Handy Resources

Understanding the 2012 Election

My Sister's Blog New!

The Desktop Dyno

Salem Gravity Gran Prix

Jordan's Eagle Project.

Duke Boys Car Chase

LoL Cartoons

Logic Primer

Gymkhana Practice

Compass Course Spreadsheet

Complete Orienteering Course Files

Things you may not know about Sarah Palin

Amazing Grace on the Sax

Obama's Magic 8 Ball

Oh, wait . . . that's from an alternate universe

Refresh to get latest blog entry

Inauguration Day
1.20.17

So apparently Obama is leaving office with a 273% approval rating . . . according to the reports I'm hearing.

But he also has a 45% disapproval rating.

Someone wondered what portion of that 45% were "racists/bigots who are still seething because a black guy was elected."

:-o

If you are one of the deranged lunatics who believes that the opposition to Barack Obama is because of his race, I'm never going to convince you of anything different.

So why do I keep beating that dead horse?

Because idiots keep making ridiculous statements characterizing opposition to the man as racism and bigotry from people seething that a black guy was elected.

Well, this is the last day. After today I won't. this is the last time I'll have to mention it.

Sweetest words: On the radio they described Obama getting on the helicopter and turning to wave. Then the commentator said "His tenure as President is over."

Yes!

(I'm obviously a racist.)

So I'm explaining the way it is one last time. But I'm not trying to convince you of my position. Either you already understand or you never will.

But if you believe we are "seething" because a black guy got elected, my talking about it just convinces you all the more that you are right. And righteous.

Like my comments saying that "I hate that Obama is black." You read that and you go all social justice warrior and spend all night in your mom's basement typing up passionate retorts to all your little friends on the social media (dude, I'm all "the social media").

See, you don't have the intelligence to understand the concept, and you further don't have the intelligence to understand how stupid you look defending an absurd premise. So my continuing to talk about my position makes you screech your position (I'm seething, you're screeching).

Then everybody looks at you and your unhinged arguments and realizes I'm right.

Hang on . . .

Mom! Wait a minute! I'm typing up retorts to imaginary liberals! Oh, can you come down and get my laundry?

Okay, so . . . I know I'm not going to convince you I'm right. But your caterwauling is going to convince everyone else I am.

Thanks.

'Cause I like saying #ByeFailicia.

. . . and today's the last day I get to say it.

. . . except three years from now Obama is still going to be running around the country doing his Final Goodbye Tour.

Okay, so here are some extra points that go with the last post. Except they would have messed up the flawless flow of the prose of that post.

I'll concede that there are probably about 12 people in the United States have a problem with a black man as President. Racism isn't dead. Especially not after the left's frenetic efforts to revive it over the last 8 years.

But . . . two things.

1) the left has pushed race relations back a half century with their rape/race hoax. When everything is racism, nothing is.

2) The ridiculously low number of troglodytes who might have a problem with a black man as President certainly has no bearing whatsoever on our national politics.

Except for the other side trying to make it an issue (point 1) which then would prompt me to have you refer to point 2 and around and around.

Okay. Some of the deranged lunatics who are talking about people still seething about a black guy being elected President are not stupid enough to believe it. They are smart enough to understand it's not true, but have an agenda to push.

You, dear imaginary reader, have seen this Evil/Stupid matrix a hundred times. So I won't put it in a matrix . . . 'cause I'm too lazy to create a table.

Here is a fact: Mustang is manufactured by Ford.

Now, if someone says that Mustangs are manufactured by Ford, the reason he's saying that is because . . . well, it's true. It's the way things are.

So we've dispatched that whole side of the matrix. (I really should make a table. Nah. Why?)

Moving to the other side, the wrong side. If someone says that Mustangs are made by Chevrolet, well, that's just plain wrong. It ain't so.

So why would someone say that? Well, he might be stupid. Excuse me, ignorant or misinformed. He may truly believe that, gotten bad information, heard the right thing once and doesn't have the mental capacity to remember it.

