Friday, March 24, 2017

Remote outlets and hackers

Hackers are going to hack.

Hiding behind their masks like the KKK, hackers are going to virtually lynch people who refuse to conform to their arbitrary and variable morality systems.  And it isn't like there is a universal morality system for hackers, the only thing anyone can be sure of is that hackers don't care about individual privacy and will happily violate article 12 of the United Nations Human Rights Declaration to enforce their brand of morality.  Whatever justification is used the reality is the same, hackers hack people because they are bullies and enjoy hurting people.

Another thing that you can generalize, and this doesn't apply to all hackers, is that guys like me who call these anonymous lynchers what they are will be attacked by hackers.  I've been pissing these guys off for almost 20 years now and for twenty years now these self appointed guardians of arbitrarily determined morality justifications have been hacking me and virtually lynching me, because that's what they do. 

Hackers oppress basic human rights in favor of ??? what?  Some arbitrary and anonymous morality that changes as often as the face behind the mask changes.  If you are outspoken you are going to piss people off and it doesn't matter what your beliefs are, some scum bag will put on a mask, hide in the virtual night, burn a cross on your lawn and string you up in a tree.  Why?  Because you are anti-pro abortion, anti-pro gay rights, anti-pro 2nd amendment, anti-pro privacy, etc.  Truthfully there is no way to satisfy the virtual blood lust of these scumbags.  They don't really have any agenda except virtual violence, trying to hurt people because hurting others is the only way they can alleviate their own feelings of worthlessness and despair.

Now, not all hackers are like that.  Some hackers have real agendas and they target corporations, governments, they make money from these entities, reveal their secrets and basically do a lot of good.  We aren't talking about these guys, they aren't going to hack people.  People are easy compared to organizations, low hanging fruit for script kiddies.  Real hackers hack organizations.

Anonymous released a list of supporters of oppression and had some people on that list who were very vocally and politically against oppression.  That is because they, very stupidly, targeted people instead of the real evil, corporations.

Sometimes hackers falsify data the way they falsified AOL messages to destroy the career of a Florida politician and that is just as wrong as corporations stripping resources from poor nations.  There is more than enough real evil that hackers with laudable agendas can address without faking crap, violating human rights and adding to the oppression of humanity.  Corporations are not people regardless of the legal fictions used to oppress the majority.

That is the 1% though, most hackers out there are just looking for reasons to hurt people because they think they can. 

One of the first things some hackers do, because they live on GDT, is to change your time to GDT.  It is just a stupid way of saying, look at me, I need attention because I have deep seated feelings of worthlessness and insecurity!  Pretty lame, but, what do you expect from a card carrying KKK member.

In the comic books good guys wear masks.  In real life, bad guys wear masks.  Look at the people who have worn masks in reality and what they have done and look at the people who have stood up for something.

There is an iconic picture of Che Guerra wearing a mask, oh wait, no there isn't.

So, what does that rant have to do with remote outlets?  (https://smile.amazon.com/Etekcity-Wireless-Electrical-Household-Appliances/dp/B00DQ2KGNK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1490381295&sr=8-1-spons&keywords=remote+outlet&psc=1) as an example.  Feel free to buy it somewhere else, I'm not shilling for amazon.

Rant over, this blog is about basic protection against hacking, and it is weak protection indeed.  Depth.  Multiple firewalls between a hacker and you.  Those firewalls have to be reset often.  I use a series of routers and firewalls and networks that are all plugged into two different remote outlets.

One of my systems is a computer without a hard drive that actually sits on the network and sniffs traffic.  It is a live CD linux distro that doesn't do anything except log data, traceroute and identify ip addresses.  Long story, the distro is out there, or it used to be, and I didn't build it.  That is hidden and I have it plugged into its own remote outlet.

Then, I have multiple routers.  I have a modem with a cheesy firewall that is plugged into o a router that I have three other routers plugged into. I have an insecure wifi, a "secure" wifi (no such thing) and then a hard wired network router. All plugged into a power strip that is plugged into a single remote outlet.  The whole thing draws less than five amps at 110.

