Tag Archives: politics

Wikipedia Reality Check

I’ve been reading a lot of Scott Adams lately; the husband and I even watched an interview between him and Mike Cernovich last night, which is saying a lot, as I normally don’t have the time or mental energy for podcasts or Youtube videos. Afterward, my husband told me I should read Scott Adam’s book, How to Fail at Everything and Still Win Big, for inspiration. He has not read the book, but is talking it up to me lately.

In any case, I did a search on Scott Adams, checking out his book (maybe I will buy it), and reading his Wiki entry. Other than his comics and his blog, I was not that familiar with the man. I’m not sure I’m better familiar with him, as I was reminded of why I don’t trust Wiki articles. They are often dishonest — intentionally so.

Compare these paragraphs:

(From the Wiki) In 2015, he stated that he would not endorse a candidate for the 2016 elections, but he has been offering praise for Donald Trump’s persuasion skills, especially on his blog. Adams has predicted that Trump will win both the Republican nomination and the general election in a huge landslide.[24] After Trump lost to Senator Ted Cruz in the Iowa caucus, rather than achieving a landslide victory as Adams had forecasted, Adams said that he suspected election fraud was committed and suggested that the caucus results were fixed by Republican Party elites.[25][26][27] Part of Adams’ views on the Trump campaign stem from his background in hypnosis. However, Adams officially announced his endorsement of Hillary Clinton in June 2016, stating that Clinton had paired “…the idea of President Trump with nuclear disaster, racism, Hitler, the Holocaust, and whatever else makes you tremble in fear” and that he would be “…a top-ten assassination target” because he “…wrote about his (Donald Trump’s) persuasion skills in positive terms”. [28]

(From Scott Adam’s blog) I’ll start by reminding readers that my politics don’t align with any of the candidates. My interest in the race has been limited to Trump’s extraordinary persuasion skills. But lately Hillary Clinton has moved into the persuasion game – and away from boring facts and policies – with great success. Let’s talk about that.

This past week we saw Clinton pair the idea of President Trump with nuclear disaster, racism, Hitler, the Holocaust, and whatever else makes you tremble in fear.

That is good persuasion if you can pull it off because fear is a strong motivator. It is also a sharp pivot from Clinton’s prior approach of talking about her mastery of policy details, her experience, and her gender. Trump took her so-called “woman card” and turned it into a liability. So Clinton wisely pivoted. Her new scare tactics are solid-gold persuasion. I wouldn’t be surprised if you see Clinton’s numbers versus Trump improve in June, at least temporarily, until Trump finds a counter-move.

The only downside I can see to the new approach is that it is likely to trigger a race war in the United States. And I would be a top-ten assassination target in that scenario because once you define Trump as Hitler, you also give citizens moral permission to kill him. And obviously it would be okay to kill anyone who actively supports a genocidal dictator, including anyone who wrote about his persuasion skills in positive terms. (I’m called an “apologist” on Twitter, or sometimes just Joseph Goebbels)….

…So I’ve decided to endorse Hillary Clinton for President, for my personal safety. Trump supporters don’t have any bad feelings about patriotic Americans such as myself, so I’ll be safe from that crowd. But Clinton supporters have convinced me – and here I am being 100% serious – that my safety is at risk if I am seen as supportive of Trump. So I’m taking the safe way out and endorsing Hillary Clinton for president.

In the Wiki article, the author/editor makes it appear as if Adams himself equates Trump with Hitler, and does not quote the satirical double-speak about Scott choosing to vote for Hillary because he is afraid of Hillary supporters. Oh, and re Trump not winning the Iowa caucus in a landslide, will someone please remind Wiki that as they update on the pro-Hillary propaganda, they might also want to update the fact that Trump did indeed win the Republican nomination in a landslide, just as Adams predicted?


I Said I Would No longer Talk Politics (I Guess I Lied)

I don’t write political posts. I don’t write them because politics tend to make me even more cynical than I already am, and so I self-medicate by writing humor that most people don’t find funny (so much for my career as a comedian). Today, however, I’m in a post-Christmas funk, and I’m tired of reading all the gun-control hype going around the internet. No, I’m sorry, but pithy memes won’t convince me of anything, and neither will the blinding emotional states people have over murdered little kids. Emotion is justifiable, of course. Still, we all need to grieve before we jump to rash conclusions, such as banning all semi-automatic assault weapons (whatever “assault” means). I can guarantee that Sen. Feinstein will simply use our collective emotional state against us with a gun ban bill she’s been planning for some time now. And if you’re the type who’s pro handgun, but feel that military-style assault weapons are unnecessary for common people, then you might want to get a hold of the bill text. The bill also calls for banning semi-automatic handguns that, according to the .gov summary, “can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics”. Um, yeah. That means the most popular handguns around (Glocks, Sig Sauers, Smith & Wessons, Colts, etc.) will be banned under Feinsteins’s plan for us.

