I think I think more than you do: and by you, I’m referring to the above average Homosapien and maybe just below guys like Leonardo Da Vinci and others… (that won’t come to me at the moment) Or possibly above… prove it otherwise! I would consent to any challenge at any time of the day or night, weekend, month…whatever… as long as it was an honest challenge, scientific!
The problem is, I’m just figuring out why it hasn’t worked out so well for me: why I’m not launching Teslas into space like Elon Musk? Part of it is due to luck –not so much my bad luck as Musk’s good variety. No, the real problem is extremely complicated: the simplified version; I never had any confidence in myself and, I never realized that I was different. Society had me believing that “we” were all the same. Meanwhile, my Neural throttle was stuck wide open.
So, Tangentental Meditation is my made-up spiritual practice based on Trensindential Meditation. Of course, “meditation” couldn’t be farther from what I do; it is the opposite of meditation! But I like the name… so screw you!
The definition, according to the dictionary of Me: is a state where the brain can’t stop leaping from task to task to task, often losing one train of thought to another and that one to yet another. Distraction Junction, might be related to Beta brain waves…
Now, no one likes a braggart, but I’m not bragging I’m just pointing out the fact… or hypothesis that ADHD can be a gift, not only to the victim but to the victim’s immediate society and or beyond.
And If it sounds like I’m angry, yer phucking right I’m angry! I’m angry at a society that claims to be functional: used to be The running joke was when some poor crazed individual claimed “I’m not crazy, it’s the world” Get the net, we comforted our dysfunctional selves with a knowing wink! Like so phucking many things these days we’re starting to dispute conventional wisdom from the last hundred-plus years, and beyond. Well, maybe not RWA’s but that’s fodder for another rant.
For now, readers, consider the merits of this rant… I know it is easy to dismiss ravings of this nature… just, lower your guard/prejudice and give it consideration… nature,
Tag Archives: hubris
Nominate An A-Soul
I struggle at times with whether things that I say/suggest have a net positive impact on society and this idea is one of those: a website to do with the nasty, not-so-nice nature of humanity
This morning CBC’s Marketplace features an article on Processed Food; more specifically the amount of sodium in processed food (including restaurant food)
We “humanity” tend to lather ourselves with praise when we come together when the chit hits our collective fan –I call them “cometogetherarians” You’ve heard the talking heads saying crap like “this community comes together when… yada yada bullshit yada” As if that makes your community special, nicer, more worthy than other communities. Stop patting yourselves on the back, you are NOT special And I used the word ‘collective’ –were not so good when individuals are drowning (unless the cameras are rolling) There is an unwritten quid-pro-quo at play when we’re all subjected to the same disaster or tomorrows inevitable disaster
So, back to Marketplace and sodium: Sodium is a killer, especially for the ‘boomer generation’ most of hume are getting old and can no longer tolerate abuse… sodium abuse!
I nominate food marketeers who, in order to thicken their wallets, lace food with salt and anything else that adds to its appeal (fat)
Economics
Well , it looks like my post was posted in cyber space… I made a half-ass copy… coming soon… Mutrer Fricker! Fuck off WP! Wasn’t that good anyway
Economocs:
We cant afford it: bullshit we can afford anything
Imagine two communities: one has decided to never raise the minimum wage. The workers can barely afford food, shelter and transportation (to and from work) they cannot afford to purchase the goods they make in those factories. Those goods can only be afforded by an affluent segment of that society. That is the way that society remains in that state forever
Now imagine a community who’s workers share the same fate as community one. One day the government in community two decides it needs to increase the minimum wage. Employers in those communities go mental “we cant afford that, we will go broke” they cry but the deal goes through. Now suddenly the workers can not only afford the basics but now they can afford to buy each others products. Suddenly the factories have a spike in demand and a proportionate increase in profit.
