When Will Folks Learn (Ghosts Of Twitter Past Are Always Lurking)

Hey! HEY! Are all of you paying attention?! Read very carefully: Once you hit "send"on a tweet it is likely out in these internet streets FOREVER!


The internet has been apart of our daily lives for...What? Twenty-five years? And, it appears folks still don't understand how this whole world wide web thing works. Lawd Jesus. Poor chirrhens, they just never learn.


How many Twitter feeds from long ago must be exposed before people start realizing if they have tweeted racist, homophobic, offensive or just all around stupid shit somebody will unearth it.


In recent weeks professional athletes and known figures have seen their past tweets come back to haunt them.


Let's start with Roseanne Barr. Now, ABC canned her directly because of a current tweet. Everyone knows the story. I'm not going to retell it. But, Roseanne MIGHT have been given a pass except for the fact her past Twitter feed suggested the tweet that precipitated her firing was part of a pattern. Despite her bullshit excuses the truth is she had an extensive history of offensive and cra cra tweets.


A couple of weeks ago Milwaukee Brewers pitcher, Josh Hader, had his Twitter past thrown back in his face because of some tweets of his from seven years ago. Hader, 24, tweeted some racist, homophobic and misogynistic comments. A couple of the tweets were rap lyrics by Drake. Why are these youngsters always quoting Drake? That alone makes me side-eye yo ass. I digress. Anyway, I don't get to worked up about White folks quoting rap lyrics featuring the "N" word. Of course, they shouldn't say it but I am not quick to jump on the "they're a racist" train.


However, Mr. Hader tweeted some other racist comments that were not rap lyrics. Instead, the tweets were just straight up indefensible racism. He also tweeted some very homophobic and misogynistic comments.


Hader apologized to his team in private and issued a public apology. He said he was "17 and just a dumb kid". Part of me says yeah he was a kid. But, more of me says that excuse is weak, somewhat insincere and attempting to shed responsibility. At 17 years old one is old enough to know right from wrong. The excuse doesn't hold water. I know myself and many others weren't saying racist and homophobic slurs at 17 and demeaning women. So, he needs to be a little more accountable.


Last week Guardians of the Galaxy director, James Gunn, was fired by ABC for tweets he had posted joking about pedophilia. Right wing activist and dbag in his own right, Mike Cernovich, discovered the tweets and exposed them. Gunn tweeted disgusting pedophile jokes along with disdainful jokes about rape.


Gunn apologized, of course. Like the others he said the tweets were from a long time ago, as if it mattered.


They were horrific tweets. He deserved to be fired in my opinion. He has actually received a lot of support asking him to be reinstated. The fact he is receiving support is unfathomable to me.


Then, just yesterday Washington Nationals shortstop, Trae Turner, and Atlanta Braves pitcher, Sean Newcomb, became the latest public figures to have their past Twitter feeds exposed. Both had posted racist and homophobic tweets around seven years ago when they were 18.


Now, Newcomb's racist tweets are a little in question for me. A couple of the tweets were Drake lyrics. Why are people quot...Lemme stop and stay on task. A couple of the other tweets weren't blatantly racist but displayed a racist tendency or at least racially insensitive. His other tweets were unquestionably homophobic. He used the slur, fag, quite a bit.


Of course, both Turner and Newcomb issued apologies. As a diehard Braves fan it disappoints (but not surprises) me that Newcomb's apology seemed weak and insincere. He said he "didn't mean to offend anybody" and he "would make sure it didn't happen again". It just appeared to me it was a step above the "if I offended anyone" line which of course isn't an actual apology.


Turner's statement on the other hand seemed more forceful and remorseful. He mentioned he was 18 but also made a point to say "that was no excuse". He said he is not that person now and his teammates and anyone who knows him would attest to that. He also specifically said the tweets were wrong and "inexcusable".


Here is what I do not understand about any of these people and the countless other folks who have their receipts revealed: How does this happen?


Aside from the obvious point that these statements should've never been tweeted, why were they still on their Twitter feeds? They knew they tweeted the shit. Even if these folks didn't remember word for word they knew they had tweeted things that were offensive, off color and in some cases heinous.


Most of these people are of the internet age. They know dadgum well once something is tweeted it's likely there forever. All it takes is one retweet or screenshot taken on a cellphone and that ish is immortalized.


Delete it! Now, because someone or several people might have retweeted the tweet, deleting it doesn't actually delete it. But, at least it wouldn't be on their Twitter feed. The vast majority of people who have offensive tweets exposed are exposed by their own Twitter feeds and not other people's retweets.


I suppose they could have forgotten about the tweets. I mean I guess it could be given some of these tweets were from seven, eight, ten years ago. But, c'mon, man! Know the world you live in. Twitter is saturated with trolls and petty people who literally will spend hours combing through folks' Twitter page hoping to find anything that will "expose" them or ruin them. Some do it for fun. Others do it because they're haters. Then, some like Mike Cernovich want to destroy Hollywood because they think it is some "holy" mission.


Regardless, it is unfathomable how so many celebrities and athletes allow this to happen.


Of course, the real lesson here is to watch what you say or be willing to suffer the potential consequences. People will scream "free speech". But, again, free speech only guarantees you the right to say whatever you want without fear of prosecution or imprisonment. It doesn't not guarantee a price will not be paid.


At the end of the day I do not feel sorry or even empathy for any of these people. Remember kids if you don't say racist, homophobic, xenophobic, pedophilic, sexist or misogynistic shit then you can't get in trouble for saying racist, homophobic, xenophobic, pedophilic, sexist or misogynistic shit. It really isn't hard to do.

Democrats, Do As GOP Does, Embrace Your Base

Poor Democrats. Always the tortured souls of the American political landscape. They always have this innate ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Sanctimony and pretentious principled stands often contribute to their complex.


Also, the lack of a killer instinct to win also adds to their seemingly reoccurring problems. The desire to win is omnipresent, but they always get in their own way.


The current Democratic Party emboldens these issues and stigmas. Here we are in 2018 and Democrats are still litigating the 2016 election. They are wringing their hands and scratching their temples as to how they lost the presidential election to the most unpopular uncouth candidate to ever run for the office.


To help sleep at night they comfort themselves with valid reasons albeit not the reason that allowed the others to factor into the election. While the GOP candidate was the most unpopular nominee to ever run, the Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton, was a close second. Yes, YES, Russian interference likely had a hand in the election because of all the misinformation they were spreading. And, of course, the tendency of a large swath of the electorate to vet nothing and never employ critical curiosity and thinking helped that misinformation campaign. Ughhhhh. Anyway...Also, besides from Clinton being unpopular, she ran a shitty ass campaign. She, Robbie Mook (campaign manager) and John Podesta were so convinced the American people would never vote for a nominee who spouted racist tropes, demeaned Gold Star families, disparaged an entire religion and called an entire group of people "rapist and murderers (except for the ones he *assumed* were good people) that they unforgivably abdicated the job of campaigning. Clinton literally not one time visited any of the three states that made up a 77,000 vote difference that cost her the electoral college.


With all of these things being said and true it is not what truly cost her the election. What cost Clinton the easy win she should have had along with partially being responsible for the Dems losing over 1000 federal and state elected seats during the Barack Obama presidency is the reluctance, if not refusal, of the party to embrace its base.


If the 2016 Democratic primaries did nothing else, it illuminated exactly where the base of the party is. Bernie Sanders tapped into the left populist movement he has purveying for years and that more and more party voters had been moving towards after Obama's first election. Honestly, the shift likely began happening after the 2000 elections.


Sanders, as a 74 year old man, energized young people. It was similar to what Obama did in 2008 and Bill Clinton in 1992. Sanders spoke to what young voters believed in. But, as it turned out, he reached older voters as well.


It became apparent that a large contingency of the party supported what Bernie was proposing even if some them weren't supporting him over Clinton. Bernie gave her a fight. It could be said he dominated in the Midwest and Pacific Northwest. As we know Bernie didn't win the nomination. I'm not going to go into the particulars of that.


But, his policies did win. He forced Hillary to the left but it was obvious she didn't embrace or believe in them. Consequently, along with other reasons, a segment of Sanders supporters didn't support her. The base as a whole did not energetically campaign for Clinton. The diehard "I'm with her" Clinton supporters rallied around her but because the rest of the base was unenthusiastic they tended to shun and side-eye what was actually the majority of the base. They were so concerned with electing the first female president they neglected to acknowledge the issues that resonated with Democratic base voters.


Now, here we are two years later and the party leadership along with the neoliberal wing of the party still aren't getting it. No, that's letting them off the hook. They just don't care or are so entrenched in their own bullshit they're not seeing what is clearly in front of them.


I like Chuck Schumer but he and Nancy Pelosi are doing the party a huge disservice with their leadership. Frankly, their leadership sucks! They refuse to listen to the base instead catering to the donor class. They are stuck in this inane doctrine of appealing to centrists and "working" with the Republicans.


Lawd Jesusssssss! You all still haven't learned the lesson Obama finally painfully learned? The GOP is NEVER going to work with you! Neva, evah, evah, EVAH!


The GOP gets it. They understand where their base is. Sure, many of the elected officials find some of the rhetoric and core beliefs distasteful but they realize if they want to win elections they have to cozy up to the Republican base. And, those who cannot stomach it such as Paul Ryan, Bob Corker and Jeff Flake are leaving. But, the RNC recognizes who their base is and has conformed its platform to the base while trying to appeal to moderates, I guess. Regardless of what you might or might not think about Republican values embracing their base has worked for them.


