Pancho and Lefty - Willie and Merle
Posted On: Monday - June 19th 2017 8:40PM MST
In Topics: Music
From the outlaw country days, this song's been in my head since writing the word "Federale", the handle for the VDare writer linked to in our previous post.
Willie Nelson and Merle Haggard sing a balled about Ole Mexico:
"All the Federales say
they could have had him any day.
They only let him slip away...
out of kindness, I suppose."
No comments - Click here to start thread
Elon Musk of Tesla, Inc (SSE*) apparently scared about Global Climate Disruption(TM)
Posted On: Monday - June 19th 2017 8:14PM MST
In Topics: Global Climate Stupidity Trump Globalists Environmental Stupidity
OK, just to explain the title first, "SSE" is State Supported Enterprise in the old Red China or even modern pink China lingo. That really means Taxpayer Supported Enterprise when you follow the money. Next, by "apparently" scared, we mean it serves a company that runs on sales linked to tax credits to it's customers well to keep this Global Climate DisruptionTM scam, er, PROBLEM big. No, he is not really scared.
I will also say as a 2nd introductory paragraph here, that it is kind of unusual for VDare to have an interest in this purely financial, crony capitalism stuff as they focus almost exclusively on all things immigration (but, read the article and the immigration angle comes in, as Mr. Musk doesn't seem to want Americans working for his American-taxpayer supported companies.) VDare is just a go-to site for me, but I guess this story can be seen plenty of places elsewhere.
A writer with the handle "Federale" (he used to be in the immigration or border patrol part of the Feral Gov't, and this word brings connotations of Ole Mehico) wrote Elon Musk Attacks Trump Over “Climate Change”,Trump Should Respond (Tesla Subsidies, H-1B, Illegal Labor) yesterday. The gist of the specific story is that Mr. Musk, flamboyant oxymoronicly-government-subsidized-entrepreneur has resigned from 2 advisory councils for Trump.
So, the welfare queen Elon Musk has quit two advisory councils serving President Trump. So, the welfare queen Elon Musk has quit two advisory councils serving President Trump. This is quite rich for Musk, whose sales of Tesla cars tank once subsidies are withdrawn.Oh, my 2 favorite sites - I see Federale then excerpts quotes from Zerohedge's Tyler Durden, It’s Confirmed: Without Government Subsidies, Tesla Sales Implode from a week back (I missed that - can't read em all.).
[stuff from original Business Insider article:]
This The Tesla and SpaceX CEO said on Wednesday that he would have “no choice” but to leave the two advisory councils he sits on if the US withdrew from the landmark climate deal — a commitment he reiterated on Thursday after Trump made the announcement.
“Am departing presidential councils,” Musk tweeted. “Climate change is real. is quite rich for Musk, whose sales of Tesla cars tank once subsidies are withdrawn.
Peak Stupidity is not Peak Oil, but we have nothing against electric cars in general. However, as our libertarian opinions on financial issues show - and will some more - we do not cotton to this subsidized crap. Why is this Elon Musk on ANY kind of advisory council to begin with, if his company is only in business due to taxpayer-stolen support? He should have advisory committees talking to his ass, not the other way around. Sit down Musk, and let some engineers tell you whether "Climate change is REAL - OMG!"
The real story here is more about Trump than this Musk character. I am NOT pleased at his lack of action on the immigration problem, meaning the stuff the the Chief Executive can get done now! His not playing along with the climate alarmist chicken little crowd, as also noted before here, just makes me still glad this guy is US President right now. It's really not that this is anything that will change the status quo - this Paris Committee would probably just jibber-jabber and no change would really be forthcoming anyway. Don't get me wrong though - in the long run these people want this Global Climate DisruptionTM stuff to enable even greater control of the non-elite population of the whole world.
Musk can go back to the plant, that's fine, but Trump has made me smile again with this move. It is indeed something that gives me hope that maybe he has not been neoconned or deep-stated to let the American people down yet again.
No comments - Click here to start thread
Just tryin' to be friendly - not worth it hardly anymore.
Posted On: Monday - June 19th 2017 7:12PM MST
In Topics: Curmudgeonry Race/Genetics
This is only the 2nd post with the Race/Genetics topic key. I don't like to write about this stuff because people get to fuming about this truth, and I've got plenty of other stuff to write about. However, this was just today, so hopefully I can put another post above it that I've been intending to write.
Where I live there is a fairly large percentage of black people in general, maybe 30% on a 5-mile scale (zooming in too much or out too much skews results) - this is the scale one's local places, say the stores and bike rides, etc. It is a generally friendly part of the country, if one would compare it to say, Massachusetts (home of the Massholes, so that is the other end of the scale, I suppose). In the past, it seems that black or white, people would still say hello to people walking on the street or start a short conversation at the store randomly and that sort of thing.
Well, it's getting hard to do that in some ways, or at least between me and black guys. I don't mean a whole group of them, usually worth avoiding, but just a one guy. At the stoplight, I saw this old black guy look at me when crossing the street between my truck and the one in front of me at the read light. He was taking a slight shortcut off of crossing at the walk, and I'd have looked at the driver too. With everyone all on the electronics these days, cars randomly accelerate or at least let off the brake and roll without any reason and all sorts of things. You SHOULD look the driver in the eye. I waved back as in "I see ya, no problem". That guy got about 2 ft. past me, onto a piece of the median, than sure enough "Hey, you got a buck?" (my window was rolled down). I did see that coming, but was still hoping this one guy might be the 1 in 10 nowadays that didn't have to take advantage of a guy just being friendly.
It wasn't like I was in a BMW X-5 either, this was a 25 year-old truck that badly needs a paint job. What, every white guy feels guilty because one of your ancestors you never heard about 155 years ago was a slave? (I figure about every one of us has got ancestors like that, if you go back far enough.) Hey, buddy, I'm not that guy! I just told him "Hell no, I was just letting you know I had you in sight." Why would he get perturbed by that, I don't know, but he seemed a bit perturbed. Me too, now, you can't even be friendly to some people - may as well live in Massachusetts if it's gonna be like this. Oh, except the Massholes are worse - forget I said that.
No comments - Click here to start thread
"Third Rate Romance" by The Amazing Rhythm Aces
Posted On: Saturday - June 17th 2017 4:59PM MST
In Topics: Music
This is mid-1970's music by a one-hit band called The Amazing Rhythm Aces. Great song, but that's about all I know about it.
Sitting at a fancy table, in a ritzy restaurant;
she was staring at her coffee cup;
he was trying to keep his courage up by applying booze.
