Just Let Me -- G -- Indoctrinate You!

Showing posts with label men of means. Show all posts
Showing posts with label men of means. Show all posts

Friday, June 10, 2011

It's a Little Boys & Big Girls Thing

Dear America,
"Socialism 
is a philosophy of failure, 
the creed of ignorance, 
and the gospel of envy, 
its inherent virtue 
is the equal sharing of misery."  

Winston Churchill

rough week when it comes to men and politics; a one liner that could very well continue to stand on its own, even if you dropped the last two words, if you ask me.

so now you must be wondering, what does Churchill have to do with it?  well in the matter of men and politics, the answer is everything and nothing at the same time.  This morning, this quote seems to say it all:  one good man declaring the utter idiocy of an ideology without one mean-spirited untruth about it.  It's simple eloquence is beyond words.

now, considering I started this "G thing" out of frustration with both subjects [men and politics] just shy of two years ago -- venturing to keep an American girl diary on the day -- I can only imagine what it will feel like twenty years from now, after studying man and politics, smart phones and dumb things, years down the road.  kinda like an Ann Coulter.

I mean, my God, she has been at this for literally decades -- basically, what might very well be all her life if we were to round things up.  How does she do it and keep herself sane?  [yes, so in my humble opinion, G totally believes she is...and how!]  And more that, that girl is one smart cookie.

Ans it goes without saying, that this girl would love to catch her debate any liberal -- just bring it.  Alan Colmes would be chopped up into a hundred pieces as soon as he opens his mouth, that's all I'm saying.  Even James Carville: gone in sixty seconds.  Whatever you could throw at her would be deflected by her armor and sharp wit before three words are out of your mouth; for she has studied 'the other side' as if being her prey -- she knows what you will bring, knowing every deep dark facet of your mindset, and is aptly, fully, methodically leading you into a trap every time.

Granted, she is hard, fierce, stealth on most days; and if we lay it all out there, she has developed one tough heavy duty shell around her, maybe in spite of the deadly, toxic environment in which she lives [and in a snap, it would appear G is returning to Darwinian day of yesterday].   And why?  Because she has had to.

Any conservative writer, commentator, pundit, journalist...friends, neighbors and countrymen...have had to adapt to the conditions on the ground.  And right quick if they want to survive.  While this phenomenon -- visceral attacks on an entire set who just so happen to think differently than the way the left brain thinks -- is set to get worse before it gets better.  To be sure -- and going the way of unemployment numbers, jobs reports and economic growth -- it is, regrettably, very much expected.

But, of course, in the weird way we think in G land, Coulter is so out of my league -- so distinguished in the area of study, of men and politics, of left and right, of good and evil -- I can see how  she can be intimidating to even the most learned leftist thinker.  Coulter is like a tall and skinny brain with a blonde bombshell attached.  What [liberal] man can really hold his own against all that?  [same with you Sydney kitties...you got nothin' on this one]

And really, digging deeper, and at the same time being totally superficial -- just look at her hair!   Every hair is long, straight, blonde,  with not one out of place; every strand stands at attention ready for their next orders.  Who can do that day after day after day?  Humidity, fuggetaboutit.  Fly-aways, not on your life.  Even Coulters hair knows exactly how to respond, no matter the conditions on the ground.  Unheard of....
 
now for me.  G.  my hair never looks the same way twice, let alone 365 days a year, year in and year out.  my locks, are like my blog, you never know whatcha gonna get...even I don't know until I get to the end...for it's like it's got a mind of it's own.  and this may be more information than you care to know, but in my view, regarding my hair, my philosophy seems to fall along the lines 'the messier the better.'  and we're back to how I blog.  that is soooo weird........

wow G, nothing like letting it all hang out this happy friday morn, is there?

Now something she said in an interview relating to Anthony Weiner, the twitter twit, delivered an ah-ha moment in an instant.  She basically said, something to the effect of ...these guys, these politicians behaving badly, are like a warped return of a personal nature.   It dates back to some kind of juvenile injustice of the hormonal kind; that these guys probably couldn't get dates in high school, and now that they have reached gluttonous levels of power and prestige and bank accounts, they feel almost sanctioned, endowed by every right under the privileges of civil servant, to act out.  The little boy who never rated with the girls then, is finally having his day.

One look at Weiner and she might have a point.

She also pointed out something else unexpected:  the infidelity rate for men is at about 15% [just to be fair and balanced, ten for women].   This may sound absurd, but I would have thought far worse.

But let's reintroduce Churchill to the discussion:  Socialism loves chaos -- the civil unrest, lack of jobs, loss of scruples, debauchery and lawlessness of all kinds.  It feeds off of the unrest like a "philosophy of failure,
the creed of ignorance, 
and the gospel of envy, 
its inherent virtue
is the equal sharing of misery".