No, I'm not telling you where my sniffer is.  Actually, I move it around and I have been thinking about putting in a second one.  I just need to put together another ITX.  Time and money.

All fairly cheesy stuff that hackers can bypass and gain access to my systems.  The complicated nature of the network makes it more difficult though and then, when I shut it down a hacker has to start all over.

I shut my network down quite regularly.  Turn off the power so it can't be powered on over the network.  If I'm not using my computer, or watching the output from my sniffer, I probably have my network shut down.

Most people leave their networks on all the time and only reset it if there is a problem.  I don't. If I shut down my sniffer it boots right back up when I turn on the power because it runs off of a Live CD.  Everything else is EEPROM so, just push the button and it all resets.  I generally wait ten seconds to several days to turn my network back on.

Turn off your network when you aren't using it.  Just push the button, shut it down and then bring it back up when you want it.  If you have different sections of network you can control them using different remotes, leave your server up, shut your personal network down, your guest network, etc.  There are all kinds of different things you can do, except, prevent getting hacked.

If you are into electronics there are some bits and pieces you can buy on the web to do all kinds of things with relays and remotes.

Some of you are probably thinking that there are people out there who can't get hacked.  That is B.S., anyone and everyone can get hacked.  This is just a simple way to make it more difficult to hack a network, but, leave still leave it open enough for people to worm their way in.  Fewer people, but, there are those who will.

There will always be guys in masks, burning crosses and lynching people because that is what losers do, beat up on others.  They will always have their justifications and it really doesn't matter what they are, the point isn't really their justification it is that they get to hurt people.  Always has been, always will be.

In the mean time, there are a few simple things we can do without going very far out of our way to make things harder for them.  I don't suggest you build a sniffer, that is essentially a "script kiddie" way of identifying KKK members.  I don't even suggest that you run multiple routers/firewalls.

I do suggest plugging your network hardware into a remote outlet so it is easily shut down.  This reduces energy consumption and it makes it easier to reset all the bits and pieces on your network.  It also shuts off access when you don't need it.

Thursday, March 23, 2017

Revenge based criminal justice is a waste of time.

I want to point something out.  I was just considering marketing strategy regarding purchasing motivation.  I don't have a good reference, I learned this stuff in a variety of seminars when I was involved in technical sales support at a software company.

People have a binary motivational personality trait, similar to the binary personality trait of extroversion/introversion.  Psychology is kind of weird in that binary thinking patterns are considered a mental disorder and then they break down psychological traits into binaries "the big five" and then classify people as either/or as opposed to accurately positioning them within a continuum between the two traits, or better yet, somewhere in a ten point circle where all traits influence each other to create an individuals unique personality matrix.  Okay, off topic there a bit.

So, binary motivational personality trait.  Some people are motivated more by desire and some people are motivated by avoidance.
If I'm trying to someone with a focus on desire why they should buy something and all I talk about is the problems they will avoid they will kick me to the door pretty quick.  On the other hand, if I talk to them about all the problems they will solve they will buy.

It isn't quite that easy, actually you have to pitch both avoidance and desire, just focus a little more on one based on an estimate of a person's location in the continuum between the two extremes of the motivational trait.  If someone is 70% desire and 30% avoidance and I explain seven problems they will solve and three problems they will avoid I've kind of hit the sweet spot in their motivational trait.

Now, other personality traits influence all this stuff, so it isn't really black and white.

Considering that knowledge I considered the motivation of criminals.  Are they primarily avoidance, dissuaded by considerations of problems?  Are they primarily desire, encouraged by thoughts of success?  Especially those with poor impulse control.

I think the vast majority of criminals don't give a rats ass about potential punishment.  I think they are motivated more by potential reward.  This means that no matter how severe punishment is it will not motivate the criminal to avoid because most criminals behavior is not motivated by avoidance.
I think a criminal justice system focused on helping people define what they want and how they can legally achieve it will work better when applied to a Pavlovian punishment/reward behavioral modification system such as the current criminal justice system.