The talk was small when they talked at all;
they both knew what they wanted.
There was no need to talk about it.
They were old enough to [unintelligible], and still keep it loose.
Then she said, "You don't look like my type,
but I guess you'll do."
Third rate romance, low rent rendezvous.
He said, "I'll even tell you I love you, if you want me to."
Third rate romance, low rent rendezvous.
[Guitar solo]
They left the bar, they got in his car, and they drove away;
He drove to the Family Inn;
she didn't even have to pretend,
she didn't know what for.
And he went to the desk,
and made his request while she waited outside.
And he came back with the key and
she said "Give it to me and I'll unlock the door."
She kept sayin "I've never done this kind of thing before, have you?"
Third rate romance, low rent rendezvous.
He said, "Yes I have, but only a time or two."
Third rate romance, low rent rendezvous.
Third rate romance, low rent rendezvous.
Third rate romance, low rent rendezvous.
These great 1970's lyrics were by Russell Smith.
Comments (2)
The Deep State vs. Donald Trump - remember Candidate Ross Perot?
Posted On: Saturday - June 17th 2017 3:00PM MST
In Topics: History Trump US Feral Government Deep State
Two months back, in wondering what is President Trump's problem, as far as keeping his campaign promises to us, Peak Stupidity had this post, Has Trump been Neo-conned?. That could have been called Deep State vs. Trump, as in the original definition of the Deep State, explained here.
In this excerpt, concerning the question of has the President been already neoconned, we said:
It could be that some threats were made to the effect of "Look what happened to JFK" or "We already put old Ronnie in his place the 1st year - we may choose a larger caliber than .22 this time". It makes me really wonder what happened during the Ross Perot campaign in summer of '92. To me, Mr. Perot was the closest thing we had to a Donald Trump in the recent past. I should say, Mr. Trump was the closest thing to a Ross Perot. Mr. Perot, if you recall, or bing it, dropped out of a fairly successful campaign due to concerns about the safety of his family. This was a business leader/entrepreneur with about the order of magnitude of wealth as Donald Trump. You don't seem to hear much about what really happened in July 1992, and Perot, after re-entering the race received almost 19% of the popular vote.
Yeah, now about the businessman Ross Perot (good short biography), you won't hear much about the guy anymore. His on-again/off-again presidential campaign has a lot of parallels to the successful campaign of Donald Trump. Both were called "populists", I suppose meaning they weren't political insiders (nothing wrong with that). They both had a lot of insight, being big-businessmen (Ross was not a big businessman, but he was indeed a big-businessman ;-} ), worried the coming devastation to American manufacturing from trade deals that were bi-partisan (meaning involving traitors on "both sides of the aisle"). Both these guys campaigned on behalf of middle class Americans, which you haven't seen in the major parties since, arguably, Ronald Reagan, maybe back to Carter/Ford or who knows how far back?
Ross Perot ran for a 3rd party ticket in 1992, eventually named the "Reform Party", but that name may have come later on. However, by 2016 primary time, or even 2012 with Ron Paul, the 3rd party option had almost been completely suppressed by the 2 wings of our red/blue = purple party with complicity of the Gov't Media, aka Lyin' Press.
From the www.biography.com link above on the 1992 presidential campaign:
His campaign seemed to gather momentum as the political race heated up. Perot promoted himself as a reformer, building on his success with the Texas Public Education system in the 1980s. But, in July, he dropped out of the race, later claiming that the Republican Party had plans to embarrass his daughter Carolyn before her wedding. According to The New York Times, Perot believed that the Bush campaign was going to start a rumor about his daughter's sexuality.
Perot returned to the race in October with only weeks left before the election. Despite this setback, he managed to garner nearly 19 percent of the popular vote. Perot was the first independent candidate since Teddy Roosevelt in 1912 to receive this large of a share of the popular vote. Still the lion's share of voters chose Democrat Bill Clinton. Perot faced off against Clinton again in 1996, but his campaign failed to win over much public support.
Well, this writer was around, and let me tell you, the withdrawal in the summer of '92 was a real let down. In those years, even till about 1995, when I started to notice that every new change in every level of government from then on was always to the side of bigger government, a bigger police state, and less liberty, it seemed people were around who could and would change things for the better. Ross Perot was one such guy. Per the biography above, Mr. Perot rejoined the race, and did get that huge 19% of the vote, even after the (what I thought was) drama of the summer.
I ended up not voting for Mr. Perot based on what I read in the Lyin' Press with no more explanations than "basically his is a flake", and don't feel good about that. No, BTW, I absolutely DID NOT vote for the psychopath Bill Clinton**, nor did I vote for the CIA-endorsed George H. W. Bush. I voted Libertarian again... and again... and again (to no obvious effect!) The reason I wrote "(what I thought was) drama" above was due to my still great trust in the Lyin' Press - we didn't even call it the MSM yet at the time, just "THE NEWS". I think now that Mr. Perot was seriously threatened in some way. Possibly it was not just about his daughter, and definitely not just a threat to embarrass someone - that was possibly all he could say.
Lookit, George Bush was former CIA big cheese. If he wanted to win, he needed to get Mr. Perot out of the race. I'm sure Mr. Bush had the help on speed dial to take care of it. It doesn't really need to involve physical threats. That would be especially true now, as almost everyone in high position has many things in databases in a large server farm in UTAH (backed-up somewhere else, unfortunately) that he doesn't want known by everyone. This is the Deep State in action. As far as his rejoining the campaign goes, possibly Mr. Perot was powerful enough to get his threats removed or maybe just determined enough to ignore them. Who knows?
It's just a big possibility, and that brings us to Donald Trump's campaign, who made it all the way through. Was it that he's squeaky clean? No, I'm sure he has plenty of vices, but we know about the women, and some of what was disgraceful back in 1992 was completely normal by 2016! It's not like nobody tried to bring up scandals, but with the extreme distrust of the Lyin' Press now, many of them "won't take" for patriotic Americans. We are beyond that, if the guy's gonna be on our side even a little bit.
Donald Trump may just be getting the brunt of the Deep State treatment as President, which explain why he is letting us down only just now.
-------------------------------------
As an aside, there are plenty of articles out there that would argue about whether most of Mr. Perot's votes came from would-be Bush voters or not. I would bet on it (maybe in the 60% range, not all of them.) Hopefully, a few good links to this issue will be forthcoming. Gotta go though.
-------------------------------------
* At least Perot had a sense of humor, while Øb☭ma was all ears too, without one.
