I don’t agree with Joe Biden’s politics or policies. I always found him an affable man but one that is largely full of shit. You can say the exact same thing about President Trump without the affable part. But the difference between the two, and it is a giant difference, is that Joe Biden obviously no longer has the capacity to be a functioning politician let alone president. He’s become a willing, or unwilling, dupe in order to get elected.
On July 28 2020, Biden gave a speech that launches his campaign slogan “Build Back Better.” Yes, it’s a lame slogan, but it’s also taken from the far left pushers of the “Green New Deal.” Putting this part aside for the moment just watch the first few minutes of Biden’s speech. He tries to joke about is age and diminishing faculties but it really comes off as making him look feeble and suffering from mild dementia.
Now on to his slogan. Here is a video uploaded to YouTube on June 17, 2020, under the TEDx moniker, from Professor John Barry. Mr. Barry is a professor of Green Political Economy and Co-Director of the Centre for Sustainability, Equality and Climate Action in the School of History, Anthropology, Philosophy and Politics at Queens University Belfast. What a mouthful of gobbledygook. In this video he talks about killing off capitalism, pushes his socialist agenda, and yes, he talks about “Build Back Better.”
A vote for Joe Biden is a vote against everything the United States stands for. The United States is not for equality of outcomes it is for equality of opportunity. State management of human lives has failed every time it has been tried.
A vote for Joe Biden is also a vote for someone who no longer has the mental capacity to be president. You’re voting ideology over country.
Wow. We all knew it was bad at places like the New York Times but this resignation letter written by one of their opinion writers, Bari Weiss, is a barn burner of a letter. She lets loose on the staff at the Times and describes such a hostile work environment that goes unchecked by the powers that be. They allow employees to be as bigoted as they please as long as their bigotry is aimed at those that don’t tow the far left liberal orthodoxy. Here’s an excerpt but you should really read the entire thing. And, when you read the New York Times keep everything she says in the back of your mind.
Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times. But Twitter has become its ultimate editor. As the ethics and mores of that platform have become those of the paper, the paper itself has increasingly become a kind of performance space. Stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions.I was always taught that journalists were charged with writing the first rough draft of history. Now, history itself is one more ephemeral thing molded to fit the needs of a predetermined narrative.
My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me a Nazi and a racist; I have learned to brush off comments about how I’m “writing about the Jews again.” Several colleagues perceived to be friendly with me were badgered by coworkers. My work and my character are openly demeaned on company-wide Slack channels where masthead editors regularly weigh in. There, some coworkers insist I need to be rooted out if this company is to be a truly “inclusive” one, while others post ax emojis next to my name. Still other New York Times employees publicly smear me as a liar and a bigot on Twitter with no fear that harassing me will be met with appropriate action. They never are.
There are terms for all of this: unlawful discrimination, hostile work environment, and constructive discharge. I’m no legal expert. But I know that this is wrong.
A group of journalists, authors, writers, entertainers and academics signed on to an open letter in Harper’s Magazine. The subject of the open letter is the signatories’ concern regarding cancel culture and open debate and discussion of “controversial” subjects. The letter is short and is benign. Read it for yourself at the link above. Here’s the gist of what they said.
This stifling atmosphere will ultimately harm the most vital causes of our time. The restriction of debate, whether by a repressive government or an intolerant society, invariably hurts those who lack power and makes everyone less capable of democratic participation. The way to defeat bad ideas is by exposure, argument, and persuasion, not by trying to silence or wish them away. We refuse any false choice between justice and freedom, which cannot exist without each other.
Here’s some of the response that harmless letter engendered among the cancel culturists.
Because the American left is basically a war zone at the moment—or online it is, at least—what happened next shouldn’t surprise anyone: A group of us posted the letter and celebrated it, while another much angrier group denounced it and held it up as proof of…well, whatever it is they hate about us and want to get us fired over (this crowd likes calling the manager). Now, it shouldn’t have surprised me—I have been through multiple rounds of this stuff—but I have to admit it did.
One such reaction came from Parker Molloy, a staffer at the left-leaning Media Matters, who insisted, of a letter that includes Rushdie and Kasparov, “not a single one of them have been censored anytime in recent history.” In the subsequent tweetstorm, she said of the signatories:
“They want you to sit down. They want you to shut up. They want you to do as you’re told. By them. Specifically.”
