Posted On: Saturday - December 5th 2020 7:00AM MST
In Topics:   General Stupidity  Media Stupidity
No, not poled, as in up the ass, with more government/lefty/commie/feminist/ PanicFest stupidity, such as we have been writing about for 4 years running. I was polled with 2 "L"s, as in by the big un', Gallup Polling. This call to my cell phone* was at least 1/2 an hour long, maybe even 45 minutes. This was about 2 weeks back, so I need to write this now, before I forget more of the questions I was asked.
I have lost more of whatever confidence I had that these pollsters knew what they were doing after this call. I don't mean the young lady asking me questions, of course. She was as polite as can be, but would cut off any extraneous part of any answer. She had to be as patient as all get-out to keep that job, as I'm sure she hears all manner of ranting (not me, this time) and if anything went seriously wrong during the call, I'm guessing the whole set of answers gets trashed. That's not a successful call, and it's not likely an employee there gets any kudos for having too many of those.
I'm not sure if the pollsters in charge have ever heard the simple saying: Ask a stupid question; get a stupid answer.. That applies to the call I got, for the most part.
The first 1/3 of the call consisted of questions to ascertain who was this guy she'd called. "Do you make between $X and $Y?" "Would you say your race is white?", "Are you between 35 and 55?", etc., each with a set of 4 answers (probably so she wouldn't get "what was the middle one?" all the time ;-}) Sure, you've got to get that info. for the independent axes of the graphs, such as with Audacious Epigone's many bar graphs.
Within all that were mixed-in other questions, possibly to get the respondent to figure "we are getting somewhere". There were 4 questions in a row about "have you not had enough money for food due to ...?", as an example. Really, is that ever the case in this age of welfare? What was the point of that series of stupid questions. How about "how much have your health plan costs gone up?", you know, something that is a real problem?
For a while, we got down to business. Still, the questions just made me roll my eyes and wonder who made these up? It's not the subject matter. There were at least a couple of political subjects that the pollster wanted opinions on.
A series of questions was about feminism, for instance. Again, it was another set of stupid ones though: "Do you strongly disagree, slightly disagree, slightly agree, or strongly agree with the statement "women should be allowed to work outside the home"? "What is the percentage of your friends, would you say, who would agree with "women should be allowed to work outside the home", under 50%, between 50% and 90%, over 90%? There were 2 more of the same. It was just tedious and stupid!
How about "do you think it's better for society if most women stay at home with their families?" and "what percentage of your friends ...?"? Give me a non-stupid question, and you may get some important data! Was the point to use this question to tell the users of this data that pretty much all Americans were pro-feminism? Or, did they ask non-stupid questions to other respondents, and I just got the stupid ones as part of some control group? Are they very very smart or very very dumb? I'm going with number 2 for $800,000, Alex.
We got to immigration even (yea!), but most of the questions were stupid-obvious there too, as in, with only one non-completely-stupid answer. I finally got to one that was straightforward. "Do you strongly disagree, slightly disagree, slightly agree, or strongly agree that there is too much immigration?" There's one for our side. That was the only question I remember to which the answer could be used to actually determine something useful.
The poll wrapped up with "what's your zip code?", and that was it. The process was extremely disappointing, and I see it as at least 1/2 hour wasted.
Is it possible that Gallup Polling asks so many stupid questions as just part of a long series gradated among respondents from stupid-obvious on one end to stupid-obvious on the other, with the discerning questions in the middle? Nah, I doubt that. I believe it comes down to the same stupid question I asked above. The stupid answer again is: These people are very very dumb.
NOTE: If I remember some other questions later on, I'll update this post.
* I still answer calls from numbers I don't know. It's hit or miss. See Modern Peak Stupidity telephone etiquette, along with Hanging up in Style.
No comments - Click here to start thread
Telenovelas are Hell - Teresa's drama in ole Mexico
Posted On: Friday - December 4th 2020 6:14PM MST
In Topics:   TV, aka Gov't Media  Humor
They (whoever "Funny or Die" is) have Telenovelas are Hell videos for all over Latin America, or at least the places where people have TV's. Oh, I know, Fred Reed, you guys are pretty damn advanced down there. I just can't be sure about parts of Bolivia and Paraguay though - and then those uncontacted tribes of the amazon - they've got their own drama - no firearms and falls through glass, just blow guns and big sticks.
The first one of these that Peak Stupidity featured was about the star named Rubi and here we've got Teresa with no "h. (Nobody ever said Latin America was a haven for spelling bee champs.) They are both hot Mexicans.
A novella is a short novel, if my Spanish or Sci-Fi memory hasn't failed me. "Tele" is for TV, so just think of these as television versions of the Cliff Notes of Dicken's Wuthering Heights, with dirtier streets and characters with 50 points off their IQs and 2 letter increases in bra sizes.
Enjoy Teresa in Telenovelas are Hell:
We Have Been Harmonized - book review - Part 1
Posted On: Friday - December 4th 2020 11:56AM MST
In Topics:   Commies  China  Orwellian Stupidity  Books
Part 1 of Peak Stupidity's review of this important book on modern China, We Will Be Harmonized by Kai Strittmatter, will be and introduction and part of the conclusion. I'll wrap things up a little bit in the last part, but I want to write about the author first and may as well give the recommendation now.
I'm going to point out some things about author Kai Strittmatter here, but as far as biographical information goes, this guy wants to remain pretty anonymous. This is odd for a book that even this blogger has heard of (though only #82,000 in ranking in books on amazon, for what that's worth). The amazon biography is sparse, with nothing but the same 2 sentence bio that's on the inside of the book jacket back cover (with a picture there). Amazon just copy/pasted it:
For more than a decade, Kai STrittmatter was the China correspondent for Germany's national newspaper "Süddeutsche Zeitung". Fluent in Mandarin, he has studied China for more than thirty years, including extensive stint is Xian and Taipei. He lives in Copenhagen.As Mr. Sailer would say, "he is based in Copenhagen.". He is not based though, as I'll get to. Amazon shows that Mr. Strittmatter has written at least 4 other books, but in German.
I can't tell how long the guy actually lived in China, because you can study the place from elsewhere, I suppose, though not as well. No other places in China are mentioned in the bios, but in the book the author mentions meeting with/visiting with (some in jail) a number of important Chinese dissident types in various places within mainland China, but it seems to lean towards Peking. As Mr. Strittmatter would be the first to tell you, Taiwan (re: his extensive time in Taipei) is not China. Well, it's not yet, anyway.
