I don’t write often about politics much any more because I really would prefer to focus on the nice and pleasant things our world has to offer. But I made the mistake of clicking a link describing how an Ohio judge has called out several of the Cleveland Browns players for being idiots. He stated as a veteran, he wasn’t willing to attend any games where players showed disrespect to the people who indirectly made it possible for the players to be there.
This nonsense is an extension of the publicity stunt that talentless Kaepernick decided the only way to get publicity was to kneel for the national anthem. Apparently he’s having a hard time finding a job this year.
I also learned the NAACP has an interim president who lacks the basic understanding of cause and effect, which suggests to me the NAACP should find a smarter person to put at the helm of their organization, if they wish to retain any semblance of credibility.
“No player should be victimized and discriminated against because of his exercise of free speech – to do so is in violation of his rights under the Constitution and the NFL’s own regulations,” NAACP Interim President Derrick Johnson.
Now if Kaepernick had any discernable talent on the football field, owners would be willing to put up with the circus he brings along with him. But he’s, at best, a mediocre player, and therefore isn’t worth the headache.
Despite the refusal to acknowledge it, there are consequences to actions. This is how life actually works, when you step out of college safe zones and the comfort of academia where you can cry until you get your way. Actions have consequences.
Personally, I think the NFL is an utter waste of time, yet another religion competing for your time and money. I don’t pay much attention to the NFL; but if I had, I would have quit paying attention last year after this take a knee nonsense. I’m not blinded by the belief that America is in anyway superior, and I’m as critical of it as they come. But football’s a business, and I don’t spend my money at places that thumb their nose at me.
Kaepernick took a knee, and now he’s just another Monday morning quarterback. Serves him right.
This week, some insignificant peon in bully Roger Goodell’s organization threatened Texas over a perfectly legal piece of legislation. Regardless of your stance on so-called Bathroom Bills, the states enacting such legislation are perfectly within their rights to do so. Now I realize I’m attacking the number one religion in America, but the NFL seriously needs to examine its priorities.
Earlier in the year, the NFL denied a request to allow the Dallas Cowboys to wear a decal honoring some Dallas Police Officers who were killed by Micah Xavier Johnson during a Black Lives Matter protest.
At the same time all of this was going on, the NFL was more than willing to let spoiled brat (and — let’s be honest here — washed up, mediocre football player) Colin Kaepernick “protest” the country that subscribes to the religion he’s a part of by kneeling during the national anthem. No disciplinary action came from that little temper tantrum, though it kept Kaepernick in the news, which is no doubt what he wanted since he’s completely irrelevant otherwise.
Of course, the media ate it all up: The BLM cop-killing terrorists fits neatly in the if it bleeds it leads category, and also fits nicely with the narrative they want to push. Kaepernick’s temper tantrum also fits nicely into their anti-America mentality. I’m no fan of Trump, but he’s not wrong when he recently mentioned the media is the enemy of the people: They’re more than happy to tear into and destroy anyone who doesn’t agree with them. Because the left hates freedom.
Which brings us back to the NFL, one of — if not the — largest media whores ever seen. Despite its religious status in the country, the NFL is merely an entertainment vehicle. It’d do well to remember that and stay in that box. In a state whose love for football is nearly a cliché, governor Greg Abbott told the NFL as much.
“For some low-level NFL adviser to come out and say that they are going to micromanage and try to dictate to the state of Texas what types of policies we’re going to pass in our state, that’s unacceptable,” Abbott told Beck. “We don’t care what the NFL thinks and certainly what their political policies are because they are not a political arm of the state of Texas or the United States of America. They need to learn their place in the United States, which is to govern football, not politics.”
I’m no fan of politicians, but this guy gets it. This guy understands that for all its imagined power, the NFL is at the mercy of the people who subscribe to its religion. These people could stand up to the NFL and make it known their place is on the gridiron, not in politics. Will they? I doubt it — religious zealotry doesn’t make sense: an organization can oppose all the values people claim they hold dear, but they’ll still support it. Which is essentially what’s happening here.
I, for one, don’t watch football. I have in the past, but I just can’t be bothered to waste my life caring about organizations that do nothing but take. So if I’m the only one boycotting the NFL, I’m okay with that.
I wrote Greg Abbott’s office an email indicating my appreciation for his actions. We’ll see how it plays out, of course.
How do you know if a person is unqualified for public office?
He’s running for one.
The US has a serious problem in this 2016 presidential election: No one currently running for the office is qualified to do the job. Now, this isn’t something that stops people from becoming president. Lincoln, Grant, both Roosevelts, Truman, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Bush, Clinton, and Obama weren’t or aren’t qualified to do the job, but that didn’t stop any of them from getting the gig. It’s apparently an American tradition to set the bar as low as possible for a presidential candidate and then vote for the one that can slither under it.
However, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are so apocalyptically unfit for the office in a way that makes even Lincoln’s dictatorship seem reasonable. They’re not even two different sides of the same coin, they’re the same side. Everyone already knows the list of crimes both these worthless sacks have committed, yet no one seems to care. On one hand, you have the Party of Hate yelling that it’s time for a woman president; and on the other, you have the Party of Hate yelling it’s time for change. Hey, I don’t disagree it’s time for a change; but I’d like to think that change should be for the better. And if a change for the better came in the form of a woman who was willing to put up with the world’s worst job, I’d vote for her.
Neither party’s voters is even voting for their own candidate as much as voting against the other party’s candidate. So even the people voting for these worthless candidates don’t actually want that person in the white house; they just want to have the other person in there less. That’s idiotic and a bad formula for picking the next
dictator leader of your country.
Do you ever wonder if England looks at this mess and thinks Whew! We dodged a bullet there!?
I never planned to vote for Trump; but to be perfectly honest, I never expected that he would become the Republican party’s candidate in the first place. The Republican party started off with a great collection of possible candidates. Rand, Cruz, Rubio… I could have supported any of them. I sure as hell won’t support the angry Oompa Loompa. Not a chance. The Trump bandwagon knows it can’t win against that miserable waste of flesh Hillary (how sad and pathetic is that?), and has resorted to threatening conservatives that it’s Trump or nothing. If you don’t vote for Trump, you’re voting for Hillary.
No. It’s not that at all. Voting for either is a vote for tyranny. And perhaps now you can understand why I’m writing this today, Independence Day: I refuse to vote for a tyrant. I may be among a small group of conservatives against which the hatred from both parties grows. I understand my vote probably won’t prevail against the tides of stupidity. I’m sure someone unqualified and unwanted by the people that voted against the other guy will be in the oval office come January. I’m okay with that. I’m less okay that I’ll be living in even more a dictatorship than I have been this point. I understand I’ll still be a slave to the lunatic religion of the Liberal Left, with all its double standards and inconsistencies and absolute hatred of everything. But I’ll be a slave with a clear conscious: I’ll have actually voted for my candidate.
Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.
So I read this youthdigital blog post about getting girls into coding. I shouldn’t have.
Now, before I begin, let me make my thoughts on this general topic clear: I don’t think it’s a bad idea for women to get into coding if they’re interested in it. I encourage my daughter to learn how to write code, since I think it would be good for her. Writing software teaches problem solving skills in a way that not a lot else can.
The problem I have with this article revolves around a couple of sentences at the beginning. Here’s the quote:
In 2015, girls made up less than 22 percent of all students who took the AP Computer Science exam. And only 18 percent of computer science degrees are awarded to women.
It’s clear that girls are not receiving the same technology education that their male counterparts are.
This is complete nonsense. I didn’t bother checking the cited percentages because those percentages mean exactly nothing.
There is no vast conspiracy keeping women from getting computer science degrees or preventing them from taking the AP Computer Science exam. In fact, I would suggest the reason “girls are not receiving the same technology education that their male counterparts are” is because the girls aren’t interested in pursuing it.
Now, if I were as irresponsible in my interpretation of this poorly written bit of crap as they were in their choice of words, I would say youthdigital endorses forcing women and girls to become coders regardless of what the girls in question want. How bloody empowering is that? Isn’t forcing women to do things against their own wishes the exact opposite of what we’re told is the point of feminism?
And while I’m on this line of thought, there’s no “Silicon Valley Conspiracy” to keep minorities out of this field either. None. In fact, with affirmative action and similar quota-systems in place, should minorities wish to pursue computer-related educations, it would probably be easier for them to do so. Women and girls included. It’s a lie that this industry has no diversity.
The opportunity is there for anyone to pursue. If they choose to do so.
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. — Edison
More than half of Americans are utter and complete idiots. Of course, we knew this already because Obama is president (elected twice, even!). Now, the FBI has squared off against Apple in a Public Relations war so as not to appear as the Evil Big Government’s Schutzstaffel they clearly are. And Americans, mostly democrats (of course), are willing to surrender their protection against search and seizure to the Feds.
I, personally, don’t like Apple as a company, and I don’t like their products. And (I’m aware of the sacrilegious nature of this statement) I’m not even a fan of or enamored by Steve Jobs — if his products were really that good, they wouldn’t need a Fort Knox-like protective barrier around their sleek, slim designs. So, yes, I think Apple is ridiculous. But the stance they’ve made on this issue is the right one. It’s not surprising the Federal Government has made a policy of overstepping its constitutional authority. That’s not news, but it doesn’t make it illegal for them to do so.
