Friday, June 16, 2017

The GOP shooting: Who is to blame?

My, how things have changed over the past few months.

I made a prediction before the Presidential Election about the violence that would follow -- if Hillary won, then militias and the likes of Richard Poplawski would have tried to take matters into their own hands, making a more planned out, methodical approach to their violence. But if Trump won, the violent backlash would have been instant.

Well, we can say that I was right about the latter.

So far, there have been violent anti-Trump demonstrations in nearly every major city in the United States, not to mention across Europe. The day after the election, a person was dragged out of their car, severely beaten and burglarized at an intersection We've seen Trump supporters put in hospitals, beaten nearly to death, Antifa shitbags who are protesting over people they've never even heard of and know nothing about. We've seen fire set to businesses and police targeted. We've seen celebrities call for violence, and Kathy Griffin playing the victim card over the backlash due to her sheer stupidity. And we also had Loretta Lynch's thinly-veiled call for violence in March. And the truly horrifying thing about all of this is that it seems almost normal.

Yesterday somebody fired shots into the truck of a Trump supporter in Indiana, and by now we all have heard of James Hodgkinson's shooting of several Congressional members of the GOP at a baseball practice in Alexandria. We have learned that Hodgkinson is a long-time socialist, supporter of Bernie Sanders, and frequently watches Rachel Maddow on MSNBC.

So, who is to blame for all of this? If you ask the average Democrat, they'll blame the Electoral College, although it's quite possibly the most important safeguard in the presidential elections that we have. If you ask Hillary Clinton, she blames everybody but herself for the loss of the election. If you ask complete morons like Michael Moore, it was clearly the gun's fault.

And the truly horrifying part about all of this, is that liberals, you know -- those kind, wonderful people who wear their virtue on their sleeves for all the world to see? Yeah, those liberals -- they are demanding even more Republican blood to be shed.

You might want to blame some part of the political machine for what happened in Alexandria. Is Rachel Maddow, who filled Hodgkinson's head with socialist bullshit to blame? No. Is Michael Moore, who would blame the number of guns in the US, to blame? No. Is Bernie Sanders to blame? He's too stupid to blame to begin with -- so, nope; can't blame him, either.

The only person who is to blame for what happened in Alexandria is James Hodgkinson. And he paid the ultimate price for his inability to separate his socialist bullshit from reality.

That being said, this problem is going to get worse in the United States, and celebrities need to accept some responsibility for the violence that is being perpetrated against conservatives in the United States. If Hillary Clinton was POTUS, and Ted Nugent made such threats against her, you'd be calling for his head on a platter. But, as the adage goes, your right to swing your first ends where my body begins. So, you primitive, leftist, fatheads -- listen up!

There is no circumstance in which you have the right to assault anyone because of their political opinion. I don't give a flying shit how badly some Trump supporter is taunting you or how angry you get when you see Old Glory waving -- you do NOT have the right to attack someone because of their political perspective. You love to apply the First Amendment to yourselves, but you will be damned if you apply those same rights to a conservative. You can't pick and choose who gets to have free speech rights -- it applies to every American who calls this great land "home". You are not the arbiter of personal freedom. Inalienable rights are those that no one can grant you or take away. If you don't like it, then you have three options:

1. Move to a country where your Marxist or Hitlerian views are accepted.
2. Get over it.
3. Die unhappy.

But do not be surprised when the other person defends themselves and puts their first right through your nose.




Thursday, June 15, 2017

The Most Overrated Bands of All Time

So, I'm sitting here, had a bit to drink, and I decided that I should write about the most overrated bands of all time. Not that my blog ever gets any traffic or anybody really cares what I have to say, but hopefully I can piss somebody off because I have nothing better to do.

Now, I will freely admit that most of the bands on this list I absolutely detest. And there's a reason for that. It's not because I hate these bands for their looks or anything, but for their overall lack of musical genius. I just. Fucking. Hate them.

With a purple passion.

With each band, I'll explain why they suck so bad. Because if these musical shitburgers are what you call genius, then may I suggest that you are in dire need of a CAT scan.

10. Carlos Santana

Don't get me wrong. I like Carlos Santana. Does he have talent? Yes. Is it minimal at best. Not by a long shot. But Carlos' problem is that he hasn't innovated anything since the 70's. Same look. Same sound. Same Santana. It's gotten so bad for Carlos that he was doing stints with braindead musicians like Rob Thomas. No thanks.

9. Coldplay

Dafuq is this shit?



No. Seriously. Dafuq is that?

8. The Smashing Pumpkins

The only redeeming thing about Billy Corgan is that he spent his youth listening to bands like Rush. Somewhere along the line, someone actually convinced him that he really can sing and that he really has talent. The result was vapid, angsty music and not much else.

Awful. Just awful. The good news is that the band has faded into obscurity. See ya, Billy.

7. Sheryl Crow

What do you expect from a nitwit who wishes everyone would use just one piece of toilet paper after taking a dump? She is only ever-so-slightly talented than Tom Petty.

6. Beyonce

Holy sheep shit, I can hear it already.

