Sorry DeGroote. You deserve your own post. We're getting sick of the sexist crap leftists, spineless, compliant wanna-bes-but-can't-do teachers and academians are pawning off as education.
Business degrees, unless in Accounting or MIS are worthless. They are just plain worthless. NOBODY should major in business. But what is worse is when you have to suffer a purposeful and designed political campaign of socialist, leftists clap trap from losers who couldn't hack it in the real world and end up being professors.
You want to go to DeGroote? Go right ahead and see if you can ever pay back your student loans.
Saturday, March 30, 2013
Friday, March 29, 2013
Road Trip Linkage
I predict the term "Affirmative Action" will achieve the pejorative tone in due time similar to "short bus."
The Canadians also have liberal arts majors.
Dal explains why men aren't responding the market price signals.
After 44 years of marriage we divorced. I consider it a successful marriage..Oh, BTW, Castro is great!
Ehhh...I don't want to mess with Kate.
Danny interviews Aurini about how economics delves into post nuclear war!
The Canadians also have liberal arts majors.
Dal explains why men aren't responding the market price signals.
After 44 years of marriage we divorced. I consider it a successful marriage..Oh, BTW, Castro is great!
Ehhh...I don't want to mess with Kate.
Danny interviews Aurini about how economics delves into post nuclear war!
Thursday, March 28, 2013
The Return of Shame
Law, at its best, prevents people from doing bad things. And that's at its best.
A lot of times people just don't obey laws (criminals) and even when they do obey laws, they may not be moral. In other words laws prohibit bad behavior, but can not compel good or moral behavior. So while I may not murder somebody, law doesn't prevent me from racking up more credit card debt than I can afford or standing somebody up for a date.
However, society did have a tool that picked up where laws left off - shame.
Though not codified or written down, society had their own set of unspoken rules or laws called "standards" and if you violated these social standards you would be shamed and scorned. This shame would compel you to behave appropriately and was a vital and necessary component of society in order for it to survive and succeed.
However, shame is very interesting in that it's very much like "paying taxes" or "having to work for a living." It's a fact of life nobody likes. You step out of line you may not go to jail, but you will be shamed by society. Therefore, you don't get to do whatever you want to do all willy nilly. However, also like paying taxes and having to work for a living, shame can be used as a political tool. Specifically, when it comes to a democracy, an amoral political party can ignore the importance shame plays in society, capitalize on childish-mentalities of the lesser members of the electorate, and promise a world with no shame.
You don't want to work? Fine! We'll tax other undeserving people to finance your life.
You don't want to pay taxes? Fine! We'll make a villainized group pay them for you!
You don't want shame? Fine! We'll launch an all out assault on traditional historical standards, the country's historical culture, and institute moral relativism.
In short, promising the electorate the elimination of shame is nothing more than bribing them. However unlike welfare, medicare or EBT cards, it's a psychological benefit, not a financial one. And thus, just as sure as leftist parties across the world promise their voters other people's money, they also do their best to eliminate shame.
We see this everyday. The idiot who couldn't do basic math and bought a house he couldn't afford is a "victim." The unemployed Music Therapy major, living at home is "just down on his luck." And there is no better example of the elimination of shame as we replace military veterans with "single moms" as our nation's greatest hero. So successful is the left that the political and social environment is now so hostile that it's now "shameful to shame." If you dare criticize somebody for failing to meet a standard you are the one that is shamed. You are accused of being rude. Your target of shaming is even arrogant and entitled, yelling "HOW DARE YOU JUDGE ME!!!" And if your target of shame happens to be in a "victim class" you are immediately called an "ist" (even though you are criticizing their actions and not their race, ethnicity, sex, etc. etc.).
Additionally, since shaming by its nature is a public or publicized action (i.e. - you can't secretly shame someone) you are immediately alienated and ostracized from society. Dare you demand EBT cards be the size of a poster for all to see on a blog or a forum, employers will no longer hire you. Dare you criticize illegal immigration and are consequently accused of racism, you cannot run for public office. And dare you criticize single parenthood, you can forget finding a date. In short we have fully eliminated shaming from society and all the benefits (personal responsibility being the key one) that came with it.
Naturally, a shameless society will fail. You can make all the laws you want, but without the social norms and mores that force people to be self-reliant, responsible, and respectful units of society, those individual units will revert to their basic human instinct and decay into shameless and parasitical ones. However, there is a consequence to society failing. Specifically, those people who are vested in society and are moral, are going to lose the only thing that matters to them - society. And while a high percentage of them may still be too intimidated or brainwashed to speak out, bluntly and truthfully, a certain percentage of people will realize the cost is too great and start shaming again. Specifically, those people who have nothing left to lose.
Understand that the reason most people don't speak out against and shame the social atrocities occurring in the US is because they have too much at risk. They have a house, they have a family, they have a career. Their entire lives have been built within this system and are thus dependent on it. And dare they get out of line, and dare they publicly shame the wrong group, the political and social cost for them daring to point out the emperor has no clothes is that they will lose it all. An HR nazi will be auditing your facebook posts. Your hiring manager will get a complaint. An Adria Richards will narc on you. Careers in America are so fragile and employers so spineless, you dare don't rock the societal boat with shaming. You watch that recent immigrant use her EBT card at your expense and you shut up and like it.
But what if you're part of a group with nothing left to lose? What if you're young, endebted by previous generations to the tune of $225,000, facing a lousy job market, and no future? What if you're part of a group that is just assumed to have benefits and privileges when that is not the case, and you're constantly accused of bigotry and being part of a "patriarchy?" Oh, and by the way, what if a mental illness has infected the half of society you SHOULD have gotten the greatest joy out of in life and instead corrupted and spoiled them leaving you little-to-no shot in life at marriage of family? What if your future was just plain taken away?
Why you'd be the typical young man in America today.
And it is here where shame is not only going to have a triumphant return, but it is already back in full force.
I hate to inform all the various political groups, victim groups, protected classes, sacrosanct faux heroes and other shameless classes the left has formed, but your strategy to "shame the shamers" won't work on this group of people. And the reason why is that your strategy hinges on one thing - that there would be an economic cost inflicted on anybody who dares to shame. But if they have no money, no job, no career, no hope, and no future, there's nothing you can take from them. Worst still, as they slowly start to wake up and realize just how much your anti-shaming campaign has screwed up society, they will blame you (rightly so) for stealing and destroying their futures. And with nothing left to do and at no cost to them, shaming you and your ideological adherents is going to become their favorite hobby.
A lot of times people just don't obey laws (criminals) and even when they do obey laws, they may not be moral. In other words laws prohibit bad behavior, but can not compel good or moral behavior. So while I may not murder somebody, law doesn't prevent me from racking up more credit card debt than I can afford or standing somebody up for a date.
However, society did have a tool that picked up where laws left off - shame.
Though not codified or written down, society had their own set of unspoken rules or laws called "standards" and if you violated these social standards you would be shamed and scorned. This shame would compel you to behave appropriately and was a vital and necessary component of society in order for it to survive and succeed.
However, shame is very interesting in that it's very much like "paying taxes" or "having to work for a living." It's a fact of life nobody likes. You step out of line you may not go to jail, but you will be shamed by society. Therefore, you don't get to do whatever you want to do all willy nilly. However, also like paying taxes and having to work for a living, shame can be used as a political tool. Specifically, when it comes to a democracy, an amoral political party can ignore the importance shame plays in society, capitalize on childish-mentalities of the lesser members of the electorate, and promise a world with no shame.
You don't want to work? Fine! We'll tax other undeserving people to finance your life.
You don't want to pay taxes? Fine! We'll make a villainized group pay them for you!
You don't want shame? Fine! We'll launch an all out assault on traditional historical standards, the country's historical culture, and institute moral relativism.
In short, promising the electorate the elimination of shame is nothing more than bribing them. However unlike welfare, medicare or EBT cards, it's a psychological benefit, not a financial one. And thus, just as sure as leftist parties across the world promise their voters other people's money, they also do their best to eliminate shame.
We see this everyday. The idiot who couldn't do basic math and bought a house he couldn't afford is a "victim." The unemployed Music Therapy major, living at home is "just down on his luck." And there is no better example of the elimination of shame as we replace military veterans with "single moms" as our nation's greatest hero. So successful is the left that the political and social environment is now so hostile that it's now "shameful to shame." If you dare criticize somebody for failing to meet a standard you are the one that is shamed. You are accused of being rude. Your target of shaming is even arrogant and entitled, yelling "HOW DARE YOU JUDGE ME!!!" And if your target of shame happens to be in a "victim class" you are immediately called an "ist" (even though you are criticizing their actions and not their race, ethnicity, sex, etc. etc.).
Additionally, since shaming by its nature is a public or publicized action (i.e. - you can't secretly shame someone) you are immediately alienated and ostracized from society. Dare you demand EBT cards be the size of a poster for all to see on a blog or a forum, employers will no longer hire you. Dare you criticize illegal immigration and are consequently accused of racism, you cannot run for public office. And dare you criticize single parenthood, you can forget finding a date. In short we have fully eliminated shaming from society and all the benefits (personal responsibility being the key one) that came with it.
Naturally, a shameless society will fail. You can make all the laws you want, but without the social norms and mores that force people to be self-reliant, responsible, and respectful units of society, those individual units will revert to their basic human instinct and decay into shameless and parasitical ones. However, there is a consequence to society failing. Specifically, those people who are vested in society and are moral, are going to lose the only thing that matters to them - society. And while a high percentage of them may still be too intimidated or brainwashed to speak out, bluntly and truthfully, a certain percentage of people will realize the cost is too great and start shaming again. Specifically, those people who have nothing left to lose.
Understand that the reason most people don't speak out against and shame the social atrocities occurring in the US is because they have too much at risk. They have a house, they have a family, they have a career. Their entire lives have been built within this system and are thus dependent on it. And dare they get out of line, and dare they publicly shame the wrong group, the political and social cost for them daring to point out the emperor has no clothes is that they will lose it all. An HR nazi will be auditing your facebook posts. Your hiring manager will get a complaint. An Adria Richards will narc on you. Careers in America are so fragile and employers so spineless, you dare don't rock the societal boat with shaming. You watch that recent immigrant use her EBT card at your expense and you shut up and like it.
But what if you're part of a group with nothing left to lose? What if you're young, endebted by previous generations to the tune of $225,000, facing a lousy job market, and no future? What if you're part of a group that is just assumed to have benefits and privileges when that is not the case, and you're constantly accused of bigotry and being part of a "patriarchy?" Oh, and by the way, what if a mental illness has infected the half of society you SHOULD have gotten the greatest joy out of in life and instead corrupted and spoiled them leaving you little-to-no shot in life at marriage of family? What if your future was just plain taken away?
Why you'd be the typical young man in America today.
And it is here where shame is not only going to have a triumphant return, but it is already back in full force.
I hate to inform all the various political groups, victim groups, protected classes, sacrosanct faux heroes and other shameless classes the left has formed, but your strategy to "shame the shamers" won't work on this group of people. And the reason why is that your strategy hinges on one thing - that there would be an economic cost inflicted on anybody who dares to shame. But if they have no money, no job, no career, no hope, and no future, there's nothing you can take from them. Worst still, as they slowly start to wake up and realize just how much your anti-shaming campaign has screwed up society, they will blame you (rightly so) for stealing and destroying their futures. And with nothing left to do and at no cost to them, shaming you and your ideological adherents is going to become their favorite hobby.
The Captain Goes to Milwaukee!
Going to Milwaukee this weekend. E-mail the ole Captain if you're around and up for cigars or dancing.
Roosh Walks Into a Libertarian Bar
Roosh interviewed me over at Return of Kings. The response from his readership about libertarians and libertarianism was a little surprising. Between him and the Washington Times, we're on track for an interview a day!
Who Employs Warren Kinsella?
Because I'd like to know who would employ such a person who seems to make a career out of defamation?
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
"The Invisible Bitch-Slap"
It's like "the invisible hand," but instead it's when you piss off the forces of economics and reality decides to punish you for your stupidity.
Washington Times Article Part 2
Part 2! "The Origins of Cappy Cap!"
Is it dark!?
Is it secret!?
How did the Captain become...um...well..uhh...the "captain?"
Was it a broken heart!?
Tortuous childhood?
Did parochial school drive him to become what he is!?
Tune in and find out!!!!
Is it dark!?
Is it secret!?
How did the Captain become...um...well..uhh...the "captain?"
Was it a broken heart!?
Tortuous childhood?
Did parochial school drive him to become what he is!?
Tune in and find out!!!!
"We're All Out of White Guilt"
and we adults are done with you elites and Hollywood types forcing it down our throats.
(so you know it links to a video of me tirading and is not safe for work).
(so you know it links to a video of me tirading and is not safe for work).
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Potemkin Women
When I first moved to my current home and started establishing a rapport with the bartenders at the local pub that would become "my bar," I remember meeting two uppity 30 something women. They were sharply dressed, boisterous, laughing and certainly the center of attention. One was very attractive while the other was average. Because they frequented "my bar" it was inevitable I would establish a relationship with them also. This relationship was business in nature, but also short lived.
They were in the "house staging/fashion" business and wanted me to help them with their finances. I agreed, but found it difficult to consult them for they would constantly bail at the last minute, change meeting times, just plain forget or just plain not take my advice. They were too busy and having too much "fun" with their business and details like "accounting" were deemed non-critical.