The thing is, it is a good day for America if these infidelity numbers ring true.  This means we are returning - or quite possibly never left --  an era when integrity and honor actually means something.  Being loyal to the love we have for another, becomes something we fight for, live for, yearn for. Like most everything, the eighty-twenty rule seems to rule the day.  There will always be some people willing to stick their reputation and honor on the line for a cheap thrill, a fast high, a quick twit with someone they don't even know.  There will always be that, because human nature is not infallible.  We fail sometimes.

The good news is that most of us really don't.   Most of us want a shared life of happiness ever after; most of us want to do the right thing for our baby; most of us want to expect the other person to treat us with loving care and do the same in return.  This is what we want, as a majority.

These may be universal values when it is all said and done -- but the reality is, like it or not, every bit of it comes with a conservative underpinning.

More Americans believe in the right to life, than those who do not.

More Americans believe in less government, than those who do not.

More Americans believe in the free market, than those who do not.

More Americans believe in God, a Creator, than those who do not.

More Americans believe in traditional marriage, than those who do not.

More Americans believe and respect our Constitution, than those who do not.

More Americans believe you teach a man to fish and all else shall be added unto you, than those who don't.

This president was raised deeply rooted in the teachings of social justice -- having been raised by a mother and grandparents who believed in Socialism, following the dreams from my father anchored in Marxism, and being a staunch believer in community organizers far and wide -- the unions, the alinsky armies, groups with intent to bring about civil unrest, creating social divides and conflicts when there should be none.

In a way, our president was raised with the deep understanding of man and politics, especially of the social justice kind, through and through.

then there is this:
"It is a happy circumstance
in human affairs
that evils which are not cured in one way 
will cure themselves in some other."
--Thomas Jefferson

Which brings me nearly full circle.

You know what I would like to see; I would like to see Obama up against the Coul-train of thought.  They are like exact opposites in most every way, are they not? [talking just politics here, not talkin' race or hair color at all.. even though for kicks and giggles we could go down that track too...he is black and she is white; his hair, very short and going grey by the minute; hers, long and highlighted, probably every six to eight weeks. now see,  that wasn't so bad now was it? ...ah so quickly we can digress, no?]

Obama believes that government is what saves the stupid people who know no better....the "philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."  even if he never says it out loud, this is what he believes.  so much so, he is fundamentally transforming America on these very ideas as we speak.

Coulter, not so much.  She believes in the philosophy of prosperity, the creed of knowledge, goodness and charity, and the gospel of God's grace, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of opportunity, with no guarantee of happiness, come today or tomorrow.

Continuing on now, as if I know her as much as I hate her perfect hair --  she believes that good and evil lives in each new day, and it is how we respond to it, with it, and around it, that creates a country worth saving no matter what other people say.  She walks her talk and is willing to debate anyone, anywhere, anytime, about it.  and to anyone who gives it a go, good luck with that.  Anthony Weiner would be fun to watch; but now, then again, like high school, she wouldn't give him the time of day.

as we started out the day, men and politics are an interesting breed, indeed; having already admitted, just men, in general, is enough said.  [don't hate, I love you guys -- matter of fact, a couple of you are worth having my heart xoxo]  But in all honesty, it may take a lifetime for a girl to fully understand them; AND, fair is fair -- it comes with an equal portion and obligation of boy understanding girl.  That is what makes life so fabulous and worth living, if I don't say so myself.  Some days, you just never know what you're gonna get.

and with that the day is done.

Make it a Good Day, G

how about this guy...

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Dear America,


WHITE, STRAIGHT,
REPUBLICAN, MALE
how else can I piss you off today?

plenty.
And right now, I wish a lot of you would just STFU -- no, scratch that, make that just one of you.

Yes,  I did.
Three days in a row.
Try to keep up as it is Hat Trick Wednesday -- featuring the same beat but to a different drum.  And today, we start with Ben, as in Ben Stein:


Unbelievable.

1.) If he is such a womanizer and violent guy with women, why didn't he ever get charged until now? If he has a long history of sexual abuse, how can it have remained no more than gossip this long? France is a nation of vicious political rivalries. Why didn't his opponents get him years ago?

Using the old, well he couldn't have done this because he has never been caught doing it before; it would be one thing if the guy had a history of such behavior -- but this one time thing out of the blue -- pulleezey sleezy. Interesting approach.

2.) In life, events tend to follow patterns. People who commit crimes tend to be criminals, for example. Can anyone tell me any economists who have been convicted of violent sex crimes? Can anyone tell me of any heads of nonprofit international economic entities who have ever been charged and convicted of violent sexual crimes? Is it likely that just by chance this hotel maid found the only one in this category? Maybe Mr. Strauss-Kahn is guilty but if so, he is one of a kind, and criminals are not usually one of a kind.
Taking the common man approach --  show me a typical economist (feel free to substitute with doctor, accountant, priest, or countryman) and I'll show you an innocent man; like, "economists" don't commit rape!  ahhh seriously, Ben?

