Archive for the PC Category

Hypnopædia

Posted in PC, Personal, Political with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 3, 2008 by ddollas

 æ  That letter shows up quite often in “Brave New World” by Aldous Huxley.  So often you’d think that this author speaks Greek every chance he can get.  ç shows up as well, and I’m sure as I get further into this book even more fun letters will be coming out of the wood work.  

Never being fully sure if I am pronouncing certain words aside, I’m very pleased so far with this book, it details a dark future based completely on rigid caste systems that are decided at birth and forced upon helpless fetuses by controlling the substances and oxygen levels granted to developing test tube babies.  Hatcheries are responsible for making babies smarter or dumber to fit certain caste requirements.  Most of these genetic offspring come from a single egg in a process called the “Bokanovsky’s Process” in which a single egg is divided up to 96 times creating a large set of identical twins who are then all forced into the same job.  

“Brave New World” is just another anti-utopian totalitarian book that I am to soon am to have under my belt.  The past month allowed me time (time I have regrettably spent away from writing, though I feel much more refreshed and alert mentally after drowning myself in so many books) to read some very good classic negative utopian books, such as “1984” and “Animal Farm” and once I finish this current book I shall be moving right on to “Fahrenheit 451” which I haven’t read since high school.  

I’m not sure what has captivated me with the obsession to read about such dysfunctional societies, though my personal view that the United States is slowly starting to mimic Oceania in terms of telling us what to think and what to care about instead of allowing us to come to our own conclusions.  They make it a point to force a two party system on us, and televise debates between the two candidates to aid us in making our choice as to who is going to be the next president.  Of course the debates never include candidates from any other party aside from Republican or Democrat, thusly elimanating virtually all chance of the presidential nominee of the Libertarian, Green, or Constitution party from ever being elected.  

Why are these parties barred from such debates?  If we truly lived in a democratic society then no single person should be barred from an event, people like Ron Paul shouldn’t be censored from Fox news because the party might now agree with the message he is pushing.  The election is presented as an event where the people shall decide who shall lead them.  Unfortunately Ron Paul stood no chance against McCain since there was a concerted effort to keep him off television until recent times.  He has been on quite a high profile talk shows now that he stands no chance of being voted the presidential candidate of the Republican party.    

I work in a highly political real estate office, where people love to spend hours debating about liberal or conservative views, Republican or Democrat everywhere I look.  Hell most of these people are ignorant to the fact that more then two people even run for president thanks to our media blackout on every third party candidate and local states refusal to place them on Ballots.  I’m looking at you New Jersey.  For anger’s sake I’m going to list the three major third parties presidential candidates for everyone.

Libertarian Party – Bob Barr

Green Party – Cynthia McKinney

Constitution Party – Chuck Baldwin

I don’t claim to know the policies of any other these people aside from Bob Barr, (since I’m Libertarian I better know what he is about or else make a nice ass myself) but I have the decency to know that they exist and take issue that these candidates are treated more then unfairly with ballot access.  How can a state simply decide that someone isn’t allowed to run for president from a legitimate political party?  While I am sure that there is some red tape reason that prohibits them from being on the ballot, what is the harm?  Every single person running for president deserves his or her best chance at being elected.  As far as I am concerned it should be illegal to withhold any person from a legitimate political party who has other elected officials working for our government from running for president.  Anything aside from a truly open ballot allowing all candidates a chance to be voted for president, or at least allow people to know they exist while at the ballot booth simply isn’t democracy.  Then again we live in a Republic, so I guess I shouldn’t complain much right?  

Before I go I should define the word I used in the title of this entry, Hypnopædia means sleep learning, and in the novel “Brave New World” they use it to imprint certain morals on the various castes of society, such as the impulse to throw out something old and buy something new, spend money on leisure at every opportunity, and that every class below yours is simply horrible and you shouldn’t speak to them.  I don’t even have to stretch it to find a comparison to modern society.  

Put down that beer and pick up that rifle!

Posted in PC with tags , , , , , , on August 21, 2008 by ddollas

Why 21?  Really is there anyone that honestly thinks that people are any more mature at 21 then they are at say another randomly decided benchmark like 18?  Even if there are some people that this might hold true for I can assure you that most people drank anyway, so what is really the point of a law that does little aside from turn normal adults into criminals?  