"Beyonce!? Bitch, puh-lease!"

Last year, Beyonce released what is supposed to be a critically acclaimed album,  "Lemonade." It has over sixty writer's credits and at least ten people to produce it. A lot of the album has samples from other shitty bands like Led Zeppelin, which I included in this list. In her song, "Don't Hurt Yourself," Beyonce included a sample from Led Zeppelin's, "When the Levee Breaks," which these rotten bastards plagiarized and passed off as their own song. So, it might not mean that Zep co-wrote the song with Beyonce but a sample stands as a credit, nonetheless. But at least she credited Zep for the sample.

Of course, Beyonce is not without her defenders like this braindead social justice warrior who infers that even criticizing Beyonce probably makes you a racist (without evidence, of course). Nevermind the fact that she has an entire army of writer's and producers for one album, doesn't play an instrument, or that many of her songs weren't even written by her in the first place. No, none of that matters. Just the fact that criticizing her makes you a racist; that's what really matters. Right, James?

Meanwhile, way back in 1977, Rush released "A Farewell to Kings." Six songs, three musicians, one lyricist, and one producer. That's it.

Comparing Beyonce to Rush is like comparing a Chevette to a Bugatti Chiron. There is no comparison.

And that's why Beyonce comes in at number six on this list. But hey, at least she really does have a lovely voice.

5. Ozzy Osbourne/Black Sabbath

Ozzy Osbourne has consumed so many drugs and bitten the heads off of so many flying mammals that he's lost practically virtually every cell in that empty, cavernous hole he calls a brain. That being said, I *very* begrudgingly must admit that (I think I'm about to puke) Black Sabbath broke fresh ground in the nascent stages of metal and helped propel it to what it is today.

Perhaps its because I never saw them live (I wouldn't want to anyway), but I find it very amusing when I hear people in their 60's espouse their views on what metal really is and how it should sound.

4. Tom Petty

This stoned, tone-deaf, uninspiring asshole has about as much talent as a retarded amoeba. What's truly perplexing about Tom Petty is that, in spite of the fact that he has little if any talent, he continues to convince concert-goers to buy tickets to his shitty performances. You would figure for as big as he is, he would have at least five albums and twenty songs that hit number one, but he never has. Ever. But for reasons that even God can't comprehend, Tom Petty's shows sell out year after year.

"But you really need to listen to him," you say. Listen, the last time I gave Tom Petty the old, college try I went into a convulsive state that lasted for weeks. There's nothing good about Tom Petty, except the knowledge that one day he will rid us of his presence.

3. Kiss

Any band that has to dress up in stretched leather, platform boots, shitty make-up, and write lyrics that degrade women in order to attract fans sucks shit and aren't worth your time. Let's see here...

"I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day...
I...wanna rock and roll all ni-iight...and party ev-er-y day..."

Great lyrics, there, Gene. Or how about these lovely lyrics?

"Every damn time I walk through that door, it's the same damn thing.
That bitch bends over, and I forget my name - ow!"

Nice lyrics, asshole. You're a disgrace to music and humanity.

Anyway, not only are their lyrics shitty, so are their compositions. The chords progressions are a coma-inducing repetition of the same chords over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again, usually consisting of a A, C, D, and E-minor (especially E-minor). Neither Paul Stanley or Ace Frehley would know what to do with a guitar if it weren't for E-minor.

Anyway, shitty lyrics. Shitty musicianship. Shitty band. And don't give me this, "But they're one of the hardest working bands ever!" bullshit.

Kiss sucks. End of story. Next?

2. Led Zeppelin

Oh, God, here we go. I can hear it now. "What? You don't like Zep, little man?" "Led Zeppelin the greatest band of all time. Fuck you, asshole!"

Three words, jocko. Fuck. Led. Zeppelin.

I'm not saying that Zeppelin isn't without its contributions and accomplishments, but face it - those things came at the expense of a great many musicians who had been dead long before Page and Plant ever embraced each other behind closed doors. If it weren't for their blatant plagiarism, Led Zeppelin would have earned my respect. But they've plagiarized their way to super-success, and for that, they'll never earn my respect.

John Paul Jones is respectable, but he's not the greatest bassist that ever lived.
John Bonham was a visionary, but he's not the greatest drummer that ever lived.
Robert Plant is an amazing vocalist, but he's not the greatest vocalist that ever lived.
Jimmy Page is a fucking thief. Period. Therefore, he's not the greatest guitarist that ever lived.

Compare Led Zeppelin to the Charlie Daniel's Band. You can't. There is no comparison because Charlie Daniel's shit has more talent than Jimmy Page has in his entire body.
Compare Led Zeppelin to Tool (in spite of the fact that Tool covers No Quarter). You can't. There is no comparison because Tool are far more progressive and experimental than Robert Plant on a opioid binge.
Compare Led Zeppelin to Marduk. You can't. There is no comparison because Jimmy Page just wishes he were a visionary of darkness. Marduk lives it.
Compare Led Zeppelin to Fallujah. You can't. There is no comparison because Andrew Baird makes John Bonham look like an infant that just happens to be sitting behind a drum kit with sticks in his hands. Bonham on his best day would never be even close to Baird even if he were on his death bed.
Compare Led Zeppelin to Dream Theater. You can't. There is no comparison because the difference between the two is like comparing a Chevette to a Bugatti Chiron. One sucks. The other doesn't.

