Issues

From iGeek
(Redirected from Category:Issues)
Jump to: navigation, search

For now, this is a pile of articles that are pop-culture issues, or things that got my attention, and I commented on. But I don't really have a better place to organize them.

Issues

🍉 The Green New Deal was a program championed by AOC, endorsed by the left, that confirms everything conservatives have been warning about the Watermelon Environmental Movement: their goal is not to save the planet, but use that to enact communism/socialism in the U.S. This $93 Trillion boondoggle admits wanting to destroy the coal, oil, airline industry, and replace planes to Hawaii with trains, and replace every building in the U.S. force everyone to go vegetarian (and eliminate cow-farts), within 10 years. Oh and complete wealth redistribution, 70%+ taxes, and so on. Politifact is of course flagging people as false for pointing this out, because they meant it, "perhaps in jest", even though there was not a scintilla of evidence of that. more...
RightTurn.png
While many people don’t know what the term Alt-Right really means, if they’re getting their cues from the mainstream media, they think it's a formal group or caucus that's the Nazi/Racist wing of the Republican party. Though I'm not sure how they can tell that for the normal Republicans, since that's how they're presented as well. But the term "Alt-right" is highly overloaded, and means different things depending on who was saying it and the context and time it was said. more...
There's real history, and the left's history -- they have very little in common. Very little. When I read Howard Zinn, or Karl Marx's view of the world -- it sounds like an average far left intersectional Democrats view of the world. While it has names in common with mine, the facts have been changed to protect the guilty and convict the innocent. more...
There's real liberty, and the left's version (Alternate Liberty) -- they have very little in common. Real liberty is about arguing with people who don't do what you want, but letting them do it anyways. Telling them not to say things, or arguing against it, but letting them do it anyways. It's about championing your causes, by trying to win in public opinion, not using the tyranny of the majority (50%+1 of votes) to force laws or authority to take away their right to do it. Remember, a law/regulation/tax is the point where a bully says, "do it, or I'll have this government goon take you property, liberty or life". more...
There's real people, and the left's version of people -- they often have very little in common. Very little. I'll hear one of my lefty friends, or watch a left-stream media channel and hear their version of something, and compare it to reality and realize, that they have the same names as the person I know, they have a completely different history. Some events/actions omitted, others imagined in. It's like we live in parallel universes, or they're perpetually tripping on LSD. more...
JustBanIt.jpg
Banning something is the tool of a weak (and authoritarian) mind. It's also the go-to-solution for every problem for the DNC. Ignoring that Prohibition only works when the VAST majority of people already want to ban something, for real -- and not just what they say for cameras or newsmen, it shows that someone is too lazy to try to convince people to do the right thing. They either know their arguments are weak, they don't trust their follow men to do the right thing, or they're just lazy anti-libertarians and want to control others. This is a list of some of the things the left wants to ban. more...
BirthrightCitizenship.jpg
Trump did an interview with Axios where he said he can end Birthright Citizenship (an imagined right) by executive order. This drove the far-left nuts (not a long trip), just like they happens when he says anything. They claimed in unison:
  1. this was unconstitutional and he was violating the constitution -- that's 100% wrong, at worst, it's debatable. But evidence supports his side (which they omit).
  2. they claimed that Presidents should have constraints against their executive orders -- something they were silent on for the 8 years while Obama was doing far worse
  3. they claim all sort of imaginary injustices if this is ruled this way -- most are hand-waiving distractions to what was the original intent of the authors.
If we're at all honest (they aren't), they would admit it all revolves around original intent of the 14th Amendment, and what it meant by "Jurisdiction", but the Chief Sponsor of the 14th Amendment (Jacob Howard) put the clause so that (to quote him), [The 14th amendment] will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States. Who are you going to believe, the Sponsor of the 14th Amendment, or the FakeNews outlets like NYT, CNN, and so on? more...
Boycotts are often a tool of hate: a way to attack private business for something that someone else said, in a way to pressure them to stop. Most of all, they're not very effective (usually). more...
