I hate to even mention his obnoxious dumb ass because I'd rather he just disappear off my radar, however since he's the current GOP frontrunner I can't not comment on Trump's offensive ethos, to wit: if you're smart you must be rich and if you're rich you must be smart.
(I refuse to respond to his comments about Mexican-American immigrants - I can't stoop that low without wrenching my back.)
Here's what I know:
Many of the most enlightened beings I've met been humble ascetics, by choice.
The decisions I've made in my own life which have enriched my existence immeasurably while impoverishing me financially are those I regret the least.
Not everyone born into privilege is a rocket scientist (Bush II, anyone?); many "self-made-men" simply luck into it (see: the inventor of the paperclip).
The donald isn't just wrong, though, or I wouldn't be writing this - far more caustically, he is full-on declaring that struggling lower and middle class men and women are in their situations because they lack IQ, not because people are in any way a product of their circumstances. Talk about ignorance! Talk about an inability to see through the eyes of one's potential constituents!
Typical entitled Anglo-Aryan rhetoric, easily dismissed. Except, for some reason, it's not been - yet.
I'm flabbergasted that Trump is apparently striking a chord with my fellow countrymen, that he is in the news so much, that he's considered a serious contender for the most respected job in this or any other country. Are we the people, who figuratively have the entire world in the palms of our hands, really so impressed by this circus act, this bully who arrogantly crows on and on about how he is everyone's "better"? Or (please o please) isn't our impulse to watch him, to goad him, to spur him on, more akin to that which causes us to rubberneck car wrecks?
Just try to imagine for a second, if you will, the donald holding high level diplomatic discussions with Putin or Netanyahu, for example. Somehow, I just don't see how shouting over the top of them and calling them idiots and whatever other names he could think of would result in a positive net gain for our nation.
He's unstable, not someone we can count on for anything other than shock-value soundbytes. He'd make a horrible president, no question about it.
C'mon people, ain't politics meant to mean something more than entertainment?
The real question is: what does it say about the state of the Grand Old Party that none of the fifteen other candidates compares favorably to him?!
Thursday, July 30, 2015
Friday, June 26, 2015
Gay Marriage, what next? Oh that slippery slope...
Same-sex marriage has won. “Definition of Marriage” traditionalists’
best argument didn’t meet the rational basis test, much less any stricter scrutiny requirements potentially on deck. Now then…
What about that slippery slope
argument Scalia and his ilk railed so vehemently against?
As I recall, it went something
like this: If we let a man marry a man
or a woman marry a woman how could we prevent a man marrying two women, or
three people marrying each other, or a couple marrying a couple, or a
grandmother marrying her grandson, or a retard marrying a broomhandle or a collie?
(That language isn't mine, it's Republicans')
C’mon, even the slipperiest slopes
get tacky. I’ll guarantee you that it
shall be slightly tougher to stop a throuple from tying the knot henceforth than it has
been. Incest, though, has always been and will
continue to be distinguishable not just on religious
grounds but on “health and welfare” grounds [1]. Everyone who has taken freshman genetics understands the risks of truly “unnatural” intercourse.
Neither the nation nor
the state can prefer one religion over another. Nevertheless, the Mormons got railroaded by Lincoln, look it up! He also suspended Habeus Corpus! Father of our nation, what?
For all of its avowed commitment to the separation of Church and State, our nation has always been a Christian one, "under [the Bible]" with liberty and justice for the domesticated.
Both the Latter Day Saints and Mohammed's Men believe in the sanctity of polygamy. But radical mainstream conservatives demonize those "others'" faith as un-American. [2]
Before today, any swinging couple with a good
lawyer could marry another down couple in all meaningful ways except assigning federal government benefits; it’s just that sometimes those
government benefits are the best (social
security, pensions, immigration). That is separate, but NOT equal. Unacceptable.
Why should the fed care if
various claimants split their hard-earned, well-deserved benefits as they
choose? What, they anticipate being rendered incompetent by the slightly more complicated paperwork?
Although a man can have a sexual
relationship with a broomhandle or a collie, this can’t be the only reason we’re granting people
marriage licenses. Neither can
procreative ability be. Thus, a grandmother can legally marry a man young enough to
be her grandson in every state today (without
being required to submit proof of her fertility). On a completely related note: one of the best reasons to let gays wed is that
they’re dying to adopt needy kids into often prosperous, surely stable loving homes- do you dare to contest homosexual people’s ability to epitomize family values?