Maybe he doesn't care enough to know. Is that a Chevrolet Mustang? Dude, Mustangs are Fords. Whatever.

Maybe he knows, but for some reason he's trying to pull one over on you. Maybe he knows you want a Mustang, but he's trying to sell you some crappy Chevy Nova. You sure this is a Mustang? Of course. Well, what's with the Chevrolet emblems on here? Sure, it's a Chevrolet Mustang. Oh . . and how come the word Mustang is spray painted on here?

Maybe he's trying to be funny. You know what would be freaking hilarious? If I said that Mustangs were Chevrolets. That would be funny, right there.

Or maybe he's trying to use humor to make a point. Obama is a great President. Yeah, like a Mustang is a great Chevrolet.

The only other thing I can think of is that he's delusional. So on the one end he's not educated enough to know. On this end (of the matrix you're imagining in your head) he's not intelligent enough to understand it, but he is educated way beyond his intelligence. "Chevrolet is from the Gaelic word meaning running water and the alignment of the constellations that start with the letters in Chevrolet and and blah blah blah blah a Mustang is a steed so therefore, technically any Mustang has to be a Chevrolet."

Point is, whatever the reason, if he's on that side of the matrix he's wrong. I forgive him if he's trying to be funny. I never personally have, but I understand that there are people who do that. So . . .

Other than that, beware of anyone operating on that side of the matrix.

Like people—idiotic, delusional, manipulating, or anyone not trying to be funny—who say that if you oppose a socialist amateur who happens to be black you are seething.

'Cause I like saying #ByeFailicia.

So Obama is out and Trump is the President of the United States.

And people are rioting.

Like all the bigots/racists who were seething when Obama got elected.

Oh . . . wait. That never happened.

The people who are rioting in Washington are racists. They are bigots. They hate Trump because he is white. And the people who boycotted the inauguration (Oh, stop! You're breaking my heart! Please come to my party!) are racists and bigots.

What's that?

No, it can't be because of his personality or his policies. You're just saying that to cover up their racism. Why are you such a racist, you racist?

Sucks when someone mischaracterizes your position, doesn't it?

Okay, so wait, you're saying you have legitimate opposition to Trump (that warrants destroying property and committing other crimes—I'll let you explain that to me another time) but it has nothing to do with his race?

Bullcrap. The only thing you can possibly oppose about him is his race.

So, wait, I couldn't be opposed to Obama's policies or personality or preparation or temperament? Only his race?

You've reduced him to nothing but his race. You did that, not me. If I can only oppose him because of his race you can only support him for that same reason. You've posited that he has no other significant characteristic.

Oh, but we've have other white Presidents. You mean like those useless morons Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter? Yeah, you didn't see any conservatives opposing them.

Like, for example the way people opposed Bush.

And show me any opposition to Barack Obama that holds a candle to the crap that Trump has already taken two hours into holding the office. I'm done here.

One last time, the link to one of many incendiary pages about Obama's race and a great explanation from the Dennis Miller show about why Obama won.

Read this article called Do elections matter to Obama? Just do it.

#ByeFailicia

Yesterday Michael Barone wrote an article called Free Advice for the Democrats (You'll notice with relief that I didn't link to it. You can ignore it guilt-free (dear imaginary reader)).

My advice to the democrats? Keep going just like you are! No self-examination or correction necessary!

Among my vast reservoir of original advice, free for the ignoring, is this nugget:

Try to look at all criticism of yourself as useful. If the person is right, you have an opportunity to improve. If he is wrong, he's a schmuck, and that's good information to have, too.

You remember (dear imaginary reader) that in the autopsy following the 2012 election the Republicans did a massive analysis of what they had done wrong. And they were wrong. In this election the Clinton camp is doing a massive analysis of what everyone else did wrong. And, you guessed it, they are wrong.

Spoiler alert. Mitt Romney didn't do anything wrong, it was a cultural deal. Hillary dismisses it as a cultural deal when it was totally her philosophy and lack of appeal.

It feels good to lock up a suspect, closure and all that. But the danger of locking up the wrong suspect is that the criminal is still at large.