America is undoubtedly a Christian Nation: founded on Judeo-Christian values and ethics. more...
Imagine a world where corporations not only control governments through lobbying and corruption, but through subverting government by inventing laws, that they force on the people. If you ask the left and right if this is a good idea, they will generally agree "no". But the left holds no value higher than getting their way. Ask them whether a company should be able to selectively censor conservatives or "hate speech" (as defined by not fitting their group-think of the day), or whether they should be able to circumvent the 1st amendment, 2nd, 4th, 9th, 10th, and so on, and they will say "sure". Ask whether you should be able to do any of the same to progressive individuals, or some intersectional victim of the day, and they will scream, "No!". There's no ethics like "no ethics". I offer examples below. more...
This article is about the Environment and Environmental issues.... and since I'm a but of a skeptic and counter-culture person, many (most) of the articles are going to have a spin about things that people think they are doing that's good, but isn't, or things that pretend to help but actually harm the environment, or the frauds that foist this bullshit on their base. more...
Fascism is overloaded (means different things to different people/groups), with a brutal history, so no one wants to be associated with it. Thus the side that it came from is going to do everything they can to obfuscate and pretend it came from "others". But fascism is more than an ad hominem attack: we can clarify conflicting meanings, and look at real history and motives. Just know that while some of us can handle the truth, reasonable intellectuals aren't usually found on internet forums or Facebook feeds. more...
FakeBudgetDNS.jpg
The first rule of politics: Democrats lie. They have to lie, because if they told the truth, they'd never get elected. This chart by the National Democratic Socialist American Workers' Party is a great example of how they lie. They cut out parts of the truth and the budget that is inconvenient for their cause -- like all the social programs, and then only look at the rest. Thus, people that believe charts like this, are either gullible rubes or liars (that don't care about the whole truth). more...
I'm not a fan of the idea of "Gay Therapy". But I'm less a fan of denial of truth. The facts are for many that sexuality is somewhat malleable. (It's not as black and white as many want to pretend -- as proven by Prison-gays. When there's no other option for companionship, some will switch teams). So there's two things here: (1) Can you convince people to change who they are (including their sexuality)? (2) Should you? If you don't believe in #1, then you don't believe Psychology is real, and that people can change. So psychologists that attack this as mumbo-jumbo, are attacking their entire field. Separately, is "should you"? And that depends. I wouldn't, for the sake of liberty: let people decide what path they want to take. But I extend that same liberty to those who want to follow the practice, as those who oppose it. Pick your own path -- just don't try to legislate it (like Stupid/Hypocritical California does). more...
JamesDamore.jpg
This is the story of Media Lies, Google Hypocrisy, and what happens when someone (James Damore) decides to tell the truth in Progressive America, "Burn the witch, after all, he said the same thing that science, common sense, and Google's own lawyers say in court!" Google encourages people to speak their minds, then fires them if they don't say what they want, then claims they're still all about free speech, just not THAT! In the end, Google proved they're not only an echo chamber, but one with blindfolds, guns and itchy trigger fingers. more...
The left believes in Green Energy: that it exists, it's cheaper, and could provide all our power needs, if we just embraced it. The facts (Science) says that Solar and Wind is unreliable, space inefficient and highly expensive if you remember to add in the costs of over-capacity, backup plants, and storage (for when they aren't working). The cheap and reliable forms of Green Energy are: Nuclear, Hydroelectric and Geothermal: but the left hates those and has resisted the adoption of real green energy solutions. more...
Gun Control is about people control. more...
The answer for every program is "compared to what?".... you could do all these other thing: desalinated clean water, more sewage treatment, much more clean energy, and 3,000 miles of more lanes and 9,000 miles of resurfacing.... or a high speed rail that few will use. Which sounds better? So it's not that I don't like the idea of High Speed Rail, it's just my brain won't let me stop comparing how much good I could do with the money, if we didn't waste it on this boondoggle. more...
