Rare Moment Where Line Of Right And Left Cross In Unceremonious Ceremony Of Misconstrued Cluster Fcuk

Update: Since posting there has been what the press is calling a leftist terror attack in the US. How convenient for the right, eh. I suppose another left-right line has been crossed because the perpetrator once volunteered for the presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders, who is a lefty (I guess). This type of violence in the US isn’t about political ideology as much as it is about a society run amok that has long since gone off the cliff of sanity. But I digress.

Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas and programmes such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free markets, civil rights, democratic societies, secular governments, gender equality, and international cooperation.

-Wikipedia

First time watching the video above was odd. Second time I watched I felt uneasy. I watched it a third time to make sure that I watched it twice before. I’m a big Oliver Stone fan. Stephen Colbert is so-so. I oogle respect for Stone–even though I don’t like all his movies. Colbert is a good television corporatist and I’d rather have him up there than any of the other talkshow talkinghead $hitbags. But let me focus on Stone.

Among Oliver Stone’s great works, Platoon, JFK and W. are on my list of recommended must-see films–especially if you want to learn something about #americant. Whaaaaaaa? You mean you haven’t seen W.? Get on it, dear worst-reader! With that in mind, I eventually realised that watching Stone get into a pissing contest with a talkshow host isn’t the worst part of this video. I actually found some comfort in watching Stone stand by his conviction of being apolitical when it comes to dealing with that thing that is ruining the world for those of us who don’t have and nor do we want riches.

Ruining this world, you ask, dear worst-reader?

Indeed. Stone has done interviews slash documentaries on Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro and now Vladimir Putin, among others. I’m worst-wondering, of those Stone has interviewed, does he have a preference for lefties? If so, is Stone somehow masking his desire perhaps to be a dictator? (Ha. Ha. Ha.) And by-the-buy, are these dictators from the political left? Perhaps my question is mute. Nonetheless.

I believe that the reason Stone does these interviews is to help the blissfully ignorant among us, i.e. those who would enable and facilitate political conservatism, i.e. those who have given the world #Trump and at the same time practically annihilated liberalism and now go about their bidness as though nothing is wrong–except for #Trump’s hair… blah, blah, blah…

In other worst-words, Stone makes these documentaries in order to provide some information which can then lead to knowledge that is otherwise unavailable and/or unattainable to the masses. For that we should all be thankful. What we shouldn’t be thankful for, of course, are confused talkshow hosts.

What is the difference between a conservative and a liberal? (Wiki definitions provided above and below.)

I remember when the conservative madness was peaking back in the late 1980s. I was in college and working odd jobs and wasting a lot of kisses on too many girls. Between the Iran-Contra affair and the S&L crisis, there was something in the air back then. It was a stench. The stench was (still is) conservatism. For the longest time I didn’t understand conservatism. But then came Rush Limbaugh. I read Rush’s first book and listened–for a while–to his radio show. One of the things Rush said that stuck with me–even to this day–is that Nazis were liberals. He went on about how conservatives, real conservatives, couldn’t do what the Nazis did. He even went as far as to claim that because Adolf Hitler was a failed artist and that Joseph Goebbels was a failure at everything except running his mouth, Nazis had to be liberals. This is the reason I can’t watch faux newz, dear worst-reader. Conservatives turn things around, up-side-down, in-and-out, force black to be white and white to unicorn purple, etc. Only a conservative mind can claim and try to rationalise the idear that Nazis were liberals.

Liberals are hippies, dude. That’s all they really are. Thank goodness not all of them want to smoke dope and lay around all day. But they do want justice. They want justice all the time. That’s it.

-worstwriter

There is obviously a fine line between right & wrong when it comes to things like power and money and status and position in this world. I can tolerate that. What I can’t tolerate is when someone looses his or her way simply because he or she can’t tell the proper time on a clock that is wrong twice a day. Colbert’s attempt to attack Stone because he thinks Stone is sympathising with Putin is a grand mistake. Colbert obviously can’t see for himself that Stone’s documentary is a way to inform the blissfully ignorant. To Stone it doesn’t matter if who he interviews is from the right or the left. I feel somewhat embarrassed for Colbert that he obviously doesn’t know that. Colbert crosses the line not unlike conservatives cross lines–all the time. The saddest part, as history has shown us, is that I’m not sure a blissfully ignorant audience can handle this. Indeed. The conservative stench is blinding.