** "Psychopath" should probably be "psychopaths" and "Clinton" should probably be "the Clintons", as even back then, the idea was brought up (by the Hildabeast) that the Hildabeast would be a working first beast. She had made the comment back then that she wouldn't be just baking cookies like some housewife. I guess Bill couldn't put a stop to that feminism, as she probably knew about more people killed by him than she had had offed at that juncture. ("Hey, just shut your mouth, Billy, I could get you put away for 31 murder-ones and a few dozen manslaughters." "Oh, yeah, bitch, I know about 3 of yours, you'll get 3 life sentences, and I'll get 31 ... better hush up right now!")
No comments - Click here to start thread
Mark Steyn 3-hour interview on CSPAN-2 BookTV
Posted On: Friday - June 16th 2017 12:44PM MST
In Topics: Immigration Stupidity Pundits
This post is just a follow-up to another post here on Peak Stupidity from a coupla weeks back entitled Childless European Leaders. I had digressed to writing about a nice interview with the pundit Mark Steyn, just mentioned in the previous post. If you've got 3 hours, it is really nice, first of all, to listen to a relaxed interview vs. a 3-minute talking-heads shout-off. The interview, in 2012, was on the CSPAN2 show called "Book TV" and the fact that you probably haven't heard of it explains how they can do 3 hour interviews. Hurray for youtube that it's on there! The interviewer is a guy named Peter Slen, who comes across so mellow and gives Mr. Steyn a chance to give complete answers to his questions.
Mark Steyn also gave answers to callers' questions. I can't remember how many callers, as I watched this whole thing more than 1/2 year ago, but in my post on the childless Euro leaders, I wrote about how I would have answered the caller.
Can I excerpt my own blog here? [Sure, saves me fixing typos for a while! - Ed.]
Were I Mark Steyn, here would be my reply: "You've got compassion lady, but how do you know WE don't. We just think a little into the future, as men have to, to build a civilization. Our compassion may extend a bit further than yours, to a point when my and your kids are living in Mexico, even though they never moved residence. How could you explain to your grandchildren how much YOUR compassion caused the country to change from the damn good one you grew up in to Mexico del Norte? Also, lady, were you a family-oriented person, you would be putting YOUR family's welfare over those of the Mexicans, as that's what being a Mom means! Have some compassion without the side of stupidity."Well, now that I think of it, I still like my answer, but it doesn't quite fit in with the tone of the show. I imagine Mr. Steyn could have done better, but you've got to get this "Compassionate" crap out into the light. Compassion can be pretty damn evil if there's no thought behind it.
Watch the whole interview, if you've got time:
Addendum: I haven't followed the story on the fire that burned up that apartment building full of Moslems in London, but Mark Steyn has a great article on it. This one will show you how good his writing is, and his opinions.
I think Mr. Steyn's site is kind of disjointed, and I don't visit it ofter, but he has his regular weekly (or more often) columns on there, mixed in with reviews of plays and show tunes or something that he really gets into.
*******************************************
UPDATE [6/17 morning:] Addendum on new Mark Steyn
article on London Fire.
*******************************************
Comments (3)
First Nations and the Spirits Communities
Posted On: Thursday - June 15th 2017 8:01PM MST
In Topics: Humor Political Correctness
Well, we've come a long way, baby, in terms of Political Correctness since 1993. With regards to the American Indians (see previous link for humor), there is new terminology out there that we all need to grasp, and use in our daily lives to "get with the program".
The term "Indian" could cause some confusion to some people who never heard of Christopher Columbus, I suppose and wonder about that moniker for the thousands of tribes that used to be spread out across what got built into America. I don't think it's that difficult, and we've got 2 modes of differentiation between them and the ones from the subcontinent of Asia:
a) "Feather" vs. "Dot"
b) "Casino" vs. "Tech Support"
Easy, peasy? Apparently not, as "Native American" was thought up 25 years back or so as a substitute term that we should all know and use. It's caused confusion already as many of
Let's digress for just a paragraph or two up to the Great White North. Believe it or not, they are more PC than we are in America. They're number 1! "O Canada!, Fuck yeah!" They even prosecute writers like Mark Steyn who "Fought the Law and the Law
Here's a story: Back as far as 10 years ago, some Canadian terminology was available for my enlightenment, and I was a rube. On a trip to a fishing lodge way up there, I overheard one of the owners of the lodge speaking of the "First Nations" people staying at the lodge multiple times. They would be gone, and we would have a few days there afterwards. "Oh, your last group was a bunch of bankers?" I asked. Yes, does it not sound like a bank? Well, apparently not, as that is the Canadian term for Indians!
Back in America now, the newest term I was informed about < 1 week ago is the "Spirit Community". The Indians are really in touch with the Spirits, I guess. This term does not roll of the tongue easily, has too many syllables, but mainly I just think someone in that PC-Euphemism dept. made a typo. Unbelievable, I know, a mistake made by people in the government - we are not sending our best bureaucrats! I'm sure the term is supposed to be "Spirits Communities:. That extra "s" puts it in context - "Spirits" as in "Distilled Spirits". Now, I get it. Like I said, the Indians are really in touch with the Spirits. I am PC-current now, and ready to socialize in mixed company again.
Let's stay PC and classy!
Another story: Yeah, we make lots of light of things at Peak Stupidity, but I do have some respect for people, and this is about a guy who respected his ancestors more than worrying about this PC crap. I was at a plant out in the West and saw a guy with a cap that had big letters FBI. What would he be doing there, and from his looks, he was no FBI guy. "You're not an FBI guy", I said. No, he smiled, "Full Blooded Indian". I liked that.
No comments - Click here to start thread
Football talk in the morning
Posted On: Thursday - June 15th 2017 5:42AM MST
In Topics: Music Media Stupidity Liberty/Libertarianism Bread and Circuses
As promised in the last post I'd just like to state that I don't care about football - college or pro. Oh, and basketball and hockey (nobody does where I'm from), and whatever. I am referring to spectator sports, but hey, an occasional baseball game at the park can be a good time.
Now, I don't have a beef against people who do, except for the ones that somehow think this is more important than what's going on in the world. It's been said before, and here too (I can't find it. Embarrassing, tweet-tweet) that "you may not be interested in politics, but politics is interested in you." In other words, none of this matters to you now, but what you don't care about WILL catch up to you and/or your family to the point when you do care. I know "I can't do a thing about it, so why bother worrying." That's understandable, but it's one of those things in which if the majority think this way, what comes is inevitable. If they do care and act, it's not inevitable.