I looked around a bit on the web and really couldn't find much more on this author.* I can see every reason why he wants to remain semi-anonymous or hard to find, based on what he's written about the Chinese Communist Party. I have a lot of respect for the man for having the guts to spell out what's going on there, though I will describe shortly how I think he is flat-out wrong regarding certain ideas. This reminds me of our beloved Ron Unz of unz.com. I have the utmost respect for his publishing a well-working website full of controversial commentary with all sides being allowed access, but that doesn't mean he's not far into the deep end with some of his ideas.**
Mr. Strittmatter is a German living in Copenhagen. He's spent time in China and Taiwan. Where he obviously hasn't spent much time is in the good old U.S. of A. This guy comes across very ignorantly in what little he does write about America, which is only about the Chinese influence and about 10 instances of Trump Derangement Syndrome. It is really surprising to see an erudite writer like this embarrass himself with his ignorant (often) one-liners about Trump taken out of some talking points somewhere.
I won't include all instances, but I did mark them in the book. The first one is some stupid comparison of Trump's estimation Of the crowd size at the inauguration in '17 to propaganda in Turkey. Trump is somewhat of a bullshitter and exaggerator often, but then here's the author taking the word of our Lying Press, who have been balls-to-the-wall anti-Trump for 5 1/2 years. This idiot Strittmatter has a line later on in the book which basically states that the NY Times is The Truth. This is right in the middle of his descriptions of the extensive Chinese Communist Party propaganda. Yeah, he gets modern China, but as for the US, and this NY Times worship, Strittmatter comes across as a complete rube.
This author compares President Trump to the extreme villain of the entire book, Chinese President-for-Life Xi Jinping at one point, and rails on the Nationalism of the President and his supporters. He is even against Trump's Chinese trade policy, at the same time the author warns us about China's global influence. In this way he sounds like the idiotic side of Fred Reed, who rants about real problems and then rants against the only people getting off their asses to fix said problems.
That last part foreshadowed my next point against Mr. Strittmatter. He is a Globalist through and through. What he doesn't like about China's influence is that he doesn't want them to be in charge of the Global government. He wants Globalist Europeans to be in charge. That way, it will be all much, much, better, I suppose ... Hence the words against President Trump's Nationalism (as if!!) and that of his American supporters.
This is a brand new book published this September, so the Kung Flu PanicFest is mentioned just a few times. Mr. Strittmatter doesn't praise China for their LOCKDOWN fu, like Ron Unz and other clueless writers do, but he also came across to me as a Pro-Panicker. He manages to get his TDS and Pro-Panic licks in here (page 333):
But China's propaganda media were even more pleased about the ever-erratic US president Donald Trump, whose ignorance and hostility toward science soon made the US the center of the pandemic*** ; the Communist Party could not have wished for a better partner in its plans to make its own sins forgotten.Oh, wait, so the US didn't create the Kung Flu and send it over there? Paging Ron Unz, Mr. Unz ... white courtesy telephone, pick up the white courtesy telephone, ... use your wipes first ... Still, it's just more of this author's own ignorance on display here.
Another piece of questionable material in the book, and I hope Mr. Derbyshire** mentions this, is that the author has a distinctly "magic dirt" opinion regarding the HBD idea. This occurs only in his section about the differences in the societies in Taiwan and mainland China. That would make for a good subject for a post here, but, again, Mr. Derbyshire, who I believed coined the term "magic dirt" could expound on that better. I believe he has been to Taiwan in addition to having spent some years in mainland China.
Luckily, both the TDS and the Pro-Panic business are not a major part of the book. However, one can see in the amazon.com1-star reviews that it sure pisses off people who seem to quit reading due to this. The Globalist stance is a big problem with the last portion of We Have Been Harmonized, so I'll get to that when the time comes.
This last beef about the book is not political. Mr. Strittmatter noted in the acknowledgements that he had a great editor, one Matin Janik, and another guy Bernhard Bartsch, "who was the first to look through the manuscript..." "They have all made this a better book. But its failings are my own." Not to start a sentence with "but" or anything, but you're on the hook then, Strittmatter, for the many, many instances (> 20) of non-sentences in this book. He started with a number of them. Like this, see. He got better during the middle of the book, and then that stuff started cropping up near the end again. The author then had the nerve to throw in a "[sic]" in a quote of a Chinaman. The Chinaman's got an excuse, buddy. What's yours?**** You can't blame these on your editor, as "its failings are my own". Face it, Mr. Strittmatter, you've failed in grammar. You've failed in your ignorance of Americans, American politics, your TDS, your Globalist stupidity, and your falling for the Kung Flu PanicFest (in a book partially about propaganda, for crying out loud!)
However, the material on the situation in modern-day China is top-notch. i urge the potential reader to ignore Kai Strittmatter's stupidity regarding these failings, and plow through it.
As I thought of a way to split up this review, I came across the idea of 3 main sections. I opened the book to work the arithmetic to check my estimate of how much of the book was each, and amazingly to me, I came across pages 13-14 in which the author laid out his 3 parts. (They are not formally laid out, as in Sections of the book.) It's amazing, because I'd completely forgotten those 2 pages about it! I suppose the author ought to have the say on this, but his 3 sections about jibe with what I was going to write anyway.
I will put in my terms, however, and this is not counting the intro which is the first 2 chapters:
1) This first section is material that I didn't have too much of a clue on. Yes, I knew there's still a Communist Party, but I didn't know how much power they have. Per the author, the CCP runs the Chinese central government. The President appointed himself President for Life a couple of years ago. I'd heard that but I didn't know till now how big a deal that was. He is the new and improved Chairman Mao. This first section is all about the usurping of even more power after Chairman Deng's long period of relative enlightenment. (This is 45% of the book, not counting the introduction chapters.)
2) The second section is about all the Orwellian things going on in China, helped immensely by their huge advances in "Tech".***** This to me, is the meat of the book. It is the part that ought to scare the living out of you, unless you have already learned to love Big Brother. Peak Stupidity readers, I know you hate that bastard. (This is 35% of the book, not counting the introduction chapters.)
3) The third section of the book is about China's spreading of their new culture and their Orwellian society to the rest of the world. (This is 20% of the book, not counting the introduction chapters.)
Those will probably be the rest of this review. Yes, it's a serious book. As much as I've just trashed the author, Kai Strittmatter has written an important book that may change the mind of any Chinaphiles, as I used to be - see Dashed high-hopes for China - - Part 1 and Part 2.
Peak Stupidity recommends We Have Been Harmonized to anyone who cares about the future of the world. Still, the author is something of a tool...
* Perhaps the good Peak Stupidity commenter crowd could help out.
** In fact, Ron Unz has an extremely rose-colored-glasses view of China himself. I think it would do him some good to read this book. John Derbyshire just wrote to me in a comment, upon my questioning him about this book, and told me he'd be reading it soon. I look forward to his review and will link to it when I see it, of course.
