The Only Answer to Aggression is More Aggression

My driveway exits onto a blind hill to my right.  The result of this situation is that occasionally people whom I can’t see ahead of time happen to come over the hill as I’m pulling out.  Since the entire road is residential and my house is visible before cresting said hill, this is not a problem 90% of the time.

Once in a while, some jack ass who likes to do 10 or 20 above the limit likes to get his panties in a bunch and ride me real hard as if the following were true:

1. He has a right to speed wildly on a road on which children live;
2. I don’t have a right to exit my own driveway;
3. He has a right to act like a baby when I mildly inconvenience him like every other driver does to everyone all the time, because it’s part of driving.

Don’t get me wrong.  I’m not guilt-free when it comes to aggressive driving.  However, I draw a line at flipping the bird at someone for performing an unavoidable routine driving maneuver which causes me to decelerate for 2 seconds.

This morning I was on my way to the gym at around 6:10, a busy time on this street since it connects some out of staters to the Maryland transit line.  Some jackass in a black F-150 decides that I cut him off.  Of course, I know thisroad and I know the limit on this road.  I know that it takes me about 4 or 5 seconds to pull out, put the car in gear, and get up to drive speed, and I know it takes about 3 to get from that hill to where I would be.  So unless you’re speeding pretty hard, you’d barely notice.

Okay, whatever, he comes real close to – but does not kiss - my bumper.  Great.  I glance in my rear view mirror.  This cock sucker has his middle finger out. 

Oh really?

Well.

I’m pretty sure this is the last time he’ll do that for a while.

I immediately slammed on my breaks and put my car in park.  I proceeded to exit my vehicle and start walking towards his.

One guess as to how tough Mr. Toughguy with the Middle Finger was when someone like me not only called him out on his asshole behavior, but replied and confronted him.

No, he didn’t get out of his pickup truck so we could throw down in the middle of the street.  I wish.

Instead, Behind-the-Wheel-Toughguy puts his car in reverse and starts driving backward.

What a pussy.

I decided to scare him a little more and open my trunk, as if I had a gun.  He continued to backup until he was 30 or 40 feet away from me.  By this time a second car was stopped behind him, so out of courtesy to the innocent bystander, I got back in my car and drove to the gym.  Before so doing, I looked straight at his ugly face, shot him a look of utter disgust, shook my head, and did one of those “you’re a pussy” hand dismissals.

I ran a hard, fast workout that morning.  Nothing pumps you up for the gym like confrontation.

I wish I could say I’m surprised but I’m not.  There are so many dynamics to this story that I could focus on.

But I want to focus on another dynamic: chiefly, what is going on through the mind of many of my readers right now (e.g., Tim Weaver).

Some of you may think that I acted inappropriately.  I want you to think about that for a minute.

You might be asking yourselves questions like, “would he really be willing to drag that man out of his car and beat him to hospitalization because he gave him the bird?  Is that really a rational response?”  The answer is yes, I would have opened his car door if it were unlocked (and he hadn’t retreated like a girly-man) and slugged him in the face.  I would have been charged with misdemeanor assault and probably be sentenced to anger management classes and probation, and it would have been worth it.

I’ve been flipped the bird plenty of times on the road, and never do I feel the need to stop my car and beat the other driver except in this particular situation.  I know that I don’t own the road in front of my house.  But when someone is speeding down my road and decides to come very close to rear-ending me, I become provoked in a way that regular anger is insufficient to describe.  It’s almost like this douche invaded my home and assaulted me.  I don’t worry about getting rear-ended – even at high speeds – because my car needs a new bumper and I’d love to let some jerk pay for it.  However, I do worry about my wife, and in the next few years my children, pulling out of my driveway with guys like this one speeding as they please.  These people also litter in my driveway routinely.

I am positive that this asshole who put his car in reverse and drove away with his tail between his legs will think twice about driving aggressively in front of my house, and hopefully in general.  And why?  Because I showed him that there are consequences to aggression, even if the vast majority of our culture is unwilling to apply any.  My answer to aggressive behavior is to respond so inordinately more so aggressively that any instigator of aggression against me or my family will think twice before instigating again.  If someone threw a spit ball at me, I’d nuke them from orbit.

You may think it’s inappropriate or even barbaric.  But I’ll you what else it is: effective.

It’s a real shame that two generations of men in this country have been so thoroughly brainwashed into thinking that the best response to aggressive behavior is the female approach of “talking it out” or responding passively-aggressively, or, in this man’s case, simply retreating because responding is too hard.  It’s even more of a shame that these half-men who repeat the doctrine rank-and-file about “inappropriate behavior” and “anger control” and all the other canned reactions to a display of force by a man will never in their lives feel the feelings that stir inside you when you’re ready to go to blows with your enemy.

When I stopped the car to beat that man’s face, I wasn’t even thinking.  Not really, anyway.  Sure.  I braked.  Not hard enough to deprive him of enough time to stop before hitting me.  I put the car in park and unbuckled my seat.  But I wasn’t thinking, “oh gee, I wonder if this is really appropriate.”  I simply did it.  That man fucked with my home and acted in a way that could endanger me or my family and had the nerve to get angry at me as if it were my fault?  Consequences mode off.  Face beat mode on.

I often wonder how many millions and billions of creatures died because they didn’t respond with their instincts.  They didn’t use the programming that I have inherited that inspires me to defend myself and my territory from threats.  Instead, they decided it would be better to talk it out or to run away and died because of it.  In other words, the insticts that drove me to respond to aggression with more aggression were a long time in the making and extremely hard earned.  The modern American male spits on that sacrifice because it’s better to act like a pussy than risk coming off like a man.

I have been accused of many things in my time, and I will be accused of many more.  But one thing I will never be legitimately accused of being is a pussy.  The same cannot be said for Mr. Tough Guy in his F-150 who couldn’t back his truck up fast enough.  The same cannot be said for any man who reads this entry and thinks that my response was the wrong one.  If you fall into that category, let me give you some advice, and I really mean this: find your balls, reattach them, and start using them.  You will thank me later.

Everybody’s saying it

There’s something intrinsically satisfying when a nationally well-known political commentator says exactly the same thing you said a few months after you said it.

California today believes in Big Government, open borders, diversity, multiculturalism and the politics of compassion.  But what liberalism has wrought in California, its native-born are fleeing.  Still, where California is at, America is headed.

Californians who are running away from the communities and towns in which they were raised have Arizona, Idaho, Colorado, Utah, and Nevada to head to. But when all of America arrives at where California is at today, where do all the Americans run to?

But maybe not when it’s Pat Buchanan…

Taurus555: You still don’t get it

One of my earlier blog posts was this monster.  Did you know that at least one girl out there is sexually turned on by my hate speech?  I bet there are others.