Homelessness is an unsolvable problem, in a free society, in that you can't claim to be free and stop people from doing things you don't agree with, at the same time. So you have to pick one: tolerance (liberty) or cleanliness/civility/order. Compassion for free-range substance abuse, mental disorders, and layabouts destroying the cities, or compassion for the hard working folks trying to make a better world for themselves and their children. So while you can't cure it, you can decide whether you want to make it better or worse, depending on your tolerance for it. more...
UndocumentedPharmacist.png
Because I have a reasoned view of immigration, some have called me a xenophobic racist, showing they don't know what either word means, and aren't listening to what I actually think (or are missing the nuances of life).

I love immigrants. I am one. Well, 1st, 2nd and 3rd generation immigrant. (Iranian Dad on one side, Italian Grandma and German Great Grandparents on the other), raised mostly by a British Step-Dad. Many of my friends (now and growing up) and coworkers today (and historically) have been immigrants as well. I've dated immigrants, I taught immigrants, and I hang with immigrants. I love variants in culture, language, food, and people. So if you think I'm against immigrants, you're a moron.That being said, if you think all immigrants are equal, and we should have open borders, your reading comprehension needs work. (I say that because lots of people will read the following, and then claim I'm anti-immigrant. more...
Incivility.png
The point of this isn't to blame one side or the other in incivility in Politics, both sides have plenty to be ashamed of. But I hate hypocrisy and lies, or bad rationalizations. Punching your sibling and then crying, "they started it" when they hit back, is a bit chickenshit to me, and should be called out. Either side can take the high road, and "lead by example". If your side is trying to do better, but is falling short, is far different than just using the other sides bad behavior to rationalize your own. So this just lists some of the history of incivility in the nations politics, to call bullshit on whoever is claiming, "they started it". more...
Of course there is inequality and injustice in the world, and even in our nation. But by and large, we're in the top handful of countries in the world as far as tolerance and diversity, in every dimension. But the progressive left is addicted "progress" (change), not balance, or knowing when to stop/slow/moderate. So no matter what progress is made, they have to ignore it, exaggerate the wrongs and the potential for government to fix society with a few laws and a little more intolerance towards that with which they disagree -- until they get to the point where their views are a caricature of reality, and a delusion. That only they are virtuous, and those who disagree in any degree, are not (and thus are enemies). more...
FascistsWillCallThemselvesAntiFascists.jpg
Fascism is categorized by some as "right wing", because in Europe (historically), left and right isn't liberalism vs. conservatism, it often means individualism (left) vs. authoritarianism or collectivism (right). So by that definition, British and American Liberalism (Libertarianism) was considered left wing, and Fascism was right wing because it was authoritarian and collectivist (not individualist) - but that means Socialism and Communism are right wing well. While in America, our terms reversed: individualists (libertarians, classical liberals, conservatives) tend to pool on the right, not the left, so the terms/meanings/roles are directly reversed. If Fascism is right wing in Europe, it's left wing in America (or they were using a different dimension to compare it on. The same way in America, Conservatism means go backwards: back when we had less government control, but in many European countries, conservatism can mean going back to when they had Monarchs and more authoritarian control. These terms don't translate as well as some people think. There's a lot of other ways to look at right versus left wing: none of them show fascism to be a purely right wing belief system, while all show it to be a strongly left wing one (by American definitions). more...
JamesDamore.jpg
This is the story of Media Lies, Google Hypocrisy, and what happens when someone (James Damore) decides to tell the truth in Progressive America, "Burn the witch, after all, he said the same thing that science, common sense, and Google's own lawyers say in court!" Google encourages people to speak their minds, then fires them if they don't say what they want, then claims they're still all about free speech, just not THAT! In the end, Google proved they're not only an echo chamber, but one with blindfolds, guns and itchy trigger fingers. more...
This is a list of various articles on LGBTQ issues. That's Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Queer for those not in the know. They also added IA (Intersex and Asexual) and a few other letters to the acronym salad, but it's really getting moronically inclusive when they start adding necrophilia, bestiality, pedophelia/pederasts, "and Fred" to the end, as s/he needs her own category. Even Queer seems unneeded, and I should probably just use the older LGBT -- if you can't get the point with that, then you're just virtue signaling by memorizing alphabet pi to the 27th place. more...
