Monday, January 23, 2017
Sunday, January 22, 2017
Unity, and other stuff
Apparently the best way for a bunch of women to march for unity is for them to exclude those that don't agree with them 100%
I wonder how many of the women who marched realized how many of the sponsor organizations are bankrolled by one man.
I wonder if folks realize that leaving mountains of trash on the streets doesn't make them or their cause look good.
I wonder how it is the the tolerant, inclusive, nonviolent leftists seem unable to protest much of anything without violence and damage to property.
I wonder why we never see a bunch of racist, gun loving, violence prone oppressive white guys running amok in the streets burning stuff.
I wonder what exactly the goal was on the protests this weekend. It seems that the reason why the civil rights protests were successful (in part) was that they had a specific clearly articulated goal that they hoped to achieve. I'd guess that "no justice, no peace." doesn't really count as a clearly articulated specific goal so much as a selfish tantrum.
Perhaps the left could take a break and demonstrate some of the tolerance they claim is so important to them.
I wonder how many of the women who marched realized how many of the sponsor organizations are bankrolled by one man.
I wonder if folks realize that leaving mountains of trash on the streets doesn't make them or their cause look good.
I wonder how it is the the tolerant, inclusive, nonviolent leftists seem unable to protest much of anything without violence and damage to property.
I wonder why we never see a bunch of racist, gun loving, violence prone oppressive white guys running amok in the streets burning stuff.
I wonder what exactly the goal was on the protests this weekend. It seems that the reason why the civil rights protests were successful (in part) was that they had a specific clearly articulated goal that they hoped to achieve. I'd guess that "no justice, no peace." doesn't really count as a clearly articulated specific goal so much as a selfish tantrum.
Perhaps the left could take a break and demonstrate some of the tolerance they claim is so important to them.
Monday, January 16, 2017
The wrong questions
I must say that I was heartened by the fact that MLK 3 was brave enough to actually enter the lair of the evil, illegitimate, racist, misogynist, hateful, Trump. Even more so that he actually had a conversation with Trump, unlike others. However I noticed that his quote demonstrates an area where people are asking the wrong questions, therefore getting the wrong answers.
King said, "We need to be talking about how to clothe people, how do we feed people.”
While I agree that there is a need to meet the physical needs of people, I think King has it wrong. Or alternatively, expressed himself poorly.
It seems to me that the goal is not to "feed" or "clothe" people, but to create an environment where people are able to feed and clothe themselves. It seems that we should be working away from dependence and toward independence, not the reverse. Now, I'm not a huge Trump fan, but he has been pretty consistent on wanting to improve the economy so that all sorts of people will be able to provide for themselves. Further, it seems that deciding that "we" need to "feed" or "clothe" people is inherently more demeaning and dehumanizing that allowing people the opportunity to provide for themselves.
On a related note, one of the issues of the last campaign was allowing refugees to come to the US.
After watching a video of a young Syrian boy a few months ago (as well as from 1st hand experience) talk about what he really wanted was a job so he could provide for his mother and siblings, I realized that we're asking the wrong question.
Instead of how many Syrians can we uproot from their homeland and relocate to the US, we should be asking what can we do in order to give the Syrians the opportunity to thrive and prosper in their homeland and build a better country for themselves and for the region.
Clearly, there will be instances where certain individuals are unable to provide for themselves and where certain conditions mean that it is necessary to relocate a refugee to the US, but having the default position that we must "feed", "clothe", and "provide refuge to" the majority of affected people seems to be coming from the wrong place.
King said, "We need to be talking about how to clothe people, how do we feed people.”
While I agree that there is a need to meet the physical needs of people, I think King has it wrong. Or alternatively, expressed himself poorly.
