Category: Blame it on the voices in my head–I do

Posted on

Grand Theft Under Color of Law

Civil Asset Forfeiture: a procedure by which government thugs can seize the property of citizens who have NOT been convicted of a crime, and especially NOT of any crime in any way associated with the use of that property/asset.

It’s nothing but government-sponsored theft, and those who practice it should

  1. Have their assets seized–all of them
  2. Be horsewhipped through the streets of whatever jurisdiction they committed the theft in
  3. Serve a real life sentence on a chain gang manually making gravel from BIG rocks.

Should, but in our corrupt society, instead they are rewarded with sinecures, jobs protected by a so-called “qualified immunity” that amounts to a functional immunity that is little other than a license to bully, steal, and–if they can get a wink and a nudge–kill.

Anyone have a solution short of bringing such vile, despicable, completely depraved individuals before their Final Judgment? Since the PTB have made self-defense and the defense of one’s property rights unlawful in today’s Amerika *sigh*, I’d very much appreciate someone smarter than me to offer a lawful solution to this kind of rampant brigandage.
____________________________________

N.B. Apart from “thought crimes” (wishing ill of these evil people), I know of no laws I have broken that would open me up to such brigandage, and nor do I own assets that would make seizing such amount to much more than petty theft, but since these corrupt law enFARCEment looters DGARA about any such thing, I have to assume I could be put out on the street any time some petty bureaucrap wants. *sigh*

One term for what these people do is “anarcho-tyranny.”

Posted on

Well, At Least the Writer Is Trying

Reading a book today that is. . . amusing. It’s supposed to be an action-packed “thriller” set “25 Years from now” (whenever THAT is) that’s chock full of “advanced tech” and “cutting edge science.”

That’s really funny. The “advanced tech” still relies on USB cables, and the “cutting edge science” is a “Dan Brown stupidity level” misunderstanding of everything from string theory to tachyons to time travel.

If it weren’t for lotsa laughs, I’d say the writer isn’t just trying but very trying. *heh*

Oh, on top of that, the writer pads the word count by having much of the dialog in both French and English (the English for the illiterates who either don’t own any French vocabulary or can’t work the meanings out via linguistic roots, I suppose).

More laughs.

Posted on

Educating Medical “Professionals”

Annual “permission slip” Dr. visit last week: ears so plugged up with gunk I almost didn’t mind having the same questions asked again. . . and again. . . by two different forms and three different people. #gagamaggot

At least something educational came of the visit, though. Nurse dropped in to ask the SAME QUESTIONS as on the form in her hand that I had just filled out and noted that she didn’t have to ask if I were depressed, because she assumed that anyone whistling a “happy” tune was in fine spirits.

“That’s a fallacious assumption,” I told her. “I’m simply whistling a tune I am listening to ‘between my ears’ in order to drown out the dreck y’all are playing on your sound system. It doesn’t mean I am ‘happy’ but that I’m listening to something better than that stuff that would gag a maggot.”

“Oh. So do you have feelings of depression?”

“Oh, yeh. That ‘music’ y’all arer playing makes me want to end it all.”

“Oh, OK. I’ll see if we can turn it down then.”

“Thank you. Now THAT makes me happy.”

*heh*

Posted on

Transitive Property

The old “Prepper” adage that “Two is one and one is none” makes some sort of sense, I suppose, in that if one only has one of a particular thing–tool, equipment, whatever–and that “one” is lost, broken, or stolen, then “none” is what one is left with.

But consider the transitive property of the adage. IF 2 = 1 and 1 = 0, then 2 = 0. Therefore, one could as easily say “n. . . is 2 is one is none,” and so no matter how large a number of [whatever] one has, it is equal to. . . nothing.

This is a principle that escapes hoarders.

🙂

Posted on

Sloppy Thinking

For many years I have heard Donne dunning my ears, but his catchy lil blank verse really borders on stupidity, though it does have bearing on so many folks’ hyper-engagement in “news” reporting of current events (see above reference to “stupidity”).

‘No Man is an Island’

No man is an island entire of itself; every man
is a piece of the continent, a part of the main;
if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe
is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as
well as any manner of thy friends or of thine
own were; any man’s death diminishes me,
because I am involved in mankind.
And therefore never send to know for whom
the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.

Pardon me while I both gag and throw the bullshit flag. Sure, in some theoretical way, the death of someone I do not know and never would have known “diminishes” me, but in reality? If someone dies and they are not at least a close acquaintance, I have no connection to them, and their death is something for their friends, family, and close acquaintances to be impacted by, not me.

Folks who get all “het up” over events that happen to others they have never even met are just borrowing troubles not their own and filling their lives with fake emotions. It’s the same sort of unhealthy behavior as being devoted to a professional sports team or idolizing some entertainer.

It’s stupid.

BTW, Donne’s death in no way impacted my life. I never knew him (of course) and I really DGARA when or how he died. His life impacted me mainly through my irritation at his stupid verse reproduced here. I would not have been “diminished” one whit had he never written this drivel.

Posted on

MMP-Wha?

I’ve taken the MMPI and MMPI-2 at different times, for different reasons (does, “For a lark” count as a reason?) and when the scoring comes back, it’s always a “Huh?!?”

Yeh, that’s what “Undifferentiated personality disorder” and other interpretive remarks (different “Huhs” at different times) all mean. The MMPI cannot classify me, except as “not normal.” I actually had one experience where the score interpreter (a p-sych grad student) told me I had been disingenuous on the test. He asked me to retake it and “play it straight” but got the same results, so threw them out of his pool. I’ve gotten that more than once–being thrown out of sample pools because I did not fit a preconceived model, sometimes in physical–lab test–results (blood lipids pseudo research in the 70s).

I’m fine with that, because I had classified myself as “not normal” way decades ago.

Other less detailed personality/p-sych inventories stumble around and place me somewhere on some contemporary “spectrum” or another, but all that means (since different inventories all say something different) is “You don’t fit our classification system. Go away.” *heh*

If one takes a bit of time and just sits down and browses through the DSM-IV, one soon realizes that EVERYONE is just a bit crazy–including oneself. Because p-sych cannot really classify human behavior1 like biology can classify species within a taxonomic system, but the DSM is great for creating billing classifications for insurance purposes. . . .

And finally, I suppose my fascination with Soren Kierkegaard is because a majority of the voices in my head find him so. 🙂

(Most Norms are scratching their heads and thinking, “Where did that come from?” *heh*)

1OK, gross classification is possible. Some behavior is clearly crazy, such as delusional behavior that is harmful to the one suffering the delusion–and to others. Some behavior. Most “disorders” in the DSM can be reclassified as simply “This makes Norms uncomfortable,” though, or “I need a billing class so I can keep this person as a cash cow.” *heh*

Posted on

Off the Wall (and around the corner). . .

Was DiCaprio so good as Arnie Grape because he was type cast? *heh*

(I only ask because his stupid pronouncements about Globull Warmening are so deeply at odds with his lifestyle, that only someone with severe mental retardation could rationalize the two.)

Posted on

Seriously Creeped Out…

. ..by the simple fact that so very, very many people cannot see the difference between

“All ____ aren’t” and “Not all ____ are.”

The two statements say distinctly different things, but many people (most, in my experience) use the first one when they intend the second meaning.

Mind-boggling to realize that so very many people are so far divorced from simple logic.