I’ve been casually watching Taurus555′s profile over the years to see if he finally gets it.  Two years later, the answer is no: he still doesn’t get it.

It’s time for round 2.  Please keep your hands and feet inside the coaster at all times.

So, Taurus, you’re energetic, random, and happy, huh?  If you’re so happy, why do you need a woman?  If you’re so energetic, why are you so fat?  We can do without random since it doesn’t mean anything.  It’s a shame OKC won’t let you insert a google ad there, but at least he could have written “this space for rent.”  At least that would have been actually random and mildly amusing.

“I am single, 26, with my own house, car, and a respectable job in the IT industry.”

While this is a marked improvement over his previous opener, it still fails to impress.  In other words: I define myself as a herb beta-male provider.  Even if he does manage to snag a woman with a line like that, what kind of woman will he snag?  A woman who is chiefly interested in those three things, all of which are simply material goods that virtually everyone his age should have, except maybe the house.  But I bet it’s a town house.

The first line of an online profile is like the opener in a real life situation.  Can you picture yourself approaching a girl in a park, or a library, or a bar, and saying, “Hi, I’m 26, single, I have a house, a car, and a job”?  No, of course you can’t.  If you wouldn’t say it in real life, you shouldn’t say it in an online profile.  Not in the very first line.

A much better approach to getting these facts about you across is to weave them into your profile with vague allusions.  This will put the idea that you might be 26, you might have a car, you might have a house and you might have a job.  What does this do?  It provides the opportunity for the girl to ask you questions.  Intrigue is the kindling for a romance.  You can’t start a fire with a match and a log.

“When I go home after work, even though I’ve been staring at computer screens all day, I still like to come home and bust some zombie heads, or rock out in rock band, or race the world in Burnout.”

Aside from the obvious lack of attention to detail here (capitalizing one game name but not the other), the problem with this is that Taurus is still trying to promote himself by talking about video games.  This didn’t pass at age 24 and it doesn’t pass at age 26.  In fact, he’s stepped it up a notch and made his profile even more video-game centric, which indicates to me that at this point in his life – a very early point, I might add – he has settled into a world revolving around video games and is now only interested in a woman who fits into that world – opposed, of course, to indicating a willingness for himself to fit himself into a new world that she and he share based on common ground.

He goes on.  “I want someone who will offer at least half-way decent competition at what I play, I won’t get mad if I lose, I will show you how to play if you want to learn, and I won’t let you win once you show that you know what you’re doing (or upon request ).”

You’ve got to be kidding me.  Seriously?  Who would write that?

Oh, I know.  A 26 year-old virgin.

In the preceding paragraph he describes his tastes as eclectic.  Bad word choice.  For someone who goes on to tout his expansive vocabularly, eclectic means “wildly varied.”  It implies multiplicity.  A man who describes his tastes as “eclectic” would probably do so as a keyword for “likes to sleep around.”

What he meant to say is eccentric, unique, esoteric, unusual, arcane, or even just “specific.”

I guess beggars can be choosers.

But seriously, this spiel about video games is one of the most effective pussy deflectors I’ve seen in a long time.  It trumps even his creepy mug-shot style front-and-side shots taken 4 days after a shave and his 5’7″/220 breakdown (which he admits online).

He wants.  What he plays.  He won’t get mad.  He’ll teach you.  He’ll let you win.  At your request.

These phrases are like giant signal flares that this guy’s trouble.  I could come up with a few ways to improve this paragraph (less “I”, more “we”), but he’d be better off just deleting it entirely.

GIRLS DON’T WANT TO PLAY VIDEOGAMES WITH YOU.  The only girls who want to play video games with boys are south asians who already have tall, atheltic white boyfriends.  Almost every man in your age range plays video games and therefore girls who also play them are a hot commodity.

The condescension in this paragraph is also staggering.  Apparently, Taurus knows best.  He wants to be in a position where he is the one with the skills and the knowledge  that he will lovingly impart upon a doting female companion eager to bask in his genius.  This is another glaring sign that this man is a beta male.  Alpha males do not seek admiration from women, because it is assumed to be automatic and therefore worth nothing.  Alpha males seek to dominate other men.  Taurus has never been a leader of a male peer group, nor could he ever be, because he’s a beta.

“I’m funny enough to be told to do stand-up, but smart enough to recognize my brand of humor doesn’t work on stage.”

In other words, the person who told him to do stand up is not as smart as he is.  The person who told him this is a female, and probably a relative.  $10 says it was his mother.

“My interpersonal humor is like a gobstopper.  I’m sweet at first, but when you get to know me, I get sour with sarcasm.”

Translation: when I’m courting you, I will act like a total pushover, never daring to neg you in any way.  Once I am settled into the relationship, I will mock you ruthlessly and “sarcastically” neg you constantly because I’m a really funny guy.  I use this method because I am too afraid to be my true self “at first” because I am smart enough to realize “sour sarcasm” is a put off at every stage in a relationship.  I also lack confidence, fearing that dare I judge a women “at first”, she will judge me back.  Only after I receive tacit validation from 2nd base will my true, dark colors bleed through.

“My music tastes.. blah blah … I can get really into the stuff that I like including singing along and thrashing (I won’t call it dancing lol).  Some women find this to be disturbing, but really, it’s just me enjoying myself.”

He’s 26, presumably courting women around his age, and he is talking about music outside of a canned question-and-answer section (such as “my favorite books, movies, music, and food” only a page and half down)?  Strike one.  He won’t call it dancing because he can’t dance, and even if he could, his ogrish form flailing about a confined space would suck the oxygen out of any room.   Strike two.  Some women find his capacity to make a total fool out of himself in response to stimuli as basic as hearing a song he likes disturbing (i.e., embarassing), but he ignores their feelings so that he can enjoy himself.  Presumably, the same rule would apply when his future date is disturbed by Taurus shitting on her chest, but really, that’s just him enjoying himself.  Strike three.  He’s out.

“I also enjoy writing.”

He’s still at it.  Does he not realize that his profile is littered with grammatical mistakes and misspellings?

It gets worse:

“My expansive vocabularly frequently flustered my former beau, so if you can keep on the level with me verbally, that would be fantastic.”

What a jackass.  Here he is again condescending his ex (with whom he later mentions he is still friends).  The first rule of an online profile is to not talk about ex-anythings.

But look at that sentence.  He didn’t even manage to use “beau” correctly, because “beau” always refers to a man, in every context.

beau (boh) – noun

1. a frequent and attentive male companion
2. a male escort for a girl or woman
3. a dandy; fop.