There's real economics, and the left's version (Leftonomics) -- they have very little in common. Real economics is about observing what is, and learning from it. Leftonomics is about ignoring what is, and believing whatever cultural Marxism has taught you and that you wish was true. Usually some variant of America/Capitalism is bad, and government authoritarianism would be better. more...
NKLetter.png
The Whitehouse responded to a teacher about her questions on Parkland and shooting, and she miscorrects him to try to prove that he's an idiot. Only her lack of research, and erroneous corrections showed who the idiots are: her and those who repeated her miscorrections without noticing they were wrong (and fit the same style that Obama and Clinton used). But if your base is partisans, things like facts won't matter. When you can't debate the merits of the facts, you can at least distract by attacking the people doing it, or their punctuation. It plays well with the gullible and partisan, while the other side recognizes it for what it is (stupid partisanism). Hey, if Democrats could grow, then the party would have ended with Andrew Jackson and the Indian Massacres. more...
I hear dimwits compare costs of living between states/areas pretty poorly. They often fall prey to what I call, "the lie of averages". more...
Malevolent liberty is better than benevolent tyranny. A lot of this boils down to the Trolly Problem: a thought experiment in ethics that goes like this: a runaway trolley is going to kill five people tied to one set of tracks, or you can flip a level where it will go to a side track and kill one person. Which is more ethical? For me, the victims not having a say in what you do, is where much of the problem is. In Liberty, they choose. In Tyranny, you choose for them. more...
FakeNewsmen.jpg
There are people who are either too biased (or aren't paying attention) to realize how biased the media is. We're not going to convince each other of anything: me with proof, and them by denying it. So this article isn't for "them". It's just a place for me to collect example's of media bias, for those rational enough to consider them. more...
Spacer.png
Some context on military suicides compared to other groups: something to keep in mind when Hollywood is giving folks their fake trope about how crazy those military folks are. more...
DNCTrumpFoot.JPG
The "Nuclear Option" (aka the Filibuster Rules) isn't really law. Since 1806, the Senate said there was no time limit on debate -- so basically, if a group of Senators was resentful enough over any rule or appointee, they could get up to the Lectern and speak (debate) until the other side gave up: basically anyone could stand on their principles or duty to prevent bad law from getting enacted by discussing it to death (called the filibuster). This guaranteed that all new laws oppressing the people would have to have super-super majority support, and wasn't so offensive to some that it would gridlock the Senate. The Democrats Nuclear Option, ended that. more...
Uninsured.jpg
Those claiming 20 million more people are insured because of Obamacare (ACA) either don’t know what they’re talking about, or are bald-faced liars. We're around 29 million people short of the campaign promise for universal coverage. And it's well below the 20 million new people covered that the fools and frauds like to claim. The facts: about 2.8M were covered because of Obamacare, and another 4-6M because of medicaid expansion, at a cost of about $20K per new person covered. more...
ACAisRepublican.png
There’s an oft repeated lie, that the Affordable Care Act (ACA / Obamacare) was modeled after a Republican plan. People that say this are either liars, DNC mouthpieces, or people completely unaware of the actual facts and are just repeating what they’ve been told by DNC mouthpieces. This debunks that tripe. more...
OpenFloorplan4.jpg
Open Floorplans: a really bad idea brought into popularity by idiots and bean counters. An allegory quote is, "As the CEO of a start-up, I instituted an open bathroom policy and took down the stalls. People started quitting, and profits began to soar. Productivity was not effected because we don't really produce anything. We're a start-up." more...
The lefts two biggest tools are envy and fear. They use them often to manipulate their constituents. But they also use projection (projecting their flaws on the other side), to trying to deflect/distract from their side doing it. So they accuse Republicans of being the party of fear (a variation of racist), as if they're scared of all brown people or anyone wearing a Hijab (or in my families case, a rusari). The Republicans aren't flawless, but such claims when your side is worse, are insulting broad-brush bigotry (something they also criticize and do more), as well as hypocrisy. And I don't suffer hypocrisy quietly. more...
