Category Archives: Blogs' Archive

Now, I’m not dumb but I must admit I am a lazy thinker.  So, the ideas I throw out there here in my blog are ideas, some of which might be good, some of which might be bad.  The reader is allowed to take them with a grain of salt, to snicker and move on, or to use them as a springboard to other, better thoughts.  It’s all good.  I am launching my ideas into the ether and if they mix and mingle with others and become something bigger and better, I will feel a pride of authorship, which I imagine is something similar to the pride of parenthood, but I’m not really getting enough feedback to know.

Anyway, tonight’s topic is memes.  I have often used this blog to rail about the prevalence and the shallowness of memes.  The junk food of food for thought, I have called them.

Then, today, I read of a scientific survey which supported my view.  It proved. through test results in a controlled setting, that people who are influenced by these little nuggets of thought, these inspirational phrases set against a background of a beautiful sunset or kittens playing with vacuum cleaners or something, have lower IQs.

Suddenly, and completely irrationally, I find myself changing my mind.  What gives anybody the right to judge which memes are stupid and which are not?  And is it not possible that some of these memes contain bits of the truth?  Of course they do.

I just wish the people who create them would learn the difference between to and too.  Because that is seriously fucking annoying.

Of course, everybody’s talking about guns, and everybody’s entrenched in their positions.  I’m kind of surprised, in view of recent events, at how many people are posting pro-gun shit on my facebook page.

For one thing, I thought I had a serious liberal bias in my friends list.  A few gun nuts in my family, everybody’s got a couple, but not so many among my friends.

Second, you would think that after a string of tragedies like we’ve  just had, that the gun nuts would be a bit abashed and hold their fire for awhile.  Even if all you’re offering is prayers and a moment of silence, that at least requires silence.

I was wrong on both counts.  I’ve been reading a flood of pro-gun comments.  I’ve engaged a few of them, with a totally predictable lack of satisfactory results.

I usually just point out the Australian gun control law of 1996, because it’s impossible to dispute that it worked.  They always respond the same.  “You can’t compare Australia to the U.S.  The U.S. is so much bigger, and more diverse.  The U.S. has a gun culture, and a long history of guns.”

Well, so did Australia, prior to 1996.  That’s why they passed the law.  As far as more diverse, not so much.  Australia is a plenty diverse society.  Bigger?  Yeah, but so what?

Actually, ‘so what?’ is my response to all of these arguments.  So what if America is a larger country?  Australia made it illegal for 25 million (I’m estimating.  It’s half past midnight and I’m not going to shift screens to google it) people to own assault weapons.  The U.S. could make it illegal for 300 million people to own assault weapons. The principal is exactly the same.

Diversity?  So what?  I’m against white people owning assault weapons.  I’m opposed to black, and  Arabic, and Chinese people owning assault weapons.  I’m against both rich and poor people owning assault weapons.  I’m against women owning assault weapons, and old people  owning assault weapons, and handicapped people owning assault weapons.  Diversity doesn’t have shit to do with it.

As far as America’s long tradition with and love of guns, that’s exactly the thing that has to change.  The sooner the  better.

Glenn Beck is a despicable human being and a poor pundit.  He is almost always wrong  about everything.  He proceeds with an absolute disregard for logic and  bases his opinions on facts  he  has made up himself.

His latest crazy theory is that Trump is a plant, a stalking  horse  for Hillary Clinton.  His job is to act so stupid he  makes the  whole Republican party look stupid and, if he gets the nomination, so  much the better.  The real plan is to let Hillary  win.

I have to say (even though there’s no evidence, whatsoever), this  theory makes some sense to me.  They know each  other.  They have had a friendly relationship in the past, which is not  too surprising.  He is a billionaire.  She is a politician.  The two go together like flies and shit, like fracking and earthquakes.

If it is the  case, it’s in danger of backfiring.  No matter what  offensive thoughts emerge out of his retarded piehole, he continues to lead the Republican pack.  I’m sure Bernie Sanders would kick his ass.  I’m not sure Hillary has the charisma.

His latest fuck-up was in speaking to a Jewish group.  There were a couple of “you people” comments.  Like “you people love money,”  “you people all love to negotiate, like me.”  Not even subtle.

You want subtle  Jewish jokes?  Watch Deep Space Nine.  The Ferenghi are the Jews of the  galaxy , no doubt  in my mind at all.

It wasn’t even like it was a slip of the tongue, because his speech, to a Jewish  group, was just full of that shit.