It’s one thing to tout your “expansive” vocabulary, which is bad enough.  It’s quite another to prove that you don’t understand the meaning of the words in said vocabulary in the very same sentence.  Later on, he uses the word “ordinance” in such a way that it is obvious that he shift-F7′d that shit and looked it up in a thesauraus, but it doesn’t even make sense.  “… if you opt not to employ your own arsenal of multisyllabic ordinance“?  WTF does that mean?  Some synonyms of “ordinance” are decree, authorization, command, mandate, and order.  He should have said, “if you opt to withhold your own multisyllabic arsenal.”  Much cleaner sentence.  Maybe, as with “beau”, he just doesn’t know what the word means.

By the way, Taurus, your alliteration is not impressing anyone.

 ”I’m waiting for inspiration to come by and help me finish [my novella].  Will you bring such inspiration with you?”

Translation: will you please validate my crappy writing?  If you say it’s good, I will have the confidence to “pursue publishing [vainly, as in with lulu.com]“.  Otherwise, I’ll leave it under my bed and never think about it.

“Physically, I’m 5’7″, 220lbs.  I’m a chunky monkey, but I’d say I carry it pretty well.  I’ve often been told I’m ‘cute’ but aesthetics are always subjective.”

Was I right about his mom telling him he’s cute or what?  Taurus, you don’t carry it well.  Nobody carries 220 pounts on a 5’7″ frame well.

“Photos are misleading.”

Wait, you’re uglier in person?  I didn’t think it was possible.

Taurus, seriously bro, if you ever want a chance with women, you need to lose weight.  Unlike me, you are not blessed with striking, masculine features such as an imposing brow ridge and square, chiseled jawline.  Add about 75 pounds of extra fat into the mix and your face is about as round as a basketball.  You do not look manly at all.  Girls have round faces.  You have a round face.  The fact that you don’t shave does not change this.  The only way to change this is to lose about 75 pounds.  It’s not hard.

Who the hell uses the expression “chunky munkey”?  Is that a flavor of Ben and Jerry’s?

In all, Taurus’s “My self-summary” not only leads much to be desired, it actively damages his cause.  My recommendation: nuke from orbit and start again.

But there’s more.  Come, intrepid readers; let’s brave on.

What is Taurus555 doing with his life?  Apparently he works in a call center.  The phrase I used in 2007 when he touted himself as a DBA was “least common denominator” but I’m afraid I was wrong.  No, friends, the least common denominator of the IT world is what he is currently doing, which is fixing printers and pressing CTRL-ALT-DELETE when the boss’s secretary’s copy of Outlook freezes up for no apparent reason.  And he finds this rewarding and fun?  You’ve got to be kidding me.

There are two categories of jobs that are worth talking about on an online profile: status jobs and exotic jobs.  A status job is something like medicine or law.  An exotic job is something like secret agent or dolphin trainer.  Status jobs are rewarding.  Exotic jobs are fun.  Reinstalling Windows XP fifteen times a day is neither, and everybody - even girls who know nothing about IT – knows it.

Calling a shitty job like that “rewarding and fun” is a code for declaring that you’ve settled into a low-paying, dead-end job.  You’ve convinced yourself that you like it even though you hate it so that you won’t be motivated to go make more out of yourself.  Good work.

As if the position wasn’t bad enough, he works for the State Department.  That means he’s a civil servant.  If he isn’t lazy and unmotivated today, after a few years of no-consequences budget-driven (as opposed to results-driven) employment, he will be.

“Keeping up my house, learning new things, and getting a real passion for music.”

Boring.  Boring.  Boring.

Is that really all you’re doing with your life?  Dang.  Sometimes I wish I were a girl so I could get a ticket to that boat ride.

What’s Taurus555 really good at?  I bet “writing online profiles” isn’t on that list.  Let’s see what is:

“Video games.”

Again.  Good lord man.  This arrested development is staggering.

“Nothing to brag about, but I will anyway.”

Good.  You recognize how completely immature and trite it is to brag about being good at video games, but that won’t stop you because it’s the only thing you’ve got going.  This would work for a prebuscent 11 year old boy, not a 26 year old boy.

“The exception here is sports games.”

Right.  Sports games would at least suggest some kind of stereotypical masculinity.  You know, right down the middle of that bell curve.  Most girls know that most guys like sports.  When a guy says he doesn’t like sports, a girl must ask why not.  Or not bother asking, because she knows that if he doesn’t like sports, she wonders what other typically masculine traits he lacks and decides it’s not worth finding out.

“Writing – it’s been a while since I’ve been creative, but when I am, I’m unstoppable!”

He used the same language, roughly, in 2007.  Since it’s 2009, “a while” must mean at least 2 years.  But who cares?  His very profile already proves that he isn’t good at writing and the fact that his two and only hobbies are apparently video games and music, neither of which smack of creativity.

What exactly does it mean to be creatively “unstoppable”?

As if any of this weren’t already condemning, he drops the atomic bomb (again).

“Magic Fingers – per my ex, with whom I’m still friends . Evidently they’re quite magical.”

Creeeeeeepy.  Nobody – especially girls you want to date – want to hear about how you got to 3rd base with your ex-girlfriend and her enormous impossible-to-miss manclit.

Aside from being perverted and gross, don’t you realize that at age 26 girls are not interested in getting fingered?  Are you still in 8th grade?  If you’re going to go this route, at least talk about your magic cock.  Oh, that’s right.  You’re a virgin.  Thankfully, you’ve publicly announced this a few pages down in case there was any doubt by this point in the profile.

“Cooking”.  Iron Chef Taurus555′s signature dishes include cheese steaks and spaghetti.  Are you serious?  My wife wouldn’t list cooking and she knows how to make flan.

The first thing people notice about Taurus555 is his crazy (maniacal, serial-killer-esque) laugh.  The second thing people notice is that he’s a fat ass.  Sorry, bud, but making a stupid, non-funny joke about how you enjoy your own cooking and that’s why you’re fat doesn’t change the message.  So the two things people notice about you is that you laugh like a freak and you’re fat.  No wonder the girls are lining up.  Who wouldn’t want to be seen in public with a lummox whose two most noticeable qualities are obesity and awkwardness?

Nobody really cares about his favorites.  If anyone is still actually reading this profile by this point, nothing in this list is surprising.

Two gems stand out in his “six things I could never do without” section -

“My family are the backbone of my life, the center upon whom I rely.”

You don’t rely on a center, Taurus.  Again with the bad writing.  Hint: you’re not good at writing.  Please remove any reference to being a good writer from your profile.

“Video games – as if that wasn’t painfully obvious by now.”

It is obvious. Painfully obvious.  And since you know it, why are you repeating it?

Taurus spends a lot of time thinking about what happens when an unstoppable force encounters an immovable object.  Oh how clever.  If this were original, that would be one thing.  But it isn’t.  This is a reference to World of Warcraft.  There’s a two handed mace called “The Unstoppable Force” and a shield called “The Immovable Object”, both acquired from the same source.  I can’t say for sure that World of Warcraft didn’t steal this pair of ideas from somewhere else (they themselves might be a reference), but given his pentient for video games, where do you think he got it?

