Just A Man With A Gun

B-b-b-b-but... liberal anti-gu- I mean, pro-common sen- No.. I do mean anti-gun (and anti-contstitution, by definition) folks have been telling me for decades that ordingary gun-carrying people don't stop crimes with guns. That can't happen, they assure me, because as everyone knows, the gun will get taken away, or they might hurt themselves or kill themselves, or scare the shrinking violets of the left so badly that they must seek counseling at the mere sight of a scary, black, loud and powerful handful of equalizing potential; and then of course they insist all gun owners are mentally ill and will almost always run to the nearest public school or mall and commit mass murder because the gun made them do it. 


But every good liberal will tell you until they are blue in the face and until you want to cry out to the gods, asking what horrible thing you did in your past life that justify sitting there, listening to the pure flow of bullshit that comes out of their mouths sounding like they are telling you that citizens who carry guns don't prevent crimes. 


Only cops preven... well, actually, no, they don't... except by accident, as a secondary function at best. Their job is not to prevent crime, but to discover it, investigate it, and collect revenue for their bosses- and no, that's not "the people"; it's whichever government agency (or corrupt individual) that funds them. This cannot be disputed, since the Supreme Court has ruled that no law enforcement officer has a duty to protect any person, their property, or their rights. They are allowed to watch someone stab you to death right in front of them without intervening. They are allowed to let you bleed to death while waiting for EMS without so much as applying pressure, or even holding your hand. They can let you drown, get beat up by your spouse, and burn to death because they chose not to pull you from your wrecked car when it started on fire.
Knowing this, why in HELL would anyone want to prevent upright, consciencious, educated citizens from carrying guns? The only ones they want to ALLOW to have them don't have to lift a finger to defend anyone, by law, and yet they want to ensure that citizens are unable to defend themselves. Sounds surreal, to me.


This officer, if roles were reversed, could allow the attacker to kill the citizen in front of his eyes and do nothing to stop it, and just wait till there is no longer a hostage in the way of the criminal's capture to get a commendation, promotion, raise, and his name in the national LEO professional journals. All without losing his paycheck, his pension, his other job benefits.. and depending on the cop, maybe without losing his bribe money, or all the neat, cool stuff he gets for the department (and maybe a little for himself on the side) from civil forfeitures that somehow either never make it to the station, or never gets returned and can be used by the department to buy helicopters, M-RAPs, riot gear, infrared cameras to see through your walls or roof, tech devices to intercept your cell calls without a warrant, ... all the trappings that the military has that they salivate over and covet unrepentantly- not to use against a foreign enemy, but against the very people they steal from-I mean terrorize- I mean .. Yeah, I mean terrorize.
Maybe they should spend some of that on gun training and use of force training. Some communication skills training wouldn't hurt, either, like dispute resolution training, intercultural communication, and effective listening. A mandatory class on animal behavior and handling is a must, so they stop killing friendly family pets in front of the children, or while they are chained in their own yards. Such brave souls who kill animals because they felt threatened- not because they were actually attacked or even saw any indication they might be- when there are so many other things to try first to control the situation and ensure the safety of EVERYONE, including those animals- should never be allowed around animals, children or civilized humans let alone be hired as an officer. They are too reactionary, emotional, and too cowardly for the job. 


I'd also throw in some mandatory and ongoing anger management that includes teaching the biophysical processes and a psychological education component that teaches them about how and why they will eventually become corrupt, no matter their good intentions- why power attracts the corruptible and by virtue of choosing that profession, they have already shown they are likely to abuse any power they are given. Included in this training should be detailed and intensive education on how to know when they've become an adrenalin junkie and the resulting brain damage that occurs from the hormone continuously being pumped into the frontal cortex-which regulates reactions, rationality, and impulse control- something many cops exhibit a lack thereof. 