But, the criminal justice system isn't focused on behavior modification, it is focused on revenge or retribution so no one really cares about behavior modification, reducing crime, and so our prison population is increasing as we become more and more focused on punishing people, getting retribution, revenge, for mala prohibitum offenses like prostitution, recreational drug offenses, gambling, and non-violent mala in se offenses like various forms of theft.

Which ends up costing us a ton in court costs and imprisonment costs and lost labor, etc.

Think about that, we get revenge on a guy for getting busted multiple times for possession of too much weed and argue about how much damage stoners do our community, a revenge that lasts sixty years and costs us a crap load in prison costs.

Is revenge that is specifically designed not to address behavior modification and costs us an incredible amount of money really worth it?  Does it do anything to solve the problems of society or is it just creating more?

Statistically, I would say revenge is creating more problems than it solves and I think the data on increasing ratios of incarcerated people in the States and increasing crime rates proves it.

Pew Report:  One in 100: Behind Bars in America 2008

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/latest-crime-statistics-released

Thursday, March 09, 2017

Modern Justice System, literally driving people crazy!

Our modern justice system is designed around two foundational concepts, innocent until proved guilty and assigning punishment which is "equal" to inappropriate behavior.

This is why we have judges and trials, so judges can determine guilt and assign an appropriate punishment which should be "equal" to the crime.  Essentially, "an eye for an eye".

An "eye for an eye" is an interesting concept and it depends on values assigned to behaviors.

Suppose an individual breaks a window and steals a watch that the retailer values at $500 (but, I can get it on Amazon for $250).  The thief is immediately caught and the watch is recovered.  It costs $1,000.00 to repair the window.

The thief is fined and incarcerated.  Fines are ???  Incarceration ???  Probably a misdemeanor, a year in jail and a fine of as much as $1000.00. http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Burglarly.htm

How do we value time?  Minimum wage is $7.25 an hour.  Do we charge people for "room and board"?  How much?  24*7.25=174 8*7.25=58 We incarcerate people for 24 hours a day.  Is a criminals time worth $174 a day?

How do we place a value on trauma?  Many people are traumatized in jails.  Prisons in the United States typically violate International laws against torture.  We legalize torture of convicted criminals and protest torture of terrorists, unless they are convicted and incarcerated and then we can torture them!  https://www.afsc.org/document/torture-us-prisons

How do we value trauma to the victim?  Do we value trauma to victims more than criminals?  Suppose the only job a person can get is dealing drugs.  Unemployment is interesting.  Unemployment only counts people receiving unemployment.  Real unemployment, the difference between employable people and employed people (Labor Force Participation) among blacks is 40%.  That means real unemployment is 60%.  Census claims the number is 61%, but, in 2013 (the latest date I can get numbers) out of 32 million people over 16 only 13 million are employed.

https://beta.bls.gov/dataQuery/find?st=0&r=20&q=Employed+black+over+16&fq=survey:[ln]&more=0

https://www.census.gov/population/race/data/ppl-bc13.html

Okay, so the only job an individual in a 60% unemployment bracket can get is dealing drugs and that person is tossed in prison for 20 years where they are tortured based on international laws.  I'll let you equate the values in the system for that one because they have nothing to do with "an eye for an eye", in my opinion.

http://www.csus.edu/indiv/c/chalmersk/sea%20website/vengeancearticle.pdf

Suppose we have a Senator who violates the constitution?  How should they be punished?  Surprise, there are no laws which specifically criminalize Senators who violate Article 6 of the Constitution during confirmation proceedings by asking nominees for civil service about their religious beliefs.

Senator Durbin did this during Judge Alito's confirmation hearings and no one even objected.  I wasn't surprised because it happens all the time even though it is illegal.  I'm just picking this incident out because I documented it in a discussion I had with an attorney friend of mine.

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-109shrg25429/pdf/CHRG-109shrg25429.pdf Page 576

An "eye for an eye", punishment equal to offense, is a Pavlovian conditioning method.  For Pavlovian conditioning to work punishment must be consistent and consistently applied.  http://psych.fullerton.edu/rlippa/Psych101/outline2.htm

Lets face it, there is no consistency either in the application of punishment or the "value" of punishment.  Our current punishment standards are overly harsh, have nothing to do with equating value of behavior/punishment and result in recidivism rather than behavior modification.