[Big digression moved to the bottom.*]
Man, that's way off of football. OK, there are fans who are in it for the stats, fascination with the strategy, whatever, and do pay attention to other stuff. Fine.
This is another out-of-my-control-vehicle-radio post, like deja vu of yesterday morning's post. It was about a month ago, and this time was sports talk, neither as infuriating nor soothing as National Public Radio. This guy was going on about what I'm pretty sure was football, in particular, about one McCafferty. He apparently is pretty good, possibly controversial, but very important. This announcer was, and I'm going to use the term for the first time on Peak Stupidity, "cucked out". Let me explain.
Here's where I've got a beef with your average football fan - you're following this bunch of thugs with a few white quarterbacks, like they have anything to do with you. You don't play and they don't care what you think about their passing, rushing, and strategy, only that you keep your cable subscription This stuff's not important, when at the same time, Globalists/elites of our country are doing their very best to replace the white male and white families in general. When will you start paying attention? You are encouraging them with your satisfaction with, and distraction by, this circus aspect of the whole "bread and circuses" deal you are being allowed to have as consolation.
Back to the announcer: It's really funny that I was thinking while listening "hey, this guy sounds like he wants to marry this McCafferty, as he's going on and on about this guy and the team like he's in love." Seconds after I thought that, the guy indeed said something just like that - "Yeah, I have a man-crush..." and another phrase to that effect. The announcer came across as positively ebullient, that's the word. Yeah, the "cucked" for "cuckolded" term really did fit there. It's really time to leave this stuff behind, people.
I'll tell ya, or ask you, why can't people just get a good sound system, just 9" woofers would be acceptable, like back in the 1970's, and blast out Rush in the morning?
Begin the day
with a friendly voice,
a companion, unobtrusive
Plays that song that's so elusive,
and the magic music makes your morning mood.
Off on your way,
hit the open road.
There is magic at your fingers.
For the spirit ever lingers,
undemanding contact
in your happy solitude.
Don't even play it without the woofers. You need to feel Geddy Lee's bass deep in your chest cavity.
Rush, with "The Spirit of Radio" from Permanent Waves
* [Big Digression here, I just noticed!:] I also may have wrote this with respect to the old small-government USA (you've to to reach way, way back now), but I will again, in case: We were such a free country and people when you go back 50 years or more, that it really was a place where one didn't generally have to care about the Feral Government. Whatever happened in Washington, FS did not have a bearing on most people's lives on a daily basis like it does in the present. Back in the day, the only time it mattered what happened over in the swamp was during war time or when the progressives went on a big rampage, cough, Wilson, FDR, cough, cough. Now, one Feral Agency can make a
No comments - Click here to start thread
A ray of hope from the football fans
Posted On: Wednesday - June 14th 2017 6:49PM MST
In Topics: TV, aka Gov't Media Trump Americans The Neocons
(Sure, but hey, the country's falling apart right now, perhaps later.)
A reader of this blog talked to me for a bit about the football forums that he reads and occasionally writes on. This is college ball, which is pretty big in most rural areas of the country. Most readers of this blog would know from other posts under the TV, aka Gov't Media topic key ( good examples of which are here and here), that I am not the biggest fan of the "boob tube". Not at all, in fact. Also, I'm not a sports follower at all anymore, so I could not relate much to my friend's talk on football.
I will write more about my opinion on the following of pro sports a bit probably tomorrow, but it was interesting what my reader had to say regarding some of the discussion on this particular football forum. I will say now, that, perhaps obviously, most serious college football fans, the ones that get on forums and take it seriously, would lean conservative and but not necessarily libertarian. They'd very likely be pro- US military adventurism, GO USA! GO TEAM!, etc. That is a great generalization, but just think of the people you know. I think they'd be very likely decent people, but exactly the type that think they don't need to pay attention to politics, even in this day and age.
Now, time to admit that this is another non-timely post, but again, we're just catching up, and it doesn't negate the point. At this particular juncture (love that word), President Trump had just decided to neocon out and order missiles fired at Syria (whoa, 2 months back, in fact). Would many college football fans peruse this map, for example, unless they were particularly involved in the US military, or care much about it? GO USA!
Well, we were discussing this event and disappointment in Trump's failure to keep his promise, and the reader related something about the forum. All types of forums do deviate far off the topic (In this case: What was the problem with the defense? Who's hurt for next game? Whatever.) sometimes. He had been reading a thread that related to the new warmongering in Syria, and surprisingly the football fans were mostly against it! To me that shows that things can slowly change in the mood of the population. It was really good to hear that. People who don't usually care have had enough of the bull. Some say that nothing will change in people's attitudes until a financial crash or big event and people are distressed and hungry. It'd be nice if change in attitudes would occur before it comes to that, and this football forum was a good sign to me.
No comments - Click here to start thread
"All Things Considered", it's been a long road to Peak Stupidity
Posted On: Wednesday - June 14th 2017 8:41AM MST
In Topics: Humor Media Stupidity US Feral Government
Some folks were discussing the Lyin' Press and good old NPR, National Public Radio, came up. This reminded me of just a week or so back, when I had no control of the vehicle radio (yeah, some still use those.) It was just a situation in which it would have been pretty rude to ask the driver to change the station or turn it off or down. After a minute, I realized that this was NPR, and that they were still in business. Easy, because the announcers are just so soooothinggg. It is very relaxing stuff to listen to, as none of them talk loud or are obnoxious in any way, until ...
... you hear what they are talking about. I should have known that, since they feed off the public teet*, they are still the same left-wing fogeys that they used to be. I realized the guy was talking about some President Trump impeachment ideas, and that sort of thing ... always so very logical and play-by-the-rules sounding ... never the other side of the story though, one notices, and never the big picture ... just keep on the establishment ... soothing ... narrative .... wonder what Nina Totenberg is like in real life ... very soothing, no confrontation ... just the only side of the story there is ... she sounds like one of those sexy librarians.. maybe a spinster....
Nina Totenberg comes in to this post because, though I have no idea is she is alive and
Sometimes I wish there was no internet, so I could still think that the woman on the left was who Nina Totenberg was:
* Yes, they will tell you a lot that National Public Radio is supported by listeners like you. Yes me and you, Kemasabe, whether we have the radio on or not. I am a listener to Rush (the band, mostly, but the guy from Rio Lindo once in a while), but still at the same time supporting NPR. They still get US Feral Gov't money, meaning mine and yours, all to spout out the same old left-wing garbage that ... wait, I don't feel soothed anymore, dammit.
