Thursday, December 22, 2016

Hypocrisy abounds

I am the type of person who really tries to be live and let live. I really don't want to be the guy who points out the stupidity exhibited by others. Ideally, nobody would need to be standing in the background imitating Dr. Gregory House, silently saying or outright screaming “You idiot.” But the world is not such a place, and you know, I can kinda understand how the character felt constantly. Hey, you're anti-vax because... You're an idiot, not only that, I have to wonder is it on purpose, or is your ignorance just something you cannot control. Normally, I find it to be the hard core conservatives that I want to do this with, but right now I am an equal opportunity offender, I am that way with Clinton Democrats.

Yeah, those liberals who are uber fan club members of the Clinton Cult. They have gone “full retard,” as Robert Downey's character in Tropic Thunder would say. What can I say, I enjoy movies and a lot of television shws, and I have a tendency to quote them when I am truly at a loss for words. That seems to be the case at present, I am at a loss of words with many of my peers at this time in my life, hell, there are times when I can only shake my head at my own mother, in sheer disbelief about some of the insane things she believes.

Now, I cannot say as I entirely blame them for this lapse in sanity, I mean we are truly living in interesting times, a time period where sanity seems to be a distant memory, where even what I consider to be a normal level of paranoia and fear, are absent. Now we have to deal with our super amounts of fear and paranoia, and it won't be easy. But, I just spent the better part of an hour dealing with a host of Clinton and Trump supporters, and the results are more frightening than Trump saying that he is definitely going to nuke every country in the world.

What are the results you ask? Well, they reflect that the Clinton and Trump supporters are really hard to tell apart anymore. Outside of a few off hand comments, and name dropping, they act and sound the same.
“Hey, did you know the US is currently dropping bombs in at least seven, count them, seven different nations.”

“No we aren't... Prove it.”

“Okay, there is Libya, Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, and Yemen. Hang on, let me get you a few links. ~produces two links showing where the claim is rated true, and news articles.”

“If we were bombing those countries, they'd kick us out.”
Yeah, literally had a Clinton supporter drop that out there. Notice no commentary on the links provided, or any reference to how the conversation progressed? Just that we aren't actually bombing in seven countries, no contending that we haven't bombed in one of those countries in the last six months, that would be Pakistan if you are curious. But wait, there's more.

Lets talk about the so-called Russian hack of our election. Now, those who put the documents out for our personal reading displeasure, have said all along that these documents were not hacked, they were leaked. But the CIA, and now various other intelligence agencies are saying the same thing, Russia hacked emails, and released them in order to influence the election in favor of Trump.

Now, in the course of that discussion, I see the same problem. You ask for proof, you are directed to several news articles making the claim, but they contain no proof, well, they don't contain anything outside of anonymous sources from within the CIA. Okay, well, as I quipped a few in a debate about this, “An anonymous source told me that Santa is an antisemitic child molester priest who sold out to Coca Cola for some slave labor and a nifty house under the North Pole.” Well, there is no anonymous source saying that, its not even true, we all know there is no Santa, but on the truthful side, there was actually a Saint Nicholas, and he was known to be a raging antisemite, whose influence is still felt in many aspects of our daily lives, not just because he became Santa. So, we know the CIA has a proven history of being on the wrong side of not only the law, but the truth. Yet now, there are those who support Clinton, who are taking their word as gospel. Sure, they acknowledge that the CIA has lied repeatedly in the past, that they are a service of disinformation and propaganda, but this time, this time they are telling the truth, and if you don't believe them, you are a fool. When asking for proof the CIA is actually being honest this time, I have been met with the “prove they are lying this time.” Then when you really can't prove it, because you cannot pull a source they find trustworthy, they say gotcha. Well, the truth is the CIA hasn't given any proof, without their so-called proof, you cannot debunk it, but guess what, you can't prove it either.