Perspective.jpg
Perspectives1.jpg
There's these different meme's about perspective -- and some are true, some aren't (or are true to only a point). Yes, what angle you look at an issue, can alter what you see. But that doesn't always make it right. In the image, one sees it as a circle, the other sees it as a rectangle, and since neither are seeing the bigger picture, they mess that it is a cylinder. So many will take away the message that both are correct from their view. But both aren't correct -- both are incomplete and wrong -- the truth is bigger than either of their views. Often there needs to be room for more than one perspective, but ultimately, on many issues there's also a right and wrong. more...
There's a famous twin study (looking at how much twins vary versus random people), to help answer nature versus nurture questions. One intriguing result was the political affiliation, or at least left/right alignment, showed that nature was far significant than people thought. They concluded that over half of the political difference (like authoritarian leanings) was genetic.
  • On one that makes sense. How logical/emotional you are, putting head over heart, or fearless about change or reserved about consequences, does sound like it would have a genetic factor.
  • On the other hand, there's another study that showed what year you were born had an impact on your political leanings (even more so). Which makes sense as well: if you grew up a spoiled millennial that had parents taxi you everywhere, you're going to have a different world-view than kids who grew up on their own during the great depression, WWII, or even latchkey generation. And since the time-political alignment study was later, it doesn't seem like the sibling study took those factors into account. (Assuming you trust a non-peer reviewed Columbia Ph.D. students grad project a reliable study). more...
Propaganda.jpg
Propaganda.jpg
Basics of Propaganda: understanding differences between white, black and grey propaganda. more...
Links to Articles about Public Education. more...
RussiaCollusion4.jpg
NO! Being rationally skeptical is called critical thinking. So as Reagan said, "trust but verify". If the evidence supports the case, and they're being open? Sure. If they're not being open, and the story doesn't add up, then "of course not". The FBI is normally about telling the truth, but the CIA's job is to lie. And both the top of the FBI and CIA, in this case, have been caught lying, politicking (against this administration), the top leadership has been fired and are being investigated. Thus the media and democrats that have been telling us since Vietnam to never trust the CIA, are suddenly saying we should trust unnamed agency sources without evidence (and without question)? That doesn't sound political to you? more...
QPhoto.jpg
So a troll named "Q Clearance Patriot" (Q Clearance implies they have Top Secret clearance on nuclear weapons and materials), got on 4chan (2018.10.28), and later 8chan,and trolled about all sorts of silly stuff about worldwide conspiracy theories such as, DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz hired MS-13 to murder DNC staffer Seth Rich, or Robert Mueller isn't actually investigating Trump, he was appointed by Trump to investigate Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and other top Democrats for their involvement in planting evidence, or a global pedophile ring. After getting thrown off Reddit, they created an App called QDrops to spread their more and more absurd theories, and a few right wing celebrities tweeted stuff.

This blew up when among the 8,000 filled seats in Trump's Tampa rally, were maybe a dozen people wearing T-Shits with QAnon, or holding up "We are Q signs"... and a few of them seemed to be involved in chanting "CNN Sucks" over the appropriately named CNN FakeNews mouthpiece and polemic hack Jim Acosta. Disagreeing with CNN just for being rude, incompetent and being wrong so often, was the last straw. Many unbiased media snowflakes tweeted how bad it was to claim "CNN sucks" and overdramatic, so they compared that to an "Erdogan-style crackdown on his media critics", and calling Trump supporters White Trash, Nazi's, the KKK, and calling for them to be euthanized.... all in the name of benevolent moderation, of course. And to those media outlets, it is the Trump supporters that are scary and using overblown hate/rhetoric? Seriously!