Conservatism is a political and social philosophy that promotes retaining traditional social institutions in the context of culture and civilization. By some definitions, conservatives have variously sought to preserve institutions including religion, monarchy, parliamentary government, property rights and the social hierarchy, emphasizing stability and continuity, while the more extreme elements called reactionaries oppose modernism and seek a return to “the way things were”. The first established use of the term in a political context originated with François-René de Chateaubriand in 1818, during the period of Bourbon restoration that sought to roll back the policies of the French Revolution. The term, historically associated with right-wing politics, has since been used to describe a wide range of views.

-Wikipedia

Rant on.

-T

Politburo PLUTOcracy Behaviourism

In all of this worst-talk about elections, The Donald, the feminine losing, how it all came to pass, one very important thing has been forgotten. What is it that makes this freak show happen? If there was ever an essence to something, there is certainly an essence here. Or are we dealing with quintessence?

Indeed. When was the last time you watched a Pluto cartoon?

But before we continue, dear worst-reader, have a look/listen at the vid above.

Oh how I wish I could have voted for Bernie. What a bit of real hope & change he would have been. Or? Who knows. After the last eight years maybe the wishes of rational thinkers everywhere is just too farfetched. Fetch, indeed. What is clear is that if Bernie were president-elect right now, and if the world could rid itself of ugly white-men and their comb-overs, we’d still be stuck where we’re stuck.

We are in a Pluto cartoon.

If Bernie had a comb-over would he look just like The Donald?

BEHAVIOURISM.

You are where you are because of how you behave. And by “behave” I really mean silly.

Have you seen that vid of Breitbart yelling atoccupiers? No? Here it is:

What a great juxtaposition, eh? Two completely different videos. Yet both videos deal with the same thing.

How you behave in your PLUTOcracy cartoon of life.

I know. I know. The first vid (of Bernie) isn’t directly about how one behaves but I put it in this post because, well, it bleeds the collective sickness that is behaviourism. The second video is ALL about behave and coincidently features the man who founded the propaganda internet site that will slap you in the face just like a 1950s dad while he tries to get you, his young progeny, to stop listening to rock-n-roll. I mean, this is where we’re at, dear worst-reader. Bernie (1st vid) will talk your head off about this or that and Breitbart (2nd vid) will just scream at you because of how stupid both of you are. This is the world you must live in. Do you live in a cartoon?

Oh. And BTW. You have been living in a poliburo for most of your life. Your behaviour mandates it. Do as you’re told. Pay your owners. Debt.

Bernie, because of how he behaves, doesn’t want you to know something. He also doesn’t want you to know that the PLUTOcracy is now complete. In fact, your PLUTOcracy might be nicknamed Pluto and looks just like the dangling dog from Disney. You need to focus on that dog and its doghouse. It’s right around the corner from the house you will never pay-off. You will be living with Pluto soon enough. Cartoon.

Or maybe not.

That said. I’m having another early morn laughing session thinking about the consequences of life, liberty and the freedom to be stupid. Way to go #Americant.

Rant on.

-t

Chasing Meaninglessness Beyond The Pale Of Wishing Your Bubbles Are Bigger Than Mine

http://www.chasingbubblesmovie.com/

Warning: major spoiler alert.

This is a really cool little documentary. If you can call it a documentary. If you don’t call it a documentary then what do you call it? A movie? A film? A TV show? A theatrical trailer for a film that is actually a warning to future generations about the pitfalls of…

  1. Not being able to chose your parents
  2. It’s not worth it anymore to actually work for a living (and for that you can thank your parents).

But I digress. And here comes the spoiler. Would you believe that some schmuck from a rich family who had everything paid for him from birth to his education and then even provided him a van to live in while he sought the meaning of life struggling to work for the only industry left in #americant–the financial sector–and then, out of life-frustration bagged it all so he could sail around the world in a f’n boat? That’s right, dear worst-reader. The star of this film is a kid who was born with PTSD or became so confused with his rearing that in order to cope with the pitfalls of having to work among other greed-mongers and automatons he lost his sh*t and decided to prove to the ocean that things float. When he finally realised that all his floating was done, guess what happens? He docks his boat and continues his travels on land and finds the trash-heap of the earth, India. While in India he catches typhoid fever and f’n dies.

Let me repeat that because Stupid needs to be repeated about as much as Stupid needs to have documentary films made.

This kid takes something like a three year journey around the world on a (relatively) cheap, used sailboat, partying the whole time with his friends, alluding to the trauma of his family, and when he’s done he realises that all he’s achieved is the humdrum of his birth. And because that’s not enough he continues his pseudo-thrill-seeker bullsh*t life and goes off to India without getting any immunisations–because he so smart from the first world!–and catches typhoid fever and dies.