As we learn studying Pavlovian conditioning the lack of consistency in punishment will literally drive those being conditioned insane.

Our justice system is currently designed to drive people crazy.  Literally, I'm not being figurative here.  I'm pointing out that our current system of punishment is literally driving people crazy.

Friday, February 24, 2017

People ignoring the law, from ancient Judah to Modern U.S. Government


Someone asked me what I thought about how well the ancient Jews followed their biblical laws.

That is an interesting question. Most of the records which have survived were those they considered most important, religious records mostly, which is why the books of the Bible survived but more common records didn't.

2 Kings 22 gives us an interesting look into how well the religious laws were protected. One of the priests suddenly finds a copy of the law in the Temple. This suggests that priests were not actually studying the law that often. What probably happened was that people followed an idea of "common" law and it is anyone's guess how important gender laws were, but, from Josiah's reaction, "Great is the Lord’s anger that burns against us because those who have gone before us have not obeyed the words of this book; they have not acted in accordance with all that is written there concerning us.” I would imagine that most of Judah was breaking laws of the scripture.

People forget the law all the time. Who knows what happened several thousand years ago. I imagine the law and public opinion "ebbed and flowed" much like it does today. Even those we expect should be most aware of the law and the Constitution totally ignore it.

I can remember watching Senate hearings of Supreme Court Nominees where Senators actually questioned nominees about their religious beliefs, something that is specifically forbidden in the Constitution. Hard to imagine Senators and SCOTUS nominees ignoring the Constitution, but, it happened during our lifetime.

United States Constitution, Article 6: "...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Therefore, no civil servant can ever be questioned about their religious beliefs. What I think is interesting is that reporters constantly violate this law, the Senate often twists religious belief questions into questions regarding the first amendment, making religious beliefs an important political issue in the selection of those serving in public office.

This creates a "hierarchy" where Freedom of the Press is prioritized over the prohibition of religious testing for public office.

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript



"Senator DURBIN. Let me ask you a few starting points. The question was asked of John Roberts about his personal religious and moral belief. And I would ask you in the most open-ended fashion. We all come to our roles in life with life experience and with values. When you are calculating and making a decision, if you were on the Supreme Court, tell me what role your personal religious or moral beliefs will play in that decision process.

Judge ALITO. Well, my personal religious beliefs are important to me in my private life. They are an important part of the way I was raised and they have been important to Martha and me in raising our children. But my obligation as a judge is to interpret and apply the Constitution and the laws of the United States, and not my personal religious beliefs or any personal moral beliefs that I have, and there is nothing about my religious beliefs that interferes with my doing that."

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-109shrg25429/pdf/CHRG-109shrg25429.pdf

Page 576

Not everyone can or should trust my statements to be facts unless I am willing to provide the resources to back them up.

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Stupid Medical Professionals, Weight Loss and Calories

You ever hear some moron say, "calories in, calories out"?  Meaning people are lazy and don't do enough to burn the calories they take in.

Anyone who says this, meaning people need to burn calories, is a moron.

Anyone with a basic understanding of eating disorders, bulimia (binge and purge) specifically, knows darn well that many people purge using laxatives and therefore metabolism is an important part of the equation.

The proper fricking equation is, "calories in, metabolism, calories out" and metabolism is influenced by a variety of things including Over The Counter laxatives.  Apples are a useful way to, very slightly, increase the pace at which food flows through a person's digestive tract.

Lots of stuff influences metabolism.  This isn't new stuff, but, I just read another dumb post about "Calories in, Calories out."  In this day and age when information on things like bulimia and metabolism are so available it is disgraceful that people spread bullshit like, "People are fat because they are lazy."

Now, there is some truth to that.  Almost anyone can lose weight by reducing their calorie intake to about 1,000 calories a day, but, that isn't about being lazy, that is about being disciplined enough to keep from eating.

Increasing activity is a great way to increase metabolism.  That doesn't work as well as people think.