Here are some facts that are simple to understand: the U.S. has the highest per capita gun ownership in the world. When I say we have the highest, I mean it’s off the charts. No other country even comes close, yet we aren’t by any stretch of the imagination the top of the list for highest gun murders per capita. We rest at twenty-eight. Some would say–and I know this because I’ve heard it repeated in a tiresome way–that we’re at number four. That number is dishonest because it’s calculated by a simple number of murders by gun rather than by a per capita tally. Per capita is actually quite simple to calculate; most people can do it with a calculator if they keep one handy. You take the number of known gun homicides, divide this number by the total population for an exact per capita or “per person” tally, and then multiply the result by 100,000 (it’s generally given as a number of homicides per 100,000 people, but you could be creative and use a per 500,000 as long as you’re consistent in using the same number for each country).

At this point, an astute person who checks up on my stats will take note that the U.S. has far more gun murders per 100,000 people than comparably wealthy, European countries. And, yes, I agree that our status in the world of violent crime, which is closer to West Bank & Gaza than it is to Sweden, is frightening. However, if you study this chart, you will not find a clear correlation between gun homicide per capita and gun ownership per capita. It would be better for all of us to take deep breaths and consider what might be causing our high gun homicide stats–you know, those pesky underlying causes. Although you may not find any exact causative factors, you’ll discover plenty of trends. For example, there’s an enormous correlation between poverty and violent crime that must not be ignored. Also, it would be wise to consider what the war on drugs has done to our violent crime rates. Dare I ask how we’ve treated the mentally ill in our society? Dare I wonder how this correlates to the rash of mass shootings?

I know. I get it. Nobody wants to consider that we might have a hell of lot of disenfranchised people in our country. Personally speaking, I hate guns and tend toward pacifism. I want to stick my head in the sand and pretend that if we all just give up our guns peaceably, divine karma will inevitably visit us. But I’m also a realist. I’ve studied far too much history and know what happens when people are disenfranchised. I know what happens when governments disarm the people. And it’s never for the benefit or protection of the people. It’s either for the purpose of maintaining control over them (treating the people like peasantry), or it’s for the purpose of exterminating defenceless population groups.

I’m not attempting to make an airtight case for the right to bear arms in this short space. Also, I’m not opposed to any and all regulations of weapons, but don’t feel like arguing “proper regulation” right now. I don’t have a large enough readership to make a difference, anyway. I don’t know what I’m doing, except dropping words in the void because I can. So here are my last words: I don’t want to see our government manipulate us because we’re in pain over the murders of innocent children. Rather, we need to use our pain to find solutions for underlying causes–poverty, mental illness, instability.


A Call to Just Servanthood

We are wards of the state. Open your eyes. Look around you. Neither presidential candidate is going to give you your freedom. This is NOT your year of jubilee. As the indentured servant of the state, you vote as a pretense of power and liberation, but you are merely voting for the candidate who will make your servitude more comfortable. You must now ask yourself: What will my candidate do for me after all my years of hard work? Will he provide me free healthcare, no strings attached? Will he provide me free food if I need it, or a retirement package so that I won’t have to provide labor for him until the day I drop?

This is a major decision for all of us–as wards–because the implication is that, if we accept the benefits our chieftain offers, we will also have to live our lives the way he tells us. We may have to send our sons to fight his endless wars. We may or may not be able to marry the person we choose–remember, our chieftain doesn’t believe in the ideal of free association, but desires that we act honorably by forging a contract with him. Later, our daughters may or may not be able to have abortions the way they want them, and they may be forced to use his idea of birth control, OR they may be forced to vaccinate their children against their wills. On the other hand, he may provide all of us with free birth control and free vaccinations because we deem this as part of our birthright as servant sons of the state. We demand it, not because we can’t legally buy these medical treatments for ourselves, but because we’re tired and we deserve to have the things we want at no cost.

You see, it’s tiring being a ward of the state. It’s tiresome when we realize that we will work all our lives and buy all kinds of fancy things with the money our beneficent chieftain allows us to keep, but we will never own the ground where we squat to raise our families. We will never own our property. We will never be able to pass it down to our children and grandchildren in any legitimate fashion. Only our chieftain-state has the legal right to the land; only our most honored landlord possesses the final say-so. He holds our birthright, our blessing. Open your eyes. If you don’t believe this is the case, then I challenge you to stop paying your property taxes. Your landlord will not be happy with you, his rebellious ward. He’ll confiscate your land–seize it from your family–and sell it cheaply to a better, more compliant tenant. He will render you homeless because you haven’t honored him. You aren’t a jewel in his crown.

Open your eyes. It’s crucial that you see the truth. It’s crucial in this most important election just around the corner. You need to vote for the candidate(s) who will create a pleasant space for you, his ward, in your retirement–and even earlier, perhaps. You need to ensure that you’re able, after all is said and done, after you’ve worked for so many years, to have everything your heart desires–for free! As wards of the state, you deserve no less than whatever it happens to be that you want.

Vote accordingly.