Saturday, August 19, 2017

To the people laughing at McDonald's employees wanting better wages because they think those ordering kiosks are going to replace them all: There's usually only 2 people at the counter taking orders...where exactly do you think the food comes from? Fucking magic? Who mops the floors? Who cleans up the bathrooms after your inconsiderate ass made a mess? Who restocks the napkins, cups, and condiments? Who wipes down the tables so you have a clean place to sit down and eat? Who unloads the supply trucks? Who washes the dishes that get used to prep all the food? Who cleans the deep fryers and grills and ovens and other equipment? Who empties the trash cans outside and cleans up the shit in the parking lot that you couldn't even be bothered to PUT in those trash cans. Who counts the money and manages the finances? And this is just off the top of my head. I suspect the people running their mouths the most are the ones that wouldn't last a week working hard in a food service job for a slave wage.

I'm not arguing that a fast food worker is a "skilled" or specialized trade... only that they do work hard and computers can't completely replace their jobs (and that they deserve respect and not to be laughed at due to the presence of ordering kiosks). At the same time lots of other non-skilled work has historically paid a lot more. It comes down to the cost of low prices and corporate structure/philosophy. I try to eat at places and shop at places that I know pay their people a bit better than the other guys. It costs a little bit more, but I can afford it. If all you care about is getting your lunch the absolutely cheapest it can be...quality and worker well-being be damned...then I guess we don't have anything to talk about. It's a free country and you can spend your money how you want.

Friday, July 28, 2017

Yeah, the political and social left can get a little nutso sometimes, and there's always going to be people on the fringe. However, what winds up being the mainstream "left" views tend to be pretty self-correcting when it gets too nutso. To be honest though I try to avoid using "liberal" or "left" labels myself. This is a contrast from the mainstream right that in the last few decades has just seemed to veer so much into Toontown that what's considered "conservative" these days makes absolutely no sense when applying any reasonable definition of the word. They've wound up defining it as someone who looks like Trump, "The Mooch", or Steve Bannon.

Sunday, July 16, 2017

I hope that all this stuff that dudes in their 20's and 30's scream about on the internet regarding it being "PC sjw pandering" to cast someone in a role who isn't a white male stays on the internet like pee in a swimming pool. That way, in another 30 years when society is a bit more enlightened, their mixed-ethnicity granddaughters can google them, or look them up on wayback and see what misogynistic/racist assholes they are.

Thursday, June 15, 2017

I like how Trump's way of trying to convince me that there are too many unnecessary regulatory barriers to infrastructure improvement is by quickly flipping through the big binders of said regulations, making a disgusted face, and tossing them on the floor. That's it? That's your argument? :::flip flip flip::: "pfffft" :::SLAM!::: Was I supposed to have seen what was in them while you were flipping? You sorta went too fast. Yes Donald, we already know that YOU don't like to read anything that's more than 240 characters long at a time. The rest of us, however... may find reason why those regulations were put there.

Wednesday, May 31, 2017

Liberals and College Kids Aren't Tolerant of Intolerance. Good.

Good for the college students running people like that Milo jackass out of town in spite of those on the right and left criticising them for it. Good for those students walking out on Pence. I'm in favor of allowing reasonable voices to be heard. I'm not in favor of "tolerating" hateful individuals who are specifically preaching hate and intolerance and trying to disguise it as a legit political position, as if they were simply debating the merits of trickle-down economics or something.

Most importantly I believe in those people's rights to try to spread their hateful messages. But I also believe in everyone else's right to shut them down whenever and wherever possible. Freedom of speech isn't open mic night down at the Laff-Shack. You're not guaranteed a mic, or a podium, or an audience, and no, it ISN'T always beneficial to give those people those things (people with alt-right/neo nazi leanings), any more than it would be beneficial to give an audience to someone preaching the merits of sex with children (Milo Yiannopoulos fitting into both categories, now that I think about it).

I'm obligated to "tolerate" things in which people have no control over (the color of their skin, their sexual orientation, ethnic heritage...etc), or things in which they do as free adults that don't have any effect on others (the music they listen to, the religion they practice to the extent they keep it to themselves and their religious peers)... Things I'm not obligated to tolerate: YOUR EXACT OPPOSITION TO THE TOLERANCE OF EVERYTHING I JUST LISTED.

When people take this position..it's like they don't think anyone notices the little jedi mind trick they're trying to pull. Do you think I'm confused? Do you think I honestly believe that my position is somehow contradictory or hypocritical? It isn't. Nope, I'm not having it.

Friday, March 24, 2017

NEA and the Budget

My sister posted the stuff in the image file originally, but given the posts weren't public I won't link to anyone.


