Lion of the Blogosphere

Archive for July 2013

Mormons and the internet

There’s an interesting article in the NY Times about how Mormons are reading about their religion on the internet, and discovering that it’s stupid and doesn’t make any sense.

Of course, all religious are stupid and nonsensical when looked at logically, but Mormonism is more so than other major religions because it was founded in the 19th century, so there are a lot of historical records to turn to, which the Mormon church leadership tries to hide. As hard as it is to believe, it seems that many Mormons aren’t even aware that Joseph Smith had dozens of wives, all clearly documented at Wikipedia.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 21, 2013 at 8:05 PM

Posted in Religion

Another quote about Trayvon Martin

Representative Cedric Richmond, from Louisiana, who is black, said:

The president said that was him 35 years ago. That’s me on a daily basis, and especially when I’m home in New Orleans and I’m dressed down. It’s something that black men still go through to this day, which is women clutching their purses, hitting the lock button on their doors, or just basic attitudes. And even as a U.S. congressman, as a black man, it is very, very frustrating, and you build up an internal anger about it that you can’t act on. [Source: Wall Street Journal.]

All of these types of quotes should clearly demonstrate that young black men know when white people are suspicious of them, and they are taught that this should make them very angry.

Maybe Mr. Richmond doesn’t act upon his anger, but clearly Trayvon Martin did act upon his anger by attacking George Zimmerman and beating him up.

(On the other hand, I’ve observed that in different situations, such as when they have the upper hand, many low class blacks enjoy being intimidating to middle-class white people.)

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 21, 2013 at 7:55 PM

Posted in News

Obama’s remarks on Zimmerman case

As you may know, on Friday Obama had a press conference in which he talked about the Zimmerman case (transcript here).

First of all, it’s not the worst thing anyone has said about this case. In fact, Obama came off as far more moderate than the typical MSM journalist.

He implied that people just have to deal with the fact that the jury returned a not guilty verdict:

The judge conducted the trial in a professional manner. The prosecution and the defense made their arguments. The juries were properly instructed that in a — in a case such as this, reasonable doubt was relevant, and they rendered a verdict. And once the jury’s spoken, that’s how our system works.

He said that people had better not be violent in their protests against the verdict:

You know, I think it’s understandable that there have been demonstrations and vigils and protests, and some of that stuff is just going to have to work its way through as long as it remains nonviolent. If I see any violence, then I will remind folks that that dishonors what happened to Trayvon Martin and his family.

And he implied that there is not going to be a federal case against Zimmerman:

I know that Eric Holder is reviewing what happened down there, but I think it’s important for people to have some clear expectations here. Traditionally, these are issues of state and local government — the criminal code. And law enforcement has traditionally done it at the state and local levels, not at the federal levels.

And even though he uses the platform as an excuse to condemn “stand your ground” laws, he sort of admits that they were not relevant to the Zimmerman case:

I know that there’s been commentary about the fact that the stand your ground laws in Florida were not used as a defense in the case.

So the fact is that Obama’s remarks are a lot more moderate and reasonable than what’s being stated by typical mainstream news media reports about the case.

But let us examine this remark and how it relates to what actually happened that night in Florida:

There are very few African-American men in this country who haven’t had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me.

And there are very few African-American men who haven’t had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me, at least before I was a senator. There are very few African-Americans who haven’t had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off. That happens often.

This actually backs up what I have been saying from the start about what happened. When Martin saw Zimmerman looking at him from his car and then talking on his cell phone, he most likely interpreted this exactly as it really was; that some guy who lived in that community thought he looked like a suspicious black criminal and he may have been calling the police. A thuggish black guy from the ghetto, like Trayvon Martin, has surely experienced “crackas” looking at him that way on many occasions, just as Obama described in his remarks. And it’s also what Martin meant when he described Zimmerman as a “cracka” to Jeantel; a “cracka” is a middle-class person who is suspicious of thuggish ghetto blacks like Martin.

Also, we know that black people are taught to be outraged when white people “profile” them in this manner. Obama implied that black people are justified in being angry at such behavior, and the typical liberal black pundit in the media is far more outspoken on this topic.

