You Jerks

Often the editors, photographers and journalists in the mainstream media are jerks. The most important parts of a news article are the headline and the picture. The next most important things are the first paragraph, and the last paragraph. (This is true in textbooks too. Each section will center on a key point, usually bolded.)

Most people check “the news” by skimming. They read the headline, match it with the accompanying picture to understand the concept or gist of the article. Then they move on to the next chunk of news without questioning that they may have been mislead. The end result is that the reader’s concept of what happened is vastly different than the actual truth. Skilled newsman can do this without actually lying, and they’re often ham-handed and not at all subtle about it. The MSM are no longer the gatekeepers of truth.

CNN recently did an article about the southern California fires being arson. When you glance at it, and read a little bit, you think “OMG! The firemen set the fire and were the ones who murdered those people and burned down all those homes!” You could easily think that because of the accompanying picture.

Check out this article and feel free to shake your head in disgust.

What a bunch of Jerks.

Not convinced yet? At the bottom of the page, they have links of Top Stories, which is ONLY a pic and headline. And look where they zoomed in the pic. Ugh. Feck em.



Hat tip to Tony.

Brandonian

Are you ready for a super heavy Brando post? Sometimes you get videos of chimp attacks or emo vidoes, and sometimes you get a healthy dose of how Brando tries to push the world. I often have people try to tell me what my position is, and they are often incorrect (or lying). So here it is, for what it’s worth.

I’ve been semi-accurately called by other people a Libertarian. Now I really want you to remember what I’m saying here. I’m not a Libertarian. I’m Brando. I don’t want to get rid of the FDA and the CIA. I say that a good chunk of human wisdom is staying out of other people’s business. Sometimes people really try their hardest to grab your attention (9/11), so their business become your business.

Ok. Here are the meat and potatoes in a nutshell. I have believed and stated for the last 9 years that gay people should be able to openly serve in the military. Yes, I meant to phrase it that way. It isn’t a Constitutional Right to serve in the military. It’s privilege. An individual is allowed the opportunity to serve. We allow permanent residents to serve. Gay people are flat-out citizens. Citizens I say! If a citizen is willing to kill and die to protect the rest of us, and abide by the UCMJ and Geneva Convention, then I say they should pick up a rifle. I’ve said it for years inside the military. The Marine Corps is about 15 years behind the rest of society, so it should be coming in about 2025.

When people ask “Should we allow gay people to get married?”, I feel a twinge of anger because they’re asking the wrong question. Should we continue to ban gay people from getting married? That’s the right question. Do we even have that right? The government doesn’t hold the right to allow anything. Laws can only ban, not allow. The government isn’t my dad. When it comes right down to it, the government shouldn’t even issue any marriage licenses. A marriage license? What the hell is that? Like we even need the blessing of the state to make a promise to another person? Ugh.

But I’m ashamed to report that 7 years ago, I marched my ass down to the government building like a little bitch and asked the government if I could get married. Stu, even went too so he could bear witness. I think I even paid them some money in the deal. I suck. That makes me angry just thinking about it. My word should be good enough, and I don’t need a priest or government official to make it more real. If two adults make an oath to each other, then that should be that. My word is certainly more valuable and binding than that of a government official or priest. My word it the most binding. Screw you, and screw me for even taking part. I’m married because me and my wife say we’re married. That should be good enough. If it's not, then you can go sit on a tack.

Here’s a quick story. I was in the restaurant business for 6 years, and yes, the stereotypes are true, there are a lot of gay people in the restaurant business. Now, with the exception of one person, I’d say that everyone I met was an asset to society. (I’ve met a bunch of heterosexuals that were detriments to society) In the spring of ‘05 when I got back from Iraq, I went to eat at a brunch in Iowa City and an old coworker (who is gay) that I used to know came up to me and said, in all sincerity “Thank you for your service. I’m. Glad. You’re. Safe.”

There was no liberal hatred, or underhandedness. He looked me square in the eye, shook my hand, and said “Thank you for your service.” It was as simple as that. It was pure, unfiltered respect.

And he’s not allowed to shoot terrorists. The military can dictate someone's behavior. They just can't dictate your mindset.