*** Oh, maybe he meant "center of the US pandemic Panic-Fest", perhaps? Sure, we're #1. USA! USA! USA!
**** Peak Stupidity's excuse is that we are just a country blog, Captain, and we don't HAVE an editor.
***** I'm sorry, but I will have to put that in quotes often. There is plenty of high technology out there that has nothing to do with software or electronics. I HATE HATE HATE that term "tech" used that way. That there's another post. These posts are proliferating like Russian ICBMs!
More Kung Flu Kontroversy
Posted On: Thursday - December 3rd 2020 10:20PM MST
In Topics:   Curmudgeonry  Educational Stupidity  Healthcare Stupidity
(I am not being sarcastic this time.)
This new flavor of stupidity just won't go away. Sure it's good for the blogging business, but I really want it to be over. What will it take? Many thought that due to the anti-Trump factor, this whole PanicFest would be quietly tailed-off once Biden and President-in-Waiting Kameltoe won the Election. They haven't won yet - don't get me wrong - but there's lots of people who maintain they have. Are they waiting for the inauguration, one way or another?
I can't say I want Trump to lose this thing just for that reason, because:
a) They may double-down on the Kung Flu stupidity, with different plans that we'd thought.
b) Decent Americans don't want what's coming from the D's, and the Kung Flu stupidity could be ended during a Trump administration. I'm sure Mr. Trump would want this, but it's not all up to him anyway. Americans have got to get over their hysteria. By beating the Establishment and their Election '20 CheatFest, we'd sure feel a lot of power to beat the PanicFest too.
I'll include 2 minor pieces of Kung Flu Kontroversy here that I got into. The first is a follow-up from my incident with the Brit woman scold that didn't like my (rash, and kind of silly, I'll admit) action outside the school a couple of weeks back (last portion of It's
I've really tried to avoid the elementary school due to anger issues brought on by seeing the face diapering stupidity at the place. I had to pick up the boy last week, though. I walked up maskless to stay across the small road from most of the people so as not to cause trouble. The School Resource Officer, aka, cop, came over to talk to me. Apparently the Brit scold was a tattle-tale too and must have gotten freaked out by my not listening to her, or else by that major biohazard of my kid's face mask buried in the bushes. (Why was the bush still there even? If this disease is so contagious and deadly, shouldn't all the shrubbery have been burned with a flamethrower? Believe me, the school district has got the money!)
This masked cop was pretty decent about it, I must admit. I'm sure he didn't want to be involved at all. He told me that my cussing and littering were a problem. I told him I didn't remember cussing at all, but when I think back, I don't know ... I apologized for the littering, as it's really something I would normally teach the boy not to do.
"I was pretty pissed off at seeing the kids in such a sad state. This whole thing is pretty sick. Aren't you getting sick of this whole mask thing?" I asked him. The guy was pretty decent about it. He nodded, though he didn't say much besides a "yeah", probably for political reasons. "The school district wants all this, so this school is just doing what the district wants." is how he put it (to paraphrase). I know, this cop would get fired if he just stood out there looking normal (with no mask) in defiance of what his department wanted. What CAN he do?
This week some friends and I met inside this coffee shop I normally avoid, as it was the only one allowing to people to sit inside, and it was freezing-ass cold outside. The place is owned by extreme lefties (which ones aren't?), so I wasn't that pleased to be in there anyway.
"Hey, you need a mask" said the one guy who I assume is an employee or owner. There wasn't a single one in my pocket, and people eating/drinking weren't wearing them anyway, of course. I checked my pants pocket and found no mask. "I don't have one." "You need one if you're standing up." "Whaaa?" "I don't have one." "We sell them for 50 cents." "Hell with that, let me look in the car." I really looked hard and had to settle for one sitting on the passenger side front floorboards, looking a little worse for the wear and tear.
I wore that old mask in there, and went up to the guy. "Hey, are you doing this because the city is all on you, or are you just hysterical." Well, he didn't like this at all, and we came really close to a fight. He could have told me nicely that "it's the city. I can't do anything about it." No, he used words that meant he was a part of the Kung Flu hysteria.
Of course, I need to stay out of that place. Things are not getting better. The Infotainment must be relentless. I wouldn't know.
What's that Bible Proverb again? 25:24 - "It is better to dwell
R.I.P. Walter E. Williams - Libertarian
Posted On: Thursday - December 3rd 2020 9:12AM MST
In Topics:   Pundits  Liberty/Libertarianism  Race/Genetics
We at Peak Stupidity don't do too many of these R.i.P. posts, unless it's the occasional Rot In Place for the passing of such scum as Juan McAnmesty. There are 10's of thousands of good people in America that die each and every day. What does some actor of musician mean in comparison?
It takes a lot of toughness to remain one of the two famous black Libertarian pundits in the country, though. Walter Williams is worth an R.I.P. to us.
I haven't kept up since the www has been the time-suck of all time-sucks for me, but I used to read Dr. Williams' columns in the newspaper way back. It's possible that his stuff was in the alternative newspaper, the one with the crime stories and News of the Weird column, as Irecollect something like that, and it'd make sense. Hard-core Constitutionalist Libertarianism was not something a respectable newspaper would print regularly, even 30 years ago.
Economist Dr. Thomas Sowell, whom we mentioned four years back, when he retired, is the only other black Libertarian pundit that I know about. There can't be many. (It's too bad I needed the Race/Genetics topic key on this one.) How many black people in general are Libertarians? It can't be more than a % or two. Even if poll questions, as appear very often in unz.com's Audacious Epigone's blog, show a 5% black bar* for "I think government is too big", that's not the reality in the black community. As a whole, and consistently, the black community wants MORE FREE STUFF. Libertarianism doesn't bring home the bacon for them. The State does.
One could search the world over for a hint of a Libertarian style government in a black country. Nada. Is it genetic or cultural? What would we hear from the black leaders if all of them had been students of Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell. As usual, it's some of each. Don't feel bad, black readers, if any. China, full of high-IQ people, we are told, has nary a Libertarian streak anywhere in its 3,500 year history. (See Citizenship in the Nation.)
One thing that even non-Liberty-loving white people appreciated about Walter Williams is that he didn't blame them for the problems of blacks. That's a novel thing, it seems, as discussed in VDare's memoriam of Dr. Williams.
I should have been following Dr. Williams until the day he died. From his site (linked to above) here is just his last "Wisdom of the Month" blurb:
Wisdom of the Month
“No one can read our Constitution without concluding that the people who wrote it wanted their government severely limited; the words “no” and “not” employed in restraint of governmental power occur 24 times in the first seven articles of the Constitution and 22 more times in the Bill of Rights. – Richard M. Ebeling, “The Real Meaning of Thanksgiving” November 2016
“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.” – Thomas Jefferson
I made an effort to shake hands with (and get a free book from) another great Libertarian pundit one time - see "Papiere bitte!" - "Your papers, please!" and memories of Mr. Vin Suprynowicz.** I wish I'd done the same with Walter E. Williams, another great American.
