Category: fun

Posted on

Cali Crazy: A Texan’s take on the Golden State—part 6—Automatic trash can dumpers, sage ceremonies and one inconvenient corpse

sage

California garbage men—I mean, sanitation technicians—never had it so easy. They grab a roll-around plastic can, wheel it from curb to truck, place it in hydraulic hands and push a button. Voila! The truck lifts it, dumps it and sets it back down. They then wheel it back.

As long as it’s not too far from the curb. Or too heavy. Or too hard to get to because of a snow berm.

No more sore biceps or achy backs and plenty of juice left over for twelve-ounce curls come quittin’ time.

In Texas, the sanitation technicians are known as garbage men who, rain or snow, hot or cold, can be counted on to step around or over kid’s bicycles to empty your light—or heavy trash can.

California law require us to use (and buy) specially designed cans that make their modern can-dumping marvel and energy saver possible. More importantly, it keeps worker’s compensation claims down, which saves 2017 budget money to spend on important stuff like:

—$30M to protect illegal aliens from deportation

—$118M Startup cash for new marijuana tax department

—$6B additional funds for state employee pensions

Now that’s thinking. Safety first. Less wasted dollars on injured waste management workers in our California counties. More for wasteful programs created and managed by wastes of good legislative seats in Sacramento.

sage

Sage is all the rage

This Texan recently learned a little somethin’ about sage. It’s an herb used by California hippies to ceremoniously cleanse homes, businesses, and ventures of any and all sorts from evil spirits, negative vibes and other spiritual drags.

In Cali-speak, sage has come to mean not only the plant but also the cleansing ceremony. When a local mentions “a sage,” other locals know it as a cleansing, purging, spiritual event.

After a little digging, I uncovered its origins in Native American rituals whereby medicine men used the plant to cleanse and as incense. Around here in our little town, a sage is performed by a resident spiritualist who is typically also a massage therapist, homeopathic practitioner and/or enthusiast, and green everything proponent.

This is how I learned about a California-style sage. Rumor has it that a sage practitioner was performing the ceremony for a buyer’s new property prior to his and his family moving in. Apparently the seller was also present. During or after the ceremony, the seller noticed something in some brush he initially thought was a deer corpse. Turns out the dead deer was a dead dude.

Oops. Once the remains were removed and an investigation completed, this may have called for a re-sage. Or maybe a super sage. I guess positive thoughts and good vibes are no match for partially decomposed bodies.

Silly me

I always thought sage was something you put in your stew. Or your wise old grandfather who saved you from doin’ dumb things cuz he’d done ’em when he was a young man and learned the lessons for you.

Sage. Live long enough and in some different places, you may just learn something new. Gotta laugh at life and silly herbal ceremonies. Especially here in California.

Now there’s some sage advice for ya.

Posted on

How to get blocked from social media—for all the right reasons

social

Want to make a short and sweet splash in the world of social media? It’s easy. For the record, I’ve only been blocked twice—once on Facebook and once on Twitter—and by the same guy who I’d been 98 percent respectful toward.

My slip-up? In a Facebook reply, I wrote that he seemed angry and arrogant. He blocked me there and then on Twitter proactively—I’d never been to his page.

So it’s not like I’m getting blocked all over cyberspace and want to show you how to become persona non grata. I want to encourage you to discuss passionately and respectfully. If you do so and get blocked, you’ll have done both for the right reasons.

Let me show you three ways to get your block on:

1) Share your opinions

And do so respectfully, logically and CONFIDENTLY.

Offer a dissenting opinion with chutzpah. There’s no quicker way to get booted in today’s namby-pamby, pseudo-discussion-friendly social media scene. Disagree agreeably … with courtesy.

To dissent—no matter how respectfully or effectively—is rude and judgmental. But it can be fun and informative, too. So disagree cheerfully and with civility … be gentle … even though it probably won’t matter.

You see, nowadays, when you disagree with someone, you “invalidate” his or her opinion. It doesn’t matter how absurd it is or how kindly you are as you reduce it to a quivering blob of nonsense—civil give and take is virtually impossible.

social

How dare you!

(Internally) How dare YOU … reject my viewpoint without any real consideration and then champion such a silly opinion that a twelve-year-old could dismantle in the time it takes him to eat a cookie?

Sadly, in our snowflake, truth-less culture, all viewpoints are equally true. No matter how ludicrous an opinion, everyone has the right to be right even when they’re demonstrably, flat-out wrong. After all, how can anyone be wrong if all viewpoints feel so right? Was Hitler right about the Jews?