I'd top it off with mandatory ongoing education on stress management and emotional discipline training, so they can hopefully stop killing the deaf, the mentally ill, old people with dementia, teens trying to run away from them, and middle aged women in their pajamas who have called them for help who get shot through the cruiser door from the passenger's side and across the partner who is driving, more than two minutes after they show up and are talking to her- because the officer was "startled".
These "brave" men and women in blue wouldn't have to be so "brave" if more citizens carried guns, no matter what the liberal anti-gun people will tell you. They are either ignorant, liars, or fools. Its up to you to figure out which one applies to the specific person or persons in your life who are telling you that it should be harder for citizens to buy and own guns, that they never prevent crime, they are too dangerous to have in the house, and that somehow, if people don't have guns, then the criminals won't either. Educate those who are ignorant, call out the liars and expose them by using the facts instead of appeals to emotion, and use your own discretion when dealing with fools- in groups, and individually, they are nearly always more dangerous than the liars who fooled them. No one will hold an idea more dearly than someone who discovers they've been duped, and in order to not appear the fool, they'd rather help the lie by assuring the desired outcome happens so they feel vindicated. 


The definition of a criminal is someone who does not follow the law. Making more laws to restrict guns and make it more difficult or even impossible for qualified citizens to own them will not stop criminals from having, getting, keeping, or using them. But it most assuredly will stop more citizens like the man in this video from preventing a cop from getting killed, or a woman from being raped, or an elderly woman who lives alone from having her home invaded, or a school full of children being gunned down by a radicalized zealot or the kid who didn't get to eat at the cool kids' table.

October 31, 2016

My Personal and Non-Professional Assessment of the American Voting Public

An Opinion Piece, by

Marcia La Vine

Individual people aren't dumb... but groups of people are not only dumb, they are dangerous- utterly incapable of independent thought, let alone capable of exercising the critical reasoning necessary to make competent decisions about anything. I wouldn’t want most voters to decide something even as meaningless as what type of sandwich I should order for lunch.

Members of political parties/ groups are capable of the simultaneous belief that as a voter, they are both responsible for any positive outcomes and yet are totally blameless for negative outcomes. This isn’t even the worst part. Consider this: political party members and pretty much all voters either deny or are completely ignorant of their having taken part in electing either another mentally impaired person, someone suffering from criminal insanity, or a rational but amoral, narcissistic, and sadistic psychopathic personality and gave them the job of running the nation.

My assessment may seem harsh, of both the candidates in question and their supporters, but let me explain.  
Why do I think someone running for president is so clearly mentally ill or evil? Look at it this way:  These people are TRYING to get a horrible-paying job that has the highest level of responsibility in our nation, the highest level of stress imaginable, entails perpetual sleep deprivation, constant surveillance, constant public and international scrutiny, and they instantly become a clear, specific and desirable target for all who are disgruntled- both nationally and internationally.

They know that they will be recognized by millions if not billions, and varying numbers of people either will revile or adore them, depending on what this person can manage to deliver to individual citizens. The job applicant, in my set of memories, always believes they will only get and then retain the position if they succeed in placating, duping and/or subduing or subjugating most of those they supposedly "serve", then strive to do well in this regard, rather than going with the job review given when being judged by each citizen’s honest, objective and unbiased assessment of how well they believe the candidate could do or may be doing to fulfill the actual duties of office. 

First, why would any sane, rational, thinking human being WANT this job? And why would any sane, rational, thinking human being trust anyone who not only WANTS the job, but wants it so badly that they are willing to do and say what virtually all politicians I have observed proved themselves willing to do and say to get that job, no matter how despicable, lowdown, vile or corrupt? And why do people keep voting the same type of person into office, while simultaneously bemoaning the levels of corruption, greed and lawlessness in government?

I believe this is because people in groups are nearly always twice as dumb collectively as the least intelligent member. They are lemmings. More specifically, I think the American voting public are lemmings, incapable of intelligent, rational thinking. It is true that individual persons are intelligent, thoughtful, bright, amazing beings capable of astonishing, brilliant and profound things, but the voting public is nothing short of a mob- a creature with anywhere from dozens to millions of eyes, ears, arms, legs, and mouths… but absolutely no brain whatsoever to prevent them from joyously dashing towards that cliff. Party members, or members of most groups, remind me of people at a hockey game afterparty that suddenly shifts from a limited local celebration to an angry, and violent throng, leaving devastation, destruction and losses impossible to calculate in its wake. No one ever knows why. Because they are brainless while acting as a group.

