Billy Shakespeare once said "There is nothing new under the sun." True it is.
I really don't need to post new material every Wednesday; I've posted enough to show you the correct viewpoint
on whatever comes up.
But even if the news is always the same, you like to have a fresh clean newspaper with breakfast every day.
Clicking the "Billy's Blog" button to the left will deliver a fresh old post right to your screen. No matter how old it is,
it will probably be relevant to what's happening today.
Today's Second Amendment Message
What to do until the Blog arrives
The John Galt Society
It can be discouraging to look around at who's running the show these days and wonder "Where have all
the grown-ups gone?"
Take heart. There are still some people who are not drinking the Kool-aid. Here's where to find them. I would
suggest going down this list every day and printing off the most recent articles you haven't read to read over
Michelle Malkin is a feisty conservative bastion. You loved her book "Unhinged" and you can read her columns here. Ann Coulter
Ann posts her new column every Thursday, or you can browse her past columns. George Will
What can you say? It's George Will. Read it.
posts every Friday. Just a good, smart conservative columnist.
If you want someone who gets it just as right, but is easier to read, try
who just posts at random times.
Jonah Goldberg seldom
David Limbaugh carries on the family tradition.
If you have to read the news, I recommend
The Nose on Your Face, news so fake you'd swear it came from the Mainstream Media.
HT to Sid for the link.
Or there's always
The Onion. (For the benefit of you Obama Supporters,
it's a spoof.)
Or just follow the links above and to the right of this section (you can't have read all my archived articles
already). If you have read all my articles (you need to get out more) go to my
I'm Not Falling For It section.
Above all, try to stay calm. Eventually I may post something again.
What the hell kind of country is this where I can only hate a man if he's white? Hank Hill
On This Day in History
Oh, wait . . . that's from an alternate universe
And the blah-blah-blog continues . . .
Refresh to get latest blog entry
Meaningless Words Matter
We're seeing a resurgence in the "black lives matter" vs. "ALL lives matter" discussion. People who would never have uttered the words "black lives matter," but always countered with
"Yes, all lives matter," are coming around. They now say that yes, all lives do matter, but the phrase "black lives matter" recognizes that there's a special need for a focus in that
area; that the phrase doesn't discount other lives, it just asks for special attention to black lives right now.
I can't repudiate that. No reasonable person can.
Trouble is . . .
That's absolutely true when you're talking about the sentiment that black lives matter. When you're talking about the anti-police anarchist borderline terrorist group called Black
Lives Matter, the phrase has nothing to do with the discussion. That's like arguing about how much coffee it takes to make a coffee table.
Now that Black Lies Matter has started a wave of assassinations of police officers, they're all "No! We're all about bringing communities together! Dialog. Peace, love, empowerment,
daffodils and butterflies." It's an odd and paradoxical deal. Now that they've stirred up people to start killing cops, they are pushing a successful PR campaign to make themselves over
as altar boys. We know better.
I told you that it's like that line: "I knew Doris Day before she was a virgin."
The group Black Lies Matter just needs to go away and disappear. It's the same damn thing I'm always going on and on (and on) about. Rape hoax. Race hoax. Boy that cried wolf. Because of
Black Lies Matter I have discounted the entire concept that black Americans may have a different experience with law enforcement than I do. And it does need attention. But that group isn't
about that. Their existence is a barrier to that understanding.
Senator Tim Scott said it best.
I simply ask you this: recognize that just because you do not feel the pain, the anguish of another, does not mean that it does not exist. To ignore their struggles, our struggles,
does not make them disappear. It simply leaves you blind and the American family very vulnerable.
Let's start the discussion there. When you start with a lie and acting childish, I'm not inclined to think you matter.
Happy Moon Landing Anniversary
He says as though he's a real blog with an actual reader.
The big flap today is that Melania Trump JoeBidened some lines from Michelle Obama at the convention last night. Likely it was sabotage; we may never know. If you give a crap you've
already read one of the 12,000 stories about it today. You don't need to read my take on it.
So I'm going to make fun of Michelle Obama's speaking.
When I tuned in in the middle of the story this morning I thought "That's from the speech last night, but without the accent. Who is that?" It sounded familiar, in an annoying way. Then
I realized that it was Michelle Obama.
That particular clip wasn't that annoying. But she's annoying. When she speaks she has this affectation she uses. You know the one, that scripted stutter, a dramatic pause. Different from
the stutter that Obama uses (more on that later).