Comments (2)
More on this "Al Stewart / History" week
Posted On: Monday - June 12th 2017 7:27PM MST
In Topics: Music History
This guy's music was just amazing. I wrote about his writing of lyrics about history in presenting his 1st song on this blog, "Roads to Moscow". Yesterday featured "Nostradamus", and today, here is "On the Border" from the album "Year of the Cat".
This is a live version that features
Late last night the rain was knocking at my window.
I moved across the darkened room and in the lamp glow,
I thought I saw down in the street
the spirit of the century
telling us that we're all standing on the border.
*********************
[UPDATED 01/24:] Rats. The version I had originally is gone. This too is a live version, but it doesn't have any more than the small bits of Spanish guitar from Peter White.
*********************
No comments - Click here to start thread
Self-Rebuttal to our post on centuries-long conspiracy theories?
Posted On: Monday - June 12th 2017 6:45PM MST
In Topics: History The Future
Toward the end of my writing Stupid vs. Evil and long-term conspiracy theories, I had some thoughts about whether a rebuttal to my thesis that there aren't these century-long conspiracies out there wouldn't be "Hey, what about the Frankfurt School?" I think that's an interesting argument to ponder.
If you're not familiar, the Frankfurt School was not a particular set of school buildings on a piece of land (though they had various ones before they got kicked out of Germany and had other ones), but a bunch of people with the same ideas that met and discussed them and made plans. So, by "school" we mean it in the same way as you may hear about the "Austrian school" in economics (the smart guys) or the "Keynesian school" (the borderline retards). There are millions of pages of information on this Frankfurt School on-line, so:
a) I won't go into it in too much detail, as you can duckduckgo* it anytime and spend a whole day on it.
b) Here is a fairly long article from the "Schiller Institute" (hmmm, are they a real institute like the "Ponds Institute for hand creams? Who knows?). Yeah, it's a random hit, but it looked very interesting, and I'll read it later.
c) Here is a shorter article from "ReturnOfKings" that just relates the Frankfurt School to modern higher education.
To summarize from knowledge of the Frankfurt School from past reading, they were Marxists, and they had big plans to change society. They really had no power back when they started meeting in 1923 when they were associated with one actual university in Germany. They left Germany in 1933 due to the Nazi's hating on Communism (hey, who doesn't?) and ended up in New York City - that can't explain everything about the place, but it all fits.
To relate this finally to the conspiracy-theory post, this group had very much influence on American society and culture, completely to our detriment. Feminism, socialism, hatred of the white man, you name it: If it sucks, they are all for it! Now they've been pushing their cultural rot for a long time; it's been damn near a century since these
No, these people just had the same overall ideas, however erroneous, about how future society should be. They had adherents that could take over the meeting, writing, and infiltration of the institutions, but was that a big plan? Was it just a bunch of people thinking the same way over many years? Is that really a conspiracy? I think not - all that would have stopped their plans would have been millions of (more) Americans (than did) not putting up with the socialist PC crap at universities and social institutions, in governments, and in the consumption of media. People let this happen, and it was not per-ordained via an evil plan.
********************************************
Addendum - pretty much off the subject, but not worth another post: About the song "Nostradamus" by Al Stewart featured in relation to this heavy thinking on historical patterns lately, here is an interesting thing about the song and the man. Though having tried some years back, I couldn't seem to really make much sense of the Nostradamus poetic prophecies from 1/2-millenium-ago France (the first of it was published in 1555). I think the songwriter, Mr. Stewart took lots of liberties about just what Mr. Nostradamus had said, and maybe made up pretty much all the verses (called "quatrains", at least wrt Mr. Nostradamus' original writings).
OK, fine, it's an amazing song no matter how accurate the lyrics. However, here's the one amazing thing - Mr. Stewart wrote "Nostradamus" in, or before, the year 1973, when "Past, Present, Future" came out. Here's one line - "A great wall that divides a city at this time is cast aside". Note, this was 16 years before the Berlin Wall came down, and Al Stewart was writing as if Nostradamus predicted this - even if he didn't and was just making it up, then Al Stewart predicted this. Is that weird, or just the odds?
********************************************
* Yes, duckduckgo.com for my searches now. Bing tried to connect up yahoo mail with what I was searching for so, as far as I'm concerned, Bing is dead to me.
No comments - Click here to start thread
Counter-protesters claim to be anti(anti)(Sharia). Do the Math.
Posted On: Monday - June 12th 2017 7:15AM MST
In Topics: Music alt-right/MAGA ctrl-left
Yes, no Calculus, Differential Equations or Number Theory is necessary here. It's just the arithmetical axiom that a negative x a negative = a positive. ZeroHedge informs us Clashes Erupt As Leftists Crash Nationwide "March Against Sharia". This story seemed kind of buried to me, but then I would not hear about it on TV, since it's in a state of OFF. However, something kinda weird on this is that, even though the link above works (as of 6/12/17), I could not find this article listed on ZeroHedge a few pages into the site at the time stated (Jan 10 9:22PM, no time zone). That's strange, as I've not run into that before on ZH.
Back to these clashes. I like that word. It's not quite a battle, but it's not a friendly debate either. Don't be alarmed, it's just A CLASH. I wish it were THE CLASH - saw them at a 3,000-seat auditorium in the early 1980's - great show!
It takes this much writing for me to get the thoughts together to get back to the point... There are people out there, say New York City, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and other places who actually came out to give a hard time to those who are having a pre-emptive protest against Sharia Law, the set of Islamic law, which is in great conflict with they type of stuff written up by James Madison, Thomas Jefferson et. al. So, you've got your Americans protesting against continued creeping Islamification (yeah, it always starts off small, but we know the people behind this don't ever let up.) Then, "counter-protesters" came out against these patriotic Americans peacefully promoting awareness about Sharia. Let's get this on the record. These "counter-protesters" are against people being against Sharia, so they are pro-Sharia then. No way around that, it's just math, bitchez!
These cntrl-left idiots have gotten pawned/owned, or whatever this is called now, in my opinion (I think "bitch-slapped" was the old expression way back in ought-5.) By making their demonstrations just about "Sharia", not Moslem infestation in general (which they are rightfully against), the patriotic Americans have pulled a good one. You've got your cntrl-left now on record as being pro-Sharia.
Wait... what? The whole cntrl-left is composed of a motley assortment of complete societal-fuck-ups, your feminists, liberal-arts-up-the-yingyang-in-debt man-bunned baristas, your gender-confused, generally, your huddled masses of stupidity, in an unholy alliance against the remaining legacy real Americans who are the last link to what was the freest nation to have seen the light of day in World history. Why would they want to be anywhere around under a Moslem-run system which would have them stoned dead before the first goat-humping Imam retired to his tent for the evening? Do they really not know that Sharia is the most conservative system around, to an extreme? There is no place for feminism, the 31 flavors of gender, and all that crap.