Democrats need to take the cue and do the same. Look, the base of the party is no longer neoliberals and centrists. The base is largely comprised of left leaning classic liberals, Progressives, Justice Democrats and Democratic Socialists. The party has moved left. It's not far left like Republicans claim but the base is no longer tolerant of center left Democrats who seem more beholden to their donors and big money than they do their voters.


Now, I recently said on Facebook that the party needs to unify and support candidates of all stripes. Some districts and states require a more moderate candidate to run. Winning needs to be the priority because an agenda cannot be implemented if elections aren't being won. I stand by those comments. It is just common sense.


However, as a whole the party has to move away from corporatism if they want win and get back into power. I understand that folks like Schumer and Pelosi sorta cringe at the rise of progressiveness and Democratic Socialism. I, also, understand they love power. But, what they, the centrists and the Clinton wing of the party must come to grips with is their ideology no longer aligns with the base. They better realize that continuing to ignore and alienate the base is not a winning strategy. In fact, it will drive people out of the party. It already has.


The old guard lives in the present as if it's 1993. It simply isn't. The country has changed. It is obviously more polarized.


They shun the left wing of the party because they don't want to be called "socialists" by Republicans. First of all, grow a spine. Who gives a shit what Republicans say?! For the love of God fight back! Second, the GOP are going to call you socialists, Marxists and Communists regardless.


Let's be real here, a'right. Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein (warning: someone will be triggered) Obama were all left of center to centrist Democrats. They were. All of them have some progressive beliefs but their core approach politically is centrists. Republicans called of three of them Marxists, Socialists and Communists.


So, Dems, stop letting the ignorant erroneous propaganda of the right dictate your approach. The right likes to strawman. How about embracing what the party is and actually employing the big tent mantra you claim to possess? Stop being disingenuous and explain what progressivism is.


Fact is the majority of Americans support many of the main tenants of the Progressive platform. Over 60% of voters support single payor healthcare. Ninety percent of Americans support sensible gun control. The vast majority of Americans support an increase in minimum wage/living wage. Almost 60% believe in justice/prison reform. Nearly 65% of voters support legalizing marijuana. A majority of Americans support getting big money out of politics.


So, this really shouldn't be hard for Democrats. Endear yourselves to policies proposed by Justice Democrats and supported by the American people. This is not rocket science.


The midterm elections are 100 days away. Most people believe a blue wave is coming. I'm skeptical. Democrats have a long history of choking. Considering where the majority of the country stands on the key issues and the daily shitshow out of the White House the midterms should be an easy layup.


But, Dem leadership, that will be up to you. Will you continue to be petty and myopic or will you fully support the Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's of the party? 2020 is fast approaching. I'm not saying Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders or Kamala Harris is the guaranteed answer to defeating the Great Pumpkin of Mar-A-Lago. But, I am certain Hillary Clinton or Tim Kaine or that ilk will result in a certain loss.


I supported Hillary in 2016. I won't apologize for that necessarily. But, I will admit I was wrong about why I chose her over Bernie. I supported with my intellect what Hillary was proposing, but my heart was closer with Bernie's vision. I erroneously thought Bernie had no chance of winning. I saw the polls showing him trouncing that orange dude, but I just didn't believe people would vote for someone the GOP was calling a socialist. I was wrong.


Democrats, don't be wrong again in 2018 and 2020. Our democracy literally hinges on you getting it right.  

No Facts, No Logic (The Frustrations Of Current Political Debate)

Generally speaking I am a shy person. I am not one who is high on confrontation. However, if the topic is a passion of mine I will debate it. Despite my shyness I actually love debate. I think discourse is healthy and educational. I am always wanting to learn. Regardless of the topic I am usually ready to have a spirited open discussion.

But, while I love debating, I hate arguing. Arguments rarely, if ever, solve anything. They are almost always fruitless, vain exercises. When people are arguing instead of discussing they inherently cease listening to the other person because they only concern themselves with getting their point across. Arguments intrinsically cause people to be more concerned with "winning" the argument than coherently having their point heard and concisely conveying their position or belief.

In this current political and social climate I find more people who want to argue rather than debate or discuss. The general discourse landscape is littered with tension, narrow-mindedness and a desire for confrontation.

This especially true regarding political discourse. So many people are in their "tribes" and "bubbles" that they sincerely believe their views are infallible. These people all but isolate themselves inside their little world where they are "good" and anyone outside of the bubble is bad. They literally surround themselves the best they can with like minded people never challenging themselves with different opinions. If they work or have to socialize with the "others" they keep their communications with them as cursory as possible because they see them as the "enemy".

Then, there is the role social media plays. It is astounding the number of people who will get on Twitter and Facebook saying things about and to people they would never have the guts to say in person. And, if they did, they would immediately be ready to play the victim.

But, a huge swath of people will post political things saying they are all about frank fair discussion. However, the second someone replies with an opposing viewpoint the claws come out. All of the talk of fair frank discussion gets tossed in favor of arguing. As I can personally attest there is rarely civil discourse; it quickly devolves into name calling, demonizing and straw manning.

What I have found maddeningly frustrating is, whether it is online or in person, people are so woefully uninformed. They will argue conflating information, if not just getting it wrong all together. They began regurgitating things they've "heard" but never vetted. They will say they "read" some erroneous information but suddenly can't cite where they read it. And, everything they say they say it as if it is fact. Then, if you debunk what they say they call it "fake news" and you a liar.

I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with something I say. We can debate it and be productive. Maybe I will see something from a new view. Perhaps, I have information wrong and they can show me where I erred.

Open, honest, frank intelligent debate is apart of the fabric of our democracy. It is essential if we desire to keep it healthy. Discourse keeps us intellectually honest.

But, in this current climate people are not concerned with civil discourse. They are even less concerned with being logical and factual. Folks only want to be right and "own" you. I do not even know what that means. I have been told that numerous times by people on Twitter after they made some half-assed fallacy filled "point" that I countered and debunked with facts. I guess because they called me a "stupid libtard" or "ignorant munkey" or "another dumb nigger" or "a faggot ass pussie" they owned me. All actual things that have been said. I always respond with something to the effect, "You didn't 'own' me. But, Darwinism certainly owns you. And, I might be another dumb nigger but at least I can spell. We're done here."

This is the type of discourse we way too often have. Our society is is filled with people who are willfully proudly ignorant. They have absolutely no intellectual curiosity. They have not a drop of desire to be well read so they can coherently express their viewpoints. Instead they insulate themselves into their own bubble where they're only receiving some information or they are not accurately absorbing the it or they are succinctly only be told what they want to hear. Then they head to Twitter, Facebook or in person looking for a fight. Inciting a political debate so they can " own" someone only to show themselves as being shallow uninformed provocateurs. What is often worse is when the person they decide to banter with is equally as shallow and uniformed.

The base of the problem is folks don't listen to one another. As I said earlier instead of exchanging ideas and viewpoints people argue. They wallow in narcissism, willful ignorance and this pervasive need for victimhood. Winning and being made to feel they are right is much more important than expressing a particular stance where someone can see where they are coming from or coming to an understanding.

I know, perhaps more than anything, what depresses me is when people aren't listening. I am not really interested in "converting" anyone. Just listen to me, understand where I am coming from and show me and my opinion the respect it deserves as I do you. Or at least try my absolute best to do.

Name calling, demonizing, demeaning and belittling is not getting us anywhere and it never will. Isolation is not either. We solve problems and fix the ills by talking rationally and intelligently. It is certainly going to become heated and raw at times, but that doesn't mean it has to devolve into juvenile pettiness. Listen to each other. Empathize. Learn. And, be informed. Having a trusted news source is fine but watch, read and listen to multiple sources including ones who align differently from you and employ critical thinking.

We have a huge divide in this country. It is mainly because of ignorance refusal to listen. It's also because of this inexplicable need to have an enemy. We are all Americans. We aren't each others' enemy.

Honestly, this is a subject deserving of a book or at least a lengthy thesis. So much can be expanded upon and explored. But, I wanted to write this to get this off my chest.

*Please feel free to comment. I don't censor. I welcome all commentary even if it is critical.

      

R. Kelly, Step...Step Into A Jail Cell

I had planned on blogging today about Milwaukee Brewers pitcher, Josh Hader, and his racist dumbassery. I was contemplating all day about what I would say and how Hader's "I was a kid" defense seems insufficient and somewhat insincere. But, then, R. Kelly had to spew out some pure unadulterated fuckery. So, now, I find myself blogging about "Mr. Pissin On You".


Today R. Kelly released a 19 minute...NINETEEN DAMB MINUTE music video titled, "I Admit". My initial reaction was, "Uh-huh! No he didn't! This fool finally came clean. Well, ain't that a..." But, then I read the story and the lyrics. He didn't admit to shit. Instead, he apparently spent 19 minutes obfuscating, self-loathing, self-victimizing, whining and attempting to elicit sympathy.


Kelly addressed his numerous sexual misconduct, sexual assault and pedophile charges. Well, he really didn't address the charges. He basically didn't deny them instead choosing to obfuscate. He said he "likes the ladies, old and young" but to call it pedophila is "crazy". He then asked, "Am I supposed to lose my career or go to jail over your opinion (that he's a pedophile)?" No, Robert, you shouldn't go to jail over someone's opinion. You should go to jail because you like to sex and pee on underage girls, you piece of shit! Lemme ask you a question. Am I supposed to feel sorry for you? I do not!