The drinking age was raised to 21 so that in theory people would be older, wiser, and most importantly more responsible when it came time to down a whiskey sour.  What I want to know is, if someone truly follows the law and never takes a taste of booze until that magical 21st birthday, how can they possible handle the situation better then had they done it at 18?  We are assuming here that this person has never drank in his life, therefore it is safe to assume that even if our imaginary friend has read countless articles on liquor and asked every single drinker in their family, they have zero idea what it does to them.  The first time having an experience with any mind altering substance will always be dangerous regardless of the age in which they start.  

With the age being set at 21 we have set up situations in which the first time drinking happens (in theory of course we all know better) when you are old enough to be living somewhere that is not with parents, so the support group for ensuring that one drinks responsibly are left somewhere between college party mates and friends, who are more then likely far more interested in having fun then watching out for you ensuring that you do not drink yourself into a stupor or get so drunk you start to make foolish dangerous decisions. 

Of course it isn’t just that I feel that it is more dangerous to not drink at home around people who are biologically compelled to look out for you, but what really gets me furious is that our government considers us old enough to be drafted into war but not responsible enough to drink a beer.  I find it difficult to think of a more insulting law that they could pass.  I don’t know about anyone else, but I really don’t like the idea of someone that is so irresponsible that they cannot drink a beer without harming himself and others holding a gun.   Would you want Private I Cannot Handle My Beer covering you in a firefight?  Or would you prefer Lance Corporeal Hey Turns Out I’m Responsible laying down the suppression fire?

When you treat people as if they are brainless idiots then why should they bother to act in any other way?  The sad part about this, is that the law accomplishes very little aside from annoying responsible people with bad luck.  Irresponsible people who would drink themselves into an intoxicated stupor when they are 18-20 and then drive around like Duke’s of Fucking Hazard will do so at 21 if they haven’t managed to kill themselves already.  They do this because irresponsible people have no respect for anything or anyone, including drinking age laws.  There will always be people that cannot handle the awesome responsibility to act like a responsible adult and we should set up our laws and punishments to punish them, not the people that are perfectly capable of acting like an adult.  

The punishment for driving drunk should be something akin to never being allowed to drive AGAIN.  Once proven that you cannot act responsible enough to handle both the right to drink and the right to drive that should be it.  Furthermore the punishment should be enacted quickly.  For example, a friend of mine just lost his license a month ago for a DUI he received over a year ago.  Despite knowing that my friend has in fact learned his lesson and stopped doing such foolish things, it does change my stance at all.  He should be punished, and punished in a far more effiecent manner.  What if my friend was one of those careless drunks that just wants to drive about with no care to the harm they put others in?  An entire year was allowed to pass in which he could have killed someone in a drunk driving accident.  I find that unacceptable.  

I’m digressing from my point.  I find that few people tend to agree with some of my more outlandish society ideals such as zero gun control, legalizing every drug, and lowering the age to drink, however in this case it seems some prominent schools are actually agreeing with me for once.  

The article explains in far more detail then I am going to go into but the short end of it is that 100 or so colleges have started rallying against the government to lower the drinking age back down to 18 to combat binge drinking on campus.  As it turns out, students that get to campus are drinking way to much without any supervision.  It is my opinion that learning to deal with how alcohol effects you should be done at home, with your parents there to make sure you are OK.

The article has someone that accuses the schools of looking for an easy way out of a greater problem.  Shouldn’t we be looking for easy answers always?  Who the hell wants a difficult one?  Besides the schools have a valid point, we assume that by 21 the students will be responsible enough to not drink themselves to death, but if they have yet to drink then how could they ever reach that level of responsibility with something they have never used?  Are 21 year old people better and more responsible with everything?  Are they by rule of age capable of using band saws in a safer way then an 18 year old would?  No!  They aren’t, the age of a person does not magically confer some sort of responsibility when handling anything.  Further more, students drink anyway, they can easily acquire booze from any 21 year old student, and by keeping it illegal we only make people want to do it more often, and because of the very nature of illegal activities, do so in dangerous ways where help cannot easily be found, especially if there is any fear that one will be in even more trouble after the fact for involving themselves in the activity in the first place.  In short, making anything illegal makes it more dangerous they it ever need to be.