I think it may be important to remember that Trump isn't destroying art (though who knows, maybe he thinks he is)... he's just cutting government funding for it. While I don't like it, and I think spending the money on that sort of thing is a long-term benefit, it's hard to make the case for it being "essential" spending (but why must all federal spending be "essential"? an argument for another day). But yes, I'm much more concerned about the effect of the budget on the elderly and the poor while we pointlessly shift more money into the military, continue to let the ultra-wealthy enjoy pointless tax-breaks, and pointlessly freak out over the debt and deficit over some misplaced "think of the children!" logic.

Monday, March 13, 2017

Shane (1953)

Prompted by Logan, I finally made a point to see Shane. Great movie, one of my new favorite westerns. It's right up there with Unforgiven. However, there's one painfully bad part when the character Marion (Jean Arthur) is complaining to Shane who's showing her son how to shoot, "Guns aren't going to be my boy's life!" and then... in the most painful, condescending, mansplaining way that has ever been filmed in the history of Hollywood, he replies: "A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that." Apparently this is a famous, well-liked line.

It's the last part that got me..."Remember that". It wasn't, 'here's my perspective on the matter' or 'allow me to offer a counter-argument' ... it was 'here's the facts dumbass, don't make me repeat myself'

Anyway. Minor gripe, I wouldn't expect most westerns to have any sort of anti-gun message. Then of course in Logan (very minor spoiler ahead), there's Laura's final words of that film, which she heard from Shane's final words "Joey, there's no living with... with a killing. There's no going back from one. Right or wrong, it's a brand. A brand sticks. There's no going back. Now you run on home to your mother, and tell her... tell her everything's all right. And there aren't any more guns in the valley."

If you liked Logan, see Shane. I'm not saying the stories exactly parallel each other, but it does offer some context, and it's just a really good effin' movie.

Sunday, February 05, 2017

My 2016 movie ratings out of 4 stars (seen for the first time in 2016 regardless of release date).
Spectre ***
The Big Short ****
Deadpool ***
Bridge of Spies (***½)
Birdman (****)
Trumbo (****)
Out of Sight (****)
The Impossible (***)
Enemy (***)
Spotlight (***)
The End of the Tour (****)
Out of the Past (***)
Witness (***)
Man of Tai Chi (***)
Batman v Superman (**½)
Take Shelter (****)
Midnight Special (****)
The Intern (***)
The Revenant (****)
Captain America: Civil War (***½)
99 Homes (****)
The Shallows (***)
The Legend of Tarzan (***½)
Star Trek Beyond (****)
Zootopia (***)
Ratchet and Clank (***)
The Nice Guys (***½)
Rise of the Planet of the Apes (****)
Room (****)
Everybody’s Fine (**)
A Hologram for the King (***)
The Man From Reno (***½)
Hell or High Water (****)
Chef (****)
The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (****)
Hitting the Apex (****)
X-Men Apocalypse (***½)
Lucy (***)
Kubo and the Two Strings (****)
Mr. Holmes (***)
Arrival (****)
Doctor Strange (***)
Manchester by the Sea (****)
The Secret Life of Pets (**)

Saturday, January 21, 2017



To most of these I say "uuhh...yep". This entire list can be boiled down to "because you refused to tolerate my stupidity, called me out on my bigotry, and refused to get aboard the dumbfuck train yourself."

I'm getting tired of this "You didn't list
en to us common white folks" crap. No, we listened. We've been listening to it all our lives. We just think you're morally bankrupt, ignorance-exhaulting bigots who's ideas are in no way worthy of being taken seriously. You don't get "political equality". That isn't a thing.

Thursday, January 19, 2017

Polls

What if I told you that polls can be misleading, and sometimes flatly wrong (as we've seen recently)..but that doesn't mean we should just dismiss polls and pollsters simply because by it's very nature it's an imperfect science and just believe whatever the hell it is that it's convenient to believe. The truth is that scientific polls are *usually* right. Where they're wrong is the exception and not the rule.
This sort of thinking is no better than climate deniers pointing to 1 piece of data that scientists got wrong out of the thousands and thousands of things they've been right about and claiming that ALL of the data must be wrong if it ALL of it isn't right.
This is no better than Trump dismissing evidence of Russian election meddling because it was provided by "the same CIA that said Iraq had WMDs". A side note to that...lets not forget Iraq should have never even been in the conversation, nevermind if anyone thought they had WMDs..but I digress.
What I am saying is this is lazy, dissonant thinking.Look at the whole picture, not just the hot-button issue on the news right now. The biggest thing that some don't get is that ***The REASON THAT IT'S SUCH BIG NEWS WHEN STUFF LIKE THIS IS WRONG IS THAT IT'S USUALLY CORRECT.***