That is to say, Don’t you know
it’s better for kids to have mas responsible, committed, loving, concerned, invested adults around than menos?
Indeed, I say,
Why not consensual polygamy?
Where're the Lesbians 4 Libertarians t-shirts! Homos, why don't you heart sluts! (C’mon: polys need your support, you’re a dominant
democgraphic now, after such a long brutal epic struggle to victory! Way to go, congrats on all
your success! Won’t you be empathetic,
in turn? Don’t you remember how it was? Help your fellow outsasts. Or wouldn't that be "just"?)
At least co-habitation is no longer prohibited in Utah - thanks Kody Brown. Many ancient and modern societies both abroad
and at home actually encourage it.
God forbid we respectfully ponder our forebears’ conclusions; just because they were wrong about a few things don't mean they had pittance IQs.
Big family=successful model. Tried and true. Tell me I'm wrong.
Law of contracts dictates parties
should have the freedom to promise what they like, so long as they possess the
capacity to give informed consent and it’s not otherwise illegal.
Marriage is a contract; it should be governed by contract law (no coercion, unconscionability, impossibility, etc.), not majority values - that's tyranny, man!
Marriage is a contract; it should be governed by contract law (no coercion, unconscionability, impossibility, etc.), not majority values - that's tyranny, man!
And yet,
Plural marriage will remain illegal
for at least another generation (I predict).
Eventually, though, tribe mating will rear its chillaxed head, because so many "normies" are doing it.
Eventually, though, tribe mating will rear its chillaxed head, because so many "normies" are doing it.
By 2099 each man woman and child
will be required to work 5 hours per month minimum, nobody more than 10/week
max; all arbitrary boundaries will be erased like an etch-a-sketch.
[1] States' police powers allow them to pass laws for benefit of their citizens, interestingly, the U.S. Congress does not have any police powers, but not to worry; it has apparently convinced the Court that the Commerce Clause is basically unlimited, so it now feels it has carte blanche to legislate however it wishes. Federalists rightly argue that the founding fathers intended the powers of the federal government to be limited. To be fair, however, they never could have conceived of the modern United States, with its 300 million citizens. The game has changed since then, fundamentally.
[2] In Reynolds v. United States, 98
U.S. 145,162 (1878), the Court opined that polygamy was "Non-Christian", and
"more appropriate for Asians and Africans" than for Americans, and that, like human sacrifice, polygamy was not a
legitimate spiritual practice which should trigger First Amendment
protection. Embarrassingly, this case remains good precedent
today. See, e.g, State of Utah v. Green, 2004 UT 76.
(emphasis added)
Thursday, May 21, 2015
Teachers should have to pass standardized tests themselves
Teachers who demonstrate mastery of their subjects should be compensated like professionals.
Talent must be wooed, especially to places like White Center, WA. Ideally, all teachers statewide should be excellent. Their teaching credentials say they are highly qualified, why not sit them down with a scantron and see how they stack up, then compensate them according to their demonstrated proficiencies? (At least partially,that is - the calculus should account too for subjective measures like instructional fluency, adaptability, ability to establish rapport and to motivate, cultural competency, and tenure should also be factored in.)
Teachers should be respected instead of sniffed at as underachieving presumptive pederasts (if one can't do, teach, many say; why else would one with other options choose such a poorly paid position?).
We should thank teachers every time we encounter them for their sacrifice, like we do soldiers.
Unfortunately, even for those who derive significant satisfaction simply from seeing the lightbulb pop on, the sacrifice is often too much. The bureaucracy which keeps educators-by-calling from ever earning a decent wage, yet pays dinosaurs who ignore the individual requirements of their charges and deliver the same material year after year passionlessly by rote (Buhler... Buhler...?) far more than they're worth, is enough to discourage most would-be-careerists.
Pay young (especially minority) rock star teachers who are willing to live and work in the neediest neighborhoods the six figures they're worth! Replace all mailers-in whose professional skills are are covered in moss! Or else let the whole system go private-charter.
Let the schools themselves compete, like businesses.
Forget the smaller class size argument (result: more mediocre-at-best mentors - albeit a perfect union outcome [unions are, of course, dominated by greyhairs - no wonder so many talented energetic young instructors wash out]) because one excellent mentor can enlighten 200 kids at a time. Especially in this digital age.
PAY GOOD TEACHERS GOOD!
Unions are anti-progressive; they incentivise doing the bare minimum not to get fired.
Sorry if you're a teacher and got offended by this rant; if it makes any difference, if you're decent at your job I'm not dissing you I'm praising you, indeed I'm in awe.
