People don't come here because of high-minded ideals about liberty. They come here because they can make money. Dry that up, and the people will automatically stop coming.
Denninger's plan would help do that--but that would be a finishing step more than a first one. If we really prosecuted employers who hire illegals, and if we didn't let illegals claiming "asylum" simply skip out on their hearings, and-and-and...then there'd be a lot less of it going on.
* * *
China emits nearly one-third of the human atmospheric carbon budget. So let's talk about getting China's carbon emissions under control before we start talking about the US, which emits half as much carbon as China does.
* * *
I'll have to check this one out. Funan is an animated movie set against the jolly backdrop of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. Woohoo! Enjoy this gleeful romp through the exciting world of communism! Sing along with the joyful songs of the workers--which will surely have you tapping your toes!--as they cheerfully give their all for the state! This film wi--eh?
Oh. I am told that the Khmer Rouge was, in fact, murderously violent and horrifyingly oppressive, and that there were no happy songs sung in the work camps.
I think it's important for people to see what communism actually does, as opposed to what it says it does. Communists in general are very big on promises, but because what they are trying to do is completely antithetical to human nature it is utterly doomed to fail, every time; and when it fails, they start killing people in job lots.
It's important to remember that communism is socialism is fascism. It cannot be otherwise. These are not three separate ideologies but three aspects of the same thing, and that one thing is government coercion. Whichever label you apply, it's government sticking a gun in your face and telling you that you will do what they tell you, regardless of how you feel about it. It's a boot stomping a human face.
And if you think it's not, I invite you to look at the case of that English kid who died not too many months ago. His parents wanted to take him to another country for treatment. England's National Health Service said "No." They begged to be allowed to go to the US or anywhere, but NHS said "absolutely not," not even when an Italian hospital said they'd treat the kid for free. NHS had said the kid would not be treated for his illness, and so he was not, and he died under the "care" of England's socialized medical system.
That is socialism.
* * *
Incidentally? That last little bit, about the kid? People laughed at Sarah Palin when she talked about "death panels," but guess what?
* * *
Yes, Democrats, please run on this shit in 2020. Go right ahead and run on wrecking the economy and taxing the hell out of people. Add "Impeach Trump!" to your campaign promises.
You guys keep fucking that chicken so the entire country votes Trump in 2020.
* * *
As if I needed one, another reason not to shop at Target.
That's the kids' section. But what someone does in their own bedroom is none of my business, am I right? I mean, it's not like anyone wants to turn your kid gay, you goofball bible beater.You know what? The writer of the AoSHQ piece, "Open Blogger", has opinions and attitudes that closely mirror my own:
No. They just want to, you know, present it as an option for kids--a really cool, socially acceptable one that'll earn you group praise and maybe a bit of friendly life coaching from a totally-not-trying-to-have-sex-with-you adult homosexual.
It's about sharing and acceptance. Also, it's about being part of a community that accounts for more than 80% of U.S. syphilis cases, but shhhhh! That's bigot talk. Love is love.
I admit that I used to take a very libertarian attitude towards homosexuality. I was even neutral on gay marriage up until about 10 years ago. But this acceleration-ism has hardened my position.I was never neutral on gay marriage but I took a "live and let live" attitude towards the rest of it.
At the very least, if homosexuality is going to be presented as not only normal, but something to be celebrated by children, then we should talk about what comes with it.
Let's start with this. According to a survey, 28% of homosexual men have had more than 1000 partners, 43% estimated they had sex with 500 or more partners, while 83% of the homosexual men surveyed estimated they had had sex with 50 or more partners in their lifetime.
Is this something to be proud of? Is this what you'd want for your kids?
Here's another. Remember how gay marriage was pitched to the squares as no different than heterosexual marriage. It was a lie. Homosexual men do not practice monogamy, even in marriage.
Until I began learning what that lifestyle actually entailed. The "acceleration-ism" stuff, too.
In my college days I had a friend who delighted in trying to horrify me with things that homosexuals do. I've never been very easy to shock, so when he told me about things like "felching" it garnered an eyeroll rather than any kind of outrage. (If you do not know what felching is, I strongly recommend that you DO NOT look it up. Just accept that it's disgusting and leave it at that.)