Admittedly I was 1/4th attempting to get some kind of angle on the hot one, but after being stood up for yet another meeting I decided to end the business relationship and replace it with a "Minnesota Nice" relationship (one where you hate the other person, but fake being friendly so as not to disrupt the over all social environment). It wouldn't have mattered anyway, because the hotter of the two made it very clear she was looking for a sugar daddy to take care of her.
For the next couple of months they would come into my bar and some of the other local ones, always talking about their business loud enough for people to hear, and always ordering the priciest of drinks to further prove they were successful. It was almost as if they were 20 year olds trapped in 37 year old bodies, who somehow made it seem "house staging and fashion design" was all about drinking, partying, networking and wearing fancy clothes.
Then nothing.
They disappeared. They were gone. And nobody took note, for it was the absence of annoyance that made things "normal" again, meaning you don't remember the moment you recover from a sickness, because that's the way you're supposed to feel normally.
It wasn't until 6 months later that for whatever reason or another a neuron fired in my skull reminding me about the loud duo and so I asked the bartender,
"Hey, whatever happened to Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb?"
The bartender laughed as he was cleaning out a wine glass.
"I don't know what happened to Tweedle Dee, but Tweedle Dumb (the hotter one). That's a funny story. She would come in at another bar I work at across White Bear Lake and just get hammered. She'd then start crying about how miserable she was, how should couldn't find a guy to marry her, and how her business was losing money. I think they went out of business, but I haven't seen them in months."
And thus was my first conscious observation of a Potemkin Woman.
If you don't know what "Potemkin" is, it is a reference to a "Potemkin Village," a trick the Soviets used to make things look better than they actually were in Soviet Russia. With poverty, lack of production, no bread, lines, and all the other wonderful benefits socialism brought them, the Soviet leadership hid this fact by making fake "villages" to make it look like everything was just hunky dory in the USSR. So when journalists and tourists visited, they were shown the Potemkin villages, not the gulags or everyday Soviet misery. It was nothing more than a ruse to make things look better than they actually were, and is the precisely same tactic many American and western women use today.
You might ask why somebody would engage in such trickery, acting more important than they actually are. But there are good reasons women use such a tactic, specifically it allows them to attain something that they personally cannot achieve or are too lazy to achieve. Usually it is a higher status/richer man, but it could also be undue and undeserved business, undue and undeserved reputation, undue and undeserved attention, and undue and undeserved status. And thus, very much like their midlife-crisis banker male counterparts, they put on the flashy clothes, talk a big game, act all independent, and scoff at people who are actually better than them. Unfortunately, it is just a bluff. A bluff that time and real life inevitable calls. But unless you are aware of it, you can very likely fall for it and (like I did) waste precious time and resources dealing with such women.
First, understand that Potemkin Women have been with us since they were little girls. Middle school girls actually. If there is an example of a Potemkin Village in America, it is middle school. Nothing is real, it is all fake, and the most popular girls rule the roost by essentially faking it into college. They have the fanciest clothes, they have a clique no one else can join, they have the latest gadgets. However, if you've ever had the misfortune of dating one of these girls, you'd know they are typically psychological messes underneath. Of course, this is rarely known or figured out because their ruse is so effective it intimidates boys (and girls) from ever approaching them, let alone dare questioning their legitimacy.
Second, understand Potemkin Girls never mature into women who shed the fakeness and the ruse. They merely become "Potemkin Women." It worked so well as a child, why not continue the strategy? They go to college, earn some worthless degree, go out and "partay," they dress sexy at night clubs and do the faux lesbian thing, only to reject the naive boys and men who dare to advance. The ruse is so effective and society is only more than accommodating, a lot of young women actually start to believe their "Potemkin Life" is a real one. They actually think they're that smart (when a 3.8 GPA as a Communications Major is laughable), they actually think they're in demand (while most 20 something men just want to have sex, not marry them), and they actually think they're going to succeed in life (as media, parents, colleges, government and every other facet of society lies to their face). When in reality, they are merely setting themselves up for a spectacular failure and accruing debt at a pace of 4 $10 Cosmo Martini's a night on a 23% APR credit card.
Finally, after getting married, divorced, and having no real skills to fall back on, not to mention, they're getting older, the 30 something Potemkin Woman puts on her best act. She wears the clothes she can't afford, starts the business that has no hope, parades a reputation that has no truth, all in the hopes of being given one more chance at attention, money, love, and/or status. However, here reality has reintroduced itself to the Potemkin Woman and I have seen it up front, close and personal. And the difference between the show the Potemkin Woman puts on and her insecure self is stark.
There was the salsa dancing 42 year old who WAS hot for her age and wore the most provocative outfits. Of course she would only dance with the most accomplished salsa dancers. But she broke down, crying one night at her house because her children hated her.
There was 29 year old lawyer who made junior partner in record time and wouldn't even consider dating men who made less than her (including yours truly), only to end up alone at a bar a decade later with a mean scowl on her face that would scare away any man.
There was the former model who at 48 still wanted to go to "night clubs." She broke down crying as it looked increasingly likely her house would go into foreclosure.
And of course there's Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb.
Now I could go on retrospectively identifying all the Potemkin Women I've ran into, but the point is, especially for men (though women will also have to interact on a non-romatic or business level with Potemkin Women) is to realize just how hallow and miserable their lives really are. The more posturing, parading and bragging you see, the more likely it is they go home and their lives are miserable. That the woman who laughed at you in front of her friends when you offered to buy her a drink, goes home that very same night in a drunk stupor and cries herself to sleep because "she can't find a man." I don't say this because I "want" it to be true or that I'm looking for some kind of "revenge" for women that spurned my advances. I'm telling you because it IS true. I've seen it. I've seen the Potemkin Woman at home all by herself at 3AM, out of the public view...
and she ain't pretty.
They were in the "house staging/fashion" business and wanted me to help them with their finances. I agreed, but found it difficult to consult them for they would constantly bail at the last minute, change meeting times, just plain forget or just plain not take my advice. They were too busy and having too much "fun" with their business and details like "accounting" were deemed non-critical.
Admittedly I was 1/4th attempting to get some kind of angle on the hot one, but after being stood up for yet another meeting I decided to end the business relationship and replace it with a "Minnesota Nice" relationship (one where you hate the other person, but fake being friendly so as not to disrupt the over all social environment). It wouldn't have mattered anyway, because the hotter of the two made it very clear she was looking for a sugar daddy to take care of her.
For the next couple of months they would come into my bar and some of the other local ones, always talking about their business loud enough for people to hear, and always ordering the priciest of drinks to further prove they were successful. It was almost as if they were 20 year olds trapped in 37 year old bodies, who somehow made it seem "house staging and fashion design" was all about drinking, partying, networking and wearing fancy clothes.
Then nothing.
They disappeared. They were gone. And nobody took note, for it was the absence of annoyance that made things "normal" again, meaning you don't remember the moment you recover from a sickness, because that's the way you're supposed to feel normally.
It wasn't until 6 months later that for whatever reason or another a neuron fired in my skull reminding me about the loud duo and so I asked the bartender,
"Hey, whatever happened to Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb?"
The bartender laughed as he was cleaning out a wine glass.
"I don't know what happened to Tweedle Dee, but Tweedle Dumb (the hotter one). That's a funny story. She would come in at another bar I work at across White Bear Lake and just get hammered. She'd then start crying about how miserable she was, how should couldn't find a guy to marry her, and how her business was losing money. I think they went out of business, but I haven't seen them in months."
And thus was my first conscious observation of a Potemkin Woman.
If you don't know what "Potemkin" is, it is a reference to a "Potemkin Village," a trick the Soviets used to make things look better than they actually were in Soviet Russia. With poverty, lack of production, no bread, lines, and all the other wonderful benefits socialism brought them, the Soviet leadership hid this fact by making fake "villages" to make it look like everything was just hunky dory in the USSR. So when journalists and tourists visited, they were shown the Potemkin villages, not the gulags or everyday Soviet misery. It was nothing more than a ruse to make things look better than they actually were, and is the precisely same tactic many American and western women use today.
You might ask why somebody would engage in such trickery, acting more important than they actually are. But there are good reasons women use such a tactic, specifically it allows them to attain something that they personally cannot achieve or are too lazy to achieve. Usually it is a higher status/richer man, but it could also be undue and undeserved business, undue and undeserved reputation, undue and undeserved attention, and undue and undeserved status. And thus, very much like their midlife-crisis banker male counterparts, they put on the flashy clothes, talk a big game, act all independent, and scoff at people who are actually better than them. Unfortunately, it is just a bluff. A bluff that time and real life inevitable calls. But unless you are aware of it, you can very likely fall for it and (like I did) waste precious time and resources dealing with such women.
First, understand that Potemkin Women have been with us since they were little girls. Middle school girls actually. If there is an example of a Potemkin Village in America, it is middle school. Nothing is real, it is all fake, and the most popular girls rule the roost by essentially faking it into college. They have the fanciest clothes, they have a clique no one else can join, they have the latest gadgets. However, if you've ever had the misfortune of dating one of these girls, you'd know they are typically psychological messes underneath. Of course, this is rarely known or figured out because their ruse is so effective it intimidates boys (and girls) from ever approaching them, let alone dare questioning their legitimacy.
Second, understand Potemkin Girls never mature into women who shed the fakeness and the ruse. They merely become "Potemkin Women." It worked so well as a child, why not continue the strategy? They go to college, earn some worthless degree, go out and "partay," they dress sexy at night clubs and do the faux lesbian thing, only to reject the naive boys and men who dare to advance. The ruse is so effective and society is only more than accommodating, a lot of young women actually start to believe their "Potemkin Life" is a real one. They actually think they're that smart (when a 3.8 GPA as a Communications Major is laughable), they actually think they're in demand (while most 20 something men just want to have sex, not marry them), and they actually think they're going to succeed in life (as media, parents, colleges, government and every other facet of society lies to their face). When in reality, they are merely setting themselves up for a spectacular failure and accruing debt at a pace of 4 $10 Cosmo Martini's a night on a 23% APR credit card.
Finally, after getting married, divorced, and having no real skills to fall back on, not to mention, they're getting older, the 30 something Potemkin Woman puts on her best act. She wears the clothes she can't afford, starts the business that has no hope, parades a reputation that has no truth, all in the hopes of being given one more chance at attention, money, love, and/or status. However, here reality has reintroduced itself to the Potemkin Woman and I have seen it up front, close and personal. And the difference between the show the Potemkin Woman puts on and her insecure self is stark.
There was the salsa dancing 42 year old who WAS hot for her age and wore the most provocative outfits. Of course she would only dance with the most accomplished salsa dancers. But she broke down, crying one night at her house because her children hated her.
There was 29 year old lawyer who made junior partner in record time and wouldn't even consider dating men who made less than her (including yours truly), only to end up alone at a bar a decade later with a mean scowl on her face that would scare away any man.
There was the former model who at 48 still wanted to go to "night clubs." She broke down crying as it looked increasingly likely her house would go into foreclosure.
And of course there's Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb.
Now I could go on retrospectively identifying all the Potemkin Women I've ran into, but the point is, especially for men (though women will also have to interact on a non-romatic or business level with Potemkin Women) is to realize just how hallow and miserable their lives really are. The more posturing, parading and bragging you see, the more likely it is they go home and their lives are miserable. That the woman who laughed at you in front of her friends when you offered to buy her a drink, goes home that very same night in a drunk stupor and cries herself to sleep because "she can't find a man." I don't say this because I "want" it to be true or that I'm looking for some kind of "revenge" for women that spurned my advances. I'm telling you because it IS true. I've seen it. I've seen the Potemkin Woman at home all by herself at 3AM, out of the public view...
and she ain't pretty.
It's for the Chillllldreeeennnnn
"Gee, Jim. I don't know. Where have all the good men gone?"
If those samples were found in the post by officials
on their way to foreign laboratories, the French men who sent them
could theoretically face a year in prison and a 15,000 Euro fine. This
year the ban was challenged but the French Government decided to uphold
and maintain the anti-paternity testing law.
The reasons for which the Government said the ban
should remain were related to the preservation of peace within French families. According to some online articles, Germany, has also banned
(or plans to ban) paternity testing for similar reasons. French psychologists suggest that fatherhood is
determined by society not by biology...
The argument against allowing paternity testing in
France is directly opposed to the argument for allowing it almost
everywhere else. While French Authorities believe that paternity testing
can cause friction within families, some fathers find that getting rid
of any doubt relating to their relationship with their child can help
strengthen the bond they have with them, instead.
In cases where their paternity has been verified,
the child could actually get to know who their 'real' biological father
was and many people believe that is important. So, rather than causing
disputes, paternity testing in France could actually settle them. Now
that the ban has been upheld, French fathers are likely to continue
breaking the law in an effort to discover whether children in their care
are biologically theirs.
Why I Refuse to See "42"
On this latest episode of The Clarey Podcast, Aaron discovers what it's like to be a stay at home wife/mom and wonders why women gave up such an easy gig for the skullduggery of work? He also reviews the movie "Burt Wonderstone" and the most recent "Die Hard." He also opines why so many good "guy flicks" are ruined by a forced romance subplot, as well as he outright refuses to see "42" as he alikens affirmative action movies to church sermons - neither of which he is fond of. Finally, drawbacks to enjoying the decline, or just being a rugged individualist. Every adventure has its drawbacks and there's not a lot of people 3 standard deviations to the right of the mean.