Crickets.

Don’t censor me
You can’t shut me up
So don’t even try
~Audio Adrenaline

2) Use corny commenter names

Note: Do this if you’ve been respectful and srill have comment bullies calling for your blocking. But do it only to comment on blogs—not on Facebook or Twitter. This step can seem disingenuous, but shouldn’t be. Isn’t what you say more important than what you call yourself? What’s in a name?

Curiously, some consider using another name to comment on a blog a breach of trust—even on blogs that allow anonymous or whatever-name-you-want-discussions. Trust? I see it as a trusty way to get back in the game.

But if you’re gonna fake it, fake it good.

When “blogmenting,” go with silly, harmless names like Lynn Guini or Bill Foled. I went with Mr. Spock once and was surprised how respectfully people interacted with me. Mr. Spock’s got real clout when it comes to the discussion scene. Of course, I had to adopt a persona of pure logic and minimal emotion, which was unsurprisingly easy for me.

Bottom line—if they miss your words because they’re hung up on your names—real discussion isn’t gonna happen anyway.

social

3) Confound them with truth

If they parrot talking points, offer them a truth cracker. This could open their cage doors to a whole world of possibilities. If they hit you with baseless assumptions, fire back with clarifying questions. Show them you care enough to understand where they’re coming from.

Say someone drops a logical fallacy bomb on you. This is a shut-down tactic most don’t even understand. Someone tried the “No true Scotsman” fallacy on me because I held that there are true Christians and people who call themselves Christian, but may not be.

Social media?

I explained that this logical fallacy application doesn’t work because a Scotsman is a true Scotsman whether he acts like one or not. A Christian shows what he is by the way he lives. A non-Christian who pretends to be a Christian will show he’s not one by his life. Nobody can fake the funk for long.

Nothing confounds like truth. Keep sharing it and they’ll either call you a hater or “judger” or try to get you banned. Or, if they’re open-minded and smart enough, they’ll try to persuade you or even admit that maybe you’re onto something. Social media discourse CAN be a learning experience.

social

Block me or ban me

I will always share truth, so do your worst, social media bullies.

As my closing argument, ponder this:

  • If someone’s viewpoint is so fragile that respectful dissent brings about a block or ban, is it truly worth discussing?
  • And if we fail to challenge the fallacy that truth is subjective and all truths are equally valid, aren’t we giving in to the spirit of the age?
  • If you care about civil discourse and its demise, will you join me by being willing to be blocked, banned and even banished in the name of truth?

We shall defend our island of objective truth, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the blogs, we shall fight on the landing pages, we shall fight on Facebook, we shall fight on Twitter, we shall never surrender.
~Lovingly lifted and adapted from Winston Churchill’s “Finest hour” speech

Posted on

From Russia with Love: Did Putin help Trump win the election?

election

That pesky Putin and his friggin’ Fancy Bear hackers … did they help Trump win? The startlingly shallow exposé that follows uncovers nothing, but answers everything. Enjoy.

Election interference. A KGB connection. An East-Meets-West Bromance of Trumputinian proportions. It reads like a scintillating spy novel and plays in the press like an international crime of the century.

Did the Russkies influence the outcome of the election? Did the press blow it? “Fake news” hurt Hillary?

Here’s the cold, hard truth—it doesn’t matter one whit who did what—Trump is our president, and there’s not a dang thing we can do about it.

But it IS fun to point fingers. And conspiracy theories about Russia haven’t been this juicy since the Cold War.

Image may be copyright protected

Let’s dig deeper

Suppose the Russians DID influence our election. How’d they pull this off and why? Does Putin despise Hillary? If so, perhaps it’s because of that silly RESET button that translated to “overload” in Russian.

Did Putin take this as a subtle snark attack on his manhood? Like maybe he thought Hillary was zinging him for his many manly shirtless horseman photos? Or for his overcharged martial arts machismo?

Granted, Putin and Hillary don’t seem to like each other. But I figured it’s because he’s a man and she’s a woman. Does the hatred run deep enough to sic his Fancy Bear hackers on her?

Image may be copyright protected

What we know and don’t know

The DNC servers got hacked, and WikiLeaks laid bare Hillary’s operatives’ election misdeeds. Did this influence the election? Probably. Should whoever hacked the DNC servers also have hacked the RNC’s? Who says they didn’t?

