"It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong." ~ Thomas Sowell
It's early January 2018, this is my first entry of the year, and you're reading it whenever and I'm sorry about that, but to give myself some leeway from repercussions I've waited until now. I don't typically write about things just because things happen as sensationalism is never as sensual as emphatic fanatics would have you believe. Also, the powers get to read this and that's going to be a small adjustment that is analogous to selfless righteousness, a power that is not only unique to a very rare and exact condition, but is too much for anyone to control, and I have my doubts about it sometimes myself regarding my sanity. You would know better than I would.
Well then.
The liberal I know is sort of a scam, if and when their plans fall to waste they become embroiled in generalizations and bitter rejection of responsibility. In these later years, I've learned that I've never disagreed with them more. More than ever. They're a liberal, and to make this about me, I always had my druthers to disagree vs that person on a moral level, as to find inner peace, who'd always set me on edge with loose interpretations and indifference to emotion, which my persona of misinterpretations and blindness to any casual emotive, combined with an artificial intelligence of physical expression, was at an arm's length from real communication in the textbook sense. To rephrase, I wouldn't have chosen to question over learning from anyone in their position, and still somehow learned top down skills to communicate with liberals, not people.
Now that's a proper insult, but let's look further.
In part, the liberal agenda is at odds with a conservative agenda, skip to the next paragraph to see what I mean. This reads like any other bullshit about liberals as time has told without straying. Many lessons of liberalism, to be accepting, to be unique, to be creative, to be successful, but it is all a blur, or a scarred photo of these things when one liberal atrocity outweighs all the good intentions, full and up. I often demand people recognize that liberalism is a youthful approach, but as others describe it as naivete, it kind of fits a metaphor, liberalism is like opening your eyes in bed, you still have to get out of bed and be a productive member of society, but the liberal chooses to procrastinate by all measures. Mostly I've seen that calls for acceptance are really stage decoration so that whatever shitshow they produce you've been coerced into watching it to the end. The liberal in question once tried to exploit a tax break on a property, and when it fell thru told me along the wording 'She's a woman, you know, they're all women,' which I don't know how bad that is and prolly never will, but that's where that liberal's mind went, it was somebody else's fault just so they could sleep at night.
Where conservatism is psychopathy fading into eventual morality, liberalism is a frantic sociopathy that's very in-the-moment, but not a moment grounded in reality. For the record, and historically, one who is conservative hopes to preserve order of the known world, whereas one who is liberal hopes to preserve the future of the possible imagination, not only are these at odds with each other, they are point-specific views based in absolutism or absolute-logic, vulnerable to themselves.
Cathartic plagiarism, idealist fanaticism, counter culturalists, these are just words.
There was a talk of fake news, I shine a flashlight/torch in your eyes at night, you cannot see forward, you cannot see peripherally (sides), but the light is for me to see, clickbait is just a way to see what's in the cave of this new generation where asking a question can be inconsiderate to people who the technological singularity search engine deep within the earth, cooled by the mountains and space, answers all. Obviously, don't stare at the flashlight, or screen, all the bloody time, you're in a cave of ignorance, it's best to keep your wits about you, not backwards-mac-backwardly. In advertisement window space, your cookie list shares lite conversation with marketing programs, where you've been creates what you see, as if a book that writes itself as you read it, the first chapter and your imagination are all that's stopping the ending from being the second-to-last chapter in a horror story for the next library visitor that borrows your book of blank pages. Lending the thought that so many impossibilities, as a compulsive writer, I'm having trouble ending even this sentence. I'll be right back, I must meditate/pray/commune/chill/foresee.
I, myself, am writing to postpone my daily responsibilities, like content-creators and curators-of-quality, likewise, in part destruction, in part creation, in part consumption, there are examples of this already.
So I don't think there's such a thing as fake news, just talking heads reading random phrases from a word generator found by a search engine that shows you what you wanted to see in the first place. In the invention of constructive critisicm in the form of objective verification, the matter is subjective, to the subject as chosen, from the eyes of someone who chose it. With each step, multiplicity. So that you scream at your computer screens with a rage to wake the dead. There's no real substance to information. As many have said, proven, and repeated. Putting martial law at the bottom of the list, it's just too bad that it inspires so much murder and chaos.