Taurus555 works his shitty job 5 days a week and on Saturday too.  Great.  Ladies love unavailable men.  Actually, in Taurus’s case, the less of him she sees is the better.  Presuming that she exists, the debate on which should be academic by now.

Even though since 2007, Taurus has rewritten the majority of his profile, he still managed to leave the most egregious lines in it, for example:

“I’ve never had sex.  Nope, not once.  And if masturbation counted, we’d all be filthy sluts.”

GROSS.  You’re a 26 year-old virgin and you fap a lot.  Is this really how you think you will appeal to women?  Do you really think this sounds like something a girl would find attractive?  This is why you’re a virgin, Taurus.  This is why.

“Oddly enough, people don’t believe me on this.  I can’t imagine why I’d put something like that here if it WASN’T true…”

It’s not that “people” don’t believe that you’re a virgin – all they’d need to do is look at your picture and they’d know the odds – they don’t believe you’d state it on an online profile.  They can’t believe you’d admit to being a 26 year old virgin on the internet.

Beggers being choosers, also known as “you should message me if…”

Based on everything else I’ve seen of this disaster, if I were him, I’d write, “if you have a pulse and a vagina” or, “you’re as desperate as I am.”  I bet he’d get messages.  From war pigs, but he’d get messages.

But instead, Taurus wants a 21 to 31 year old woman (or older, anything wil do) and proportional. 

Wait, what?

You’re almost 100 pounds overweight, but you want a woman who’s proportional?  What a hypocritical douchebag.  Good luck with that one, pall.  You’re size 18 material, minimum.

No, I spoke too soon – Taurus recovers with, “you don’t have to be fit or thin – curves in the right places preferred”.  Okay dude, “proportional” means fit and thin.  Make up your mind!

“Race mostly doesn’t matter, but I’m not romantically interested in black women.”

Wow.  Just plain wow.  Look, Taurus, let me explain something to you.  Even if you’re a racist – and you’re looking for a racist woman – you can’t say something like that on the internet.  Our culture has decided that it is inappropriate to be discriminatory, even when it comes to personal romance.  Whether or not you agree with that cultural policy, or whether or not you have nothing against black women (except sleeping with them) is not the point.  The point is that you shouldn’t say something like that in a public place because it shows that you don’t understand this fact.  You don’t understand how to fit in with the crowd and tow the line even though you personally disagree with it.

You don’t want to date black women?  Fine!  Don’t respond to their messages!

Every woman, regardless of whether she feels the same way about black men or is herself a racist also, reads this line and sees it as a giant red flag.  If you’re willing to say that on the internet, it means you’re likely to also say other inappropriate, offensive, awkward things in mixed company.  It means you don’t understand proper decorum and the appropriate times to say what’s on your mind and to keep it to yourself.

Interesting enough, this disaster uses similar language to, like this profile, vainly attempt to hook women.  Let’s see.  Taurus555 and Chrischan …. they’re both the same age, they’re both fat, they’re both ugly, they’re both single, they’re both virgins, they both have a passion for video games, they both have a passion for music, they both fap a lot, they both claim to be “creative”… I wonder if they’re both also mildly retarded?  Is Taurus555 a high functioning autistic?  Or a closet gay?  I gotta say, the similiarities are as striking as the equal likelihood that neither one of them will find true love in 2009.  Or 2010.  Or 2011.  Or ever.

Taurus555, if you should ever stumble upon this post, I apologize in advance if your self esteem may have been lowered by my hateful vitriol.  In remediation, I am more than willing to help you write a new profile that is far less damning than the ones you’ve been putting on the public internet.  I can help you.  You may not believe me, but believe this: I am getting married on September 13th, 2009.  I am marrying the first and only girl I ever messaged on OK Cupid.

Weaver’s at it again

So Timmy is back at politics again after swearing it off.  I’m not surprised.  I myself vowed not talk about politics but I couldn’t resist, so I wouldn’t expect him to either.  It’s compelling.  When you feel strongly about something, you just have to write about it.  That’s why we blog.

I’m not going to comment extensively about Tim’s latest desperate longing for someone else to pick up his hospital tabs.  I’m only going to illustrate a few flaws in his thinking that allow him to be liberal.

Flaw the first: this poll.  Tim took it and ran with it, saying “Today in America 76 percent of us say that having a public health option is important to us.”  Notice the way this question was phrased.  How do you suppose the results would have been different if a direct question like, “do you support a single-payer public health option?” were asked?  Of course they would be quite different, which is why pollsters write oblique indirect questions to get the results they want, not the results that are relevant to the policy at hand.

Here’s a simple example which illustrates this point.  “Is money important to you?” I would suspect about the same split – 75/25 - would answer “yes” to this question.  But ask the question a different way, for example, “Do you think the government should give you a million dollars?”  I suspect the results would still be disheartening, but I would be surprised if more than 50% of Americans would answer yes to the latter question.

Another analagous question pair would be, “Do starving children upset you?” versus “Will you donate 10% of your pretax income to help starving children?”

This is a classic example of the problematic way the liberal mind works.  First, the liberal trusts the poll – any poll – if it aligns with what they want the results to be.  They determine what they want the results to be out of some emotional perogative or rote subconscious self gain.  If the poll doesn’t give them the results they want, they will either change the poll by asking indirect questions like this one, or find some flaw in the polling mechanic such as, “this doesn’t take into account people with only cellular telephones” or “you only called on Tuesday.” 

The next step in the liberal policy maker is to immediately call to fulfill whatever it is the poll claims the Americans want without bothering to think about how it will work (and be funded) nor any tangential collateral damage caused by satisfying the majority’s perogative, according to some random cherry picked poll.

While enacting the so-called majority’s whims, they stand up on soapboxes and talk about how the majority oppresses the minority and we need to do more for the minorities in this country (as long as the majority of poll respondents says we do).  Even Tim proves this hypocrisy by opening his blog entry about the cruel majority and then trumpeting the need for universal healthcare by virtue of the majority said so in a poll in the Washington Post.

By the way, it doesn’t matter that a very large majority of people in this country already have health insurance or consciously choose not to pay for it even though it is well within their means.  The majority apparently says the choice of a public plan is “important” so it’s time to get the ball rolling.  How someone can go from such a vague assertion as “it’s important” to managing a trillion dollars’ worth of one of the most important resources in this country is another entry unto itself.

Flaw the second: “Life has become too complicated for small government to be viable anymore.”