 I have already decided that I’m going to get my children drunk, so that they wake up with an awful hangover and hopefully understand that drinking large amounts of any liquor has some pretty shitty consequences.  Hell, my dad gave me beer when I was eight years old, it was never taboo in my house, and now that I’m much older, I don’t drink a drop of beer, it tastes awful.  My point is that since it was never taboo for me, I never felt a need to go binge drink with friends, cause there wasn’t any mysticism attached to it.  I was allowed to have a drink at home when I wanted to, so I never had to go sneak out and engage in theft to get liquor to go drink it somewhere that might be dangerous.  People are going to do what they want to do, silly laws like the drinking age just makes innocent people criminals.  

Our laws should be based off what people will do, instead of what people should do.  Should is a relative term that is different to every single person on earth.  For example, I think we should get past all this religion stuff so that we can have one less thing to breed hate in our world.  Other people think I should go to church.  Japan has a law that states that video games cannot be released on a weekday.  Because kids will cut school to go buy it, and instead of trying to fight that social norm of their society, they just altered the rules to accommodate it.  As far as I am concerned if we are going to set an age for adulthood, then with that age should come all rights and privileges associated with it.  People will drive drunk, that is certain, but lets simply punish those people, not punish the 18 year old adults that have yet to do anything wrong and for all anyone knows might never do a damn thing wrong when it comes to drinking.

Step one: Inspect Underpants….

Posted in PC, Political with tags , , , , , on July 28, 2008 by ddollas

A man was arrested a few days back after claiming to be an “Underwear researcher” and offering families 20 dollars to inspect their young children wearing various brands of underwear.  He would instruct the children to try on various pairs, and run his fingers along the waistband to “check the labels” while he took notes about what he seen.  

Now unless the notes read “God these are some terrible parents to sell their young children out to an obvious sexual predator for 20 dollars” there is nothing about this situation that is even remotely normal.  No underwear company would send a single creepy man out to stare at scantily clad children while they try out various brands of underwear that while it was never made apparent were most likely not even manufactured by the same company and wouldn’t be sending a single representative collect a detailed “feel” from little kids.  

This man managed to convince three families that this was a perfectly legitimate situation before getting himself arrested.  That is six adults that we can assume went to school in our American education system, that didn’t think twice about allowing someone to hang out with their 8 year old children alone in bedrooms while they stare at them in their undergarments.  

That is six adults too many in my opinion.  How can anyone in a country such as this be dumb enough to allow an “Underwear inspector” into their home?  It’s as bad as handing over your wallet to the Wallet Inspector, are we incapable of thinking for ourselves anymore?  Has our country dulled our brains to the point that we accept anything a man in a suit has to say simply because he looks the part?  Are we so afraid of turbans that we forget that the majority of the harmful people we will encounter in our lives will be American?  The news doesn’t remind us of hidden dangers that doesn’t advance their political agenda, only vaugue terrible threats that most likely will never occur.  As my friend and fellow blogger has pointed out, we have never been lower then Yellow on the Homeland Security Advisory System, yet we have not been attacked by a group of forgien terrorists since 9/11.  Significant threat of terrorist attack my ass.

The media has turned this country into a flock of helpless sheep, incapable of drudging up an opinion of their own about anything more important then the latest hollywood teen turned parent.  Hence I don’t watch the news, I don’t care about which tomato made someone in Oklahoma sick, and I don’t care about any other media scare.  I’ll watch the news when they aren’t trying to pointlessly scare me, and they have something worthwhile to say.

Get out of the car and read it yourself!

Posted in PC, Uncategorized with tags , , , , on July 16, 2008 by ddollas

Why is there braille on the McDonalds drive thru menu?  What possible reason could they have placed it there for?  Yahoo answers seems to have no idea either, aside from the very sure people who plainly state that it is for blind passengers and then call everyone else idiots for not coming to the obvious conclusion.  Let me just say right now that anyone who forces a blind person to hang outside of their car windows to read the menu himself instead of just reading it out loud for him is a complete and utter asshole.  There is no sense to placing braille on the menu because blind people cannot drive a car, nor should they ever be walking about in the drive thru.  

I can’t even find ground for it’s presence in the form of discrimination, because blind people will never use it!  They can’t drive, so it’s a no brainer that it just serves zero purpose aside from making political correct nazi’s happy.  

Taking Braille away from a drive-thru wouldn’t harm blind people in anyway, and it would certainly look less silly.  

In related news, about a year ago Mcdonalds refused to serve an armless women by the name of Dawn Larson who bought food.  That is just dumb, hand her the food, who cares if she grips it with her feet?  The employee stated things like “I’m not doing this!  I’m just not!” Like she’s too good to serve her with her burger flipping job.  Get over yourself people, the girl has no arms and yet still manages to drive herself about, and have a normal life and you act like she’s diseased.  