The problem to me seems to be that the media is not in on the joke that many of these folks are just punking the media. The alt-right is filled with trolls that dick with the media for attention, and a lot of their followers do too -- they get geek credit for getting the media to repeat false memes that were created to outrage the media and the far-left. There's little evidence they actually believe the shit they spout, there's a ton of evidence that they enjoy pretending they do, because it outrages the left, and the media creates clickbait headlines and sensationalizes the conspiracy (which proves to them how bad/gullible the media is). Of the dozen that showed up to a Trump rally, I expect that 8 are enjoying punking the media, and 4 are true believers of any batshit theory that makes the media or left look bad. Meanwhile, 60% of ALL Democrats in polls think Socialism had positive impacts on society (if you ignore the 180M murdered last century by them). Which is more scary to you? If you think the former, you probably watch CNN without laughing. more...
Recycling.png
Recycling is not the panacea that some think it is, it is about teaching the gullible to follow without question, while increasing pollution, waste, taxes, and government control over our lives. That's not conspiracy, these are just facts. But still the gullible trained proles follow out of ignorance or virtue signaling as a demonstration of symbolism over substance -- they put their agenda above science. more...
The idea of Reparations is moronic and racist. We have too much mixing to be able to separate those blacks who traded or had slaves, from whites who found against it, and immigrants who had nothing to do with either. It is not judging a man on the content of his character, but punishing/rewarding based on the color of his skin -- and that's vile. It's also what the NAACP has devolved into, which is not about helping people who suffered (which can never be resolved since all are dead), but to exert power and remake America into a more unjust and authoritarian country. more...
Sarah Palin was appointed chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (responsible for overseeing the state's oil and gas fields), then she became the youngest person and the first woman to be elected Governor of Alaska, then the first Woman on the Republican National Ticket when she was appointed VP candidate for John McCain. She has endorsed and campaigned for the Tea Party movement (a pro-constitutionalist conservative faction). Her book Going Rogue has sold more than two million copies. more...
While you can't judge all individuals by the group behavior, you can judge the group by the group averages. If there are traits in common to the group, that's hinting that it is a group dynamic. They might be filtering, intentionally or unintentionally. But either way, if you ride with outlaw bikers, don't be shocked if you end up in a bar fight.

(1) Tribalism: If there's differences in rules or treatment for insiders versus outsiders, that's a hint away from healthy group psyche.
(2) Hypocrisy: If the movement refuses to be introspective and admit it's own flaws or it's leaders don't live by their own rules, another hint.
(3) Ignorance: If the majority of the followers are low-information, prefer to argue feelings over facts, or fall back to talking points or fallacies like appeal to celebrity, authority, popularity? That's a hint.
(4) Intolerance: How do they respond to divergence of thought, identity or behavior, is one of the stronger indicators of whether it's a cult. Cults demand conformity.
(5) Transparency: How open is an organization, their finances or their leadership? Public versus private rituals or beliefs? A secret society and lack of transparency is cultish.
(6) Paranoia: Being paranoid and into conspiracies (especially doomsday ones), especially without some valid reasons, is a strong sign. So Jews or Mormons being a little paranoid has some valid history and justification, thus deserve a bit more leeway. Democrats in Academia or the Media? That deserves finger-ear orbits: the American Sign Language gesture for cult.
(7) Ability to leave: If adherents can leave, and not be ostracized or attacked? That's a good sign for a group. If they will be ostracized, maligned or attacked? It is not.
(8) Abuse: Demands for conformity, litmus tests for being devout enough, punishments for non-compliance with micro-managing norms? Cult, cult, cult.
(9) Insecurity: If adherents constantly try (and fail) to measure up to their exalted leader or absurd standards? Guilt, doubts, unworthiness are not signs of a healthy organization/individual psyche.
(10) Eccentricities A little is fine, a lot is not. Cults start differentiating themselves with alternate language/terminology, dress, mannerisms, or history. Those divergences from norms (and reality), aren't good signals.
(11) Prophets: If the leader is revered and infallible, and becoming more than a flawed human, then that's another strong hint of losing touch with reality.

