The Shaming of the Fools

Trump

Oh GOP Oh GOP
Wherefore art thou GOP?
Deny your standards and ignore thy base
Or, if thou wilt not be but sworn my liege
And I'll no longer be a Democrat


Republicans-
Shall I hear more, or shall I speak at this?

Trump-
Tis but thy name that is my enemy
Thou art thyself, though not conservative
What is a conservative? it is not thought or deed
Nor ideals nor beliefs nor any ideology
belonging to a man, O be some other name!
What's in a name, that which we call Republican
By any other name would still elect a personality

So GOP would, were he not GOP call'd
Discard that dear platform which he owes
Without that title. GOP doff thy name,
And for that Name which is no part of thee
take all of myself


I will take the party by my words
Call me but yours, and we will be New Democrats
Henceforth We will never be GOP

Of Genie's, bottles, and Pandora's Box

Unless you've been living under a rock, or just don't care about tech news. There is a big dustup between Apple and the FBI over a federal court order intended to force apple to create a "special iOS version" of the software that runs on the iPhone for the express purpose of allowing the FBI to "brute force" the iPhone of San Bernardino terrorist so that they can extract any possible information from that phone that may lead the investigators to other terrorists before they can harm more Americans.

"SO WHAT!!" You exclaim. Who cares? Screw Apple, they should do the patriotic thing and help the Government catch those terrorist dogs before more Americans are hurt or killed!

Whoa there skippy! Calm down. Put down that pitchfork and put out that torch before you hurt yourself. Let me explain why I and a lot of others who understand this situation are behind Apple defying this court order...100%.

1.) The federal government is asking for something that does not exist. While they are saying that it is only this one time, if Apple were to comply and spend the millions of dollars developing this backdoor, the precedent would be set and more and more cases would be based on this. There are already discussions about how strong of encryption/security civilians should be allowed to have. That should scare any sane person out of their minds. Additionally, there are reports of as many as 13 other iPhones that the FBI want included on this court order. So much for just this one time, just this one phone. As I said above...the Genie will be out of the bottle and won't go back

2.) Apple has built a reputation of having extremely secure products, building this custom version of iOS would destroy that reputation while putting the security of every single iPhone owner at risk of having their information stolen because the details of this iOS version will be leaked, people can be bought. Having this tool available is dangerous, plain and simple. When its details were to get out, regardless of how, someone will find a way to reverse engineer it so that it can be remotely installed on the iPhone of unsuspecting people. Information will be stolen. Hackers are crafty suckers. If something exists, they will find a way to get it, or break into it.
3.) This brings up my 3rd point, the reason the government cannot break this phone is because of the hackers they employ. They don't employ people who have the creative genius necessary to do this sort of work. The Mozarts, and Bachs of our day. The people who can see systems in ways that you can I could never learn. The government won't hire these people. Why? Because they won't hire people with 2' tall mohawks, tattoos, heavy gauge piercings, who demand a salary of over $500,000/yr. There are people who do hire them. One of them is named Tim McAfee. He has said that he his team can break that phone within 3 weeks time and they will do it for free. Tim hires the right people to do that because he has built an international company around security. A company that is trusted, and has earned that trust through years of keeping peoples data safe. Its what they do.

4.) Despite what is being reported, Apple has been cooperating with the FBI. They have spent a large amount of money advising the FBI and offering specifications and other details in their attempt to help the FBI to break this phone. They said that if there was a way to get the phone to back itself up to the iCloud that they would decrypt and turn the data over to the FBI from that backup. The problem with that idea comes from a low level county employee who changed the iTunes password that was associated with that phone. That single act prevents that phone from performing a backup  to the iCloud. Where Apple is having an issue is the order to create that which doesn't exist. A specialized, and compromised, version of iOS.

Yes, Apple has broken into iPhones in the past. Those iPhones were running older, not nearly as secure versions of iOS. Those phones lack the hardware, and software protective measures that the newer iPhones, such as my iPhone 6s has. These are complex systems that where software and hardware work together to protect the data that is stored on the data.