You know what I'm talking about—where she's reading a script but intentionally repeats words to make it sound sincere and spontaneous.
"When I look . . . look at the children who are . . . who are hungry."
Sounds so affected—the complete opposite of what she is trying to achieve.
Anyway. You remember back in early 2009, Obama himself tried it. Like once or twice. It was hilarious. So he's giving one of his long, boring speeches and tries the same trick.
"If we don't . . . don't fix America's healthcare, then we . . . we can't possibly fix the debt."
Just freaking funny, because it was so obviously Michelle's trick. Completely different from his stutter. Like trying out your friend's nose ring to see if it works for you. He dumped it.
Didn't work for him.
I could just hear Michelle nagging him about it. She wouldn't take no for an answer. "Try it. I insist you try it. I insist. Next speech you give. You'll be amazed at how it works!"
Like the guy in the sales seminar learning the secret mind control techniques that make people buy their crap without knowing why. "Talk like the deal is already closed. Like: 'Where do you
think you'll install your new 3D printer?'" Or "You have to keep mentioning the name of the product."
That's a favorite of people selling books. They're on a radio show and the host will say "So, what did you think of Melania's speech last night?" Well, as I discuss in my new book
"How to Rebuild Your Small Block Chevy" . . .
It's completely undetectable and you don't even realize you're being programmed! You just drive your car like a zombie to the nearest Barnes and Noble and fork over the cash!
Point is, it's so obviously fake. And the only person who can't see it is the one delivering it. Like that time when you were a kid writing a letter to Santa and playing the humility card.
So, as I was listening to that (actually useful) podcast on How Eloquence Works, and the guy was extolling the ethereal speaking skills of Barack Obama, the subtext occurred to me.
It's like when you think one thing is driving another, but it's the other way around. The guy talked about Martin Luther King's speech, and how it broke the rules, and it still worked.
Well, it worked because of the man and the emotion. And now the very thing that "broke the rules"—the pause in an unexpected place, becomes a speech tool. Because it hearkens back
to the MLK speech.
It becomes great because of the emotion that surrounded it at the time. That's how the "rules" get written. It's like scripture. Maybe the way the translators wrote it down wasn't the
best way to express it, but it becomes the new standard.
Wow. Leany on Life—Daily achieving new depths of boringnessosity.
Rimsky Korsakov's Flight of the Stutterer
You have to listen to this.
I dare you to watch that without laughing. I defy you to count the number of times he says "if" in that one machine-gun delivery.
did a segment on this.
Apparently it's not a stutter. It's a—I'm not making this up—an "intellectual stammer." Seriously. Someone wrote an article for the LA Times and explained that Obama is just so incredibly
smart that the stammer is because his "brain that is moving so fast that the mouth can't keep up."
Uh . . . that's completely bass-ackwards. The mouth is going just fine. it's the brain that's not keeping up with the mouth.
Just insane. These people. Like the people who want to shake the hand of the hand that shook Obama's. Or that were so concerned that people might not flatter him in political cartoons.
Or the guy who wrote that ridiculous article on "how to speak like Obama," that I expected to be a hilarious tutorial on how to stammer and sound like Yogi Bear. Instead it was some
guy who wanted to have his baby.
It's great to admire someone, but 1) Pick someone worthy of admiring (as opposed to someone you think makes you look enlightened to admire), and 2) Realize he's just a man.
I admired Carroll Shelby, but I never thought touching his coveralls would heal me.
More Mindless Obama Bashing
I've told you that I hate Barack Obama because he's black.
Okay, now run off to your little safe space and pretend that my ideas are the scariest enemy you have to confront. If my ideological
lifeboat is too scary for you, just hang onto that familiar guardrail on your big, safe, sinking ship.
What's that? Why, yes, I do intentionally get extra inflammatory here. Today's new-age SJW liberals are so anxious to be offended I try not
to make them work too hard before they feel like they can jump to a conclusion.
Also, I am going to enjoy this Freedom of Speech deal for the short time that we have it left. I'm going to enjoy the sweet Willy Wonkas
out of it by pushing the envelope to the extreme.
Oh, crap . . that gave me a thought. And you know how dangerous thoughts are. Especially when the thought-machine that turns them out is as
out of adjustment as mine is.