If they did, but chose not to release Trump’s nefarious election dealings, is it because there was nothing to release? Okay, I know what you’re thinking—are you kidding me? Trump and his Trumplings are as crooked as the day is long. You’re probably right.

But we don’t know they’re crooked based on any hard evidence. We DO know about Hillary’s minions’ odious dealings concerning Bernie Sanders. Everything else is innuendo and blind Trump hatred. You can run with innuendo all you like—it’s a free country.

 

But it isn’t FAIR

What does fairness have to do with anything? The virtue making of fairness is a uniquely American construct. The rest of the world doesn’t play that way. And if we’re honest, neither do we. For sure, Putin’s (former?) KGB operatives don’t trouble themselves with fairness.

How hackers “interfered”

Let’s analyze this election interference stuff.

Hackers hack DNC servers. In doing so, they uncover bad and “unfair” stuff. WikiLeaks publishes it. Hillary takes hits in the form of distractions that slow her momentum. Trump capitalizes by bloviating nonstop about her untrustworthiness.

Seems like politics as usual.

Did the hackers make this stuff up about Hillary’s campaign? Did they create fake emails and disguise them as John Podesta’s or Debbie Wasserman Shultz’s? I haven’t heard or read any denials from either of these schmucks. Have you?

They screwed up and got caught.

Hackers uncovered damaging information, and WikiLeaks simply revealed it to us voters. Is this election interference? Nope. Did it influence voters? Yup. But there’s a big difference between influence and interference.

As voters, we influence each other. The media influences us with their bias. Voter fraud is election interference. So is tinkering with vote counting systems.

If this “interference” is actually influence by information giving, please, Russkies, interfere EVERY time. And make sure you do so with both or all the candidates.

When voting for president, I like raw information. We don’t get it from our media, so why not get it from WikiLeaks? It’s funny how every other scrap of info WikiLeaks has provided—NOT Hillary-related—is praised with none of this handwringing over fairness.

Image may be copyright protected

The BIGLY question answered

Did the Russian (or whoever) hackers help Trump win? Who knows? But here’s what we DO know:

Damning emails helped Trump win. Sleazy Hillary operatives helped Trump win. Hillary’s arrogance, secret server and elitist and dismissive deplorable comments helped Trump win.

Trump’s capitalizing on an eight-year anger build helped Trump win. INFORMATION helped Trump win.

American voters helped Trump win.

 

Does Putin have a bromance with Trump? I don’t know, and I don’t care. 

But I doubt it because Putin is all about Putin. He’ll do or say whatever he thinks will best preserve and expand his power while, secondarily, furthering Russia’s interests. Trump’s probably the same way, except for a niggling streak of patriotism that may counter his power trip.

Perhaps that’s why Putin and Hillary hate each other. They’re more alike than they are different. Maybe it’s a matter of conflicting interests:

Hillary wanted to reign in Putin’s power and Russia’s influence through sanctions and pressure. Putin wants to do the same to us by any means possible.

Trump wants to work with Putin by schmoozing and making deals. At least for now.

Siberian-cold, hard election truths

Those who keep beating this dead horse wouldn’t give a Russian rat’s arse about any election interference, if their candidate had won. Stop whining, and give our electorate a little more credit.

But they don’t and won’t because they can’t accept the idea that Trump voters may not ALL be the caricatures the “resistance” and our media portrays them as: Angry, ignorant, deplorable Bible-clingers and gun toters.

Maybe, just maybe, many are thoughtful, value-driven, high-information voters who carefully consider any and all information about the candidates—no matter how it’s acquired—and then vote accordingly.

Is it possible that some Trump voters voted for the platform and not for the pervert? Should they have voted for his criminal opponent? If they had, there’d still be a pervert in the palace—a prowler of interns with a presidential wife to protect him by destroying even more women.

Meme may be copyright protected

Next steps

Hey, Russian hacker/Putin monster makers—Get over it. The election is done and in the books. Instead of chasing Russian ghosts, let’s secure our servers.

Intelligence agencies—Show us what you’ve got on this election interference jazz. Otherwise shut up and stop hassling Americans who don’t deserve your carte blanche surveillance.

Angry protesters—Hack this: Your candidate lost because she sucked a little more than her opponent.

It’s high time to let it go.

Trump’s our president. Like him or not, we’re stuck with him until 2020, at least. Let’s make the best of it.

Putin and the Russians will.