3.) The prosecutors say that Mr. Strauss-Kahn "forced" the complainant to have oral and other sex with him. How? Did he have a gun? Did he have a knife? He's a short fat old man. They were in a hotel with people passing by the room constantly, if it's anything like the many hotels I am in. How did he intimidate her in that situation? And if he was so intimidating, why did she immediately feel un-intimidated enough to alert the authorities as to her story?

Ben, really, shut up.  Because HE was unarmed?  Just a short fat old man? And you seem to have left out "naked" by the way.  What?  So she didn't say "no" loud and clear enough?   Was it in Spanish perhaps?  No means no all over the world, doncha know; as it is a universal language easily recognized and understood.


4.) Did the prosecutors really convince a judge that he was a flight risk when he was getting on a flight he had booked long beforehand? What kind of high-pressure escape plan is that? How is it a sudden flight move to get on a flight booked maybe months ago?

Okay, so because his secretary booked the flight in advance -- oh, looky there, lucky for me I am leaving the country in a matter of hours -- perhaps I could squeeze in a little bad behavior before I go?  Hmmm now what to do, what to do...  But even if the alleged crime wasn't pre-meditated, but just the spontaneous combustion upon the immediate reaction of a woman walking into his room -- somehow, applying Ben's logic, the flight risk argument evaporates into thin air because he was planning on it?  The guy is wealthy, has lots of friends, and one of them is bound to have a personal jet just hanging around -- if there was ever a guy with a flight risk...he foots the bill.

5.) Mr. Strauss-Kahn had surrendered his passport. He had offered to stay in New York City. He is one of the most recognizable people on the planet. Did he really have to be put in Riker's Island? Couldn't he have been given home detention with a guard? This is a man with a lifetime of public service, on a distinguished level, to put it mildly. Was Riker's Island really the place to put him on the allegations of one human being? Hadn't he earned slightly better treatment than that? Any why compare him with a certain pedophile from France long ago? That man had confessed to his crime. Mr. Strauss-Kahn has not confessed to anything.

  ...love the part  "based on allegations of one human being."  Guessing before he's done we should be lucky Stein is actually referring to her as human.  Discrediting the victim coming right up...

6.) People accuse other people of crimes all of the time. What do we know about the complainant besides that she is a hotel maid? I love and admire hotel maids. They have incredibly hard jobs and they do them uncomplainingly. I am sure she is a fine woman. On the other hand, I have had hotel maids that were complete lunatics, stealing airline tickets from me, stealing money from me, throwing away important papers, stealing medications from me. How do we know that this woman's word was good enough to put Mr. Strauss-Kahn straight into a horrific jail? Putting a man in Riker's is serious business. Maybe more than a few minutes of investigation is merited before it's done.

"love and admire hotel maids" to "on the other hand...complete lunatics, stealing...stealing...and more stealing..."

7.) In this country, we have the presumption of innocence for the accused. Yet there's my old pal from the Ron Ziegler/ Richard Nixon days, Diane Sawyer, anchor of the ABC Nightly News, assuming that Mr. Strauss-Kahn is guilty. Right off the bat she leads the Monday news by saying that Mr. Strauss-Kahn is in Riker's... "because one woman stood her ground..." That assumes she's telling the truth and he's guilty. No such thing has been proved and it's unfortunate for ABC to simply assume that an accusation is the same as a conviction. Maybe he's in jail because one person didn't tell the truth. I don't know one way or the other, but I sure know that there has been no conviction yet.

presumption of innocence -- unless you happen to be this hotel maid.  I mean, "I don't know one way or the other" -- so why, then, is your mouth moving?

 8.) In what possible way is the price of the hotel room relevant except in every way: this is a case about the hatred of the have-nots for the haves, and that's what it's all about. A man pays $3,000 a night for a hotel room? He's got to be guilty of something. Bring out the guillotine.

Exactly -- because he IS a man with means (funny, just like you Ben); men with means have been known to weasel out of all kinds of things -- pay people off, escape a country, send in the big guns, orchestrate a coup.  It happens every day; it is may be a minor detail to you, Ben, but to the rest of us it is duly noted and considered as just part of the character building of a man I am guessing nobody really knows -- unless you are Strauss-Kahn.

Just before parting the blogosphere you add: "But, so far, he's innocent, and he's being treated shamefully."

Shamefully?  Earth to Ben, the guy is just being booked and jailed on suspicion of raping a woman just like every other low life in New York City.  Kudos to the police chief and the entire band of civil servants looking out for those of us of questionable means,  protecting the common, ordinary people -- like the maid, for one.

Making eight unbelievable declarations -- making oh so certain that the good old boy bias is alive and well -- for a man he admits he does not even know.  That is simply astounding. Now, on many things money related, I think Ben is swell; but if I may give up my last two cents -- cause that's about all I got -- it might behoove you, BennyBoy, to shut your mouth now.  and I will do the same.

white, straight, republican, male  -- and this one not very bright today -- what a big fat disappointment and a disgrace.


Make it a Good Day, G