Then, he drops this little jewel. "Say I'm abusing these women? What the fuck? That's some absurd shit. Brainwashed? Really? Kidnapped? Really? Can't eat? Really? Real talk, that shit sounds silly." Well, it doesn't sound that silly. And, they're not women, fucktard! They are girls!


Now, just in case you were getting sucked into buying this bullshit he removes any doubt of who he is with this ish. "What's the definition of a cult? What's the definition of a sex slave? Go to the dictionary, look it up. Let me know. I'll be here waiting."


Welp, R. I went to the dictionary. The second listing for a cult is as follows: "A group that devotes itself to or venerates a person, ideal, fad, ect." I also looked up sex slave. Definition reads as follows: "A person entirely under the dominion of some influence or person obligated to provide sex to said person for free". Uh, muthafucka that sounds like what those girls were to you!


Now, Kelly also stated in the song he was molested from the age of 7 to 14, which if true, he needs to seek help for. Lawd forgive me but it sounds a bit convient. He also said he's functionally illiterate, which begs the question why someone of his wealth never took classes to become literate. Also, he claims to write his own music so...


Look, I am done with R. Kelly! D-O-N-E! He obviously has issues. It is so apparent he is guilty as sin. He is a manipulator, which is evident by this bullshit song. Worse yet, he is a predator.


I found it interesting he never flatly denied any of the accusations. What I also found quite intriguing is while he was "bearing his soul" there was one thing he left out in his self-serving bs. He didn't say a damb word about his penchant for pissin on folks.


What about that, Mr. Keep It In The Closet?! Not one word about peeing on young girls. And, how effed up is that? Look, I like to get down; get my freak on but in my near 44 years on this earth I have never once thought about peeing on a woman. That shit is crazy. I mean what balanced dude looks at woman and says, "Dayum, Girl. Your booty is poppin. Your boobs are on point. Baby, you just make me wanna piss all over you. Gurl, I wanna pee so much I dehydrate myself!" No normal human being says or thinks that. Yes, I know there are people who are into that and that's a level of freak that heavily implies you need to talk with Jesus! I'm just sayin.


The fact is I have ZERO sympathy for R. Kelly. He is a predator. I don't care why he is a predator. It is just clear he is. And, I fully understand these girls parents are culpable. Who in they right mind would allow their teenage daughter to go "stay awhile" with a grown ass man? I wouldn't have let my daughters be alone with a R. Kelly cd let alone his urinating happy ass!


And, these folks defending him and being apologists... Lawd help ya! You have two groups defending him.


The first group is the same dumbasses who constantly shill for Chris Brown. They propagate the defense, "Yes, he does wrong but he can saaaaang". What in the fuck?! He "can saaang"? Oh, so because he makes great music he should be allowed to molest young girls. That is a sound defense, if you're a bonafide mental midget. Sorry. Not sorry. Yes, R. Kelly has made some bomb ass music. That is not enough to overlook sexual predatory behavior.


The other group is what I call the "Bill Cosby" defenders. Their mantra is "Yes, he is a pedophile but he's a Black male role model. Besides, what about [insert White sexual predator's name]?" Lemme address the latter statement first. What about them? When "what about-ism" is your defense you don't have an intelligent defense. That defense screams, "I know my guy is guilty so I'm going to deflect." Yes, there are plenty of White dudes who slide by but that doesn't mean we should literally look the other way when a sexual deviant and criminal is preying on young Black girls and women. That makes no sense.


As to the first part of the defense, we (Black folks) have plenty of other Black male role models. John Legend, Kendrick Lamar, Russell Westbrook, Stephen Curry, Malcom Jenkins, Colin Kaepernick (Yes, I said his name! 😒) to name a few. But, there is a plethora of Black men we can look up to who aren't sexual assaulters. Can we please aim just a little higher? Inequality is real and every Black person with a shred of dignity knows it; but, Black folk, really is the likes of R. Kelly a hill worth dying on? REALLY?


And, hey, I've been complicit. I knew something was off about that Negro when he was damn near 30 years old and married Aayliah the day she turned 16. But, I moralized it away like the Chris Brown defenders because "I Can't Sleep" was the shitz and Aaliyah did say, "Age ain't nuthin but a number." But, that was bullshit! My Black ass wouldn't be marrying essentially 15 year olds when I was in my 20s! So, why should've I excused it from him. But, I did. I was indefensibly wrong. However, when it came out he was peeing on folks like some stray dog would a tree I was off the train. When Toure asked this fool if he thought it was wrong to sex young girls and he said, "Well, what do you mean young? How young are you talking?" I was screaming for Chris Hansen. If there was ever a moment for "To Catch A Predator" to have its cameras rolling.


R. Kelly should be in jail. This isn't for debate. Seriously! Seriously! When it comes to child molesters there can't be a parsing or moral equivalency.


 Wrong is wrong. Is there really a need for discussion?....

Yes, Lefties, You Are Guilty Of Violating Free Speech Rights Too

Let's get this clear upfront. Not wanting to hear racist, xenophobic or homophobic speech is not morally equivalent to not wanting to hear a celebrity or athlete's opinion simply because you disagree with it ideologically.


However, free speech is all encompassing. Just as it is wrong for those who are right leaning when they attempt to silent opinions they oppose it is wrong for those on the left when they do the same. Free speech is not always comfortable nor is it always moral. It can be hateful and abjectly ignorant. Regardless, all of it has a right to be heard.


The last few years have seen an increase in censorship of certain speakers on college campuses. The majority of those speakers are the ideological right. Some of those speakers are avowed racists, White Nationalists, anti-Semites and Islamophobes. Often a contingency of students have voiced concern, if not blatant objection, resulting in universities and colleges caving in not allowing certain speakers to appear despite many of them having already been booked.


The institutions of higher learning always cite a fear of violence as cause for cancellations or non-invites. While the violence concern has merit it is often a disingenuous excuse. Usually, it has more to do with students, professors and many college administrators finding such language and positions morally repugnant. That repugnancy could affect the bottom line. Profit motive is always lurking around.


But, what many of these students need to realize and what the professors and administrators should already know is that a college campus is supposed to be the ideal establishment for an exchange of ideas and a platform for varying opinions. College is the place where you expand your horizons and study different ideas. It doesn't mean those ideas will be embraced.


It is completely reasonable to see figures such as Ann Coulter, Richard Spencer and Milo Yiannopoulis as reprehensible. It is fair to see their positions on race, immigration, and equality as unsettling and disgusting. If the term "White Supremacist" was used it would be hard for an intelligent person to argue against it.


However, censoring them from campuses only emboldens their fan base and gives them fodder for make themselves "victims". More than that censoring them goes against the very idea of free speech. As long as they are not directly inciting violence they have a constitutional right to say whatever they want to say regardless of how idiotic it might be. Now, that doesn't mean they can't get fired from a job or lose endorsements. That is a potential cost of free speech.


One could argue doesn't a college have the same right as an employer to not want hate or intolerant speech or the propagators of such speech on their campus. If said propagator is an employee then, yes, of course.




But, in the case of guest speakers they should actually welcome such speakers. When anyone gives a speech on a campus they are likely subject to pushback. If someone is speaking whom others have disagreements, they should exercise their First Amendment rights and protest. Confront these people contradicting their talking points with facts and analyses. Instead of censoring them expose them for being the hateful, intolerant bigoted people they are.


Everyone's opinions are not going to be yours nor should they be. Part of what makes America great is that differing ideas and opinions can be freely expressed. A "nuisance" of that free expression is some opinions and ideologies you are going to find more than disagreeable. You are going to find them repugnant and unpalatable because they are hate filled. Unfortunately, this country has racists, xenophobes, homophobes and generally intolerant ignorant people. But, those people have the right to say what they think. It doesn't mean it should be embraced or coddled. It also doesn't mean it should be censored.


Stop being snowflakes. Quit looking for your "safe space". Stand up! Fight for what you claim to believe in! Be principled. Don't run and hide from those you oppose. Confront their language and ideologies. Call it out for what it is.


Look, the world will always...always...always have people like Coulter, Spencer, Yiannopoulous and Steve Bannon. But, censoring them to silence them is not the answer; debunking, discrediting and exposing them for the racist charlatans they are is what will silence them.


Free speech belongs to ALL of US (even the hateful and ignorant).

The Right To Free Speech Is Everyone's (Not Just To Those With Whom You Agree)

One of the most continuous and fierce arguments in society is free speech and what it comprises. Free speech is one of the pillars of our democracy; thus, why it is included in the First Amendment. Everyone says they love freedom of speech and are its ardent defenders. But, that stance often gets tested when the free speech is contrast to one's beliefs or that speech is controversial.


A frequent issue that arises is the role of non-political public figures and their free speech and its permissiveness. Some people from news "commentators" to "regular average joes" seem to feel celebrities and athletes should keep to themselves their social and political beliefs. Often critics and detractors will utter phrases such as: "Shut up and dribble"; "Stick to acting"; "Just entertain"; "Stay in your lane". These critics and detractors apparent position is essentially these people are politically novice, if not ignorant, and should refrain from offering opinions. They feel celebrities and athletes, for lack of a better term, should be seen and not heard.


At best these arguments are specious. At worst they are unabashedly hypocritical. These critics issue seemingly isn't public figures expressing their opinions; it is the opinions they express.


These critiques of celebrities and athletes often come from the political right. It is no coincidence that the public figures who often speak out are from (but not exclusively) the political left.