In short, there is no such thing as "the greatest band of all time." And even if there were, Led Zeppelin wouldn't even come within thirty magnitudes of it. So, get it through your thick, naive skulls, fanboys and girls; Led Zeppelin, although they left a rather sizable footprint in the world of music, ain't shit. If they were, they never would have had to steal a single song then pass it off as their own.

So fuck Led Zeppelin on a cracker. Sideways.


1. The Fucking Beatles.

Yeah, the whole point of this post was to hate on the Beatles.

The Beatles' entire career practically hinged on three chords. The whisper-thin fellow below illustrates how so many idiots have been fooled into believing the so-called Fab Four actually had talent. Twenty-one of their biggest hits were written with three chords.

Three.

Fucking.

Chords.



Now, if that wasn't enough to piss you off then let's put things into perspective.

The Beatles came along at a certain time in history in which people had been more or less repressed in every way imaginable, especially sexually. By the time the Beatles were playing coffee shops and bars in Liverpool, the constant barrage of sexual and spiritual purity by the likes of shows Leave It To Beaver, Father Knows Best, I Love Lucy, The Donna Reed Show (Donna Reed...*swoon*), and The Honeymooners had young women everywhere aching to leave the confines of the kitchen and stifled bedroom and into something a bit more liberating and comfortable.

By the end of the 50's, women had simply had enough. Elvis Presley's scandalous hip thrusts started the revolution during the 50's. But along came four of the shittiest musicians who ever existed, with their bowl haircuts and boyish good looks, they eagerly exploited these womens' desires. They were darling in the public eye and women found them simply irresistible for reasons I will never understand. Much like the young women of today who worship this motherfucker:


At least the women in the 60's had an excuse. Fans of the Biebs have no such luxury.

Anyway, did you see what I did there? Is it starting to make sense now? That's exactly right. If you said, "You made me realize that there really never was anything to the Beatles to begin with," you're absolutely right. In other words, if The Beatles came out today, they would be no more significant that Justin Fucking Bieber, simply because both of them had a fan base that found them extremely desirable sexually without the slightest hint of any measurable talent.

And that's what it's all about with the Shittl...errrr...Beatles. Take away the coma-inducing, spastic head-bobbing, the bowl cuts, the drugs, the pseudo-intellectualism of John Lennon, the suits, and you're left with nothing more than the likes of Justin Bieber, New Kids on the Block, or even Hanson.

FUCKING. HANSON.

Now, if you're screaming at me in a fit of sheer rage and some sense of misplaced sense of self-righteousness, this can come from only one place. And that place is classic rock stations across the country. Chances are if you turn on the radio right now and turn the dial to a classic rock channel, you're going to hear one of the following bands:

Led Zeppelin (as a matter of fact, I JUST turned on DVE to prove my theory and "Hey, Hey, What Can I Do" came on)
The Beatles
Ozzy/Black Sabbath
Lynrd Skynrd (whom I admire, even though I'm not a fan)
Bruce Springsteen
Bob Seger
The Who
The Police
Yes
Rush (bow your head, damnit!)
The Eagles
The Grateful Dead (not even worth mentioning)
Guns N' Roses

Now, I'm not saying that these are the only bands that you'll ever hear on a classic rock station, but chances are that they'll be one of the first bands you hear.

And of those bands, you'll hear no more than five songs from them on average. Unless of course we're talking about Led Zeppelin or The Fucking Beatles, then they'll play every single song they ever written, had someone write for them, or flat-out stole. You know, in case you forgot that they're a thing.

Anyway, like I said, if you think that these are among the greatest bands this world has even produced, then you need to get out more often. There's more to life than classic rock and bands that are light years beyond The Beatles when it comes to pure talent.

I recommend you start with bands like Opeth, Ayreon, Dream Theater, Amplifier to see just how good music can really be. Your deprogramming begins now.



Saturday, June 10, 2017

Follow-up: Team relocations, Nashville, and those damned Coyotes

When I last wrote about NHL expansion/relocation all the way back in 2011 (wow...six years ago already), I was wrong about a few things and right on a lot of things.

First and foremost, I was wrong about Nashville relocating. The fans have picked up the slack in sales and have developed a pretty feverish love for the Predators. In 2011 when I first wrote about the Predators, they were 21st in attendance with 94.3% in 2010-11 and 97.5 in 2011-12, while this year they're at 100%. Good job guys! I like what their fans have done (even though I despise country music). They've attached their identity to their team, and have made Nashville a different team than any other in the NHL.

Now, if you guys are going to insist on throwing catfish on the ice in Pittsburgh, please bear in mind I love mine deep-fried.