Gosh I love the freedom of having no audience. Takes away all the pressure of having to write coherent . . . what's that shiny thing over there?!
Okay . . . those of you still with me (Ha-ha hah! I slay me), let's chat about this . . . since,
you know, I haven't explained it 738 times in the last eight years.
I'm not Barack Obama's biggest fan. Okay, I don't like him. All, right, all right, since I'm being inflammatory here, I hate the guy.
But I don't hate the white beret-wearing Bernie Sanders supporter studying Art History at Columbia; the one discussing socialist theory with his
little friends in the dorms late at night (and putting out his cigarettes in the carpet).
Because he's white.
And because he's white no one will ever hear of him. He'll never be in a position to wreck the country I love.
The only difference between the little pipsqueak I described and the guy in the Oval Office is that one is white and one is black. And I
hate the black one. Because he's dangerous. The forever-relegated-to-nothingness white pipsqueak will never be a real threat to the country I love.
He isn't of a race that's useful to the forces that got Obama where he is.
We do not elect horrifically unprepared radicals with a temperament so poorly suited to the office. Geraldine Ferraro nailed it:
If Obama weren't black you never would have heard of him. And then he couldn't have wrought the destruction he has on the nation.
Except . . . well, barring a good old fashioned meteor strike that we're all praying for, we will elect a horrifically unprepared radical
with a temperament poorly suited to the office.
(Hillary. You know it's going to be Hillary. I've got to go throw up now.) So I have to get in all my wailing about "We don't elect that kind of
person!" while I still can.
Okay, back to my being racist because I judge Obama by the content of his character and don't give him a pass because of the color of his skin
(attribution to Michelle Obama for the original line). The odd thing is, it's a self-feeding fire. Because he's black (half black)
I'm expected to tread lightly which is exactly why I don't. That's what makes me intentionally be inflammatory.
I resent that he was forced on us for reasons having nothing to do with his fitness for the position.
I reject that I'm not allowed to have an opinion.
And I refuse to conform to the mindless groupthink that ignores the facts in favor of fantasy.
I've told you before, the big hip and/or with it enlightened voters are late to the game. If you voted for Alan Keyes in 1996 like I did
(before he went crazy), then we can have a discussion about how open-minded you are compared to me. Otherwise I wonder if you might be guilty of what
MLK warned us about.
How's that Fundamental Transformation Working Out?
This Payne guy finally made a good cartoon.
You remember the irony of Obama using divisive language to say we're not divided. It's back to the speech deal. Sometimes you can read what he says and think "That's not so bad." But
to hear the hatred that drips from his lips when he delivers it . . .
In the case of him saying we're not as divided as "some of those stupid people who we hate" say we are, it was the wording. And it was a true reflection of his sentiments; he didn't just
misspeak. He could have said "It may seem that we're divided, but I believe we're not as divided as we seem." Instead, he said "We are not as divided as some people! say we are."
Okay, so . . . here's a pretty good column on
how Obama created Black Lies Matter. You know the deal.
I believe that Obama is responsible for the chaos we're seeing right now. We're living in the times I grew up in, when Life magazine painted a horrible picture of a society coming apart.
Some would say that what we have is exactly what Obama intended. I don't agree. On the Evil to Stupid spectrum I think he's maybe off that straight line. He's not genuinely trying to make a
better America and just failing miserably at it, but I can't believe he orchestrated all this.
But I do think he caused all this without organizing it. I think he can't help himself, he dislikes the cops, he comes out against them every chance he gets. (Oh, shut up. Do you
really think anything he says now has any meaning? Geez. What do you expect the arsonist to say if he's asked to comment on the fire?) So in that sense he's evil.
But in another sense he's just the same bumbling amateur we've watched stagger his way through the last 7-1/2 years.
Who didn't know that supporting a group that espouses rebellion against the force of Law would result in this?
A community organizer without any life experience, that's who.
Oh (you thought we were almost done), I read an article on . . . can't remember, already purged it . . . some mindless Obama worship site (Google "greatest president")
that was making the case that (I swear, I am NOT making this up) Obama was the greatest President that we have ever had.
One of the points they made was that " . . . once he became the leader of the racist nation that had elected him."
No, they really said that. I swear. They said that the nation who by a majority rule democratic process elected a black man hates black men.
It had to have been a parody site. Not even an elbow pad wearing liberal intellectual is that stupid.