And the crappy part is that no political platform really gives a crud about this group. No, not even democrats. Not the socialists either. Nobody. Sometimes I feel like I’m torn and my ideals are hybridized. Imagine how a Gay Patriot feels. Imagine how a Black Female Gay Patriot feels. It stinks that they Crazy Hatred Liberals are the default social group for gays. The mainstream society will come around. It just takes time and pressure.

My gun control position can be summed up in “Don’t tell me what to do.”

My abortion position is “Don’t tell me what to do.”

My No Child Left Behind position is “Don’t tell me what to do.”

But oddly enough, the 1.6 gallons per flush rule is a pretty good idea.

The 80's

I understand that fashion and music run in cycles. I sure hope we’re entering an 80's phase again.

Here's the vid from a more reliable spot. I know that the music snobs turn their noses up at this stuff, but I love a catchy tune.

I need, I need.

So, I’ve changed the quote to something I’ve personally said. Is it possible that I’m really that arrogant? Yeah, it’s possible.

Have you ever noticed that when people say “You really need to...XYZ.”; It doesn’t address your needs at all. It addresses the speaker's wants.

The phrase, “This is something you really need to hear.”, can be almost perfectly translated into “This is something that I really want to tell you.”

It’s almost for sure something that you don’t need.

Whenever someone insists on telling me all about what I need, I get worried. When the word “need” hits my ears, red flags go up, and I get a mental low-center of gravity. I view the speaker as dishonest. As a charlatan.

I just looked up some Heinlein. I guess my quote wasn’t really all that original.

* The phrase "we (I) (you) simply must —" designates some thing that need not be done. "That goes without saying" is a red warning. "Of course" means you had best check it yourself. These small-change clichés and others like them, when read correctly, are reliable channel markers.

So why not just dispense with that 'Need' talk? Just tell me what you want, and why. Oh, and when I politely point out that you're not actually interested in my needs, don't get all pissy. You know you're not. Just stop saying "need". That's what I'd like. You're dumb.

And I thought Bush was a bad speaker

Is that really what you meant to say? Cause it sounds sort of unhinged. This is what it would sound like if Kanye West held office.



At least it's better than they do it elsewhere.

Fight in Russian Parliament

India Style

Don't be silly

I suppose it's that "fake but accurate" nonsense again. Here at the Brandodojo, we say that gravity exists. And I take a firm stand on that. My boy 'Zack backs be up on that. Check out the story here.

Sarcasm Sickness

**Warning, this is an actual focused thought post. And not meant to be silly**

Sarcasm Sickness = A pathological need to communicate through sarcasm.

Have you ever tried to have an open discussion with someone who was pathologically sarcastic? With a person who was unable to convey their thoughts without being sarcastic? I mean actually unable to do it? Are you one of those people? A person who resorts to sarcasm when straightforward speech will do just fine?

You might be floored by this, but I don’t think that liberals have the market cornered on this. It’s certainly a trait of liberals, but it’s pretty darn widespread through other groups. So go easy Lawrence, and don’t get all riled up. I’m not talking about any individual person.

I’ve heard someone say that the lowest form of argument is stupidly imitating the sound of someone else’s voice. I think they might be right. We’ve all done it. When someone else is talking we pretend that we’re them and do a pathetic impersonation of the way they sound to us. It’s usually high pitched and whinny, and always unreasonable and unrespectable. “Blah, blah, words, words, Look at me I’m you, blah, blah, whheeeeee!” Think of the courtroom scene in Idiocracy and you won’t be far off.

Imagine trying to have a conversation with someone like that. It’s like calmly explaining something to a barking dog. They’re not interested in the topic. They’re interested in barking at or biting you. They don’t even understand the topic. They’re too busy barking.

Welcome to my world.

Now, don’t get me wrong. Sarcasm has its place. It can be pretty funny, but it’s not a substitute for logic.

I’ll say it again.

Sarcasm is not a substitute for logic.

Think of the Colbert Report. Think of most discussions. Or even most disagreements. Watch how quickly sarcasm is used as a method of persuasion. Instead of good observable premises. Point out that the person is being sarcastic, and ask them to stop so you both can start the real conversation. See what happens. They'll get more sarcastic, and claim that they really mean their crazy position.