The detractors will almost always defend themselves by saying, "Everyone has the right to free speech but these people often are not well versed in the subjects they address" or something similar in nature. The fallacies of that defense are it's frequently false and it reeks hypocrisy. These same people daily critique and bemoan athletes, actors, and entertainers' performances and works. It is a societal staple. These detractors would bristle and take great offense if an athlete said, "Hey, You, stick to painting and not worry about my batting average." They would be extremely chaffed if an actor snapped, "Listen, Skippy. You just keep snaking that shit out of toilets and stay in your lane." If past reactions are an accurate indicator when similar comments have been made, the immediate reaction would be, "I have a right to say what I want. I pay your salary." The somewhat fallaciousness of the salary paying claims aside those people would be rightfully offended. They have a right to criticize because they're paying customers.


Well, athletes and celebrities are voters. They are United States citizens. The same issues that affect other Americans affect them.


But, a counterpoint to that argument from the critics is this almost asinine assertion that these figures are rich so why should they care so much. On its face it is an absurd argument. As stated earlier, much of this opposition comes from the right, so it's right leaning policies that usually come under fire. Lately, it is the current administration's policies and proposals that are the criticism recipients.


Why the position is so silly and quite frankly intellectually dishonest is because it implies, if not ostentatiously asserts, wealthy people shouldn't care about poor people or social issues. Many celebrities and certainly athletes feel it's an obligation to care about the disenfranchised because before they became wealthy they were disenfranchised. They feel it is their civic duty to give back to their communities. Many of them feel because they are rich it is their civic and Christian duty to protect and speak for those who don't have a voice. They believe it is an obligation to take advantage of their platform to better the lives of the less fortunate.


So, if speaking out or railing against policies and/or people whom they perceive are inflicting harm or undue strife on the less fortunate will provide the aforementioned less fortunate a voice, it is their right to do it. It is their right to freedom of speech and their right to protest as an American citizen.


It is rather pretentious for anyone to feel it is they who decide whom does and doesn't have the right to express their free speech. That is not how the Constitution works. The idea that athletes and celebrities should not, because of their wealth, speak their minds literally drips with irony and hypocrisy. The notion that these public figures shouldn't concern themselves with social issues and injustices, aside from ironically being blatantly elitist, is fervently febrile ignorance.


Free speech is not free. Even though free speech's price does not include arrest, prosecution and imprisonment it is often rather pricey. But, regardless of the price it may carry, the right to free speech is the one thing we all can afford. It is not a privilege; it's a right! You may not like what everyone's speech is, but if you are a true defender and believer of American ideals and principles you must respect their right to express it.


And, for the right-wingers who are thinking I am just "attacking" them, be patient. I am coming after the leftists over free speech in the next day or so.

The Clown Show Hit Helsinki

Yesterday was a sad day in American history. An United States president shamelessly subjugated himself to an adversary. The performance Donald Trump put on yesterday before the entire world was more than just embarrassing it was anguishing. It was almost paralyzing to see the leader of the free world all but abdicate American principles and values in an acting like a smitten submissive school boy with a crush.


The summit between Trump and Russian President, Vladimir Putin provided a bigger shitshow than the most pessimistic of skeptics could have imagined. They started the summit with a "pregame" press conference which featured an indifferent appearing Putin and Trump whom all but said, "Isn't Vlad just the coolest? He's so cute." After all in attendance likely threw up in their mouths the two *ahem* leaders held a private meeting where only the two accompanying translators were allowed. (Nothing fishy about that.) The meeting lasted over two hours. And, then the clown show officially began...


The two men held a joint press conference where questions were actually allowed. They both gave vague generic descriptions about what was discussed in the private meeting. Then, questioning began. Surprisingly, the White House press corp went in on both of them.


It was at that moment the American president threw American intelligence agencies under the bus and flat out refused to have the American people's back. Instead he chose to fawn all over Putin and become completely servile.


President Trump blamed America for the "bad relations" between the two countries. He said we were "foolish" and "stupid". He essentially said both countries have been foolish but mostly America. The President then said if Russia meddled in our elections it was our fault. He followed those gems up with point blankly saying he didn't believe our intelligence agencies assessment and summations that Russia unquestionably interfered in the 2016 election. He said, "I couldn't see why they would."


Oh, but the Orange One wasn't done. He then said he believed Putin over the United States intelligence community because "President Putin strongly and very forcefully denied Russia interfered". Seriously!


But, wait! There is more! Trump then said Vlad had "some interesting ideas on what could've happened". Uh, I'm sure that he did. Of course, Trump offered zero detail about these "interesting ideas". Then, he went on some incoherent diatribe about Hillary's emails (I'm so fucking tired of hearing about those damb emails!), the DNC server and a Pakistani guy the DNC hired. He said some rambling shit about the Pakistani dude, which was either lies or conflation. He actually ramblingly mentioned the DNC servers periodically during his babbling. He then called the twelve indictments of Russian military intelligence officers fake news.


But, he saved his best for last. Get ahold of this jewel. He said...I swear to God in heaven he said, "The president actually made a very generous offer. He said our investigators (meaning Mueller's team) can go to Russia and he would have his investigators work with ours and they can share information to get this figured out." 😐 *What did this little Black mutha****** type?!* You read correctly. Uh, yeah, I'm sure Robert Mueller will hop on the next plane to Moscow and give the Russian investigators all his info. And, the entire time Putin is looking at Trump with this wry smile as if he was thinking, "This shit can't be real. This is way too easy."


This fiasco of presser ended with Putin being asked if he had any compromising info on Trump or his family. His answer was pure gold if you really listen to it, which I strongly implore you to do if you haven't already. At first Putin chuckled and said, "I've heard these rumors." He then gave this rambling answer interestingly referencing the time frame of 2013 when Trump was in Russia for a Miss Universe pageant and a business conference (and an alleged R. Kelly style get down with some Russian professional hoes). Putin said there were 500 businessmen there for a conference and this bs about, "You don't think we could surveillance that many people do you?" Everyone in the room was like, "Uh, yeah, we do." What Putin never said was the word "no". Then, of course, President "Doesn't Know When To Shut The Hell Up" just had to have the last word chiming in, "If there was such information, it would've came out by now." No, it wouldn't have, Dumbass! If Putin had such info why would he publicly release it when he could hold it over you and...I don't know... have you act just like you did throughout the entire press conference.


So, kids, what did we learn from that last exchange? The #PeeTape is real. Oh, it is so real! #TheOrangeRKelly


Trump literally crushed and fawned over Putin like a 15 year old girl would over Justin Bieber. No, let's not sugarcoat it. What our president did yesterday usually isn't allowed on network television or even basic cable. That work Trump did is usually reserved for Hustler Tv or Vivid Entertainment. *Well, so I've heard. I don't really know about such channels. Uh, anyways..* Young children should not be allowed to view that press conference. It is not hyperbole to say Trump completely embarrassed himself, our intelligence community and the United States of America. It was so disgraceful, disgusting and atrocious even Fox News was ripping him using words like "disdainful" and "unfathomable".


Now, the Orange Gasbag feeling heat from all sides held a brief press conference to "clarify" part of his statement from yesterday. He said he does believe the intelligence community's summation that Russia meddled in our election and he *really* meant to say, "I could see Russia meddled in our elections" instead of, "I couldn't see..." 😒 Fool, puhleeeeeeeeeze! You try that gaslighting bullshit with your kool-aid drinkers because nobody else is buying it! Nooooooooobody! He said numerous times before he believed Putin over U.S. intelligence and every effin word before and after that one sentence yesterday supported that one sentence. Stop. Just stop!


Y'all damb well know as soon as he walked out of that room today he was on the phone with Vlad. "You're not mad are you, Vladdy. I had to say that. You know I didn't mean it. I'm your guy." Putin was like, "It's ok, Trumpy. I understand." Trump interrupts him, "What's that noise in the back?" Putin says, "Oh, I'm just watching one of my favorite independent films. You're familiar with it, no. It's called 'Two Girls, A Cup And PeePee The Clown'. Night, night, Donald."

Get Off The Pot! Legalize Marijuana

Allow me to begin this diatribe by saying I do NOT smoke weed. I have no intention to smoke weed. Not that this should be germane to my impeding argument but I have reasons for not tokin on the chron. One, in general I am not someone who uses drugs or desire to experience its effects. Two, and most importantly, I have a job I love and co-workers I adore and I am not going to jeopardize that by failing a drug test. We are subject to random testing and knowing that it doesn't make much sense to roll the dice. Now, that I've said that, let me be clear, I'm a staunch advocate that the gaunge should be legalized (medically and recreationally).


I am aware some states have already legalized marijuana either medically or recreationally, if not both. But, it's time every state legalizes it as well as the federal government.


Most people are for pot being legalized in one form or another. However, the vocal minority is dead set against it and apparently willing to do anything to stop progress. They employ these asinine "reefer madness" campaigns which spread misinformation in the hopes of inciting mass hysteria and paranoia. They have these myopic archaic and quite frankly idiotic views of weed. And, some folks simply oppose it because they believe it will hurt their profit margins. I know. Shocker that money is at the root of hindering progress. But, I'll get to that trifiliness in a bit.


Marijuana has many uses other than getting people hiiiiiiigh. It has multiple medicinal uses. It can help cancer patients, people suffering from chronic pain and other chronic illnesses. It has benefits regarding mental health. It has been shown to suppress depression and alleviate anxiety. While weed, like any drug has its side effects, it's natural. Thus, weed is exponentially safer than opiods. NFL players have began vociferously expressing their desire to have weed legalized because the pain meds and anti-depression meds team doctors prescribe have devastating effects in real time and in the future. And, yes I know CTE has an equal hand in football players' issues so save that argument. Many of these guys play in immense pain and live with it afterwards causing them to get hooked on opiods. The fact is chron is way less dangerous and addictive. It has benefits that can medically help every segment of society.