Monday, March 25, 2013
$1,300 for a Class in Chicana Lesbian Studies
For the Patron Saints Name of Frick.
I mean, you just can't make this up. It REALLY IS A CLASS!.
My question is this - what IDIOT decides it's worth spending $1,300 for ONE CLASS on LESBIAN CHICANA STUDIES???
Honest to freaking Christ. What moron, even at the naive age of 18 decides to part with $1,300 of their own money to pay for this veritable shit?
And you people question my decision to give up and Enjoy the Decline.
I mean, you just can't make this up. It REALLY IS A CLASS!.
My question is this - what IDIOT decides it's worth spending $1,300 for ONE CLASS on LESBIAN CHICANA STUDIES???
Honest to freaking Christ. What moron, even at the naive age of 18 decides to part with $1,300 of their own money to pay for this veritable shit?
And you people question my decision to give up and Enjoy the Decline.
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Character Trumps Diversity
If you ask two men (or women) to describe themselves, the lesser of the two will cite their religion or ideology rather than their profession. i.e.- the superior of the two will say,
"I'm a plumber"
or
"I'm a surgeon"
or
"I'm a stay at home wife."
while the inferior of the two will say,
"I'm Christian"
or
"I'm a liberal"
or
"I'm a vegan."
The reason why one is superior to the other is that in order to be a "plumber" or a "surgeon" or a "stay at home mother" means you must do something or achieve something. Being "Christian" or declaring yourself a "vegan" simply takes a declaration and nothing more (please do not flood me with e-mails about catechism). And though it may seem to be a very subtle difference, it is something I immediately pick up on when meeting people for the first time. For nearly 100% of the time when somebody defines themselves by their belief system or ideology and NOT their profession that person proves to be somebody I not only dislike, but do not trust.
The reason why is that when somebody substitutes a belief, religion or an ideology for achievement, it is an (admittedly) unconscious admission of laziness and proof of a weak, or total absence of, character. A person who defines themselves by merely joining a group or espousing beliefs lacks the rigor, determination, work effort and temerity to do something productive and meaningful in their lives. However, their ego is such that it cannot stand having no prestige or respect and thus they join a "club." Ergo why I truly believe the VAST majority of religious participants do not participate in religion for something as noble as god, as much as it is first and foremost for themselves.
However, religion aside, there is another variant of this intellectual hypocrisy and that is "diversity."
Let us be clear what diversity is - it is nothing more than a political tool of the left. It works by irrationally and undeservingly applying value to traits that a person was born with, and thus, had nothing to do with.
For example, say you were born the "Triple Crown" of affirmative action - black, female, and homosexual.
You are a veritable celebrity in leftist circles. You are fawned over, placated, kowtowed to and told how oppressed you are. You are also told how great you are just by the fact you have the traits of being:
1. Black
2. Female
3. Homosexual
and still manage to live, "courageously" in the face of evil white privilege, male, patriarchy blah blah blah.
But what did you achieve?
The answer is nothing. You just happened to be born with the traits of being black, female and homosexual.
THESE ARE TRAITS, NOT ACHIEVEMENTS. Traits you HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH AND NO CONTROL OVER.
Of course this isn't to say that a black woman who happens to be homosexual does not have character. If she is a surgeon and you say, "describe yourself" and she says, "I'm a surgeon and an avid cyclist," she is placing value on her achievements and hobbies, not her ethnicity, gender and sexual preference, none of which she did anything to attain. Unfortunately, though, the appeal of "diversity" and applying value where there is none proves too tempting to many. One only has to look at the sea of worthless degrees and worthless college departments in "Hyphenated-American Studies."
"Women's Studies"
"Gender Studies"
"African American Studies"
"Chicano American Studies"
and the list goes on and on and on.
Here the political tool of diversity is particularly deceitful, evil and outright bigoted. It lies to various groups of people telling them traits they were born with somehow give them value. It lies to those same groups of people telling them because of these traits, they are oppressed by those who do not share their traits. It ruins the lives of these innocent people saying the ONLY way they can overcome these injustices is through the government via Democrat/Socialist/Lefitst parties (of whichever country they're in). And worst of all, it deprives these individuals of any real individualistic achievement by brainwashing them into an crippling coma-like state of "Woe-Is-Me-ism." In short the irony of these programs is that they claim to help these individuals, but merely serve to ruin their lives by making them veritable slaves to a political party.
I often wonder how long it's going to be before the black community wakes up and realizes that despite 40 years of affirmative action and democrat bribery their communities are in tatters and they are still in last place sociologically speaking in the US. I often wondering how long it's going to be before the Latino and Hispanic communities wake up and realize they're voting to turn the US into a more northern and colder version of the crappy countries they or their ancestors fled. And I wonder how long it's going to be before women realize feminism has done nothing more than enslaved them to the rat race, replaced their would-be-husbands with a government check, and destroyed any hope for true love and happiness via a normally functioning family.
Again, I don't care. I've checked out. It's just a sad crying shame nobody is heeding the words of Martin Luther King, especially those he worked so hard to help.
"I'm a plumber"
or
"I'm a surgeon"
or
"I'm a stay at home wife."
while the inferior of the two will say,
"I'm Christian"
or
"I'm a liberal"
or
"I'm a vegan."
The reason why one is superior to the other is that in order to be a "plumber" or a "surgeon" or a "stay at home mother" means you must do something or achieve something. Being "Christian" or declaring yourself a "vegan" simply takes a declaration and nothing more (please do not flood me with e-mails about catechism). And though it may seem to be a very subtle difference, it is something I immediately pick up on when meeting people for the first time. For nearly 100% of the time when somebody defines themselves by their belief system or ideology and NOT their profession that person proves to be somebody I not only dislike, but do not trust.
The reason why is that when somebody substitutes a belief, religion or an ideology for achievement, it is an (admittedly) unconscious admission of laziness and proof of a weak, or total absence of, character. A person who defines themselves by merely joining a group or espousing beliefs lacks the rigor, determination, work effort and temerity to do something productive and meaningful in their lives. However, their ego is such that it cannot stand having no prestige or respect and thus they join a "club." Ergo why I truly believe the VAST majority of religious participants do not participate in religion for something as noble as god, as much as it is first and foremost for themselves.
However, religion aside, there is another variant of this intellectual hypocrisy and that is "diversity."
Let us be clear what diversity is - it is nothing more than a political tool of the left. It works by irrationally and undeservingly applying value to traits that a person was born with, and thus, had nothing to do with.
For example, say you were born the "Triple Crown" of affirmative action - black, female, and homosexual.
You are a veritable celebrity in leftist circles. You are fawned over, placated, kowtowed to and told how oppressed you are. You are also told how great you are just by the fact you have the traits of being:
1. Black
2. Female
3. Homosexual
and still manage to live, "courageously" in the face of evil white privilege, male, patriarchy blah blah blah.
But what did you achieve?
The answer is nothing. You just happened to be born with the traits of being black, female and homosexual.
THESE ARE TRAITS, NOT ACHIEVEMENTS. Traits you HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH AND NO CONTROL OVER.
Of course this isn't to say that a black woman who happens to be homosexual does not have character. If she is a surgeon and you say, "describe yourself" and she says, "I'm a surgeon and an avid cyclist," she is placing value on her achievements and hobbies, not her ethnicity, gender and sexual preference, none of which she did anything to attain. Unfortunately, though, the appeal of "diversity" and applying value where there is none proves too tempting to many. One only has to look at the sea of worthless degrees and worthless college departments in "Hyphenated-American Studies."
"Women's Studies"
"Gender Studies"
"African American Studies"
"Chicano American Studies"
and the list goes on and on and on.
Here the political tool of diversity is particularly deceitful, evil and outright bigoted. It lies to various groups of people telling them traits they were born with somehow give them value. It lies to those same groups of people telling them because of these traits, they are oppressed by those who do not share their traits. It ruins the lives of these innocent people saying the ONLY way they can overcome these injustices is through the government via Democrat/Socialist/Lefitst parties (of whichever country they're in). And worst of all, it deprives these individuals of any real individualistic achievement by brainwashing them into an crippling coma-like state of "Woe-Is-Me-ism." In short the irony of these programs is that they claim to help these individuals, but merely serve to ruin their lives by making them veritable slaves to a political party.
I often wonder how long it's going to be before the black community wakes up and realizes that despite 40 years of affirmative action and democrat bribery their communities are in tatters and they are still in last place sociologically speaking in the US. I often wondering how long it's going to be before the Latino and Hispanic communities wake up and realize they're voting to turn the US into a more northern and colder version of the crappy countries they or their ancestors fled. And I wonder how long it's going to be before women realize feminism has done nothing more than enslaved them to the rat race, replaced their would-be-husbands with a government check, and destroyed any hope for true love and happiness via a normally functioning family.
Again, I don't care. I've checked out. It's just a sad crying shame nobody is heeding the words of Martin Luther King, especially those he worked so hard to help.
Results of "Forced Discipline and Regimen Month"
The month is up and the results are "good." Not "spectacular" but well enough to show improvement.
Though physically there is some visual improvement, most of the improvement came via numbers. i.e. - my bench press increased by 15 pounds, military press by 10 pounds, the amount of reps I could do also increased, and my resting heart rate went below 60. Blood pressure is also low at 114/70. I lost no weight, but did lose an inch in the waist, leaving me to believe I translated some fat into muscle.
While I did want to pretty much cut out all carbs and go paleo, unfortunately I pretty much had already done that as much as is "bachelorly" possible. Meaning to cut out carbs would require I make my own food and go WAY out of my way to do so. I got sick of spending an hour in the grocery store looking up "carbs" on the back of boxes. Carbs are freaking everywhere. Nearly impossible to cut it out of your diet beyond just not eating bread, pasta and other obvious things. It's easier instead to just work out more or run some physical chores or errands and eat the occasional Mexican dish than piss away an hour a day "looking up carbs."
The work out routine I followed was alternative lifting weights and running each day, it was also closely paralleled to Victor Pride's "30 Days of Discipline." So one day I would lift weights and the next day I would run. I forced myself to run 6 miles a day no matter how cold or how tired I was. I would take Sunday's off. Thankfully, however, this routine has become engrained and I will continue it.
Though physically there is some visual improvement, most of the improvement came via numbers. i.e. - my bench press increased by 15 pounds, military press by 10 pounds, the amount of reps I could do also increased, and my resting heart rate went below 60. Blood pressure is also low at 114/70. I lost no weight, but did lose an inch in the waist, leaving me to believe I translated some fat into muscle.
While I did want to pretty much cut out all carbs and go paleo, unfortunately I pretty much had already done that as much as is "bachelorly" possible. Meaning to cut out carbs would require I make my own food and go WAY out of my way to do so. I got sick of spending an hour in the grocery store looking up "carbs" on the back of boxes. Carbs are freaking everywhere. Nearly impossible to cut it out of your diet beyond just not eating bread, pasta and other obvious things. It's easier instead to just work out more or run some physical chores or errands and eat the occasional Mexican dish than piss away an hour a day "looking up carbs."
The work out routine I followed was alternative lifting weights and running each day, it was also closely paralleled to Victor Pride's "30 Days of Discipline." So one day I would lift weights and the next day I would run. I forced myself to run 6 miles a day no matter how cold or how tired I was. I would take Sunday's off. Thankfully, however, this routine has become engrained and I will continue it.
Latest Episode of "The Clarey Podcast" Available
Podcast 3-22-13
How cars are being progressively made more and more for chicks and how this will ruin cars. Aaron also talks about who his favorite talk radio show hosts are, as well as explains "the early dark days before the Manosphere" and how men figured this stuff out on their own. Show was heavily edited for quality purposes, however, you will DEFINITELY want to tune in at the 45:00 minute mark.
How cars are being progressively made more and more for chicks and how this will ruin cars. Aaron also talks about who his favorite talk radio show hosts are, as well as explains "the early dark days before the Manosphere" and how men figured this stuff out on their own. Show was heavily edited for quality purposes, however, you will DEFINITELY want to tune in at the 45:00 minute mark.
Saturday, March 23, 2013
Whores Can't Be Choosers
Boys, you paying attention to this?
The ingredients before baking were already there to warn you before this happened.
Worthless degree, "writing profession," lack of science, math or STEM.
And how much do you want to bet she will self-proclaim herself to be an "independent feminist" who doesn't need a man while she parasites off of you guys for a meal?
I don't know what angers me more. That she no doubt will claim to be "independent" and thinks this is so "cute" or that there are enough men/suckers to let a veritable whore get away with this.
The ingredients before baking were already there to warn you before this happened.
Worthless degree, "writing profession," lack of science, math or STEM.
And how much do you want to bet she will self-proclaim herself to be an "independent feminist" who doesn't need a man while she parasites off of you guys for a meal?
I don't know what angers me more. That she no doubt will claim to be "independent" and thinks this is so "cute" or that there are enough men/suckers to let a veritable whore get away with this.
Friday, March 22, 2013
Using "The Law of Supply" to Pick Up Chicks
I'm not joking when I say this, but I believe economics is the key to understanding women.
But by all means. Keep using economics to figure out really important stuff like "how to lower interest rates" or "how to increase labor productivity."
I'll be using it to unhinge bras.