Another thing I was wrong about back in 2011 was not seeing the forest for the trees in Pittsburgh. It's no secret that Gary Bettman has not a fan in Pittsburgh, but what most fans (including myself) failed to realize back then is that Jim Balsille wanted to move the Pens to Kansas City, Gary Bettman put his foot down and told Balsille, "No." So, it wasn't just Lemieux who helped keep the Pens in Pittsburgh; Bettman also had a tremendous hand in keeping them there.

That being said, Bettman has now realized his dreams of expansion into the American southwest, and the NHL will now have a home in Sin City. Like I said back then, the Wranglers of the ECHL could muster little interest in their team in 2011. That season, they were only able to average about 3,700 fans per game. Welp, as it turns out, they tried to hold off during the 2014-15 season as they went looking for a bigger building. And guess what? That never happened. Now the Wranglers are no more.

Enter the Las Vegas Golden Knights. I'm going to call it now; the Golden Knights will be around one year before they start bleeding money like their cousins in Arizona. Speaking of the Coyotes, they've had a new owner since 2014 who paid $305 million for the team, and says that the team is looking to build a new arena. You know, even though they never filled seats at Jobing Arena to begin with.

Las Vegas' population has grown since 1990 from 740,000 to over 2 million as of 2015. Keep in mind that Atlanta has a population of over 5 million, and the Thrashers moved to Winnipeg after eleven years in the NHL. Again, the argument cannot be made that population makes all the difference in the world. Nashville is only the 25th largest city in the US, and Predators fans fill the seats consistently.

The lesson of this story? I was only partly wrong in 2011. It's only a matter of time before the Coyotes relocate to Seattle or Quebec, and the Golden Knights relocate to Seattle or Quebec.

While I've been extremely harsh on you in the past, Mr. Bettman, I have a new respect for you. But for the love of everything that is good in the world of hockey, please accept the reality that you can't go where you're not welcome. The Coyotes and now the Golden Knights will relocate. Stop prolonging the inevitable, Mr. Bettman, and bring the NHL back to Seattle and Quebec.

Thursday, February 2, 2017

Thoughts on the "Women's March", Islam and Rape Culture

A few weeks ago, about 200,000 women showed up in Washington DC and around the country to protest...well, know one really knows what they were protesting, but they sure were earnest. The march supposedly was to support immigration, women's reproductive rights, and access (a.k.a., get free shit) to contraception. But what really ensued was jackassery and stupidity of the highest order.

Take these women for example.

Here's a dyed-haired social justice warrior espousing the virtues of gender equality, which is a complete myth from top to bottom, inside and out. Women are not equal to men, and men aren't equal to women. Period. Oh, this red-headed harpy would love for you to think that women are equal to men, except for, you know, when they need some muscle to take care of a problem that they can't deal with on their own...



So, if a woman who seeks equality with she abuses a man and the man has had enough and hits her back, does she have the right to complain? I'm starting to wonder.

Anyway, here's a woman holding a sign of some her idols. Some, like Malala Yousafzai, deserve admiration from not only men, but the entire world. But only a few inches above Malala's picture is a picture of the Butcher of Germany, herself, Angela Merkel. You know, the one who cleared the way for undocumented rapis....*errr!*....migrants to waltz into Germany and destroy it from within? You know, the one who is repulsed by the very sight of her own nation's flag?
via GIPHY

Yeah, that Angela Merkel.

Oh, and a note to the snowflake standing behind her holding the sign about fascism - fascists don't urge their citizens to arm themselves to the fucking teeth. Quite the opposite. Read a history book.

Here's a picture of a woman holding a sign supporting...uh...well, we don't know who she's supporting exactly, but she's resolute in whatever is going on in her little head. And, dude - what's the the guy wearing a pornstache and a pussy hat? My God, man! Grow some balls! And to the women in the back with the red hat, I absolutely agree with you, ma'am - your pussy does deserve respect. That's why we throw rapists in prison where they belong.

Here's a woman holding a sign that infers that President Obama is a defender of freedom. You know, that same dickhead that sent us $20 trillion into debt, invited those who can't legally vote in the US to vote, that expanded Bush's wars from two countries to seven, threw more whistleblowers in jail than Bush ever dreamed of, and dropped over 23,000 bombs in his last month in office? Yeah, that dickhead. Oh, did I mention that he won a Nobel Peace Prize? Freeeeedooooom!

Anyway, here's woman reminding us that she is a woman, and not an object of desire. How much do you want to bet that she objectifies others on a daily basis?

Here's a lovely lady holding a sign that...well, I agree with. Seriously. Good stuff.

Okay, moving on. Here are two women holding signs showing their disapproval of the Donald. Umm...again, I agree. He's not exactly good to women. But I wonder if these same women ever called out the Obama's for inviting rapper after rapper into the White House who wrote songs about everything from sitting on some dude's face to flat out rape. Where were you on that one, hypocrites?

And where were you when Hillary stood on stage with a man who writes lyrics about abusing women and just discarding them like a piece of used toilet paper? All that and not even having the decency to treat them to at least a steak dinner. Keep it classy, Jay.