But, the "reefer madness" folks don't seem to care. They're convinced weed is dangerous and choose to ignore what the medical science says. Of course, we all know folks of this ilk tend to disregard science in a numerous areas.


Another opposition group is the medical community. (Some of the medicinal community). Those of us in Oklahoma have witnessed this and seen them in conjunction with the state government undermine progress. The medical community is against medicinal use of marijuana because it hurts their bottom line. If people are able to grow weed themselves or get it from private dispensaries then they won't need doctors and pharmacies as much. So, for example here in Oklahoma, the state medical board essentially gutted a proposition legalizing medicinal marijuana that passed resoundingly back on June 26th of this year. They almost literally neutered the ability of private growers and sellers to profit. They made a series of amendments which will basically make it where only hospitals and medical corporations could "provide" the weed and cut out small business. And, the Governor who claims to be all about small businesses and small government signed off on it. Can't piss off those donors nor relinquish an opportunity to line her pockets. Legalizing medicinal pot can help so many people. Isn't the goal of medicine and the government to improve people's health thus improving their quality of life?


Along with medical recreational marijuana should be legalized too. Let's get real and tell the truth. Fact is, weed is the least addictive drug of all "illegal" drugs. For most people gorging their asses on Taco Bell and Mountain Dew is about the most costly side effect. Yes, I know short term memory loss happens in some smokers. But, I assure you there are over the counter meds people gobble like effin Skittles every single day that have way more pervasive and dangerous long term effects. Let's not even mention the number of prescription drugs that literally have to take the last 20 seconds of a 60 second tv ad to list all the shit that can go sideways such as uncontrollable anal leakage and suicide.


Another reality weed is that it being illegal does NOT stop people from using it. Anyone who has heard me discussing this issue knows what I am about to say. Everybody either knows someone they can get weed from or knows somebody who knows somebody. It's a fact. Gaunge isn't that hard to obtain. I'd argue you can find the chron easier than you can a quality hamburger. Tell me I'm wrong.


Also, how many people are in jails and prisons for simply selling the Mary Jane. Our correctional facilities are over crowded because they're filled with non-violent drug offenders. It's insane. And, it's hypocritical. You're a fool if you think it's only "the Blacks" or "the bad Hombres" or "trailer trash" that partake of the "earth's greatest herb". Really?! But, I know people for a fact people think that idiocy because I've heard them say it. I also know that some of the biggest weed dealers around lived in the 'burbs and "nice areas" and almost, if not all, of their customers were middle class/upper middle class to affluent. So, spare me the vague racism and classism when it comes to drugs. Oh, and so I'm clear about the hypocrisy there are people who go to church, walk out of the church and upon entering their house if not their vehicle are lighting up. Not everybody smokes weed. But, it's more than "those people" who do it.


Now, of course, not only are the "moral majority" against the legalizing of recreational but so is law enforcement. They say legalizing weed will cause an increase in crime. Yeah, because nobody is illegally selling it now. With all due respect to the great men and women in law enforcement I'm calling bullshit! If chron was legalized the profit margin would be heavily damaged. Most of the arrests made now are petty drug offenses. As I stated earlier, most of the jail/prison population is non-violent drug offenders. Many of the prisons are privately owned. Many of the petty drug offenses carry somewhat sizeable fines. If weed is legalized all of that money gets blown away like weed smoke. Don't bullshit!


Legalize marijuana! Police and prison profits aside legalizing weed would bring a financial windfall. Ask states like Colorado, Oregon and Washington. If pot is legalized, it can be taxed and regulated. The government can make profit off of it while propping up small business. Hear me, Mary Fallin. Weed would essentially become the new tobacco and alcohol.


And, no, legalizing it would not lead to significantly higher use. Oh, please, with that tired silly ass argument. If you don't "puff tuff" now, are you really likely to do it because it's legal? It's like prostitution. If you wanna go pay a professional to mustard up your hot dog, you're going to do it whether it is legal or not. The difference is if it's legal you know that mustard isn't tainted and you don't have to deal with dudes named Pinky.


Stop being regressive! Be progressive. Look at the bigger picture. Think about healthcare, education, infrastructure, ect. Legalize marijuana!

Why It Is I'm What I Am

Recently, someone I've known the majority of my life who I love and respect said something to me that challenged me to do some self-evaluation. They said they were a little vague about where I stand politically because my dislike of the President tends to obscure the message I am attempting to relay. I thought I have always been pretty clear where I stand, but after some contemplation I realized that may not be the case. At the very least I've, perhaps, done a poor job at conveying what my issues with the President are aside from my finding him repugnant as a human being.


So, I am going to list some of the reasons I do oppose him. Now, I understand in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter what I think. Most people probably could care less. I like to think I'm not a self-absorbed person and understand that. Frankly, I write these blogs and my Facebook posts because I love writing. I write about topics that interest me and I have a passion for. I write because I like and hope to spark dialogue and debate. Dialogue and debate are healthy. I like to debate. I don't like to argue. Arguing solves nothing because it inherently involves the need to get one's point across instead of listening to each other and discussing the differences and the agreements.


Again, I know my opinions are just that, opinions. I do my best to state informed intelligent opinions. Whether people agree with my opinions isn't as important as whether people can understand what they are and feel they're presented in a reasonable intelligent manner. With that being said here is why am what I am.


Admittedly, I am not a fan of our President. My dislike and distaste for him goes well beyond the moment he began running for president. I have found him to be disdainful for over 30 years. He has always come across as shady and creepy. I have always thought, despite his wealth and apparent success, he was a con man. He always seems to be "selling" something and I have never found that type of person palatable. Throughout the years it has become obvious to me he is amoral, unethical, un-empathetic, cruel, bigoted (at least), narcissistic and patently dishonest. I believed that as a kid 30 years and the passage of time has only confirmed and reinforced those beliefs.


So, when he announced he was running for president he already had two strikes against him in my book. Then, he came down that escalator in all his pompous self-aggrandizing glory and said Mexicans "are rapist and murderers". And, once again everything I believed to be true about him was confirmed. But, it is more than his character. Here are a few issues I fundamentally disagree with him (and probably a majority of my social circle) about.


Race- Let's just get it out of the way. I believe the President is at best a bigot and at worst a White Supremacist. Be triggered if you must. But, his rhetoric and handling of racial issues illustrate his views on people of color. His handling of #Charlottesville and his never-ending dehumanizing of Brown people are glaring examples. I make my feelings about bigotry very clear. I can't roll with racism and I sure as hell will not roll with White Supremacy or being apologist for it. I am about all people being treated equally and with dignity. When I say we are all God's children and are equal I mean and believe it!


Education- I will make this a bit all encompassing. First, let's start with literal education. I do not believe anyone who placed Betsy DeVos' "touched" self as education secretary is serious about education. The education secretary should at least sound educated and be well verse in basic grammar and mathematics. She obviously is not! Although the President loves to boast about his Ivy League education he doesn't seem the least bit interested in sounding educated (whether it be in person or on Twitter) nor does he seem interested in improving education for all of America's students. He obviously has little regard for the Department of Education as he is seriously considering merging it with the Department of Labor. The two departments really have nothing in common. It appears he's interested in abolishing both departments. I think education along with adequate healthcare and nutrition is the most important thing for the development of America's youth. We can't continue to compete with our industrial nations if we can't read, write and add. All you have to do is spend 10 minutes on social media, listen to the average person converse or shop to realize an alarming number of people cannot adequately read, write or perform basic mathematics. The President seems to be indifferent to this "norm" which is a crisis.


Environment- As with DeVos, the appointment of a scoundrel and grifter like Scott Pruitt plainly illustrates the environment is not even a minor concern. In fact, the deregulation that the President loves to brag about is doing and will do great damage to our environment. Pruitt doesn't care about the health of citizens. He cares about making money. I realize he's gone but his replacement is no better. All the focus was on Pruitt's trifiliness but the real scandal was the detrimental policies he implemented and the ones that were rolled back. Again, the President approved of the detriment to the environment and Pruitt's unethical, likely criminal, behavior. Call me crazy but I think clean air and water are important.


Climate Change- Simply, it's real. When all but two of the world's recognized top scientists say climate change is real I tend to believe it is real. They know more than I do and mostly everyone else. All you have to do is look around. The weather patterns are so crazy and backwards. The anti-climate change people say weather is cyclical which explains the unusual patters but have no proof to really back that up while actual scientists and meteorologists have shown proof that changes are due to climate change. I totally disagreed with the President removing the U.S. from the Paris Accord. The vast majority of his cabinet members opposed taking us out of the Paris Accord. But, the President did it anyway to appease his base and because he believes climate change is somehow taking money out of his coffers. Look, just because some folks took science in the 11th grade means they know more than highly educated extensively trained scientists.


Taxes- The tax cuts implemented in the beginning of the year are crap. They only benefited the wealthy. The "increase" in my paycheck has been miniscule. Starting next year me and everyone else making less than $75,000 a year will have our taxes raised. The President's concern is rich people get richer. Sorry. I'm not down. The middle class and poor in this country need to be looked out for and the President and Congress aren't doing that.


Healthcare- The President and Republicans systematically dismantling the Affordable Care Act is one the most atrocious things done in this country's history. Yes, it has problems and needs an overhaul somewhat. But, dismantling it in an attempt to repeal thus leaving millions of Americans without healthcare is just cruel. And, the fact is the main reason the President wants to dismantle it is because Obama created it. His petulant insecurity about Obama and wanting to erase everything about his legacy is so pathetic and petty.