“They are totalitarians in the waiting,” she wrote. “They are bad people.”
The Millennial Generation once again showing that growing up being sheltered from anything that might harm them, mentally or physically, has made them quite sick. If you cannot handle arguing with people over different ideas what can you handle?
I wish I was so elegant as to be able to write such an opinion. This op-ed in the Wall Street Journal regarding the recent decision by the Supreme Court on transgender rights is so beautifully written and the argument so wonderfully presented. I read it twice.
The decision handed down from the Supreme Court created law that made us all transgender and effectively removed any pretense of nature determining whether we are male or female. Now it’s all in your mind.
To say that a man who believes he is a woman is exactly the same as a woman is an affront, and should be offensive, to all natural born women. For men it is different. I do hold a bit of a double standard because I believe that men and women are truly different biologically. That is not to say one is superior over the other. Men and women are just different and no amount of judicial decision or legislation will take away the discrimination that exists in people’s heads.
The example shows the ruling’s totalitarian character. It requires everyone to live for all public and practical purposes as if what they know to be true in their pre-ideological experience of reality—the knowledge we imbibe with our mother’s milk—were officially false, a “stereotype.” Even worse, it requires everyone to live as if what they know to be false were officially true. Ironically, what is now “true” is nothing but stereotypes, that bundle of mannerisms, dress, makeup and hairstyles by which one imagines what it feels like to be a woman or a man. Worse still, it prefers them, especially when they are at odds with one’s actual sex. The war on pronouns, an assault upon the language by which we recognize a world in common, follows of necessity. What we are dealing with is nothing less than a war on reality itself. And everyone has just been pressed into service.
There is no totalitarianism so total as that which claims authority over the meaning of nature. Increasingly the courts are assuming this authority, though they typically exercise it in part unconsciously, even ignorantly, and in part dishonestly and subversively, all under the pretense of “neutrally” mediating between interests, rights, powers and authorities. Or in this case, simply parsing “plain English.” But this is bosh, and no one believes it.
I just read an opinion piece in the New York Times where cardiologist, Dr. Sandeep Jauhar talks about people not going to the doctor or hospitals during the COVID-19 bruhaha. In this article he talks about how perhaps we go to the doctor too much. I agree.
When you go to the doctor they’re don’t just examine you for the reasons you are there. Because of laws and insurance they must run a battery of tests and examine things you don’t want just to protect themselves from our wonderful litigious society.
The big revelation and talk about burying the lead Dr. Jauhar slips in this paragraph.
In a survey a few years ago, two-thirds of doctors in the United States admitted that between 15 percent and 30 percent of health care is probably unnecessary.
I had no idea and I know I never saw this reported in the media. Maybe I missed it. Regardless, this should be huge news. What the hell are we doing?
In an effort to hear from physicians about the magnitude of the “too much medical care” problem, the Johns Hopkins research team—part of a national consortium exploring ways to reduce unneeded care—invited 3,318 physicians to complete a survey about health care practices. The survey was conducted between Jan. 22 and March 8, 2014, and a total of 2,106 physicians’ responses were included in the published research report.
The majority of the physicians who responded to the survey said they believed that at least 15 to 30 percent of medical care is not needed.
Breaking down the types of unnecessary medical care, survey respondents reported that 22 percent of prescription medications, 24.9 percent of medical tests, 11.1 percent of procedures, and 20.6 percent of overall medical care delivered is unnecessary. The median response for physicians who perform unnecessary procedures for profit motive was 16.7 percent.
Physicians with at least 10 years of experience after residency and specialists were more likely to believe that physicians perform unnecessary procedures when they profit from them.
If you care at all about freedom in the United States and the division being sowed between black and white people today, especially today, you need to watch Uncle Tom.
This movie, produced by Larry Elder, is extremely important because it shows that the black community is not a single ideological voting block. It shows that some black people are tired of protesting racism while continuing to vote for the same political party that perpetuates that racism.