I agree with Tim in some respects.  But, in keeping with my stereotypical conservative beliefs, I believe the complication of the world is the recent advent of the fate of the entire globe resting upon the individuals who operate national governments.  “Life” is more complicated because if Kim Jong Il wakes up on the wrong side of the bed he might decide to nuke Seoul.  A large government with the means and will to prevent such actions from occuring necessarily bloats the size of the government.  When you serve as protector of the planet – as America does – size does matter.

But the idea that an individual’s life is too complicated for him to manage himself without the aid of a nanny state is outrageous.  Simply outrageous.  Are there really voters who think this way?  I guess there are.

Who do you think this nebulous nanny state is?  It is people.  People we elect, and the people they appoint.  Tim has not spent enough time in the company of civil servants to realize that people employed by the federal government – the people Tim entrusts to manage details of his life that he has presumed himself unfit to manage himself – are the lowest common denominator of job holders in this country.  It is a well known and accepted fact that if you can’t make it in private industry there’s always a desk in some federal or state agency waiting for you.  This is a direct consequence of the total lack of consequences in government agencies.  Government agencies do not produce a product that must be sold against competitors.  Government agencies spend their budgets and their budgets are renewed regardless of how much is done or isn’t done.  The only threat to the survival of a government agency is the election of enough republicans so they can turn off the tap to useless programs.  The fact that Tim does not understand this (or accept it as fact) is a direct result of his inexperience in the real world.  The truth about waste in government is a white elephant.

The only reason anyone could or would question this truth is because they are on the government payroll.  Even little kids understand not to bite the hand that feeds you.

But regardless of the waste in government, the real problem with a statement like Tim’s is that it is so childish.  Life is too complicated?  All I hear when I read that statement is “wahh, wahh, wahh.”  Does baby want his bottle, Timmy?  Is life too hard?  Evidently, it is.  You want and need people to take care of you.  Why should we let you vote, again?  What was the reason?  So you can vote people in to help you?

Give me a break Tim.  Life is not more complicated than it was in 1776.  In fact, I would argue that it is far less complicated.  In fact, it is so obviously less complicated that people need to invent drama to keep themselves entertained.  Don’t believe me?  Watch a reality television show.  I’d be willing to bet that in a world where people starved to death and died from common illnesses that we laugh about today and where one out of five women died giving birth, they wouldn’t just dislike the fake non-drama we call entertainment, it would probably anger them.

Thomas Jefferson wouldn’t support public health care because he, like most responsible people, understand that health care is a service that must be paid for, and it is no more the government’s job to finance one free service than any other.  Also, he wouldn’t really need to worry about it because he was wealthy.  I’m sure a liberal would cringe at the very thought that our founding fathers were the same type of aristocratic wealthy people they hate today, but that’s the truth.  Wealth has its priviliges, and while I may also be jealous of the wealthy, I don’t seek to rob them to provide myself with free material trappings, such as health care.

Flaw the third: “Intelligent people change their minds.”

Actually, Tim, intelligent people are right the first time.  They don’t need to change their minds because they weren’t wrong.

A statement like this falls under the general laissez-faire mindset that liberals adopt to excuse any and all of their own flaws.  If we all lived in a world where we don’t judge, the basement dwelling liberal who’s turning 24 this year and still lives with his parents and doesn’t have a job hasn’t failed, he’s just different.  If we all had license to change our minds all the time, we’d never have to own up to being wrong, would we?  When the readiness to change one’s mind as a virtue trumps the virtue of not making mistakes thus necessitating said changing of said mind, what we have is a disaster.

Flaw the fourth, but certainly not the last: “Big government is here to stay, folks.  Isn’t it time that it started serving the needs of the unrich?”

Yes, Tim, big government is here to stay, mostly because of programs, entirely devised and enacted by liberals, that offer entitlements that are entirely impossible to eradicate once created.  While I agree that even without those programs I would still use the term “big” to describe a government whose only excess was military in nature, let’s not forget the difference between “big” and “bigger.”

My government does serve my needs, Tim.  It gives me a safe, fair environment in which I can pursue my fortunes and become rich.  Maybe I will, maybe I won’t.  The playing field is level, the referees are (mostly) unbiased, I am not likely to be attacked by foreign invaders, and I don’t have to bribe my way through life.  I’d say I have it pretty darn good, especially compared to the condition of every other human ever born.

Wealth is out there for you to accumulate, Tim.  You just need to know where to look.  If you had more initiative to seek that wealth and less initiative to bitch and moan about how hard life is on the internet, you wouldn’t be advocating other people less motivated than you are to take your wealth to fund their emergency room visits.

But I guess that’s the difference between conservatives and liberals, isn’t it.

Liberals on Healthcare in One Fel Swoop

My idiot liberal cousin posted a link to the Bill Maher show which I usually avoid like the plague because he’s a contender in the race for smuggest media personality in circulation today, but as usual, I’m drawn to the fishbowl cuckoo’s nest of the liberal mind like a moth to a flame.

Somehow the debate moved from gay marriage (on which no opinions were offered) to univeral healthcare and they started talking about profiteering in health care.  One of the panelists made a misleading nonsequitor that I’d like to point out: “Healthcare is the only industry where quality hasn’t gone up and cost has gone down.”  Not only is that not true (costs generally do not come down in any industry unless qualify is sacrificed), there’s a very dangerous angle to healthcare that so many proponents of single payer/big brother healthcare are either oblivious to or willfully ignore: R&D costs.  The costs to find new medicines for age old illnesses is enormous, particularly because trying to test new medicine on human subjects carries an astronomical litigation risk (not to mention astronomical regulatory barriers).

If you’re a proponent of universal healthcare, I have a homework assignment for you.  I want you to do a comparsion between new drugs (i.e., cures) coming out of American companies financed by our current, evil for-profit healthcare industry versus new drugs coming out of every nation which has universal healthcare combined.

I’ll give you a hint: America produces almost all of it.  And why?  Because they have the money – and the incentive – to do so.

Take away a profit motive from the pharmaceutical industry and it disappears.  Say goodbye to all advances in medicine.  All.  With the exception of a few new surgical techniques that only slightly mitigate risk or reduce time on the operating table, the number of medical advances coming out of this country dwarves the rest of the world by such a large degree that it isn’t a stretch to say that America carries the advancement of medicine.

So the next time you bear witness to – or espouse yourself - the glory of a single payer system, unless you can explain how and why new drugs will continue to appear on the market, you need to weigh the overall good of finding new cures or applying existing ones more often, even to people who can’t pay.

But here’s the one fel swoop that explains the liberals’ love with universal healthcare.  To quote Bill Maher, “But this isn’t like any other industry [where you can profit off of goods sold].  This is people’s health!”

No, Bill.  It’s exactly like every other industry.  Watch me use your same reasoning to explain why everything should be government-provided to everyone, even the poor, unemployed, and lazy.

If you don’t breathe, you die.  Fortunately, air is free.