Civil Rights- The President's Justice Department has quietly reversed several Civil Rights statutes and resolutions that provide certain environmental protections for low income people, homosexuals and people of color. The Attorney General has implemented policies that specifically target people of color. It's ironic that Jeff Sessions has actually enacted the President's agenda more successfully and comprehensively than any of his other department heads.


Justice Reform- Needless to say the President has shown complete disdain toward the concern for the ongoing unnecessary killing of African-Americans at the hands of law enforcement. He has done nothing in the way of offering suggestions to help improve the relationship between the police and communities of color. He's openly ridiculed and demonized any displays of protests that attempt to highlight these issues. He has seemingly ignored the systematic unfairness in the bail system which discriminates against low income people and is in actuality a scam. There has been no real movement on the prison system and how the prisons are overpopulated with non-violent and petty drug offenders. Many of the prisons are privately owned making them money making machines. Like with healthcare incarceration should be about making lives better; not a profit margin. But, again, it is the rich who are looked out for.


Marijuana- It should be legalized! Both medical and recreational should be fully made legal. I don't say that as a smoker. I don't smoke it at all. If it was legal here in Oklahoma, I wouldn't smoke it. It's not my thing. But, it has tremendous medical benefit and is much safer than opioids. It's not a gateway drug like many want claim. The fact is many people already use it so why not make it legal. The government can tax it and make money. Look at the states it's been legalized. Their economies have improved and their opioid abuse has been reduced. Despite erroneous claims nobody has ever overdosed. Unless, you count gorging on Captain Crunch and Mountain Dew. I am in complete disagreement with Jeff Sessions and his archaic myopic views on this. The President has expressed an openness to federally legalizing the chron but has more often expressed an ignorant view of it.


So, there it is. Some of the things I feel strongly about which are apart of what shapes my feelings about the President and why I oppose him. I don't apologize for my disdain for him and I don't apologize for my convictions.

Hannity & Jones: The Right's Conspiracy Theorist Pimps

Conspiracy theorists aren't new. They have been around for forever and a day. Some of them have actually been onto something and their conspiracy theories have at least in part turned out to be true. Most conspiracy theorists, though, spin wild theories that stretch the limits of credibility and sanity.


In today's society conspiracy theories have become common place. They just seem to be apart of the discourse fabric. There are still wide eyed nutjobs spitting out outrageous scenarios. And, you have seemingly sane people spewing forth conspiracy theories almost as outrageous as what the "crazies" put forth.


Enter Sean Hannity and Alex Jones. They are the right wing's most vocal conspiracy theorists who also happen to be arguably President Trump's biggest cheerleaders. On the surface, Hannity and Jones seem to be world's apart. Sean Hannity is a radio and television host for a mainstream legit news organization, Fox News. (Y'all stop side-eying me. It's legit...sorta...kinda...a little.) While Alex Jones is also a radio and television (YouTube) host is also the founder of a legit news website, InfoWars.com...(Ok. I'm kidding. InfoWars is a nutjobs paradise and isn't close to legitimacy.)


Hannity has created himself a mini empire at FoxNews. His reported salary is north of $25 million per year. He's the top rated host on cable news. He is considered a leading voice in the Conservative movement despite some intellectual Conservatives bristling at him being labeled that way.


Jones has also built himself quite the empire. He has gone from being a local radio and public access television host in the Austin, Texas are to a well known YouTube and internet stalwart. He is known for his *ahem* political commentary and vast conspiracy theories. He started InfoWars in the last 1990s and has turned it into a profitable media site with a sizeable loyal following.


Some, perhaps many, people would say these two dudes are nothing alike other than a fanboy like affinity for Donald Trump. I say that they have quite a few similarities including their sycophant like praise of Trump.


Both of these guys love to tout conspiracy theories. They love to rile up their legions, who are also fierce Trump supporters, into a lather with often incredulous defenses of the President. They both love to promote the advancement of culture wars. Some would say they like to veer toward, shall we say, racially insensitive territory.


Sean Hannity is seen more as an intellectual type by some. Why or how only God knows. Hannity likes to espouse inane conspiracy theories like Special Counsel for the Russia investigation, Robert Mueller, is running a "crime family" or that "deep state" operatives (who by the way many are Trump appointees) are out to get Trump. For example, accusing Trump of nepotism is a deep state lie to undercut Trump's presidency according to Hannity. Of course, nevermind that giving your daughter and son-in-law high level high security clearance jobs in the White House is the very definition of nepotism. Anyway, Hannity presents this mess while wearing a nice suit, speaking in a moderately calm tone and sporting what I guess is a decent haircut, so it doesn't sound conspiratorial or insane according to some people.


Now, Alex Jones on the other hand is seen by those outside of his followers and subscribers a bit differently. Jones usually wears a casual sports coat and t-shirt. He often looks like he's never seen a shower he likes. He is always a bit fidgety. He says little gems such as the Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax. He recently claimed Democrats were going to start a civil war on the 4th of July. He has claimed Michelle Obama is a man and that President Obama is a demon and it's true because he smells like sulfur and is constantly surrounded by flies. He has subscribed to the belief NASA is running child sex slave rings on Mars. Oh, he said the Pentagon is placing "special" chemicals in perfumes and colognes to turn men gay so they can't reproduce. And, all of these things he says are true because he has reliable sources who, of course, he can't reveal because it will endanger his life and theirs.


Now, admittedly what Jones says is far more out there, we'll say, than what Hannity says. So, how are they alike?


Well, they both are people our President routinely seeks counsel from. And, they're both two bit hustlers.


Hannity's hustle is to come off as a serious political and media figure. He sells himself as some policy wonk. He calls himself a "media advocate" which he thinks gets him around the obvious conflict of interest appearance he has as a news show host who reports on the President yet advises him. Hannity turns his popularity and alleged political knowledge into speaking engagements and CPAC appearances. It's a joke. He knows it is a joke. It is why he has that bitchass smirk on his face when he "reports" on the Mueller investigation or anything to do with Trump. Hannity knows as long as he kisses Trump's ass he's golden.


As for Jones, he's not quite the charlatan Hannity is. He's more like a disgraceful televangelist. While he does his charlatan act claiming to be a journalist, Jones is more of a shameless hustler. Aside from his batshit crazy conspiracy theories he pushes actual tangible products. After a couple of hours of ranting and raving about globalists, demons, child sex slave rings on Mars and how the government is going to take away our cars and guns and force us to live in hobbit homes and have sex with horses (something he's been saying since the 90s) he hawks supplements. No, I am not kidding. Jones pushes on the rubes he calls an audience such wonderful products like penis enlargement pills, vagina vitality supplements, muscle growth vitamins and "special" red white and blue fluoride enhanced toothpaste. I'm serious. Checkout the website for yourself.


These two Trump ass kissing stooges have no ethics nor any shame. But, honestly they don't scare me as much nor do I put the onus of their success on them as much as I do their listeners and viewers. Especially in Jones' case. They didn't create the audience. The audience created them. That is what is scary. It's frightening to me that someone like Hannity can spew forth these bullshit theories and narratives with no proof or semblance of proof whatsoever. It is downright mind numbing that anyone with a IQ in the double digits could listen to Alex Jones for more than one minute and come away thinking anything other than he's certifiably batshit crazy. I mean the man said on numerous occasions that lizard people were going to take over our minds. And this is a man the President of the United States of America considers a sound mind to get consultation from on domestic and foreign affairs.


#IJustCantWithThesePeople

Toxic Masculinity

Admittedly, I am not macho nor do I care. So, everything I'm about to say can have the previous sentence used as a qualifier.


Toxic masculinity is one of the main contributors to our societal woes. It has often had a hand in the mass shootings. Toxic masculinity is the foundation of rape culture; thus it naturally plays a role in the mindset that dismisses #MeToo. Toxic masculinity affects our politics and who is elected. *Whispering* And, if you think this is a right wing problem you would be seriously mistaken. Toxic masculinity is pervasive in society regardless of race, political affiliation or even gender. Yes, I said gender.


Now, the concept of masculinity today is different (thankfully) from what it was 50 years ago. However, the "traditional" view of masculinity is still quite prevalent. In fact, one could argue it helped fuel a certain presidential campaign.


Many people see masculinity as being a certain way and if you don't adhere to that way you're weak and soft. Being a man means being tough or more accurately appearing tough. Showing any vulnerable emotions is effeminate. Real men control everything. They're dominant. Being masculine means there are certain things you're entitled to and taking no for an answer is not acceptable.


I'm sure some read the previous paragraph and said that's not true. But, it is. I know plenty of "real men" and they all adhere to things I listed. They might say in a singular statement women are equal but everything else they say and do highly suggests otherwise.


As I said, I know plenty of "real men-tough guys. They believe only certain jobs are for men and they feel inadequate if they have to work a "woman's job". They feel certain types of television programming and music are not entertainment men should partake. Superhero movies are good while romantic comedies are bad. Two Chains is a man but if you listen to John Legend you must be "funny". This mess is still happening in 2018 every single day.


Toxic masculinity says real men are tough and keep their women in check. We all know these guys. They walk around with their arms all puffed up at their sides. They are constantly mean mugging. They threaten to beat up anyone who "crosses" them. They're initial reaction to everything is either to get their gun or start throwing hands. Talking things out is for pussies. We all know that dude and probably know plenty of those dudes.