Groups of people also seem to be populated by individuals who believe that being a member of a group is an automatic, appropriate, adequate and acceptable absolution of guilt. We see it all the time- membership in group activities is always used to completely deny an individual's own portion of responsibility for the consequences of the actions of the group/mob. Even worse, most members truly do believe that they hold no responsibility because of their low-ranking group membership status, and lack of understanding of their own group dynamic which led to negative consequences.

I've never heard a single average voter- the least involved and least invested member of the political system- say they were personally responsible to any degree for what happened during their candidate’s presidency. No voter I’ve ever spoken to has admitted that even a small fraction of what may follow could possibly be their fault. Instead they all openly and adamantly deny their small but clear and undeniable culpability for the consequences of their individual voting decisions. I’m positive that I never will hear an average voter admit to having a share of blame for any political mess, because no one believes they ARE responsible. Not even the candidates themselves. Why? Leadership lays it on the members, and members on each other, leadership, the opposition, anyone but themselves. Because as a member of their political party, or any group, they see themselves as an unidentifiable, anonymous, insignificant and a minuscule part of a whole that no one of importance could possibly lay blame to for anything.

They see no cognitive dissonance when, though they have admitted to varying degrees of involvement with their group, they behave as if they have no real connection to their chosen congress of baboons or murder of crows, except maybe an admittance of agreement with that party’s foundational ideologies or stated grievances, or perhaps they buy into the rhetoric. But the consequences of supporting those things? Here is what I hear almost daily: “Oh, heavens, no. It wasn’t my fault! I didn’t: [vandalize that building/trash that park/increase taxes/support an admitted criminal/cause the deaths of tens of thousands both here and abroad]. All that happened in a place whose name I can’t even pronounce let alone point out on a map. I just [partied with/camped out with/voted for the mandate/voted for the candidate/demanded action in the form of revenge from our leaders] in retaliation for them attacking us.”

I swear, it makes me want to throat-punch someone sometimes. So instead, I smile and either change the subject or exit the conversation. I at least happen to be aware that of ALL my actions, large and small, have consequences. Besides, I was brought up to control myself like a big girl without collapsing into hysterical violence or uncontrolled weeping whenever things don’t go my way.

People need to realize that group membership always stipulates they are not merely passive observers, but are instead agreeing and accepting the position of a legitimate, active, and representative member of a specific group – and the higher order mammals are not only aware of but have a willingness to use their own portion of individual power and the responsibility that comes with it for the group they align with and work to elevate.

The lemmings are literally every group of people which gathers for a cause but identifies themselves as a group, rather than identifying themselves as a collection of individuals with separate identities, with individual names, who choose to gather to support a common cause. This type of coalition has united for a defined purpose, and the responsibility for all consequences which flow outward from the actions of the group are shouldered by every individual associated with it. Responsibility is not shrugged off, passed on to the next guy, or weaseled out of. No blame, no abdication after the fact. They are willing to pay the freight, so to speak. These are rational, thinking, higher order humans. But most are lemmings.

Why do people join groups without accepting the often-unspoken obligation which comes with membership in a group? I’ve had it explained to me once: This person said it was fantastic to be able to feel safe, anonymous, belonging, important, justified and yet, still blameless and able to deny knowledge of and responsibility for what the leadership decided to do and say for the group.

I must point out that the empirical evidence seems to indicate that she wasn’t the only one, by a long shot.
And it doesn't matter WHICH party or ideology those lemmings agree with or which group they choose to march toward the edge of the cliff with, because they all march while insisting they are not a member of the group and instead are merely walking the same way, to the same place, at the same time, for the same goal, together. But it’s not their fault.

The general voting public is not interested in accepting personal responsibility or accountability for even this smallest yet most important action the American people can do to participate, determining the direction and subsequent actions which our government will perform in our name for the next four years. If anything goes wrong, it is always the other guy’s fault. To me, this qualifies most voters as being "dumb.” And dangerous. And doomed.

No one needs that many air bags!