If you don’t drink, you die.  Fortunately, water is essentially free – we have public restrooms, water fountains, etc. all over the place.

If you don’t eat, you die.  Therefore, food should be provided to everyone free of charge.  (Guess what, we already have this one covered via food stamps and homeless shelters.  Gosh, we’re swell).

If you don’t heat your house in the winter, you die.  Therefore, all utilities should be provided to everyone free of charge.

If you don’t have a car, you can’t get to work.  Then you can’t afford all of the things that aren’t free yet, so therefore ,you die.  Cars and gas should be provided to all Americans free of charge.

This is people’s health we’re talking about!

Ultimately, all of the things I’m talking about – food, shelter, even water, and medicine have to be provided by people and those people have to be paid for their time, effort, and expertise.  When you take away these peoples’ chances or rights to profit from their services, what drives their incentive to continue to deliver these services?  The goodness of their hearts?  Give me a break.  Are you really that naive?  Are you really that idealistic that you think people are going to tirelessly work to provide you with goods and services and get nothing (or less than they could otherwise get doing something else) in return?  99.9% of the people who would say yes to this question have never spent a minute of time in their lives doing volunteer work, but in their worldview, other people will even if they won’t.  Fools.

Human nature is immutable and more powerful than your ideas.  Don’t make a plan based on how humans should function – make a plan based on how they do function.  It’s a waste of energy to think or expect people to change.  They won’t.  We have to work with what we have – and what we have are inherently selfish, inherently lazy people who nearly always do what’s in their own best interests with total disregard or indifference to the interests of everyone around them.  The best way to get people to get off their asses and do things – like work a society – is to give them some incentive.  Make it their interest to do something and they’ll do it.  Give them a speech about helping everyone and working together and they’ll ignore you and go back to watching satellite TV, drinking beer, and procreating new wards of the state.

Your idealism doesn’t do you or us any good.  For the love of god, come back down to earth.

Natural Economics

A lot of people dismiss World of Warcraft as a mindless waste of time hobby.  For some, it certainly is.  But for most, I would claim, World of Warcraft can be an incredible learning experience.  Some of the lessons it teaches you include understanding of economics, time management, wealth planning, diplomacy, people skills, probability and statistics, resource management, and system planning.

I know, I know.  Here he goes again.  Bear with me.  Today I’d like to share with you some observations about the nature of economics based on my observations of the natural economies of World of Warcraft.

First, for those of you who don’t play, a basic understanding of the game mechanics are required.

The main goal of the game is essentially to defeat raid bosses.  A raid boss is a powerful creature that requires a large number of players to defeat – some require 10, some 25 (and in the past, 40).  Raid bosses drop powerful weapons and armor that you can equip to make your character stronger.  In reality, most players view the end goal of the game to make their characters as powerful as possible – the raid bosses are not ends themselves, but rather simply means to an end – the boss must die before its loot can be taken.  Since the game continually expands upward, every few months the “best” in the game suddenly becomes rather average – new raid bosses are added into the game with even more powerful loot.  This keeps the subscribers subscribed, and the cash rolling in.

So, even though having the best loot is a fleeting moment in time with a built-in expiration date, it doesn’t matter – people wish to achieve it anyway.  I suppose a real life corrolary would be to say: suppose you knew for a fact that 10 years from now, $1M would be worth only $10k.  Would you still try to earn $1M today and enjoy that money even knowing it would be worthless in the future?  The answer most people would probably give is yes, because even though the money will be worthless one day, today it isn’t.

Of course, there’s a side economy to the game as well – items are the major goal, but there are other items as well, for example, materials to consume to increase your skill at trade professions (which can be used to create items), small companion pets that follow your character around (for looks only – they don’t aid you in any way), impressive mounts like mammoths and dragons, etc.  All of these are generally financed with the game’s currency, gold coins.  Gold coins are found on the bodies of most monsters, in either pure form or via some trash items that can be sold to non-player characters to generate gold.  Gold can be earned without the assistance of a group, so the only limiting factor is time.  So-called “gold-farming” is an industry in China, where people play the game for hours at a time earning gold to sell for real money, mostly to US players.

The mechanics of the game prevent the best items from being bought and sold on the side economy.  When you defeat a powerful 25-man raid boss, the loot he drops is called “bind on pickup” - once you acquire the item, you cannot trade it to other players, which means you can’t sell it.  Therefore, gold cannot be substituted for raiding.  Lastly, each 25-man boss only drops between 3 and 5 items, which means 20 to 22 of the players who helped kill the boss will not get loot each time a boss dies.  Most dungeons have enough bosses for there to be approximately 40-50 items per week, but not every player can use every item.  Warriors cannot use wands, for example, and priests cannot wear plate armor.

Okay.  That’s enough of a backdrop.  Let’s get down to how economics works when left to its own devices.

The major marketplace in World of Warcraft is an auction house.  Technically, this implies some kind of bidding, and while bidding does occur, the auction house offers a “buyout” option similar to eBay – if you want the item immediately, you can pay a preset price and win the auction instantly.  This option is almost always used, because unlike a real auction, items on the WoW auction house last for days at a time.  You can place a bid and then be outbid by someone awake at 4am when the auction is set to expire at 5am.  If you are asleep and offline, you lose.  Sometimes people try to emulate a real auction environment by listing their item in an open trade chat and accepting running offers, but this is rare.  Most people simply set a reasonable buyout price and most people pay a reasonable buyout price, especially on consumable items like potions that are needed at the moment and cannot be delayed.  (Potions assist players when killing raid bosses, so when you’re stocking up before a raid, you don’t have 24 hours to wait to win the auction).  Another mechanism used to sell items instead of auctioning them is to set the minimum price to be equal or only very slightly less than the buyout price – in other words, it would be ridiculously stupid to bid higher than the buyout price, so nobody ever will, and since the minimum is the buyout price, the seller is essentially saying: this price, or nothing.

Just as in the real world, in the World of Warcraft, time is money.  Prices on goods reflect the time it takes to acquire the good.  Rare goods that have small chances of dropping from monsters go for particularly high prices.  There is even an import/export quality to the WoW economy, since one half of the players (the Alliance) cannot trade directly or communicate with the other half (the Horde).  The only way to broker goods between them is to use a neutral auction house that takes a cut of the sale price for the service, so Alliance-only items sell for a premium on the Horde auction house and vice-versa since they require what boils down to essentially a tariff on the goods and are much more difficult to arrange since Horde and Alliance cannot communicate with each other in-game, and you are not allowed to arrange transactions strictly between your own characters, because even if you create an Alliance character and a Horde character, your Alliance character will not be allowed to bid on your Horde character’s auctions and vice versa.