Look at it this way. Would you want the manufacturers of the government computer systems to leave back doors that they could use to get into the systems, you know just in case.

The long and the short of it is, Apple did a damn fine job making sure that phone is not able to be broken. They did a damn fine job making a product that is secure, and now they are being told that they have to compromise that security by creating a compromised version of iOS. That compromised version will find its way into the wild into the hands of nefarious people. That compromised version will be abused by our government.

Yes I am all for catching terrorists. But I will not sacrifice liberty (mine or another's) in order to do it. Those that would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

When They Came For Us, We Had Already Done The Job For Them

  Perhaps it's just me, but the answer to online  censorship is not tucking tail and running, but rather the "Hail Hydra" approach. Every account shut down should be met with seven new accounts opening up. What exactly is the benefit in saying "Oh, they might stop me from speaking, so I am going to preemptively shut up"?

  I have been quite flabbergasted at the "Imma gonna quit" crowd. THIS, boys and girls, is why conservatives are losing.  We can't keep our voices if we leave at the first sign of any push back.


 I have a serious problem with a media platform, in an election year, silencing opposition voices. I have an even bigger problem with conservative voices volunteering to pack up and leave.

 We were told that conservative voices weren't wanted in schools.

 So we left.

 We were told conservative voices weren't wanted in Hollywood.

 So we left.

 We were told conservative voices weren't wanted in media.

 So we left

 We were told that conservative voices were not wanted in government

 So we left

 We were told that conservative voices were not wanted on social media.

So

we

left

 Holy crap people,  does NO ONE have to come for us, we just simply, show ourselves out.  How is THAT a strategy for winning?

 In life, the old adage still holds true, "The squeaky wheel gets the grease".  One has to be the squeakiest wheel in this game. And conservatives are still playing "Thank you Sir, can I have another", with shuffling feet and downturned eyes. Yet, we we have the audacity to complain when our congressmen represent us to a T.

 Look, for example, at the fight for a defining core conservative principle, The Right to Life, versus the core defining liberal principle, Abortion on Demand. In the public square we have screeching liberal women vehemently, unabashedly, marching with vagina hand puppets, even full body costumes, to protest state governments defunding Planned Parenthood being praised as good, wholesome, unobjectionable, righteous even.

 On the other side, women marching solemnly, prayerfully, with actual pictures of aborted babies, being vilified as gross, disgusting, objectionable, inflammatory, accusatory, evil, mean. Do we indeed have the courage of our convictions? Are we still watching, supporting the network that brought us this?  Yes, we are. We politely eat what is put on our plate, and wonder why we keep getting fed garbage.

 College campuses are another ground that we have lost, without a proverbial shot fired. Due process for men accused of heinous crimes are being trampled upon with impunity. We have even had presidential candidates praise this nonsense. Any voice that criticizes is met with accusations of being a rape apologist or worse, an actual rapist. Those words, just like the readily bandied "racist" are effective at melting conservatives like water on a witch. "What a world" indeed. Perhaps there is some merit after all, in the SJW claim that words are violence, when the threat of being called names keeps people from speaking their minds.

 If our principles are not important enough for us to stand for them, how to we expect to win hearts and minds? Especially when we have hogtied and gagged ourselves voluntarily. We can not afford to hover outside the window, moping like sad vampires of old, waiting to be invited in. We must boldly go in, as it were, and be ready to verbally stand and defend our hills. Waving a white flag and walking off of them surely is a strategy for a loss.

On Sacrifice

According to Merriam-Webster, the simple definition of "sacrifice" is "the act of giving up something that you want to keep especially in order to get or do something else or to help someone." Many sacrifices have been made by all of our ancestors for the benefit of their future generations — us. These sacrifices were for life, liberty and freedom, and have been made by people of all races, colors and creeds. Much of that sacrifice involved loss of life and mistreatment based on arbitrary and even hateful notions. And all of it was painful, even if for some more than others — and to varying degrees.