Now imagine some bright bulb in community two has an epiphany: He realizes that everybody’s standard just increased and being a bright bulb suggests we try that raise thing again? So with much grumbling they give all the workers a substantial raise: well lo and behold things improved once again proportionately to the to the higher rate of the second increase. The workers can now afford frivolous crap and manufactures of frivolous crap see a boom in demand for their crap. Again the bright bulb suggests we do it again…
Meanwhile back in community one heads are starting to swivel and, their brilliant deductions team suggests; we should try that and away ‘they’ go…
The only looser in this scenario is the earth: the earth has to endure an assault on its resources and pollution! In, marches Swedish teenagers and now we have the EPA being funded by all those factories who’ve noticed the prosperity gains, etc! A segment of these new prosperous communities is building wind turbines and sequestering CO2 and buying frivolous crap and around we go.
Now imagine that, that prosperous arrangement starts take hold in other countries: now we have less need to exploit poor labor markets or “take” resources from other (poor/defenseless) countries. A recipe for peace… possibly? We can now concentrate on reducing the population/carrying capacity of the planet and develop technology to mine asteroids rather than oceans
And, the reason this idea or any other idea will not work is because even if the idea weren’t fraught with flaws nobody is listening or should I say paying attention. Not necessarily to me but in general and those who are listening aren’t on the same page; Conservatives would rather use force, like in the good old days, they despise the left and there silly pacifist notions.
I give up, we’re doomed!
G
Socialist Bogeyman
I getting tired and old, lazy and sore and as I’ve mentioned before; I struggle with English and my organizational skills are atrocious. So I’m going to rely on articles I’ve gleaned from web news sources like Common Dreams, Democracy Now, etc. These are sources that have no association with Big Money, Big Pharma, The Koch Brother, or Fox News
If I can I’ll add my two cents in squiggly brackets like these { } or a distinct color (if I can) Oh, I can so lets go with color
Okay, here goes: Robert Right and I get along well so, I’ll refer to him as Bob. In this article Bob has left out the fact that Trump voters are not the sharpest pencils and seem to be easily coned –as if they are in shock and they may well be due to the train wreck that is their beloved Merica.
They, as well as their less traumatized or less dazed kin on the left have good reason to be concerned. But when the orange buffoon tells his base that he loves them, even though or because they’re uneducated and hugs the flag and offers more whoppers that Berger King and chits on a gold throne and gropes women, and surrounds himself with robotics like Kushner and a whole host of ne’er-do-wells including a religious fanatic VP –in hope’s of duping religious voters into thinking he’s a god fearin’ feller like just like us? Nooooo! He is not! He is a con-man and he’ll do what ever he can to string you along for as long as necessary… as long as it takes for him and his cronies to strangle your constitution and once that happens he wont have to rely on deception… Once he has all the power he wont need to pander to Christians, or the poorly educated or the middle class, etc.
Snooze time
It’s Not Bernie But the So-Called “Moderates” That the Democratic Establishment Should Be Freaking Out About
byRobert Reich
Published on
Friday, February 28, 2020
by
The day after Bernie Sanders’s big win in Nevada, Joe Lockhart, Bill Clinton’s former press secretary, expressed the fear gripping the Democratic establishment: “I don’t believe the country is prepared to support a Democratic socialist, and I agree with the theory that Sanders would lose in a matchup against Trump.”
Lockart, like the rest of the Democratic establishment, is viewing American politics through obsolete lenses of left versus right, with Bernie on the extreme left and Trump on the far right. “Moderates” like Bloomberg and Buttigieg supposedly occupy the center, appealing to a broader swath of the electorate.
This may have been the correct frame for politics decades ago when America still had a growing middle class, but it’s obsolete today. As wealth and power have moved to the top and the middle class has shrunk, more Americans feel politically dis-empowered and economically insecure. Today’s main divide isn’t right versus left. It’s establishment versus anti-establishment.
Some background. In the fall of 2015 I visited Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Missouri, and North Carolina, researching the changing nature of work. I spoke with many of the same people I had met twenty years before when I was secretary of labor, as well as some of their grown children. I asked them about their jobs and their views about the economy. I was most interested in their sense of the system as a whole and how they were faring in it.
What I heard surprised me. Twenty years before, most said they’d been working hard and were frustrated they weren’t doing better. Now they were angry – at their employers, the government, and Wall Street; angry that they hadn’t been able to save for their retirement, and that their children weren’t doing any better than they did. Several had lost jobs, savings, or homes in the Great Recession. By the time I spoke with them, most were employed but the jobs paid no more than they had two decades before.
I heard the term “rigged system” so often I began asking people what they meant by it. They spoke about the bailout of Wall Street, political payoffs, insider deals, CEO pay, and “crony capitalism.” These came from self-identified Republicans, Democrats, and Independents; white, black, and Latino; union households and non-union. Their only common characteristic was they were middle class and below.
With the 2016 primaries looming, I asked which candidates they found most attractive. At the time, party leaders favored Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush. But the people I spoke with repeatedly mentioned Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. They said Sanders or Trump would “shake things up,” “make the system work again,” “stop the corruption,” or “end the rigging.”
In the following year, Sanders – a 74-year-old Jew from Vermont who described himself as a democratic socialist and wasn’t even a Democrat until the 2016 presidential primary – came within a whisker of beating Hillary Clinton in the Iowa caucus, routed her in the New Hampshire primary, garnered over 47 percent of the caucus-goers in Nevada, and ended up with 46 percent of the pledged delegates from Democratic primaries and caucuses.
Trump, a 69-year-old ego-maniacal billionaire reality TV star who had never held elective office or had anything to do with the Republican Party, and lied compulsively about almost everything – won the Republican primaries and then went on to beat Clinton, one of the most experienced and well-connected politicians in modern America (granted, he didn’t win the popular vote, and had some help from the Kremlin).
Something very big happened, and it wasn’t because of Sanders’s magnetism or Trump’s likeability. It was a rebellion against the establishment. Clinton and Bush had all the advantages –funders, political advisors, name recognition – but neither could credibly convince voters they weren’t part of the system.
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
If you believe the survival of independent media is vital to a healthy democracy, please step forward with a donation to nonprofit Common Dreams today:
A direct line connected four decades of stagnant wages, the financial crisis of 2008, the bailout of Wall Street, the rise of the Tea Party and the “Occupy” movement, and the emergence of Sanders and Trump in 2016. The people I spoke with no longer felt they had a fair chance to make it. National polls told much the same story. According to the Pew Research Center, the percentage of Americans who felt most people could get ahead through hard work dropped by 13 points between 2000 and 2015. In 2006, 59 percent of Americans thought government corruption was widespread; by 2013, 79 percent did.
Trump galvanized millions of blue-collar voters living in places that never recovered from the tidal wave of factory closings. He promised to bring back jobs, revive manufacturing, and get tough on trade and immigration. “We can’t continue to allow China to rape our country, and that’s what they’re doing,” he roared. “In five, ten years from now, you’re going to have a workers’ party. A party of people that haven’t had a real wage increase in eighteen years, that are angry.” He blasted politicians and financiers who had betrayed Americans by “taking away from the people their means of making a living and supporting their families.”
Trump’s pose as an anti-establishment populist was one of the biggest cons in American political history. Since elected he’s given the denizens of C-suites and the Street everything they’ve wanted and hasn’t markedly improved the lives of his working-class supporters, even if his politically-incorrect, damn-the-torpedo’s politics continues to make them feel as if he’s taking on the system.
The frustrations today are larger than they were four years ago. Even though corporate profits and executive pay have soared, the typical worker’s pay has barely risen, jobs are less secure, and health care less affordable.
The best way for Democrats to defeat Trump’s fake anti-establishment populism is with the real thing, coupled with an agenda of systemic reform. This is what Bernie Sanders offers. For the same reason, he has the best chance of generating energy and enthusiasm to flip at least three senate seats to the Democratic Party (the minimum needed to recapture the Senate, using the vice president as tie-breaker).
He’ll need a coalition of young voters, people of color, and the working class. He seems on his way. So far in the primaries he leads among white voters, has a massive edge among Latinos, dominates with both women and men, and has done best among both college and non-college graduates. And he’s narrowing Biden’s edge with older voters and African Americans. [Add line about South Carolina from today’s primary.]
The “socialism” moniker doesn’t seem to have bruised him, although it hasn’t been tested outside a Democratic primary or caucus. Perhaps voters won’t care, just as they many don’t care about Trump’s chronic lies.
Worries about a McGovern-like blowout in 2020 appear far-fetched. In 1972 the American middle class was expanding, not contracting. Besides, every national and swing state poll now shows Sanders tied with or beating Trump. A Quinnipiac Poll last week shows Sanders beating Trump in Michigan and Pennsylvania. A CBS News/YouGov poll has Sanders beating Trump nationally. A Texas Lyceum poll has Sanders doing better against Trump in Texas than any Democrat, losing by just three points.
Instead of the Democratic establishment worrying that Sanders is unelectable, maybe it should worry that a so-called “moderate” Democrat might be nominated instead.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
Fascists At The Door
This is an article from Common Dreams. It backs my idea of wealthy far right wingers conspiring to subvert the fragile democracy in the excited states and the world.
The trap is set; think about the possibility it could be tripped soon if US citizens don’t support Bernie Saunders and get over their fear of the “S” word “socialism” or in Bernie’s; case Democratic Socialism
The US propaganda machine has tainted the public’s perception of socialism and promoted what is turning out to be unfettered capitalism so that they –the creators of that machine can remain in control of “their” corrupt system.
Think about how the brainwashing of the masses is hurting the masses and will possibly become irreversible in the not too distant future
Published on
Friday, February 28, 2020
by
Democratic presidential hopefuls Former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg (L), Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren (C) and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders (R) participate in the ninth Democratic primary debate of the 2020 presidential campaign season co-hosted by NBC News, MSNBC, Noticias Telemundo and The Nevada Independent at the Paris Theater in Las Vegas, Nevada, on February 19, 2020. (Photo: Mark Ralston/AFP/Getty Images)
Way back in 2000, my indy media friends and I were filming Colorado’s Green Party Convention, held at some fancy hotel in Denver. The keynote speaker was, of course, the Party’s presidential candidate Ralph Nader. The hotel was packed with anti-corporate activists young and old, environmentalists, anti-war folks, state, and local Green Party candidates.
Also conspicuously present was this culture-jamming street theater group called “Billionaires for Bush… or Gore.” This satirical comedy troupe randomly appeared throughout the 2000 electoral season. Dressed as high-society billionaires in their tuxedos, black top hats, evening gowns and feather boas, carrying plastic cigars, this group of 15 or 20 actors paraded up and down hotel escalators, blowing proverbial smoke in people’s faces, carrying signs with slogans like, “This is what Plutocracy looks like!”; “Widen the Income Gap!”; “Leave no Billionaire Behind!”; and “This is Class War, and We’re Winning!”
I’m pretty much nostalgic for those days now. Twenty years ago, the complete plutocratic control of our electoral system was an idea so cynical and absurd, that it was downright funny! This was ten years before the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling opened the floodgates for financial contributions via Super PACs, corporate lobbyists, and dark money organizations to spend billions of dollars on election campaigns. That era was our warning.
Today, I have this sickening feeling that political historians will look back at the 2020 US presidential elections as the final battle in the long war between electoral democracy and plutocratic oligarchy in the United States. I also believe that the chance of President Trump securing another term is totally within reach—not because it’s what most Americans want, but because it’s what the DNC, the superdelegates, and the ruling class inside the Democratic establishment are working very hard to deliver to us.
“If this electoral season is teaching us anything, it is showing us that core democratic values are highly fluid when billionaires pour money into them.”
Here we are, just before Super Tuesday. There’s so much energy and excitement in the air as people of all political stripes are getting geared up to go to the polls en masse. Meanwhile, Michael Bloomberg is laying the groundwork for a brokered Democratic Convention in July, where he is planning to complete his wholesale purchase of the Democratic nomination.