Speaking of the White House, here's a washed-up has-been who said she dreams about blowing it up. You shouldn't be surprised that she received a prompt response by the Secret Service. Only then did she tuck her tail firmly between her legs.

Sorry, asshole. But white liberals are the biggest racists of all.





Here's another one of those "Love Trumps Hate" signs. Love does trump hate. Unless you're a Sith Lord. Or any of these assholes who attacked Trump supporters throughout his campaign and will no doubt continue his presidency. Where are you social justice warriors when someone is being beaten simply for their political opinion?



And I'm sorry, but I just love this. Yes, cupcake, he is your president. You might not like it, but he's your president. He won the Electoral College. I never heard any of you bitch and moan about the Electoral College when President Obama was elected.

Okay, I'm almost done, but I wanted to show just one last pic. This is disgusting. Seriously. And no child who hasn't even been taught to think for themselves should ever wear one of these things.

Finally, we have this snake of a human being who helped organize the Women's March.

Yes, Linda Sarsour is a snake. She has the reputation of being called a cockroach because sarsour is Arabic for the tiny insect that carries disease wherever it goes. And while this may an accurate metaphor for Linda, I think the term snake is more befitting. Because a snake is cunning and conceals itself in plain view. And once the prey has been completely seduced, the snake strikes.

I'm sure that after being bored to death with all those pics, me calling Sarsour a snake must have shocked you out of your picture-induced slumber. I can practically hear it now. You're calling me a racist, aren't you? Bigot perhaps? Islamophobe? Please.

But why would I call her a snake? That's a pretty nasty thing for a guy to be calling a woman. Well, before you let your tempers flare beyond control, let's review some of Linda's thoughts and musings. But before we do, let's learn a little bit about her.

Linda was born in Brooklyn, NY in 1980 to two Palestinian immigrants. Nothing wrong with that at all. At the tender age of 17, she was forced into an arranged marriage and had three kids by the time she was 20. I wonder if she's ever had the balls to ask her husband for a divorce. Anyway, shortly afterward, her career in political activism began. And if you listen very closely to her carefully-crafted words, you will can practically hear the venom dripping from her forked tongue.

Being a Muslim, Linda would like for you to believe that she is the object of oppression in the United States. She recently posted on her Facebook account, "They criminalize our leaders. They criminalize our communities. Our faith. they make claims that we are less than. That our beliefs are backwards and somehow what we believe impacts others negatively. They will be consistent in their propaganda. Ordinary, well-meaning people will believe it. Horrible things will happen to said communities because people will believe it's justified."

Sorry, Linda. Your "faith" is drenched with blood of over 230 million people. Spare me your cries of victimhood.

See what I mean? Poor Linda. Every time she opens her mouth she acts like a traumatized dog that has been beaten for years and is just finding strength to fight back. Ask yourself, who is being criminalized? Where in the United States is it illegal to be a Muslim? Are the beliefs of Islam really backwards? I mean, they are. But if so, how are they backwards? Finally, Linda has the balls to talk about propaganda. This coming from someone who actively promotes Hamas. You know, the same terrorist organization that just allied themselves with Daesh?

Anyway, so Linda stands on a national stage spouting on about whatever goes on in that little head of hers. Her words were so well-crafted that those who were in attendance stepped forward to have a hijab wrapped around their empty heads without even the slightest apprehension. Of course, those hijabs were fashioned in the Stars and Stripes, something Article 4 of the US Flag Code strictly prohibits. But do you think any of those so-called patriotic women knew that? Nah. Probably not.

Okay, so why am I attacking Linda Sarsour? Well, for one thing, she is hiding behind our Constitution to promote a heinous ideology that leaves bloodshed and hatred in its wake. This reeeeaally pisses me off. Linda knows that the First Amendment will protect her in her efforts to lead the brainwashed sheep to slaughter, and she hides behind that fact very well.

See, Linda believes in Sharia law. Now, if you're a progressive, leftist, or whatever you want to call yourself these days, you're probably mindlessly accusing me of racism like Ben Asscrack did when he had his ass handed to him by Sam Harris on Bill Maher's show. Pay no attention to Maher, though. He barely has a handle on what being a classical liberal really means.



Sharia allows very little for men, but even less for women. Women who are raped but aren't able to produce four neutral witnesses  are stoned to death (sounds legit, right?), are allowed to be beaten by their husbands, are not allowed to file for divorce, are considered half as valuable as men, and are genitally mutilated (as are men, mind you). Basically, if you're a woman living in a truly Islamic country, then you're subjugated and trodden underfoot by men.

Secondly, Linda's a coward. She knows that if she goes to a truly Islamic country like, oh, Saudi Arabia (You know, that country that stones rape victims to death and throws homosexuals from rooftops?), she would have her ass in a sling in a New York minute, not to mention face daily beatings, if not outright death, at the hands of her husband or family member. You know, because Islamic law forbids women to be without a male member of their family in their presence, right? So, empowering that Islam. Especially for women.