Before that  there was the thing  about him making fun of a handicapped guy.  Before that, there was him urging his supporters to beat up the Black guy, and not exactly condemning them for peeing on the homeless.  Before that, he was threatening to close all the  mosques.  Never mind how illegal that is.  Before that is  was “She probably had blood coming out of her you know what.”  Before that it was ‘Mexican rapists.’

It’s all kind of unbelievable, unless, of course he  really is a straw man.  But he’s got a chance of winning and, even if he was set  up by the  Clinton’s, there’s  nothing  to stop him.

Except Bernie Sanders.

News reports are still sketchy and contradictory.  I heard that the shootings took place at a Target, at a Golf Course, and at a center for disabled people.  I heard 12 dead, and I heard 20 dead.  I heard the gunmen were of Middle Eastern descent, but I saw right away that was an extreme right wing site. (Doesn’t rule  out the possibility, but there’s no reason to rule it in at this point, either)

Here’s what seems to me to be the best information so far (reports by mainstream news sources, quoting police spokespeople).  Three gunmen, wearing masks, came into the conference room at a center for the disabled where an awards ceremony for county employees was taking place, and started shooting.  They had rifles.  I’ve no idea what kind.  14 people are dead.  Maybe more.  The gunmen got away, allegedly in a black SUV, which is probably the most common kind of vehicle there is in San Bernardino.

From here on out, it’s my guesswork.  This is not your typical crazy person shooting.  They  knew where they were going, and there was somebody in that conference room they wanted dead, and they wanted him or her dead bad enough they were willing to kill a whole bunch of random people to do it.

I hope I’m wrong about this, but the police may never catch these guys.  A black SUV is not a very precise definition so if nobody got a license plate number, that clue has already gone cold.  Since they were wearing masks, nobody got a look at their faces.  Ballistics tests won’t help much, since the guns weren’t left at the scene, and lots of people in that area own rifles.  Even figuring out their motive might be difficult.

There are a couple of cop shows I watch sometimes.  One is called “I Almost Got Away With It” and the other “Cuff Me If You Can.”  Their format is almost identical.  Dramatic re-enactments mixed in with interviews of police, friends and families of the accused, victims and their friends and families, anybody associated with the case.  I like these shows because they are documentaries, realistic.

They almost always end the same way.  “It seemed the trail had gone cold, when the police got a lucky break” they intone dramatically.  What happened is that somebody turned them in.

Maybe the police will catch a lucky break this time.  I hope so.

It would be cynical, presumptuous, petty minded and unfair of me to be cynical about this development.  Mark Zuckerberg, the facebook dude, is giving away a shitload of money.  About 45 billion dollars worth of facebook stock.

Proud Parents: Priscilla Chan and Mark Zuckerberg

He (and his wife) say they were inspired to do it by the recent birth of their daughter, Max.  They realize they want to make the world a better place for her to grow up in.

Fair enough.  Becoming a parent is an awesome thing, and it does tend to inspire you and  bring your true values into sharp focus.  It definitely takes you outside of yourself, and forces you to see things from a different perspective.

So, maybe it’s  sincere.  I hope so.

A couple  of things make me question it.  Facebook’s stock is divided into two categories, and he’s keeping the  decision making kind.  He’s not giving up ownership of facebook or anything.  And I’m sure he’s still got a few billion, so he won’t really need to make any lifestyle changes.

Also, the world is full of funds and foundations (the Clinton  Foundation, for instance) which are really more about PR than about helping people.  Maybe a bit of tax avoidance, too.  Goodwill, the Salvation Army and even the Red Cross have come under fire recently for funneling more money into their executive’s  pockets than into good deeds.

Zuckerberg and Chan have listed some of the objectives of the charity.  Curing  diseases sounds good.  45 billion could pay for a lot of research, build a lot of clinics, or  get a lot of life saving drugs to people who can’t afford them.  Education sounds good, but that can mean anything, really.  And community building?  What the heck does that mean?

I  wish  we lived in a world where charity was unnecessary, where people  making  billions of dollars (and I’m all  in favor  of there being more of them) paid enough  in  taxes that everybody could be fed, housed, cared for and educated.

I also suspect that if all the money given by Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg and all the other insanely wealthy philanthropists was actually spent on making the world a better place, the world would be a better place.

But, who am I to scoff?  Mark Zuckerberg has changed the world once before.  I use his site every day and so do millions of others.  Maybe he will change the world again.  It’s certainly a serious chunk of change and he was under no obligation to do it.

So, pay no attention to my cynicism.   Let’s, for now, just say thank you and wish him luck.