But by all means. Keep using economics to figure out really important stuff like "how to lower interest rates" or "how to increase labor productivity."
I'll be using it to unhinge bras.
Guns That Shoot Bugs & Misc.
My concern isn't so much the "gun safety nuts" who race to point out others' failings in gun safety, but "how big are the bugs you need a salt gun to kill them???"
Age acceleration. It is a fact of life. The first 5 years of my "conscious" life seem about 4 times as long as the next 30. I believe, if this acceleration continues, the last decade of my life will be about a day long in the eyes of my 3 year old self.
Remember being forced to pay $200 for the "15th edition" of your professor's book becausehe wanted to rape you for another $200, err...the 14th edition, just was so outdated? Yeah so do I.
We deport people who don't agree with socialism. Everybody else, COME ON IN!
More on bitcoin. Something I still am too lazy to start studying and understand.
Finally, I have not given Delusion Damage its due. If you have not visited him, you should as it is the single largest source of traffic and the single greatest aggregator of various right/mano/econ sites. Make it part of your daily regimen.
Age acceleration. It is a fact of life. The first 5 years of my "conscious" life seem about 4 times as long as the next 30. I believe, if this acceleration continues, the last decade of my life will be about a day long in the eyes of my 3 year old self.
Remember being forced to pay $200 for the "15th edition" of your professor's book because
We deport people who don't agree with socialism. Everybody else, COME ON IN!
More on bitcoin. Something I still am too lazy to start studying and understand.
Finally, I have not given Delusion Damage its due. If you have not visited him, you should as it is the single largest source of traffic and the single greatest aggregator of various right/mano/econ sites. Make it part of your daily regimen.
Why Minorities Account for a Majority of My New Readership
Uh oh! Looks like all those minority/victim groups are getting sick and tired of being lied to by the left! Even so much to the point they'll trust a evil right wing, bigoted, racist, sexist homophobe like me!
Thursday, March 21, 2013
Andy Yang is Your Problem, Not Adria Richards
If a whiner, tattle-tale or NARC goes to the authorities and the authorities can easily identify her as a tattle tale, real leaders will dismiss the tattle tale as childish, stupid, and irrelevant. If you're spineless and lack any kind of leadership or wisdom, you give the tattle tale power and kowtow to her demands.
The truth is, if the people at PyCon and Andy Yang had ignored Adria Richards for what she was (a NARCy little whiner) none of this would have happened and the true loser (Adria Richards) would be left to wallow in her self-absorbed pity and self-forced-perceived "injustice."
Instead, kowtowing to political correctness, affirmative action, and spineless corporate "leadership," Andy Yang fired somebody who shouldn't have been fired and tarnished the reputation of his firm Playhaven.
Now, it will be very doubtful if any male (who account for not only the numerical majority of IT talent he needs, but highly skilled talent) will work under Andy Yang. whether at Playhaven or not. They will search his name and say,
"Oh yeah. That guy. The one without a spine and who will throw me under a bus for something as childish as a NARC. No, I think I'll take my Masters in Computer Engineering elsewhere."
The good news is that this story has a happy ending. The villain (Adria) got fired. Her accomplice (Andy Yang) is exposed for the spineless Igor he is. PolyCon's reputation with males is shattered and will want to seriously reconsider how much they want to open the floodgates to feminism. And I'm pretty sure the young man who got fired will be picked up by a less-politically correct, and more profit-oriented firm.
The lesson to pull from this is for all you executives and bosses out there to not give teeth to such worthless vermin as the Adria Richards of the world by being spineless wimps and bending over backwards for faux harassment complaints. The cost is the people who really matter - us adults who are sick and tired of walking on eggshells worrying about when the next power-tripping, egomanic, entitlement-minded brat is going to eavesdrop and file a complaint.
You want to talk about a hostile work environment? Well then you just keep kissing the asses of the Adria Richard's of the world.
The truth is, if the people at PyCon and Andy Yang had ignored Adria Richards for what she was (a NARCy little whiner) none of this would have happened and the true loser (Adria Richards) would be left to wallow in her self-absorbed pity and self-forced-perceived "injustice."
Instead, kowtowing to political correctness, affirmative action, and spineless corporate "leadership," Andy Yang fired somebody who shouldn't have been fired and tarnished the reputation of his firm Playhaven.
Now, it will be very doubtful if any male (who account for not only the numerical majority of IT talent he needs, but highly skilled talent) will work under Andy Yang. whether at Playhaven or not. They will search his name and say,
"Oh yeah. That guy. The one without a spine and who will throw me under a bus for something as childish as a NARC. No, I think I'll take my Masters in Computer Engineering elsewhere."
The good news is that this story has a happy ending. The villain (Adria) got fired. Her accomplice (Andy Yang) is exposed for the spineless Igor he is. PolyCon's reputation with males is shattered and will want to seriously reconsider how much they want to open the floodgates to feminism. And I'm pretty sure the young man who got fired will be picked up by a less-politically correct, and more profit-oriented firm.
The lesson to pull from this is for all you executives and bosses out there to not give teeth to such worthless vermin as the Adria Richards of the world by being spineless wimps and bending over backwards for faux harassment complaints. The cost is the people who really matter - us adults who are sick and tired of walking on eggshells worrying about when the next power-tripping, egomanic, entitlement-minded brat is going to eavesdrop and file a complaint.
You want to talk about a hostile work environment? Well then you just keep kissing the asses of the Adria Richard's of the world.
Adria Richards Fired
Halle-freaking-luja
Here's the official statement.
You can "like" the announcement on facebook.
To all the ladies who think it's your right to not be offended in this world, please take note and stay out of other people's business.
Here's the official statement.
You can "like" the announcement on facebook.
To all the ladies who think it's your right to not be offended in this world, please take note and stay out of other people's business.
Part IV of a "Worthless Degreed Person"
Part 4 is our friend Jorge explaining the political environment at his arts college. You would think they would be open minded, especially be a liberal school, but the hostility Jorge experiences is something most leftists would file a harassment complaint over if it were coming from the other side.
Cubanos in Wisconsin Quote
"For those of us who no longer have to fight to pursue freedom, it is easy to forget how precious it is."
"Who's the Private Economist Who's a Salsa Machine to All the Ladies?"
CAP!
It's "Shaft Themed Linkage" today!
Hey, works sucks, but don't let us stop you ladies from climbing that career.
Ace of Spades enjoys the decline! (though it's nestled in there)
You get what you deserve and we're laughing our asses off at you.
Adria Richards continues to help improve the reputation ofnazis...errr..bitches..errr..both...errr..."feminists."
The fact American's who hate their country and themselves so much that this is even a debate is why I enjoy the decline. And if Americans, specifically American women (yes, I am singling you out because of voting patterns) can't understand why the rest of us here can't afford to pay for EVERYBODY'S HEALTH CARE IN THE WORLD, then the 19th amendment deserves serious reconsideration.
It's a scam and a racket people. Education was NEVER intended to help the students, just the professors.
What's missing from this article?
Tam hits 6 million!
This is why you just pass all students with B's and give the students who try A's. Trust me, that's how you keep your job in academia, and besides, most kids don't learn anything and don't want to learn anything. Make it work for you.
Or, ORRR, just don't have kids in the first place.
Bars prove to be a better place to meet your future spouse than church. BAR TRUMPS CHURCH!
Widowed Alpha Females (a good read, especially the observation about how television shows have changed for women in the past decade)
How do you fight such stupidity?
"If 50% of companies were ran by women and 50% of men stayed at home, then we'd have true equality." And equal misery and a fraction of our productive capacity and a country ripe for being taken over by our enemies. But hey, at least the feminists will be happy!
But we own the blacks! And we own the poor! They're our bitches and their lifestyles be damned! We need to pay back the teachers unions whose money keeps us in power!
This is why I want a bartender as a mom and not a sociologist professor. I would come 2nd, 3rd or 4th in terms of importance to the sociologist professor and 1st in the life of my bartender mom.
I will explain "The Rule of Chores" again. Whoever has the lowest standards of cleanliness THAT STILL IS ACCEPTABLE AND CONSIDERED HYGIENIC, is the one who does the least amount of chores. If somebody else wants standards of cleanliness HIGHER than that standard, then that person will do all the extra work necessary to clean to that level. So (as typically is the case) if the husband cleans to his bachelor pad level (the environment of which he survived just fine in with no medical complications) and the wife wants a cleaner standard, then the wife can clean till her heart's content.
Free Northerner also does an excellent job dissecting government and GDP figures.
Finally, our sponsor, GLORIOUS KARL! Who visited me recently and we had cigars. But in Soviet America CIGARS SMOKE YOU!
Buy GLORIOUS HAT HERE!
It's "Shaft Themed Linkage" today!
Hey, works sucks, but don't let us stop you ladies from climbing that career.
Ace of Spades enjoys the decline! (though it's nestled in there)
You get what you deserve and we're laughing our asses off at you.
Adria Richards continues to help improve the reputation of
The fact American's who hate their country and themselves so much that this is even a debate is why I enjoy the decline. And if Americans, specifically American women (yes, I am singling you out because of voting patterns) can't understand why the rest of us here can't afford to pay for EVERYBODY'S HEALTH CARE IN THE WORLD, then the 19th amendment deserves serious reconsideration.
It's a scam and a racket people. Education was NEVER intended to help the students, just the professors.
What's missing from this article?
Tam hits 6 million!
This is why you just pass all students with B's and give the students who try A's. Trust me, that's how you keep your job in academia, and besides, most kids don't learn anything and don't want to learn anything. Make it work for you.
Or, ORRR, just don't have kids in the first place.
Bars prove to be a better place to meet your future spouse than church. BAR TRUMPS CHURCH!
Widowed Alpha Females (a good read, especially the observation about how television shows have changed for women in the past decade)
How do you fight such stupidity?
"If 50% of companies were ran by women and 50% of men stayed at home, then we'd have true equality." And equal misery and a fraction of our productive capacity and a country ripe for being taken over by our enemies. But hey, at least the feminists will be happy!
But we own the blacks! And we own the poor! They're our bitches and their lifestyles be damned! We need to pay back the teachers unions whose money keeps us in power!
This is why I want a bartender as a mom and not a sociologist professor. I would come 2nd, 3rd or 4th in terms of importance to the sociologist professor and 1st in the life of my bartender mom.
I will explain "The Rule of Chores" again. Whoever has the lowest standards of cleanliness THAT STILL IS ACCEPTABLE AND CONSIDERED HYGIENIC, is the one who does the least amount of chores. If somebody else wants standards of cleanliness HIGHER than that standard, then that person will do all the extra work necessary to clean to that level. So (as typically is the case) if the husband cleans to his bachelor pad level (the environment of which he survived just fine in with no medical complications) and the wife wants a cleaner standard, then the wife can clean till her heart's content.
Free Northerner also does an excellent job dissecting government and GDP figures.
Finally, our sponsor, GLORIOUS KARL! Who visited me recently and we had cigars. But in Soviet America CIGARS SMOKE YOU!
Buy GLORIOUS HAT HERE!
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
The Check Engine Light That Cried Wolf
If you grew up in "my day" you knew that when the engine light went on in your car it was something serious. Ruptured cylinder, exploding piston, melting transmission, fire in the glove box, the Russians launched their ICBM's.
Then something happened around the mid 90's.
The horrible and much-feared engine light would go on, and after a gallon of adrenaline shot through your body, praying the car wouldn't blow up with you in it on the interstate during rush hour, it magically made it safely to the nearest and most-rip-offish service station. The next day you picked it up and found out "eh, oxygen sensor. 100 bucks to reset the code."
Next car, engine light, panic, station, 100 bucks "fuel sensor."
Next car, engine light, "what the F&CK? Again???" mild panic, drive it around a little more, station, "fuel sensor" 100 bucks.
Next car, engine light, "f#ck it, don't care." Drive around for another 6 months, pull into an auto part store and the clerk tells you "yeah, if you give us your ID, we can lend you this plug in device to your dashboard and it will reset it for you. You walk out, WOW! Who knew! O2 sensor! Reset button, NO 100 bucks.
So in 15 years the much-feared engine light, which was essentially X-Box's "the ring of death" for cars, no longer says a damn thing about your actual engine, but whether or not your exhaust indicates the TIPPY TOP MOST SUPER EFFICIENT mix of air and gas.
Is it vital?
No.
Is it even important?
No.
But unless you run the damn diagnostic on the car, you never know if THIS ONE TIME it ISN'T the bleeping oxygen sensor and the car is about to blow up and render you a charred corpse on a traffic jam during rush hour.
Now, it isn't as bad as in the mid 90's when the local station would charge you $100 to plug something in and hit a button, but you still have the fear of an imminent exploding car and the annoying chore of driving to your local O'Reilly's Auto store to use your license as collateral to boring a plug in device. And so when your beloved ole Captain was driving early this morning, and received the deceiving "engine light" on his car, only to find out it was once again the stupid "fuel sensor" he went online and bought this.
Not only will I save enough in gas to pay for the damn thing, I will also increase my life expectancy by 40 years not fretting about the stupid check engine light.
Then something happened around the mid 90's.
The horrible and much-feared engine light would go on, and after a gallon of adrenaline shot through your body, praying the car wouldn't blow up with you in it on the interstate during rush hour, it magically made it safely to the nearest and most-rip-offish service station. The next day you picked it up and found out "eh, oxygen sensor. 100 bucks to reset the code."