Which may prompt the question, if Islamic women aren't allowed to be outside the presence of a male member of their family, then why is she standing on a stage surrounded by women? Ah! Now you're thinking! Let's listen to Anni Cyrus tell us why. If you don't know who Anni is, she is a woman who escaped Iran to the United States under the penalty of death for leaving Islam. She faces death every second of every day and she knows it. She's suffered every punishment for women under Islamic law that a woman can take, except for death.



So, we learn that Linda may very well be practicing deception through the Islamic practice of taqiyya. And therein lies the problem. The sheep at the Women's March have no idea that they've been deceived. You know, the same sheep who are supposedly fighting against some mythical patriarchy in the United States? The same sheep who voted for a woman that has taken money from Saudi where there truly is a patriarchy? All of this in spite of the very religion that they're being duped into states explicitly that no country that has a woman as their leader shall ever prosper.

If all of this isn't enough for you to see the Snake for who she is, let's take a look at some of her tweets.

Here is one in which she dares to call Ayaan Hirsi Ali a hatemonger, someone who's actually lived in Somalia and Saudi Arabia, was in an arranged marriage to a man she never met, had her genitals mutilated, and now as a result of her apostasy, has a death sentence against her.

Here's a tweet from 2012 of Linda expressing pity, yet rage, toward Ayaan, because she simply has the ability to think for herself. Why would you feel toward rage when you pity the same person.


Here's one in 2011 in which she seems to take a threatening stance toward Brigitte Gabriel, yet another woman who was born in another Islamic country, and bears the scars to prove it.


Here's one that confirms that Linda is not above deleting controversial tweets, and wishes ill-will upon Ayaan. 

But lest anyone believe that she's full of hate, which she is, and her religion is patriarchal and hateful toward women, which it is, she wants you to believe that Sharia law is actually a good thing. You know, the same law that says homosexuals should be put to death, adulterers should be stoned to death, anyone who walks away from Islam should be put under the sword, and states that it's perfectly okay for non-Muslim women to be raped because they're not Muslim.

Sorry, Linda. You may fool the sheep, but you're not fooling the rest of us.

Finally, here's a tweet in which she's again trying to get women to believe that living under a patriarchal, supremacist religion is actually a good thing.



Go peddle your poisonous ideology in Saudi Arabia where it belongs, Linda. It doesn't belong in the United States.

And what's really infuriating is that those same social justice warriors that are hell bent on either reducing or flat out eliminating white males from the public eye are the same ones inhaling the bullshit that the Snake is selling them - hook, line, and sinker.

Which brings me to the myth of rape culture. In spite of what third wave feminists may say, and how desperately they want you to believe it, there is no rape culture in the United States. Rape is punished to the maximum extent of the law in the United States. Yet, complete shitbags like Lena Dunham who has admitted to not only falsely accusing someone of rape, but to forcing herself up on her sister when she younger, everything from bribing her with candy in order to kiss her, to jerking off beside her in bed, to inserting her fingers inside of her.

Lena writes, "As Grace grew, I took to bribing her for her time and affection: one dollar in quarters if I could do her makeup like a 'motorcycle chick.' Three pieces of candy if I could kiss her on the lips for five seconds. Whatever she wanted to watch on TV if she would just 'relax on me.' Basically, anything a sexual predator might do to woo a small suburban girl I was trying. Maybe, I thought, she would be more willing to accept kisses if I wore the mask my grandmother had for when she did her dialysis (The answer was no.) What I really wanted, beyond affection, was to feel that she needed me, that she was helpless without her big sister leading her through the world." 

Of course, since Lena is a raging social justice warrior of the feminist sort, the only people who are going to come to her defense will be those who would substitute delusion for objective reality. Besides, she's a professional victim.

Anyway, listen. If you're a third wave feminist who's been duped into believing that all white men are rape-happy, racists, then you seriously need to stop being angry at us and start being angry at your real enemies. You say you hate rapists? Great! So do I. So, if you really want to strike a blow against rape, then start speaking out against Muslims who rape women out in the open. If you want to see what these rotten bastards are doing to women in Europe, then watch the videos below,







Meanwhile, when Donald Trump expressed concern for what's happening in Germany, Sweden and all throughout Europe, you feminists labeled him a racist, scumbag, whatever you wanted. Even though later that week, news came out of Europe that groups of Muslims were raping women at will, something they'd been doing for decades but is only now starting to get the recognition it needs.

No, ladies, there is no rape culture in the United States, much less a patriarchy. Islam, however, it at its very nature highly patriarchal and permits rape of women, so long as they're a non-believer. In Islam, if you are a rape victim unable to produce at least four witnesses, you're in pretty deep shit. And before you label me a bigot and racist, you need to understand that Islam is not a race -- it is a dualistic ideology that is about 10% religious and 90% political. So, spend some time reading about the blood-soaked history of Islam since its birth in 622 A.D. It's killed more people than nazism, socialism, and communism combined.

But hey, it's okay to punch nazis, just leave Mao and Stalin alone, right?






Thursday, December 29, 2016

An Open Letter to Mark Bezos

Mr. Bezos,

You can lose $1 billion in a day and you hardly even feel it. Blue Horizon is a grand idea, and those of us who love space exploration applaud your efforts and hope you succeed.