One of the problems people have when they begin an exercise plan is that they usually lose some weight quickly and then the weight loss drops off and they plateau.  This is because people generally don't change their eating habits and their metabolism quickly adapts to the extra activity.  People often suggest switching things up often so that an individuals metabolism is less likely to adapt, but, that doesn't work great.

When it comes down to it, what matters is heart rate.  When someone starts exercising their heart rate increases and stays increased for a longer time.  As someone adapts to physical activity their heart rate slows during activity and it recovers faster.  It takes more work to achieve the same metabolism effect.

So, why 1,000 calories?  Because 1,000 counted calories is probably closer to 1,250 calories.  Calories of foods are "accurate" within plus or minus 25% and, generally, packaged foods are on the high side.  You wouldn't believe how stupid the FDA testing is.  I wrote a blog about it a while back that described how bad it is, no one read it of course.  The post was techno babble for geeks discussing a left skewed distribution with an n of 10.  Sometimes they actually combine 10 samples, do one test and then divide the total to determine the average.

So people suggesting a diet of 2,000 calories is really suggesting a diet of closer to 2,500 calories.  This is why calorie counting generally sucks for losing weight.  Believe me though, anyone can lose weight if they eat few enough calories.

If you want to lose weight, figure out how many calories you should eat, multiply that number by 0.75 and set your calories at that number.  It is wicked hard and most people aren't going to do it, but, that will generally work. 

Stress screws metabolism up too.  I'm not going to mess with that in this.

Ever see kernels of corn in your shit?  That's because people don't digest corn very well.  That means a chunk of calories in corn are not digested.  All foods are like this.  If you bothered to really inspect your shit you might find bits of masticated and undigested foods.  How much depends on the speed of your metabolism.  Take some OTC laxitives and those chunks will be pretty big.

This is how weight loss surgery works, by messing with the metabolism.  Shrinking the stomach, removing intestines, even lap bands.  They all force changes to metabolism.

Speed, meth, influences metabolism.  Lots of stuff influences metabolism and reduces calorie absorption.

Think of how your body works and quit listening to morons.

So why are they morons?  Because anyone who says this shit isn't thinking.  Anyone in the medical or nutritional profession should have a basic awareness of bulimia so claiming "calories in, calories out" means they aren't using their knowledge to understand.  And if they are too stupid to make the connection between bulimia, metabolism and weight loss they are too stupid to make simple connections with other knowledge they have.  This is why there is so much medical malpractice.

I see this failure to connect information to arrive at an accurate decision a lot, hell, I've done it myself occasionally.  Less and less as I learned how to think.  Schools typically teach deference to authority so people regurgitate crap "authorities" tell them without actually thinking about it.  That sucks, research "deference to authority in education".  There are actually programs at some universities that are trying to "deprogram" students that have been brainwashed by Western education.

That is why so many "educated" people are stupid, they can't actually think.  They can only regurgitate crap their "authorities" spout.  We are seeing a lot of this in politics.  One authority says this and their sheeple start spouting the same crap.  Another authority says that and their sheeple starting mouthing off about that.  Pure stupidity.

You don't have to think to lose weight, but, it helps.  What helps more is understanding metabolism, one's own metabolism in particular.  Lacking that, brute force it on a 1,000 calorie a day diet.  Wicked hard, could be dangerous for some so many people won't recommend that for fear of liability.

I'm a high school drop out with almost no formal education in nutrition or metabolism.  As I've said before, take everything with a grain of salt.  Think before doing.  If it isn't working for you, stop.  Most important, know yourself.

Sunday, February 19, 2017

Solar Watch Charging

A few years ago I bought a Solar watch that wasn't holding a charge.  Being the kind of guy I am I built a solar watch charger, stuck the watch in it and let it charge for a week.  Works great now, holds a charge for a week or so.  That was back in 2012 and I have talked about it a few times on the Internet since.  I tried to drum up some funding for producing a short run of a few thousand Solar Watch Charging boxes, but, short sighted dorks couldn't see the value.

My first Solar Watch Charger (SWC) was a cheap, plastic, watch box that I stuck a 12v LED in the top of.  I wired it to a 12v adapter.