Next car, engine light, panic, station, 100 bucks "fuel sensor."
Next car, engine light, "what the F&CK? Again???" mild panic, drive it around a little more, station, "fuel sensor" 100 bucks.
Next car, engine light, "f#ck it, don't care." Drive around for another 6 months, pull into an auto part store and the clerk tells you "yeah, if you give us your ID, we can lend you this plug in device to your dashboard and it will reset it for you. You walk out, WOW! Who knew! O2 sensor! Reset button, NO 100 bucks.
So in 15 years the much-feared engine light, which was essentially X-Box's "the ring of death" for cars, no longer says a damn thing about your actual engine, but whether or not your exhaust indicates the TIPPY TOP MOST SUPER EFFICIENT mix of air and gas.
Is it vital?
No.
Is it even important?
No.
But unless you run the damn diagnostic on the car, you never know if THIS ONE TIME it ISN'T the bleeping oxygen sensor and the car is about to blow up and render you a charred corpse on a traffic jam during rush hour.
Now, it isn't as bad as in the mid 90's when the local station would charge you $100 to plug something in and hit a button, but you still have the fear of an imminent exploding car and the annoying chore of driving to your local O'Reilly's Auto store to use your license as collateral to boring a plug in device. And so when your beloved ole Captain was driving early this morning, and received the deceiving "engine light" on his car, only to find out it was once again the stupid "fuel sensor" he went online and bought this.
Not only will I save enough in gas to pay for the damn thing, I will also increase my life expectancy by 40 years not fretting about the stupid check engine light.
Why It Will Remain a Boys Club
It's people like Adria Richards and her petty sense of an "umbrage-free" life that will cause more harm to women as her antics scare away any potential employers from hiring women in fear they will do PRECISELY what she did - go on a crusade first and foremost for her own ego at the expense of pretty much everyone else. I mean, good god. Taking pictures at a conference for a conversation you were not part of and REPORTING IT???? What nazi goose-stepping BS is that??? Are women the new East German Stasi??? I can only imagine the effects of a nanny-nazi-narcfest on employee morale and productivity.
Look ladies, if you can't handle boys being boys, and your skin is so fragile you're going to NARC on them, then you don't belong in IT. You belong in HR.
For the Patron Saint's Name of Frick.
ht.
Look ladies, if you can't handle boys being boys, and your skin is so fragile you're going to NARC on them, then you don't belong in IT. You belong in HR.
For the Patron Saint's Name of Frick.
ht.
All Economic Production Comes from the Fed
I checked CNBC. Don't ask me why, I was just checking in to see how crazy the crazies were on the financial markets. And well, they're still crazy. Here's the headline title:
If I do my math right, we are now entering the 5th year where the financial markets focus all of their attention solely on the Fed for economic salvation and a source of economic production. Of course, this is nothing more than desperation. Much like middle aged divorcee women focus their attention on "Eat Pray Love" type movies to provide them the rationale a single George Clooney with millions of dollars will choose them and their baggage over a 25 year old, childless hottie, so too do the millions of finance professionals and 401k Clergy depend on an ever increasing stock market for their livelihood. And ANY excuse, even something as pathetic as thinking the central bank is the source of economic production, will do.
Therefore, since it seems the market insists on being irrational longer than that saner heads have patience, I thought it high time to make a couple economic charts explaining this new economy.
First, GDP by sector:
If you don't believe this chart, then you obviously didn't attend an Ivy League school and are stupid. You're probably racist too.
Second, a new refined chart on the basics of government finance:
You're an idiot, or at least not a Wall Street professional or D.C. financier genius like Paul Krugman, if you don't understand this. But it's alright, not everybody can be as smart as these guys. Debt is GOOD. Don't worry that there aren't any metrics on the Y-axis, it doesn't matter. That's how awesome and smart these eocnomists are and how stupid you are. You're also a racist if you don't agree with or understand this chart.
Finally, unicorns.
The implication of this chart should be obvious even a non-Ivy League graduate should understand it. Economics+Unicorns = Awesomeness. But that's OK if you don't, because that's why we have finance professionals to explain these "complex" financial and economic issues to dumbass commoners like you. This is cutting edge stuff by the way. The introduction of the "Unicorn Complex" has pushed economics as a field into new and unchartered territory. Barack Obama came up with it himself. That's how smart he is. And if you don't know why unicorns have anything to do with economics, then you are a racist AND a sexist.
This post brought to you by Amazon. You have to buy something, might as well get it on Amazon so I get a commish and don't have to ever work a real job again.
If I do my math right, we are now entering the 5th year where the financial markets focus all of their attention solely on the Fed for economic salvation and a source of economic production. Of course, this is nothing more than desperation. Much like middle aged divorcee women focus their attention on "Eat Pray Love" type movies to provide them the rationale a single George Clooney with millions of dollars will choose them and their baggage over a 25 year old, childless hottie, so too do the millions of finance professionals and 401k Clergy depend on an ever increasing stock market for their livelihood. And ANY excuse, even something as pathetic as thinking the central bank is the source of economic production, will do.
Therefore, since it seems the market insists on being irrational longer than that saner heads have patience, I thought it high time to make a couple economic charts explaining this new economy.
First, GDP by sector:
If you don't believe this chart, then you obviously didn't attend an Ivy League school and are stupid. You're probably racist too.
Second, a new refined chart on the basics of government finance:
You're an idiot, or at least not a Wall Street professional or D.C. financier genius like Paul Krugman, if you don't understand this. But it's alright, not everybody can be as smart as these guys. Debt is GOOD. Don't worry that there aren't any metrics on the Y-axis, it doesn't matter. That's how awesome and smart these eocnomists are and how stupid you are. You're also a racist if you don't agree with or understand this chart.
Finally, unicorns.
The implication of this chart should be obvious even a non-Ivy League graduate should understand it. Economics+Unicorns = Awesomeness. But that's OK if you don't, because that's why we have finance professionals to explain these "complex" financial and economic issues to dumbass commoners like you. This is cutting edge stuff by the way. The introduction of the "Unicorn Complex" has pushed economics as a field into new and unchartered territory. Barack Obama came up with it himself. That's how smart he is. And if you don't know why unicorns have anything to do with economics, then you are a racist AND a sexist.
This post brought to you by Amazon. You have to buy something, might as well get it on Amazon so I get a commish and don't have to ever work a real job again.
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
The Captain Goes "Full Monty"
From Instapundit:
Short of going the full Clarey, it is prudent to think of places to put your money where it will be harder for the looters to get at: Paying off debt, educating your kids, hard goods that you’ll enjoy, etc.
I like that. New economic phrase, "The Full Clarey." Defined as "when you really go off the deep end, give up on everything, and pound down the Rumpie while driving your Ninja at excessive speeds."
Short of going the full Clarey, it is prudent to think of places to put your money where it will be harder for the looters to get at: Paying off debt, educating your kids, hard goods that you’ll enjoy, etc.
I like that. New economic phrase, "The Full Clarey." Defined as "when you really go off the deep end, give up on everything, and pound down the Rumpie while driving your Ninja at excessive speeds."
When CSR Infects a Corporation
From an agent in the field:
The company (Origin Energy) continues to pay their employees their full wages, but rather than doing accounting, admin or maintenance for the company, they're released to plant saplings, ladle out soup, and counsel troubled 'yoof' for the charity organisation of the employee's choosing. This "charity leave" is provided in addition to the employees annual leave. The only possible way it could make for good business is if consumers were so impressed with Origin's squeaky clean social conscience, that they'd choose to forgo a cheaper energy provider to make the world a kinder, friendlier place....bahahaha....God, are we proles really that stupid? I'm not sure I want to know the answer to that. In any case, I'm pretty sure Origin isn't pushing that angle with their customers, they're pretty quiet about it actually, rather it seems to be a recruiting lure, it's hinted at here:
http://www.originenergy.com.au/2233/Our-culture-values
I can't see why they wouldn't just offer their favoured charities discounted electricity and be done with it - seems far less economically destructive to my uneducated mind.
CSR is a disease.
Let there be no doubt about it.
It just happens to infect corporations and not people.
The company (Origin Energy) continues to pay their employees their full wages, but rather than doing accounting, admin or maintenance for the company, they're released to plant saplings, ladle out soup, and counsel troubled 'yoof' for the charity organisation of the employee's choosing. This "charity leave" is provided in addition to the employees annual leave. The only possible way it could make for good business is if consumers were so impressed with Origin's squeaky clean social conscience, that they'd choose to forgo a cheaper energy provider to make the world a kinder, friendlier place....bahahaha....God, are we proles really that stupid? I'm not sure I want to know the answer to that. In any case, I'm pretty sure Origin isn't pushing that angle with their customers, they're pretty quiet about it actually, rather it seems to be a recruiting lure, it's hinted at here:
http://www.originenergy.com.au/2233/Our-culture-values
I can't see why they wouldn't just offer their favoured charities discounted electricity and be done with it - seems far less economically destructive to my uneducated mind.
CSR is a disease.
Let there be no doubt about it.
It just happens to infect corporations and not people.
Monday, March 18, 2013
Your Bank Account Is Safe
Do not buy a motorcycle.
Do not buy silver.
Do not buy that shapely AR 15.
You will obey.
You will conform.
You will keep your finite life's seconds of life in the form of dollars in the US banking system.
You will Obey.
You will conform.
All is safe.
You are a racist if you dare to have a thought otherwise.
Do not buy silver.
Do not buy that shapely AR 15.
You will obey.
You will conform.
You will keep your finite life's seconds of life in the form of dollars in the US banking system.
You will Obey.
You will conform.
All is safe.
You are a racist if you dare to have a thought otherwise.
The Lesson of Cyprus
I ran out of patience and went off the hinge. But at the same time explained the Cyprus event and why so many sheeple are scrambling to get their savings.
Sunday, March 17, 2013
Larissa Faw's "Successful, Gorgeous, and Amazing" Friends
Ed Thatch has a post up on Return of Kings that merits reading unto itself, but what caught my eye was him quoting a young lady named "Larissa Faw." Larissa writes for Forbes magazine about Millennial and young women's issues (because what else would there be to write about?) and in her latest post she did what every budding 20 something female journalist seems compelled and mandated to do:
She bragged about her "awesome" friends and how they just can't seem to find a man.
So common is this it makes one sit back and say,
"OK, why is this such a common phenomenon? Why are there so many "successful, gorgeous, and amazing" friends of female journalists that just "can't seem to find a man? More so why do these journalists keep bragging about their "amazing" friends who just can't seem to find a guy?"
The answer is in the myopic view of women, especially those in journalism. They are incapable of asking what men want, and instead ply their own standards of either what they want or what they think men should want in terms of a suitable and compatible mate. This results not just in a mismatch between the traits Larissa's "successful, gorgeous and amazing" have and what men are looking for, but complete and utter confusion on the part of the ladies.
Of course to the outside observer, this is funny. Women telling women what men should like in them, is like my friend Steve telling me how I should breath while in labor. It doesn't apply. But what makes it worse is when a woman dares to ask a man what he wants OR a man simply speaks the truth about what men want, they are lambasted, lectured and villainized. Women even go so far as to TELL MEN WHAT THEY SHOULD LIKE IN A WOMAN (You ever been called "shallow?" You see the "fat acceptance" movement? You ever have a woman's personality listed as the primary reason you should date her?)
The reason for such a vitriolic response to fact and truth (instead of what it should be - acceptance) is because women have been brought up and brainwashed (primarily by their own selves) to believe what they WANT. Not what the reality is. And so any time someone dare introduce an ounce of reality into their fragile and delusional world, they get angry. Never mind that the purveyor of truth is trying to help you. Never mind this article would help Larissa's "successful, gorgeous, and amazing" friends (SGAF's henceforth). The irony/hilarity/sad thing is most women reading this right now are having their emotions blind them to the gold nugget of help we're trying to give them.
Now, even though I doubt most of Larissa's SGAF's will listen, in a vain attempt to bring an end to young female journalists wondering aloud how their "amazing" friends aren't snatched up by men, permit me some explaining. Specifically, let's look at what qualifies a woman as "gorgeous, successful and amazing" in the eyes of a woman and compare it to what men want.
When it comes to "gorgeous" women give other women, especially their friends, such a large handicap it dwarfs the tonnage of affirmative action handicap we've given to Barack Obama on the economy. I don't know how many arguments I've had with heterosexual women about how "pregnant is not beautiful." There I am, the heterosexual male. THE authority on what is or is not "gorgeous" in the female sex, and I have a bunch of women, who have NO INTENTION OR DESIRE to date other women and therefore are NOT authorities on female beauty, arguing with me about whether a pregnant woman is beautiful. "Gorgeous" means (and I'll say it again, despite saying it many times before):
Tight ass
Pretty face
Long legs
Long hair
Big boobs preferable
That's it. Period. End of discussion.
How many of the SGAF's actually have all those traits? Probably none. But Larissa can't tell her friend Amy, "You're ass is too big" and thus needs to keep the lie up.
"Successful?" I think we've covered this before. Successful in what? Engineering? Surgeon? Oil platform driller? Accountant?
OR
"social worker, teacher, nanny, marketing executive, designer consultant, fashion consultant?" ie-somebody who not only doesn't make a lot of money, but relies on men disproportionately paying more in taxes to create a government make-work job to make you feel like you're "an independent woman?"