We get it. You have vision.

Now take that the energy behind that vision and use it for a better workforce. Because the last thing the planet needs are giant floating warehouses marring our skies so that you can make even more fucking money. This idea is a one gigantic civil lawsuit just waiting and itching to happen.

In the meantime, get over yourself.


Regards,

Matt

Tuesday, June 21, 2016

Thoughts on Orlando and Gun Control

Wow. It's been a long time since I've been here. But in light of the massacre in Orlando, Florida, I feel compelled to say a few things.

I need to be clear that I do not take lightly what happened in Orlando. Nor Aurora. Nor Newtown. Nor any other place where gun violence took its bloody toll. I have no idea what it's like to watch my friends or loved ones die in a rain of bullets. However, it seems that there is a great deal of confusion with regard to not only gun laws, but the differences between guns themselves, particularly the AR-15.

Predictably, there has been a myriad of articles being written after Omar Sateen took 49 lives and injured 53. Most of the authors mean well, writing with such passion and conviction as if their words would summarily end gun violence once and for all. Over at Rolling Stone, there has been at least one such article written by constitutional scholar, David S. Cohen. In the article, "Why It's Time to Repeal the Second Amendment", Cohen provides examples of constitutional faux pas that needed to be repealed.  However, Cohen's claim with regard that the Founder's "blatantly wrote racism" into the Constitution is well off the mark. Cohen is, of course, referring to Article I, Section II, Clause III, which states:

"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may include within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."

Cohen's interpretation of this clause is based on the long-held falsehood that the Constitution determined that black people are only three-fifths human. This is patently and demonstrably false, as the clause has nothing to do with race, but political representation. Happily, however, the 12th Amendment repealed the aforementioned clause.

But the main premise of Cohen's article is that the Second Amendment is something that is a "threat to liberty and a suicide pact" and needs to be repealed post haste. Instead of making a sound reason for why the Second Amendment needs to be repealed, he makes an appeal to emotion by inferring that the Founders were mere musket-toting revolutionaries that never could have foreseen that technology would someday make weapons that could kill multiple people by simply squeezing the trigger once. Not surprisingly, Cohen is wrong about this myth as I will elaborate on shortly. He furthers his emotional appeal by stating that we should just be allowed to enjoy our liberties to enjoy a night out with friends.

Meanwhile, another article at Rolling Stone has resurfaced since Orlando that was written by feminist and social justice warrior, Amanda Marcotte. This inanity of Cohen's article is a work of genius compared to Marcotte's. Entitled, "4 Pro-Gun Arguments We're Sick of Hearing", it continues Rolling Stone's ongoing agenda to destabilize the American society and replace it with a socialist utopia.

As the title describes, the article provides four pro-gun arguments which Marcotte attempts to destroy. But she unwittingly destroyed her own argument by displaying her ignorance of common sense, let alone anything that is based on fact.

Let's review Marcotte's article, one pro-gun argument at a time.

1. "Guns don't kill people. People kill people."

The very first objection Amanda puts forth isn't based on fact, but emotion. The last time I checked, a gun of any kind can't just get up by itself and kill anyone. Someone had to obtain the weapon, learn how to shoot it, think about the person(s) they wanted to kill, find them and put all of that knowledge into action. By Amanda's logic, no one should be allowed to own a car, rope, knife, Louisville Slugger, or even water. Either way, if someone has the intent to kill, they're going to find a way with or without a gun.

So, say it with me, Amanda - Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Period.

2. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."

Of all the gun owners I've even known, I've never heard any of them say this. Marcotte would like you to think that there hasn't been an example of an armed civilian that stopped an active shooter.

If Marcotte had done as much as a Google search, she could have fact-checked her statement about law-abiding citizens stopping gun-wielding murderers thereby saving herself the embarrassment of looking like a complete fool.

But let's suppose that Amanda's right. Even if her premise was true, take into consideration the fact that places where mass shootings occur have the tightest gun restrictions. If a law-abiding citizen were allowed to carry weapons in those places, there wouldn't be as many people shot dead as a result of a gunmen that has lost his mind. Why should Marcotte or any other liberal be shocked when shooters go for the softest targets where no one can shoot back because of the laws their braindead legislators passed won't allow them to?

Marcotte is hoping that her readers are stupid and lazy enough to do their own research to verify if she is telling the truth. I am happy to disappoint you, Amanda.

Examples of good guys with guns stopping bad guys with guns can be found here, here, and here. One of which just happened last month. Almost all of them happened in the past 30 years, Amanda.

Oh, by the way - there are some reports that it took the Orlando Police Department three hours to respond, Amanda. If someone inside Pulse had a firearm, there may have been fewer lives lost on June 12, 2016 in Orlando, FL. And if anyone should garner at least some of the blame for what happened in Orlando, the FBI definitely deserves some. They've received multiple warnings about Mateen years before June 12, not to mention the fact that he was their terrorist watch list. Funny that they took him off.