Later I built a few others, timers, batteries so I could travel with them, etc.  I worked with a timer on You Tube and in the post I discussed using it for an SWC. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0eLz5n58lo) Don't watch the video if you are looking for a solar watch charger, I don't show it being used for that, although, I am currently using it for that purpose.

I actually hooked it up to an aquarium light I bought off of eBay.  I used to have the light plugged into a regular timer, the "geek" timer is just because I like messing with stuff.  I used those double sided tapes they use for those hooks that can be removed from walls to attach the light to the side of the jewelery box.


I broke the aquarium light clamp because the clamp was designed to fit on a wall thinner than the wooden toolbox I use as a jewelery box.  I leave the top open, but, I could wire lights into the lid so I could close it, I just haven't done that yet.  (comma splice) The light comes on for about an hour a day to keep my solar watches charged.

There is a guy who took my idea, ran with it and built a really hokey device.  He used to sell it for $10 bucks, then more, now it runs almost $30 on Amazon.  People have built lights in watch boxes.  All pretty simple stuff anyone can do really cheap.

The easiest way to charge a watch is to just set it somewhere and put an LED flashlight on top of it.  Just buy a cheap, short, LED flashlight, turn it on and put it on top of the dial.  Leave it for a while.  Yeah, sometimes the flashlight falls over, but, anyone can prop it up.  This is the main reason I couldn't get funding, everyone wanted to know why anyone would buy something they could do with a $1 flashlight.



There are these LED puck lights, buy one at a dollar store, put it under a shelf and shove your solar watch under the light.  Easy Peasy.  Costco sells LED Puck lights that have a timer built in and a very cool remote.  I had to wire a wireless remote into my timer to turn the lights on and off.

There are hundreds of ways to solve this solar watch charging problem.  I've shown a few here and discussed another.  I like building stuff.

Still, I imagine people will be producing SWC systems into the future.  Any of us who own more than one watch needs a way to keep our watches charged.  I like the aquarium light best, so far.  I can keep 8 watches fully charged in my jewelry box pretty easily. 

Thursday, February 16, 2017

Elon Musk, idiot at large

Since the industrial revolution began "robots", automated machines, have been doing work that people used to do.

At one time people wove cloth on simple looms. As looms became more complicated and more automated fewer people were needed to weave the same amount of cloth.

At one time paper was hand made. It was incredibly expensive and labor intensive. Today machines make paper and we literally sh*t on it, of course, far fewer people are employed per any amount of paper.

Think about how many galley slaves lost their rowing jobs...

Now, I could write reams about the jobs lost to automation. From weavers to bullard operators. Truthfully, no one would care.

But, Elon Musk starts running his mouth about jobs being lost to robots and suddenly people are freaking out. Yes, people are going to lose jobs to automated machinery, "robots", just like they have been for hundreds, even thousands of years. That is never going to change. Unemployment will grow, and fall.

Truthfully, over population is a far greater danger than automated production systems.  Elon Musk isn't really an idiot, but, he has failed to understand the history of economics and manufacturing and that is pretty idiotic.

And, yes, people are going to become "cyborgs".  I have a "machine" inside of me already, a heart stent.  Medicine is going to use nanobots and people will have communication devices medically implanted in the future, just like they do today with cochlear implants.

Change is inevitable and hanging on to the past always fails.

We need to reduce the global population, especially in places where there isn't enough arable land to support the local population.  We really need a planet with less than 2 billion, preferably around 500,000,000, yes, 500 million.  That is a heck of a population reduction, but, it is better than us burying ourselves in our own garbage.

Wednesday, February 15, 2017

Christianity and marriage, once again

I'm Christian, see if this logic makes sense.

If marriage is of people, a creation of people and which people have authority over, then God has no authority over marriage and marriage begins when people say marriage begins.

If marriage is of God, created by God and which God has authority over, then people have no authority over marriage and God has sole authority over marriage.  Marriage begins and ends only when God decides it does.

Now, some people will claim that God gave the church authority over marriage, but, there are no scriptures that tell us this.  That's just something people who want control tell other people.

Luke 16:13 KJV
No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon."