Also, as mentioned in Ed Thatch's post, how much money do those ladies save? Because, let's just say for the sake of arugment, the SGAF does make $100,000. How many of them blow through that and spend $120,000? Isn't success supposed to be how much money or wealth you have saved up? Not how many pairs of shoes you have? And don't even get me started about student debts. I'd surmise the majority of Larissa's SGAF's have a negative net worth and are heavily reliant upon the Daddy-Government-Hubby complex for their livelihood and subsidy.
"Amazing?" Really? Did she really do something to AMAZE you? Like if I met your group of SGAF's I would be AMAZED with each and every one of them? Notice in my previous post I LIST THE INDIVIDUAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS of my male friends. They have done things that ARE amazing. I have done things that are amazing. So when you compare your typical SGAF's accomplishments of,
"Earned my Masters in English, and I like to travel, I TOTALLY LOVE SUSHI, OMG! And I'm like really conscious about the environment."
to
"I scaled 10 11,000+ foot peaks in a year, did two 1,500 mile plus motorcycle rallies, put myself through college, wrote 4 books, taught myself motorcycle repair, and I'm a ballroom dancer"
you can understand;
1. you're not amazing, you're actually quite common, common to the point there's millions of women just like you out there
2. you do not prompt an inkling of desire to consider you a potential candidate for marriage
3. compared to me, you're so boring and NOT-amazing, my hobbies and interests are more rewarding than having sex with you.
In the end what men want is so simple, it's laughable more women haven't figured out what a HUGE advantage it would give over their competitions.
A physically attractive woman who is
nice
responsible
reasonably intelligent
and likes sex
How 5 simple variables seem to elude the 150 million American women (even with all the brainwashing and propaganda) is beyond me and worth a Double Face Palm Award.
She bragged about her "awesome" friends and how they just can't seem to find a man.
So common is this it makes one sit back and say,
"OK, why is this such a common phenomenon? Why are there so many "successful, gorgeous, and amazing" friends of female journalists that just "can't seem to find a man? More so why do these journalists keep bragging about their "amazing" friends who just can't seem to find a guy?"
The answer is in the myopic view of women, especially those in journalism. They are incapable of asking what men want, and instead ply their own standards of either what they want or what they think men should want in terms of a suitable and compatible mate. This results not just in a mismatch between the traits Larissa's "successful, gorgeous and amazing" have and what men are looking for, but complete and utter confusion on the part of the ladies.
Of course to the outside observer, this is funny. Women telling women what men should like in them, is like my friend Steve telling me how I should breath while in labor. It doesn't apply. But what makes it worse is when a woman dares to ask a man what he wants OR a man simply speaks the truth about what men want, they are lambasted, lectured and villainized. Women even go so far as to TELL MEN WHAT THEY SHOULD LIKE IN A WOMAN (You ever been called "shallow?" You see the "fat acceptance" movement? You ever have a woman's personality listed as the primary reason you should date her?)
The reason for such a vitriolic response to fact and truth (instead of what it should be - acceptance) is because women have been brought up and brainwashed (primarily by their own selves) to believe what they WANT. Not what the reality is. And so any time someone dare introduce an ounce of reality into their fragile and delusional world, they get angry. Never mind that the purveyor of truth is trying to help you. Never mind this article would help Larissa's "successful, gorgeous, and amazing" friends (SGAF's henceforth). The irony/hilarity/sad thing is most women reading this right now are having their emotions blind them to the gold nugget of help we're trying to give them.
Now, even though I doubt most of Larissa's SGAF's will listen, in a vain attempt to bring an end to young female journalists wondering aloud how their "amazing" friends aren't snatched up by men, permit me some explaining. Specifically, let's look at what qualifies a woman as "gorgeous, successful and amazing" in the eyes of a woman and compare it to what men want.
When it comes to "gorgeous" women give other women, especially their friends, such a large handicap it dwarfs the tonnage of affirmative action handicap we've given to Barack Obama on the economy. I don't know how many arguments I've had with heterosexual women about how "pregnant is not beautiful." There I am, the heterosexual male. THE authority on what is or is not "gorgeous" in the female sex, and I have a bunch of women, who have NO INTENTION OR DESIRE to date other women and therefore are NOT authorities on female beauty, arguing with me about whether a pregnant woman is beautiful. "Gorgeous" means (and I'll say it again, despite saying it many times before):
Tight ass
Pretty face
Long legs
Long hair
Big boobs preferable
That's it. Period. End of discussion.
How many of the SGAF's actually have all those traits? Probably none. But Larissa can't tell her friend Amy, "You're ass is too big" and thus needs to keep the lie up.
"Successful?" I think we've covered this before. Successful in what? Engineering? Surgeon? Oil platform driller? Accountant?
OR
"social worker, teacher, nanny, marketing executive, designer consultant, fashion consultant?" ie-somebody who not only doesn't make a lot of money, but relies on men disproportionately paying more in taxes to create a government make-work job to make you feel like you're "an independent woman?"
Also, as mentioned in Ed Thatch's post, how much money do those ladies save? Because, let's just say for the sake of arugment, the SGAF does make $100,000. How many of them blow through that and spend $120,000? Isn't success supposed to be how much money or wealth you have saved up? Not how many pairs of shoes you have? And don't even get me started about student debts. I'd surmise the majority of Larissa's SGAF's have a negative net worth and are heavily reliant upon the Daddy-Government-Hubby complex for their livelihood and subsidy.
"Amazing?" Really? Did she really do something to AMAZE you? Like if I met your group of SGAF's I would be AMAZED with each and every one of them? Notice in my previous post I LIST THE INDIVIDUAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS of my male friends. They have done things that ARE amazing. I have done things that are amazing. So when you compare your typical SGAF's accomplishments of,
"Earned my Masters in English, and I like to travel, I TOTALLY LOVE SUSHI, OMG! And I'm like really conscious about the environment."
to
"I scaled 10 11,000+ foot peaks in a year, did two 1,500 mile plus motorcycle rallies, put myself through college, wrote 4 books, taught myself motorcycle repair, and I'm a ballroom dancer"
you can understand;
1. you're not amazing, you're actually quite common, common to the point there's millions of women just like you out there
2. you do not prompt an inkling of desire to consider you a potential candidate for marriage
3. compared to me, you're so boring and NOT-amazing, my hobbies and interests are more rewarding than having sex with you.
In the end what men want is so simple, it's laughable more women haven't figured out what a HUGE advantage it would give over their competitions.
A physically attractive woman who is
nice
responsible
reasonably intelligent
and likes sex
How 5 simple variables seem to elude the 150 million American women (even with all the brainwashing and propaganda) is beyond me and worth a Double Face Palm Award.
Where the Good Men Are
I took inventory of my single male friends.
Nearly all of them are 30+, all of them own their own house, all are gainfully employed, and though not all Ambercrombie and Fitch models, not one of them is obese or below what I would consider a 6.
They also all have at least ONE unique eccentricity about them. Many of them are ballroom dancers. Two of them are pilots. One belongs in a band. A fourth is starting his third serious company. And another has taught himself two languages because he managed to retire at 42. It is because of their eccentricities they are part of my crew of friends. They are interesting and significantly-above-average intelligent people and conversation with them is the most enjoyable aspect of my life.
However, there is one who stands out in this category of "Captain's single male friends." The reason he stands out is he is the only one who actively pursues dating.
Though 43, he is in good enough shape and charming enough with the ladies he manages to date 25 year old women on average. While this is certainly fun, his long term goal is to get married. However, he faces a quandary. Most 20 something girls are immature and not marriage material. They are pain to date and are not capable of the level of intelligent conversation he needs. To find women his maturity level, he needs to date older, "older" to him meaning 30+. But when he does there is inevitably a deal-breaker, usually another guy's kid or a financial wreck. Thus, he still plugs along, filling his date card with 24 year old's, occasionally wandering into 30+ territory only to have her life-mistakes return him to the younger ladies.
Now you would think "this is a great situation" and he is having the time of his life. But alas, my 43 year old friend is starting to suffer from "Player Burnout." He no longer is excited about the prospects of a new date. He no longer has the giddiness and hope of taking out yet another 26 year old. And when they text him their naked pictures he merely shows me and the others guys and says, "meh." In the past year I have seen his interest in other hobbies supplant his interest of women, and if you were to ask him today if he'd rather smoke a cigar than go on another date with a girl he met online. In short you are witnessing the last dying moments of a player, much like watching the final stages of a star gone supernova, before it collapses into nothingness.
When he does go "supernova," however, there will be no more players, let alone men looking to date in my crew. And with his resignation from "the game" he will pull himself out of the dating market and there will be one less "good guy" out there for the ladies. It then dawned on me that the answer to:
"Where have all the good men gone?"
was staring me right in the face. I can answer that question by simply explaining what all my single male friends do.
"Mike" the retired at 42 year old has a lifestyle akin to mine. He has no real job, he wakes up when he wants, and he pursues various intellectual pursuits to stimulate his mind. He is a minimalist with very few expensive possessions and though he is a veritable millionaire, he drives the cheapest import car he could afford. For entertainment he tries different coffee stores and hangs out with some of his other retired friends during the day. In the evening he hangs out with us usually for cigars or a cheap dinner at one of our favorite dives. He returns home where he teaches himself languages, reads books, watches documentaries, has cocktails and goes to bed around 4AM.
"Bill" is a pilot. He just purchased a very nice home and the mortgage on that home is the only debt he has. He has been living frugally for the past 10 years, building up a massive downpayment that he could afford a 15 year mortgage and a very low interest rate. He works out with me religiously. He is also the musician in our group and can ballroom dance. He's been working on his music, his body building, and his career. When he's in town he joins us for dinner at that same dive restaurant or (time permitting) is up for flying down south to enjoy warmer weather.
"Fred" is a computer networker and a race car driver. His house is pretty much paid off because he busts his ass off working about 60 hours a week. If you want to find him you can find him at work, at the gym, in his basement (tinkering with computers) or on the race track. You will not find him at a club or a loud bar, because he is a beer connoisseur. You will find him at the quiet local brewpub with a bunch of other 40 somethings.
I could go on, but if I were to succinctly summarize where to "find the good men" it would be:
1. At home
2. At a coffee shop/low end restaurant
3. At work
4. Out doing their hobbies
In short, NOT at the bar or the night club.
But here is where the women face a high, if not, impossible hurdle. You can't meet these men even if you wanted to. You can't go to random houses, knocking on guys doors to see if any "good guys" are home. You can't go to a restaurant and randomly approach men to see if they are good guys. You certainly can't go to various corporate offices to see if any good guys are at work. And unless you are in the passenger seat of Fred's race car or Bill's airplane, you're not going to find good guys attempting to join their hobbies. In other words, they've gone ghost. They're gone. They're not only off the market, you can't even find them to convince them to consider going back on the market.
This leaves marriage-seeking women with the "nightclub" or "online dating" as markets for finding men. Unfortunately, these aren't "good guys." Not that they a morally bad men, they're just not marriage minded men. They're players. And so when a guy scores a number and lines up a date with a girl he met at a bar, 9 out of 10 times he has no romantic interest in her, only sexual. This makes things doubly bad for women because it is misleading or (to borrow from economic parlance) "sends the wrong pricing signals." With all these players asking for their numbers, women misinterpret this attention as romantic attention, not sexual. Thus, they are constantly thinking "Mr. Perfect" is just around the corner, when it is just another player. 20 years of bar-hopping and night-clubbing go by with no yield of "good men" and thus, with the biological clock screaming, they ask "when have all the good men gone?"
The answer, ladies, is "home."
Enjoy the decline!
Nearly all of them are 30+, all of them own their own house, all are gainfully employed, and though not all Ambercrombie and Fitch models, not one of them is obese or below what I would consider a 6.
They also all have at least ONE unique eccentricity about them. Many of them are ballroom dancers. Two of them are pilots. One belongs in a band. A fourth is starting his third serious company. And another has taught himself two languages because he managed to retire at 42. It is because of their eccentricities they are part of my crew of friends. They are interesting and significantly-above-average intelligent people and conversation with them is the most enjoyable aspect of my life.
However, there is one who stands out in this category of "Captain's single male friends." The reason he stands out is he is the only one who actively pursues dating.
Though 43, he is in good enough shape and charming enough with the ladies he manages to date 25 year old women on average. While this is certainly fun, his long term goal is to get married. However, he faces a quandary. Most 20 something girls are immature and not marriage material. They are pain to date and are not capable of the level of intelligent conversation he needs. To find women his maturity level, he needs to date older, "older" to him meaning 30+. But when he does there is inevitably a deal-breaker, usually another guy's kid or a financial wreck. Thus, he still plugs along, filling his date card with 24 year old's, occasionally wandering into 30+ territory only to have her life-mistakes return him to the younger ladies.
Now you would think "this is a great situation" and he is having the time of his life. But alas, my 43 year old friend is starting to suffer from "Player Burnout." He no longer is excited about the prospects of a new date. He no longer has the giddiness and hope of taking out yet another 26 year old. And when they text him their naked pictures he merely shows me and the others guys and says, "meh." In the past year I have seen his interest in other hobbies supplant his interest of women, and if you were to ask him today if he'd rather smoke a cigar than go on another date with a girl he met online. In short you are witnessing the last dying moments of a player, much like watching the final stages of a star gone supernova, before it collapses into nothingness.