Like many Bernie supporters who witnessed the DNC-rigging of the 2016 Democratic primaries, it’s hard to be hopeful about a fair process in 2020. For those who weren’t paying close attention then, here’s a quick run-down of the anti-Sanders establishment manipulation in 2016. Sanders had secured electoral victories in 18 state primaries. And yet, superdelegates across the board awarded a majority, if not all, of their delegate votes to Hillary Clinton, even in states where Bernie Sanders won by a landslide! In other words, superdelegates acted as spoilers, nullifying and defying the electoral results from their own states. The DNC, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, and the corporate media—who conistently featured superdelegate tallies alongside earned delegates—successfully secured the nomination for Hillary Clinton, who then turned around and lost to Donald Trump in the general election.
After the dust settled from this disaster, a class-action lawsuit was filed against the DNC on behalf of millions of Sanders supporters who financially backed his campaign, and who expected the DNC to administer a fair, impartial and democratic process. Plaintiffs accused the DNC of rigging the primaries: of violating of their own charter in regards to ensuring neutrality. The corruption was rampant: The Hillary Clinton Victory Fund paid the DNC $3.3 million, effectively merging the two entities. The DNC Chair, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was Hillary Clinton’s former campaign manager in 2008. The DNC colluded with the corporate media to smear the Sanders campaign all throughout the primaries. And yet, the class-action lawsuit was dismissed after several months of litigation.
This last November, multi-billionaire Michael Bloomberg “donated” a combined $800,000 to the DNC and 44 states, when he announced his bid for president. Since then, he has poured $400 million into broadcast, radio and cable ads, $42 million into Facebook ads, and $36 million on Google ads for his campaign. He’s spent about half-a-billion dollars in three months, and it’s just the beginning of his campaign. In this same time period, he has risen from four percent to 20 percent in the polls, even though he hasn’t been on the ballot or even participating in the debates, until February of this year. It’s incredible to witness the sheer power he has in manipulating public opinion simply by dropping millions of dollars on an election.
“This isn’t about who your favorite candidate is anymore (if it ever was). It’s about voting for, or against, the oligarchic takeover of the Democratic Party and the end of electoral democracy in this country.”
Most people still have a hard time comprehending the scale of Bloomberg’s wealth. His net worth of $62.8 billion is more than 20 times the net worth of President Trump. It dwarfs the net worth of all the other Democratic presidential candidates combined, including Tom Steyer, whose $1.6 billion is a pittance compared to Bloomberg’s wealth.
Many progressives are hoping that Bloomberg’s lengthy and atrocious policy record will trump the power of his money for most voters: his overtly racist stop-and-frisk program, his NYPD Muslim surveillance program, his dozens of sexual harassment allegations, etc. Surely the fact that he’s been a registered Republican for most of his life, someone who has praised redlining, someone who wants to cut basic government programs like Social Security, will be enough to offend the majority of Democratic primary voters! But if this electoral season is teaching us anything, it is showing us that core democratic values are highly fluid when billionaires pour money into them.
Toward the very end of the Nevada Democratic Debate, MSNBC‘s Chuck Todd asked candidates to answer this question quickly: “There’s a very good chance none of you are going to have enough delegates to the Democratic National Convention to clinch this nomination. Should the person with the most delegates at the end of this primary season be the nominee even if they are short of a majority?”
This one question was perhaps the most critical question of the night. After the disastrous 2016 primaries, the DNC was pressured into forming a “Unity Commission” as an attempt to negotiate with the angry Sanders campaign surrogates who felt the process was rigged. This commission was composed of Sanders and Clinton surrogates. The hope on the Sanders’ side was to reduce the role of superdelegates—or get rid of them completely—in future elections. Out of this 2017 Commission, a key compromise was made. The agreement was that in 2020, superdelegates would no longer be allowed to vote in the first round of the Democratic primaries. Instead, they would now be restricted to voting only in the second round, if one Democratic candidate doesn’t secure a clear majority of pledged delegates (1,991, or just over 50 percent of the total). In the second round, all 3,979 delegates will be free to vote for any candidate they choose. Even former pledged candidates are allowed to change their votes.