Now this is where it gets interesting.  Because World of Warcraft is a totally deregulated market, you might ask how it is that it functions.  The answer is that in some ways, it doesn’t.  In the real world, so-called price-fixing is wildly illegal.  But in the World of Warcraft, it is a very common mechanism used to make money.  The scheme works like this.

You pick a target item – generally something that is in high demand and is bought peridoically, such as raid potions (called flasks) – and find every current auction on the house.  Let’s suppose they vary in price between 30 and 50 gold each.  Let’s say about 75% of the flasks are going for around 30 and only 25% are going for around 50.  You buy every flask on the auction house and immediately resell them all for 40g a piece.  Since you purchased the entire market, you have no competitors, so players are stuck either paying an extra 10g per flask when the market rate is usually about 30 a piece, or going without.  When his raid leader demands that he bring flasks to the raid, he buys the flasks anyway or he doesn’t get invited to the raid.  You make your money.

This is a very typical activity and is usually obvious (the same player is selling the entire market of a particular good).  How does the market still function without this spiraling out of control?

The answer is that it does only for a few reasons that differ from the real world.  First, flasks are not a matter of life and death.  You will not starve to death if you cannot afford to pay an artificially inflated market price for flasks.  Second, there is, in theory, an infinite supply of flasks.  They can always be renewed, which means eventually the price fixing is unsustainable.  If the price fixer gets too greedy and starts demanding prices higher than people are willing to pay, someone will undercut him – it’s an inevitability.  A particularly vigilant price fixer will watch the auction house for hours and immediately buy any auction that undercuts him and resell at his target price, but again, this is unsustainable indefinitely, because people have to sleep, and auction house watching is boring.  Also, since goods can be traded outside of the auction house, an undercutter needs only send out an ad on the trade chat channel – which most of the server listens to – and he’ll get business.

These simple observations about the nature of price fixing in an unregulated market say everything that needs to say about market regulation.  Goods that sustain people and are therefore inevitable expenses must have some regulation attached or a price fixer can cause immense harm by depriving the majority of the market the ability to pay for goods they cannot live without.  This exact situation was the cause of the oil price panic last summer, when the price of oil suddenly doubled in a short time – an event orchestrated by the price fixing cartel of crooks known as Opec.  Since oil is not freely available to everyone who has the time and energy to drill it up themselves (as everything in World of Warcraft is), the price fixers were able to get away with it until the U.S. surely made a back alley deal with the Saudis to quit Opec so they could keep feeding us oil at $50 a barrel instead of $120.

Of course, you could argue that it wasn’t Opec but instead it was oil speculators that drove the market artificially high – one way or the other, the price was artificially ratcheted, in exactly the same manner as a price on a WoW good is when it is price fixed.

You might ask what happens when the reverse occurs.  As in real life, you can imagine that in WoW, I did witness this occur.  The reverse, of course, is when a price is artificially lowered – often times less than cost – also known in the real world as a subsidy.  The US government has subsidized food prices in various markets for years to prevent farmers from growing so much food on their land that the supply exceeds the demand to the point that smaller farmers starve on lack of volume.  In World of Warcraft, the barrier to prevent this from happening is the fact that there is a floor on all prices.  Take, for example, bags.  Bags allow you to carry more items in your inventory and are a one time expense for any new character in the World of Warcraft.  Bags are made by gathering cloth scraps (which drop from humanoid monsters) and turning them into bolts of cloth and then sewn into bags, a skill which all tailors have.  As with all items in World of Warcraft, the scraps of cloth can be sold to vendors ad infinitum – they never run out of money, and they always buy – so as a result, the materials to make the bag have an inherent value.  If a bag is sold at lower than its inherent value, the maker loses money.  In a farm subsidy, the government acts as a WoW vendor – they will buy a farmer’s crop at a specific minimum value, regardless of market supply.

The first WoW server on which I played had a gnome mage named Magi who felt the need to set the market lower than cost on bags.  This ruined the tailoring profession, since at the time, bags were the primary money vehicle for that trade.  He saw it as a charity – having large bags is a huge advantage, especially to low level players – but the rest of the community saw it as intentionally damaging the economy and ruining other players’ livelihood.  This earned him huge hatred and eventually he became a total server outcast – no one would group with him, no one would talk to him, he became the #1 target in player vs. player combat – all because he intentionally tampered with the economy.  I always found this very interesting.  The amount of hatred piled on this guy simply for messing with people’s virtual money was extremely telling about the nature of people.

I don’t have any experience with economics.  I have never taken an economics class or a business management class or a finance class, yet my simple observations of World of Warcraft has given me a deeper understanding of basic market principles than most people in the general population, and I would suggest that everyone who plays WoW understands these same principles even if they can’t elocute them as well or associate them with the real world phenomenoms happening aroudn them.

Next time, the even more interesting subject of the raiding economy - how different groups of people distribute very finite loot resources on raids that take more time than a part time job.

Good grief

I’m going to have a lot of angry discussions with public school administrations in the next decade.

The buffoons in charge of public schools across the country are attempting to raise the next generation of queer-loving perverts by brainwashing children as young as seven that homosexuality is more prevalent than it is and that they are terrible people if they find it wrong for any reason.

As usual, the pro-gay opinion has been deemed superior because the anti-gay opinion is “hate mongering” and might lower the self esteem of gay people.

I am already faced with the invetibility of suing any school district that reads Heather Has Two Mommies to my eight year old.  I won’t put up with that bullshit.  In the end, my children will probably attend private school – and I hope they do so with money earned from winning a case against some arbitrary pro-gay school district.

I don’t agree with homosexual marriage.  I don’t agree with homosexual parenting.  I don’t agree with homosexual relationships.  I don’t agree with gender bending.  I don’t agree that any of these opinions make me a hate monger.  I don’t agree that gay tolerance is morally superior for any reason.  I don’t agree that the gay movement is an equal rights issue.

And I absolutely do not agree with the liberal public school system attempting to indoctrinate my children to believe things that I do not believe.  If anyone has a right to teach my child how to view the world, it is me.

I would suggest that liberals would find this view impossible to understand, but I don’t believe that’s true.  I believe that liberals do understand this view, but they refuse to accept it because they will never be able to gain any ground if conservatives like myself are allowed to replenish our numbers by raising conservative children.   That’s why an indoctrination campaign – a liberal indoctrination plan – is pivotal to the liberal strategy.  Get ‘em while they’re young.  Teach them to react with rote emotional responses in all situations and divorce any analytic reasoning from their worldview and they’ve cooked up a liberal.

I will not let them do this to my children.

How will I avoid it, you ask?  Simple.  Preemption.

When you know how and when your enemy will strike, mounting your defenses becomes an exercise.  The only detail left to get right is the exact words used in explaining to your child that your teacher is full of shit and not to listen to anything they tell him.