I'm on a roll lately. I just crafted a pretty good piece of hyperbole that perfectly matched a ridiculous meme comparing guns and cars. Here's what I wrote on that one:

I didn't know that cars were a right! Cool! And of course, the government needs to be the ones to control all of that safety gear, even if the constitution said that everyone has a right to own seatbelts and airbags. How could the framers possibly have foreseen the use of super-strong, almost unbreakable materials when all they were using was woven cotton or wool? Ridiculous! And besides that, everyone knows that only rational and peaceful people like me choose not to buy those dangerous implements. Nuts who think the government is going to take their cars surely don't need extra safety precautions that exceed mine. It offends me that they believe their right to be as safe as they choose doesn't agree with my right to demand that their rights be removed! Because of this, I demand that the government ensure my ability to force those who have extra safety gear to get rid of them. If we can't do that yet, lets make them register so that the government will be better able to control those who legally purchase their equipment, while ignoring the illegal black market seatbelts and side air bags that the criminals have, some of which were even distributed by the government. That shouldn't matter, because my right to not have something I don't like should outweigh their right to have it! 

The government's job is to make sure my neighbors never have a car that is safer than mine, because no one really NEEDS that much safety gear. The only reason to ever have that much is simply because you want to make sure you're going to survive, which is totally wrong since that equipment is scary looking and makes me uncomfortable, and you probably only got it to look cool instead of ensuring your safety even if the people who don't have all of that die. How awful! It's simply psychotic, I tell you.. these seat-belt nuts just don't have any sense, so we now must enact common-sense seat belt laws to force them to curtail their zealous purchases of items intended to save their lives. People who don't believe in too much safety gear want to make sure that your ability to survive a crash never exceeds their own, even though its been shown that criminals who install illegal safety gear never follow the laws, anyway, because.. well, they're criminals.
Oh, and did you even get proper training for all those buckles and straps? You did? Well, someone else didn't so clearly, you should have to suffer because of it. I know! Lets make those permits for airbags exceeding some arbitrary minimum that has no correlation to safety at all, and is primarily driven by being as inclusive to those poor disadvantaged folk who just never wanted all that extra responsibility of learning how to use the best protection they could get. They should be so expensive that only people who make more than $25 an hour can afford to get extra belts!

And another piece of evidence pointing to the inevitable extinction of our species

It just gets more surreal by the day, I swear.. 
I came across a post about how bullies are now running roughshod, unchallenged by their peers, because now the schools are cracking down on the children who are "bullying the bully" as a way to make them stop their behavior. Good lord, why am I not surprised at such idiocy? I can tell you.
My son was bullied in grade school.. Instead of disciplining the kids who tormented and abused him, it was easier for the admins to call him the trouble maker. inciting and asking for the older kids to repeatedly thump him in the back of the head with a large text book, day after day, during recess, or simply just punching him in the stomach when the faculty attendant was pointedly watching traffic on the road instead of the kids on the playground. Once they decided that he was the reason he was getting beat up every day and not the bully's responsibility for doing the beating, I understood when my son became angry, a bit hostile when it came to the adults he trusted to protect him so he could learn. Not only did he become frustrated and angry, my own made his look like a mild reaction given by someone half way to comatose. I was LIVID, and I told them so. I was beyond frustrated, shall we say, with the administrators and their excuses, blame and shame game that they used as a tactic in their attempted bullying of ME. 
So, when my son's attitude of distrust and contempt showed through to the useless playground monitor when he was getting punched less then fifteen feet from her, they stepped it up and labeled him as "oppositional-defiant disorder". I was threatened with court action in order to force me to take him to a psychiatrist and get him medicated at that point. I found my own therapist, refusing to take him to the pill pusher they strongly "recommended", simply because he fought back against the bully, once, and held those charged with his safety accountable for their failure. Some time later, the special ed teacher he was forced to have class with physically assaulted him by grabbing and jerking his arm, so he pulled away and his hand came into contact with her forearm as he pulled his body away from her assault, so she had HIM charged with assaulting HER. A TEN YEAR OLD had to go to court for assault charges against the teacher who was supposedly trained to cope with "difficult children", and knew better than to touch any child without permission or with compelling reason. Yes, I'm still angry, still vocal, and still "oppositional- defiant", But he isn't. He never was, 
He's now 28, was never medicated, and never had ODD, ADHD, or any other "mental or behavioral disorder" that they claimed he "suffered" from, and for which they tried to charge me with neglect because I didn't take the word of someone who doled out pharmaceutical speed like candy to kids as young as 5 and sleeping pills to the parents so they could "maintain their own sanity". What a racket. Now to the good part.. Pay attention, Class... there may be a pop quiz later....
Check out the list of criteria for this supposed "Disorder" they claimed my son who was clearly well-adjusted until that time suddenly acquired out of nowhere, with no known cause, and lots of "treatments" from pills to hospitalization available, provided your insurance was up to snuff....
The entire list of symptoms and behaviors is nothing but very ordinary, common, occasional behaviors of pretty much ALL CHILDREN, at varying stages in their lives. Ask any mother who's had more than two, and was a stay at home mom. We know normal behavior when we encounter it. None of the things on that list is anything other than what kids do while learning their limits. See what happens when you remove limits from kids? Even the psychs don't remember how kids once responded to them! Seriously, this is normal stuff.
Its how children grow up to learn how to become self-sufficient, trust their own judgement, question unsubstantiated claims, and THINK FOR THEMSELVES. Kids who exhibit the behaviors listed are considered a threat to the society the social engineers want to create, well, except those whose treatment leads to them becoming either too afraid to challenge their elders in any way, or such damage that renders them just a bit too dim to figure out that they're being trained as a good little monkey, whose sole purpose is to become a good big monkey one day. Shut up and take your pill.
From the May Clinic Website, under "Diseases and Conditions" 