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
If you believe the survival of independent media is vital to a healthy democracy, please step forward with a donation to nonprofit Common Dreams today:
It’s one thing to require a 51-percent majority to secure a party nomination when there are two candidates. It’s quite another to require a 51-percent majority when there are eight candidates still in the race! With such a huge pool of Democratic candidates dividing the vote, it will be a huge challenge for any one candidate to reach a 51-percent threshold. And if no one can, then we move to a brokered convention in July, according to DNC rules, where superdelegates will again place their hands on the lever.
Who are these superdelegates? Well, there is actually little public understanding of who they are. We know they are members of the DNC (which in 2020 includes many fossil fuel and bank lobbyists), Congress members, Democratic governors, party insiders and VIPs. They’re appointed (not elected) by the DNC to protect establishment interests. They’re not bound to follow the votes of their own states, nor are they accountable to voters in any way. In essence, they can very easily act as spoilers. And in interviews, they are currently making open threats to thwart the will of the people and block a Bernie Sanders nomination, even if he has a plurality. In addition, they are being actively courted by Michael Bloomberg.
So in response to Chuck Todd’s question, Biden, Warren, Buttigieg and Klobuchar all answered “no,” that the candidate with the most votes should not necessarily be the nominee. The only candidate who answered yes, that the person with the most votes at the end of the primary season should win, was Bernie Sanders. This one debate question speaks volumes about each candidate’s willingness to follow the democratic will of the people, instead of handing over the power to the superdelegates and the DNC to make the final decision. This is what’s at stake with a brokered convention.
We’re fighting a class war: the people vs. the corporate oligarchy. This isn’t about who your favorite candidate is anymore (if it ever was). It’s about voting for, or against, the oligarchic takeover of the Democratic Party and the end of electoral democracy in this country.
If Bernie Sanders remains as the frontrunner, and the DNC and their superdelegates nullify and defy the votes of millions of Americans, there will be political war. And the Democratic Party will longer have any legitimate base in U.S. society. No longer will there be even a façade of a party that represents the interests of the working class, the poor, women, people of color—the majority of this nation. The Democratic Party will be a sham, an oligarchy, and the plutocratic transition will be complete.
“The stakes couldn’t be higher. After four years of Trump, we are in a moment of national and global emergency as a result of staggering wealth inequality, institutional racism, political corruption, rising fascism, and ecological collapse. This election is critical, not just for the future of the United States, but the future of life on this planet.”
We’ve seen what happens when corporate democrats put their hand on the lever and substitute their establishment candidate in order to protect the one-percent. Voters stay home on Election Day, and we end up with President Trump. This is the likely scenario at this very moment, unless one candidate is somehow able to sweep Super Tuesday, grabbing the overwhelming majority of state votes and pledged delegates, and someone wins the nomination in the first round. Five Thirty Eight has Sanders with a 50/50 chance of winning in the first round. And so democracy hangs in the balance.
While it’s every candidate’s prerogative to stay in the primary race as long as possible and capture as many delegates as they can to carry to the Convention, this strategy of staying in the race is actually increasing the likelihood of a Trump win in November. None of the candidates, except Sanders (and to a lesser extent Biden), consistently beats Trump in a head-to-head lineup—not Bloomberg, not Buttigieg, not Warren—none of them. Only Bernie Sanders consistently beats Trump, especially in key battle ground states.
If these other candidates really cared about defeating Trump, the strategic thing for them to do now would be to suspend their campaigns and unify behind the candidate who’s most likely to defeat Trump. But they already told us where they stand during that Nevada debate and what’s most important to them.
The stakes couldn’t be higher. After four years of Trump, we are in a moment of national and global emergency as a result of staggering wealth inequality, institutional racism, political corruption, rising fascism, and ecological collapse. This election is critical, not just for the future of the United States, but the future of life on this planet.