When he does go "supernova," however, there will be no more players, let alone men looking to date in my crew. And with his resignation from "the game" he will pull himself out of the dating market and there will be one less "good guy" out there for the ladies. It then dawned on me that the answer to:
"Where have all the good men gone?"
was staring me right in the face. I can answer that question by simply explaining what all my single male friends do.
"Mike" the retired at 42 year old has a lifestyle akin to mine. He has no real job, he wakes up when he wants, and he pursues various intellectual pursuits to stimulate his mind. He is a minimalist with very few expensive possessions and though he is a veritable millionaire, he drives the cheapest import car he could afford. For entertainment he tries different coffee stores and hangs out with some of his other retired friends during the day. In the evening he hangs out with us usually for cigars or a cheap dinner at one of our favorite dives. He returns home where he teaches himself languages, reads books, watches documentaries, has cocktails and goes to bed around 4AM.
"Bill" is a pilot. He just purchased a very nice home and the mortgage on that home is the only debt he has. He has been living frugally for the past 10 years, building up a massive downpayment that he could afford a 15 year mortgage and a very low interest rate. He works out with me religiously. He is also the musician in our group and can ballroom dance. He's been working on his music, his body building, and his career. When he's in town he joins us for dinner at that same dive restaurant or (time permitting) is up for flying down south to enjoy warmer weather.
"Fred" is a computer networker and a race car driver. His house is pretty much paid off because he busts his ass off working about 60 hours a week. If you want to find him you can find him at work, at the gym, in his basement (tinkering with computers) or on the race track. You will not find him at a club or a loud bar, because he is a beer connoisseur. You will find him at the quiet local brewpub with a bunch of other 40 somethings.
I could go on, but if I were to succinctly summarize where to "find the good men" it would be:
1. At home
2. At a coffee shop/low end restaurant
3. At work
4. Out doing their hobbies
In short, NOT at the bar or the night club.
But here is where the women face a high, if not, impossible hurdle. You can't meet these men even if you wanted to. You can't go to random houses, knocking on guys doors to see if any "good guys" are home. You can't go to a restaurant and randomly approach men to see if they are good guys. You certainly can't go to various corporate offices to see if any good guys are at work. And unless you are in the passenger seat of Fred's race car or Bill's airplane, you're not going to find good guys attempting to join their hobbies. In other words, they've gone ghost. They're gone. They're not only off the market, you can't even find them to convince them to consider going back on the market.
This leaves marriage-seeking women with the "nightclub" or "online dating" as markets for finding men. Unfortunately, these aren't "good guys." Not that they a morally bad men, they're just not marriage minded men. They're players. And so when a guy scores a number and lines up a date with a girl he met at a bar, 9 out of 10 times he has no romantic interest in her, only sexual. This makes things doubly bad for women because it is misleading or (to borrow from economic parlance) "sends the wrong pricing signals." With all these players asking for their numbers, women misinterpret this attention as romantic attention, not sexual. Thus, they are constantly thinking "Mr. Perfect" is just around the corner, when it is just another player. 20 years of bar-hopping and night-clubbing go by with no yield of "good men" and thus, with the biological clock screaming, they ask "when have all the good men gone?"
The answer, ladies, is "home."
Enjoy the decline!
Saturday, March 16, 2013
This Is Why You HOLD PHYSICAL ASSETS!
How you Keynesian believers in the central banking system doing?
You doing alright?
You OK?
You have faith in your government and what your politicians are telling you?
Could you bend over a little more please?
You doing alright?
You OK?
You have faith in your government and what your politicians are telling you?
Could you bend over a little more please?
Review of "Why Can't I Use a Smiley Face"
"Why Can't I Use a Smiley Face" is the latest installment of Roosh's series that charts his exploits across the world as he gallivants, country to country, studying how to pick up women in said countries. For those of you follow Roosh or live vicariously through him it would be describe as another, though lengthier chapter, of his Bang series, and will not be let down. However, if you are looking for a stand alone book, say like Dead Bat in Paraguay, this is not the book. Ergo if you are new to Roosh or don't really have an interest in his adventures, this book will disappoint.
The book is essentially the "homecoming" chapter of Roosh. After 2 years in the field he returns to America, specifically his home town of Washington DC and chronicles his day to day life and experiences. These experiences certainly include him going on attempting to pick up girls in DC's nightlight, but also his observations of family, friends, society in general, as well as some familial resistance to his chosen path in life.
Of particular interest is reading his various Bang guides of different countries and then comparing his foreign experiences to domestic ones. Most notably getting uncalled-for assaulted by women twice (slapped and punched) whereas to the best of my recollection no woman ever touched him outside the US. Other unacceptable events result in quite a damning testimony to the perpetually decreasing and unacceptable quality and caliber of young American women (though this is in the DC area only), though this was not the intention of his book. Regardless, the difficulty, rudeness, and just outright unacceptable behavior he experiences going out in DC shows Roosh he no longer has a home field advantage and that he is better at away games, leading him to an important decision.
The overall lesson of the book, however, is one of "player fatigue." Keep in mind by this time Roosh has been overseas doing something no other person has done, and though successful, and though a very interesting career, inevitably he gets burnt out. The burn out comes in three forms. The first is the physical and psychological demands of world travel that would fatigue anybody. The second is that he achieves his goal, foisting the Alexander the Great quote of "When he saw the breadth of his domain he wept for there were no more worlds to conquer" on him. The chase or the novelty no longer appeals to him and he starts searching for a new mission, a new meaning in life. The third form is he starts to realize the costs of playerhood. Get all the play you want, you STILL have to go out, you STILL have to spend time, and you STILL have to spend money. The particularly poor results of his D.C. outtings not only made his recent domestic investments a waste, but they also planted the seeds of "opportunity cost" in his mind.
"Why Can't I Use a Smiley Face" can be found in both paperback and Kindle for $8 and $3 respectively. It is a very short read (took me about 1.5 hours) and worth the cheap price, especially if you're looking for something to tide you over during a flight OR if you are a regular follower of Roosh. I will, however, warn you the first few paragraphs are unnecessarily crass and lewd. Getting past that you should have a decent read.
The book is essentially the "homecoming" chapter of Roosh. After 2 years in the field he returns to America, specifically his home town of Washington DC and chronicles his day to day life and experiences. These experiences certainly include him going on attempting to pick up girls in DC's nightlight, but also his observations of family, friends, society in general, as well as some familial resistance to his chosen path in life.
Of particular interest is reading his various Bang guides of different countries and then comparing his foreign experiences to domestic ones. Most notably getting uncalled-for assaulted by women twice (slapped and punched) whereas to the best of my recollection no woman ever touched him outside the US. Other unacceptable events result in quite a damning testimony to the perpetually decreasing and unacceptable quality and caliber of young American women (though this is in the DC area only), though this was not the intention of his book. Regardless, the difficulty, rudeness, and just outright unacceptable behavior he experiences going out in DC shows Roosh he no longer has a home field advantage and that he is better at away games, leading him to an important decision.
The overall lesson of the book, however, is one of "player fatigue." Keep in mind by this time Roosh has been overseas doing something no other person has done, and though successful, and though a very interesting career, inevitably he gets burnt out. The burn out comes in three forms. The first is the physical and psychological demands of world travel that would fatigue anybody. The second is that he achieves his goal, foisting the Alexander the Great quote of "When he saw the breadth of his domain he wept for there were no more worlds to conquer" on him. The chase or the novelty no longer appeals to him and he starts searching for a new mission, a new meaning in life. The third form is he starts to realize the costs of playerhood. Get all the play you want, you STILL have to go out, you STILL have to spend time, and you STILL have to spend money. The particularly poor results of his D.C. outtings not only made his recent domestic investments a waste, but they also planted the seeds of "opportunity cost" in his mind.
"Why Can't I Use a Smiley Face" can be found in both paperback and Kindle for $8 and $3 respectively. It is a very short read (took me about 1.5 hours) and worth the cheap price, especially if you're looking for something to tide you over during a flight OR if you are a regular follower of Roosh. I will, however, warn you the first few paragraphs are unnecessarily crass and lewd. Getting past that you should have a decent read.
What's Wrong With This Article?
Not the article itself, but what is wrong about what the article is about. There should be something very disturbing, but too many generations of sheeple have been brainwashed not to see it.
Friday, March 15, 2013
Why Michael Bloomberg is the Reason the 2nd Amendment Exists
The latest podcast from "The Clarey Podcast" includes Marissa Mayer's (Yahoo CEO) decision to force her employees to work at the office instead of home, the failure of Americans to embrace the telecommute revolution, how women would prefer to sleep with Richard Branson vs. Mark Dayton, how Michael Bloomberg is the reason the 2nd Amendment was created, why the Captain would love to meet him in a dark alley, and what drives men to succeed and achieve (sex and physical attraction, BTW).
Coffee Boxer Short Linkage
Starting this Friday off right with coffee, boxer shorts and a T-shirt, and a hot roaring fire in the fireplace. Let's get to work!
Ah feminists. Fighting against nature and ruining everybody's good time in the process.
AR15's are only for the spouses of liberals. You conservative neanderthals can't have one.
A member of the League of Unemployable Bloggers thanks god that we don't have an oppressive, invasive and brainwashed employer class that thinks your political beliefs or personal life is their business. Thank god!
Even the STEM majoring women (which I am very "pro") still can't stop that nagging desire to be (GASP!) women! Again, feminism has certainly hurt men. But it has hurt women more.
The father could not be reached for comment.
But the important question was whether he was an aspiring rap artist?
Sting Ray writes about chivalry.
A real quick history about Ceasar and power.
What if your Nanny is actually a Thug.
Nearly a dozen billboard-sized photos of vaginas in various states – including shaved ones, others that are blemished, and still some with tampons inserted – are slated for display today and tomorrow at the University of Cincinnati. Where or where could we cut the budget?
Associates in STEM > PhD in Humanities
When "liberal, white guilt" trumps your kids.
And just so you know, boys, you shouldn't rape women. That's "a bad." Thank god we have a Masters in English telling us this important lesson. Because beforehand I was a little unclear about whether or not I should be raping women. Cripes, do liberal arts majors EVER do ANYTHING of value????
You go to Harvard for connections, not to learn anything.
Ah feminists. Fighting against nature and ruining everybody's good time in the process.
AR15's are only for the spouses of liberals. You conservative neanderthals can't have one.
A member of the League of Unemployable Bloggers thanks god that we don't have an oppressive, invasive and brainwashed employer class that thinks your political beliefs or personal life is their business. Thank god!
Even the STEM majoring women (which I am very "pro") still can't stop that nagging desire to be (GASP!) women! Again, feminism has certainly hurt men. But it has hurt women more.
The father could not be reached for comment.
But the important question was whether he was an aspiring rap artist?
Sting Ray writes about chivalry.
A real quick history about Ceasar and power.
What if your Nanny is actually a Thug.
Nearly a dozen billboard-sized photos of vaginas in various states – including shaved ones, others that are blemished, and still some with tampons inserted – are slated for display today and tomorrow at the University of Cincinnati. Where or where could we cut the budget?
Associates in STEM > PhD in Humanities
When "liberal, white guilt" trumps your kids.
And just so you know, boys, you shouldn't rape women. That's "a bad." Thank god we have a Masters in English telling us this important lesson. Because beforehand I was a little unclear about whether or not I should be raping women. Cripes, do liberal arts majors EVER do ANYTHING of value????
You go to Harvard for connections, not to learn anything.
Thursday, March 14, 2013
Explaining the Angry Atheist
For once, Inmalafide wrote a piece that doesn't involve enough foul language it manages to insult all 6.6 billion people on the planet. Of course I merely skimmed the article, so maybe I missed something, but regardless, his article highlights how the left hates religion, which reminded me about one of the more curious phenomenon out there - the Angry Atheist.
The Angry Atheist confuses and confounds your average conservative or even your average innocent bystander. Most people don't know where the visceral hatred Angry Atheists have comes from and are kind of shocked by it. Most people's thinking is:
"Well, if you're an athiest, then what do you care about religion? Shouldn't you be some kind of easy, laid back, live and let live sort of guy? What's with all the hatred, mockery and ridicule of people who just happen to believe in a religion?"
Thus when an unsuspecting person breaches the topic of religion or mentions their particular faith, they are completely blindsided by the ensuing screed delivered to them by the Angry Atheist.
However, being brought up on an extremely religious household and becoming an agnostic myself, I believe I can explain why some atheists are so angry and thus explain this phenomenon.
First, understand I have no skin in this game. I couldn't care less what people's religion is. If there's any problem I have with religion, it's that most participants of all religions do not participate in the religion for anything as noble and selfless as worship or a god, but rather for ulterior and selfish motives. Finding a spouse, socializing, business connections, belonging to a team, heck, even rationalizing taking over the world. Whatever the reason it isn't for "god." But for the few sincere and legitimate practitioners of religion, I respect them and leave them be. So whether you're a Jew or a Catholic or even an atheist, I don't care.
Second, NAAALT (Not All Atheists Are Like That). I know the majority of atheists are the laid back, live and let live types. I have atheist friends and I am certainly no fan of religion. Remember, we're focusing on the ANGRY Atheists who feel compelled to foist themselves into people's personal religious decisions. Not Bob at the water cooler who doesn't go to church.
With those caveats out of the way, there are two primary sources of Angry Atheists,
The first source are formerly religious people that had religion forced on them. And not just forced on them, they suffered some kind of abuse. I'm not talking sexual abuse, but psychological abuse. A brainwashing that religion forces on the child, to the point it IS a cult. Cults being what they are, they destroy the individual for the "commune" of the cult. You are no longer your own person, and as a child, not only are you not #1 in your own life, your parents and your family put you second to the cult as well. I would estimate around 30% of all Christian-based religions are at this cult-level in the US, and, naturally, when a young person grows up and "escapes the cult" they have the wool removed from their eyes and realize they were merely being used by a sadistic and self-serving commune. They also realize that their youth was not just wasted, but taken advantage of, and the only and natural consequence is hatred and revenge.
In this case the Angry Atheist has a legitimate beef with religion. But instead of attacking the religion on genuine and weak grounds (ie-most people don't believe it and participate in it for ulterior and self-serving reasons) they just bash it in general. They lack the finesse to surgically strike at people's hypocrisies and just call them "idiots" instead. They have such a hatred for the religion, they need to "undo it" and therefore lack the ability to realize that a true revenge would to let people remain in the religion/cult and that will cause more damage. And finally, they also lack the ability to move on and let it go. Their experiences were so bad, they just cannot let the injustice of what happened to them stand, and thus partially lessen their lives in the process. A bit of forgiveness and understanding might be called for.
The second reason or "variant" of the Angry Atheist should shock no one - they're crusaders.
It is no coincidence your average Angry Atheist is also a leftist. The reason why is that atheism is the easiest religion of them all, requiring no effort, thought, ponderance or work. You simply "declare" you're one and POOF! You're in the club and you now "belong."
In this sense, it's the epitome of irony, because the Angry Atheist is simply joining another religion. It's just not so much an "absence" of religion (as a true laid back atheist would be), it's an "ANTI-religion religion." They have a vendetta, they have a crusade, they (like all other religion people) now have a purpose and belong to a club - we must destroy other people's religion. If anything, it's a testament to the most cowardly (and borderline psychotic) mentality of a Crusader-Angry-Atheist because his/her "religion" is simply to destroy something others have built. They can't just let it be. And it is here we see the parallels between Angry Atheists and leftists because their psychologies are the same.
First, both are hypocrites. Leftists and Angry Atheists are such because the average liberal does not "care about the poor" nor does the Angry Atheist "really want to stop cultish and abusive religions." They are in it first and foremost for themselves. The leftist will ALWAYS trumpet and parade their ideology first thing in a conversation because that is CORE to their being. The Angry Atheist will as well. They claim membership to these groups FOR THEIR EGOS, not for anything as noble as "helping the poor" or "stopping abusive religion." They are crusaders, and most ironically (again) they are the most devout, zealous, and extreme of religious people. Their religions just happen to be godless.
Second, both are usually worthless people (I am reminding normal Atheists, this does not include you). They have no value beyond their religion. They are too lazy to go and develop a skill, a trade, a career, and develop themselves as a human and live an interesting and productive life. And instead of enduring or expending the effort, rigor, development, trials, tribulations and challenges in life that would give them a core and worth, they instead claim allegiance to a "holy and noble crusade" they really couldn't less about to fill that hole. The average leftist joins the Peace Corps and does nothing to help Africans while the Angry Atheist rips on religious people because their liberal arts degree isn't getting them a job.
And finally, they are envious. Since they are too lazy to go out and get what they want out of life, they must criminalize and villainize what others have. The leftist criminalizes "wealth" and "the rich" while never resting a second in their lives to concoct lies and false rationalizations to confiscate said wealth. The Angry Atheist wishing to belong to something, but not wanting to expend any effort to meet the standards of that club (not to mention, no doubt also envious of religious people's tendency to be wealthier as well), rips on religion, allowing him to immediately join a group of anti-religion religion, thereby giving him an identity and belonging.
If you got intellectual warm fuzzies, buy something you have to buy anyway on Amazon for the ole Captain. Proceeds go to his "Poor Starving Bachelor Fund"
The Angry Atheist confuses and confounds your average conservative or even your average innocent bystander. Most people don't know where the visceral hatred Angry Atheists have comes from and are kind of shocked by it. Most people's thinking is:
"Well, if you're an athiest, then what do you care about religion? Shouldn't you be some kind of easy, laid back, live and let live sort of guy? What's with all the hatred, mockery and ridicule of people who just happen to believe in a religion?"
Thus when an unsuspecting person breaches the topic of religion or mentions their particular faith, they are completely blindsided by the ensuing screed delivered to them by the Angry Atheist.
However, being brought up on an extremely religious household and becoming an agnostic myself, I believe I can explain why some atheists are so angry and thus explain this phenomenon.
First, understand I have no skin in this game. I couldn't care less what people's religion is. If there's any problem I have with religion, it's that most participants of all religions do not participate in the religion for anything as noble and selfless as worship or a god, but rather for ulterior and selfish motives. Finding a spouse, socializing, business connections, belonging to a team, heck, even rationalizing taking over the world. Whatever the reason it isn't for "god." But for the few sincere and legitimate practitioners of religion, I respect them and leave them be. So whether you're a Jew or a Catholic or even an atheist, I don't care.
Second, NAAALT (Not All Atheists Are Like That). I know the majority of atheists are the laid back, live and let live types. I have atheist friends and I am certainly no fan of religion. Remember, we're focusing on the ANGRY Atheists who feel compelled to foist themselves into people's personal religious decisions. Not Bob at the water cooler who doesn't go to church.
With those caveats out of the way, there are two primary sources of Angry Atheists,
The first source are formerly religious people that had religion forced on them. And not just forced on them, they suffered some kind of abuse. I'm not talking sexual abuse, but psychological abuse. A brainwashing that religion forces on the child, to the point it IS a cult. Cults being what they are, they destroy the individual for the "commune" of the cult. You are no longer your own person, and as a child, not only are you not #1 in your own life, your parents and your family put you second to the cult as well. I would estimate around 30% of all Christian-based religions are at this cult-level in the US, and, naturally, when a young person grows up and "escapes the cult" they have the wool removed from their eyes and realize they were merely being used by a sadistic and self-serving commune. They also realize that their youth was not just wasted, but taken advantage of, and the only and natural consequence is hatred and revenge.
In this case the Angry Atheist has a legitimate beef with religion. But instead of attacking the religion on genuine and weak grounds (ie-most people don't believe it and participate in it for ulterior and self-serving reasons) they just bash it in general. They lack the finesse to surgically strike at people's hypocrisies and just call them "idiots" instead. They have such a hatred for the religion, they need to "undo it" and therefore lack the ability to realize that a true revenge would to let people remain in the religion/cult and that will cause more damage. And finally, they also lack the ability to move on and let it go. Their experiences were so bad, they just cannot let the injustice of what happened to them stand, and thus partially lessen their lives in the process. A bit of forgiveness and understanding might be called for.
The second reason or "variant" of the Angry Atheist should shock no one - they're crusaders.
It is no coincidence your average Angry Atheist is also a leftist. The reason why is that atheism is the easiest religion of them all, requiring no effort, thought, ponderance or work. You simply "declare" you're one and POOF! You're in the club and you now "belong."
In this sense, it's the epitome of irony, because the Angry Atheist is simply joining another religion. It's just not so much an "absence" of religion (as a true laid back atheist would be), it's an "ANTI-religion religion." They have a vendetta, they have a crusade, they (like all other religion people) now have a purpose and belong to a club - we must destroy other people's religion. If anything, it's a testament to the most cowardly (and borderline psychotic) mentality of a Crusader-Angry-Atheist because his/her "religion" is simply to destroy something others have built. They can't just let it be. And it is here we see the parallels between Angry Atheists and leftists because their psychologies are the same.
First, both are hypocrites. Leftists and Angry Atheists are such because the average liberal does not "care about the poor" nor does the Angry Atheist "really want to stop cultish and abusive religions." They are in it first and foremost for themselves. The leftist will ALWAYS trumpet and parade their ideology first thing in a conversation because that is CORE to their being. The Angry Atheist will as well. They claim membership to these groups FOR THEIR EGOS, not for anything as noble as "helping the poor" or "stopping abusive religion." They are crusaders, and most ironically (again) they are the most devout, zealous, and extreme of religious people. Their religions just happen to be godless.
Second, both are usually worthless people (I am reminding normal Atheists, this does not include you). They have no value beyond their religion. They are too lazy to go and develop a skill, a trade, a career, and develop themselves as a human and live an interesting and productive life. And instead of enduring or expending the effort, rigor, development, trials, tribulations and challenges in life that would give them a core and worth, they instead claim allegiance to a "holy and noble crusade" they really couldn't less about to fill that hole. The average leftist joins the Peace Corps and does nothing to help Africans while the Angry Atheist rips on religious people because their liberal arts degree isn't getting them a job.
And finally, they are envious. Since they are too lazy to go out and get what they want out of life, they must criminalize and villainize what others have. The leftist criminalizes "wealth" and "the rich" while never resting a second in their lives to concoct lies and false rationalizations to confiscate said wealth. The Angry Atheist wishing to belong to something, but not wanting to expend any effort to meet the standards of that club (not to mention, no doubt also envious of religious people's tendency to be wealthier as well), rips on religion, allowing him to immediately join a group of anti-religion religion, thereby giving him an identity and belonging.
If you got intellectual warm fuzzies, buy something you have to buy anyway on Amazon for the ole Captain. Proceeds go to his "Poor Starving Bachelor Fund"
Charty Goodness
I have a confession to make. I am lazy with my charts. I normally will make a chart and its shelf life can last several years, if not, a full decade as long as the economy doesn't change too much. For example the stock market has remained bubbly over these past few years rarely requiring I update the S&P 500 PE ratio or dividend yield. But the same cannot be said for Obama's deficit spending and accrual of debt. Each year I have to update any debt related charts because the SOB adds another trillion+ to the deficit every year.
Original Source: Poker Listings
So here are the two main charts (updated) attesting to debt - deficit and debt to GDP.
For S's and G's I decided to also check to see how much the federal budget was as a percent of GDP:
I love the jump in spending not just under Obama, but how the American public keeps voting in to have government play more and more of a role in our lives. And that chart above is JUST FEDERAL. Tack on another 10% to account for state and local, 20% if you're a sucker and live in California.
Original Source: Poker Listings
So here are the two main charts (updated) attesting to debt - deficit and debt to GDP.
For S's and G's I decided to also check to see how much the federal budget was as a percent of GDP:
I love the jump in spending not just under Obama, but how the American public keeps voting in to have government play more and more of a role in our lives. And that chart above is JUST FEDERAL. Tack on another 10% to account for state and local, 20% if you're a sucker and live in California.
Late Night at the Cappy Club
Even though it's morning, I think if you play this song you'll be much more capable of enjoying the decline today:
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
The Kissing Balance of Sickness
The paradox is a common one.
One of the lovers is sick.
The other is not.
Do you refrain from kissing that person, so as not to infect him/her?
OR
Do you "wuv dem sooooo much dat" getting sick is worth the few precious kisses and you infect them anyway?
Well, let a cold hearted economist provide some insight.
Say one of you is sick.
This precludes you from kissing your beau/babe for the time that person is infected with the disease. That person suffers, and you don't get to kiss him/her. But inevitably that person will recover and then you can get back to "sickness-free kissin' time."
But if you are of the "kisses are worth the sickness" philosophy, then you too are going to get sick.
If you get sick and the other person recovers, then all you have managed to do is simply put that person in the exact same position you were in, THUS PREVENTING THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT OF KISSING.
THEREFORE (thanks to my SAEG (tm))
It is best to let the person be, NOT KISS YOUR BETTER HALF, have "girls weekend" or "guys weekend," and let them fully recover, for if you do, then you
1. won't get sick
2. won't lose out on any more kisses than you would anyway (because of the duality of sickness)
3. and will halve the sick-kissing time, replacing it with "healthy-kissing time."
I am glad I have solved this life-long paradox, making life easier for millions of future generation people.
You may send your thanks by shopping at Amazon or buying one of my many SAEG (tm) books.
One of the lovers is sick.
The other is not.
Do you refrain from kissing that person, so as not to infect him/her?
OR
Do you "wuv dem sooooo much dat" getting sick is worth the few precious kisses and you infect them anyway?
Well, let a cold hearted economist provide some insight.
Say one of you is sick.
This precludes you from kissing your beau/babe for the time that person is infected with the disease. That person suffers, and you don't get to kiss him/her. But inevitably that person will recover and then you can get back to "sickness-free kissin' time."
But if you are of the "kisses are worth the sickness" philosophy, then you too are going to get sick.
If you get sick and the other person recovers, then all you have managed to do is simply put that person in the exact same position you were in, THUS PREVENTING THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT OF KISSING.
THEREFORE (thanks to my SAEG (tm))
It is best to let the person be, NOT KISS YOUR BETTER HALF, have "girls weekend" or "guys weekend," and let them fully recover, for if you do, then you
1. won't get sick
2. won't lose out on any more kisses than you would anyway (because of the duality of sickness)
3. and will halve the sick-kissing time, replacing it with "healthy-kissing time."
I am glad I have solved this life-long paradox, making life easier for millions of future generation people.
You may send your thanks by shopping at Amazon or buying one of my many SAEG (tm) books.