"DSM-5 criteria for diagnosis of ODD show a pattern of behavior that:
Includes at least four symptoms from any of these categories — angry and irritable mood; argumentative and defiant behavior; or vindictiveness
Occurs with at least one individual who is not a sibling
Causes significant problems at work, school or home
Occurs on its own, rather than as part of the course of another mental health problem, such as a substance use disorder, depression or bipolar disorder
Lasts at least six months
DSM-5 criteria for diagnosis of ODD include both emotional and behavioral symptoms.
Angry and irritable mood:
Often loses temper
Is often touchy or easily annoyed by others
Is often angry and resentful
Argumentative and defiant behavior:
Often argues with adults or people in authority
Often actively defies or refuses to comply with adults' requests or rules
Often deliberately annoys people
Often blames others for his or her mistakes or misbehavior
Vindictiveness:
Is often spiteful or vindictive
Has shown spiteful or vindictive behavior at least twice in the past six months
These behaviors must be displayed more often than is typical for your child's peers. For children younger than 5 years, the behavior must occur on most days for a period of at least six months. For individuals 5 years or older, the behavior must occur at least once a week for at least six months.
ODD can vary in severity:
Mild. Symptoms occur only in one setting, such as only at home, school, work or with peers.
Moderate. Some symptoms occur in at least two settings.
Severe. Some symptoms occur in three or more settings.
For some children, symptoms may first be seen only at home, but with time extend to other settings, such as school and with friends."
It scares the crap out of me that the psychiatric community gets away with pseudo-science like this, and many parents just let them drug their kids at the first mention of "mental disorder", and it's all just based on unproven opinions that their friends all agreed sounded good, would make them tons of money, would prevent individuality and creativity from spreading like the plague, and nothing more. Oh, yeah.. profits and power are winning over parents' discretion and those lucky few kids who actually get a childhood in spite of those who claim to be "protecting" them from the big bad world.