Now let’s make a documentary film TV movie about this kid.

Oh. And here’s another spoiler . I guess you could also call it the catcher of this film. Right at the end the film maker(s) throw in the thought that maybe this whacked-out rich kid ain’t dead after all. Really? How original. I mean (sarcasm on)… the world really is gonna miss this kid (sarcasm off).

Still. Since I love sailing, it is a movie worth seeing. Hence my worstwriter recommendation. And so. May stupid white people that have created this f-upped world find their cheap thrills and then catch some fever and go, finally, away.

Prosit stupid people and be careful when you drink India’s grey water.

Rant on.

-t

Waking Up With Chinaski, Wanda And The Lie Of Persuasion

Read any Bukowski lately? Me either. Yet I woke up this morn with two things in my head. The movie Barfly and the art of persuasion. A strange mix indeed.

Let’s begin with Henry Chanski and Wanda Wilcox waxing misanthropy.

Wanda: I can’t stand people, I hate them.
Henry: Oh yeah?
Wanda: Do you hate them?
Henry: No, but I seem to feel better when they’re not around.

As far as persuasion goes, check out the vid above, which I watched before I went to bed. The creator of Dilbert can do more than draw laughs in the shape of cartoons. He can also hypnotise and persuade. Wow. Because of what he can do he can also predict the fall of a nation. But who’s listening? Those who read comics? Indeed.

What do these two mind bending things (Bukowski + Dilbert) have in common? Well, nothing. Except that I woke up with both in my head this morning and for the life of me can’t figure out why.

Nomatter.

I don’t miss Charles Bukowski. In fact, I’m glad he’s dead. More reality based grand literature the world most certainly doesn’t need. And Dilbert? Well, Maher asks in the vid above if there is anyone in the audience that’s never read a Dilbert comic. I can raise my hand on that one. Of course I’ve heard of Dilbert, but I can honestly say I’ve never read one. Reason? I fucking hate Dilbert. I hate Dilbert because Dilbert is part of what keeps America #americant. Comics like Dilbert only prove that society is stupider than dumb-waiting whores stuck in shallow wells of eunuchs mistook for The Donald at the voting booth managed by a world of cocksucking corporatists that think and live like cartoons and will never realise that only Henry and Wanda have the answer.

And one last thing. Persuasion only works on the gullible–or, to paraphrase a wise man–on the suckers born every minute.

Rant on.

-Tommi

Apple Pie, Pumpkin Sky, Bern It To The F'n Ground Already

Repeating myself goes like this: I wanted Hillary in 2008. Not repeating myself goes like this: I wanted Hillary in 2008 but…

That may bring you, dear worst-reader, to ask the following question: Why the “but” and why now? Well. I suppose most of the/my reasoning for wanting Hillary can be traced to a bus ride in DC in 2010 where I attended the Rally To Restore Sanity. When I got on the public bus it was already filled with young rally goers on their way to The Mall. One of those goers was passing out pieces of tape that, once written on with a black permanent marker, could be put on your hat or your clothing and thereby you can declare your favourite Barry-O political accomplishment. When the young rally goer turned to me to ask if I wanted to join the group in supporting Barry-O, I nodded my head and said: But could you please write on mine: Hillary ’08. Suddenly the commotion and enthusiasm of all the young rally goers in the bus stopped. They all stared at me as though I was alien. As quick as they were called-out on the lie of the(ir) democracy, they also lost interest in the middle aged sour puss with an odd sense of humour.

I was against Barry-O as president for three basic reasons:

  1. He’s from Chicago
  2. He’s a neoliberal
  3. He’s naive

I can now state without remorse that Barry-O is the single greatest president in my life time. I love the guy. I even went out of my world travel way to vote for him–twice! Btw, I did the same thing voting against dipshit Dubya Bush. Which means, somehow and in hindsight, the greatest thing Barry-O has done is that Dubya enabled him to be elected. I know. I know. That last sentence doesn’t make much sense. But lets run with it.