No, what it took for me was the discussion on why HIV/AIDS spread through the homosexual community so fast. Going back to that "lifetime partners" statistic, that was why; and it was not uncommon for a majority of homosexual men to have lots of anonymous sex with as many partners as possible--and when told "This is what's spreading HIV," they decided it was just anti-gay propaganda and kept on keeping on. They protested to keep those places open, and would not allow anything to impede the party. HIV was indetectable; there was no test for it. It was also untreatable, and fatal--and the gay community refused to take any steps to curtail its spread.
The media present the gay lifestyle as a kind of reflection of heterosexual life: gays are just men who love men instead of women, and if they were left to themselves and all bigotry was erased they'd quietly settle down in monogamous relationships blah blah blah etcetera.
The problem is, it's not so. They don't. They won't. The lifestyle itself is built around promiscuity--and the fact that the sex clubs and bathhouses remained open despite the presence of an indetectable, untreatable, fatal STD demonstrates that.
* * *
Speaking of which, the first ep of the latest season of Black Mirror--
First ep of the season and they're trying to get themselves another award from a LGBTAGNEAGM group, like they got last year for "San Junipero", the show about two lesbians downloading their consciousnesses and living in a digital stromatolite. I wrote about that one already (though I cannot find the post) so I won't rehash that.
This ep's basic story is about this married guy, and his best friend (male) gives him a VR game. The two of them play a fighting game and they always play the same characters--him a male one, the friend a female one. They try the VR version and after beating each other up a few times the girl kisses the guy.
The next time they play, they talk about how they were both drunk, and start up the game, and go right to making out in the game. This turns into sex, of course; and now we have a story about the married guy having an affair with his male best friend in the VR game, basically a lampshaded homosexual relationship. At one point our hero sends a text message to the other guy, telling him that he can't play tonight since it's his wedding anniversary, and almost includes an "X" at the end of the message, signifying a kiss. But he deletes the X before sending the message.
They try kissing in real life, and nothing happens, but they end up back in the game, and--yeah.
Even so, his wife notices that he's not interested in sex any longer, and worries about an affair. Eventually it all comes out, and at the end of the story it's his birthday again and he's allowed--for one night--to go into the game with his buddy and have all the virtual sex he wants while she gets to go have herself a one-night-stand in the real world. On the plus side, it does look as if she's a little dissatisfied by this.
That series had already put me off, to a considerable extent. It's nothing but dystopia; and that stupid lesbian episode was enough to take the series off my "watch" list. Mrs. Fungus insisted that I watch it last night with her, but that episode is enough to convince me that I do not need to watch any further episodes.
It's not just the lampshaded homosexual relationship. It's the immorality: guy having an affair, cheating on his wife, having that being presented as a happy outcome. A lot of that could have been excused, but the story was BORING and I didn't give a rat's ass about the characters. I was given no reason to invest anything in them before the VR sex started, and my reaction to that development was disgust because of how they handled it. And then the logical developments from the VR sexual relationship--you know, divorce, a real-world relationship, any change at all from status-quo-ante--none of those happened.
It was pointless. "Guy discovers that he loves to have virtual sex with his best male friend, but it has no permanent effect on his life." That's not science fiction; at best it's "sex positive" propaganda. Because oh, his "alternative lifestyle" must not be shown in any kind of negative light because that would be homophobia (or "transphobia" or something). It would be homophobic to suggest that this guy's VR sex life would wreck his marriage; why, the problems he had weren't caused by the sex itself; it was the secrecy that was doing it. Right? Right?? So now that it's all out in the open and they're both stepping out on each other once a year, now it's all fine and dandy!
I say that the wife did not look satisfied by the arrangement only because of the expression she had on her face as she walked into the singles' bar at the end. She wasn't smiling, she wasn't glad to be there; she only started smiling when a guy at the bar smiled at her. I say that's a plus because she shouldn't be satisfied with this arrangement--not given the mid-episode speech she gives about what "commitment" means!--and at least there is a sign that there is a consequence of her husband's behavior--that there has been some change in their lives due to the presence of the VR technology. Because otherwise the VR game is just a MacGuffin, an excuse to show a guy having a homosexual affair; that makes the show "not SF" because it could have been anything that led the guy to do that. The VR tech just makes it possible to lampshade it more effectively. And it's also "not SF" because the technology doesn't do anything; if there are no consequences--good or bad--it's meaningless.
Black Mirror, back on the "avoid" list.
* * *
Well, it's Saturday, and I have yard work to do. Whee!