What kills me though is almost every #ToughGuy I know isn't actually that tough. If anyone stands up to them they crumble into punk bitches. With any adversity or failure they react like petulant children. And, they don't understand the difference between being tough and being strong.


I know a lot of strong men. They aren't dudes sipping chai tea. They would describe themselves as masculine. But, they are secure enough to show emotion or vulnerability. They don't feel the need to tell you how tough they are. They don't feel their being a man entitles them to whatever they want.


Earlier I said toxic masculinity has a hand in these mass shootings. They do. Many of these shootings are because of losing an ex-wife or unrequited love or because they were bullied by having their manhood challenged. Many of these males held their emotions in until they exploded. As is often the case, using a gun or performing some sort of violence was seen as the only option. In the cases of lost or unrequited love these guys had an attitude of entitlement to these women which led to anger when they were rejected.


Don't get me wrong. Nothing is wrong with masculinity, so don't even go there. Toxic masculinity, however, is an entirely different story. These archaic ideas of what being a man is are ridiculous. It's ok to cry. It's ok to show vulnerability. It's ok to be empathetic. These are not characteristics that make you a "pussy". And, these dudes who love to say that are showing their effed up view of masculinity by calling anyone they don't see as a real man a "pussy", which is misogynistic.


As I said earlier, some of the biggest whiners and cry babies I know are these #ToughGuys. They get sick it's like they're five years old. If something doesn't go their way, they literally stomp and mope around. Someone has the gall to disagree or contradict them they become pettier than any 16 year old girl could dream of being.


Being a man isn't about being tough, intimidating, controlling or emotionless. Being a man is the same as being a decent human being which is being strong through adversity, humble, thoughtful and empathetic. It's about taking care of your family and others; not so you can say, "Look at me! I take care of mine!" but because it's the right thing to do.


If you have to constantly show or say how tough you are and you're a man, I am going to have serious doubts as to whether you're being honest. Real men don't have to tell you they're real men.

Truth Is Not Subjective

The late Senator Patrick Moynihan once said, "Everyone is entitled to their own, but not their own facts." The truth is made up of facts. Facts are not subjective. Thus, the truth is not subjective.


However, we live in a time some people call the "post fact era". We reside in a space where we believe what we want to believe regardless of it's authenticity or factual standing. The truth is what we want it to be. This nonsense has caused our society to become caustic, narcissistic and toxic.


Any truly free society must have freedom of opinion and a structure of truth. The members of such a society must understand that these two things are different but by no means are mutually exclusive. Any solid reasonable intelligent opinion has to be composed of facts.


Now, while the truth is certifiably objective and facts are undeniably elements of certainty, how truth and facts are perceived can be varied. For instance, the country's job numbers are unquestionably high. Unemployment is low. That is not up for debate. But, the interpretation of those numbers can be a matter for discussion. If you're a proponent of the current administration you will likely say 230,000 plus jobs added every month is an awesome achievement. However, a critic of the current administration could point out many of those jobs are low wage and low skilled jobs. Both lines of thought can be seen as true. But, what is unquestionably a fact is the raw added job numbers.


What is happening though in the current landscape of the country is facts are only being acknowledged if it fits a desired narrative. If said facts do not fit the narrative they are either being ignored or represented as a falsehood. Gaslighting has become as natural for some as breathing. It could be argued maybe more so.


We dwell in a time where people literally make up their own truth. A practice that used to be reserved for the deranged, unhinged and criminal.
If people read or hear something they don't like, they label it "fake news" even if it's something that has been proven and is verifiably accurate. Folks literally reject things that are right in front of their face for something more palatable.


We have people of prominence, influence and power who get up before us every day and simply lie. They twist and distort facts. They call facts lies and lies facts. They say, "The truth is what we tell you it is." But, it is not! The truth is what the facts say it is.


 Look, I'm 5'4". Yes, I am short. I am perfectly fine with my height. However, I will not lie. It'd be nice to be 5'11" or 6'0". But, I'm not. I could tell people, "I'm 6'1"." They would look at me like I was insane and say, "Bruh. You're short. You are not 6'1"." I could reply that I am and keep repeating it. How crazy does that sound? Well, guess what, people do similar every single day. Some of our leaders do it. People do it in their personal lives. It's gaslighting run amok.


Here is the issue. It works. It really works. As a society we are so polarized, so narcissistic, so caught up in our prejudices and self-indulgence that we allow it to work.


Instead of accepting the reality we're in and working to change it if we don't like it, we create our own. Or, we reside in a reality created by someone else. We literally live in bubbles. "Bubbles" is an in vogue term but an accurate one. Many of us insulate ourselves from any and everything we don't want to be associated with or accept. Many of us ignore the truth if the truth isn't what fits our ideal world. We gravitate toward a bubble that will cultivate the truth we want.


The media has been made victim of this. The so-called mainstream media has numerous faults. They have biases. But, the vast majority report accurately. They relay the facts as they are. Some may put a slant on them but they report verified information. And, if you don't accept what they say the information they report is verifiable. And, what isn't verifiable most of the news organizations are very good at saying that.


But, so many people reject any news stories or articles if they are negative toward their "guy or woman" or a subject they're for. Again, it's called "fake news" regardless if the information is verifiably factual. However, if the news is something they like, "Well, they're being truthful."


As someone who loves journalism and information and who loves to learn, it saddens me that we are in this "post fact era". This mindset that has pervaded our culture is toxic. Quite frankly, it is dangerous.


One of the pillars of a democracy is the fourth estate, the press. A free press is essential to a free society. That is exactly the reason a free press is mentioned in the beginning of our Constitution. But, the press is under constant attacks from some of our leaders. And, they're not under attack because they are lying. They're under attack because they are reporting facts. And, facts themselves face attack every day.


It is not just an issue in our politics but in personal interactions. People will literally attack and gaslight other people for merely confronting them with the truth. This should not happen in a healthy democratic republic.


The truth is perhaps the pillar that holds us up. The ability to hear the truth, read the truth and express the truth is what makes us free. The truth is not what we say it is. The truth is what facts say it is. Hopefully, we haven't so lost sight of this that it's too late.

The Democratic Party's Bitchassness Is Why They Can't Have Nice Things

Allow me to start off by saying I owe the U.S. Representative from California, Maxine Waters, an apology. I was wrong. I rewatched her entire comments twice and she said nothing wrong. This is the second time today I've apologized because I was wrong. Sometimes you have to be an adult-an actual grown mature man and admit when you've been wrong.


Auntie Maxine wasn't inciting violence with her comments a couple of weeks ago. I thought upon initial listening they were inappropriate because they could be misconstrued but upon actually listening to everything in context I concluded my previous conclusion was stupid. I got caught paying attention to Conservatives and Fox News who as always cherry pick and distort. I also got caught up in listening to Democratic leaders who also condemned Rep. Waters for something she didn't say. The Republicans and the President (so-called) hijacked the narrative and twisted it into something to rile up their subjugated base.


And, therein lies the difference between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. Somebody says something slightly controversial and the GOP manipulates into being something it isn't while the Dems take the bait hook, line and sinker. They then wind up aiding the GOP in ripping their own in some misguided attempt to snatch the moral high ground.


Do you think for one effin second if a Conservative politician had said that about Obama's administration what Waters said about the current administration that Republican leadership would've condemned their comments? Chile, please! They would've doubled down and fortified around them. Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell would've disappeared from sight while every Conservative pundit alive would've flooded CNN, Fox News and MSNBC defending the comments and repudiating anyone who dared criticized or called the statements "inciting violence".


Straight up, Democrats (in particular the leadership) are soft as baby shit. They allow themselves to be pushed around and bullied. They allow Conservatives to dictate the narrative. Dems are always concerned with "appearing to do the right thing or be civil" while Republicans could give a rat's left nut. The GOP could not care less about how they appear or even if their stances and talking points are coherent. All they're concerned with is dominating the conversation and dictating the narrative.


This entire Supreme Court nomination is the perfect example. Colonel Sanders nephew, Mitch McConnell, doesn't give two damns he looks like a blazing hypocrite about this nomination nor that he stole the previous nomination from President Obama. That wannabe Civil War reenactment participant stood on the Senate floor last week and with a straight face said that this nomination needed to be confirmed swiftly. Nevermind the nomination is being made by a president under multiple investigations who has shown a tendency to think he's above the law and isn't even close to being above selecting a justice who'll guarantee him of ruling in his favor should his legal predicament go before the Supreme Court. To hell with all of that if this justice will also overturn Roe V. Wade and LGBTQ rights. Someone like Chuck Schumer, on the other hand, would never do something like that because it would be "wrong". That's why Obama's lawful and just pick, Merrick Garland, was thieved in the first place. Obama and the Dems were too nice and trying to do right instead of ensuring they got their way and win.


See, the GOP doesn't give a fuck. That goes for elected officials, the base and the evangelicals. They aren't interested in doing "right". They are interested in only winning. And, evangelical Christians, save it. I mean really save it! If morals, ethics and doing what is just was really your concern you wouldn't have hitched your wagon to a morally bankrupt, unethical, ungodly, corrupt repugnant person like the current president. Save the crap. That ship has sailed and is lost at sea!