It seems to me that the goal is not to "feed" or "clothe" people, but to create an environment where people are able to feed and clothe themselves. It seems that we should be working away from dependence and toward independence, not the reverse. Now, I'm not a huge Trump fan, but he has been pretty consistent on wanting to improve the economy so that all sorts of people will be able to provide for themselves. Further, it seems that deciding that "we" need to "feed" or "clothe" people is inherently more demeaning and dehumanizing that allowing people the opportunity to provide for themselves.
On a related note, one of the issues of the last campaign was allowing refugees to come to the US.
After watching a video of a young Syrian boy a few months ago (as well as from 1st hand experience) talk about what he really wanted was a job so he could provide for his mother and siblings, I realized that we're asking the wrong question.
Instead of how many Syrians can we uproot from their homeland and relocate to the US, we should be asking what can we do in order to give the Syrians the opportunity to thrive and prosper in their homeland and build a better country for themselves and for the region.
Clearly, there will be instances where certain individuals are unable to provide for themselves and where certain conditions mean that it is necessary to relocate a refugee to the US, but having the default position that we must "feed", "clothe", and "provide refuge to" the majority of affected people seems to be coming from the wrong place.
Open letter
To all of the people (mostly women) who continue to ask that I stay out of their bedroom/sex life/uterus,
To all of you who feel so strongly and passionately that people like me stay out of areas of your life that you consider to be personal and private, I say that I will gladly stay out of yours as soon as you stop asking me to subsidize the choices that you make in your bedroom or your sex life and for helping you remove the foreseeable consequences of those activity when they end up in your uterus.
It would also be nice if you gave the spaces where people should have some degree of privacy the same degree of respect you want for yours.
Sincerely
Craig
To all of you who feel so strongly and passionately that people like me stay out of areas of your life that you consider to be personal and private, I say that I will gladly stay out of yours as soon as you stop asking me to subsidize the choices that you make in your bedroom or your sex life and for helping you remove the foreseeable consequences of those activity when they end up in your uterus.
It would also be nice if you gave the spaces where people should have some degree of privacy the same degree of respect you want for yours.
Sincerely
Craig
Monday, January 9, 2017
Looking forward
As we prepare for the Trump inauguration and continually focus on rehashing that completely legal and correct election results, I'd like to look forward a bit.
A week or so back Gallup released an updated poll which points out that Conservatives outnumber Liberals (36%-25%), and that the gap is growing wider.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/201152/conservative-liberal-gap-continues-narrow-tuesday.aspx
Then we look at what can only be called a landslide of conservative (more conservative) victories in both state legislatures and governors races.
It seems that we could reasonably draw a couple of conclusions from this data.
1. The folks who claim that the US is trending toward the left politically, are simply propagating more fake news.
2. That the conservative agenda is much more popular and persuasive that the news media wouyld have you believe.
So, as we look forward it seems clear that if the democrats would like to regain control of the presidency and the US legislature that there are some hurdles they must overcome. Clearly, one of the biggest is the need to convince a significant percentage of Trump voters to vote for whoever they trot out. Yes that's right, they need those ignorant, racist, sexist, stupid, misguided Trump voters to vote for their candidate in 4 years. That raises a couple of questions.
1. Is name calling and demonizing a significant percentage of the electorate a good strategy to get them to vote for your candidate in future elections?
2. If these people are all of the nasty things y'all have been saying about them, then why would you want such a bunch of "deplorables" to vote for your candidate anyway?
I wish them good luck trying to walk back all the nasty things that have been said.
Maybe they should look at the data and base their campaigns on that instead on name calling and denegration.
A week or so back Gallup released an updated poll which points out that Conservatives outnumber Liberals (36%-25%), and that the gap is growing wider.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/201152/conservative-liberal-gap-continues-narrow-tuesday.aspx
Then we look at what can only be called a landslide of conservative (more conservative) victories in both state legislatures and governors races.
It seems that we could reasonably draw a couple of conclusions from this data.
