Friday, May 29, 2009
Thursday, May 28, 2009
You may have noticed that I joined Twitter and added a widget to my blog. But more importantly, The Korean Central News Agency of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea has begun using Twitter as well. And what's more, if you follow them, they will follow you back! I am pleased to report that North Korea is now following me, and I them.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Some unbearable asshole decides to tear across a highway in a minivan, leading police in a high speed pursuit, and even tries to run one cop over. The chase ends with the asshole flipping his minivan, getting knocked unconscious and being ejected through the window.
Then a violent gang of police encircle him and kick the shit out of him while he is unconscious. Thus these cops erase the distinction between good and evil, and become the very thing they profess to fight!
The whole thing gets caught on video, but the cops decided to send the District Attorney an edited version of the video that does not include the beating.
Fortunately, the media obtained a copy of the video that includes the beating. Watch and then drop your jaw:
|Birmingham police beating video|
Thursday, May 21, 2009
I recently read Kafka's "The Trial." That book, and this video are far closer to truth than fiction.
Prague's Franz Kafka International Named World's Most Alienating Airport
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
California is having a special election today, the third of its kind in a mere six months time. And this election sure is special, all right: special ed!
The polls are still open as I write this, but so far the voter turnout has been absolutely astounding! And by astounding, I mean astoundingly low:
Voters were slowly trickling into their precincts today, casting ballots for six propositions related to the state budget crisis as well as several local issues, including races to elect a Los Angeles city attorney and the city's District 5 City Council member.
By 10 a.m., voter turnout in Los Angeles County was a mere 3.69%. In a comparable statewide election in 2005, turnout had reached 8.92% at the same time.
So it looks like about 4 in every 100 registered voters will actually show up to vote today (I, of course, am not one of them). And of those that do show up to cast their ballots, most of them are expected to vote no on everything, except for a bill that will freeze pay rates when the state runs a deficit. In other words, this "special election" is a big retarded waste of time and energy, thus earning the coveted "special ed" title.
Democracy is a monopoly of force dictated by majority opinion. Whoever gets 50% +1 vote is the "winner." But Democracy has many weaknesses, and one of its biggest is apathy. Non-voters imperil the perceived legitimacy of the state by refusing to grant consent to the whole scheme, whether through active opposition, or more commonly, disinterest.
An example of this disinterest can be found in this example from the same article linked above:
Tim Safarik, 42, sat down for his daily breakfast with his parents at Bob's Big Boy in Burbank. He had no plans to vote, even though he did during the last election.
When the voter pamphlet arrived in the mail, he said his reaction was, "That voting thing again? Ah, jeez. ... To be honest with you, I'm not even sure what we're voting for."
He said he was not unduly alarmed by dire predictions about the state budget. "I'm sure it's the worst. It's always the worst."
None of the significant bills that the state wants to be passed are likely to actually do so. Most California voters don't even know what this election is about, and even many of those who do know what it's about don't plan to vote today anyway. I don't blame them: Even if I were an enthusiastic voter, I would likely get tired of it by the third election in half a year.
So what is the lesson to be learned? The lesson is that Californians have thrown up their hands in despair and/or disinterest over the state's incredible buffoonery, outrageous corruption, and total inability to manage its finances, products, and services. In other words, apathy pwned the government of California.
In the world of private markets, this would signal the bankruptcy and subsequent closing of a company. Only in the insane and violent world of government rule can the collapse of a willing customer base still allow for the continued operation of an organization.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Brian Lee Crowley, himself a Canadian, lays out the problems with the Canadian Health Care system. Listen carefully to the thigns he says about government-run medicine, and remember in your mind that these problems apply not only to medicine, but all products and services that government ever provides.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Yet another example of criminals one-upping the government in the drug-and-information war.
Some hacker managed to steal the entire database of 8 million patient records and 35 million prescriptions from the Virginia Prescription Monitoring Program. The hacker wants $10 million in ransom money.
What is the Virginia Prescription Monitoring Program, you ask? Why, its a tool that the government uses to catch malicious, heartless prescription drug abusers!
So let's get this straight:
1. Virginia claims a monopoly jurisdiction on medical record and personal information protection policies and regulations for the entire state, financed by taxpayers.
2. Virginia claims jurisdiction over all drug use in its territory, and then uses taxpayer money to create a drug abuse database in order to catch and persecute all the pill-popping, drug-addicted (mostly senior) citizens.
3. Some hacker punk breaks in to said government database and steals all the info and then demands a $10 million dollar ransom.
4. If the government pays the ransom, it will be paid with taxpayer dollars.
5. If the government doesn't pay the ransom, then the records will be sold on the black market, the fallout of which will have to be dealt with via government methods, again funded by taxpayers.
The War on Drugs created this liability, and the very entity that claims the responsibility to protect private data had its database compromised. The taxpayers paid for the War on Drugs, the database, and will surely pay one way or another for the fallout (either in ransom money or in damage control upon the sale of the records on the black market).
And even if they catch the hacker, the taxpayers will still have to pay for the manhunt, trial, and the jailing/housing/feeding of him.
It's obvious to me that the problem here lies not with the hacker, or the abuse by Virginians of prescription drugs. Rather, the problem lies with the War on Drugs and the existence of a government monopoly that tries to protect the privacy of citizens by collecting all their personal data and amassing it into a single gigantic database.
The greater risk to the citizens of Virginia is not the potential for drug abuse, but the very existence of a database containing sensitive information intended to prevent drug abuse.
If there were no government, or at least no War on Drugs, this database wouldn't have existed in the first place.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
The propaganda is so blatant, yet so few people recognize it. It makes my head spin!
Take a look at this:
By voting in EP elections, you choose who influences your future and the daily life of close to 500 million fellow Europeans. If you don’t bother, somebody else will - and decide who represents you at the only directly elected Pan-European assembly. Elected MEPs shape the future of Europe for 5 upcoming years. Get the Europe you want! If you don’t vote, don’t complain.
Why do so many people believe that line of bullshit? The truth is the opposite! A couple weeks ago I had a little dialogue with a friend over the "if you don't vote you can't complain" theory. It went like this:
Him: (speaking about US elections) If you don't vote, you can't complain.
Me: Why not? Explain to me the logic please?
Him: You can't be serious. Isn't it obvious?
Me: Seriously, no it isn't obvious to me. Please connect the dots for my stupid ass.
Him: Because if you don't participate in the process then your opinion on the outcome has no validity.
Me: Well I'm forced to participate in the outcome regardless of whether or not I vote, so I sure do have the right to complain. The one who doesn't participate is the one who is not subject to our laws and taxes and elected leaders, but I am subject to those things, and by your logic I certainly can complain.
Him: Well you should complain by casting your ballot.
Me: Casting your ballot is not a complaint, but a consent. A vote is an approval. It is not possible to complain against the very system by consentual participation in it. The only way you can possibly complain is by not casting your ballot at all!
Him: No, that's not true. You can complain by voting for the opposite choice or the opposing candidate. Don't be such a contrarian.
Me: That's like trying to complain about McDonald's Big Mac by purchasing the McNuggets instead. I'd rather complain by simply not dining there.
Him: Well if you don't like it, you can leave it. There are plenty of other countries you can live in.
Me: Are you a Lobsterback?
I eventually broke through to him to the point where he agreed that a non-vote is a complaint, but he still doesn't agree that you have the "right" to complain when you don't vote. Yeah, I can't figure out his logic on that one either.
The brainwashing of the populace runs so deep when it comes to voting and democracy, that I fear I won't live to see its spell being broken. How sad.