It's like the sagacious observation by Frank Leany in his imaginary book Philosophy or Something Like It. "If you choose the easiest answer instead of the correct answer you haven't solved the problem."

A correct diagnosis is kind of important, because if you're getting the wrong treatment you keep getting sicker.

So . . . yeah . . . a quotable and two analogies all saying about the same thing.

Anyway . . .

It's intriguing that Hillary suffers from the same problem as Barack Obama. Maybe it's a democrat deal.

I penned a brilliant piece some time ago about how Barack Obama (Praise-ed be His Holy Name forever) is a loser and would always be a loser. I said that's an interesting observation about someone who has attained the highest office in the land, but he would never advance because he always see his failures as someone else's fault.

Today Brent Bozell wrote an article that somewhat echoed those sentiments. Yeah, I did link to that one. Click and read or suffer the guilt.

Tell me you didn't see this coming (dear faithful imaginary reader). This all ties in to the Rape Hoax and This is not That.

Gimme a minute while I try to remember how . . .

Interlude: I keep a store in my mind of stupid things that I've done in the past. Whenever my brain refuses to function I refer back to them to placate myself into believing that I've always been an idiot and it's not a horrifying degenerative condition.

Okay, so you've got Hillary viewing this as the voters are idiots and culturally opposed to voting for her. Setting aside the logic of that for a moment, let's look at the This is Not That aspect of that. You remember I've called it the counterfeit and the masquerade and other things. The idea is that for the counterfeit to work there has to exist the authentic article.

And it does. It exists in the defeat of Mitt Romney for exactly that reason. People didn't elect him because he wasn't the cool black guy.

Okay, so now the people who were so anxious to vote for a guy simply because he was black refused to vote for Hillary because she's a woman?

This is not that.

This is Not That is Hillary's main game. She's always trying to play on counterfeits, like the "vast conspiracy" that was trying to take down her husband. Yeah, that would have the same outcome as the two of you being skunks and the people rejecting you at the grass roots. But Hillary doesn't believe in grass roots. Everything she does is astro-turfed. Plants in audiences with questions, being fed debate questions, all that.

The other one, the one that best demonstrates the piggy-backing onto a real concept, is when she tried to say "You can't look at my e-mails because my mother died!" Yeah, that sort of hardship does afford someone a little extra leeway. But when you fake it . . .

Did you see that? Rape hoax.

When you try to hijack (that was the other term. Masquerade, counterfeit, hijack—remember past idiocies, Frank. You're not having a stroke . . . ) a concept that is valid, you undermine the concept. Sure, your mom dying is a horrible thing and it merits a little compassion—unless you clumsily try to use it to get away with a crime. Then all of a sudden we're suspicious of other people when they use the technique.

But honestly, and I hope that the Hillary campaign is too busy to read this blog today, because this would give her the information to turn it all around (unless Michael Savage has already given her the key to winning), Hillary is so incredibly wooden in her delivery. She is just so fake in her performance, precisely because it is a performance. She's just a bad actor, literally a bad actress, and people see through her stiff and stilted delivery.

. . . a story with only tangential relevance. Because I'm old and I get to tell pointless stories. Hey, if I've got to have hair growing in my ears I'm going to take advantage of what little benefits this stage affords me.

A close personal friend of mine was visiting a relative once to return a bassinet. This relative had kind of a thing for my close personal friend's wife. The guy had some health troubles and was sitting in the kitchen with a blanket on him when my close personal friend arrived with his wife.

They dropped the borrowed bassinet off in the front room and the relative said "Who is it? Come closer so I can see who it is? Who is it? Come closer."

They went in close and chatted, the guy said his eyes didn't work, they told him they were bringing back the bassinet that they left in the front room, and then the relative looked up and said "Oh, I see you brought back the little blanket with it."

Yeah.

So, the point is, if someone is playing games like that –like Hillary invoking her dead mother to steer us away from her corruption, for example--there are two ways to deal with it. First way is to just let them do it. If it's worth it enough for them to trade their dignity for it, just let them have it.