We in America had a nice happy medium here, back in the day, where the laws of nature were observed, yet the rule of law, based on natural law (such as self-defense), and not the rule of men, was also observed.
The cntrl-left extreme nutcases who actually come out on the streets to interrupt free speech and assembly (still expecting no pushback, for now) call themselves "antifa" for anti-fascist, but act just as fascist as the Nazis did on a bad day. However, if you go with their terminology that they are against a right-wing (conservative - in THEIR twisted terminology) then, let's see: anti-fascist & pro-Sharia ==> anti-hard-core-conservatism & pro-hard-core-conservatism. That's a contradiction that looks like the end of a mathematical proof. It IS the end of a proof, by contradiction, with the original statement having just been contradicted being: "These people are sane."
I never did like proofs, but that one was both easy. I still say, though, that 3-D Calculus is the most useful math ever invented - thanks, Issac!
frameborder="0" allowFullScreen>
OK, yeah, they weren't a LOT brighter than the antifa clashers, but they could play guitars, dammit.
(This song was originally written by Sonny Curtis for Buddy Holly's band The Crickets, but was covered by anyone who wanted to act like he was a rebel, over the next 6 decades.)
No comments - Click here to start thread
Nostradamus - Past, Present, Future
Posted On: Friday - June 9th 2017 7:27PM MST
In Topics: Music History
I suppose as a rebuttal to the theory of no long-term conspiracies you could have had one of these evil-plotting conspiratorial bastards in cahoots with Nostradamus. Now, that'd have been an evil pair.
A musical artist named Al Stewart featured here before due not only his great tunes but his lyrics about history wrote this epic "Nostradamus" for this Past, Present, Future album. This seems appropriate what with these serious posts about the centuries past these last 2 days.
BTW, some historians say that this Nostradamus was completely wrong in all his poetic prophesies, and had actually been known in his time in the late middle ages by the moniker Nostra-dumbass.
No comments - Click here to start thread
Stupid vs. Evil and long-term conspiracy theories
Posted On: Friday - June 9th 2017 7:04PM MST
In Topics: Commies General Stupidity Globalists ctrl-left
This post may be kind of boring - that's just the way it's going to be, but I have promised to just explain this a number of times in other posts. This can follow nicely from the previous one on 100-year old history, as we left off with a video about the founding of the Federal Reserve Bank, created in secret by a small cabal. One may call that a conspiracy, I suppose, as the way the Fed Reserve was founded and it's real purpose has been kept fairly secret over a long period.
Here's the point I will expound on: I don't think there are any long-term conspiracies, that could be used by some to explain the evil in this world, or just the reason America is what it is today. By long-term, here, I mean > 50 year, and more like century(s)-long plans. This is as opposed to shorter-term odious behind-the-scenes deals made by globalist elites and high-level bureaucrats, the quasi-military organizations, CIA, NSA, people within US and other gov't agencies and various other evil types. There would be no way to list all the even very credible ones here.
The people behind the short- or medium-term conspiracies are not even all blatantly evil. It could be about just wanting to hurt people or groups, but more often there is a lot of money or power to gain as the motive. As to the arguably (that's what the comment section is for ;-}. ) most important issue going on today, the importation of peoples to replace Americans and Western Europeans with the 3rd world, for example, there are multiple different credible theories on why the evil behind-the-scenes people would want to do this. Even this type of evil happening is not done SPECIFICALLY to hurt people ALONE. That is not necessarily how evil works. There are people however, who don't care at all how many 100's of millions of people get hurt by having their lives changed for the worse. Many times the gains are not even JUST the money and increase in power, but this evil is done by people who feel they are doing good. They want to feel good about themselves.
Let me reiterate this and explain it more. There are many wise men who have been quoted to this effect, but perhaps it was put the most simply by T.S. Eliot, with "Most of the evil in this world is done by people with good intentions.". This may include the "useful idiots" who, by definition, are not smart enough to be out to purposeful hurt anyone by what they think is the right thing to do, in addition to the fairly-smart, leaders who also think they are doing the right thing, but unfortunately have the power to get it done. See, this is the problem, people with power who think they are omniscient, though they are not. They are smart, but not smart enough to know that they may not be right about everything. It's OK to have people like that, but not in positions of great power of the population.
This is how you get your Chairman Mao's, your Lenin's, your Pol Pot's and your Hitler's. All of them probably had a good head on their shoulders and "knew" what must be done to help their countrymen. People helped them gain positions of great, almost absolute power. It didn't work out very well, did it? YOU! DO! NOT! LET! ANYONE! HAVE! GREAT! POWER! OVER! YOU! The founders of the American Republic were the best in history in knowing this, and their grand experiment worked out pretty well for 150 years or more, until the people got slack.
Back to the evil ones and the conspiracies. The guys like Soros making plans to encourage destruction of the western nations, the guys in the CIA fomenting revolution in foreign lands, the guys behind assassinations, the groups creating legislation in back rooms to help their cronies, all of them - they make some pretty elaborate schemes sometimes and then some fairly stupid ones that backfire. Are they smart enough to make plans that don't come to fruition for 50 years, 100 years, or multiple centuries later though? Again, they are NOT omniscient; they just think they are. Back to the Federal Reserve creators again, as an example. They wanted to control the money supply. They probably didn't care about free money concepts and how the average American would be worse off, but I doubt they were smart enough to know, or be planning for, the transition of the small Federal Gov't to the huge beast it has become. There was no way to know the effects of their short- and even medium-term evil a century hence.
Yes, there were the Rothchilds and other rich families who had big money, hence, power over multiple centuries, sinister people in the Catholic Church, the Masons, etc. People say they had big conspiracies to cause what we are dealing with a few centuries later. Did they really make plans, the effects of which would be known on their great-grandchildren? How could you even know which countries would be around? Would you know what to invest in for that long a period. My conclusion is that there is just nobody that smart - if he was, he would most likely not make plans that would end up causing pain and trouble for so many, as He would be God.
No comments - Click here to start thread
Man, another century's gone by - felt like only a coupla 3 decades!