Rest in Peace.
* By not being a graphical-cuck and using appropriate colors, Audacious Epigone makes things easy on the reader of his graphs. One doesn't have to keep looking back and forth to the legend in his pie charts. Not only that, other graph makers will not be consistent anyway, as light blue may be "white people" one time and burnt orange the next.
** See also "Papiere bitte!" - "Your papers, please!" - Part 2 and "Papiere bitte!" - "Your papers, please!" - Stories from the real deal
Article II, Section 1 v Blue Squad CheatFest - Part 2
Posted On: Tuesday - December 1st 2020 6:48PM MST
In Topics:   Elections '16 - '20  Trump  Morning Constitutional
Yeah, it's pretty hard to read that, so here's the text of the second clause of Article II, Section 1 of the US Constitution:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress; but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States shall be appointed an Elector.[My bolding, of course. Again, they didn't have bolding back then.]
Whatever happens with all this, in the medium run, elections are not going to solve the fundamental problems in this country. My hope for Trump that he would change to act like '16 Candidate Trump in a 2nd term is a pipe dream. Realistically, if he pulled this out, just the extreme aggravation to the Commie left that it would cause would be well worth any effort I could help with. Trump would stave off the Socialism and some of the economic stupidity for a few more years. That is all.
However too far gone this country is, one good thing out of this legal fight is that Americans may be belatedly learning about, of all things, the US Constitution. We have a well-thought-out but complicated way of electing the President. When things don't go smoothly, that document is there to be referred to ...
... well, by those of us who care about it. Even Conservatives regularly deride the Libertarians and "muh Constitution". The Red Squad has a new-found interest in it now. I'll give them a little more credit than the Blue Squad for caring about it. We only hear about the Constitution from the left when they use it to weasel out of trouble on technicalities or when they tell us "hey, ho, this electoral college has to go!", when it doesn't work out for them so well, such as with the defeat of the Hildabeast.
People who actually read the document, especially Article II on the Executive branch, especially Section 1, clause 2 regarding election of the President, are discovering that the States have a lot of power in this election process. They do per the document, that is, were it followed closely and shit. The States have some power still left even after this Law of the Land was egregiously amended by the odious Amendments XVI* and XVII.
In Mr. Titley's post on the legal/legislative battles going on in Pennsylvania, the ability of those Penn legislators to run, or correct, the election process however they see fit is discussed. My question, as Peak Stupidity has asked before, (see City cops vs. Sheriffs and A China story and Chinese vs. American police states), is: are the State officials really going to stand up to the Feds? The usual case is that the Feds say “jump” and State officials say “how high, Sir!?” It’d be really nice if that changed, right there in Pennsylvania, then Michigan, Georgia, ...
It the States stood up and exercised some of their power, I wouldn't be so pessimistic about more than just this election CheatFest.
* That one was a 3-parter, so here are Part 2 and Part 3.
Article II, Section 1 v Blue Squad CheatFest - Part 1
Posted On: Tuesday - December 1st 2020 5:10PM MST
In Topics:   Elections '16 - '20  Websites  Trump  Morning Constitutional
Peak Stupidity is a site for commentary. It isn't a news site, and we don't keep you up very well - look elsewhere if you need a news "aggregator"*.
What a weird term that is, but it does make sense. The Drudge Report, a site we won't be linking to any more, due to Matt Drudge's having gone left at least a couple of years ago, is an example of a "news aggregator". I've had suggestions for others, though I often forget, but, yet again, we can go to unz.com yet again for this. Mr. Unz, per a suggestion by one of his commenters (with the handle of Rurik), added this feature to his site. Due to the nature of Mr. Unz's site, with the commenters suggestion the off-site news articles, there's bound to be some wild and wacky stuff there. (Come to think of it, I'm not sure if it will get you to the average news items that are being discussed in the Lyin' Press.)
The reason for this post is that a friend asked if I'd been keeping up with the legal battles of the Trump/Guliani/Powell crowd in fighting the huge '20 election CheatFest of the Democrat party (Blue Squad). Honestly, I have not been keeping up very well. I've read articles here and there on it, especially soon after the voting, as we'd kept up for a couple of days at least - See Is it all gonna come down to Philly or Carson City?? Send lawyers, guns, and money ..., Carson City, get me outta this!, and Your cheatin' hearts, will turn States blue ....
The action shifted to the more important States than Nevada. All those in question seem to have had a huge amount of last-minute cheating, mail-in ballot shenanigans, and possible machine hacking. In my State, I can't have an effect on the whole thing. I could donate money to the legal fight, as my wife has, but what else? It's just the pessimism I've got that these things ALWAYS go for the left that has kept me from posting on it.
To keep myself up better on the important events in this fight, my friend suggested Gateway Pundit, whom I've heard of before. He indeed has lots of detailed material on it.
There are 3 basic areas one can read and learn about, regarding this blatant travesty.
1) There are the details of the types of cheating going on. One can learn about the myriad ways the chain of secrecy and security can be broken or hacked, whether it was illegal registrations, pure creation of voters, the mail-in process, machine hacking, or ideas we haven't even thought of yet.
2) There are the vote numbers themselves and the statistics that go along with them. Apparently, the D's didn't expect such a huge Trump turnout in key States and augmented their CheatFest with some shoddy "work"manship. The last minute turnaround in the numbers look so ridiculous. Likely they even do to the Democrats themselves, but they won't show their embarrassment. They've got the Lyin' Press on their side. They will just take notes for next time.
(1) and (2) have a big overlap.
3) The legal battles. A writer named Brett Redmayne-Titley has an article on unz.com that details the legal and legislative situation in the State of Pennsylvania. The article, Election Bombshell! the US Constitution Goes to Court..., though formatted kind of weirdly and a bit repetitive, has a nice run-down.
Peak Stupidity readers will probably know more than this blogger about (1) and (2) matters, but I want to discuss (3) with respect to that good old US Constitution. That'll be Part 2, coming in just a bit.
Frustration at 300 dollars an hour
Posted On: Monday - November 30th 2020 10:59PM MST
In Topics:   Curmudgeonry  Artificial Stupidity  Customer Care
I had to think of it this way: This one health plan website I had to visit in order to simply check off a few things and go through some questions was going to put at least $300 on my "account". It would have been stupid not to make this effort for what will likely be $300 I would have to pay out of pocket otherwise. However, I'd been dreading doing this thing for the same reason as usual - I was pretty sure I'd run into a frustrating quagmire of website bullcrap and end up on a phone tree.