This Month's Rant

I can easily draw parallels to the myths and legends of all religions and all societies to what I've been seeing in recent years within this so-called "civil" society. I wonder if maybe I've seen the seventh sign, or the fourth horseman of the apocalypse. I don't know. I've been seeing some totally nonsensical bullshit served up as if it were ambrosia, and people are buying it, so what else can explain this sorry state? I think my first obvious sign of the approaching end of mankind has been the sharp, concurrent and almost proportionate declines in both manners- common courtesy- and reading proficiency. I myself saw the end draw so close to me, more than once, that I thought I could finally plan my last party and see who shows up to mourn. The utterly schizophrenic and pointless hate-fest between what were purported to be reasonable adults who were once capable of simply being happy to be taking another breath are now reveling in their dual party system, all poised to devour anyone who dares to voice any type of dissenting view of any kind, on any subject, even if they're right is proof enough for me. Such behavior isn't just now the norm, it seems to have become an excepted, and expected show of worship for One Side, or The Other. We're being led to become the cannon fodder for either the delusional far-left, whose belief that more government control will result in a sustainable, unchanging equitable wealth distribution (as if this is something to be desired in the first place), while insisting that we allow the government to decide how we must eat, sleep, learn, be entertained, blame for our lot in life, value as a meaningful calling, but just call it a career because you don't dare use words that might illicit emotions associated with joy, faith, happiness, wonder and mystery- Why? I've actually heard this argument, almost ver batim, from a 24 year old white guy sporting smelly dreads and a $350 pair of jeans that his mother just gave him. He said " they sound too Christian..unless the Dalai Lama says them,, that's totally cool. Or Muslims.. they're the religion of peace, you know.. or Wiccans... yeah.. Wiccans aren't Satanists. They're all about nature, so they're a good religion...Some words sound good from those people, but not white, redneck, republican Christians. They're racist and believe in a religion which once killed probably billions, for all we know..They slaughtered half the world's population in less than ten years, more than the Black Plague, according to this article I read last year. Yeah, they didn't stop till around 150 years ago, give or take. At least in Europe. They were still burning Jews and witches then. It's an evil religion that white redneck republicans believe, so I just can't help it if I insult them." I shit you not. I just think he believed what he was told and taught, so it's hard to fault him for that, as he was a college student on break in NV at the time. Oh but wait! There's More! It slices, dices and makes Julienne fries! Just Look at that tomato! Turn your gaze to the other team, maybe this one is your team! You should be delighted to know that I hold the other side in equal amusement, and appalled fascination... I refuse to be cannon fodder for the far right, whose blind faith has led to more death, despair, evil, hate and utterly incorrect theories" throughout all of history than.. I don't know, anyone? They once called them "science", supported by the might of the Vatican's thirst for killing heretics, but its now called an "alternative theory" when it really should just be called what what it is:Fairy Tales and Myths from Long Ago. Both of these opposing sides notify us daily on TV (and here) of who we must associate with and who it's okay to insult, because it can't mean anything if we are forbidden from acknowledging them as fellow human beings- right? they're evil Capitalists! They're evil Socialists! They deserve our expressed revulsion and hatred! I've heard it said so many times, I can't even smile wanly when I hear it any longer, let alone muster up the energy to engage them in an attempt at rational argument through civilized debate. They attack my gender, age, education, place of residence, or the imagined political affiliation attributed to me by both sides, each calling me a member of their hated enemy camp. It was once funny, now it's just sad. An exercise in utter futility, and I'm the only one who seems to appreciate the poetry of such an occurrence.

Just the other day, we were yet again informed that the agency of the week, whatever it might be now, has been declared by our leadership and the sychophants behind them, cheering, have signed a paper that not only justifies what was commonly accepted as a crime yesterday suddenly becoming the approved and standard method of the government to prove they're right, because they said so. They manage fetes like this by obtaining the assistance and collusion of the government equivalent of official interpreters of the English Language, bought and paid for by whoever managed to buy enough congressional votes to get them a seat on the bench. They're given sole authority to assign any words they might choose whatever meaning that proves either more lucrative or more popular, depending on which side they support. They now have grasped, unchallenged, the supreme authority to change what was once a simple expression of a simple concept into something so utterly nonsensical, only those same official interpreters are qualified to determine a word or phrase's new meaning. For example, perhaps the new meaning of the word "might" could eventually be used as legal grounds to move forward with the armed enforcement of a questionable arbitrary mandate, as if it were a law, fundamentally changing the documents that those same interpreters and their cohorts in congressional and executive branches have taken an oath to protect. Huh... Must be one of those phrases that have been interpreted for modern times but I just haven't heard the new official definition of it yet. ...

The Administrative Branch's new additional role as lawmaker has begun by taking perhaps the first step towards removing all the choices once enjoyed by anyone who wanted to defend themselves in an equal manner of their most dangerous threat- the people who were once individuals but are now simply known and referred to as "The Government". Those people now get to tell everyone else how they'll be allowed to defend themselves against itself. HUH? You heard it right.. the government has grasped the brass ring, giving itself the authority to tell you how you will be allowed to defend yourselves against it! Next thing, your neighbor will be allowed to tell you what you can and can't do, when they decide to break in and murder your spouse and steal your wedding rings. You can't be trusted to decide that for yourself, after all- because someone else broke a different law, causing people to feign emotional distress over actions that they never experienced, don't understand, and don't really care about in the long run, because everyone's doin' it, man...