Now that the republican field has been cleared of all its sh*t stains, except one, it’s time to focus on the other side of the same coin. With that in mind, allow me to interject this: I like the American bipartisan political system. I like the US Constitution, which is also kinda bipartisan. No other place on earth is as politically cool as the US–which I endearingly refer to as my beloved united mistakes of #americant more often than I probably should. That said, I’ve been having a hard time supporting Hillary like I used to support her. Does that mean Bernie has changed me politically? No, it doesn’t. Does that mean I believe all the BS that’s being spewed about email servers? No, it doesn’t. Do I even have anything negative to say about Hillary and her record? No, no, no. Yet, I’m starting to drift. Or. I’ve just boarded a DC bus. The girl turns to me and asks: what would you like on your piece of tape, sir? I look around the bus at all the automaton millennial faces that make up #americant and say: Please, young lady, write on my piece of tape: I’m feeling the Bern.

The above video is not overly convincing. In fact, it feels like a repeat of the other time Bernie Sanders was on Maher’s show. Yet, over the past few weeks I’ve been more and more weary of throwing my useless eating vote Hillary’s way. But again, I’m not defecting from Hillary because of all the BS that’s said about her. It’s just that, she’s not been moved enough by all the right (as in correct) BS that Bernie says. I’ve lived long enough in socialised countries to know that if Hillary can’t wake up to the reality that Bernie is stirring in the US right now, then maybe she’s not the right candidate.

Wow. It almost hurts for me to worst-write that.

Don’t get me wrong. I’ll vote for whomever gets the Democratic nomination. But in the last couple of days I’ve been hearing the call of Bernie 2016 more than the call of Hillary 2008. And if you’re wondering what I think of Trump if Hillary doesn’t get the nomination? Well, I’ve been giving that some thought, too. You know, maybe it would be better if Trump, i.e. pumpkin head, wins against Bernie and not against Hillary, i.e. a used apple pie. Why? The phoenix cannot rise without its ashes.

Link:

Rant on.

-Tommi

 

Do Your Job Sounds The Same As Get A Job

Who knew that rational thought existed in the united mistake’s Senate? Why aren’t there more Senators like this one? Oh yeah, #americant prefers batsh*t. Now, if only I could get through a #trump2016 speech. Wait. Let me swallow some mustard water first. There. Now I can watch a Trump speech.

Rant on. -Tommi

This vs That And Something Above The Snowball(den) Effect

As usual, dear worst-reader, worst-writer is shocked. (But I’m not surprised.) I’m shocked that #americants once again just don’t get it. I mean, come on. Do you really believe that Blackberry died such a tragic death because the Canadians are so bad at managing a corporation? Or could the whole demise of Blackberry have something to do with the fact that it lost its edge in security? Ok. Ok. I have absolutely nothing to substantiate a claim that Blackberry went under because it lost-out on the secure-phone game. But I can say this: the fact that Apple has to answer to the US government because it made products that are secure enough to prevent a multi-billion-dollar funded security apparatus from cracking customer passwords…. Yeah. ‘Nough said. With that in mind, let’s do a worst-writer run-down of what’s happened here so far.

  1. Yet another horrific murder spree takes place in San Bernardino, CA, USA. This murder spree is different than any other murder spree because, well, it was committed by… (wait for it) “terrorists”.
  2. One of the murderers possesses an iPhone, which, btw, was issued by his US employer.
  3. After the murder spree and during the subsequent criminal investigation of it, it’s determined that the culprit shut off the auto back up settings of his US employer issued iPhone.
  4. When the US authorities discovered that a few days of backups were missing they decided that they needed that information in order to further their investigation.
  5. The US authorities, via court order, requested that Apple provide a means to crack the security settings of their iPhones. In other words, Apple has to rewrite its iPhone operating system so that US investigators can attempt to re-install the new operating system on the phone they want to crack. If that works, then US investigators will attempt to “brute force” cracking the iPhone and its user’s access password.
  6. Brute-forcing a password means nothing more than being able to submit millions upon millions of password inputs on the phone. Preventing multiple inputs of passwords is the fundamental means of securing the device.

Ok. I’ll stop there. But if you get a chance to see the video I’ve linked to in this post (see above), heed this: the entire conversation about this issue is wrong. The fact that Apple’s security methodology is being discussed means nothing more than the US has failed after it has invested multiple trillions of taxpayer dollars into a system that was unable to do anything about… the Boston bombing, 9/11, London, Madrid, Paris…

Once again, #americant and the automatons that are part of its hugely expanded government protection apparatus have failed. But then again, failing upwards is winning. And so. While failing all one has to do is tap into the ingenuity of corporatist that don’t fail (as much) and all that taxpayer waste will be fine. Or maybe not. Good luck suckers. And…

Rant on. -Tommi