Posted On: Thursday - June 8th 2017 9:55AM MST
In Topics: History Global Financial Stupidity US Feral Government
The older you are, the more time and history seems shorter - we all know that - except when we're young. It's pretty obvious why, as the few short years a kid's been alive are everything there ever was to him. After a while 2 years ago is not that awful long ago anymore, when you're, say 30 years old. After a while, you're like, what, gotta start writing dates with 4 digits now!? Or, what, we don't need to keep writing 4-digit years anymore, as people didn't do that in 1917? They just wrote '17 and talked about, "well, let me tell ya' sonny, back in ought-5 we didn't have fancy ... whatever-the-hells".
History behaves the same way in our minds as we the number of years behind us, in our memories, changes. As a kid, most "old people", as we called them, had memories of World War I times, "the Great War". Now, you would find nobody with personal knowledge about it to talk to. The 1960's turmoil and Beatles music is as long ago to the kids now, as prohibition and ragtime music was to me as a kid. The Vietnam war is as long ago for kids now as WWI was to people who were kids when I was a baby. Ronald Reagan as president is as historical to kids now as Harry Truman as president was to us, and I even have a memory of some guy wearing the hats people used to always wear reading a newspaper with a big-font headline "TRUMAN DIES". Who cares, I thought, and still do.
Think though, about how Ronald Reagan, VietNam, and the 1960's are NOT, however, ancient history to us. Go back to 100 years of history now, and it does NOT seem like you are reading about a totally different kind of people that didn't know anything, and just acted in ways that were so foreign to us, and that nothing at all that happened back then has ANYTHING at all to do with what goes on in the world now. As a kid, however, this would be like being told it that the panic of 1873 and the status of the new colonies in Africa, and the goings-on in the court of Queen Victoria were important in relation to our present kid's lives of hula hoops and Beatles 45's. Now, it's 2017 and I can look back at the people in American history a century ago, and see what they did to us.
It so happens that the years about an entire century ago +/-5 years were years when people and events began changes to America's future all for the worse. 2 of the worst of it were the Constitutional Amendments, the 16th, allowing (Note that word, allowing, overriding Amendment 10) a Federal Income tax, ratified in early February of 1913, and the 17th, specifying direct elections of US Senators, ratified only 2 months later. Though the latter SEEMS like just an adminstrative "housekeeping" change, it is most definitely not, and it was as if the people had said "America's Federal government is not broke, but let's fix it!". How much damage was done in just 2 months in 1913.
However, that's not all, folks. Before the professor Woodrow Wilson got the US into the Great War right at a century ago, after being elected on a platform-plank in 1916 of "he kept us out of war" (does this sound familiar, as, again 1964 is not long ago for, cough, cough, some of us?) there was the founding, via legislation a day before Christmas Eve of the Federal Reserve. The last may have really been the key instigation of the eventual ruin of America.
I came across The Corbett Report from some videos being shown by a commenter named Agent76 on unz.com. This James Corbett speaks some real truth in his videos, and here is a 1 1/2 hour one about the Federal Reserve. As he says in the beginning, economics sounds boring, but this stuff will have you enthralled (with possibly rage later on) with these 1-century-ago elites who created this beast that controls the money, hence the economy, causing the coming terrible financial crash. Not many wanted to hear Ron Paul talk about it, but give this a try. It gets more interesting about 15-20 minutes in.
These elites causing havoc for an entire nation seems somehow familiar to me, like Deja Vu all over again.
No comments - Click here to start thread
What IS the Deep State?
Posted On: Wednesday - June 7th 2017 7:25PM MST
In Topics: US Feral Government Deep State
We (we bloggers, I guess) need to get something straight. This phrase, "the Deep State", has been trending, as the idiots at google, yahoo, and assorted other idiots like to say these days. The phrase is being used a lot, though it is nothing new, yet I've been reading it as having 2 different meanings. This Peter Brimelow blog post on VDare is an example.
The original meaning of "the Deep State" is the one that has been used for 50 years or more, at least in reference to goings-on with or really, behind, the US Feral Government. It refers to a "shadow government" and/or powerful elite non-government people who work behind the scenes to make the real decisions as the politicians play their role as puppets. The idea is that these nefarious types do not want to be public figures and they don't want the public to know there even is any Deep State. By "Deep" here, writers mean "deep secret", so we don't guess these people blog about their activities or have a Deep State facebook group and stuff like that.
Conspiracy theories can be made about much of the goings-on in government, and not all turn out to be wrong. As has long been promised, Peak Stupidity will have a post about long-term, as in centuries-long conspiracy theories, and why we doubt their possibility. That will make this post (again!) too long, so, anyway, most conspiracy theories and facts involve people behind the scenes that, in any large conspiracy could be thought of as the deep state. Any conspiracy that takes even a modicum of planning and intelligence could not involve just the faces we hear from, the politicians and Gov't agency heads - there MUST be some smart people behind them.
There are plenty of just plain facts out now about the CIA, NSA, and groups without published names that carry our all kinds of evil and sick behavior on behalf of "the common defense of the United States of America". Peak Stupidity thinks of these people, these agencies, and some elite super-rich globalist scum-bags that care nothing for America, nor any other country, really, working with them, for them, and over them, as this Deep State. That is the deep state that could have easily compromised President Trump, as we just theorized here in paragraphs 4 and 5.
Now, the other definition I've been reading lately is more like just the deeply set-in-place US Feral Government bureaucracy. That is what some articles have been referring to as the Deep State in reference to the inability of President Trump to follow through on his promises to the patriotic American voters.
This is quite a different story. There are indeed millions of entrenched usually not-easily-fire-able employees in government. These people are almost all very much in favor of Big Government, because, (yeah, no shit) they work there and want to keep their cushy jobs with decent pay and a really nice pension
The 2nd-definition deep state is something that can be dealt with, at least more easily than the 1st-defintion version. In a war against stupid vs. a war against evil, I'll take bets only on the war against stupid. In fact, come to think of it, this very website is a squadron-level unit in the battle against stupid. Back to Trump and all the Feral Gov't entrenched bureaucrats at all the different agencies, let's get one Constitutional thing straight - the President is the head of the executive branch. That is where all of these cabinet-level and sub-cabinet-level agencies reside - the executive branch. Donald Trump has every right to get rid of whom he wants and hire whom he wants.
Sure, that is a lot of people to fire, we're talking millions, but we've got just the guy in there to do it! What other president in our lifetimes has ever had his own TV show where the whole theme was "You're Fired!"? But, but, we're going to have hollowed-out, ineffective Federal agencies!!! Hey, that's a feature, not a bug, here, people. It's called, (wait for it) freedom. In fact, why not just keep the jobs unfilled, excepting the border patrol?
YA FIYAD!