Some more liberalism traits, in worrying about the chaos of a world of individualism they seek to control everything, as a personality type thru-out time, I've seen that to them diversity refers only to diversity-of-body, not of thought. In a double standard, disagreeing with diversity as defined by conformity of different faces, is defiance to liberal nature, which wants blue skies on a rainy day, can blame anyone at anytime, and in varying degrees blame and punish the innocent. In conservatism, the same thing. These are just words, it's all just clever wording.
My favorite part. This next part, if you disagree with me, you'll be wrong, and I'm writing my side of the debate, and giving you until the end of time to do the opposition research, so that you won't be wrong and whatever that means to you, before you read the next sentence, but you'll still be wrong.
I hope you're ready.
I warned you. Don't say I didn't.
The immigration debate (I live in U.S. #usa) is a fine example of liberalism at its nucking futtiest. Two wrongs don't make a right, and there are at least three wrongs going-on here. Liberals have convinced conservatives to deport illegal immigrants. In a sentence of proper defining, if "immigrant" is the verb, and they are trespassing, then the adverb is "illegal," and terms like "undocumented" and "dreamer" are superficial. The entire ploy of this entry is that planners are better than dreamers, if you can't tell.
So then.
Discouraging the strong, or the smart, and above all, the moral, from entry is a sad state of modern geopolitics. Oh? You're confused on how it's the liberals' fault? Let me explain it, jeez.
A democrat is someone who practices democracy, so that excludes liberals, and a republican is anyone who lives in a republic, thus everyone is a republican, but having muddled these terms opens the doorway to the first error, anarchy. Next, priorities have been muddled in that the country has social benefit programs, the importance of them its own debate, this society has chosen presently to keep them, which means someone here to use those programs in lieu of citizens is bad thinking. The counterpoint is often stated as that there is 'enuf money for something so trivial' because the common assumption is that 'there must be because i want it to happen,' leading to the second error, ignorance. If $ wasn't an issue, you'd have a flying carpet by now. Wow, déjà vu much? If liberals new anything about economics, they'd be conservatives. At least that's the saying.
Break.
My confusion is limited to the defined reality, those worried about credibility now when they weren't up-to-and-including-now is like asking for an umbrella in a boat because water is wet. Not making sense is its own magic I suppose. Parlance, the word was parlance. Or that on immigration the capitalists of one country agree with the communists of another, but the reverse is also true while the stated goals are pure opposites, immigration and programs, station and statement, rank and file. They're not coming from countries with amnesty and they're not bringing amnesty-for-others to the table, it even contradicts itself. If only I could've predicted everything ever.
Big plate.
Conservatives aren't all that much better, in the mirror universe I hate them in place of liberals because the cycle of violence is just that, it takes a village to raid another village, so i stay out of liberal cities and conservative dens. Enuf about me, how about ancient Rome, very patriarchy, much castes. That's bad, but honestly, they did have levels of involvement. Non citizens can't vote, new citizens had rights but couldn't vote, and citizens could vote. Criminals couldn't vote, were the law to change, none sentenced before the liberty to vote given, could vote, because that was the law before they got here. There's that shitty part where the last president made a promise and promises have to be kept, but if I were Caesar I wouldn't let you vote, on what pagan parallel world would that benefit anyone, so long as there's the possibility that they could open the very gates of hell, this is madness.
Okay, i have to go to the gym (#cough i'm bragging), so let's wrap this up and put a quote at the top and the bottom, then let you carve-up this post for, let's say, awhile. As far as the news goes it's all fake, i just don't think the message is intentional because they're without any real purpose in life other than greed, praising creativity and then trying to escape illicit behavior by saying "i'm just being creative" is a mean dog on a thin string, and the immigration debate is shit because the programs to be had/exploited are what legal-immigration advocates are protecting that wouldn't draw people here if those programs didn't exist and would drive liberals insane until those programs newly existed, but that's not true because there will always be people who want to come here because their places of origin are shitholes.
My theory is that those shitholes come into existence because a person feels oppressed when they are not, said person comes into power, and oppresses the fictional enemies, in a lifelong journey of clueless whatthefuckness.
"QongDaqDaq Qotbe' tlhInganpu'." (Klingons do not lie in bed.)