3. "But, mental health!"

Law-abiding citizens who are of sound mind and body do not arm themselves to the teeth and spray bullets, Amanda. How else should address the mental state of assassins, Amanda? Cuddle them and tell them it's not their fault?

4. "Second Amendment, baby!"

Shortly after I started my blog, there was a shooting in Pittsburgh in which three police officers were killed. This one hit close to home because I'm from the Pittsburgh area. I was inspired to write a blog post about this shooting in which I questioned if the Second Amendment should be repealed, not unlike Cohen's premise.

But the more educated I become about the nature of mass shootings and the frequent failure of gun laws that are supposed to protect us, the more I'm convinced that concealed carry is a viable option for stopping active shooters. So much to the point, that I'm actually considering arming myself. Which is a tremendously huge decision for me. My wife is vehemently against guns in any way, shape or form, other than using rifles for putting food on the table. But primarily because I have a boy that loves getting into places and touching things he knows that he shouldn't. These two reasons are the only ones that have prevented me from purchasing a firearm.

What's that? I don't own a gun? You mean, I'm not a gun-crazed lunatic like this troglodyte?

No, I don't own a gun and I have more respect for my flag and country than Ted Nugent ever dreamed of.

But this line from Amanda's article astounds me the most:

"But sure, if you think it's that precious, we can compromise: If you love the Second Amendment that much, feel free to live in a powdered wig and shit in a chamberpot while trying to survive off what you can kill with an 18th century musket. In exchange, let those of us living in this century pass some laws so we can feel safe going to class, or the movies, or anywhere without worrying that some maladjusted man will try to get his revenge by raining down death on random strangers."

The irony here is thick like a stinky cologne.

First, notice that Amanda nailed the problem right on the head in the last sentence without her even realizing it. Because we all know that people that who happen to not be maladjusted are in dire need of psychiatric treatment and should be banned owning guns. But I have to ask - do you know how many gun laws are on the books, Amanda? The short answer is over 16,000. And how many of those gun laws did Omar Mateen observe on June 12, 2016? Yep. You guessed it; zero.

So, when are you going to realize that the Dylann Roofs and Omar Mateens of the world don't give a flying shit about law, Amanda? And when are you going to learn that soft targets like Pulse night club, a place where guns are strictly prohibited, attract active shooters like moths to flame?

Orlando, FL. Charleston, SC. Aurora, CO. Blacksburg, VA. San Bernardino, CA.

Newtown.

How are those gun laws working for you, Amanda?

Sunday, August 24, 2014

Ice bucket challenge? No, thanks.

I'm going to make this a brief entry into my blog, which nowadays really hasn't seen much action. I've lost interest in blogging, but every now and then, I feel the need to say something. So, if you know me, whether you're a friend or family member, and this pisses you off, then sobeit.

Unless you've been living under a rock over the past month or so, there has been a feverish pitch for you to accept the Ice Bucket Challenge. One of the dimwits that conceived this idea just drowned in supporting this insipid idea. Sorry, I'm going to be one of those cold-hearted bastards that says there's one less idiot that we have to worry about.

So far, I have received two challenges; one from a family member and one from a dear friend. I have yet to raise a finger to accept either challenge. Here are the reasons why:

1. First and foremost, I couldn't give a shit less about ALS. Yes, it's a horrible disease that robs even the strongest of men of their strength. But, frankly, I simply couldn't care less about it.
2. If I give to charity, it's going to be something that I truly care about, like St. Jude's, the Four Diamonds Fund, soldiers in need, the homeless, and light pollution awareness.
3. The more someone tries to guilt me into do something I don't really want to do, then I'm going to become more resistant to that cause. Stop begging me for money.
4. I care about light pollution, but you'll never see me give a passionate plea to raise money to try to end light pollution pouring out of my neighbors sodium lamp.
5. Finally, what about other diseases that people don't know or care about? If every time some poor afflicted soul of some wasting disease makes an impassioned plea for money, and we like fools come running to throw money to that cause, we would eventually go broke. But even so, so what? What about lupus, any number of flu viruses, cyclopia, or anencephaly?

So, instead of giving your money to a cause with a bunch of celebrities pulling at your heart strings, give your money to a cause that you care about, not Jimmy Fallon. Don't give in to a guilt trip by your friends and family just because you want to look like a nice person.

And here's another thing, and it's about the phoney, self-aggrandizing Bill Gates. This fraud is worth $76 billion. He makes so much money that if he were to bend over and pick up a $100 bill, he'd actually be losing money. As of this writing, the Ice Bucket Challenge has raised about $50 million dollars for ALS research. In other words, Bill Gate's single-handedly has the ability to donate enough money to pay for all the money that the Ice Bucket Challenge has raised 1,520 times. Not to mention that this is the same Bill Gates who donates money to eugenics causes. Bill Gates might fool others, but he damned sure doesn't fool me.

So, if by not pledging myself to be a part of the aura of false piety known as the Ice Bucket Challenge makes me an asshole, then I guess I'm an asshole, and I'll wear that title like a badge of honor.