Tuesday afternoon rant

Every day Facebook reminds me what a depressing place this country is becoming lately.  New bullshit every day.

And yet in the comments sections of practically any political post (and plenty of non-political posts too) remarks from the ignorant, the deluded, the angry, and the downright degenerate faction of the country, that portion that is disproportionately vocal to the sane people, but (hopefully) isn’t as big as it seems. (It’s still big enough to make me depressed there are this many assholes in the world.) So pretty much, the more stuff changes, the more it stays the same.
Today’s rant is brought to you by the “It  has nothing to do with race; Obama was an awful president/Trump is a way better President” comment crew.

Lyin’ ass motherfuckers … Which policies of Obama’s specifically didn’t you like? Was it how he wanted everyone to have healthcare and take care of the earth? Gee, what a dick *eye roll*.  Lemme guess. That’s code for  you were mad caring about others and the environment might cost you more? *bigger eyeroll* And now that Trump is President you claim the rest of us should “accept” it and respect the office.  *eyes roll out of head and down the street*

First of all, the right bitched and moaned the ENTIRE time Obama was president. You didn’t accept or respect him. There were plenty of the n-word and lynching references being thrown around, cries to impeach, and it’s on record how McTurtle (McConnell) filibustered Obama’s supreme court nominee. So stop being fucking hypocrites. Secondly, Obama was a LAW SCHOLAR. Trump is a FAILED business man. Obama was articulate, impartial, and smart. Even tempered. Social minded. Just because he gave attention to the racial divide in America doesn’t mean he was putting down white people . Trump is reactionary, immature, petty, ignorant of policy, and (it seems) half illiterate. And Trump has been named (literally tagged in graffiti) and referenced in various incidences of racial hatred since his election. He has emboldened race hate. His lies can be directly fact checked (and HAVE been. He is reported to have already uttered over 3000 lies since his campaign, Maybe since Fox didn’t report it you all missed it.) You are fully entitled not to like Obama, but don’t even try to pretend Trump can hold a candle to him. Don’t pretend he isn’t a dumpster fire set on catching fire to everything around him if it gets him more money or power. Don’t pretend Trump cares about you. If you believe that, you’re a bigger fool than you sound (and you sound plenty foolish when you say dumb shit like this). And we are just as entitled to NOT like Trump because of the way HE runs this country, (we can actually cite specific examples and their fallout too, unlike most of you when you complain about Obama) which is quickly turning into a cesspool that feeds on and is a monument to Evangelical white male fragility.

I understand SOME of you are too proud to renege or backpedal (although best believe backpedaling is one of the things Trump does best.) I understand you would hate to have been “wrong” or admit that the man you backed so loudly and proudly is a charlatan. But do the rest of us a favor, if you insist on dying on this battle field, take that “Trump is a way better President than Obama was” shit and tell it to one of your fellow Trumpers. They are the ONLY people who believe it. The rest of us, (including and not limited to people watching from other countries) are sick of your denial, sick of your bullshit, sick of your President, and frankly no longer have the energy to argue abject reality with people who choose to remain deliberately ignorant.  But thank you all for having the courage to band together and vote your heart, even if it is simply to fuck up an entire half century of social progress.

Warning: I’m Just ONE Mad Woman (House Votes to Defund Planned Parenthood)

Because this can be such an emotional topic, at least in regards to the issue of abortion, I’d like to preface what I am about to say with this:  I have come to the conclusion that is real life sometimes there is no “good” solution.  There is only the best solution for a given person at a given time.  I have thought it over quite a bit myself and while I can definitely see the pro-life point of view, in the end, I can’t get behind one living thing, a person, (the woman), losing her rights in deference to another living thing.  Anytime a woman feels she has to make a choice like this, it’s a hard, shitty choice to make, but I do believe it still should be a choice.

Please feel free to offer an opinion in the comments if you like but keep it civil towards all involved.  Thank you.