As the street-theater group used to say: “This is class war. And we (the billionaires) are winning!” With the support of millions of people, Bernie Sanders is waging an ideological and political war against the billionaires and corporations that control our politics, our economy, and our entire society. He’s up against the fossil fuel industry, the private healthcare industry, Big Pharma, the prison industrial complex, and the military industrial complex. He’s 78 years old, and he’s carrying the weight of the world on his back. He’s fighting for us, all of us… and we’re fighting for him.
This is exactly why Sanders is so threatening to the ruling elite. They keep telling us he’s unelectable, but the truth is he’s the most electable candidate we have, and the only one likely to beat Donald Trump. So on your primary election day, let’s do what the one-percent fears most. Let’s show up in droves. Let’s show up in armies. Let’s bring so many friends and family to the polls that we break the voting machines. Let’s overwhelm the system. The ruling class needs to know that we’re coming for them. And this fight doesn’t stop at the ballot box. Whatever they do to sabotage this election, this movement will spread like fire because this isn’t about an election anymore. This is truly the fight for our lives.
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
From:
How To Get Away With Murder
Where to start??? It seems you can do whatever you want IF you have money or power or any iterations of money/power. If you are a Saudi “Royal a-soul” (MBS) you can have your goons murder anyone who pokes fun at you and your stupid hat or your abuse of power or whatever Jamal Khashoggi suggested/exposed you did. The bullchit in this case is so thick https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/khashoggi-search-for-body-1.4877541
Listening to the news today it also came up that Canada’s CRTC has exposed nefarious dealings involving the gouging/mistreatment of customers… to which the head honchos wiggle and dance, suggesting they are innocent and unaware and don’t tolerate…yada yada yada. https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bell-rogers-crtc-1.4879376
Another story today, involving religious, white male a-souls cutting women out of their “Christian” gig… still, in 2018
Indoctrination
It has been said; that if you were to divide up all the worlds wealth equally it would quickly flow back into the hands of the same people. That’s probably true and it tells me two things –actually a whole bunch of things but lets go with 2
One; that there are people in the world who feel they are more deserving of the crap money can buy and two the rest of us are either too dumb, too lazy or too stupid to care or, too, indoctrinated to balk I’m guessing that the latter is the big cog in this machine
A few years after I arrived on the planet –as the fog of my arrival began to dissipate, I began to become aware that there was this disparity… some people had more than others? So I asked my host AkA my father; WTF,-wus-up-wit-dat? Dad told me that on earth there are people who are more deserving than others and it depends on many factors like; smarts, laziness, aggressiveness, goodnessness, badassnessness, popularnessness, etc.
It didn’t seem right but I bought it and lived it for another 40years and in that 40 years the fog continued to lift and I began to develop an increasing problem with my papas rudimentary explanation By the way, everybody I knew, all my friends had been told a similar variation of this explanation to the point it was rarely discussed and almost never questioned. As time passed some of our more progressive “teachers” gave us pause to ask loftier questions, inequality among them… for me that was 30 years ago… see the: five monkeys experiment new version https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIzVe5s8OHQ
Since those early years the subject has crossed my radar with increasing intensity and I began saying “HEY WTF” more often… to the point of hopping mad! Others are hopping mad too. For a while there we had the 99% movement but it petered out almost entirely… too much complacent resistance from the stupid, which leads me to believe that Only The Stupid Can Save Us Now!
The stupid are the ones who said during “the movement” in that dumb Homer Simpson voice “what are they complaining about” (“have another beer”) Those are the people we need to engage –not an easy chore. Firstly they don’t know they’re stupid and other than tune their opiatic ROCK radio to NPR or CBC or BBC, etc I don’t know how to fix that… They need to be urged to examine their inane lives –to question the status quo… The #Me Too is important but # QUESTION EVERYTHING needs to become a serious movement…
I’m running out of steam, so, in shutting down; If we cannot get the stupid on side, we are doomed to travel this dysfunctional, pothole (a-soul) pocked, gravel, road to oblivion… which is on the horizon already
Nap time
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former. Albert Einstein
Communism Socialism and the Boogeyman
I recall –growing up in different areas of the country– a universal hatred of those commie bastards. A lot of us were smack dab in the middle of the time of The Cold War which exacerbated our hatred for people we knew absolutely NOTHING about!