(12) Extremism: a lot is about degrees and balances, which is what makes the lines a bit fuzzy. You can disagree, but how much? I once had a coworker shriek "No" in pain, like I'd physically struck her, because I'd mentioned some of the mis-assumptions people make on organic farming. Not a healthy reaction. But someone just politely saying, "I disagree and here's why" is completely reasonable. It's the old, "I'll know it when I see it".
more...
There is no "hate speech" exclusion for the first amendment (1A). Destroying public property because it "offends you", is no exception. And if you start destroying others tributes, then why should any be allowed? Before you grease any slippery slope, you might be wise to ask, "what's at the bottom?" more...
There is no one "Black Community", so generalizations are just that: statistically observations that can apply to sets, but should not be applied to individuals, or all subsets. Still, Blacks have been taught to think they're an oppressed minority in the Country that gives them more civil rights and protections than any in the world. Often more rights than the majority groups in the country. (Hate crimes, affirmative action, etc., all only apply to some protected minorities and not the majorities). Here's some articles that sum up the problems. more...
The Great Depression wasn't all that great. We'd had many depressions before that, many triggered by the Federal government meddling with trade or monetary policy, and we bounced quickly back within a year or two. What made the Great Depression so grand, was that the Federal Government not only caused it, but tried to fix it with Keynesian spending. That extended it from 2 years, to long enough to have another depression in a depression. more...
GayKlansmen.jpg
support trans-folks being able to use whatever bathroom they want. Right up until they try to bully others and pass laws forcing others to adapt to their delusion. That's where they jump the shark and go from defending the little guy, into being the bullies. This article documents how the timeline went down, and where the bullied became the lying bullies. more...
NatGeo.jpg
I don't like people exploiting children. NatGeo, the parents, and the LGBTQ community is exploiting this child for their agenda (or advertising). We know that most kids with gender dysphoria grow out of it, most that don't, are in for a lifetime of depression and challenges, and gender re-assignment doesn't help. So this to me is like celebrating and sensationalizing childhood schizophrenia, I'm not sure that helps anyone. more...
Vaxxers.jpg
I hardly have a dog in this fight, and don't have a problem (in theory) with either side -- but both sides can be preachy and wrong. While I'm no anti-Vaxxer (I've gotten all mine, I don't think vaccines are the cause of autism, and I would get them for my imaginary kids), I find the anti-Vax crowd has points that the anti-anti-vax crowd is either unwilling or incapable of understanding (their arguments are more simplistic and focused around the cult of authority). There are extremes and idiots on both sides, but I usually throw out the outliers and listen to the moderates on both sides, and the anti-Vaxxers I know, are far more well reasoned than the anti-anti-Vaxxers, at least based on the arguments both sides have presented. That could just be the circle of libertarian minded friends, or many articles I've read. But I've searched and found few anti-anti-vaxxers that were well informed or willing to concede valid points. To me, it's not ignorance that's a problem, but willful ignorance mixed with preachy sanctimony that gets on my nerves. This article has a few reminders on these facts. more...
One of the reasons the left is thought to be Anti-American and Anti-Fact has to do with selective hypocrisy/rememberences on American Wars. They might cheer for the War at the start (especially if Democrat Presidents are for it).... but then they undermine American interests and support our enemies in the end. Almost every trope that makes America look bad about War, (Bush Lied, America did it for Oil, imperialism, etc) has leftists at the forefront of the cause with a megaphone, and often Soviets or other American-hating backers behind them. Years or decades later when you show their trope was false all along, they deny, make excuses, or attack anyone for defending the facts. more...
Woke Corporate Slacktivism.png
Woke Corporate Slacktivism is the idea that corporations should stop trying to maximize shareholder value by meeting their customers needs, but start becoming political/religious organizations that preach their agendas to others. It seems to fail more than it works, because most people are wise enough to recognize that they're insincere. And even those gullible enough to believe otherwise just find some other hypocrisy by the company to feed their need for moral outrage. So their short term allies will always turn on them, and they alienate everyone else. more...


Reference