1. The folks who claim that the US is trending toward the left politically, are simply propagating more fake news.
2. That the conservative agenda is much more popular and persuasive that the news media wouyld have you believe.
So, as we look forward it seems clear that if the democrats would like to regain control of the presidency and the US legislature that there are some hurdles they must overcome. Clearly, one of the biggest is the need to convince a significant percentage of Trump voters to vote for whoever they trot out. Yes that's right, they need those ignorant, racist, sexist, stupid, misguided Trump voters to vote for their candidate in 4 years. That raises a couple of questions.
1. Is name calling and demonizing a significant percentage of the electorate a good strategy to get them to vote for your candidate in future elections?
2. If these people are all of the nasty things y'all have been saying about them, then why would you want such a bunch of "deplorables" to vote for your candidate anyway?
I wish them good luck trying to walk back all the nasty things that have been said.
Maybe they should look at the data and base their campaigns on that instead on name calling and denegration.
P-BO and Clinton get bitten in the ass by 80's foreign policy
Back when P-BO was running against the (evil, rich, racist, killer) Romney, 'ol Mitt made a comment about how the Russians were the biggest foreign policy challenge we faced. P-BO's response was something dismissive like "The 80's called and they want their foreign policy back.".
I guess maybe P-BO and his foreign policy apparat, should have paid a bit more attention to Mitt and not been quite so dismissive and patronizing.
I guess maybe P-BO and his foreign policy apparat, should have paid a bit more attention to Mitt and not been quite so dismissive and patronizing.
When our clergy fail
At the same time the animosity that has been fostered by the rhetoric
of the campaigns and our nation's history makes it completely
understandable.
4 Black youths kidnapped and tortured a white kid in Chigago, and the above is the kind of statement we get from (some) liberal white clergy.
I've seen virtually none of the folks I follow on either blogs or social media (you know the ones who jump to the politically expedient conclusion and broadcast it everywhere) speak out against this crime. Just the kind of thing exemplified by the above quote.
It's bad enough that the president' hometown is a slaughterhouse, It's worse that the left chooses to downplay and ignore this interesting bit of data.
But for anyone to excuse or condone this action (no matter how obliquely), especially someone in the clergy, is simply uncomprehensible.
It's interesting that we've gotten to the point where folks on the right are supposed to condemn loudly, publicly and vociferously any action that can be remotely construed as having any racial component at all, while those on the left largely remain silent about this kind of thing from their own.
One last thought, it seems as if it's now fashionable to construe the criminal process as somehow unjust. Even when (for example) a white officer is charged with the shooting of a black victim, the hue and cry that when "justice" (I suspect the really mean punishment) isn't instantaneous that it is somehow not justice.
4 Black youths kidnapped and tortured a white kid in Chigago, and the above is the kind of statement we get from (some) liberal white clergy.
I've seen virtually none of the folks I follow on either blogs or social media (you know the ones who jump to the politically expedient conclusion and broadcast it everywhere) speak out against this crime. Just the kind of thing exemplified by the above quote.
It's bad enough that the president' hometown is a slaughterhouse, It's worse that the left chooses to downplay and ignore this interesting bit of data.
But for anyone to excuse or condone this action (no matter how obliquely), especially someone in the clergy, is simply uncomprehensible.
It's interesting that we've gotten to the point where folks on the right are supposed to condemn loudly, publicly and vociferously any action that can be remotely construed as having any racial component at all, while those on the left largely remain silent about this kind of thing from their own.
One last thought, it seems as if it's now fashionable to construe the criminal process as somehow unjust. Even when (for example) a white officer is charged with the shooting of a black victim, the hue and cry that when "justice" (I suspect the really mean punishment) isn't instantaneous that it is somehow not justice.
Satire is...
Culture In Which All Truth Is Relative Suddenly Concerned About Fake News
http://babylonbee.com/news/culture-truth-relative-suddenly-concerned-fake-news/
Sometimes satire hits a home run.
Or this...
http://babylonbee.com/news/progressive-christian-refreshes-bible-app-see-god-updated-stance-homosexuality/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)