This movie gives a different perspective on the history of black people in the United States. It pushes a perspective that in many ways the black community was more cohesive prior to the Civil Rights Act. It doesn’t say the Civil Rights Act was a bad thing. It does say the policies enacted in the wake of it were designed to weaken the black community at the time when they should have compounded the gains already achieved.
This movie is important because black people are giving their stories. They tell of when they reached the realization that they were part of the problem and perpetuating the old way of thinking. They were the ones holding themselves and others in their communities back. They decided to stop and make the change to improve the lives of not just black people but of all Americans.
Liberals of the United States created what they believe to be a permanent victim class and people like Larry Elder are trying to interrupt the victim thought process and push people to take control.
First it was the Land O Lakes Native American woman, then Aunt Jemima, and now they’ve come for the Eskimo Pie. We can’t have nice things anymore.
The owner of Eskimo Pie treats said it would change the name of the nearly century-old ice cream brand because the term is derogatory, following similar moves this week by the makers of Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben’s.
“We are committed to being a part of the solution on racial equality, and recognize the term is derogatory,” Elizabell Marquez, head of marketing for Dreyer’s Grand Ice Cream, said in a statement.
Forget that the images and connotation of the above names and likenesses have changed over time to better reflect the sensitivities of the day. According to the keeper of all knowledge, Wikipedia, the word Eskimo is not a derogatory word.
Etymologically speaking, there exists a scientific consensus that the word Eskimo comes from the Innu-aimun (Montagnais) word ayas̆kimew meaning “a person who laces a snowshoe” and is related to “husky” (a breed of dog), and it does not have a pejorative meaning in origin.
Today we’re just too sensitive for anything. Or the skeptic in me sees this as a marketing opportunity for a brand that has been in the deep freeze for a while (I’ll stop with the puns now). Who eats Eskimo Pies anymore?
In that same vein, I propose we change the name of the State of Illinois to the State of Bankruptcy. At least it’s an honest description.
Why should we appropriate the culture of the Inoka? Using the name of Native Americans that used to roam this state is insulting to those people. Look what we’ve done to this beautiful land.
Google is at it once again. For some unknown reason, later this year, they are deprecating Google Play Music (GPM) for YouTube Music (YM). What the hell is wrong with this company? They always feel the need to fix things that aren’t broken or to kill off products. I’ve been using GPM since it was first available and it was by far the easiest way to listen to my music library. Today I received the link to transfer my library and playlists from one to the other. So far I am not impressed whatsoever with YM.
YM is too graphic heavy. It’s pushing video all the time. There are three tabs on the bottom. Home, Explore, and Library. On the home screen I’m greeted with junk. Today is Juneteenth (which is a dumb name and should be changed to Emancipation Day or something else more appropriate because Juneteenth is not a word and doesn’t mean anything) and front and center are things relating to Juneteenth. I don’t care! I just want to get to my music and not be pushed to engage in stuff that doesn’t matter to me.
Next I hop on over to the Library tab. I’m greeted with what YM thinks is my most recent activity. It is not correct. The recent activity also included the Billboard Top 50 Christian Songs Playlist. I have never listened to this playlist… EVER. There is no way to get rid of that selection either.
Frequently I go to either a playlist I set up or I go directly to the artist I want to hear. In YM I tap on the Artists tab and the next screen has two tabs at the top. YT Music and Uploads. But let’s start with the list of Recently Added things. Who the fuck is Chris August? I’ve never heard of him and never listened to him. I don’t want to click on it either to find out in fear that Google’s algorithm will somehow think it’s something I want. Forgetting about Mr. August for a moment. The list is not what I recently added. It’s not the same as the recent activity on the last screen either. Shouldn’t the two things be related?
Let’s say I want to listen to Lianne La Havas. I tap on her name in the recently added list and I’m presented with a giant picture of her links to shuffle play, radio, an icon for her latest release, and the beginnings of her top songs. In GPM you would see the artists top songs right away and more than just one would be present. But scrolling down isn’t much better. After a few more of her tops songs the next thing you see is simply Albums and after that simply Singles. Are these all her albums and singles? Are they part of my library? What are they? After that you get the categories of Videos, Featured On, and Fans might also like.