I understand the idea of using software and the web to avoid collection all kinds of paper forms about this and that from hundreds or thousands of people. The problem is that every damn "program" of any sort not only has to have a web page, but one must register, have an "account", then log in to get even the smallest thing done. I understand the need for security too. In this case, were the account part of the regular company site, requiring a sign in, or even using the login/pw again, I could handle it better.
I will write another extremely curmudgeonly post about passwords, and they are the basic problem. I just knew that whatever login (I didn't even know how the login was formatted) and PW I'd used a year or two ago were long lost to me. Half the work in doing business on-line nowadays is in finding out how TF to get going!
Sure enough, though I got the login straight finally, there was no way I was going to guess the PW right. (Yeah, I'll get to that stuff in another post which will explain my problem better, I promise.) The security questions for a lost PW? Yeah, right, I didn't give right answers anyway, but I could no longer remember my best fake ones. On to the phone it was.
This was the amazing stroke of luck: I listened to the first "blah blah" coming through after the phone answered and mashed two "0"s. That's all it took to get a live Filipina girl on the blower!* Things were looking up.
The first problem we ran into was that even after all kinds of other information, she had two more questions, of which I'd better get one right to be identified. It was close, let me tell you. Then, the website that I really needed to do my little questionnaire and such on was not the exact same thing as the one I needed to get on first. It had it's OWN login and PW, she said. Oh, man! I had to vent my frustration at this, which was exactly why I'd put off doing this to right before the deadline, requiring this last-minute call to customer "care".
I made sure to tell the nice young lady that I wasn't at all mad at her, just at the stupidity of all these levels of logging into shit. She got me a new PW that should match some other one, till they make me change it. Luckily, the login to the first part got me into the 2nd part, something the girl on the phone had been wrong about. That was it. 300 bucks.
All this messing around only took about an hour, all told. Easy money, right? It just didn't seem so.
* You, the Peak Stupidity readers, are now privy to this information. Imagine how much money one would pay in 1980 to dial up the Philippines for a 20 minute call! I'm telling you that now you just dial 00 to get (what I imagined was) a cutie in the Philippines to help with (almost) all your needs. If you have an out-of-control fire in your house, say, or a home invader who is not yet dead, but 9-1-1 is busy, just dial 00 and there'll be someone to help! Maybe you see an old woman in curlers down on the ground writhing around and saying something that you think means "I've fallen, and I can't get up" in Tagalog. Simply dial 00!
Peak Constitutional Amendment - XXII
Posted On: Monday - November 30th 2020 9:58AM MST
In Topics:   History  Liberty/Libertarianism  Dead/Ex- Presidents  Morning Constitutional
(Continued from Amendment XI, Amendment XII, Amendment XIII, Amendment XIV, Amendment XV, Part 1 on Amendment XVI, Part 2 on Amendment XVI , Part 3 on Amendment XVI, Amendment XVII, Amendment XVIII, Part 1 on Amendment XIX, Part 2 on Amendment XIX, Part 3 on Amendment XIX, Amendment XX, and Amendment XXI)
It's been a month exactly since Peak Stupidity's last morning Constitutional, and let me tell you, the Doc's not happy with that at all! Here's Amendment XXII:
Section 1Amendment XXII is the only Amendment to the US Constitution that looks like it was created on behalf of one man. It was neither created to help this man nor to punish him, as in a retroactive Bill of Attainder. No, the 22nd Amendment was made because one President, the Socialist Franklin Delano Roosevelt was not satisfied with "serving" as head of the Executive Branch for only 2 terms (8 years), but well after the fact.
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.
Those of us who got some real non-SJW schooling back in the day know that one thing Americans can be really proud of is the decision of President George Washington, our 1st one, to not run for office for a 3rd term. As the General who had won the War of Independence for the colonists just a generation before, he had the popularity to keep on going, like an elected monarch. By stepping away from office, Mr. Washington showed the new nation what its new government was all about.
I'll write a post on this, as it's half-way written in my head already, but back in President Washington's time, the office really was a position to serve in. After all, these yeoman farmers had lots going on at home, and to move away from the homestead for years, without a King Air or "Essential" Air Service, he'd have had much to worry about and he'd have been leaving his normal life entirely behind. The office didn't involve running an empire back then, so the power trip was not likely the same.
From our sometimes-biased but trusty Constitution Center interpretation page:
Surprisingly, many of the Framers—including Hamilton and Madison—supported a lifetime appointment for presidents selected by Congress and not elected by the people. That would have made the presidency what Virginia’s George Mason called an “elective monarchy,” however, and when this was put to a vote it failed by only six votes to four.This time, the writers really don't have a whole lot to say about this Amendment. This one could be called just "housekeeping" language, but it's a little more than that.
There were no term limits for any office written into the US Constitution. The idea was truly that those in office were public servants and wouldn't want or need to stay for decades It was simply a convention, not any law, that the the US President would stay in office 2 terms max., until FDR came along. Franklin Roosevelt, a big piece of the New York power structure, was first elected President in 1932*, beating out Republican incumbent Herbert Hoover by 54.5% to 39.5% of the popular votes (472 to 59 EVs).
FDR won another landslide victory over R-Al Landon, with 61% to 31.5% (523 to 8 EVs) in 1936, because, the guy was supposedly getting us out of the Great Depression that whole decade**. We had to keep all that going, I guess. Then, by next Presidential election, in 1940, war was not necessarily imminent, but there were plenty of people who wanted it to be. (I'll leave that part of history to guys like Pat Buchanan and Ron Unz.) Roosevelt won an unprecedented 3rd term in 1940 election by 55% to 45% (I've been rounding to the nearest 1/2%) (449 to 82 EVs). Americans just had to "stay the course" or something. I'm guessing that's the kind of thing they were told.
Of course, by November of 1944, the Commander in Chief had us winning the war in Europe, with still a 6 month stretch of battles to go, and the war in the Pacific was on-going. You can't ditch the guy then, right? I don't agree, of course - the guy's not a General - those guys will still be doing the same job either way. After all, now with wars running for near 20 years, we switch Presidents multiple times, and just continue the "spreading of Democracy".***
Anyway, in 1944, the Presidential election was actually a slight bit closer of a race, with Roosevelt defeating R-Thomas Dewey by 53.5% to 46% (432 to 99 EVs). Look at this Wiki page for lots more detail on all of these.