But here we are, the CIA and other agencies now agree. They have proof, but we haven't seen it, we have to take them at their word that they have it, and its bad. Its damning to say the least, yet we can't see it, its need to know information, or in simple words, the proof is top secret. Of course I also noticed that the Clinton supporters like to throw out, prove they don't have proof that Russia hacked the election. It's kind of like a hard core religious freak scream “Prove God doesn't exist,” while an Atheist says, “but claim he does exist.” Yeah, the true Agnostic is king in that fight, as you cannot prove or disprove the existence of a God at this point. God in this case is the proof the CIA has that Russia hacked emails, turned them over to people like Wikileaks, and that possibly influenced the election.

Speaking of this influence, I noticed another trend regarding this election, and this was well before the emails started leaking, or in the mind's of Clintonistas, being released to cripple their horrid candidate... There was a decent sized contingent of people who refused to vote for Clinton. No matter what was said, they steadfastly refused to vote for Clinton, even up to the last primaries in the contest, they said they would not vote for her. I myself said many times I would not vote for her. Yet that is totally disregarded. The emails influenced people to vote for Trump.

Yet, for her faults, and as horrid of a candidate as she was, she still won the popular vote by a huge margin, but we all know that the popular vote doesn't matter in the scope of things. Those emails did not matter in the scope of the election, not enough to really matter. If they had, it would have been a blow out in favor of Trump, or at the very least it would have been a lot tighter race in the popular vote.

But it wasn't, she blew Trump out of the water on the popular vote, but did not win enough states to outright win the election. Now, we have the CIA saying that Russia Hacked the election, and we have people who refuse to believe anything anyone says if it does not confirm their bias, even if it is coming from a source they normally say is “credible.” Oh, how do I know this? Remember that we have been bombing in seven countries discussion I had, one of the sources I linked was The Washington Post, the same paper that dropped the CIA memo about Russia hacking the election. Where this becomes truly insane, they aren't reputable when it comes to discussing the bombing raids we have been performing, but they are reputable when it comes to the CIA thing.

Does that sound familiar? Its called Cherry Picking, and now the Clinton supporters are doing that as much as the Trump supporters. And they wonder why some of us are getting fed up with them, and politics in general. Liberals are supposed to be better than this, for the last thirty years we have been calling out conservatives for this nonsense. We were calling out the lies on Iraq in the lead up to the second invasion of Iraq, we were calling them out when conservatives outright lied about so many things. We called out the intelligence agencies who repeated lies about WMD, but now a segment of our peers are screaming that we have to trust them once again. They ignore the fact that in the last year we have dropped bombs in seven countries, no doubt creating more of the terrorists we seek to stop.

The takeover is complete, and thanks to those liberals who refuse to see anything outside of their own fear and hatred of the right, the divide in our nation is only going to get worse as our populous fragments even more. Yes, by all means, we have to hold conservatives accountable for their actions and statements, but we cannot idolize our politicians, we have to hold them just as accountable as we do the opposition. We have to remain open minded, we must always remain open minded, less we become what we dislike. Of course, some of us have closed our minds, ignored those who were waving the signs of warning. History will eventually show who was right all along, but in the meantime we are left with what-ifs, and could have beens. What if people would have taken a step back during the primaries when rumors started flying about DNC rigging, could Sanders have handily beaten Trump... What if Clinton had won the election, would we be talking about these leaks/hacks the way we are now, I say we wouldn't be talking about them at all, except demands by Clinton's supporters to drop it already. What if the CIA is actually attempting to pull a coup of its own government. We know the CIA has a history of this in other nations, what if they are using all the lessons the organization has learned since its inception to overthrow our own government.

Oh, and there is this, and it is what I find laughable. When a corporate sell out candidate in Clinton was running for office, outside of Citizen's United, I very rarely heard her supporters bitching about the corporate influence on our elections. You see, corporations have been taking this nation over for years, and that wasn't so much of an issue, until Russia allegedly attempted to help them out a bit.