You know what I want when I get to the artists page? I want to know if they have released anything new (which is fine here) and I want to get to the tracks in my library. After all that’s why I’m in the Library section of the app. But nowhere can I tell what is supposed to be in my library. In GPM there is a section on the artists page that shows exactly what’s in your library. I don’t have to guess or remember what is mine and what is other stuff in their catalog.
The next tab on the artists page is Uploads. This is a totally useless tab. It lists everything I’ve uploaded by artist alphabetically. But it’s not smart at all. In the pic above take a look at the bottom two uploads. They are separate tracks from the same album and YM lists them as if they are from different artists even though they are from the same artist and album. The metadata on the song lists the artist as being different on these two tracks because Alicia Keys gives credit to other artists that are on each track. This is stupid. It does that for several artists and albums. Any time an artist is featuring another artist and it’s in the metadata it will list it as if it is a different artist. This makes this tab unusable.
All I can say is thank you to Google. They are going to save me $9.99 per month because I will be cancelling my Play Music subscription as soon as the GPM app disappears. I’m not paying for YM and it’s pain in the ass music app.
I’ve already started to migrate over to using my own cloud media server from Subsonic. This is simple software that you install on your computer, tell it where your media files are located, install an app on your phone, and access your own music library anywhere in the world. It’s not as elegant as GPM and not as user friendly but the premium version only costs $1/month.
For other music that I want to sample I’ll use Amazon Music. I already pay for Prime. If I want new music I’ll buy it, download it to my PC, and stream it using my own personal cloud.
I’m so sick of Google doing this to their apps and services. I already stopped using Chrome and mostly stopped using Google.com for search. Next I have to figure out how to extricate myself from Gmail. If it wasn’t for their superior spam filtering I would have stopped using that long ago.
Back to wrapping up my opinion on YM. Don’t use it. It sucks balls.
Clearly I have failed. In so many things and in so many ways. Some days these failures actually have a visceral effect on me and some days I just chalk it up to life.
The easy to take failures are ones that maybe were not totally in my control. It’s easier to accept the ones where success or failure was tipped in the wrong direction by things which I could not change or assert enough influence.
The visceral failures are the ones most difficult to cope with. These are things I felt I had control. I had the bases covered. I knew where I started and I knew where the goalpost was. I had a strategy. I feel I’ve done absolutely everything I could have done. I feel I made all the right decisions and took the right actions. I thought what I set out to do succeeded. Then I find that all my efforts were in vain. Little of what I set out to accomplish actually happened. I crashed and burned and there is no one to blame but myself. That stuff hurts. I can’t fix it either. It’s just there and will always be there.
The positive side of it is that once I accept the failure I can move on. My problem is that I haven’t succeeded at acceptance yet. Not a single time.
Millennials don’t know what they are doing. They are killing the United States and classical liberalism. I’m not talking about “liberals” like members of the Democratic Party I’m talking about classical liberalism where ideas matter.
There is no freedom of thought in their ranks. You either tow the line or you are ostracized and pushed to irrelevance. Sooner or later this will all come back to bite them. When the next generation or the generation after that rebels against the political correctness and the control freaks of the Millennial Generation. I don’t know how they’re going to deal with a lack of a safe space 30 or 40 years from now when they are at the end of their reign.
I always thought the Baby Boomers were the worst generation. But, I have reconsidered and now it is the Millennials. They’re rotten from the inside and don’t know it. That kind of ignorance is dangerous to a free society.
An ostensibly independent opinion section was ransacked because the social-justice warriors in the newsroom opposed a single article espousing a view that polls show tens of millions of Americans support if the police can’t handle rioting and violence. The publisher failed to back up his editors, which means the editors no longer run the place. The struggle sessions on Twitter and Slack channels rule.
All of this shows the extent to which American journalism is now dominated by the same moral denunciation, “safe space” demands, and identity-politics dogmas that began in the universities. The agents of this politics now dominate nearly all of America’s leading cultural institutions—museums, philanthropy, Hollywood, book publishers, even late-night talk shows.
On matters deemed sacrosanct—and today that includes the view that America is root-and-branch racist—there is no room for debate. You must admit your failure to appreciate this orthodoxy and do penance, or you will not survive in the job.