I think the most productive way to approach a conversation, is with open and straightforward speech, where all parties are adults who understand that they own everything they say. I tell you what I want. You tell me what you want. And we can probably work something out, as long as you're not a complete horror of a human being.

You telling me what I want isn’t going to work. And you telling me what you want, pretending to be me, but actually just telling me some base reflection of yourself, certainly isn’t going to work.

Unfortunately, I’m usually listening to or arguing with people who use sarcasm as normal speech. Yes, that’s right.

As. normal. speech.

And here’s the real kicker. I believe that they actually start to think in sarcasm, so that their mind-set and self-view is satire. It’s sort of an all-mixed-up form of nihilism. They lose track of what their positions are because the satire itself is what is perceived as good, and not the actual positions. The become a parody of themselves. And the really sad thing is that they don’t know that they’re doing it. Sarcasm has become such a part of their thinking, that they have become hardwired to speak that way. It would be really hard for them to stop. I trust that you understand the concept, and now you’re going to notice it all the time, and it’s going to bug you. It might even bug you when you do it.

So that was really wordy and hard to remember. I should trim it down to a single mission statement that is easy to take away from this page.

“Don’t use sarcasm when honest straightforward language will do.”

I have an even better idea to help this stick. Just remember the words “Sarcasm Sickness”. It’s a new meme. In fact, I’d like you to stare at the words for 5 seconds to etch it into your psyche. Count to 5.

“Sarcasm Sickness”
1..............2............3............4.............5

Uncomfortably Energetic

Yeah, so basically this blog is just me posting videos. I'll get back to my regularly scheduled programming someday. For now just crank it up to 11.

You're doing it wrong

Video games and Virtue

When was young pup, I went into Babbages or something looking for a fun new video game to buy. I looked up on the wall and saw a huge poster of a guy standing tall, with his foot placed on the chest of some red winged monster, and his sword and shield raised divinely.



Here’s a pic of the battlefield chapel at FOB St Mike, with a very similar image.


I took one look at that and thought, “That’s me.”

And so I walked out of the store that day with the boxed set of Ultima 4,5, and 6.

It has a cool virtue system that I really liked, and at the beginning some gypsy asks you a bunch of moral dilemmas to determine what kind of avatar you’ll be. No, it was not Clea Duval.


According to this game, there are 8 virtues:
Honesty
Valor
Honor
Justice
Compassion
Truth Gargoyle virtue
Sacrifice
Humility
Spirituality

(Is Humility even a virtue?) The virtue system was pretty cool and tied in nicely with the gargoyle virtue system.

The Gargoyles have a trimmed down version of the Virtues. Truth, Love, and Courage.
Truth, love and courage are the equivalents of Honesty, Compassion, and Valor. The other virtues are combinations of those "pure" virtues. For example Honor is Truth and Love put together. Justice is a combo of Truth and Love. Spirituality and Humility are the weird ones. Spirituality is supposed be be all three virtues, while Humility is independent of the three.

Ultima 6 was a pretty darn fun game. You run around doing good deeds, trouncing knaves, and you even get to befriend a mouse named Sherry, to help you get the Rune of Valor. Squeak squeak, little Sherry. Squeak, squeak.

Update: Holy Crap, I'm all jacked up. The Gargoyle Virtues are actually Control, Passion, Diligence. The Truth, Love, and Courage are simply the basis for the human virtues.

Not really a news flash

Yep.

Highway To The Danger Zone

I like to listen to the radio or catch a talk show if I can, or listen to some news to stay informed of what folks have to say. I think they might have misreported this one.

On two separate occasions I’ve heard someone say that the military is killing monks at Miramar.

No I didn’t mishear them. They clearly said “Miramar”. And they clearly said “The Military”, which in America means “The United States Military”. In fact we all know that Miramar is specifically a Marine Corps base in California. When we trained to go to Iraq, part of our work up time was there. It used to be a Naval dogfighting school, that became widely known after the movie Top Gun staring Tom Cruise.


If what they say is true, then Goose, Iceman, Maveric, Jester, and probably even Sundown have a lot of explaining to do.



