishments. For their politics to complement my own is an added bonus. It's probably that way for you too. But, a celebrity's politics are not always a deal breaker for me. I like most of Clint Eastwood's films, for example, and don't let his confused politics taint that. He's still Dirty Harry to me despite his chair-talking foolishness.
Politics- to me- is simply about right and wrong. It's about money to most folks though, so when you find people who get the right/wrong aspect of it, you need to cherish them whether they are famous or not. The anti-Hollywood sentiment of the right is troubling however. When you get people talking about remaking America you have to stop and think about how most sequels and remakes this side of Godfather II just really suck. You have to question why they have to always so wrongly revisit success, without success. Well, money, of course. There's big bucks in re-doing stuff that was pretty much fine in the first place.
Trump can't Make America Great Again anymore than he could make Casablanca a great film again with Scott Baio in the lead. Alyssa Milano as as Ilsa Lund wouldn't even work. I gotta be honest here. And that's no reflection on her or him.
You don't remake the classics. You love them and hold them in your heart with all the other good memories of your life. We all get old and want our childhoods back. That's a natural feeling but, it doesn't work that way in the real world any more than it does in politics or film. America is a continuing drama. Any notion of a conservative cultural revolution is just a plot twist that must be dealt with by we the people rather than those that fancy themselves to be the "executive producers". We all have a voice in this. We should all be heard.
Wednesday, March 1, 2017
Nobody gives good news anymore
I'm old enough to remember Walter Cronkite. His era was the last great days of the news. It was a time when giving Americans the news was a service and not a business. Though he did step up and condemn the Vietnam war, it wasn't just his opinion, it was an obvious fact.
It's a business now as 24 hour cable stations have taken over. Some, like CNN and MSNBC offer news but are admittedly heavy on opinion. Fox is Fox, yammering on about some whiny shit that liberals are doing, occasionally breaking from that for news. It isn't Cronkite and Huntley and Brinkly but, it is what we have now and we have to deal with it. That idiot and his minions in the White House need to realize that.
When Trump said that the media was the enemy of the people, my first thought was that he turned on them pretty damn quick! It was them more than Russia that got his sorry ass elected in the first place. I watched a lot of news in the build up to the election and it was all about him. And even when it wasn't about him, that was because it was about Hillary's emails and how that was equivalent to his inept pussy-grabbing self. Being a business, you couldn't blame them for focusing most of their attention on the obscene side-show that Trump was (and still is) rather than the boring, nuts and bolts of the fact that Bernie or Hillary should be running the country and not just because neither is a fucking asshole. The main stream media is not supposed to pick sides but they do know which side of their buns gets buttered.
So, trust them? No more than I would hate them at the behest of the Troll In Chief. My life doesn't work that way because I learned long ago that others want to influence me in ways that favor them over me. Who knew? Well, me, if you're paying attention. If you can't see through Trump's or Kellyanne Conway's bullshit, Cronkite wouldn't help you. It saddens me that there are so many stupid people in the media today but, this nation made the Kardashian's famous. It might as well be a Kardashian in the White House. It's all for show anyway. I think Trump realizes this and rolls with it because he is going to make a lot of money whether he winds up in prison or not. If we have another duly-elected president some day, I already feel sorry for him or her because they will have to face the fact that a total fraud preceded them. You might think it'd make the job easier to have such a low bar set but would you want to follow such an act at your job? "The guy before you was an idiot. Do better..."
So, Trump says the media is the enemy of the people. It was the good-looking talking heads of cable news that fawned all over him and helped make his election possible. I like some of these people but, don't mistake them for journalists. If they are saying today that "Golly- Trump looked so presidential last night..." they aren't to be taken seriously. Like doctors and lawyers, half of them graduated at the bottom of their class. Some may have graduated from Trump University. Good night and good luck with that.
It's a business now as 24 hour cable stations have taken over. Some, like CNN and MSNBC offer news but are admittedly heavy on opinion. Fox is Fox, yammering on about some whiny shit that liberals are doing, occasionally breaking from that for news. It isn't Cronkite and Huntley and Brinkly but, it is what we have now and we have to deal with it. That idiot and his minions in the White House need to realize that.
When Trump said that the media was the enemy of the people, my first thought was that he turned on them pretty damn quick! It was them more than Russia that got his sorry ass elected in the first place. I watched a lot of news in the build up to the election and it was all about him. And even when it wasn't about him, that was because it was about Hillary's emails and how that was equivalent to his inept pussy-grabbing self. Being a business, you couldn't blame them for focusing most of their attention on the obscene side-show that Trump was (and still is) rather than the boring, nuts and bolts of the fact that Bernie or Hillary should be running the country and not just because neither is a fucking asshole. The main stream media is not supposed to pick sides but they do know which side of their buns gets buttered.