Fifty years later I met a woman who declared; I Hate The French! She hated these people with a passion but when I asked her why, she struggled with a reason –spouting some sort of inherent french a-soulistic behavior. And when I asked if she was referring to french neighbors she said ‘no’. Did you work for a French Gee (guy) she said ‘no.’ who then has cause this hatred to come about? Turns out it was tradition. WTF she didn’t know a single french person. She was a bonafide member of The Chubby Amygdala cult AKA a conservative (a-conservative) And, it amazed me that in her late 60’s she didn’t have a clue, didn’t have a clue that there was a serious division of ideologies –known as right and left, and that it was a world wide phenomenon almost as “hard” as gender… okay maybe that isn’t that hard anymore… but… well, you know 🙂 (see my earlier rand regarding CASD)
So what I’m trying to say is we gather our prejudices as youngsters based on the amount of stupid (sPPM) in our atmosphere at the time and we become set… until
something disrupts that comfortable ignorance See the 5 monkey experiment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-PvBo75PDo
I’m getting tired so I’ll cut it short with a question; Who would benefit the most if communism, or commies little brother socialism –were to be completely eliminated worldwide and, who might pay trillions (this is a hint) of dollars to demonized those leftist attitudes?
Any guesses?
Okay, put another way; who would be terrified of loosing all of their wealth, social status, comfort and power if socialism became the default system of world society’s
Hint: these people will stop at nothing to sabotage threats to their… comfy lifestyles.
And lastly –for now at least– who among you is willing to listen to the boogeyman’s side of the story?
More on this subject after my nap
A-soul Merry-Go-Round
The A-soul Merry-Go-Round has become such a popular ride here on Circus Earth its hard to find space!
We apes, especially the critical-thought-challenged-knuckle-draggers, have a tendency to watch the other apes in the troupe for social clues. So when we see an a-soul ape being an a-soul and doing well, we tend to bring knuckle to noggin and “think” ‘maybe a-soul chimp is on to something’… maybe I need to be more of an a-soul… l-i-k-e… t-h-e… P-r-e-s-i-d-e-n-t…C-h-i-m-p… scratch scratch?
And In becoming a greater a-soul he (new inductee a-soul chimp) develops greater animosity in the non a-soul community, dragging them just a little closer to the A-soul Merry-Go-Round… and, around she goes? A-Soulization Of The Nation
I Reserve The Right To Be Wrong
Its amazing how many people who don’t know chit, have opinions and beliefs –adamant ones, carved in stone. We can probably say for sure (99.9*10⁹⁹ % sure) that the sun will rise tomorrow, its been a trend for a while now.
But other than that and similar trends, its ridiculous to consider the unknowable one way or the other. I don’t know if God exists, I don’t know if the cosmos is infinite… The one thing I’m pretty sure of is; I don’t know chit for sure and neither do you! Having said that, who knows, maybe you do know these things… all I can do is review my doubt’s and wait for proof. And, if God suddenly materializes in front of me in a blare of trumpets with angles and, they’re all wearing robes and stuff and they make things right in the world –well then, I’ll will be 99.9*10⁹⁹ % sure. But, being cocksure, smug or arrogant about things, hobbles the mind… I think… probably…most likely!
Those who wish to dismiss inconvenient truth or believe convenient lies, do so at your own peril. But and its a big but, so listen up Splugie McDipshit, don’t for a moment think you have the answers and don’t think for a moment, that killing “possibly” innocent people in the name of whatever religious BS you subscribe to, is a good idea… its “probably” not!
In the mean time my motto will be “Question Everything” And I’ll use qualifiers like: maybe and its possible, I suppose, who knows, what if, etc. And in the case of pressing issues (like climate change) its probably best to error on the side of caution.
The Fractured Snap Of Ginger Rogers 