Another example is this entire bullshit convo about civility. Something else which I fell into the trap. I largely stand by what I said last week about civility. But, having civility doesn't mean losing your nutsack. Sorry, it doesn't. It is absolutely absurd for Democrats to cower in shame over lectures from Conservatives about civility. Are you fucking kidding me. The same people who are shamelessly fear mongering and lying about Liberals wanting unchecked unpatrolled open borders are lecturing about civility? The same people who call anyone who is prochoice "baby killers" is lecturing about civility. The folks who scream at homosexuals "God hates fags" are lecturing about civility? The very people who stay silent or look the other way regarding White Nationalists, White Supremacists and Neo-Nazis are preaching about civility? The people who full-throated support the guy at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave despite every racist, homophobic, xenophobic, misogynistic and repulsive thing he says and tweets are all high minded about civility? The people who cheer aforementioned dude at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave when he encourages violence at his ego rallies and incites vitriol toward journalists are scolding Liberals and Independents about being civil? Why, yes, yes they are? And, Democrats and Independents just take it shamefully looking pathetic and disgraceful.


The reason the Democratic base is so uninspired and disenchanted with the party is because they don't feel the infrastructure of the party has a backbone. They don't believe the leadership fights for them the same way the President ( so-called) and the GOP fights for their base. Or at least has the sense and perspective to fear it's base. And, they're right.


 The Democrats only give credence to a fraction of their base. They don't seem to take seriously or listen to or adequately defend the true backbone of their base which is Black women, Hispanic women, the LGBTQ community, young people, millennials and Progressives. All of these folks fueled Bernie Sanders' campaign in 2016.


Instead the Pelosis, Schumers, Bookers and Clintons of the party think they can just be civil. They repel at Conservatives' attacks of being called "progressive", "radical", "leftists" and "socialists" instead of setting the record straight and firing back. They allow #CheetoJesus to propagate lies and half-truths about them and everything else without nary a word with the exception of a minute few. They "go high" but when they do that and allow unfettered false narratives to be spewed they hurt their standing and alienate their base. There is a reason Elizabeth Warren, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Kamala Harris, Maxine Waters, Eric Swalwell, Ted Lieu and Adam Schiff are the most popular people in the party and none of them are in leadership. It's because they push back against #Cheets and his bullshit. They punch back against the sycophants and ball lickers in Congress. They embrace the aforementioned groups of the base that establishment Democrats either ignore, take for granted or simply don't take seriously.


Take Ocasio-Cortez. She is 28 years old and took out an incumbent in the Bronx, Joe Crowley, who had literally been in Congress for a damn generation! She won in a system designed to protect people like Joe Crowley. She embraces the term Democratic Socialist. She pushes back when the likes of Nancy Pelosi dismisses her. She takes the gloves off when tools like Sean Hannity go after her. She doesn't recoil when two bit Conservative tv hosts attempt to discredit her by telling lies and distorting facts. She didn't do the usual Dem tactic and whimper like a lil bish. She stood firm and set the record straight. She defended her background, her parentage and her story. She didn't allow Republicans to dictate the narrative about her or steal her story. She essentially said, "Fuck you! This is who I am! You muthafuckas won't define me!" I took some journalistic liberties but it's essentially what she meant. And, for that, her base will solidify and her support will swell.


It's what #Cheets did and does. He didn't recoil at criticism. He doubled down. Of course, his behavior and most of his positions are either asinine or doomed for eventual failure or simply amoral and morally repugnant. But, he stands by them, makes his base believe he's fighting for them and he's unapologetic. Why the Democrats refuse to do the same I don't know. They always want to appear to have the moral high ground. Muthafuckas, you already do! You don't have to appear to do shit! Have some fucking convictions for God's sake! Stand up for the people who stand up for you and want to believe. Like Obama said the other night, "Quit moping." This self-loathing and searching for the perfect message and candidate is pathetic! Fight for what you claim to believe in. Don't give in. Don't succumb to media pressure or pressure from the other side! Be resistant and persistent! You don't have to get as sleazy as that Orange Wannabe Dictator. You can't realistically do that. But, you can battle and force your will!


It is exactly what the Republicans do. I watch MSNBC, CNN and Fox News. Every #Cheets Conservative pundit has one thing in common. Well, two. They lie without conscience. But, they also stick to their talking points. They never relent. They get the desired message across. And, most news hosts and some Liberal pundits never fact check them in real time.


Less than 1/3 of Americans identity themselves as Republican. On most key issues (abortion, immigration, race relations, environment, economy, entitlements, Russia) the Democrats have more of the public's support. Yet, Democrats can't win shit. They're almost non-existent in the middle of the country. Why? How? It's simple really. The GOP are brilliant at getting their message out and dictating the narrative. They vilify the other side with little to no resistance. They stand firm on their beliefs with no apologies. They have zero shame in their tactics. They don't care about the moral high ground in their approach. They care about winning! Winning at all costs. They come to the fight with guns while Liberals come with rocks and butter knives because it's the "civil" way to fight.


Democrats will continue to lose as long as they alienate their base and insist in being purveyors of bitchassness! #UltraFact

I LOVE BIG BROTHER!!! And, I'm Neither Sorry Nor Ashamed

Truthfully, I am not a huge fan of summer. I hate the heat and where I live (Oklahoma) the humidity can often make summer damn near unbearable. But, I get through summer because of baseball and my summer love, Big Brother.


Yes, I said Big Brother! The CBS reality show that airs every summer.


Anyone who knows me knows I'll watch some "trash tv". Reality shows are most certainly apart of that. Now, I will note some folks erroneously think it's all I watch. However, I love well written and thought provoking tv shows as well as comedies, sports and news. My tastes are eclectic.


However, I don't see Big Brother as "trash tv". It's undoubtedly my biggest guilty pleasure. I often bristle at it being called "junk" or "trashy". I discover people who label it that have either only watched a miniscule amount of episodes or have never watched it at all. They assume what it is without knowing what it is. Generally, people who watch "trash tv" will gleefully tell you it's trashy television. I venture to say most Big Brother fans (same with Survivor) would never label BB "trashy".


I am sure those previous statements sound a bit defensive. They are. Yes, there are trashy elements to the show. The producers make sure to sprinkle a few trashy houseguests (participants) into the show's cast. Drama always abound. It's a television show. But, if you really watch the show, it's a reflection of real life.


The premise of the show is to place people of various backgrounds and personalities into a house without any access to the outside world for an extended period of time. The houseguests are on camera and can be viewed by the audience literally 24 hours a day, which means unique compared to other reality shows. The houseguests along with no contact from the outside world have no movies to watch, music to listen and no books to read other than the Bible. They literally have no privacy because none of the bedrooms have locks. The bedrooms usually have three or four people to a room except the "Head of Household" room which houses the week's head of household. That person nominates two people for eviction from the house along with getting a room to themselves with all of their preferred amenities sans tv, radio, internet and newspapers, of course. The HOH has all the power for that week and is exempt from being HOH the following week.


Big Brother is actually way more a game than a typical reality show. To survive week to week a strategy must be employed. Houseguests must get into alliances, asses "threats" and compete in events that employ the use of physical or mental attributes. In some cases both are required.


And, ultimately, the biggest key to success or failure in the game is how one is able to socially interact with the other houseguests. If you look at almost every winner of Big Brother they either had a great social game or they knew how to read people. Knowing how to read people is essential when it comes down to final two or three contestants because securing jury votes or knowing who to sway determines victory and defeat. The jury is made up of evicted houseguests so that whole social interaction thing comes into play.


I said earlier Big Brother is real life. What I find fascinating about it is the way the game reveals who people are. It reveals that people have multiple layers to them. It reveals what people are truly about when under stress and adversity.


I think anyone who works (or has worked) in an office or a work environment with a moderate number of people should be able to relate to Big Brother because they basically live it everyday. They basically have one or two people they trust explicitly. They have one or two people they don't trust. Everyone else is in the middle and the relationships are fluid. People tend to get into cliques even if they rant against them. People who don't get into cliques are usually called floaters, which sometimes works in their favor and sometimes don't. Some people befriend or tolerate someone not because they actually think highly of them, but because they feel they need that person for whatever reason. And, this may all seem cynical and even cutthroat. But, it's how life works.


Big Brother is awesome to me because I'm into sociology and psychology. I am an admitted people watcher. While people can infuriate me I find them fascinating. I am also big into strategy and competition which is partly why I'm into sports and politics. For someone like me Big Brother is the ultimate drug. And, I am an unapologetic addict.


I have watched Big Brother since season one. I always find myself saying I hate most of the houseguests initially only to find a few I love and getting hooked. Like sports, I find myself rooting for certain people whether it's because I feel a connection to them or I feel sorry for them or simply because they're the enemy of an alliance I don't like. And, it's weird because when you watch these people daily for three months you do feel like you know them. For instance, last year's winner, Josh Martinez. I hated that dude the first two weeks but as time went on I started liking him. I always look at each houseguest in the perspective of how would I get along with them if I were in the house with them. I began seeing Josh differently, empathized with him and ultimately rooting for him. And, every fan knows you get your favorites. I loved Dr. Will, Danielle (season 3), Donny (season 16), Derrick (season 16) and of course the queens Da'Vonne (season 17 and 18) and the goddess Janelle.


I would love to be on the show; not because I'm looking for fame or to be seen. But, because I love the show, the gameplay, the social interaction and because I think I could win. You Big Brother fans already know my diary rooms would be the shit!


Big Brother is more than my guilty pleasure. It's my summer love! I love being in the discussion groups. I have some friends who watch it religiously like I do, which makes it even better.


 I am still feeling out this year's cast. I already have a couple of folks I can't stand but that could always change. I am looking forward to next three months!


I love Big Brother! And, for that I do not apologize or feel shame. You may call it "trash tv"; I call it summer's best addiction.