I Hope Your Cardiologist is an Obama Supporter

I originally posted this on Facebook, but then remembered by “no more politics on my Facebook” vow, and decided to post it here.  Because I am really, super fucking tired of reading about and hearing people bash Obama for the Affordable Care Act, and even more tired of seeing people make carte blanche statements about people they’ve never even met based on who they voted (or didn’t vote) into office.  Some people are just random morons spouting their uneducated/ biased opinions in Huffington Post comment sections would likely not be so free with their opinions if they were face to face with the people they were insulting; after all… most civilized people regard it as gauche to just straight up insult someone because you don’t agree with their politics.   But apparently, it’s okay to do that online.  As evidenced by all the hateful political memes going around Facebook.  When I was growing up, who one was voting for was often considered a private matter, much like asking someone about their salary.  But now apparently it’s okay to criticize people in retrospect for their choices in the polls.

Oh, this is funny? You probably just insulted and alienated half of your Facebook “friends.” But I bet you’re really a nice person in real life, aren’t you?  For realz.

You don’t have to agree with the President, or even like him, but I can’t help but feel like a lot of the negativity surrounding the ACA is born of ignorance and bigotry.  After all, socialized medicine is not a new idea, and Obama is not the first President to try to implement it.  Historically speaking, the Social Security and Medicare programs were also met with some resistance.

” Harry Truman took on the idea of national medical care and tried to integrate it into his Fair Deal program. Truman’s attempts were also unsuccessful, though during his presidency the fight for national medical care became specific to the aged population.Once the targeted age was decided, a lengthy debate began over presenting a coherent medical care bill to Congress. During the Eisenhower administration, the House Ways and Means Committee was created. The members of this committee were mainly Republicans and Southern Democrats, complicating attempts to pass social health programs. Wilbur Mills, chair of the committee, later played a role in creating the health care program that was integrated into the Social Security Act.” (source)

Obama’s ideas may not be perfect, but I do think they could work better if all parties cooperated instead of some businesses and politicians just trying to keep their already fat pockets padded.  Obama didn’t single-handedly ruin this country, as so many claim… lobbyists and politicians did.  As much as some people feel like he is not doing this country any favors, he’s not Adolf Hitler either.  He’s not the anti-christ… (and btw, your tin foil hat is crooked.)

But the main thrust of this post is actually this;  for those of you who feel comfortable judging a whole group of people as “morons” (or any other unflattering but essentially meaningless defamation) simply because you dislike that they voted for Obama (or didn’t, as the case may be,) just remember, these people are people too.  They have ideas, dreams, people they love, and people who love them.  And some of them are probably people you know, people you call “friends” and even like.

Or maybe they are people you will need some day.  If you should one day find yourself caught in a burning building, are you going to turn away a fireman who comes to your rescue because he’s a “moron who voted for Obama?”  (Psst…if you are that much of a self-righteous dick, you should probably consider just dying.  Just sayin’.)

Okay.  Red Queen out.

All A@@holed Out

At least once a week now, I ask myself the same question, usually prompted by some ignorant, separatist redneck post or some anti-abortion self-righteous meme…posted by my “friends.”  Some of these are people I haven’t actually “seen” since high school, and even then, they were more like acquaintances.  Many are people to whom I used to be closer, and time and/or distance has come between us, but with whom I would like to keep in some sort of contact.  And then I’m realizing I just never knew some of these people to begin with.  And I actually like some of these people…I mean, except for the unfortunate fact of their intolerance…

Um…yeah, okay.

Shall I attempt to point out the many ways this meme is ridiculous?  Firstly, the only people who have a problem with secularism are people who feel everyone should be their religion.  Secondly, pretty sure many of the “lazy, unproductive” people were that way before Obama got into office.  I can only assume this is a jab at people who are on some type of public assistance.  (These are also likely the same people who post memes like “before we help the poor in other countries, we need to help our own” and then go around bitching when any laws that actually attempt to do so get proposed.)

Thirdly–  Ow! I stubbed my fuckin’ toe!  Thanks, Obama!

But anyway, the question I have been asking myself is this:

At which point do I draw the line between respecting my friends’ views and differences of opinions to “You’re just an asshole and I don’t think I wanna be your friend?”

Generally I would say, the difference would be whether or not their “views” encourage hate or discrimination of any kind.  But seriously…have you seen  some of the memes going around now?  The line between expressing opinion and attempting to insult/control the opposition seems to be becoming increasingly blurred.