It's been decided on your behalf that you aren't responsible enough, smart enough, from the right family, from the correct ideology, the right religion or no religion, have poor health and cost us money, are in vigorous health so you're a dangerous menace- or perhaps just a really annoying self-congratulatory vegan with too much money, not enough, or you are oppressed as a minority, or are a part of the tyrannical majority... they've got logical reasoning on their side to justify being given the autyhority to act, and make "sensible" laws, because no matter what everyone else does or doesn't do, we'll never be trustworthy enough by government standards to choose for ourselves and accept the consequences like grown ups... so they have taken it upon themselves to act as your benefactor...or not, merely because it's "For Your Own Good". Americans never stood a chance.

Shut up, and be happy! Just accept your government masters, and you will finally experience the new government-approved definition of "freedom" , the way the founders didn't know they had mistakenly interpreted as oppression and serfdom, but which we were meant to embrace and enjoy, as we call it freedom and social enlightenment.

I'm not done. They aren't the only forces of evil I've seen!

This leads us to the swing of the pendulum the other way.. of far-right religious zealots insisting that only the legislating of morality backed by the force of the law as wielded by thick-armed and even thicker headed soldiers-in-disguise, dressed as servants of their communities for photos one day, and the next as an armed gang of enforcers without conscience, wearing the proverbial jackboots, khaki fatigues, black bullet proof vests, while driving tanks and threatening to shoot your dog because.. they felt their life was threatened by a 22 lb mutt. They were too busy busting down the door of a family unlucky enough to have a house number not even close to the one the DA and chief of police quote on TV as a crack house, based on nothing but the word of perhaps one known criminal whom they promised to pay for such "valuable" information about six or eight weeks ago, and we should trust that they know what they're doing, won't harm people who "don't deserve it", and if you would only just obey all the laws, even if they themselves don't know what they are and don't follow them, then you don't have to worry about being shot by mistake the next time their hired thugs try to shoot your poodle for viciously panting in their direction, making them fear for their safety, and for yours, of course.

We're assured by BOTH sides, to one degree or another, that men such as these are necessary in the battle against other people's vices, poor choices which may harm the collective, and to save us all from ourselves, because only their wisdom, backed by their own assurances of righteousness or their social conscience, will set all aright in this nation, while simultaneously saving the souls of imaginary children who were never wanted by the people who chose their own wants over any concept of responsibility for their own actions. 

Neither side will face the stark reality of having to admit you can't control anyone else but yourself. They use the word "love" while sneering openly and making the most vulgar of insinuations or snide and almost always incorrect judgements of people they don't know, as well as all those they hold in contempt while calling it "hating the sin" or "supporting the weak". Their missions seem to be to save all individuals from any personal rights they might possibly, somehow, get the government to protect, so they might use their free will to do something which offends the sense of morality of right-wing nutjobs.., but don't ask if their neighbor's sex life harms them directly..you might get called a liberal as if they were calling your sister a strumpet, your mother a whore, and your father a fudge packer, all at once... proving that they themselves behave contemptibly on a daily basis, but it's okay for them, God told them that they have the right to demand their interpretation of moral law is the only "right" and "true" view, based not on preventing bad behaviors of only the believers, but in the mistaken idea that if they could only just forcefully prevent OTHERS from exercising fundamental rights they don't agree with, all would be well, and they'd finally be taken up in the rapture.. or be voted in for another term.. either one is fine by them.....

Yep. This stunning state of ridiculously hypocritical and nonsensical ideologies, both equally bad and equally wrong, equally dangerous and equally destructive, are what I see as the most obvious sign of the end times that all ancient civilizations told stories about. This chaotic, and inescapably idiotic time on earth is what may very well result in the imminent destruction of modern society, and all in less than three generations. And as the final death blows are dealt to our species and our planet, both sides will STILL be shouting down the opposition, using many words to say absolutely nothing, even at the end of all, claiming themselves as winners because of the obvious rightness of their positions... until the silence of oblivion shuts them all up equally, and without choosing a winner.. Because there are only losers in a battle of politics. Always. Every time. So... Finally, peace. .