That's the history, and one can see why some in the Congress and the public (of whom the majority of still voted for the guy for term4!) had had enough. What surprised me just now in looking at the dates, is that this Amendment was not even passed until March of 1947 and not ratified until February of 1951. The action in Congress was during President Harry Trumans' first term, and the ratification was in the middle of his 2nd term. One can see by the 2nd clause, looking like it's directed to help FDR, was written to help Harry Truman instead, who wanted another term that would have gotten him 11 and three-quarters years in office, had he not been beaten in the 1952 early primary in New Hampshire and promptly bailed out. (Of course, he'd have probably lost against Ike anyway - Ike beat D-Adlai Stevenson by 55% to 44% (442 to 89 EVs)). Hey, they tried for you with clause 2 of Section I, Harry, now go home.
It seems that the Congressional voters for the bill, the State legislators that voted for ratification, the writers of the interpretation page, and we at Peak Stupidity are/were all in agreement that Amendment XXII was a good one. That's what, only about 2 now, and really, Amendment XXI was nothing but a repeal of another real dud.
I guess those "public servants" in Congress and the State legislators are more civil than your current era bloggers, such as yours truly. Were I on any of these committees, I would have added a Section 3:
And fuck you, FDR, you Socialist asshole!
PS: That Section 2 of this Amendment is the same language as in 3 others: Amendments XVIII, XX, and XXI all had this language, as did the aborted ERA (hence the abortion of it). That's a good idea for the modern age, when politics is just all pervasive and goes on and on ... They all have the same 7-year limit, as, if we can't decide by then, maybe it's not some brilliant idea after all.
* As a Democrat candidate VP, Roosevelt lost the Election of 1920 to Peak Stupidity's favorite, Mr. Calvin Coolidge. who was the VP running mate of Warren G. Harding. Damn I wish I could have been there nearly a century ago, pulling the lever for my man Silent Cal back in '24!
** It just got worse in 1937 again. I will add, to be fair, that some say that if President Roosevelt hadn't implemented some of the Socialist policies, the US may have had a real time preventing Communists from taking over. I dunno...
*** Think about this: There have been 3 Presidents as Commander-in-Chiefs of the (undeclared) war in Afghanistan, 2 of them for 2 terms!
[UPDATED later on 11/30:] Per Mr. Blanc's correction, that 1920 race was the Warrent Harding defeat of James Cox. Roosevelt v. Coolidge was on the Vice-Presidential side. * Footnote corrected. Thank you, Mr. Blanc!
Escape from Stupidity II
Posted On: Saturday - November 28th 2020 8:49PM MST
In Topics:   General Stupidity  Music
This is a sequel to Escape from Stupidity. There are no Steve McQueen motorcycle chase scenes, just kids playing with big sticks.
After a fairly friendly run-in with the School Resource Officer, aka, cop, last week, we also had another pleasant experience at the park. No, that alone does not make a Peak Stupidity post. It's just that this time, we got even more out of the era of hysteria, if only temporarily, as the 4 kids grabbed some 8-10 ft. long sticks* and had sword fights for half an hour!
It was my boy, 2 kids a bit younger, and a girl from his class who amazingly likes to play with the boys. What was so enjoyable to me was that there were no freaked-out Moms and no scolding. The Mom of one of the boys was gone, entrusting me with her boy, and then the Dad of the two other kids was raking leaves across the street at their house (great location!).
Face masks were the least of anyone's worries. Yeah, one boy got hit in the face, but he told me quickly "I'm alright", as if afraid I was about to tell them to stop. I do believe the school Principal would have had a early-onset heart attack were this happening during recess. She doesn't even allow balls, so that the kids end up throwing shoes at each other!
OK, I've got my safe space now from the Kung Flu stupidity. Thank you all for reading the blog. Posts are lined up for next week.
* They were pieces of some shrubbery that had gotten out of hand, I guess, but with the leaves and other branches stripped off.
C'mon guys, it's all tribalism nowadays!
Posted On: Saturday - November 28th 2020 1:53PM MST
In Topics:   Elections '16 - '20  Immigration Stupidity  Websites  California  Pundits  Race/Genetics
(You're right. Peak Stupidity has seriously overused this line from Chevy Chase in the old movie Fletch, but c'mon guys, it's all memes these days! Yeah, I know, I skipped the "whaddya' need, a refresher course?" part.)
I want to mention a very good article on California's rejection of its Proposition 16* a few weeks ago. The article, by pundit David Cole, is California Secedes From Black America.
Mr. Cole is a Jewish pundit who was formerly heavily involved in Hollywood, but pissed off the whole crowd with his views. He changed his name, or picked up this pen name, I should say, and writes stuff that I am about 95% in agreement with. That's at least from what I've read of him on Takimag, or "Taki's Magazine", as the banner up top now says (trying to look back like real magazine, I guess??)
Speaking of the Takimag site, as I went to the main page to find the Cole article in question, it's gone down the tubes in 3 ways over the last couple of years. The first thing was the doing away with the comments. Comments bring in a lot of readers. At some point, I'd gotten sick of them myself anyway, as the takimag crowd had a lot of commenters who would argue a long thread about minute details of history having nothing directly to do with the posts. I'm sure they had fun at it, but between that and the hidden comments you had to click to open up, I thought it was really wasting my time. (Who am I to criticize the format of a comment section is another subject, haha.) Still, if one is bored ...
Secondly, the format was changed. I don't like these kinds of changes to begin with, and if it's not in the order I'm used to, I may just bail out.
Thirdly, I have bailed out, also because I don't see any of the good writers I'd follow anymore on the site. Other than the syndicated Ann Coulter, who I can read on thousands of sites elsewhere, there are the Steve Sailer weekly columns that I get to from links on his blog, and then I like this David Cole**.
Before I get to this gist of post about this California referendum, let me categorically state that California is dead to me, dead to me, ya' hear? They called it Paradise, rightly so, about half a century ago. Due to that long a period of socialism and immigration stupidity, doubling the population (mo people, mo problems!), they kissed it goodbye. (That's all explained in that old post.)
Back to the present day, Mr. Cole explains the real reasons for the rejection of Proposition 16 in California. The proposition was about getting rid of the legal restraints on Affirmative Action in government employment, education, and contracting in the former Golden State. That doesn't mean there aren't plenty of "extra-legal" ways of arranging for White men to be screwed over, but they wanted to be on the up and up there. This was "amazingly" rejected. The word's in quotes, because the amazement comes from conservatives and the left both, who are deluded as to what's really going on with the tower of Babel that is California and California politics. Tribalism rules now. Mr. Cole explains the stupidity of both the left and the right in their interpretations of how the vote went wrong or went right, respectively. First, he explains the battle:
And on the subject of Californians and electoral surprises, commentators left and right have been puzzling over the fact that we defeated an attempt to bring affirmative action back to a state that banished it in 1996. Proposition 16, which would have allowed for favoritism of nonwhites in public employment, education, and contracting, lost by a wide margin. Yet the backers of Prop. 16 outspent the opposition $30 million to $2 million. And what a list of backers it was! The California Democrat Party and every Democrat officeholder in the state championed Prop. 16, as did every major newspaper. Every leftist “social justice” organization—the ACLU, NAACP, NOW, the ADL, BLM, even the Sierra Club and the PTA—backed Prop. 16. So did the Chamber of Commerce, Twitter, Facebook, Netflix, Microsoft, Uber, Dropbox, Reddit, Lyft, Yelp, AirBnB, Instacart, Gap, Levi’s, United Airlines, Wells Fargo, the 49ers, the Giants, and the Oakland A’s.Holy crap. Remember these people. If you care, then I don't know what to tell you - get off the social media, don't watch movies, don't travel, hold your money in cash, property and precious metals, take over the PTO (not PTA now), and, most definitely***
Soros backed it. The Chan/Zuckerberg Initiative backed it. Ava DuVernay backed it. Kaiser, Blue Shield, and PG&E backed it.