1Maybe they meant the greatest President of whatever this is now that America has ended, which is an easy case to make, because he's the only
President we've had since that happened.
Keeping it Tacky
So Presidebt Obama is speaking at the memorial in Dallas today. I'm honestly wondering how the families of the slain police officers
feel about him being there, much less speaking. It's kinda like Mrs. O'Leary's cow giving a speech on fire safety.
It seems like he kind of invited himself, which is fine. About time he even acknowledged the murder of a police officer. But I wonder
who thought it would be a good idea for him to speak. Did he just volunteer?
If I were in charge I would certainly say "Thank you so much for coming, but we have the program all lined out. Thank you."
In the last few weeks Obama hasn't been able to open his mouth without trashing the Second Amendment. The question momentarily crossed my
mind whether he'd bring it up in his comments today. But I immediately dismissed it. Not even Obama is that tacky.
Like the article says, I really hope there's a grownup in the White House somewhere who can convince Obama to come to his senses and
I'll close with the soon to be unheeded advice of Dennis Miller to . . . well, to the President. I don't have the emotional energy at
this point to come up with a clever jab at someone so lacking in class as Obama has proven himself to be.
Mr. President, I've never asked for a favor before, largely due to the fact that I don't believe you're predisposed to listen to a
"guy like me" (i.e. someone who's conservative on some issues) but when you're in Dallas tomorrow, please don't try to exhibit your
usual Solomonesque wisdom in an attempt to lecture. Mourn the heroes...get back on the plane. Save the teachable moment for a future date.
Five. Apparently that's how many police officers have to be killed at one time for Barack Obama to recognize it.
You know, you just can't please me. I was all pissed off that Obama never recognized any of the cops that were killed as a result of the Black Lies Matter crap. He was always
hot on defending the criminals that cops killed, but when a police officer got gunned down Obama never attended any of those services. He never even made statements condemning
the killings. Now that he's cutting his European vacation short to attend the memorial service of the police officers killed in Dallas, I'm pissed off about that, too.
I just like being pissed off, I guess.
You know the deal. It's like Walther Schwieger all of a sudden expressing concern about the passengers on the Lusitania.
Just chaps my rosy red to hear him all of a sudden come out in support of the police (like I want him not to?) after inciting violence against them for so many years.
Listening to his remarks was like living in Alice in Wonderland.
Just bizarre. Bizarre and horribly disingenuous. Felt like the worst kind of pandering.
His remarks last Friday represented The Limbaugh Theorem on display like never before. He was going on and on about "We can fix this. We can do this. It's not going to be easy,
but we can get this done." I can't find the transcript, but he just kept talking about how this has been a problem for a long time and . . . well, he's had 7 1/2 years and
it's done nothing but get worse.
I wish I could find the transcript, 'cause I think it was racial tensions he was talking about. And he is directly responsible for how bad they are. Directly responsible.
One newspaper in England said "As the first black US President, Mr. Obama is unique among occupants of the Oval Office in his capacity and willingness to address racial tensions.
Yet he has also presided over a period in which those tensions appear to be as fraught as at any time since the Civil Rights era." I'd have to say " . . . since the Civil Freaking War."
Even Michael Medved, whose show I heard Obama's remarks on, pointed out that Obama is the one who's been in charge. He highlighted how silly it was for Obama to be talking
like he's just a spectator and someone should do something. Like the quarterback complaining that the wrong plays are being called (my analogy).
That was Friday. and I didn't hear Limbaugh today, but I guarantee that he used the words "Limbaugh Theorem a whole bunch of times.
Maybe you think I'm being too hard on Obama, like he's just one guy, it's not his fault.
So, you think he doesn't have anything to do with that? If he can't affect that, why do we even have a President?
And why was everything Bush's fault, if nothing is the President's fault?
Or maybe it's like Hillary's cattle futures trading with Red Bone. Obama takes the dividends on the gains, but he gets to pass off the losses to someone else.
Barack Obama is directly responsible for the craziness that is happening in the nation right now
And I really wish that he were smart enough to recognize the irony of using divisive language to say “America is not as divided as some have suggested."
That's funny right there. "Everybody look at the people who don't agree with me and ridicule them. They say America is divided! They are not part of us!"
Why my blogs are long and boring.
Well, because I suck at writing almost as much as I suck at thinking.