Why in the world are protesting monks at Miramir, and why are they being hunted by the military?



(psst. Try "Myanmar".)

Human Being

Recently a highly intelligent man named Tony has given me a lot to think about and I am trying to process his words. I think I disagree with them. But I’m willing to give it a close look. He’s previously let me know how he feels about Rage Against the Machine’s proposal for the violent overthrow of the government. I didn’t really dig it, but I understood that a lot of people did. He also let me know how he felt about an attempted murder on a serviceman. I didn’t dig that position either. It’s quite possible that I’m the minority in that view.

He recently told me point-blank that he viewed terrorism and terrorism supporters as the same thing. He extrapolates further on what should be done.

“By declaring someone to be a terrorist can you then just kill them on the spot? That would be an excellent way to dispose of any dissenting ideas and create an ideal Brando world. I mean why stop and just implying that people are terrorists or terrorist supporters?”

I can’t agree with him on this, and here’s why in a nutshell. Murder is wrong. Rules of Engagement (ROEs) are pretty clear that an individual’s behavior is what makes them an acceptable target to be engaged. Can you imagine actually committing murder based solely on how quickly you can physically utter the word terrorist? It staggers the mind with how evil that would be. I think that would make for a very poor world indeed. I do think that sometimes deadly force can and should be used, but I have a much higher filter than Tony’s “excellent” way. We all interact with others on a regular basis, and those people hold a wide variety of ideas. I can confidently say that I shouldn’t take someone’s life because they think “The Journeyman” is a good show, but that’s just me. “any dissenting ideas “ is a bad criteria to take away everything a man has, and everything he’s ever going to have. Oh no, no no. That would be very far from ideal. Tony and I have completely incompatible views on this. Agree to disagree, I guess. Another thing that I think is important to note is that there is a difference (to me) between a terrorist, and a terrorist supporter like Ward Churchill, for example. I feel that Ward Churchill’s gloating about 9/11 and his claims speech about “coming home to roost”, are pretty terrible. But I don’t think that he should be slain for that. That’s nowhere as sinister as AQ’s SOP of stripping your face off with a piano wire, shoving a power drill in your navel, or holding a cutting torch in your mouth for a couple of minutes. To me those are in different categories. I see the difference. I hope my reader can see the difference too. Tony feels that my view it childish, and I suppose it is sometimes. Maybe I’m naive and hopeful that enough people are holding on to their humanity. In his question “I mean why stop and just implying that people are terrorists or terrorist supporters?”, I’m forced to answer “Because you are a human being, that’s why.”

Anyway, thanks for reading. I hope it’s clear to you that I’ve listened to a great many opinions. I may not agree with them, but there they are.

It's not easy being a Terrorist

Even AJ is being forced to admit that Al-Queida is being smoke-checked at a cyclic rate. The Surge was such a success that even the most pro-terrorist folks must painfully and grudgingly admit it before they say “but” and launch into their script. I’ve heard it a few times.

“Well, OK, yeah, sure. I suppose that the so-called surge met with some measure of success against the so called enemy, but isn’t that just violence? And violence is bad. So actually the violence increased. Or escalated, as I like to say. So if “the violence” is the measure of failure then violence against Al-Queida is actually a defeat for the United States. Winning equals losing! Hardy-hardy-har-har-snort”

Wimp-Lo Logic.

For those of you that have seen that awesome movie, you know what I mean. Face-to-fist style.

The leader of Al-queida in Iraq even got his just desserts recently. I can’t even say that I knew his name. Zarky’s replacement. Now Al-queida has to find Zarky’s replacement’s replacement. Can you imagine interviewing for that job?

“Is there room for promotion?”

“Not unless the afterlife is a promotion.”



Even Sadr has had enough and said that his militia is done fighting Americans and the Iraqi government. The way for Americans to leave is with a stable and productive Iraq. I think that’s good. Others think that’s bad.

Any time now the apologies will start rolling in. (I know that I rarely use sarcasm, but that was some right there) I actually don’t believe that the apologies will roll in. Just more accusations. And maybe more claims that terrorists don’t really exist.