DON'T DONATE ONE RED CENT TO THE SIERRA CLUB, EVER!!
Sorry, where was I... Yeah, it was the little people against that PC Globalist juggernaut, but this is not particularly a win for the White man. After all, White people, and especially conservative White people are a small minority in the State of California. This was a tribal thing. The few conservative whites couldn't have voted this down. It's not 1970 anymore.
No, the Hispanics and Asians, both the Chinese and the •Indian immigrants, have no love for the few black race hustlers left in California. They don't feel guilty about anything, even things they probably ought to, like being grateful to have left their shitholes and being able to live in what lots of them have turned into Paradise Lost. The Chinese care about the Chinese, the •Indians care about the •Indians, and the huge Hispanic population cares about the Hispanics. None of them believe that this AA is going the help their tribe or they'd have voted otherwise. Constitutional principles, fairness, all that? Not a factor.
Mr. Cole explains that the stupidity of the lefties' interpretation of the election result, that the proposition was written in a confusing manner, because voting YES is rejecting older law that prohibits AA:
No, the wording of the proposition was not confusing. The ballot summary was crystal clear: “Proposition 16 permits government decision-making policies to consider race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin to address diversity.” That’s hardly Aramaic.If the California voters couldn't understand that language (per the lefties), then maybe we can get them onboard with some voting restrictions. We could start with property ownership, then maybe sex, then, if we could work together really ambitiously, we could draw up some restrictions based on being an American citizen even. If that is a bridge too far, how about just a working knowledge of English? I mean, we all don't want these mistakes to continue to be made in the future.
I want to include this part just to show that David Cole is a funny guy too:
And knowing what Prop. 16 was, whites, Asians, and Latinos in California voted against it. Only blacks overwhelmingly supported it. And at a paltry 5.8% of the state population, black “overwhelming support” plus two bucks buys you a McNugget and Coke.Now, as for the establishment Conservatives, they are very happy about the result, thinking this proves that these big minority groups rejected identity politics:
Meanwhile, establishment conservatives at National Review, Hot Air, and elsewhere took the defeat of Prop. 16 as proof that “minority voters reject identity politics,” because inside every Ibram Kendi is a Thomas Sowell crying to be freed. “Demography is not destiny,” wrote John Sexton at Hot Air; nonwhites are “opting out” of the Democrat identity-politics machine.[My bolding to point out the snark.] Mr. Cole answers that stupidity here:
But no, Prager U grads, Latinos and Asians did not rebuff Prop. 16 because they “rejected identity politics.” Something was indeed “rejected,” but no one wants to acknowledge what it was. Here’s a simple truth that none of the analysts left or right are willing to admit: Prop. 16 was a referendum on blacks. Not “diversity,” not “identity politics,” but blacks. Everyone with half a brain understood that Prop. 16 was there to help blacks, and blacks alone. Asians and Latinos are doing exceptionally well in the UC system (Asians are overrepresented, and Latinos, represented at roughly their percentage of the population, outnumber non-Hispanic whites). Blacks are the ones who need the “special help.” They’re the ones who feel like they can’t compete without being given extra points for melanin.There's a lot more there. That was a very illustrative article about a place that is far gone down the road of immigration stupidity and tribalism. I've long given up on California. Peak Stupidity noted that California was the epicenter of much of our stupidity in our about page even. It's time to find a solid doorway, for The Big One.
Proposition 16 posed a question to the people of California: Wanna help a brother out?
And Californians said no.
* Yeah, these numbers have gone around back through 1 again. They've had a LOT of them over the years! I kind of like the referendum idea - it works great in a place full of educated voters, but, then that gets us back to the subject of this post, speaking of coming around...
** My 2nd favorite writer behind Steve Sailer on that site was Jim Goad, whom we praised on this site long ago. He is gone from Takimag, per commenters under his article Tom Metzger, American Radical (April 9, 1938-November 4, 2020), which appeared on unz.com. I hope Mr. Ron Unz makes Jim Goad's writing into a column on his site.
*** You're gonna want to read Part 2 too.
Chicken suits and soap water enemas
Posted On: Friday - November 27th 2020 4:02PM MST
In Topics:   Humor  Healthcare Stupidity
This one comes from Mr. Anon, who comments here and on iSteve Sailer's blog, which we all know and love. Mr. Sailer, though not nearly the panicker* about the Kung Flu he has been, gives out continual info about the vaccines that have been coming out. I don't think Mr. Sailer has really got into his head how much the whole COVID-19 thing has been, is, and will be more, used as a weapon by Totalitarians.
Mr. Anon's comment under one of these posts a great way to put this:
Most western countries, and many states in the U.S. have mask mandates and have had them for months now. And yet the virus, we are told, is peaking again. Of course we will also be told “Well, imagine how bad it would be if there weren’t mask-mandates”. Someday we will all be saying “Well, imagine how bad the pandemic would be if we weren’t all wearing chicken-suits and getting daily soap-water enemas!” or whatever our public-health wardens next deem to be “the science”.Mr. Adam Smith, somewhat of an image guru, has just the picture to go along with Mr. Anon's comment (also taken straight off that blog comment thread):
Mr. Smith, if this is some kind of patented enema-ready chicken suit of yours, or at least a copywritten picture of such a suit, Peak Stupidity's legal team apology and disclaimer is at the bottom.**
* I really don't have a better term. Mr. Sailer has always been very logical about things, and he never got hysterical by any means. However, from the inundation of posts with very pessimistic looks on the COVID-19 business onto his blog from March through May of this year, he at least used to be on the (Mr. E.H, Hail's term) "pro-panic" side of things.
** We own nothing! Nothing! - PS Legal Council, on retainer from Dewey, Cheatem, and Howe.
The Peak of Stupidity has been postponed...