I know what you must be thinking.  How will that work?  It won’t be easy.  Obviously, teachers spend most of their time actually teaching real things – reading, writing, ‘rithmetic.  Many teachers are on my side, too – but they are compelled to force whatever curriculum their school distrct imposes on my children whether or not they agree with it personally – they do what they’re told.  So, knowing this, the conversation will go something like this:

“Kid – today is your first day of school.  You will learn many important things, like how to read, how to write, how to add, to subtract, to multiply; you will learn about birds, bees, and dinosaurs; you will learn about George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin Roosevelt; you will even learn how to sing and paint. 

But once in a while your teachers will also try to teach you other things.  They will try to teach you that the most important thing in the world is someone else’s sensitive feelings.  They will try to teach you that sharing is the most important thing in the world.  Sharing is good, and you shouldn’t try to hurt other people’s feelings for no reason.  You will learn about George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, but you certainly won’t learn about someone named Jesus Christ, a man who George Washington and Abraham Lincoln both admired.  Jesus Christ said: do to others as you would like them to do to you.  In other words, if you don’t want someone to hurt your feelings, you shouldn’t hurt theirs either.

But your teachers may try to teach you about very strange things – about boys who like to dress up as girls and about boys who fall in love with other boys and about girls who fall in love with other girls.  When your teachers tell you about these things, your teachers are lying.  They are lying about it because they have to lie about it – it’s not their fault.  They will lose their jobs if they don’t.  So, don’t believe them.  They will try to ensure you that they are teling the truth, but they won’t be.

But when you’re at school, you have to listen to your teacher anyway.  Do what she tells you to do, and if you think she is lying to you, don’t say anything to her.  Pretend that you believe her.  If you don’t, she’ll get mad at you and you’ll get in trouble.  So, just pretend that you believe everything she says, all the time.  When I get home from work, you can tell me what she said, and I will tell you if she is lying or not.

The future of the whole world depends on you, kid.”

The Baby Boomers Failed, Revisited

Early in my blogging career I wrote this, which has since proven to be one of my most popular entries.  Apparently a lot of people agree with me.

First, I want to absolve the boomers of any blame for their own failures.  In a way, they were powerless to become anything other than what they became.  I have begun to believe that culture is inevitable.  Put simply, no matter by whom a generation is populated, space and time will shape those people into one and only one possible result.  It’s not the fault of the individuals.  Culture is a steaming locomotive on a one way track – you can get on board or get out of the way.

So, boomers: don’t take it personally.  You probably did the best you could.

However, some of you certainly came out better than others.  Namely, some of you saw through the cultural lies of your time and ignored them.  Unfortunately, most of you bought it hook, line, and sinker.  You became rank and file baby boomers and simply swam with the current.  First you were hippies.  Then you took a break in the 1970′s to prepare yourselves to become yuppies.  Then you stayed yuppies in the 1990′s.  Then you panicked in the 2000′s when retirement started to rear its ugly head.  Now you’re looking at your children to pay your retirement tab.

Along the way, you’ve invented so many cultural lies that your children are treading water in a morass of stupidity.  The examples that you set for them – such as your no-fault divorces, dependence on prescription anti-depressants, living beyond your means, and faith in ideologies that have no basis in reality – are preparing your children to be unprepared, and worse, incapable of ever escaping the epic debt you voted them to carry when you let the congress you elected create more money than has been spent by the combined governments of the entire world during your lifetime.

You will have been born, lived, and died in a world created by your parents and paid for by your children.  Only lies lie in your wake.

Lie the first: human nature can be ignored.  See pretty much any idea their generation has ever had.  Boomers believe this lie as a gateway to believing all other lies they have told.  When you confront human nature for what it is, it becomes obvious that the progressive movement was a way to justify delaying responsible adult living in favor of several years of drug use.

Lie the second: if you love someone, marry them.  All you need is love.  Love, love, love.  When you don’t love someone anymore, divorce them.  The consequences of this policy speak for themselves.  One consequence of believing this lie is the support of gay marriage.  Gays love each other, so they should get married.  Only someone who believes that love is the only factor for marriage could believe that gays should get married.

Lie the third: the environment matters.  The environment did not matter to them and it does not matter now.  The baby boomers brought us Valdez, DDT, and plastic six pack rings.  More damage has been done to the environment on their watch than on anyone else’s watch in history.  More diarrhea has been spewed from the mouths of the biggest environmental criminals in history about the need to protect the environment than by any group in history.  The end result of this will be that every single boomer who bitched and moaned about the environment and greenhouse gasses will be long dead before any consequence comes to bear.  It is also likely that anyone alive reading this post today will be long dead before any consequences come to bear.  The baby boomers know this, and while they claim to care about future generations, they don’t care about them enough not to demand that pragmatic, actual results that matter – such as who pays their social security checks – come off the backs of their progeny.

Lie the fourth: women have more than equal rights, they are the equal.  No man has ever seriously believed this.  Only misguided, stupid women actually believe this.  In fact, some even more misguided, stupid people believe that women are superior to men.  Most of these people write divorce laws, oversee divorce cases, and represent women in divorce cases.  The experiment in women’s “liberation” and “feminism” has failed.  Look around.  I don’t need to look hard to find reasons why I’m right, but if not, you will have to look hard to find reasons why I’m wrong.  Unless you’re a woman who believes she’s equal, in which case your “reason” is that feeling equal makes you happy.  That is not a reason.  This lie is another enabler of the gay rights movement because two equal sums are interchangeable.  Since I contend that the sums are not equal, they are not interchangeable.

Lie the fifth: statements such as women are not equal to men are offensive to a small minority of stupid people and therefore I should not be allowed to say them under risk of litigation.  In other words, the world would be a better place if no one ever offended anyone ever.  The result is political correctness.  This is perhaps the boomers’ undoing, as while their previous lies continue to hold water among those lacking any deep understanding of anything, political correctness was too outrageous to believe and is now the subject of mockery.  Unfortunately the laws enforcing this cultural lie have yet to be repealed and I can still be sued or fired for speaking the truth, which is why I write this blog anonymously.  This is yet another enabler of the gay movement because even suggesting that they are full of shit necessarily makes me a bigot, and ad hominem attacks like that are deal closers for stupid people.

Lie the sixth: all of this is someone else’s fault.

The only thing baby boomers ever did for which they should be proud is civil rights for blacks.  Of course, every policy they instituted above and beyond the rights to be treated equally under the law and have the same opportunities afforded to them as everyone else has been disasterous for black people, but that comes with the territory of fostering ideologies, something I find the boomers do in excess.

Will my generation rise to the occasion?

I’m thankful to say that most of my generation does not believe our parents’ lies – yes, even to the incediary results I’ve described – but I’m afraid we will tell all new ones that are equally harmful to civilization.  Next time: the millenials’ destruction of all good society.