And especially in lieu of the George Zimmerman verdict and all the “moral outrage” and barely concealed racism going around, I am SO sick of seeing hateful, ignorant posts about “reverse racism” and white victims of black killers.  How about we direct some of that moral outrage and righteous indignation towards the things that really matter, and maybe realize that all these posts are just widening the racial divide?

But, back to my original question, how do you personally decide when to accept differences, and who to cut loose because they are just too different (aka, an asshole)?  Frankly, I’m all “assholed” out.

“Your assumptions are your windows on the world. Scrub them off every once in a while, or the light won’t come in.”
― Isaac Asimov

Gun Control, Gun Rights, and Women (updated)

Pursuant to the massacre at Newtown and President Obama’s subsequent attempt to institute a stricter gun policy, there has been a tight focus on gun rights and an immense push to make our schools safer for our children.  Needless to say, the result is that the divide between gun rights advocates and gun control advocates is widening.

I have always leaned towards agreeing with the right to own a gun and protect oneself and one’s family.  That said, I believe the words gun control have gotten a bad rap.  Somewhere along the way, the idea of moderation, of common sense, got lost to both sides and the words gun control became synonymous with  “complete firearm ban.”

I do believe control is the issue.  I think people who own firearms need to better secure them against theft and illicit use (even by members of their own families.)  I think gun owners should be held to the strictest responsibility for their firearms.  I do not feel there should be a total ban on firearms.

The aim of this article though is to give some food for thought to both sides by introducing a slightly different perspective on the gun rights issue.  This is merely information…information backed by statistics and scientific inquiry.

I doubt there is anything worse than what happened at Sandy Hook in December, but this information shifts the focus of gun victimization.  To women.

Abused women are five times more likely to be killed by their abuser if the abuser owns a firearm.(source)

This is women, killed by men who legally own their firearms.  In short, it suggests a link between the availability of household firearms and female victimization rates.  

Of course, the first argument against this concept is that a man who would beat on his wife should not be allowed to own weapons, and there are laws that prohibit the purchase of a firearm by a person subject to a domestic violence restraining order.  But that is true only of known abusers.  What about the women who have not reported their abuse?

Approximately 20% of the 1.5 million people who experience intimate partner violence annually obtain civil protection
orders. (source)

As I said before, I’m not really trying to push a partisan view of the gun issue, I’m merely hoping to give both gun control advocates and gun rights advocates more information…

And perhaps help them to see we should all be working together towards a solution to end gun violence, rather than fighting against one another.  Maybe if we try to view the problem collectively- and objectively- we can come up with a solution that protects everyone’s rights and safety.

image: HR Giger

[UPDATE: (4/18)  I have no problem with gun ownership, in theory, but here’s what I think, as succinctly as I can put it: People keep spouting the whole “outlaw guns and only outlaws will have guns.” But the problem is, “outlaws” aren’t the only people committing gun crimes. Regular, everyday people are using their own guns (or family or friend’s legally owned guns) in domestic crimes, and then people are saying “We never thought he/she was capable of this!” So, clearly, despite heavy lobbiest protestations, it is not just inner city gang bangers and drug dealers using guns to kill each other. I agree with responsible gun ownership, I just think the word “responsible” needs to be redefined (and reinforced!!!) ] [Update: 10/2015 A 2014 view of the demographics of gun ownership in America.  And a 2013 NBC article FULL of gun and gun ownership stats.]

 Edit (6/2016)

After yet another mass shooting, by a homegrown (that’s American) Islamic terrorist,  using mostly “legally” purchased firearms…in a club with armed “good guys” (security guards)…

Analysis by the Violence Policy Center has found that at least 29 mass shootings since 2007 were carried out BY perpetrators with concealed carry permits. That’s more than three times the number of concealed permit holders who prevented mass shootings through their swift action. (source)

I am tired of banging my head against a wall arguing with people who let their emotions mold the “facts” to suit them.  To be very clear, it doesn’t matter how you “feel” about it, or how much you support 2nd Amendment rights; it is a documented fact that increased gun ownership in a developed county leads to increased gun deaths in that country.  Not only is it documented, it is common fucking sense…

The number of firearms injuries remains high in the United States, compared with most of the rest of the world. Firearm suicide rates are strongly impacted by the rate of gun ownership. (Kaplan and Geling, 1998) There is a positive correlation between firearm fatality rates and number of guns in developed nations.  (Bangalore and Messerli, 2013) (source)

(source)

To the gun nuts: Let’s be clear…  Obama doesn’t want your damn guns.  Gun “control” is not “confiscation.”  I know they both are “c” words but see if you can keep up with me here.