So, trust them? No more than I would hate them at the behest of the Troll In Chief. My life doesn't work that way because I learned long ago that others want to influence me in ways that favor them over me. Who knew? Well, me, if you're paying attention. If you can't see through Trump's or Kellyanne Conway's bullshit, Cronkite wouldn't help you. It saddens me that there are so many stupid people in the media today but, this nation made the Kardashian's famous. It might as well be a Kardashian in the White House. It's all for show anyway. I think Trump realizes this and rolls with it because he is going to make a lot of money whether he winds up in prison or not. If we have another duly-elected president some day, I already feel sorry for him or her because they will have to face the fact that a total fraud preceded them. You might think it'd make the job easier to have such a low bar set but would you want to follow such an act at your job? "The guy before you was an idiot. Do better..."
So, Trump says the media is the enemy of the people. It was the good-looking talking heads of cable news that fawned all over him and helped make his election possible. I like some of these people but, don't mistake them for journalists. If they are saying today that "Golly- Trump looked so presidential last night..." they aren't to be taken seriously. Like doctors and lawyers, half of them graduated at the bottom of their class. Some may have graduated from Trump University. Good night and good luck with that.
Wednesday, February 1, 2017
Smells Like Team Spirit
Are Americans tired of winning yet with Trump? Not even close! There's so much more winning left to do!
Just three months ago, republicans in congress vowed to stymie any USSC appointments by President Clinton. They figured we could go on just fine with eight justices on the Supreme Court. Of course, they hadn't figured at the time on seeing the inside of The White House anytime soon. With Trump/Pence they were merely fielding a team to remain in the game. They were figuring on retaining both houses of congress and being obstructionist, Grumpy Old Pricks. It's what they do best. Amazingly, however, Trump won the presidency using the Electoral College, an archaic system of voting that the founding fathers installed as a form of Affirmative Action so that the presidency wouldn't always be a popularity contest. There had to be a way to get less-popular candidates in there so as to level the playing field. Pay no attention to that notion that the EC was a safeguard to keep out demagogues. If that were true, we'd have another President Clinton right now.
Many people had posted vaingloriously about holding their noses to vote for either candidate. "Trump was not a mainstream candidate...and yada, yada yada" And, of course, "Hillary had a private email server! Who does that??!!" Well, everybody in the current Trump administration actually but, hey, we dodged that bullet...
Now more than ever politics is a team sport. You want your team to win no matter what, no matter how. Winning isn't just everything- it's the only thing. The Chicago Cubs (finally) winning the World Series brought me immense personal joy. There's no doubt about that. Myself and others get bragging rights at least for a year. Not bad but, I personally did not win the WS. My team did. The guys who did, many of them will win new contracts, bringing them more fortune to go along with their fame. Ticket prices will rise for the games along with concessions as being champions is great for the wallets of a lot of people. But yeah, we won!
That's baseball. Any sport, really. You get bragging rights in politics too. All over the internet you see people who are likely about as republican as Trump isn't, boasting about "our win". Mostly though, much of that boasting is more about the liberal loss than a republican victory. In this respect republican fans are a lot like Chicago White Sox fans in that they hate the crosstown Cubs far more than they love their team. If you live in Chicago, you know what I mean. It's pathetic fandom, indeed. Lots of hate involved without much love self love. It was more important for them to know that Hillary was defeated rather than Trump was declared winner. They erroneously describe her as "liberal" and being representative of all the feel-good, liberalness that ruins their lives on a daily basis. Trophies for participating. Safe places in schools for after-shooting therapy. Open arms for refugees. They hate that shit. Anybody who defeats that is okay in their minds. They are tough and armed and they shoot good and, if God were not for us, who could be against us? They've been trained to believe this since Reagan. It finally accidentally worked.
I really can't see your average Trump voter getting anything more than bragging rights out of this. Concessions will go up. Turns out Mexico is not going to pay for that wall after all. Who didn't see that coming? Sixty million Trump voters, that's who. Many surely doubted the wall would be built at all but appreciated the sentiment just the same. Now it looks like they'll not only get the wall but they'll get to pay for it via income taxes and again with higher prices on goods from Mexico. Trump never mentioned that during the campaign. When you can get people to even pretend to believe something like building a wall and making the neighbor pay for it, you pretty much can get away with anything. Trump really grabbed those people. When you're rich and a celebrity, you can do things like that. I believe Trump did mention that.