Now, many people translate "mammon" into "money", but, if we look at the Greek translation it actually translates as "personified riches", as in "rich personality", what we might think of as "charismatic people" or leaders.

"Origin: of Aramaic origin (confidence, i.e. wealth, personified)

TDNT entry: 10:28,6

Part(s) of speech: Noun Masculine

Strong's Definition: Of Chaldee origin (confidence, that is, figuratively wealth, personified); mammonas, that is, avarice (deified): - mammon."

Okay, so we choose between two masters, people and God.  Which has authority over your marriage?

Me, I'm a Christian so I believe God has authority over marriage.  In my case, the Holy Ghost explained it to me and because I'm a person of reason the Holy Ghost used logic.  It flew in the face of my personal beliefs, but, there was no denying the logic or the Holy Ghost.

Nothing wrong with ceremonies and traditions, as long as we remember who is in charge of marriage.  I'm glad you honored your children's wishes.  Your marriage didn't begin when people said it did though, it began when God decided.  If you want to know when that is, pray and ask God.  Believe you will receive and God will give you the answer.

Saturday, January 21, 2017

Disgusted with politics and annoyed at fear mongering

I have self identified as Republican since about 1990.  I voted for Reagan and when he pussyed out with Iran in 1981 I was pretty pissed off.  It took me a long time to get over that.

Not that I would ever identify as a Democrat, slave mongering genocidal scum bags.  Andrew Jackson is a national disgrace and should be removed from the $20.  The United States first Democrat President was the most genocidal president in history and his "I'm too stubborn for abolitionists to change my mind" mule symbol is still the Democrats symbol.  FDR and his concentration camps, I could go on with Democrats genocidal behaviors from their support of slavery to their support of segregation and the hate/fear mongering they do today.

When Trump won the Republican nomination I began self identifying as Disgusted.

Back in the 1980s-90s Trump was going to build the worlds tallest building.  He totally failed, which made the World Trade Center Osama bin Laden's phallic target rather than some mythical Trump erection.  During the attempt to grow his massive mythical erection Donnie managed to alienate the entire New York city pseudo intellectual elitist power base.  Truthfully something I envy since I enjoy nothing better than pissing off a bunch of elitist pseudo intellectual morons, however, Donnie had to expand his business outside of New York since he had effectively eliminated himself from the New York real estate development market.  Donnie went international.

Any of you old couch potatoes who watched Dallas Reruns might remember when JR did the same thing and had to do the same thing.  So far Donnie has continued being somewhat successful in the international market, but, I figure it is only a matter of time before he alienates enough people in the international market that his business is finished.

So I didn't give a rats ass about all the B.S. people were spouting, Trump this, Trump that.  I couldn't verify any of that bullshit, except for his being a misogynist like Billy Clinton and his famous desk hole.  I didn't like Clinton even before that, after his lying about Monica I really had no use for him.  I already didn't have any use for Trump so the misogynist crap didn't sway me.  I already had no use for Trump, or Billy Clinton.

The lying propaganda and fear mongering annoyed me more than Trump's locker room banter.  At least he wasn't shoving cigars up inside some woman when she wasn't tucked into his knee space.

The United States can't expand onto other worlds when Donnie Trump alienates the rest of the world the way he alienated the New York pseudo intellectual elitists.  Now, yes, I kind of admire that in a way, but, to do business Trump needed those assholes working with him.  Alienating that bunch of scumbags was in direct opposition to Trump's own best interest, and the idiot did it anyway.

Regardless of the unverified hate speak I've seen published about Trump I think he will make a poor president, specifically because the idiot fucked himself up.  That is some self destructive, mommie didn't love me enough, bullshit right there.

Personally, I think all the lying bullshit just made Trump more electable.  Really, telling unverifiable lies just made Trump more attractive to a lot of people, and undermined the reality of the few truths that were told about him.  Sheeple are easily made afraid and all the people encouraging people to question their safety are just fear mongering.  First comes the fear, then the ridicule, then the hatred and finally people work themselves up to become violent, trying to protect themselves against an imaginary fear.

Pretty fucking sad.