Just as another version of the conclusion here, Peak Stupidity agrees with the 1st definition as the meaning of Deep State. It has been around longer, and makes more sense. The 2nd definition should rightfully have a different term, say the "Deadbeat State".
No comments - Click here to start thread
Reader Comment - US military as world's policeman
Posted On: Tuesday - June 6th 2017 2:44AM MST
In Topics: Americans Liberty/Libertarianism US Feral Government The Neocons
Commenter Buck Turgidson had a good comment re this post on the US military. I had called the things going on these days ...
"...a sick social experiment...." That is well stated. Our military has gone way, way beyond its original mandate and what is should be reasonably doing today. Our military is extremely overextended and this global military empire is tremendously expensive and a big reason we are $20T in debt. The net result, other than the debt, is heartache, failed expectations, and a huge friggin mess.
Unfortunately, the military seems led by people who cannot learn a damned thing from this experience and, unfortunately, receive way too damned much money from our US Congress. I know several military officers. Good guys and friends, all that. At the same time, they have an entitlement mentality regarding the US Treasury and my tax dollars, and do not think there is any place on Earth that they should be stationed and keeping an eye on things. They believe that they are entitled to a bottomless pit of money to play global geopolitical engineers and strategists, and blow up things, kill people, take out leaders, and so on, as they see fit. No doubts.
The opinion of a taxpayer such as myself, who foots the bill for this insanity? Not worth considering, as it's coming from an outsider who does not really know how the world works, like they do. I am from a military family, but our military needs to be reigned in, and we need to start living within our means. We also need to keep our nose out of other nations' business. We can't fix every damned problem in the world. We also should not be saddling our future generations with a mountain of debt b/c we have neocons who think they are in charge of policing the world. Sorry kind of a rant, we have bad leadership in this country and the military sees bad guys around every corner. and we're broke.
The paragraph breaks were from Peak Stupidity, but we could not have said this better. Thanks, Buck.
Comments (2)
Berkeley Prof. states 5 Laws of Stupidity
Posted On: Monday - June 5th 2017 6:11PM MST
In Topics: General Stupidity
Commenter Heidi something-or-other brought up this article on a website called "Quartz", about a month back. We wish we had thought first about coming up with some laws, but these 5, from a Berkeley Professor of Economics back in 1976 seem pretty reasonable. Since this was back > 40 years, I shudder to think of what new laws will be discovered very soon, as we reach the peak.
Intro from the Quartz article:
In 1976, a professor of economic history at the University of California, Berkeley published an essay outlining the fundamental laws of a force he perceived as humanity’s greatest existential threat: Stupidity.
Stupid people, Carlo M. Cipolla explained, share several identifying traits: they are abundant, they are irrational, and they cause problems for others without apparent benefit to themselves, thereby lowering society’s total well-being. There are no defenses against stupidity, argued the Italian-born professor, who died in 2000. The only way a society can avoid being crushed by the burden of its idiots is if the non-stupid work even harder to offset the losses of their stupid brethren.
Here are Professor Cipolla's 5 laws without comment, but the article has elucidations on each:
*********************************************************
Law 1: Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation.
Law 2: The probability that a certain person be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.
Law 3. A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.
Law 4: Non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals. In particular non-stupid people constantly forget that at all times and places and under any circumstances to deal and/or associate with stupid people always turns out to be a costly mistake.
Law 5: A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person. (PS: One must read the article about his 3 types of people in order to understand "dangerous type" here.)
**********************************************************
Heh!
No comments - Click here to start thread
At the Beach
Posted On: Monday - June 5th 2017 8:54AM MST
In Topics: Curmudgeonry Artificial Stupidity
It was early morning at a very nice beach; the tide was coming in and surf was up just a bit. That's a nice place to hang out at that time before anyone else is around ...
... except some guy taking video, up and down the beach, he kept on going, more video. Can some people not just enjoy being somewhere? The sound of the surf is soothing indeed, and a big part of the reason people rent or buy beach houses. The view is first, I would guess.
I worked it out one time, how much good coastline we have in this country, and you'd be surprised how few people could live on the beach in a detached beach-house, even with only 100 ft.-wide beachfront lots, with no gaps for anything else. This is a "fractal geometry" problem in a way, as in some places the length of the coastline changes quite a bit depending on your scale. By counting parts of the Great Lakes, one could easily get to a round 10,000 miles. That's 500,000 lots on the shoreline, and for families averaging 4 even, that's just a coupla million, so just above 1/2 a percent of the population. Well, you can build condos everywhere to bring this up by a factor of 10. That's why "it's all time-shares nowadays".
Anyway that whole paragraph was to say, hey, we can't all live at the beach so, let me enjoy it in peace while I'm there. Get your camera out of my view, dude.
This was not some young kid even, who wants his whole life on camera (well, here's a case in which I should probably use "she" for the unknown-gender 3rd-person pronoun.) They would rather watch themselves walking on the beach later on, as they're crossing the street or driving down the interstate. That's how they roll, these young people.
He was not Oriental either, as it is no erroneous stereotype that the Japanese, in particular, have got to take those pictures, everywhere. (I had thought back in the day, that maybe they were all Fuji Film employees with deep employee discounts and a determination to put Kodak out of business). However, the Chinese are giving the Japanese a run for their money. They are not above taking their share of photos, what with it being absolutely free now. The girls have got to get themselves in front of some landmark they know squat-all about with the peace signs that mean absolutely nothing. Let me tell you Chinawomen about the peace signs - it came from hippies imitating the V for "Victory" from WWII days while changing it's meaning. Fair enough, but while that was going on, China was in the kind of turmoil, in the midst of Mao's "Cultural Revolution" that we are only beginning to see a taste of now in our country. What's that peace sign supposed to mean, girls? Let me just sit here and see what I came to see.
What is the purpose of all this continual picture-taking? If this video guy was trying to get something on youtube to teach/demonstrate something, I guess I could see that. I always appreciate the fix-it guys that put up auto repair, etc. on-line. Some, I'm sure, do it to get a following to eventually help out their businesses or just make a few bucks on it, but others do it just to help.
It's the continual selfies or posed photos everywhere in front of every damn thing that makes me think "do you not think people will believe you, if you said you've been here? Are you taking the pictures to prove it? If not, don't you think you can download a better picture of this place without idiots posing in the way? If you want your whole life on video, with you in it, get some kind of end-of-nose-cam that records any and all of your doings. However, not everyone's going to want to view this world of peak stupidity - they've been through in "meat space."
No comments - Click here to start thread