The articles linked to above are about the public’s perception, and it doesn’t say exactly what was asked. I’m curious what the same people would say if the question were phrased: Do you think Apple should hand over your personal data to the FBI?
Now, I understand, that may not change the percentages very much. I’ve already pointed out (with supporting evidence) that many Americans are scheißdumm. But that personalizes the issue, and here’s how: What’s to keep the FBI from labeling you a terrorist and ransacking your personal life? Granted, they can do this now, I get it; but they at least have to pretend to have cause.
The Federal Government and it’s various Schutzstaffeln have the means to brute force the technology currently; they want Apple’s help to make it easier, because the gimme-gimme-gimme mentality is pervasive in this country. But if Apple were to give in to this, they would be sending a clear message to the public that they don’t value the privacy of their customers. Plain and simple. For that reason alone, they should stay the course. We already know we can’t trust the Federal Government with technology. Once they have the ability to side load invasive software on one phone, they’ll do it where ever they please (fourth amendment be damned), and you’d be a fool to think otherwise.
Die Gedankenpolizei are here. Political Correctness and the Left’s war on freedom is but one front the Thought Police wage against the America they hate. Perversely, it’s the elitist media, those useful idiots of die Schutzstaffel, that are the biggest pushers of this crap. And the public has bought the lie wholesale. 1984 isn’t fiction; it’s here, it’s now. The last tie I read this, I wasn’t thinking of Soviet Russia — I was comparing it to our current Soviet America. It’s as if the Liberal Left looked at it, not as the warning against totalitarianism that it is, but as a How-To guide to implementing the Fascist State in which we currently live.
I’m not a Confederate Flag apologist; I don’t have any particular attachment to it. The whining leftist weenie censorship element in our country has done a good job of convincing the ignorant, unwashed masses that it’s a symbol of racism, a term which itself is a semantic satiation any more.
But in reality, the Confederate States of America were formed in response to a repressive, bullying federal government that blatantly overstepped its Constitutional boundaries in direct violation to the 10th Amendment. Sort of like the repressive, bullying federal government does today.
The difference was, the Confederates believed enough in their rights to stand up to the repressive, bullying federal government and its boundaries-trashing president. I bet Lincoln wishes he could’ve distracted the unwashed masses with ESPN back then while he blatantly disregarded the Constitution. Obama doesn’t know how good he’s got it.
And while the federal government has continued to violate, undermine, and actively destroy our Constitutional freedom, it’s also done its damnedest to vilify those who stood up for theirs, to ensure that no one tries it again. And it seems to be working.
We live in a country so full of ignorance that the majority have no idea what’s going on. They’re the product of a public school education, which means they’ve been taught by the very same federal government whose sole purpose is self-preservation. And that ignorance is pervasive and spreading.
Case in point:
A man in Louisiana wants a Confederate flag on a cake. Wal-Mart refuses. So he goes in the next day and asks for a cake with the ISIS battle flag on it. Guess what?
Per Wal-Mart policy, it’s perfectly acceptable to decorate a cake with the symbol of a group that beheads people, burns them alive, and who knows what other atrocities they’ve committed that the liberal leftist awestruck media hasn’t gleefully reported. But it’s not okay to put the Confederate flag on a cake.
I know the company has issued a pro forma apology to the man, lest those it’s fleecing think less of the company while it engages in its campaign of censorship. But even putting aside the empty words and censorship they’re engaging in, there are a couple of problems that I can see. The first, is that this “talented bakery associate” was so ignorant that he or she had no idea what this man was asking. Secondly, the company thinks this is acceptable and condemned the customer for probing Wal-Mart’s loyalties. This speaks volumes about where the company places its values.
And this is indicative of what’s wrong with Wal-Mart. I haven’t done my shopping at Wal-Mart in five or six years at least. I quit going there because I got tired of the dirty, disgusting stores, the entirely discourteous, clueless, and apathetic staff, and most of the rest of the other people there. In short, I got tired of dealing with these sorts of “talented associates” and this sort of corporate dogma. And if I had never spent another dime in Wal-Mart, it wouldn’t have hurt my feelings.
While it was an In-A-Pinch option before, I’d rather do without than spend any of my money at Wal-Mart ever again. I think the company’s demonstrated where its loyalty lay. Wal-Mart has every right to be pro-ISIS, pro-censorship, pro-political correctness, and pro-ignorance (pardon the redundancy of the last three; I’m aware they are all the same thing). But by not shopping there, none of my money will find its way via the Wal-Mart Avenue to ISIS’s coffers.