Talent must be wooed, especially to places like White Center, WA. Ideally, all teachers statewide should be excellent. Their teaching credentials say they are highly qualified, why not sit them down with a scantron and see how they stack up, then compensate them according to their demonstrated proficiencies? (At least partially,that is - the calculus should account too for subjective measures like instructional fluency, adaptability, ability to establish rapport and to motivate, cultural competency, and tenure should also be factored in.)
Teachers should be respected instead of sniffed at as underachieving presumptive pederasts (if one can't do, teach, many say; why else would one with other options choose such a poorly paid position?).
We should thank teachers every time we encounter them for their sacrifice, like we do soldiers.
Unfortunately, even for those who derive significant satisfaction simply from seeing the lightbulb pop on, the sacrifice is often too much. The bureaucracy which keeps educators-by-calling from ever earning a decent wage, yet pays dinosaurs who ignore the individual requirements of their charges and deliver the same material year after year passionlessly by rote (Buhler... Buhler...?) far more than they're worth, is enough to discourage most would-be-careerists.
Pay young (especially minority) rock star teachers who are willing to live and work in the neediest neighborhoods the six figures they're worth! Replace all mailers-in whose professional skills are are covered in moss! Or else let the whole system go private-charter.
Let the schools themselves compete, like businesses.
Forget the smaller class size argument (result: more mediocre-at-best mentors - albeit a perfect union outcome [unions are, of course, dominated by greyhairs - no wonder so many talented energetic young instructors wash out]) because one excellent mentor can enlighten 200 kids at a time. Especially in this digital age.
PAY GOOD TEACHERS GOOD!
Unions are anti-progressive; they incentivise doing the bare minimum not to get fired.
Sorry if you're a teacher and got offended by this rant; if it makes any difference, if you're decent at your job I'm not dissing you I'm praising you, indeed I'm in awe.
Grammar police: "Literally"
Will EVERYONE PLEASE stop using the word literally like literally every sentence?
Especially cause y’all be using it so blatantly incorrectly. Also superfluously – and that too is quite literally annoying. ("Quite" literally - really? As if there is another valid kind?)
One properly uses the term literally only whilst contradicting an idiom. Such as: that pool is cool, literally (I don't mean neat-o, I mean temperature-wise), or gay bars are gay places, literally (i.e. they're happy and full of pep).
If you insist on continuing to use such a so-2014 term, please at least amend it to "like literally". As annoyingly valley girl as that turn of phrase is, at least it approximates accurate.
One properly uses the term literally only whilst contradicting an idiom. Such as: that pool is cool, literally (I don't mean neat-o, I mean temperature-wise), or gay bars are gay places, literally (i.e. they're happy and full of pep).
If you insist on continuing to use such a so-2014 term, please at least amend it to "like literally". As annoyingly valley girl as that turn of phrase is, at least it approximates accurate.
Thank you.
Friday, November 28, 2014
Which is the All-‘Mrrcan-er holiday, Black Friday or Thanksgiving?
Thanksgiving should be a two day holiday. Black Friday
should not exist cause it’s disgusting.
Binge-buying is the opposite of Thanksgiving; indeed it is antithetical to the whole idea of Thanksgiving. That Black Friday is what it is when it is makes us hypocrites.
As my immigrant wife says:
the United States would be a much better country if Thanksgiving were two days long. The idea is
that Thanksgiving should be the biggest, most important holiday we have. We should
really focus on giving thanks.
Thanksgiving is a uniquely ‘Mrrcan
holiday. Therefore it should be our greatest. Right? Most people make it a four day holiday already - except for retailers of course.
Due to a certain festering canker of a trend.
Has Black Friday become the quintessential 'Mrrcan expression?
Which better epitomizes our culture, Thanksgiving or Black Friday?
Is what it means to be ‘Mrrcan: spend spend spend? Sure. Course it is. Feed like a pig watching football all day watching millions of ads then go out the
next day and buy a bunch of crap you want don't need- is that what it means to give thanks?
Once upon a time the final Thursday in November was designated to be a day of appreciation for the indigenous of this land. And we should be thanking them - for saving our ass. Also
for the land I suppose, though we fought them fair and square for that. Except
for the smallpox, etc. Let's just not think about that.
Americans spent $9.1 billion dollars "saving money" on "deals" this Friday- in addition to $3.2 billion on Thursday itself!
Thanksgiving should be about going out and buying anyone
who has any indigenous blood at all a beer rather than a smorgasbord of self-gratification. The least we can do as wannabe mindful citizens is to boycott Black Friday; c’mon, man. Thanksgiving should be
the greatest of all ‘Mrrcan holidays, y'all, a break
from our all-consuming materialism!
Thursday, September 25, 2014
Holder resigns! What this means for medical and recreational marijuana.
The next Attorney General of the United States will be in charge of enforcing all federal laws, including Nixon's Controlled Substances Act, which lists cannabis as a schedule 1 hallucinogen.
Holder has followed Obama's lead; he has been permissive of medical and recreational shops selling buds in the open. But will the next guy be? What we need is an act of Congress (or the Court), amending the anachronistic controlling legislation. Until then-
The next guy may be a Mormon, or even worse, a Republican. It's a good job Holder's resigning now, to give his boss time to hire and indoctrinate his replacement.
Regardless, one thing the new AG can't do is conscript local or state law enforcement officers to enforce his objectives. And the crux of any law is the enforcement of it. Short of expanding the DEA until it's larger than the military (or deputizing soldiers to make arrests), city governments will dictate policy - under the command and control of the people.
Blaze on.
Holder has followed Obama's lead; he has been permissive of medical and recreational shops selling buds in the open. But will the next guy be? What we need is an act of Congress (or the Court), amending the anachronistic controlling legislation. Until then-
The next guy may be a Mormon, or even worse, a Republican. It's a good job Holder's resigning now, to give his boss time to hire and indoctrinate his replacement.
Regardless, one thing the new AG can't do is conscript local or state law enforcement officers to enforce his objectives. And the crux of any law is the enforcement of it. Short of expanding the DEA until it's larger than the military (or deputizing soldiers to make arrests), city governments will dictate policy - under the command and control of the people.
Blaze on.
Sunday, April 20, 2014
On Being a Pot-Smoking American Hindu
No, I haven’t memorized the Vedas or the
Bhagavad-Gita. I like several of the
stories contained in those entertaining texts, though—the Greeks spun pretty
good yarns too. But the fact that I don’t
worship each holy-writ word of them like radical fundamentalists pedestal-place
the Bible doesn’t make me not a practicing Hindu.
Indeed, Hinduism only became a text-based
religion once the Brits took over. Hindus never considered themselves a "group" until they were forced by political
reasons (exacerbated by the imposition of their colonizers’ parliamentary
system) to other Muslims.
Hinduism pre-dates
books. It was only the Brahmins who could
read throughout most of history after all.
(Just as Catholic priests had a monopoly on the interpretation of the Word until Martin Luther recognized: one requires no conduit to God.)
The reason that there
are 30,000,000 Hindu deities is that each individual spiritual practice
developed independently. Whatever made sense
to thee was valid. This truth is what resonates with me.
I learned while living
in India that the purpose of the Hindu “religion” is to get in touch with
innergod i. There exists no strict doctrine—
Hinduism mandates no proscriptions, reeks not of blind faith. Hinduism is, quite simply, pure self-seeking, utilizing timeless techniques.
Hinduism is natural mysticism (rather than a
carrot-and-stick social control mechanism) in all of its incarnations—and it is
much aided by cannabis sativa.
Marijuana is stress-relieving and peace-inducing. It is also a mind focuser, and a spiritual
aid. Meditation is an invaluable ritual, found in many faiths (chanting the Rosary produces quite the same effect - albeit muted - as does singing Hare Krishna) and ingesting THC incontrovertibly facilitates “zoning in”. Shaivites[1]
have known as much for dozens of centuries.
Music is important to
my spiritual practice. The sympathetic
vibrating of the understrings of the sitar explains Aum to me, if i focus. Being high helps me to
hear it.
Many scholars opine that Jesus may have journeyed to India. If he did, he probably ingested hashish with holy ascetics, and wrapped his mind around thier concept of enlightenment. Then he returned, enlightened, and devoted himself to uplifting others, exactly as a bodhisattva would.
Easter falls on 4-20
this year. Coincidence?
Q: WWJD?
A: Inhale.
A: Inhale.
All I know is: the more
I booze drink, the less I practice my faith.
Whereas, the more I engage in augmented sadhana[2],
the more I calm and center myself, and become able to critically re-evaluate paradigms.
On this doubly holy day I humbly suggest: marijuana can and should be used as a sacrament.
Labels:
420,
cannabis sativa,
Easter,
Hinduism,
meditation,
Shaivism
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)