That's the real reason. It's a sinful waste of time to type this blah-blah-blog; it would border on disgusting to take the time to edit it.
But other than that, it's a protest; a rebellion against the shallow 140-character culture we've become. The issues that I think about—when I should be thinking about things I can do
something about—can't be solved with a meme.
Oh, but I did make this one:
And that's a pretty darn good meme, right there. It pretty much says it all (says the guy who's making the point you can't do that (to his imaginary reader))
Anyway . . .
For example, I'm about to tell you that I hate black people. I'm not and I don't, but that's all the room that's on a bumper sticker. So that's what you'd think you were getting on a meme.
But to tell you what I really mean I have to focus on this aspect, then explore that aspect, then acknowledge that I understand this and that, but that doesn't change the point I'm trying to
make. Then I have to try to counter imaginary protestations about my opinion like "Are you saying that they bring this on themselves?!!!" Then I have to make up three or four analogies
with only peripheral relevance because . . . well, because that's what I do.
So if you want a meme that you can click "Like" on and have fulfilled your obligation to consider the subject, you've got one there. That may be the greatest meme in the history of memes,
by the way (then again, it may not). But I won't buy into the culture of simplifying to absurdity.
I should probably scratch my blogs out on a piece of slate. I'd be much more economical with my words. (Did you see that? That was a "This is not that" sighting. Being long-winded and
inefficient isn't necessarily the good balance to the bumper sticker meme and done attitude.) Typing is just too easy.
Especially typing on the internet. That's why there's so much crap like this blog out here. When you had to go to the trouble of printing books you were more likely to make sure your
efforts were on something somewhat worthwhile.
Speaking of Efficiency
Okay, if you're Bill Clinton--then I'm very sorry. It must be horrifying to look in the mirror every morning and realize that you're Bill Clinton. But if you're Bill Clinton you've got to
feel a little bit of an obligation to take umbrage at the way people trash your wife.
Back in when Clinton was President (good times!) someone said something bad about Hillary (no, really, that did happen once). Bill said he felt like
punching the guy in the nose. Yeah, big tough Bill who
couldn't win a fair fight with an oyster on the half shell surrounded by all his armed Secret Service guys is pretty frickin' tough talking about punching people in the nose. (Black
eye Bill who lost a fistfight with his own wife)
But the point is, if you're a husband you've been conditioned to defend your wife against attacks.
First—Clinton despises Hillary as a person as much as the rest of America, but he appreciates what she can do for him monetarily, politically, and in terms on cornering more power.
Second, Bill Clinton knows better than anyone what a crooked piece of crap Hillary is, and that the transgressions people know about enough to bash her for aren't half of the evil things she is constantly doing.
Here's what I'm saying (in slightly more than 140 characters): It's the same thing as what I've said about demorats in general. Oh, you don't like me saying you're evil? Have you
considered not being evil?
Maybe if he gets tired of hearing people say awful things about her he could chat with her about not being so vile.
I get it. You stand up for family. I do. My country right or wrong kind of deal. Yeah, I'll take the wrong side when I'm defending my family.
But . . . if what you're really concerned about is people saying bad things about your wife, maybe it would be more efficient to coach her to not do evil things that will draw those attacks.
Just sayin' . . .
You know, for efficiency and to save you the trouble of always taking on the world.
I've flapped my virtual gums about this before. It was in the context of parents and children.
Among the mix in the schoolyard demographics you've got bullies and you've got victims. But you also occasionally see an annoying kid who gets picked on because he is annoying.
Now the parents are going to do what they can to keep their kid from being picked on. They are going to talk to the administrators. They might confront the parents of the kid who's picking on
theirs. They might teach their kid the Twenty-five Strikes of Death to use against the kids who are picking on him.
But in terms of efficiency, they might want to coach their dear child in how to not be so freaking obnoxious.
Again, the 140-character caveat. Please hear what I mean and not what you think I'm saying (he says to his imaginary reader). When a kid gets picked on the one who is attacking is the bad guy,
the victim is not. (Oh! I see a This is Not That here!) When a kid is picked on you stop it right then, by one of the methods I mentioned. But long term there may be a solution that keeps you
out of the front offices so often and doesn't get you in fist fights with other parents.
Oddly enough, one of the best takes on that aspect of it was none other than the delusional and confused Chris Matthews. No, really, he actually said something right once. Broken clocks
and blind squirrels.