As an African American woman, I know my ancestors sacrificed an incredible amount — their lives, their livelihoods, their souls, even. But they did those things so I could have a better life than they did — so I wouldn't have to have those same painful experiences. And I don't. So why am I constantly being told to celebrate their sacrifices and at the same time behave as though none of it ever happened?

With the election of President Obama, many (not all), cheered that a Black man was finally in the White House as the leader of the free world and not just a servant. We had come a long way, right? Well, yes, we had. But the bigger question is, did we really believe that? And I think the answer is no.

While I know for sure that racism in this country and elsewhere continues to exist (and always will on some level — that's the nature of humanity), I have a very hard time believing that it still exists to the degree that it did even 60 years ago. And this is an important point to make and to understand. Think of it this way: If last week 9 out of 10 people hated me because of the color of my skin, and this week 1 out of those same 10 people still hate me because of the color of my skin, I would consider that tremendous progress. So why would I continue to look at the 9 who progressed as though they are the same as the 1 who has not? This is what has happened in the U.S.

Many of President Obama's supporters are ignoring the fact that an overwhelming majority of people do not care that he is Black. Why don't we care? Because we've been taught, and have learned, that race doesn't matter — it's the content of his character that does. And yet, every criticism of him that is based on his political views or his actions (which, surely, are based on his character) is met with the assertion that the reason for the criticism is because he is Black.

There is a double standard here by well-meaning people that does a great disservice to President Obama and all people of color. To claim that we've overcome racism enough for a Black man to be President, and yet that he is still subject to the exact same level of racism of generations past is absurd. It simply cannot be possible. And it places the same stereotype of previous generations directly on him — that any poor decisions he makes are because he's Black. I would say that's a big slap in the face — not only to President Obama, but to all the men, women and children who sacrificed their lives, their livelihoods and their souls in order for him to become the leader of the free world.

If you believe a Black man is capable of leading the nation regardless of his skin color, yet assume any and all criticism of his flaws is based only on race, you are essentially saying that Blacks still aren't good enough — not even to be flawed.

It's All Fun and Games 'Til the SJW's Get Involved.

 Body positive. Gender equality. Forced tolerance under any other name is still propaganda, and it still smells.

No longer satisfied with brainwashing your kids on social media, tv shows and public schools, the Equality Brigade of Big Sister want to start indoctrination at the cradle. By social engineering the lumps of plastic your child can play with and what mascots adorn their breakfast cereal box  they hope to build their socially conscience utopia brick by Lego brick.

"How many Lego mini-figures live on your street? With a planet-wide population of 4 billion, there are sure to be a few plastic folk nestling down the back of a sofa near you. But for all the mini-figures in the world, Lego does not produce a single one with a wheelchair or a disability?"


Of course this is not true, pirates with eye patches and peg legs have been available for quite sometime.( Yay for being represented by a yellow plastic toy?). The X-men set also has the iconic wheelchair bound character. I am sure there are more, but who cares. It's a toy. Toys are for play, for imagination expansion. You can remove arms and legs or wrap injuries in toilet paper bandages. You can get a sharpie when mom is not looking and draw scars.

The article goes on to bemoan the lack of wheel chair accessibility for Lego Airplanes. Seriously. This is adult grievance culture forcing its world view on the mind of a child. I can remember many times as a child, a certain figure was the wrong size for the entrance for whatever building you were playing with. ( Oh and you could actually cross play. Barbie did not have to play with just Barbie abodes, she could ride "in" your brothers Tonka truck) We used our imaginations and pretended it got through and placed said figure on the other side of door. Imagine it's wheelchair accessible, if you are a child and actually concerned with such, and go your merry way. Problem solved simply, without the retooling of a whole toy manufacturing complex.