Posted On: Friday - November 27th 2020 3:40PM MST
In Topics:   General Stupidity  Websites
... due to a severe, order-of-magnitude sized overage that was not at all expected at time of the creation of this blog. Peak Stupidity went on
Yeah, no kidding. We were way, way off!
From the looks of it, though I'll say in our favor that the graph was created at least a year before the blog cranked up live, we were very optimistic thinking that 2018 would be when stupidity peaked. Who could have foreseen all the new flavors of stupidity that have come about in the intervening years? This 9-months-running Kung Flu PanicFest was just a twinkle in some idiots' eyes when we started this blog. America and the Western World in general, but especially Washington, FS, the Capital of Stupidity, have grown in ways unimaginable in our 4 years in operation. Seed money from all over has been flowing in to make us the virtual Silly-con valley of Stupidity.
You readers have been receiving a cost-free education in Stupidity. After 4 years, you deserve some kind of certificate or something. Your education has been worth much more than that received from many in some of our best Ivy-, or at least Kudzu-league schools, for which people are in hoc for mortgage-sized sums... that will soon be "written off" by the Super-Spreader. You could have done a lot worse with your time spent:
Posting has been really steady over this long term. This post number is 26 posts short of being twice the 2-year blogversary number. Site visits are up from about 65,000 for the '19 calendar year up to over 100,000 (easily) projected for the full 2020. At the end of the year, page views will have gone from 250,000 or so up to 350,000. Spread the word. The peak may not be so nigh. There's more time to read before the Peak SHTF.
PS: For thoughts from our other year blogversaries, see the posts at 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years.
Happy Thanksgiving 2020
Posted On: Thursday - November 26th 2020 9:19AM MST
In Topics:   General Stupidity
We've heard a lot about how the year 2020 itself has been the problem ... somehow, on it's own. Nope, there's nothing about the stupidity of this year (so far!) that cannot be pinned down to those responsible. The problem is only that they are not being held responsible.
We can all be thankful for our health, our families, and for the days we have. I would like to have seen another 4-year slight reprieve from the deepest stupidity that a Trump win would have given us. (On the election, who knows, still?)
One thing that helps with my coping with the stupidity inundation is talking over it with friends. We're not going to find many solutions, but it's still entertaining. A good friend of mine died a little before Thanksgiving last year. He was always good for a long talk once a week or so. Maybe we agreed on only 90% of things, but I sure do miss that. Another friend can will talk on the phone about it, but he is too far away to come by.
I am thankful that my family is fairly well on-board with what is going on and what we have to think of doing next. It wasn't always like this. My wife's schedule of catching up with the big picture that I try to relate to her has shifted from a 5 - 10 year lag to something like a year or 2. I will write my post about this later this week, I think.
Also, I am thankful now to have the commenters on this blog. Though I know people are viewing the pages at least, if not reading, from the stats, it's great to hear directly from you who comment in. Thank you all. This and Steve Sailer's blog, with the good commenters there, including almost all of you too, are a great help.
T HA N K S G I V I N G !
I should be back on here tomorrow.
Tampax marketing genius doubles the market over
Posted On: Tuesday - November 24th 2020 8:25PM MST
In Topics:   Music  Humor  Political Correctness  Salesmen  Female Stupidity  Big-Biz Stupidity
Genius, sheer marketing genius!
I mean the "New Coke! OK, we hear you, it sucks. Now, New Coke AND Classic Coke! New Coke? Oh, you don't want that crap anyway." campaign was damn clever, you know, to make the product visible and all. Some people would have never heard of soft drinks otherwise, I guess ... However, I don't think it changed the size of the market, so... actually, what was the point again?
This campaign, though, involved some real out of the box thinking! Materials and methods to stem the flow, if you will (well, you'd better!), of menstrual blood have been around since the 15th century BC, per Wiki. That was even before the writing of Proverbs 25:24! (We'll get to in a bit.) More recently, Tampax started selling their products in 1933. That's 87 years of sales, and it took just this one guy and his tweet to double the market. I don't think this was meant to be a joke. The tweet looks like the real deal - it doesn't have blood stains, but there is that blue check mark.
The same wiki page says "The average consumer may use approximately 11,400 tampons in her lifetime (if using only tampons)." Whoa, wiki, that there's some pretty offensive stuff, assuming it's women generating all that toxic waste. We men can generate a few tons of it ourselves if we put our minds to it, you sexists. Yes, we can!
The tranny market for Tampax is somewhat limited, as Peak Stupidity discussed already in Can Male to Female Transexuals have Periods?. We delved into the plumbing tweaks that would need to be involved, not beyond the capabilities of modern engineering and surgical practices, but our question was "why?!"
As far as marketing goes, it's time to go with the tide of diversity and inclusion and sell to men in general. Why didn't someone think of this before? If a tweet says that men can have periods, in this politically correct country of ours, who can argue with that? People are much too scared to stand up and shout out "the Emperor has no clothes!", or in this case "these men have no vaginas!" With a strong ad campaign, plenty of male TV viewers can be convinced to find a hole somewhere in which to put these things. It may not be so obvious as to what time of the month to apply them, but we can find out on the Tampax for Men application, excuse me, "app", Ragtime 2.0.
One does wonder whether a passage in the Bible, Proverbs 25:24, may need to be changed now to be more inclusive. Peak Stupidity wrote in part 2 on periods - the 2nd half of that post:
It is something that many religious texts have discussed over the millennia. Proverb 25:24 of the Old Testament, for example says "It is better to dwell in the corner of the housetop, than with a brawling woman and in a wide house.". [King James Version]. Now, this must be taken in light of the times in which it was written. What I mean is, the roofs were flat back then. All the proverbs in the world aren't going to help you when you roll off a 50% slope and fall 10 ft to your death. Anyway, details, details ... modern interpretation could easily have us read "woman on the rag" for "brawling woman" and "man-cave" for "corner of a house top". That is the point, we men need plans for these 2-5 day periods to be completely away, but it must be constructive time for us too - we could be working on updates to blog software just as a random example.Next, we will have to get an apology from Vincent Furnier, who, while using a nice trans-sexual name like Alice Cooper, had that old fashioned notion that, pssshaaaww, Only Women Bleed.
PS: If you have noted the date of this informative tweet, you may wonder about the delay in the writing of this post. Peak Stupidity was going to write it in a timely manner, but that was a bad time for this blogging. In mid-September, or around that period, all my best typing fingers were totally cramped up, all my friends and family were acting weird and mean to me, and life was just meaningless. All those people have changed back to being normal now, so it was time to write the post.
* Though I met an engineer who worked for a company that made machines for the Proctor & Gamble tampon production line in Cincinnati. The output of one of the huge machines was something like 10 tampons/second. If something got out of whack, whoa, talk about the supervisor being on the rag!