He was talking about terrorists and said something like "When so many people want to do us harm, maybe we should try to figure out why. Obviously, when someone commits a terrorist act we
should take them out, no questions asked. But in terms of a long-term solution it might be more efficient to try to understand and address the roots of their behavior."
Or words to that effect.
Sean Hannity (among others) freaked out. "Chris Matthews says we have to sympathize with the terrorists!" Oh, he did not. He specifically said we have to kill them. But he suggested
that a more efficient long term solution might be to put the brakes on at the top of the hill.
Bad guys and Victims
You see this all the time. Something bad happens to someone, but they put themselves in a position to make it happen.
You remember when Kobe Bryant raped that girl in Colorado. She was stupid for going up to his room. She could have prevented that from happening; it was in her hands up until then.
That doesn't excuse in the least what he did. Not in the least.
You don't leave your keys in the car, you don't leave your car unlocked. That's just stupid. And it's inviting someone to steal it.
Even so, if you leave your keys in the car the guy who steals it is a worthless thief. You could have prevented it, but it gave him the opportunity to prove he's a waste of skin.
That's kind of a tie-in to our Evil/Stupid deal, only there are two people on the matrix.
Just 'cause one of them is stupid doesn't mean the other isn't evil.
This is Not That
I know how anxious you've been for me to get to this. I told you there was a "This is Not That" back in the bully post.
When someone is picking on a kid the one doing the picking is the bad guy. It's not the one getting picked on. That is absolutely
true and valid.
Now . . .
You might think Hillary Clinton is getting picked on. She's the obnoxious kid on the playground. Yes, she could avoid being picked on by not being so insufferably annoying, but that doesn't
excuse the bully.
She's not annoying, she's evil. She would love you to believe that you're the hater and she's the victim (the persuasion matrix . . . or something). But she falls clearly in the lower
half of the matrix. She is the bad guy.
Not a Safe Space
Okay, we've weeded out the 140-character crowd. We've likely weeded out everybody. I can't imagine anyone wading through all this boring crap to this point, not even my most loyal imaginary
reader. Now I get to say the really politically incorrect inflammatory stuff.
Okay. Blacks are being taught to be afraid of the cops. It's just like the little muslim kids who are taught to hate the Jews. They are taught Jews want to use the blood of little muslim
children in their religious rituals. Of course they're going to grow up hating Jews. And of course blacks are going to hate cops when evil people like Black Lies Matter tell them the cops
are out to get them.
Result: Cops are afraid to confront blacks because they know the blacks see them as mortal enemies. That means that cops are going to be more trigger-happy with blacks than they
should be, because they are more likely to get shot by blacks. It also means they aren't going to venture into neighborhoods where blacks are victims of criminals.
If you wanted to create a culture where black lives were in danger you could not do a better job than Black Lies Matter has done.
Okay. Here's the politically incorrect part. For a whole lot of reasons cops have cause to be a little afraid of blacks. All over YouTube you've got videos of blacks street fighting
like savages. You've got blacks playing the knockout game. You've got the rap culture that is angry and violent (and insufferably annoying). The image that urban blacks have painted of themselves is not of a people who you want to love.
Take all that and then throw in Black Lies Matter with their hatred and advocating harming cops.
ADD Moment: Remember the line "I knew Doris Day before she was a virgin?" Black Lies Matter advocated harming cops. In the wake of Dallas they're all "Oh, we love the police!
We are a group dedicated to informing and bringing the communities together!"
Right. And that redneck was just helping the sheep through the fence.
Black Lies Matter is an anti-police organization. Always has been.
I've got to be honest with you, with everything I've seen since Ferguson, black lives matter less to me now than they ever have.
Now go scurry to your safe space.
You're going to hear all kinds of statistics spouted about blacks in prison, black arrests, all that. Barack Obama was talking about that. Now, I'm not sure if he's stupid and really
doesn’t understand the statistics—that's very likely, or if he's evil and he clearly understands them and is outright lying to us—actually, that's pretty likely, too. But it is an
absolutely true statistic that tells a lie.
Blacks are in prison at a higher per capita rate than whites.
What's not true is that blacks get arrested for crimes that whites and Hispanics get away with. Here's the truth. Blacks commit more crimes.