Can I move to Europe yet?

Our country is in distress

Posted in PC with tags , , , , , , , , on July 7, 2008 by ddollas

 

Freedom of Speech

There is nothing illegal or shameful about an upside down flag.

Superbishops!

Posted in PC, Religion with tags , , , , , , , , , , on July 7, 2008 by ddollas

Spell check is informing me that Superbishop is not a proper word, and three days ago it most certainly would not have been.  On the 6th of July the Church of England announced that it would be creating an entirely new class of Bishop called “Superbishop”.  The reasoning behind this new superhero, excuse me, this new Superbishop, is that there is a sizable rebel faction within the Church that refuses to be lead by ordained women.  This is certainly going to go over well without anyone new protesting yet another sharp divide in which once again it is blatantly obvious that you cannot go very far in most main stream religions if you happen to be born without a penis.  

Why are there even women left in these churches?  I don’t think I would willingly include myself in any organization that informed me up front that I had no chance of elevating myself based purely on my birth right, so I find it difficult to wrap my brain around the scores of women that do involve themselves with such things, especially in less theocratic areas of the world.  People throw major fits when any other organizations blatantly discriminate against women, but in this case we have religious taboo shielding to protect any backlash that might come it’s way.  To the Church of England it is more important to prevent a few rebellious church goers from going to the Church of Rome, then it is to not screw over the entirety of the females in their church.

I really hope that one day in the not too distant future, women just get fed up and quit, leaving a bunch of power hungry men with nobody to push around.  They can go start their own churches where men can’t be anything other then Nun’s, which would also make them cross dressers keeping out a large amount of the homophobic nutty men from their new found church.  

Also I find it strange that the Church of England even needed a new subtype of Bishop.  Wouldn’t a normal male Bishop be perfectly capable of residing over these stubborn males that refuse to obey a female Bishop, despite her being ordained and therefore (correct me if I am in fact wrong) clearly capable in gods eyes of performing her duties to the church?  I guess these “Superbishops” are just another way of these “traditionalists” (read bigots) of feeling that they still in fact have more power then any mere women.  

 I however welcome our new Superbishops and all the bigotry and chauvinism they represent, because despite the years upon years of unfair rules being handed down by the our various churches, there is only so far one can push a group of people before things just start to deteriorate and collapse, and well if anybody reads the Internet (most people these days seem to.) far more often then not these days, people are calling out all the insane things that these institutions are finding it OK to do to their paying and caring customers.

 

Yea I meant customers.

 

*Edit

It turns out that the General Synod struck down the amendments by traditionalists to create Superbishops, and are thusly faced now with a potential split of the Church of England.  As far as I am concered though, they can only benefit by allowing these backwards bigots to leave the church and thereby distance themselves from such negative opinions of women.  

Good riddance!

Westboro babtist Church

Posted in Hate, PC, Religion, Westboro church with tags , , , , , , on July 4, 2008 by ddollas

I’m sure I will be blogging about this wonderful group of religious nuts many many times.

For anyone that is unaware about who these fanatics are, they are a independent Baptist church situated in Topkea Kansas that has actually been officially labeled as a “hate group” by the Southern poverty law center.  Their antics include running websites such as GodHatesFags.com, picketing the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq, attempting to link pretty much all terrible events in this country to the “homosexual agenda”, picketing the funerals of homosexuals killed via hate crimes, attempting to picket the funerals of the Amish children killed in a shooting, praised the earthquakes in china, thanked god for 9/11, and is going to picket and protest the funeral for late comedian George Carlin.

Normally I would be slightly more irate at stories like this, but it seems to be the general consensus that these people are just fucking out of their minds, they hate everything and everyone and seriously believe that all the worlds problems stem from homosexuality.  All too often the right to be a religious dickhead is upheld over ones personal freedom and liberty.  It is OK the exclude gays from some school activities because it is a christian based club that is doing the excluding, and forcing them to accept the gay members would infringe on their right to practice their religious tenement to hate gays without any rhyme or reason.  (source the God Delusion, read it)

However in this case laws have been based making it a felony to protest someones funeral in many of the states that the WBC has protested in, along with many lawsuits being filed against and won by family members of those targeted by their insane hate campaign.

Hopefully this group of hateful god worshippers will never gain any real crediblity and can continue to provide the non insane members of this country something to both laugh at and aspire never to be.