We're about 12 days into his term and he's already signed 20 Executive Orders. EO's used to be something a dictatorial king like Obama did. Now they are as cool as private email servers.
There's no telling what other mischief Trump has in store. We worried about an oligarchy but it's looking more like a kleptocracy now. This administration is out to loot and pillage everything they can grab. How long can these idiots cheer for that? How long before they realize that maybe the best they can hope for is a *job* as a kapo in a concentration camp? Don't think Trump or the republicans will go that far? Why? Because they were against that when they told you Obama was going to do that? These people foreshadow everything they intend to do by assigning it to someone else. I bet you did Nazi that coming.
Just three months ago, republicans in congress vowed to stymie any USSC appointments by President Clinton. They figured we could go on just fine with eight justices on the Supreme Court. Of course, they hadn't figured at the time on seeing the inside of The White House anytime soon. With Trump/Pence they were merely fielding a team to remain in the game. They were figuring on retaining both houses of congress and being obstructionist, Grumpy Old Pricks. It's what they do best. Amazingly, however, Trump won the presidency using the Electoral College, an archaic system of voting that the founding fathers installed as a form of Affirmative Action so that the presidency wouldn't always be a popularity contest. There had to be a way to get less-popular candidates in there so as to level the playing field. Pay no attention to that notion that the EC was a safeguard to keep out demagogues. If that were true, we'd have another President Clinton right now.
Many people had posted vaingloriously about holding their noses to vote for either candidate. "Trump was not a mainstream candidate...and yada, yada yada" And, of course, "Hillary had a private email server! Who does that??!!" Well, everybody in the current Trump administration actually but, hey, we dodged that bullet...
Now more than ever politics is a team sport. You want your team to win no matter what, no matter how. Winning isn't just everything- it's the only thing. The Chicago Cubs (finally) winning the World Series brought me immense personal joy. There's no doubt about that. Myself and others get bragging rights at least for a year. Not bad but, I personally did not win the WS. My team did. The guys who did, many of them will win new contracts, bringing them more fortune to go along with their fame. Ticket prices will rise for the games along with concessions as being champions is great for the wallets of a lot of people. But yeah, we won!
That's baseball. Any sport, really. You get bragging rights in politics too. All over the internet you see people who are likely about as republican as Trump isn't, boasting about "our win". Mostly though, much of that boasting is more about the liberal loss than a republican victory. In this respect republican fans are a lot like Chicago White Sox fans in that they hate the crosstown Cubs far more than they love their team. If you live in Chicago, you know what I mean. It's pathetic fandom, indeed. Lots of hate involved without much love self love. It was more important for them to know that Hillary was defeated rather than Trump was declared winner. They erroneously describe her as "liberal" and being representative of all the feel-good, liberalness that ruins their lives on a daily basis. Trophies for participating. Safe places in schools for after-shooting therapy. Open arms for refugees. They hate that shit. Anybody who defeats that is okay in their minds. They are tough and armed and they shoot good and, if God were not for us, who could be against us? They've been trained to believe this since Reagan. It finally accidentally worked.
I really can't see your average Trump voter getting anything more than bragging rights out of this. Concessions will go up. Turns out Mexico is not going to pay for that wall after all. Who didn't see that coming? Sixty million Trump voters, that's who. Many surely doubted the wall would be built at all but appreciated the sentiment just the same. Now it looks like they'll not only get the wall but they'll get to pay for it via income taxes and again with higher prices on goods from Mexico. Trump never mentioned that during the campaign. When you can get people to even pretend to believe something like building a wall and making the neighbor pay for it, you pretty much can get away with anything. Trump really grabbed those people. When you're rich and a celebrity, you can do things like that. I believe Trump did mention that.
We're about 12 days into his term and he's already signed 20 Executive Orders. EO's used to be something a dictatorial king like Obama did. Now they are as cool as private email servers.
There's no telling what other mischief Trump has in store. We worried about an oligarchy but it's looking more like a kleptocracy now. This administration is out to loot and pillage everything they can grab. How long can these idiots cheer for that? How long before they realize that maybe the best they can hope for is a *job* as a kapo in a concentration camp? Don't think Trump or the republicans will go that far? Why? Because they were against that when they told you Obama was going to do that? These people foreshadow everything they intend to do by assigning it to someone else. I bet you did Nazi that coming.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)