It is a myth that more guns will make us safer. It is a myth that other developed countries have “just as much” gun violence.  It is a myth that in most situations, but especially mass shooting situations, that a “good guy with a gun” can “stop” the bad guy. ((FBI report  on active shooter situations issued 2013) )

And yes, I am aware that not all gun control measures have been successful in the past.  I am NOT in favor of revoking all rights to bear arms, but this bullheaded refusal to acknowledge what irresponsible use of this right has cost us is pissing me off severely…

Federal data from the Centers for Disease Control indicate that between 2007 and 2011, an average of 62 children age 14 and under died each year in unintentional shootings.4 By this measure, American children are sixteen times more likely to be killed in unintentional shootings than their peers in other high-income countries.(source)

…and I know I am not the only one.

One thing remains certain, despite laws for or against gun control, a lack of care and concern regarding one’s fellow human beings, whether in war or through domestic violence, will continue to promote firearms injuries. (source)

Post Script: 6/12/2016
I would like to share one final source I came across today.
For OR against gun ownership, I don’t care. Just don’t keep pretending there isn’t a correllation and/or causal relationship. This article addresses every argument the pro-gun camp typically trots out, with data from a variety of sources. To be clear, I am NOT suggesting confiscation of weapons, but can we please stop frontin’ like there isn’t a problem?

There is a very strong correlation between gun ownership and gun violence — a relationship that researchers argue is at least partly causal. And American gun ownership is beyond anything else in the world. At the same time, these guns are concentrated among a passionate minority, who are typically the loudest critics against any form of gun control and who scare legislators into voting against such measures. (source)

But don’t let the above fairly editorialized blurb scare you off the article.  There are tons of independent studies and sources cited.

This article is pretty succinct, and sums up what I have been saying in pretty much any of my gun-related articles…  and anyone who still wants to argue is not gonna get any more time from me.

Related articles

• Gun Control Has Always Been A Part Of American History (personalliberty.com)
• Obama: Gun-control advocates have to listen more (sacbee.com)
• How They Got Their Guns (NY Times)
• http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/6-things-americans-should-know-about-mass-shootings/
• https://alienredqueen.wordpress.com/2015/10/03/umpqua-the-mental-illness-panacea-as-it-relates-to-gun-violence/
• https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-stop-more-crimes-evidence-shows/

People to Obama: Do Something NOW…But not THAT!

My intention is that this will be a short post, where I make an important point concisely, as it really should be self-evident.  But…we all know how I seem to be be practically incapable of not pontificating or at the very least, indulging in tangent streams of thought as they occur to me.   See?  There I go again…

But the main thrust of this post is this; I find it amusing, in a tongue-in-cheek sort of way, that people are clamoring for the President to “do something” about the violence in our schools (and in the country in general,) some doubtlessly even going so far as to blame him for it, but the minute he makes a proposal, everyone is bitching about infringement of their rights.  I’m not saying I am either for or against President Obama’s proposal.  What annoys me in the reaction of an ungrateful country who shout a call to action, usually with no practical (or accurate) idea of what it takes to actually achieve success.

Rep. Paul Gosar’s statement on Obama’s proposal was the following:

I will actively fight any attempt by this Administration to undermine our Constitution and infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. With the attack on personal gun-ownership, the Second Amendment, and our God-given rights, the Obama-Biden Administration has been relentless in their pursuit of taking guns away from law-abiding Americans. (source)

Some of these “free thinkers” even go so far as to compare Obama to Hitler.

