In socialist Venezuela, their leader merely sets fire to it. "I believe in socialism, and I am ready to starve as many of my people as it takes to prove it! Hey, give me another slice of that filet mignon, and make sure it's medium rare this time, and--oh, shit, is this thing still on?"
The creep doesn't want his people to get any help from outside the country because then their loyalty might not be to the socialist government which--so far--has done everything with such utter incompetence that one of the most oil-rich nations on the planet has to import gasoline.
I do have to say that Venezuela is the perfect example of what socialism does, and this is what happens every time it is tried.
* * *
Hello, Ms. Donkey Chompers! It is none of your fucking business what Americans eat.
* * *
The government should not be in the business of funding this crap anyway. I notice that the NRA does not get government funding; why should Planned Parenthood?
* * *
I believe this 100%. What was once a prosperous town now is a shithole, because of astroturf.
The article does not say why the civil rights marches went there. Why was Selma chosen as the battleground? Was that part of the socialized educational system's version of history? Or was there another reason? I'd be interested in knowing that.
Still: the people marching were bused in. The people opposing them were from elsewhere, as well. In the aftermath, those who could leave, did, rather than be associated with everything that happened there, and the result is yet another ghetto.
* * *
Yeah. Yeah. Talking about Presumed Innocent, Kim du Toit lays out a lot of what is wrong with our culture, and/or our entertainment.
I've commented on this before, every time there's this or that TV series in which everyone's a bad guy. That seems to be the default position now: no one is virtuous, at all, and everyone is evil, and who the protagonist of the story is ends up being based solely on who the writers decide it is. It needs to be made pretty obvious, because otherwise the viewer won't know who to root for.
When everyone's evil, conflict is easy to generate, and you can have them do basically anything that appeals to you. This often results in a race to the bottom, where this or that character has to be shown to be more evil and ruthless than the other one. You see this especially in shows where there are a lot of temporary alliances and double-crosses.
...but it's unwatchable dreck.
At least for me, it is. I can't watch those shows, because I have absolutely no dog in the fight. I don't care if Mr. Bad Guy wins, or Mr. Other Bad Guy wins. I frequently don't even bother to learn their names.
This is why I won't watch shows like Dexter and Breaking Bad and name-your-critically-acclaimed-series. I watch the first ep and I'm just left totally cold by it.
The eponymous character in Dexter is evil. The fact that he has directed his evil into punishing criminals has no bearing on the matter: what he does is morally wrong, and if the series were about justice it wouldn't have gone past one season because he would have been sent to jail at the end of it.
Then there's the opposite kind of story, one that's much harder to tell--and that difficulty is why you usually don't see them made that way. I'm talking about something like Princess Mononoke, where just about everyone in the story is actually a good guy, and the conflict arises from their differing goals. The only real bad guy in this story is the monk, who wants to kill the Deer God for the reward money. Everyone else has good motivations, but they are at cross purposes.
But you won't see that kind of story on TV anytime soon, not as a dramatic series written for adults, because those kinds of stories are considered "trite".
* * *
Well--need to hit the store today for a few sundries. The weather is approximately "February". That's how it goes, I suppose.