Now, as Chris Matthews suggests (I just threw up a little in my mouth) maybe we ought to figure out why that is. I mean, if we're really serious about protecting black lives.
What's that? Oh, I'm sorry. I'm wrong? Carry on. You've clearly got it all figured out.
Having said that . . .
I'm definitely on the side of Blue Lives Matter. If I have to take a side. It's silliness that I have to; that saying "All Lives Matter" will get you shot. That's the world we live in.
But I get it. There are bad cops, there are racist cops. There are bad people, there are racist people. Imagine the most awful control freak abusive person you know. What if he were a cop?
Cops are people. Even with the filtering process you're going to get some bad people with a badge carrying a gun.
And that's a scary thought. I watched two movies over the weekend that had corrupt cops. Term Life and Triple 9. It's a scary deal. Someone with a badge and authority who can set up
situations where you get shot and he can plausibly claim to be the good guy? It's a scary thought.
But I'm still on the side of the cops. Life is a deal of probabilities, and if you bet on the outliers you will lose a lot more than you win.
Okay. So Newt Gingrich said something about the phrase "black lives matter" just emphasizes an aspect that is often forgotten. Yeah, everybody gets that. Every single person understands
the "all lives matter/black lives matter" semantics.
But Gingrich also said that as white people we cannot possibly know what it's like to be a black person in a police encounter. He said something like we have to "correct" that somehow.
Gingrich is a smart guy trying to bring reason into the discussion, but even so, it sparked debate.
Then I heard a good take on Newt Gingrich's take
The guy said that Newt Gingrich was saying "Blacks may have a different experience when it comes to encounters with the police.
We should believe them when they try to explain that to us."
He said it better than I did. But you get the idea. Yeah, I will still always take the cop's side first. But I understand there are different perspectives and people go into situations with
experiences different than my own.
More Mindless Obama Bashing
We're going to talk about Linguistics. That's the only word that could chase more people away than "Math."
I was listening to a podcast called How Eloquence Works. It was good and informative. And interesting. Because it said you needed to do things in triplets. Yesterday, today, and tomorrow.
That's good speechifying.
But then the guy finished with an analysis of Obama's 2008 victory speech. Some of it was good (the analysis, not the speech). He talked about "training" the audience, like when Obama
kept saying "yes, we can" until finally the crowd clued in and started cheering every time he said it. It was actually a pretty good analysis, but what drove me crazy was this guy, an
intellectual type, buying into the hoax that is Barack Obama.
He went over some rules and guidelines then pointed out how Obama broke the rules. You know the deal, the Picasso deal, where first you learn the rules and follow the rules, but then
when you're really good, you break the rules. And it's brilliant.
The rule was the amount of things you could cram in a sentence without losing people. And he was listening and Obama passed the number then he kept going . . . and going and going.
And it worked! Can you believe it! Amazing incredible incomparable Barack Obama made it work!
Of course it worked, you idiot. Sorry, he's not an idiot, but that was an idiotic thing to say. Barack Obama could drown kittens and make it work because everyone is so vested in their
being so incredibly cool that they support the cool black guy. Of course it worked. They're not going to let it fail, 'cause then they don't get to be all cool and hip (and intellectual).
Obama does that all the time. It's not because he's brilliant, it's because he rambles (he could be a guest blogger on here).
This is an actual line from a speech that I imagined in my head Barack Obama giving.
When you think you might be sick but you're not sure but you don't want to go to the doctor if you're not sick but you don't want to not go to the doctor if you are sick but you don't know
and you can't tell unless you do go to the doctor but you don't want to spend money going to the doctor if you're not sick but you don't want to should have gone to the doctor because then
you'd feel dumb but you'd also feel dumb if you weren't sick and paid for a doctor visit.
Now, say that in your head in a Yogi Bear voice with a bunch of holds and pauses and saying "uh" a lot and you can hear Barack Obama saying that
That's like the line that the guy was saying worked when Barack Obama said it. Of course it worked. Barack Obama could have said anything, and it would have worked.
Hell, the guy can trash the economy and pit the races and classes against each other and still get reelected. Making people cheer at a line in a speech? Pffft. Child's play.
Oh, The Eloquence!
Barack Obama could be drunk out of his gourd and say:
"Huckleberry, Huckleberry, Huckleberry Finn."
And tomorrow the New York Times would have a two-page column about how eloquent that was.