Let me explain something to you…people of questionable intellect.  Hitler’s tyranny was born out of a society in disarray.  At first, Hitler offered an ideal that the people wanted to believe.  An article from the Scientific American Mind describes tyranny as the result of a group processes, not one individual person’s pathology.  And yes, our society is in disarray, but that is due as much to the idea of entitlement that has been sewn into the fabric of our society.  Now, everyone thinks they’re owed something, and that they have the right to make waves to get whatever that something is.  A lot of greed,  useless righteous indignation, and not enough consequences for poor behavior is what is ruining our society… not ONE man.

Groups… are ultimately about collective self-realization. They use social power to make an existence in the image of their shared beliefs and values. But when groups cannot produce such a
working order, their members become more willing to accept other social structures—even if these new systems violate their existing way of life.

In specific reference to Nazi Germany:

Moreover, when the collapse of a system wreaks such havoc that a regular and predictable social life becomes impossible,
the promise of a rigid and hierarchical order becomes more alluring. Thus, the chaotic failure of the democratic Weimar led to the rise of Nazism.

See? I have already written more than I intended, but forgive me, because it is all to support my point.

AT first glance maybe it seems like I am actually inferring that I agree with the conservative view of the President’s plan.  Actually, what I am saying is that:

a) It takes more than one man to create a tyranny and

b) the very people that are criticizing the President’s every move are still looking to him to give them an answer, a solution, and berate him if it is not the answer they were hoping for.

Basically, I liken this to the smaller scale example of the society/ laws that restrict parental rights and decision-making (corporal punishment, health care and vaccinations, etc) but then blame the parent when the kid gets loosed on society as a disrespectful, anti-social mess.

You can’t have it both ways!  You can’t expect someone to perform miracles with their hands tied behind their backs (or in bureaucratic red tape.)

Just sayin’.

Related articles

• Drudge Links Obama and Hitler on Gun Control. Left Cries, “Foul!” (teapartyeconomist.com)
• The 2nd Amendment Is What Makes The Other Nine Possible (forbes.com)
• Our Protections Against Tyranny (bettercareful.newsvine.com)
• http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/government-elections-politics/how-conservatives-reinvented-the-second-amendment/

Why I Don’t Give a Crap About Voting

Call me a misanthrope– you might be right.  Call me cynical– you’re probably right.  Frustrated?  Definitely.  And I have hesitated to blog my opinions on the presidential campaign because I don’t feel like getting into a debate with anyone about my views on Obama, Romney, the 47%, welfare, gay marriage, or anything else really.  I don’t want to have to defend my feelings to ignorant people, or even to educated people.

But I will say one thing, and it’s not about either candidate, per se, and in all honesty, is an opinion I think could be applied to the world on a macro-level.

A few moments ago I posted this status to my Facebook page:

Upon discussion of why electoral voting was implemented, someone said it was so that the uninformed “rabble” couldn’t elect a nitwit… my first thought was “now the uninformed rabble can’t elect a nitwit because the corporations have BOUGHT their nitwit’s votes with campaign money.“

This sums up my issue with this country in a nutshell.  Our votes don’t mean squat.

A quick point about the electoral college:

Most of the time, electors cast their votes for the candidate who has received the most votes in that particular state. Some states have laws that require electors to vote for the candidate that won the popular vote, while other electors are bound by pledges to a specific political party. However, there have been times when electors have voted contrary to the people’s decision, and there is no federal law or Constitutional provision against it. (source)

The key phrases to note there are “most of the time” and “no federal law or provision” to prevent electors for voting contrary to the people’s (that us “common folk”) decisions.

And apparently there a quite a few people who feel this way.

If we have these fancy voting machines and all this technology now that was not present even 50 years ago, why can’t we move this country toward a more direct presidential election process?

We hold elections where these men spend untold thousands of dollars to make us promises and then blame them when they can’t fix in one term, decades’ worth  of the country’s issues.

As one of my very intelligent and sensitive friends pointed out:

The last four years have taught me that it doesn’t actually matter who is president so long as congress won’t let them do anything they said they would…

What started as a checks and balances action has in at least some measure made our leaders impotent.

But what it basically boils down to for me is an overwhelming feeling that us “little people” will never be able to compete against the big corporations or the extremely wealthy private parties who have enough capital to ensure their will is carried out…

Proposed amendment to voting propaganda:
“It’s Up to You!… SYKE!HaHa.JK.LOL!RUFKM?”