No answer on how toy manufacturers are supposed to illustrate less visible handicaps, like mental illness or blindness

For years, child development researchers have been calling for unstructured play to encourage creativity in children. At one time coloring books were frowned upon. Pre-drawn illustrations were thought to handicap creativity.  Experts thought a blank page was the best resource to bring out the artistry in preschoolers. Yet today the SJW wants to force your child to draw inside the lines. Having every toy possibly imagined and pre-made for each possible play scenario, surely inhibits inventive problem solving.

Of course that is the point. Control. "Wrong play" might lead to "wrong think" so let's be sure that no "wrong imagining" happens. We know their busybodying does not come from genuine concern for the less fortunate, because after all, these the same people that fight for the right to abort a disabled baby. When it actually matters, their concept of forced acceptance only goes so far.

Of course the bane of a feminist existence could not go unscathed. Mattel announced on Twitter, Time Magazines new cover featuring the new "realistic" body Barbie. Because that is what play time is all about, realism and not fantasy.

What a powerful moment and this is just the beginning... #TheDollEvolves #Barbie https://t.co/wuAgbidIby pic.twitter.com/e0tCmOxDlt

— Barbie (@Barbie) January 28, 2016

"Barbie has, to some extent, always been this bully to women. Her impossibly thin waist has taunted us, pointing out what for many of us is our biggest insecurity — our body size. Though she is carved plastic, she has screamed at us across generations, telling us our bodies aren't good enough. Now, that voice may quiet — albeit just a little."

 When your toys are oppressing you, you really should seek help.


As a child I read a lot of books about little girls. Not once do I remember Laura Ingalls wondering if she was going to look like a corn cob when she grew up. Little girls through out the years were playing with molded clay dolls that vaguely had human shape. Sticks and clothespins wrapped in scrap cloth. Faceless primitive rag dolls misshapen and stuffed with saw dust never once pressured a child into wishing she too had a featureless visage.  Having a real doll was once a rarity. You sure as heck didn't complain about it's dimensions

  "As the old saying goes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.   There’s just one problem: Despite our demographic diversity, not everyone’s beauty gets equal representation. However, new changes to one of the world’s most iconic (and influential) dolls are set to address this"

  "In what is unquestionably Barbie’s "biggest change" since the toy first hit stores in 1959, Mattel is making room for other Barbies — 33 to be exact — to have a chance at dominating the shelves. And, to be honest, we’re all better for it."


   Barbie is a toy, not a role model. To run an advertising campaign stating she is, is a bigger issue than her waist size. Of course Barbie is suffering the effects of the modern age. Kids are choosing electronics over plastic and ad campaign like this is causing product to move, initially. Why? Limited run items are highly collectible. How many stores is going to devote shelf space to all models and clothing sizes. How many parents are going to fork over for the different clothing for all the diverse body types. Skipper was never popular for just this reason. Matel needs to have realistic pocketbook standards. This is not realistic long term business model. Retooling to become less streamlined rather than more is backwards in today's market, but of course not a single SJW will mourn Barbie's passing should she indeed prove unprofitable. They got their feather, and if the bird dies, they will blame institutionalised misogyny etc and say it was too little too late.

  Girls will never be a mermaid or Cinderella. Should we quit giving them toys that promote this false vision of the future? Most children will never grow up and own a Lamborghini, let's promote realistic driving standards. If we follow this logic, kids should only play with minivans. Allowing children to play with Disney castles or Barbie Dream Houses (or yachts) just sets them up for an unrealistic homing image. The will never be satisfied with their apartment complex or basic rancher. It's best to just nip all that imaginary play in the bud.


1 Corinthians 13:11-13King James Version (KJV)

11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

Believer or not, this is good advice, for the most part. Children's play time is exactly that. Let them play. Let their creativity and imagination flow freely to solve the problems important to them. Let them be kids. Let the adults deal with all the serious issues that need serious people addressing them.