So Martin, outraged that Zimmerman “profiled” him, possibly egged on by Jeantel, decided to teach Zimmerman a lesson and give him what Jeantel explained is a “whoop ass.” The fact that she has a name for this type of behavior and actually finds it funny demonstrates that a “whoop ass” is common behavior in her milieu.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 20, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Posted in Law, News

Gervais Principle (replaces the Peter Principle)

A reader pointed me to Michael O Church’s explanation of the corporate hierarchy and the Gervais Principle.

Losers are at the bottom. Losers realize the corporate game is rigged against them so they do as little work as they can possibly do without getting fired. 98% of Indian computer programmers seem to fall into this category.

Clueless are extremely conscientious and hard workers, and loyal to the company they work for. But they are clueless because they don’t realize that their hard work will only get them promoted very slightly higher than the losers. They may also not be that smart, because the sociopaths don’t want to be shown up by those who work hard and are smart. They are not headed towards senior management, the people who make the real money.

Sociopaths are at the top of the corporate hierarchy. They realize that their purpose at work is not to create value or do the right thing for shareholders. Their purpose is to make sure that the people with the power to promote them see them as someone they would like to promote.

One way of looking at things is that it’s impossible to get very far in corporate America without some sociopathic tendencies, although I would divide sociopaths into two categories. Category one is the sociopath who enjoys making life miserable for the people with no power over them. These types tend to do the most damage to the companies they work for, but their superiors seem to tolerate them. Category two sociopaths don’t go out of their way to be mean and they are often pleasant people when you are not in their way, but they always place their own career advancement ahead of anything else, and will turn on their mean and evil side if it helps promote their interests.

I recommend that all of my readers be sociopaths. It’s the only way to get ahead so that you can afford to live in a safe neighborhood and send your children to quality schools.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 19, 2013 at 9:24 AM

Posted in Labor Markets

Sony lens-only “camera”

I want one of these. It’s a Sony lens-only camera, with just a lens, sensor and wifi chip. You control the camera and view the image with an iOS or Android mobile device. This seems like it would be especially useful for “street photography.”

It’s not science fiction, it’s a real product coming out soon. (Or it could be a practical joke.)

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 19, 2013 at 8:49 AM

Posted in Photography, Technology

College graduates less engaged at work

Gallup reports that college graduates are less “engaged” in their jobs. As a general rule, most people are not engaged in their jobs.

Employed Americans of all ages with college degrees are less likely to be engaged at work than are their respective peers with a high school education or less, so their engagement is not related to being a recent graduate.

College-educated American workers’ lower engagement mainly stems from being less likely to strongly agree with the statement “at work I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day.” Americans with some college education or a college degree were also less likely to use their strengths at work.

Gallup also discovered that people in a managerial, executive, or official role” are the most engaged.

Americans with a college degree who work in a managerial, executive, or official role at work are, by far, the most likely to be engaged, at 32.5%. Engagement drops significantly among college-educated employees working at all other jobs when compared with their colleagues with lower levels of education — except installation or repair work.

Some may get the false impression that to be happier at work you should not go to college, but that’s very unlikely, because disengagement probably comes from being too smart for the work you are doing, and not going to college won’t make you stupider because intelligence is pretty well fixed before the age of formal college education.

The real takeway is that you will be happier at work if you get promoted to a higher level position or if you otherwise have a career track that’s suited to your abilities. And this is most likely to happen if you have the best educational credentials.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 18, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Crackas are wimpy

islandmommy wrote:

The real wimps were the two guys who wanted to go out and break up the fight but their wives wouldn’t let them. Jenna Lauer’s husband was ready to rush out but she nagged him to stay inside & he obeyed. You can hear her bitching at him on the 911 recording. I believe John Good was the other one, IIRC his wife wouldn’t let him in the fray so he instead called 911.

Indeed, “crackas” are wimpy people who avoid at all costs getting involved in fights. They call the police instead.

And that’s why we know that Martin was not “terrified” of Zimmerman as various morons have fantasized about the case. The fact that Martin called Zimmerman a “cracka” indicates that he saw him as a wimpy white person who calls the police instead of solving his problems with his fists, the way the “niggas” do things.

If Martin had said that a “nigga” was following him, that would have indicated he was afraid of the person.

Martin probably ran away because he thought that Zimmerman was calling the police on him, and his first instinct was to run away because he has frequently engaged in criminal behavior (including theft, using illegal drugs, and being involved in “whoop ass” situations that “crackas” consider to be illegal) so he normally would want to avoid encounters with the police.