The other way is simply to call them on it. Really? You can't turn over your e-mails because your mom died?

You'll find a lot of situations like that. The perfect example is the race card. Just identify it. Wait, did you really just tell me I'm not allowed to point out behavior in bad taste if the actor is black?

Next time you come across that crap, you'll know. Either simply identify it, or if it's harmless and costs you nothing understand it costs the player his dignity.

I can't stand listening to used car dealers yelling. That's my excuse.

Okay, I was listening to NPR, all right? The other stations were on commercials. (ADD moment—and it was a rare moment that NPR's commercials weren't in sync with them. They have just as many commercial time outs as stations that aren't paid for with my taxes.)

I just find it entertaining sometimes—like watching a ridiculous cartoon. But, just like watching a ridiculous cartoon, you can only take it for so long. (What? Yeah, I did rent Neighbors, and it was painful to sit through the entire show just for that 10-second funny part where the airbags launch him into the ceiling.)

Somebody from The Atlantic wrote an article titled My President Was Black. Someone on NPR was interviewing him and he said that Barack Obama at his core is an unflagging optimist. But he underestimated the deep-seated racism that is America.

I'm not kidding.

It's a funny thing. We weren't racist until we elected a black President.

That's what . . . intrigued me? Confused me? . . . about that exchange when the douche from the cast of Hamilton was bloviating to Mike Pence. I'm commenting on the guy's manners and all of a sudden someone's screaming "Racist!"

I asked the guy "Is that still a thing? I thought calling someone racist for disagreeing with you went out with the flip phone."

He said "Oh, racism is still a thing. Racial prejudice still exists."

Yeah, only nobody cares anymore. Nobody cares because of all the snowflakes running around screaming "Racist!"

It's like a car alarm. It's just annoying. It never means there's any threat or danger.

My daughter was in a music class and they were talking about the pitches of the strings on a guitar. She named them the way her father taught her: "Easter Bunny Gets Drunk At Easter." The class laughed, but one girl said "Racist!"

Uh . . . against bunnies? Easter? Drunks?

Obviously, "racist" only meant "You said something edgy that some people might be uncomfortable with." So . . . what do you call the despicable human being who judges other human beings based on race? The word has no meaning.

It's just lazy language substituting for real thinking. But it's a shame that the consequence is that the car alarms only make people turn away, so the "burglars" are free to wreak destruction.

The rape hoax. Or in this case the race hoax. You know, dear imaginary reader, this deal I bore you about over and over (and over) again.

Just last month some girl got raped in the parking garage at the U of U. I was ready to drive up and lend my imagination to the authorities to torture to death the guy who did it. (And you know what an imagination I have, typing a blog for my imaginary friends).

Only they never caught the guy. The reason they never did is because it never happened. They went through surveillance video and spend hundreds of man hours on the case and they concluded it never happened.

Okay, let's think about this. What is the consequence of that? Now, there are some out there who think that rape is such a horrific thing that they help by inflating the numbers. You know the deal, four out of five college girls will be sexually assaulted. They figure if the real number is two out of five, or whatever, they need to make it sound much more alarming than that so it gets the requisite attention.

But does it have that effect?

No.

When you do that you undermine the credibility of the whole deal. So the girl who cried "Rape!" committed a crime against the victims of rape, the same way that rapists do. She undermined the credibility of real rape accusations.

"Oh, racism is a thing. Racial prejudice exists." Yep. But the villagers aren't listening anymore 'cause they're tired of chasing your imaginary wolves.

Apart from the cultural destruction that the new meaning of "racist" has, the laziness drives me crazy. That's what I hate most about the new language. It's just so sloppy. Sloppy language from sloppy thinking.

"He's, like, totally, like, you know?"

No, I don't. As the speaker you have the responsibility to paint the picture for me with words.

Just bizarre that a vocabulary is so desperately inadequate that, like, someone would like, you know, like say, like, racist, for like something that was like, you know.

When I heard that guy describing Obama as someone completely different from who he is, a scene from Star Trek, the Next Generation came to mind.

Jean Luc Picard is being tortured and he's shown four lights. He's told that all he has to do for the torture to stop is say that he sees five lights. He refuses. As he's being drug away he defiantly screams "There are four lights!"

That's the opposite of these people (like the NPR guy). They are looking at one thing and seeing something completely different.

Obama (and the left in general) have stirred up racial tensions to a level you have to go back to the 60s to find. The election of Barack Obama has set race relations in this country back at least a half century.

And the country is full of useful idiots running around adding to the chaos. Sure, whatever, five lights, six, whatever you tell me to say.

These people are so incredibly delusional. Absolutely incapable of seeing what's in front of their face.

The article in The Atlantic featured a . . . whatchamacallit . . . like, you know . . . a sidebar dealie . . . that screamed "Obama’s victories in 2008 and 2012 were dismissed by some of his critics as merely symbolic for African Americans. But there is nothing “mere” about symbols."

You can say that again. Not when serious issues were affecting us that required more than a symbolic President. Wow. Whatever race the guy was, he was incompetent, and now we have ISIS, open season on cops, economic stagnation . . .

The delusional crap you'll read if you click on the link (dear imaginary reader) (I could secure the nation's nuclear codes by posting them on a link here—it would guarantee not one person would ever see them ever) included this nugget.

Whiteness in America is a different symbol—a badge of advantage. In a country of professed meritocratic competition, this badge has long ensured an unerring privilege, represented in a 220-year monopoly on the highest office in the land.

Seriously? The man who holds that office only has that privilege because he's not white. How many lights do you see?

OMG. I can't. I just can't.

Oh, yeah. And Trump. That's the other thing that electing a man because of his race got us. Now we have an insane person headed to the White House. From incompetent to insane. Frying pan/fire.

I know there are those who don't understand how the democrats are responsible for Trump. The argument that they are has three levels, on a continuum.

1. Indisputable. The democrats chose Hillary Clinton as their candidate. In addition to being politically completely out of sync with America (which voters don't give two craps about) she is a despicable human being and a crook. She may well be the only person in the known universe so horrible she could lose an election to someone as childish and unhinged as Donald Trump.

Republicans didn't make them pick her. That's all on them.

2. True, but disputed. The pendulum effect. By installing someone as radical as Obama, and by using the "racist" argument to make sure that anyone with civility and decorum won't oppose him, what do you think you're going to get? When people are discussing, people discuss back. When people start swinging, they get swung on. The tactics that work on sane people don't work against Donald Trump. That's his appeal. You bring a knife to a debate, we'll get a gun.

This is the crux of the argument and the part that Obama was whining about. "I uh I've been uh blamed for uh a lot of things, but, uh, I don't see how, uh, how this is uh, my fault." You don't need to make radical corrections unless the car is careening out of control. No one's surprised that Obama can't understand that. He doesn't understand much, as we've seen.

3. Whacked out conspiracy territory, but not necessarily untrue. Bill Clinton (pardon my language) convinced Donald Trump to run, some kind of mysterious voodoo happened and he got the nomination. The voodoo included democrats voting for Trump in the primaries and the media pushing him hard as the their favorite—the same media who had all kinds of trash to release on him once he got the nomination.

All this because Hillary was so horrible (see number one) that she had to have an opponent who was crazy, and unhinged, and childish and . . . how many thesauruses have been worn out between Hillary and Donald Trump? He was ordained because anyone else would easily beat Hillary Clinton (did you know she has a granddaughter?). The conspiracy theory hinges on the idea that he was somehow installed by the democrats because he was the only offspring of God who Hilary could beat.

But, as we saw, she couldn't even beat him.

But, hey, they've got it all figured out. It's because we hate women and we're deplorable. Just like we were racist for electing Barack Obama.

They've got it all figured out and good on 'em. They don't need to change a thing. They should plow ahead the same way they've been doing. No correction needed here. Keep it up, democrats!