Huckleberry Finn represented an ignorant understanding of the races, but he was goodhearted, and able to come around. And the three words repeated were a triplet, which is a eloquence device,
excellently implemented by the master.
And Huckleberry has 11 letters which represents a football team, which is American, as in our American values that we hold so dear. And there are four words in the sentence, and 11×4 is 44,
which represents the 44th president, which puts a cap on the sentence.
Because "Finn" sounds like the Latin word for end, or finish, and Huckleberry represents the racial divide, but the 44th president ended all of that. Ended it.
And the New York Times will gush about how that will go down in the annals of history along with the Gettysburg address. And people will print it
on T-shirts, and make rings that say HHHF. And all of the Bernie Sanders supporters will get bumper stickers for their mom's car that say HHHF.
People are freaking stupid. Yes, it did work, but not because it was eloquent.
If breaking the rules works just as well as keeping the rules, they aren't really rules, are they?
So the FBI released its findings on Hillary's e-mail server. They concluded taht she was sloppy, not intentionally trying to hide anything or do anything evil.
Before we go any further let me say this:
You're going to be surprised to learn that I think they came to the exactly right conclusion. I really do. I don't think they caved to pressure or were trying to
save their jobs or anything. I can't see how they could have come to any other conclusion, and I completely believe what they said about it being apolitical and
But . . .
Just kidding. There's no but. Honestly.
I know the talk radio universe is going to explode today. I can imagine what Hannity is doing right this second--the guests he's lining up to hang out on the other
end of the phone while he talks about how the FBI is in the bag (can't think of the proper metaphor at the moment) for Hillary.
Hannity: Speaker Gingrich. What do you think of the announcement the FBI made today?
Gingrich: Well, Sean, I think that the thing to remember is . . .
Hannity: After all the e-mails, 30,000 e-mails and 27 investigations and Bill Clinton on the plane with Lorretta Lynch and the e-mail to Chlesea and to the
ambassador of Goosebeakistan, and the 25 pages of reports and all the corruption and Paula Jones and Juanita Broadrick, and do you think that Hillary
knows where Jimmy Hoffa's body is?
Gingrich: Well, Sean, I think the main thing that we can take away from this is . . .
Hannity: And Bill Clinton. What was he doing on that plane? You know, my sensei always said--you know I'm a martial artist. You know I study the martial arts. I do.
I'm working on my brown belt. I study the martial arts. I know karate. And all of the 30,000 e-mails and Hillary's yoga schedule, and her mother's funeral, does
she look like she does yoga?
Gingrich: Uh . . .
Hannity: I'm asking you a question.
Gingrich: I think that the main issue is not her yoga but whether . . .
Hannity: And another thing!
Yeah, I think Hillary is unfathomably evil. I think the whole reason she had that server was to cover up activities with the Clinton Crime Family Foundation. But I
don't think the FBI could have come to any other conclusion. And--I'm not saying they didn't do a very thorough investigation--there was never going to be any
Which makes Bill Clinton's meeting with Loretta Lynch puzzling. He had to know they couldn't come to any other conclusion. He had to know how bad it would look.
Did he think he wouldn't get caught? It was, after all, a local affiliate that happened to get the story. Or was he trying to make it look like he was influencing it
just as a message to us that he was controlling the outcome? Like commanding the sun to set when it's going to set anyway.
But you recognize the evil-stupid deal here. they conclude she was sloppy, not intentionally criminal. Doesn't change the fact that bad operators accessed her
server. But she's made it to the lower left-hand corner of the matrix.
I also corrected the matrix. You wouldn't know unless you saw it before (dear loyal imaginary reader) but I didn't have the titles on the x axis. I guess it was
just so obvious I missed it. Left side of the matrix is accidental, right side is intentional.
Okay, I'll clean up this post later. Or maybe I won't. But I wanted to get something down right away, because . . . geez, who knows why I do this? I guess if you
have to have a mental illness, typing in a blog no one reads is a lot less dangerous than some.
Mired in Chrome
Wow. Much better. I always used Chrome to edit this, because it allows a screen re-size that MIE doesn't, which makes editing a LOT easier. But for the past
few weeks Chrome takes literally two seconds to input every single character. I'm a slow typist, but not that slow. Literally, when I reach the end of a 25-word
sentence the first word has just appeared on the screen.
If any of you imaginary readers out there knows how to fix that, send me an imaginary message.