But after having more time to think about it, and possibly being egged on by Jeantel, he decided he should give George a “whoop ass” as punishment for profiling him.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 18, 2013 at 11:01 AM

Posted in Uncategorized

What’s a creepy-ass cracka?

People are confused when Rachel Jeantel uses these terms.

A “cracka” is a person who acts in a white manner. Which means they speak and write correct English, and they get annoyed when they see “niggas” smoking joints or giving people “whoop-ass.” This attitude is also attributed to police. People like Jeantel don’t see much difference between private citizen white people and police, they both represent the racist white ruling class that is ruining their fun.

Even though Zimmerman is technically Hispanic, he was a “cracka” because he was acting in a white manner; he was concerned about safety in his community and he volunteered to be in the neighborhood watch, which is the altruistic behavior of white people.

“Creepy-ass” is just an enhancing adjective. A “creepy-ass” cracka is a cracka who acts even more white than a regular “cracka.”

* * *

A commenter, “Scipio Africanus,” wrote:

Wrong.

A cracker, when and where I was coming up, was specifically a white southerner. And I’m from the North.

It was basically the term the black people used for white everyone else would call rednecks.

Martin is from Miami area where there aren’t any Southern rednecks. The white people who live there moved there from the northeast, after the invention of air conditioning.

If Martin regularly uses the word “cracka,” it’s to describe white people or people acting in a white manner, the kind he normally sees in the Miami area.

* * *

That Martin used the term “cracka” indicates that he was not afraid of George. “Crackas,” who are people who act in a white manner, are non-violent. They don’t pick fights, they call the police. Which is exactly what George was doing. And in fact, when Martin saw him on the phone, he may have very well suspected that George was calling the police. Which would have outraged him, because black are taught to be very outraged when white people think they are criminals. So Martin attacked George because of his rage at being profiled.

Incidentally, the fact that George was acting in a white manner is why the liberal elite jumped on him for being an evil racist. If George (Hispanic) had killed Martin (black) because they were in rival gangs, or because he thought Martin cheated him in a drug deal, then no one would have cared about that because that’s the sort of routine minority on minority murder that happens all the time. Even stray bullets from those sorts of routine encounters aren’t considered a big deal by the liberal elite.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 17, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Posted in Uncategorized

Whoop-ass

Rachel Jeantel told Piers Morgan

They don’t understand, they understand, “Oh, he would just bash, or was kill.” When somebody bash somebody, like, blood people, trust me, in the area I live, that’s not bashing. That’s just called “whoop-ass.” You just got your ass whooped. That’s what it is.

My interpretation of this is that Jeantel understands that Martin was really the aggressor and he was giving Martin a “whop-ass” in order to teach him a lesson for looking at him the wrong way and being “creepy.” This totally goes against the mainstream-media-liberal narrative that George was the aggressor beating up Martin (pictured as a 12-year-old kid) who was shouting for help.

Also, it’s clear that Jeanteal approves of the concept of a “whoop-ass” based on how she explained it as not being a big deal. I wonder if maybe Jeantel told Martin he should give the “cracka” a “whoop-ass.” If she did, I think she would omit that fact to make herself and Martin look better. She has already admitted that she sanitized the story the first time she told it to Martin’s parents. The story may still have been sanitized in her courtroom testimony.

When will the liberal mainstream media admit they were all wrong about this case? Probably never.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 17, 2013 at 8:26 AM

Posted in Law

Did homophobic Martin beat up Zimmerman because he thought he was gay?

That’s Rush Limbaugh’s interpretation (I think) of what Rachel Jeantel was saying about George being a possible “rapist.”

So maybe, Martin is the one who committed the hate crime against George, and it was not a race-based hate crime, but an anti-gay hate crime.

But my opinion is that Jeantel is just really stupid, which is why she doesn’t have any coherent or sensible theory of what happened. I think my theory, that Martin saw George as someone who lived there who thought Martin looked like a suspicious criminal type, and Martin was outraged by this profiling of him (because blacks are taught to be outraged when whites profile them), so he beat up George to teach him a lesson about not disrespecting him.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

July 16, 2013 at 5:56 PM

Posted in Law

%d bloggers like this: