So now I've been following up on Fort Hood and what happened there and am in a little more understanding of what happened and this is what I'm going to say.
The Army, being the Army, needs to pull its head out of its ass and call this what it is. When Fort Hood, the location where this happened, is wrenching as to 'why' this happened when it is blatantly obvious that this is indeed, a lesson to what we call, sensitivity training.
People say that this guy was harrassed for being a muslim and that's why he snapped. Well, no shit he was harrassed, if indeed he was harrassed, because this guy advocated for Jihad to his peers and gave a power point presentation at walter reed talking about beheadings and why this was perfectly acceptable.
There are muslims in the army, I've worked with them, and they are by and large decent people who don't get harrassed because you know why? They aren't talking about how Jihad is ok and questioning the war on terror being a war against Islam. They are serving and as long as they serve and soldier up and not go talking jihad, people will respect them for who they are, soldiers who happen to also be muslims. Most soldiers don't see this as a war against islam. It's a war against terror, unfortunately, the perpetrators tend to be Muslim. When Terrorists stop killing Americans in the name of Islam, maybe we can start seperating the two a little easier.
This is a terrorist action. End of story, this guy needs to fry. Let's stop talking about how it's the army's fault this guy snapped because if this causes everyone to have to sit in on a briefing army wide about how we need to be sensitive to other people's feelings I'm going to snap. We're the Army! You know what we do for a living? We kill people and we protect this great nation from our enemies by killing them. Listen up all you kids out there that are thinking about joining the army so you can get your education paid for or because the economy stinks and you need a job, if you join the army you are going to learn how to fire a weapon with the intention of killing somebody with it. You are paid to learn how to kill people. If you are easily offended, you don't need to be joining the army. It is not for you.
If you disagree with the war on terror (oops, my bad, the overseas contigency operation) then you don't need to be joining the army. If you are a muslim who sympathizes with Osama Bin Laden and decide to join the army and get harrassed for calling your coworkers infedels, then don't start complaining because people don't like you. You don't belong.
Why in the hell is the military a gun free zone? You know what would have stopped this idiot from opening up fire on a bunch of unarmed people? People who could meet fire with fire, which ended up being a couple civilian police officers. Why are civilian police officers (God Bless 'em) coming in to put a stop to a crazed lunatic opening fire on soldiers anyway? These are SOLDIERS!!! You know what the definition of a soldier is? Somebody who knows how to use a gun! If anybody has the right to carry weapons, a uniformed soldier does. Because Gun Free Zone is just an open meat market to anybody who wants to go slaughter people. Take a gun into a gun free zone and open up. Now, if you want to open up fire in a place where everyone is armed, see how many shots you are able to release before somebody takes you out. It sure in hell won't be one hundred.
So, in conclusion, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan needs to be put down. He's a traitor to his country and last I heard, punishment for Treason is death. Just throw him under an electric chair and let him meet his just reward. Stop making excuses for this bastard and why this happened.
Furthermore, just because the military is short on Psychiatrists doesn't mean we have to keep them all in because that is the problem here. This guy should have been kicked out a long time ago. He should have never made Major but this is a problem with the medical corp unfortunately. We are under strength and when you are under strength, you hang onto the crap because they 'supposedly' can do the job. And now you wonder why Socialized Medicine is so great? Why was this idiot even a psychiatrist? That is where the army failed people, by allowing this guy to stay in instead of getting rid of him in the name of 'diversity'.
End of Rant
A blog about a girl who speaks her mind and talks about whatever she wants. So its a blog about everything, and absolutely nothing, all at the same time. . .
Showing posts with label Rant. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rant. Show all posts
11.13.2009
6.05.2009
Blogs and Ranting
So I started blogging again thinking I could talk about whatever was going on, to discover that right now, I have very little to talk about that isn't involved with what I do for work right now. And even if I had complete freedom to blog about what I do for work, I have discovered that I really have lost the interest in blogging. It's something I have largely outgrown since I started way back in 2001ish, and yes, it's crazy to think I've been blogging off and on since then.
But the reasons I blog now are different then when I blogged when I first started. This was primarily a ranting form for me, that's how I got the load off my chest, and what was bothering me at the time, I knew I could post some details of what was going on and people in the world, strangers could freakin' read what I wrote. For some reason, that was very therapeutic at the time. The problem is, well, in my job and my position, ranting is very inappropriate for me. I am in no position to rant about day to day life. This is no longer an outlet like it had been.
Also, even if I talked opinions like politics and such, which is the direction I originally wanted to go when my blog started taking off, that is another topic that I largely have to avoid. Back before the current election, though I was critical of some of his policies, by and large I still supported President Bush. I have very little support for President Obama's policies, but due to his position, I need to respect his title and his stances on certain issues I disagree with, especially related to the military. I have a lot of frustrations to vent towards the government right now, however I need to remain mum on that front as well. Politics are somewhat of a dead issue for me right now. So even if I turned completely in that direction and my opinions on such things, and left my personal life completely alone, there is really nowhere I can go with the topic without going into a highly critical nature of the current administration.
So in respect to that position, and lack of time otherwise for even maintaining this thing, I'm going into a somewhat of a hiatus mode once more. I have downgraded the main page to one post because I hate seeing posts from three months ago just sitting there, and it keeps a neater appearance.
That is all. Ciao for now.
But the reasons I blog now are different then when I blogged when I first started. This was primarily a ranting form for me, that's how I got the load off my chest, and what was bothering me at the time, I knew I could post some details of what was going on and people in the world, strangers could freakin' read what I wrote. For some reason, that was very therapeutic at the time. The problem is, well, in my job and my position, ranting is very inappropriate for me. I am in no position to rant about day to day life. This is no longer an outlet like it had been.
Also, even if I talked opinions like politics and such, which is the direction I originally wanted to go when my blog started taking off, that is another topic that I largely have to avoid. Back before the current election, though I was critical of some of his policies, by and large I still supported President Bush. I have very little support for President Obama's policies, but due to his position, I need to respect his title and his stances on certain issues I disagree with, especially related to the military. I have a lot of frustrations to vent towards the government right now, however I need to remain mum on that front as well. Politics are somewhat of a dead issue for me right now. So even if I turned completely in that direction and my opinions on such things, and left my personal life completely alone, there is really nowhere I can go with the topic without going into a highly critical nature of the current administration.
So in respect to that position, and lack of time otherwise for even maintaining this thing, I'm going into a somewhat of a hiatus mode once more. I have downgraded the main page to one post because I hate seeing posts from three months ago just sitting there, and it keeps a neater appearance.
That is all. Ciao for now.
11.13.2008
Protesting Continues
In the aftermath of the election, I have been following the Prop 8/Mormon Temple protests pretty closely. I guess I take them pretty personally, and have talked more about my faith in my blog since the elections then the six years I've had a blog before that.
So people are now protesting in Manhattan, again giving the response of how dare the church get involved in "taking political stances and calling them moral when it's nothing but politics."
I've already stated my opinion on Prop 8 and my opinion of the rallies that oppose it and are protesting the church for its passing of it. As for this being a 'political issue', the church only sees it as a moral issue, period.
People seem to think that this is some hateful stance, but need I remind everyone, the church has not changed its policy on homosexual conduct in the years it has been restored. It believes homosexuality to be immoral and wrong, and the church plays a huge role in the protection of traditional marriage, which is believed to be the foundation of the family, which is at the very center of our religious beliefs. The church takes this very seriously, and it is not doing it with the intention to be hateful and mean, it takes this stance because the issue of family, and the role family plays is very instrumental to the foundation of our faith. Everything centers around the traditional family unit, and despite the statistics of divorce and single parenting and what not, the traditional family unit is still central to the church.
But because people are suddenly overwhelmingly targeting the church, and other organizations for helping pass Prop 8, they are taking to the streets, protesting in mass, and threatening institutions. Over the weekend, seven LDS chapels had their windows shot out, though the police are hesitant to say that it is related to Prop 8. Speculate all you want, but the timing is impecable. There is also news of people sending white powder to LDS Temples in SLC and LA, causing the buildings to be evacuated and investigated. Fortunately, it appeared to be a prank, but it is a blatant attack.
Yes, the church has experienced backlash on this issue, but I know they will stick to their guns and continue to follow the beliefs that we have always held, and a few people holding a bunch of signs picketing the temples will not change the minds of our leaders. And further more, the more violent and angry the crowds get, they will eventually turn into mobs, and by attacking the church, I think there may be some backlash towards them.
Although this is not the mindset of all gay people, it is appearing to be the common group think of more and more people, who think that 'violence is the answer.' Attacking religious organizations for encouraging their members to utilize their right of free speech to vote their conscience and being attacked will alienate more people then it will help to persuade. And it certainly won't convince to many mormons. At church on Sunday, I noticed a lot of people there were making pretty much the same comments.
"Well, looks like we're being persecuted again."
"This must be what the pioneers experienced."
According to practicing Christians, in the final days the good will be called evil and evil will be called good. Am I saying Homosexuals are evil? No, I'm saying homosexuality is a sin according to God. And pardon me for preaching, but the actions in these 'Latter Days' are proving this notion correct more and more, as this action against those of strong religious beliefs are finding themselves attacked and persecuted by the 'wicked', and I will use that term because one definition of wicked is 'morally bad', and if you believe homosexuality is a sin, then by its definition the act of homosexuality is bad. And those who actively take part in it and encourage it instead of fighting against it can be defined as wicked. And by fighting against it, I mean the urge to take part in homosexual behavior. I speak from personal experience, read that as you will.
If you want to call that hate speech, that's fine by me, even though I'm merely stating my opinions, as I had a lot of respect for some people of homosexual orientation as i believe it is the sin you are protesting, not the person themselves, but their actions over the last week have made me think that they no longer deserve my sympathy, and in fact over the last two weeks, I have become stronger in my faith then I have in years, where three months ago I was pretty much inactive. And seeing these actions occur around me has made me realize what the state the world is in and my own need to prepare myself for what is bound to be an interesting turn of events over the course of these next few years.
So, when a group starts talking about Burning Churches, and begins actively vandalizing our buildings and threatening our members, I merely need to look back into history and think 'hmm, where have I seen this before?'
Yep, angry mobs have razed one of our temples and murdered our Prophet. It may have taken a while, but we rebuilt it, and our faith is as strong as ever.
So keep attacking the Catholics, Rick Warren, Evangilicals and churches inLansing Michigan. Because ironically enough, as much as some of these faiths do have preached in the past against Mormons, this is a rally cry for different faiths to band together. So thanks for unifying various faiths in this matter. It's been swell.
Meanwhile, like I said before, I don't hate gay people, I just disagree with the lifestyle, but some people have the right mindset with this radical nonsense. Opponents of Prop 8, you might be winning over some hearts and minds with your 'peaceful protests' that are turning more and more violent, but I think you are also alienating a lot of people by your actions. Go protest if you want, but maybe you should take your protest to the capital of California and leave the churches out of it, who have every right to their beliefs and opinions just as you have every right to live your lifestyle. Besides, the ones who are coming off as intolerant are the ones that are frequently preaching that we must be tolerant of their lifestyles. They don't seem to be particularly tolerant of a religion's right to believe that their behavior is sinful. That doesn't constitute hate, that is just a system of beliefs.
Of course, the protesters want to rally against the will of the voters in California and everywhere else. Gay marriage propositions have come up in thirty states (twice now in California). Gay Marriage has been defeated in every one.
And now, suddenly its all the Mormons' fault.
Fine then. My comments are below, I don't delete them unless they're spam. Protest me if you think my church is hateful and mean, I stand with my religion and I stand by my beliefs. Continue protesting in the streets if you wish, I am still a soldier, and I will defend your right to do so. But I still maintain my personal beliefs that homosexuality is wrong. And protesting my church will not get it to change its position, you have my word on that.
Ramble much?
Update: Famous Mormon Author Orson Scott Card shares his views on this topic.
So people are now protesting in Manhattan, again giving the response of how dare the church get involved in "taking political stances and calling them moral when it's nothing but politics."
I've already stated my opinion on Prop 8 and my opinion of the rallies that oppose it and are protesting the church for its passing of it. As for this being a 'political issue', the church only sees it as a moral issue, period.
People seem to think that this is some hateful stance, but need I remind everyone, the church has not changed its policy on homosexual conduct in the years it has been restored. It believes homosexuality to be immoral and wrong, and the church plays a huge role in the protection of traditional marriage, which is believed to be the foundation of the family, which is at the very center of our religious beliefs. The church takes this very seriously, and it is not doing it with the intention to be hateful and mean, it takes this stance because the issue of family, and the role family plays is very instrumental to the foundation of our faith. Everything centers around the traditional family unit, and despite the statistics of divorce and single parenting and what not, the traditional family unit is still central to the church.
But because people are suddenly overwhelmingly targeting the church, and other organizations for helping pass Prop 8, they are taking to the streets, protesting in mass, and threatening institutions. Over the weekend, seven LDS chapels had their windows shot out, though the police are hesitant to say that it is related to Prop 8. Speculate all you want, but the timing is impecable. There is also news of people sending white powder to LDS Temples in SLC and LA, causing the buildings to be evacuated and investigated. Fortunately, it appeared to be a prank, but it is a blatant attack.
Yes, the church has experienced backlash on this issue, but I know they will stick to their guns and continue to follow the beliefs that we have always held, and a few people holding a bunch of signs picketing the temples will not change the minds of our leaders. And further more, the more violent and angry the crowds get, they will eventually turn into mobs, and by attacking the church, I think there may be some backlash towards them.
Although this is not the mindset of all gay people, it is appearing to be the common group think of more and more people, who think that 'violence is the answer.' Attacking religious organizations for encouraging their members to utilize their right of free speech to vote their conscience and being attacked will alienate more people then it will help to persuade. And it certainly won't convince to many mormons. At church on Sunday, I noticed a lot of people there were making pretty much the same comments.
"Well, looks like we're being persecuted again."
"This must be what the pioneers experienced."
According to practicing Christians, in the final days the good will be called evil and evil will be called good. Am I saying Homosexuals are evil? No, I'm saying homosexuality is a sin according to God. And pardon me for preaching, but the actions in these 'Latter Days' are proving this notion correct more and more, as this action against those of strong religious beliefs are finding themselves attacked and persecuted by the 'wicked', and I will use that term because one definition of wicked is 'morally bad', and if you believe homosexuality is a sin, then by its definition the act of homosexuality is bad. And those who actively take part in it and encourage it instead of fighting against it can be defined as wicked. And by fighting against it, I mean the urge to take part in homosexual behavior. I speak from personal experience, read that as you will.
If you want to call that hate speech, that's fine by me, even though I'm merely stating my opinions, as I had a lot of respect for some people of homosexual orientation as i believe it is the sin you are protesting, not the person themselves, but their actions over the last week have made me think that they no longer deserve my sympathy, and in fact over the last two weeks, I have become stronger in my faith then I have in years, where three months ago I was pretty much inactive. And seeing these actions occur around me has made me realize what the state the world is in and my own need to prepare myself for what is bound to be an interesting turn of events over the course of these next few years.
So, when a group starts talking about Burning Churches, and begins actively vandalizing our buildings and threatening our members, I merely need to look back into history and think 'hmm, where have I seen this before?'
Yep, angry mobs have razed one of our temples and murdered our Prophet. It may have taken a while, but we rebuilt it, and our faith is as strong as ever.
So keep attacking the Catholics, Rick Warren, Evangilicals and churches inLansing Michigan. Because ironically enough, as much as some of these faiths do have preached in the past against Mormons, this is a rally cry for different faiths to band together. So thanks for unifying various faiths in this matter. It's been swell.
Meanwhile, like I said before, I don't hate gay people, I just disagree with the lifestyle, but some people have the right mindset with this radical nonsense. Opponents of Prop 8, you might be winning over some hearts and minds with your 'peaceful protests' that are turning more and more violent, but I think you are also alienating a lot of people by your actions. Go protest if you want, but maybe you should take your protest to the capital of California and leave the churches out of it, who have every right to their beliefs and opinions just as you have every right to live your lifestyle. Besides, the ones who are coming off as intolerant are the ones that are frequently preaching that we must be tolerant of their lifestyles. They don't seem to be particularly tolerant of a religion's right to believe that their behavior is sinful. That doesn't constitute hate, that is just a system of beliefs.
Of course, the protesters want to rally against the will of the voters in California and everywhere else. Gay marriage propositions have come up in thirty states (twice now in California). Gay Marriage has been defeated in every one.
And now, suddenly its all the Mormons' fault.
Fine then. My comments are below, I don't delete them unless they're spam. Protest me if you think my church is hateful and mean, I stand with my religion and I stand by my beliefs. Continue protesting in the streets if you wish, I am still a soldier, and I will defend your right to do so. But I still maintain my personal beliefs that homosexuality is wrong. And protesting my church will not get it to change its position, you have my word on that.
Ramble much?
Update: Famous Mormon Author Orson Scott Card shares his views on this topic.
10.16.2008
The Hypocracy Kills Me
Yes, a little political talk, because I have to admit, the way this election cycle is going, it is downright ridiculous.
We'll start with Joe the Plumber. Anybody hear about him? He's just an average Joe trying to make a living and he has the nerve, the audacity to ask Barack Obama a question on the stump.
Ok, for a minute, let's forget Joe the Plumber and focus on Obama. His answer to Joe's question is downright socialistic. This is scary times, but what is interesting to me that suddenly, after the Liberals and Obama keep harping on the fact that any little criticism detracts from the real issues, now that some ordinary middle class American has dared bring to light the true nature of what an Obama Presidency might bring, instead of focusing on what Obama said, the whole "spread the wealth around", Joe the Plumber is now the focus of a massive Character Attack as his personal life comes unto intense scrutinity.
Proof? Well, from a blogger's perspective, I'll just link to Ace of Spades, Here, Here, Here, and Here.
There's also this crap being spewed by liberal sources such as Huffington Post courtesy of Right Wing News.
What is this a sign of? Well, from my own humble opinion, its a little enlightening of what the US will be like if Obama gets the most powerful office in the nation. Because the issue that has aroused from this debate has turned it onto Joe Wurzelbacher, making him the focus of attention, when all he did was ask Obama a question. Quite frankly, as far as I'm concerned, Joe is an ordinary citizen, he doesn't appear to be running for higher office and last I checked, most ordinary citizens have a little dirt in their past. Hell, I'm disthymic, have a chronic lead foot with plenty of speeding tickets to prove it, and have a bad NCOER stating that I'm completely incompetent in the field of Preventive Medicine. Should I ever have the opportunity to meet Barack Obama and dare ask him a question with the News Media present that made headline news because of Obama's questionable answer, the focus would immediately shift from him and all of my dirty laundry would come to light.
Hell, look at Sarah Palin, she is announced McCain's running mate and suddenly people are questioning whether Trig Palin is even her son with absolutely NO BASIS WHATSOEVER. But Trig Palin isn't the issue, if I were to say anything, I would say that this attempted character assassination was trying to deflect from the issues.
Because the issue is no longer about Barack Obama, but about the person who dares question him. The thing is, it shouldn't matter if the question came from Joe Wulzerbacher, Katie Couric or Jesus Christ himself (because as the only perfect person to ever walk the earth, good luck finding some dirt on him). The person asking the question is irrelevant. What should be detrimental is the answer that Barack Obama gave. That is the issue here, that is what the focus should be on. Doing a character assassination on Joe the Plumber to tear apart his credibility does not change the fact that Barack Obama stated that he wants to destribute the wealth just like the Socialists do.
I'm sorry, I have to disagree with that policy.
This whole election issue has been very enlightening, and I have been watching it very closely these last few months. But if you look at the trend for the last few months, every negative attack against Barack Obama is turned against the person making the attack, if you try to discuss his highly questionable number of personal acquaintances for which I doubt he would be able to get a Secret Security Clearance with the US Army, you are labeled as trying to detract from the issues and pointing out that Bill Ayers *a freakin' WHITE guy* as a terrorist who appears to have extremely close relations with Barack Obama, bloody hell you must be a racist. Every negative attack is deflected with lies and an excuse to detract from the issues, but they are relavent.
What gets me is for eight years we have heard people screaming Bush=Hitler and proclaiming that the Bush administration is encroaching on their constitutional rights and freedom of speech, but they kept doing it. But Barack Obama can't be criticized without being labeled as a racist and having your character attacked?
I'm sorry, but I see the first ammendment being under serious threat under a Barack Obama Presidency more so then the entire eight years of the Bush Administration.
No, I am NOT voting for Barack Obama, if that hasn't been made clear enough. And though I have remained relatively quiet on the political front for the past few months on account of being active duty military this summer and feeling that as a representative of the Army I need to keep my political opinions to a minimum, enough is enough. I am still a soldier, and as a soldier it is my duty to protect the constitution of the united states, and that includes MY right to free speech.
This country is going to hell in a handbasket right quick. People aren't paying attention to what's going on around them, thinking that if they ignore the issue, it might just go away, or somebody else might take care of it. But it's dangerous to think like that. You HAVE to pay attention, or before you know it, to many people are going to just lie low thinking that somebody else will fight the fight and then before you know it, we will have the executive branch (presidency), both legislative branches (senate and house of representatives) and the judicial branch (supreme court) in the hands of the liberals, with no system of checks and balances in play, just watch as this great nation turns to a liberal utopia of socialism and you find your freedoms stripped away for the greater cause.
I'm a conservative. I respect everybody has a right to an opinion, and if you believe that socialism is the way we should go, then more power to you. That's your opinion, I disagree with you but will respect your right to have that opinion. As a soldier that is my duty, to make sure everyone has a right to say what they want to say, that they have a voice and a right to their opinions.
The problem is, as a conservative, with the way things are going, the thuggary involved in the mainstream media and liberal left to anybody who dare opposes the inevitable election of 'The One', I might just lose my own voice.
I'm not going down without a fight, I've got about three weeks to election, and I'm not keeping quiet anymore. see ya all at the reeducation camps in January.
UPDATE: Courtesy of Perfunction via Instapundit
Very enlightening. . .
. . . one can only hope that people start waking up these next few weeks and see what kind of person Obama really is. . .
We'll start with Joe the Plumber. Anybody hear about him? He's just an average Joe trying to make a living and he has the nerve, the audacity to ask Barack Obama a question on the stump.
JOE WURZELBACHER: "I'm a plumber. You know, I work, you know, 10, 12 hours a day. If I buy another truck and add something else to it, and you know, build the company..."
OBAMA: "Right."
WURZELBACHER: "... you know, I'm getting taxed more and more."
OBAMA: "Nobody likes high taxes."
WURZELBACHER: "No, not at all."
OBAMA: "Right? Of course not. So -- but what's happened is, is that we end up -- we've cut taxes a lot for folks like me who make a lot more than $250,000. We haven't given a break to folks who make less. It's not that I want to punish your success, I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance at success, too. And everybody is so pinched that business is bad for everybody. And I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." (FOX News' "On The Record," 10/13/08)
Ok, for a minute, let's forget Joe the Plumber and focus on Obama. His answer to Joe's question is downright socialistic. This is scary times, but what is interesting to me that suddenly, after the Liberals and Obama keep harping on the fact that any little criticism detracts from the real issues, now that some ordinary middle class American has dared bring to light the true nature of what an Obama Presidency might bring, instead of focusing on what Obama said, the whole "spread the wealth around", Joe the Plumber is now the focus of a massive Character Attack as his personal life comes unto intense scrutinity.
Proof? Well, from a blogger's perspective, I'll just link to Ace of Spades, Here, Here, Here, and Here.
There's also this crap being spewed by liberal sources such as Huffington Post courtesy of Right Wing News.
What is this a sign of? Well, from my own humble opinion, its a little enlightening of what the US will be like if Obama gets the most powerful office in the nation. Because the issue that has aroused from this debate has turned it onto Joe Wurzelbacher, making him the focus of attention, when all he did was ask Obama a question. Quite frankly, as far as I'm concerned, Joe is an ordinary citizen, he doesn't appear to be running for higher office and last I checked, most ordinary citizens have a little dirt in their past. Hell, I'm disthymic, have a chronic lead foot with plenty of speeding tickets to prove it, and have a bad NCOER stating that I'm completely incompetent in the field of Preventive Medicine. Should I ever have the opportunity to meet Barack Obama and dare ask him a question with the News Media present that made headline news because of Obama's questionable answer, the focus would immediately shift from him and all of my dirty laundry would come to light.
Hell, look at Sarah Palin, she is announced McCain's running mate and suddenly people are questioning whether Trig Palin is even her son with absolutely NO BASIS WHATSOEVER. But Trig Palin isn't the issue, if I were to say anything, I would say that this attempted character assassination was trying to deflect from the issues.
Because the issue is no longer about Barack Obama, but about the person who dares question him. The thing is, it shouldn't matter if the question came from Joe Wulzerbacher, Katie Couric or Jesus Christ himself (because as the only perfect person to ever walk the earth, good luck finding some dirt on him). The person asking the question is irrelevant. What should be detrimental is the answer that Barack Obama gave. That is the issue here, that is what the focus should be on. Doing a character assassination on Joe the Plumber to tear apart his credibility does not change the fact that Barack Obama stated that he wants to destribute the wealth just like the Socialists do.
I'm sorry, I have to disagree with that policy.
This whole election issue has been very enlightening, and I have been watching it very closely these last few months. But if you look at the trend for the last few months, every negative attack against Barack Obama is turned against the person making the attack, if you try to discuss his highly questionable number of personal acquaintances for which I doubt he would be able to get a Secret Security Clearance with the US Army, you are labeled as trying to detract from the issues and pointing out that Bill Ayers *a freakin' WHITE guy* as a terrorist who appears to have extremely close relations with Barack Obama, bloody hell you must be a racist. Every negative attack is deflected with lies and an excuse to detract from the issues, but they are relavent.
What gets me is for eight years we have heard people screaming Bush=Hitler and proclaiming that the Bush administration is encroaching on their constitutional rights and freedom of speech, but they kept doing it. But Barack Obama can't be criticized without being labeled as a racist and having your character attacked?
I'm sorry, but I see the first ammendment being under serious threat under a Barack Obama Presidency more so then the entire eight years of the Bush Administration.
No, I am NOT voting for Barack Obama, if that hasn't been made clear enough. And though I have remained relatively quiet on the political front for the past few months on account of being active duty military this summer and feeling that as a representative of the Army I need to keep my political opinions to a minimum, enough is enough. I am still a soldier, and as a soldier it is my duty to protect the constitution of the united states, and that includes MY right to free speech.
This country is going to hell in a handbasket right quick. People aren't paying attention to what's going on around them, thinking that if they ignore the issue, it might just go away, or somebody else might take care of it. But it's dangerous to think like that. You HAVE to pay attention, or before you know it, to many people are going to just lie low thinking that somebody else will fight the fight and then before you know it, we will have the executive branch (presidency), both legislative branches (senate and house of representatives) and the judicial branch (supreme court) in the hands of the liberals, with no system of checks and balances in play, just watch as this great nation turns to a liberal utopia of socialism and you find your freedoms stripped away for the greater cause.
I'm a conservative. I respect everybody has a right to an opinion, and if you believe that socialism is the way we should go, then more power to you. That's your opinion, I disagree with you but will respect your right to have that opinion. As a soldier that is my duty, to make sure everyone has a right to say what they want to say, that they have a voice and a right to their opinions.
The problem is, as a conservative, with the way things are going, the thuggary involved in the mainstream media and liberal left to anybody who dare opposes the inevitable election of 'The One', I might just lose my own voice.
I'm not going down without a fight, I've got about three weeks to election, and I'm not keeping quiet anymore. see ya all at the reeducation camps in January.
UPDATE: Courtesy of Perfunction via Instapundit
Very enlightening. . .
. . . one can only hope that people start waking up these next few weeks and see what kind of person Obama really is. . .
4.06.2008
Charlton Heston - RIP
As many of you know, I'm a bit of a gun nut. I like Guns. I have been a member of the NRA and truthfully I need to get my membership renewed sometime in the near future, before this next presidential election when you have people like Barack Obama who wants to ban all hand guns.
So, as many of you know, Charlton Heston, former President of the NRA, passed away yesterday at the age of 84.
I noted his passing mentioned on Perezhilton.com yesterday (one of my guilty pleasures I admit) and was curious as to what Perez's readers might say about the man they would likely see as their enemy due to his stance on gun rights.
Apparently, these people are rabid haters of anybody who wants to own a gun. And they are apparently also loyal supporters of the film maker Michael Moore.
Michael Moore's movies should be shown in Critical Thinking classes, and that's about it. The man distorts and edits so much in his movies that he completely tweaks the truth to fit his agenda. Because he does this, he has lost all credibility with me. I've seen Bowling for Columbine. I refuse to watch any other movies that he's made, no matter what message he's trying to portray that I may or may not agree with (and mostly I disagree, but the man is a complete narcissist so why should I even bother?)
Apparently, people still look at the film 'bowling for columbine' and it's character assassination of Charlton Heston as gospel. Including the apparent scene where he goes to a gun rally in Denver shortly after the Columbine incident and rallies his fellow gun-loving troops behind him.
I would link to the Bowling for Columbine Myths page to get a better understanding of all the problems with the film, but alas, the link is broken.
Whatever the case, Charlton Heston, a screen legend in Hollywood, a strong supporter of the civil rights movement in the 1960's, and a advocate of the 2nd ammendment, was a good man that does not deserve the hostility he has gotten from rabid lunatics of the left who follow Moore passionately.
Besides, if anything to encourage the ownership of guns, look at Switzerland and their unusually high gun ownership rate. They also have a very low homicide rate due to gun violence. Why? Because I know if I were a criminal, I would be less inclined to attack somebody if I knew they were armed.
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have the guns. There are a bunch of these little sayings, but you know what? They are quite true.
I guess I didn't mean to go on a bit of a rant on the owner ship of guns when I'm talking about the death of a great man, but I guess they go hand in hand, don't they?
So, as many of you know, Charlton Heston, former President of the NRA, passed away yesterday at the age of 84.
I noted his passing mentioned on Perezhilton.com yesterday (one of my guilty pleasures I admit) and was curious as to what Perez's readers might say about the man they would likely see as their enemy due to his stance on gun rights.
Apparently, these people are rabid haters of anybody who wants to own a gun. And they are apparently also loyal supporters of the film maker Michael Moore.
Michael Moore's movies should be shown in Critical Thinking classes, and that's about it. The man distorts and edits so much in his movies that he completely tweaks the truth to fit his agenda. Because he does this, he has lost all credibility with me. I've seen Bowling for Columbine. I refuse to watch any other movies that he's made, no matter what message he's trying to portray that I may or may not agree with (and mostly I disagree, but the man is a complete narcissist so why should I even bother?)
Apparently, people still look at the film 'bowling for columbine' and it's character assassination of Charlton Heston as gospel. Including the apparent scene where he goes to a gun rally in Denver shortly after the Columbine incident and rallies his fellow gun-loving troops behind him.
I would link to the Bowling for Columbine Myths page to get a better understanding of all the problems with the film, but alas, the link is broken.
Whatever the case, Charlton Heston, a screen legend in Hollywood, a strong supporter of the civil rights movement in the 1960's, and a advocate of the 2nd ammendment, was a good man that does not deserve the hostility he has gotten from rabid lunatics of the left who follow Moore passionately.
Besides, if anything to encourage the ownership of guns, look at Switzerland and their unusually high gun ownership rate. They also have a very low homicide rate due to gun violence. Why? Because I know if I were a criminal, I would be less inclined to attack somebody if I knew they were armed.
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have the guns. There are a bunch of these little sayings, but you know what? They are quite true.
I guess I didn't mean to go on a bit of a rant on the owner ship of guns when I'm talking about the death of a great man, but I guess they go hand in hand, don't they?
2.02.2008
Artists are Finicky Peoples
Alright, so I think I need to explain my little rant more in depth, to give you an idea of the mind of an artist.
Most real artists like critiques. They see it as a way to make themselves better, as long as the critique is constructive. Nobody likes to hear that their work sucks without it being explained why.
If you look at my gallery and tell me i'm a sucky artist, I'll go right back in your face and tell you you're an idiot, unless you can give me a reasonable excuse as to why you think my art sucks. If I don't know what is wrong with it, I can't change it, and as an artist, I often get to close to the work to see the obvious faults in it, or on the flip side, I'll see everything that is wrong with it.
Most often then not, I can rip to shreds any artwork you throw at me. You want it critiqued constructively? I bet I can find something wrong with it.
But let me go into it a little further. To tell you the honest truth, I don't see myself as much of an illustrator, I never have been. I've been working on the illustrator side of my art for a few years now, but honestly, I consider myself an artist.
My illustrations always have something wrong with them. heck, my art does too but usually not to the degree.
So I had a bunch of illustrators tell me my art is 'wonky' (which is a word I am going to use to describe everythign I see wrong with a peice from now on) without going into detail and me, being, well, me, I blew a gasket on them. Because you don't tell an artist they suck without giving them reasons as to why. Especially somebody who considers themselves an artist.
My illustrations are always from my head, but this latest episode made me realize that I need to work more on my art and away from my illustrations (which has, in fact, been killing my art to tell you the truth). So I'm going to start sketching more. I just need to draw more. I need to find pictures and draw what I see. It doesn't matter that it doesn't look like the person I'm drawing, just so long as it is a drawing.
I need to focus on how I'm going to illustrate my project anyway.
Most real artists like critiques. They see it as a way to make themselves better, as long as the critique is constructive. Nobody likes to hear that their work sucks without it being explained why.
If you look at my gallery and tell me i'm a sucky artist, I'll go right back in your face and tell you you're an idiot, unless you can give me a reasonable excuse as to why you think my art sucks. If I don't know what is wrong with it, I can't change it, and as an artist, I often get to close to the work to see the obvious faults in it, or on the flip side, I'll see everything that is wrong with it.
Most often then not, I can rip to shreds any artwork you throw at me. You want it critiqued constructively? I bet I can find something wrong with it.
But let me go into it a little further. To tell you the honest truth, I don't see myself as much of an illustrator, I never have been. I've been working on the illustrator side of my art for a few years now, but honestly, I consider myself an artist.
My illustrations always have something wrong with them. heck, my art does too but usually not to the degree.
So I had a bunch of illustrators tell me my art is 'wonky' (which is a word I am going to use to describe everythign I see wrong with a peice from now on) without going into detail and me, being, well, me, I blew a gasket on them. Because you don't tell an artist they suck without giving them reasons as to why. Especially somebody who considers themselves an artist.
My illustrations are always from my head, but this latest episode made me realize that I need to work more on my art and away from my illustrations (which has, in fact, been killing my art to tell you the truth). So I'm going to start sketching more. I just need to draw more. I need to find pictures and draw what I see. It doesn't matter that it doesn't look like the person I'm drawing, just so long as it is a drawing.
I need to focus on how I'm going to illustrate my project anyway.
I'm A Little Annoyed
Ok, I have to say something, because I'm a cranky person and I can't stand it when people tell me I suck at something without having a good reason as to state why.
See, when I draw anthropomorphic characters (basically anything non human with human qualities) I generally draw them a little cartoonish, and granted when it comes to art this is not my strong suit. At all. Even though its basically the only thing I draw anymore because I don't draw as much as I used too.
I am also usually very good at taking constructive criticism with my art, because I am an artist and sometimes when a person is too close to a piece, they don't see the problems with it. So as long as the criticism is constructive, I take it well.
So I joined this art exchange, thinking I'm bored and I want to draw more and I like drawing other people's characters because it gives me a fresh look on things as I tend to get caught up in little rifts where I draw the same thing over again. I gave them a link to my two galleries online, one on this website and one over at DeviantArt.
I got this email in the mail saying I had been declined for a sketch exchange. Here is their exact wording in fact.
This is the piece they critiqued.
So basically, because I use foreshortening in a lot of my art so the legs don't look exactly the same, I got dismissed. Is this on me as an artist? Or is this on them as art critiques? Because as far as I'm concerned, this is a perfect example of foreshortening. You are looking at two legs from different angles, of course they are not going to look the same. This looks like an example of a Digigrade Biped to me (digigrade meaning walking on toes, not flat footed, all of my anthros are digigrade unless stated otherwise.)
I replied with a comment that wasn't so nice that I won't link to because, well, it will most likely get deleted, but I mean, come on?
Because my reply will most likely get deleted, I'll post what I wrote to them here.
Ok, Yes, the annoyance is apparent, but really, come on!
Give me your opinion, do you think I have a decent argument or do I suck at anthros? Or are you just a non-artistic type that goes 'hehe, puppy!'
EDIT - So my rant got some attention, they didn't delete the post after all, but I calmed down considerably when I got a constructive critique back. Mind you, I don't delete this stuff, so if you want to see how this goes, please visit the LJ.
I just don't know what to get from 'wonky'.
Constructive Criticism is always game for me.
See, when I draw anthropomorphic characters (basically anything non human with human qualities) I generally draw them a little cartoonish, and granted when it comes to art this is not my strong suit. At all. Even though its basically the only thing I draw anymore because I don't draw as much as I used too.
I am also usually very good at taking constructive criticism with my art, because I am an artist and sometimes when a person is too close to a piece, they don't see the problems with it. So as long as the criticism is constructive, I take it well.
So I joined this art exchange, thinking I'm bored and I want to draw more and I like drawing other people's characters because it gives me a fresh look on things as I tend to get caught up in little rifts where I draw the same thing over again. I gave them a link to my two galleries online, one on this website and one over at DeviantArt.
I got this email in the mail saying I had been declined for a sketch exchange. Here is their exact wording in fact.
Mods voted: You have some interesting stuff, but we feel you could use a bit more practice before you join us. Feel free to try again in the future though! :)
Comments were: Anatomy's a little wonky, such as this piece: The legs look dramatically different from each other. She needs a little more work on getting her anatomy to look natural as far as her anthros go.
This is the piece they critiqued.
So basically, because I use foreshortening in a lot of my art so the legs don't look exactly the same, I got dismissed. Is this on me as an artist? Or is this on them as art critiques? Because as far as I'm concerned, this is a perfect example of foreshortening. You are looking at two legs from different angles, of course they are not going to look the same. This looks like an example of a Digigrade Biped to me (digigrade meaning walking on toes, not flat footed, all of my anthros are digigrade unless stated otherwise.)
I replied with a comment that wasn't so nice that I won't link to because, well, it will most likely get deleted, but I mean, come on?
Because my reply will most likely get deleted, I'll post what I wrote to them here.
Um, do you guys know the definition of Foreshortening?
The freakin' right leg is at an angle facing the audience, if you were to actually look at the left leg, you might actually see that there is nothing wrong with this. But oh wait, that's right, this is a freakin' SKETCH exchange. This may not be a traditional anthro because it doesn't show as much human in it, but it doesn't mean its wrong.
Oh, and I know how to draw anatomy, thanks for the heads up on telling me that I don't know what the hell I'm doing.
PS - for a sketch exchange, I would probably complete my art a little more so that it doesn't need to be completed in Photoshop, because believe it or not I CAN draw.
Thanks for everything, but I think I'll pass and not bother with this stupid exchange in the future.
PPS - The rejected art piece is freakin' two years old. Since you said I apparently need to practice my anatomy, I'll let you know I've had plenty, thanks.
Ok, Yes, the annoyance is apparent, but really, come on!
Give me your opinion, do you think I have a decent argument or do I suck at anthros? Or are you just a non-artistic type that goes 'hehe, puppy!'
EDIT - So my rant got some attention, they didn't delete the post after all, but I calmed down considerably when I got a constructive critique back. Mind you, I don't delete this stuff, so if you want to see how this goes, please visit the LJ.
I just don't know what to get from 'wonky'.
Constructive Criticism is always game for me.
9.29.2007
A Minor Rant About a Minor Injury
So, I've discovered I really like to rant. That was one of the reasons why I started a blog in the first place, it was a public area where I could just say what I wanted to and anybody who wished to read it could read it, and if they didn't want to read it, so what?
I just got off of a profile, and in my military career I've only been on a profile a handful of times, once I was ordered to go to sick call by my drill sergeants after smashing my face against the carrying handle of my M16 and started bleeding everywhere. Thus was my no Camouflage profile which was the only profile I held during Basic.
I didn't really want to go on profile this time, but I was having a strange pain in my back that really only bothered me when I tried to march or run. I wanted to suck it up and drive on as I thought it would go away but after a day and a half I decided I needed to get it looked at to make sure it wasn't anything to serious. Or if it wasn't, that it wouldn't develop into something more serious.
Turns out its a pinched nerve, the sciatic nerve going into my right hip. Its actually something I can handle, but they put me on a run/march/jump at your own pace profile just so I can rest it and get it back up. So I've been taking advantage of this and walking when I can and avoiding running when I can.
The problem is, my profile says seven days, and technically I'm not supposed to be on profile for longer then 72 hours or I risk being kicked out of the school, even though this does not hinder my ability to do the training, I just avoid running for a couple of days, thats all. But because it says 7 days, I have to tear up the profile and pretend it doesn't exist. So I guess that's what I'm going to do.
I think the army has this mentality of toughness to suck it up if you are hurt and just keep driving on. While that's ok for the most part, especially if you know its just a bruise or a minor injury, it's also ok to check something out if you need to, your body uses pain as a way of telling you that something is wrong. So I went to sick call and checked out my back to make sure it was nothing serious, and to get it documented just in case it was and it turns out it isn't a big deal. But now I feel like I'm being told that I'm dogshit by my Senior Drill Sergeant because I didn't just suck it up and take it, instead getting a profile.
I don't know much about the sciatic nerve or the injury I got, but I was told that if I didn't rest it that it could get worse so I took advantage of the last couple of days and rested myself as much as I could. So sue me, if I don't feel better by Monday, then I'll suck it up then. I didn't miss any training to utilize sick call, I made sure training was done for the day before I asked to go.
More went into this issue with this little chat I had with the Senior, with which I won't discuss here, but we'll say I didn't gain any more respect for the person because of it.
I just got off of a profile, and in my military career I've only been on a profile a handful of times, once I was ordered to go to sick call by my drill sergeants after smashing my face against the carrying handle of my M16 and started bleeding everywhere. Thus was my no Camouflage profile which was the only profile I held during Basic.
I didn't really want to go on profile this time, but I was having a strange pain in my back that really only bothered me when I tried to march or run. I wanted to suck it up and drive on as I thought it would go away but after a day and a half I decided I needed to get it looked at to make sure it wasn't anything to serious. Or if it wasn't, that it wouldn't develop into something more serious.
Turns out its a pinched nerve, the sciatic nerve going into my right hip. Its actually something I can handle, but they put me on a run/march/jump at your own pace profile just so I can rest it and get it back up. So I've been taking advantage of this and walking when I can and avoiding running when I can.
The problem is, my profile says seven days, and technically I'm not supposed to be on profile for longer then 72 hours or I risk being kicked out of the school, even though this does not hinder my ability to do the training, I just avoid running for a couple of days, thats all. But because it says 7 days, I have to tear up the profile and pretend it doesn't exist. So I guess that's what I'm going to do.
I think the army has this mentality of toughness to suck it up if you are hurt and just keep driving on. While that's ok for the most part, especially if you know its just a bruise or a minor injury, it's also ok to check something out if you need to, your body uses pain as a way of telling you that something is wrong. So I went to sick call and checked out my back to make sure it was nothing serious, and to get it documented just in case it was and it turns out it isn't a big deal. But now I feel like I'm being told that I'm dogshit by my Senior Drill Sergeant because I didn't just suck it up and take it, instead getting a profile.
I don't know much about the sciatic nerve or the injury I got, but I was told that if I didn't rest it that it could get worse so I took advantage of the last couple of days and rested myself as much as I could. So sue me, if I don't feel better by Monday, then I'll suck it up then. I didn't miss any training to utilize sick call, I made sure training was done for the day before I asked to go.
More went into this issue with this little chat I had with the Senior, with which I won't discuss here, but we'll say I didn't gain any more respect for the person because of it.
9.28.2007
Why Haven't the Bush Twins Enlisted?
Ok, in the Blame Bush category, everybody harps on how Bush is this major war hawk and how he went into Iraq under false pretenses and is over stretching the army and all of this mumbo jumbo and then they claim that they need to inact the draft starting with the Bush twins, as if Bush is so eager to go to War, he should send his daughters there first.
Ok, this logic is kind of twisted in several ways. For one, it is somewhat impractical for Jenna or Barbara to enlist. Furthermore, you know how many women enlist in the army in the first place? Not very many. In a country of 300 million people, there is something like 1.5 million people serving in our armed forces at any given time(that number may or may not be correct, but there abouts, bare with me). I think the demographic of women to men is that 15% of the military is female (again, an estimate, bare with me). If they inact the draft, they aren't going to draft women right away because women are barred from the combat arms and that's what they are primarily going to be drafting for most likely if they need a draft. Yes, they will need to fill other positions in the service support branches, but the first target is males.
Regardless, back to the original statement, a very small percentage of women in the US are even in the military. True, there are many who have served at some point and have gotten out but even with those into consideration, so giving a very liberal estimation, we'll say that 5% of American women have served in the US Military at some point in their lives. My point? So what if Jenna and Barbara Bush haven't joined the military to serve their country? There are a lot of people who haven't. It doesn't make them any more or less American. Everybody who gives me the BS statement that if you support the war, why aren't you or your kids serving in the military and fighting it? Well, there are a lot of Americans in this country, some support the war and some don't. But going back to the small percentage of Americans who are actually in the military, it stands to reason that some people who support the war have a family member serving and others do not.
Guess what? The Army is not for everybody. There are plenty of people out there that have no business being in the military because their personality or issues they may or may not have are incompatible with it. Maybe they are just scared of being shot at. Joining the Army is not a small matter, it takes a special kind of person to gather that much courage to think about enlisting, and yes, there are people out there who join the army because they don't know what else to do. It doesn't make them any less of a person and they can become better for it.
And besides, if Jenna and Barbara Bush did join the army, can you think of the secret service mess that would cause? Would it even be logical for them to join? Specifically enlist? I mean, seriously, how many children of Presidents enlisted in times of war? I could see them possibly becoming officers if the desire struck them to do that instead, but really. . .
Using this argument against Bush is actually kind of dumb. I wish people would stop muttering about how hypocritical he was for sending our men and women of the armed forces to war when he doesn't have his own daughters serving.
I can just imagine the nightmare that would be for the Drill Sergeants who would have to train them if they did decide to do such a thing.
Case in point, shut up about it already. Its not a big deal that the Bush Twins have never served in the military. Members of the Bush family have served in the past and I bet their might be a cousin or another relative serving now.
*yes, a rant, saw some special on one of the cable news networks interviewing Jenna on why she hadn't enlisted yet and I thought it was ridiculous.*
Ok, this logic is kind of twisted in several ways. For one, it is somewhat impractical for Jenna or Barbara to enlist. Furthermore, you know how many women enlist in the army in the first place? Not very many. In a country of 300 million people, there is something like 1.5 million people serving in our armed forces at any given time(that number may or may not be correct, but there abouts, bare with me). I think the demographic of women to men is that 15% of the military is female (again, an estimate, bare with me). If they inact the draft, they aren't going to draft women right away because women are barred from the combat arms and that's what they are primarily going to be drafting for most likely if they need a draft. Yes, they will need to fill other positions in the service support branches, but the first target is males.
Regardless, back to the original statement, a very small percentage of women in the US are even in the military. True, there are many who have served at some point and have gotten out but even with those into consideration, so giving a very liberal estimation, we'll say that 5% of American women have served in the US Military at some point in their lives. My point? So what if Jenna and Barbara Bush haven't joined the military to serve their country? There are a lot of people who haven't. It doesn't make them any more or less American. Everybody who gives me the BS statement that if you support the war, why aren't you or your kids serving in the military and fighting it? Well, there are a lot of Americans in this country, some support the war and some don't. But going back to the small percentage of Americans who are actually in the military, it stands to reason that some people who support the war have a family member serving and others do not.
Guess what? The Army is not for everybody. There are plenty of people out there that have no business being in the military because their personality or issues they may or may not have are incompatible with it. Maybe they are just scared of being shot at. Joining the Army is not a small matter, it takes a special kind of person to gather that much courage to think about enlisting, and yes, there are people out there who join the army because they don't know what else to do. It doesn't make them any less of a person and they can become better for it.
And besides, if Jenna and Barbara Bush did join the army, can you think of the secret service mess that would cause? Would it even be logical for them to join? Specifically enlist? I mean, seriously, how many children of Presidents enlisted in times of war? I could see them possibly becoming officers if the desire struck them to do that instead, but really. . .
Using this argument against Bush is actually kind of dumb. I wish people would stop muttering about how hypocritical he was for sending our men and women of the armed forces to war when he doesn't have his own daughters serving.
I can just imagine the nightmare that would be for the Drill Sergeants who would have to train them if they did decide to do such a thing.
Case in point, shut up about it already. Its not a big deal that the Bush Twins have never served in the military. Members of the Bush family have served in the past and I bet their might be a cousin or another relative serving now.
*yes, a rant, saw some special on one of the cable news networks interviewing Jenna on why she hadn't enlisted yet and I thought it was ridiculous.*
7.17.2007
Dysthemics and Narcissists Shouldn't Mingle
Ok, I have a confession to make. I've let something bother me longer then I should have. And I've discovered today that I have had every reason to be bothered. Warning, this is a rant, and it's been a long time coming. And after this post is over, this topic is officially dead. Unless I write an update on my NCOER, which might cause it to resurface.
If any of you have been following my blog for the last few years, you know I deployed to Kosovo for the duration of 2005. And my deployment was anything but smooth. And it wasn't the stress of actually being in Kosovo that made it thus, because a deployment to Kosovo is a cake walk, basically a paid yearlong vacation.
It was the fact that I put up with a major asshole for the duration of the deployment. Yes you narcissist son of a bitch, I'm talking about you. And yes, despite the fact that you outrank me by one lousy paygrade, you know, you decided to look past the fact that the United States Army entrusted me with the rank fo E5, not you who treated me like a PFC (his own words), I'm going to consider the fact that you have no business leading troops and you were an E6, not a non commissioned officer. There is a difference. Therefore, kiss my ass. I don't respect your rank because you sure in hell didn't respect mine. Your job was to mentor me, great job on doing that. Hell, I learned more about what not to be in a leader from you then how to be a leader.
There, I said it. Though I doubt SSG Dipshit no longer reads my blog (I would definitely not put it past him though), I can now get over the fact that I am officially over that whole incident. I've let it eat away at me for to long and I gave him the benefit of the doubt for bothering me for as long as he did. I can take comfort though, that I got to him too. I know I did. How he treated me when we demobilized back to the states confirms that. That bastard was on his guard, and he knew I was just waiting for him to cross the line because I would have been all over his sorry self.
Well, maybe I should start at the beginning. Being a Drill Sergeant Candidate that leaves for school in less then a month, I had to take a Behavioral Health Evaluation to be sure I was fit for training troops. I wanted to be honest with it because I had some issues where I was worried with how I behaved during my deployment.
My psychiatrist was great. I've been diagnosed as a dysthemic, though I haven't had any real issues since my deployment, just the usual mood swings that accompany hormones, and in my case, it will probably help me as a Drill Sergeant. Drill Sergeants (especially females) are supposed to be pissy. She looked at my mental health evaluation and pegged me as a dysthemic right away. Being a dysthemic does not bar me from drill sergeant school. See, I've got a clean record. I've had some mental health issues like depression before, but I've never truly acted on it other then at times crying my eyes out. And the last time I had a real break down was in Kosovo. I've looked back and have realized that I've never had issues like that before with other commanders and NCOICs. Just the one. And its because of him that I needed to be medicated there when I've never needed it at any other time in my life, before or since.
The psychiatrist pegged him right away as a narcissist, and told me that having those feelings and how I acted was completely appropriate for the situation. In fact, she told me the best idea for dealing with narcissists is to avoid them completely. And how do you peg a narcissist? She told me a great way. If you run into somebody that makes you feel like you're stupid, get away from them. Believe it or not, he did that to me. I know I'm not stupid, heck, I was an A student in high school and did awesome on that ASVAB, having the pick of any non combat MOS I wanted. Why oh why did I pick preventive medicine to this day I do not know. But I remember feeling like an idiot when I was around him. And it wasn't that he was really that intelligent (in his eyes he surely thought he was the world's smartest person and knew more then General Schoomaker) but he did make you feel like a dumbass. That is one way to peg a narcissist. She described a narcissist to me and I thought 'holy hell that's him!'
There are some other feelings I had towards him that I won't discuss in detail, but imply what you will, and she said those were appropriate too. And I think those feelings was what made me dwell on it for so long, that I had the capability of actually thinking that. The important thing was though I had the thoughts (it is not uncommon for people to have these types of thoughts at some point in their life), it was the fact that I did not act upon them and kept my reason. Good thing, I wouldn't want to end up in FT Leavonworth because of his pathetic ass, he wouldn't be worth it.
I hope that guy turned in his 20 year letter, because he has no business deploying in a real hostile environment. He has no business being in the military during war, he'll get his soldiers and himself killed. And for himself, it would likely not come from enemy fire.
This topic is dead, this is my one last rant about it. I'm in a kick ass unit now that I love, with people who give me a hard time (what do you expect, they're drill sergeants!) that I can actually respect. When they get on my case, I truly deserve it. And instead of hanging me out to dry by explaining in detail how I'm being punished, they actually tell me what I need to do to correct it.
PS - Everyone that has looked at my NCOER since coming off my deployment has told me that one ate up as hell NCO wrote it. And they don't even have to hear my side of the story to make that assessment.
If any of you have been following my blog for the last few years, you know I deployed to Kosovo for the duration of 2005. And my deployment was anything but smooth. And it wasn't the stress of actually being in Kosovo that made it thus, because a deployment to Kosovo is a cake walk, basically a paid yearlong vacation.
It was the fact that I put up with a major asshole for the duration of the deployment. Yes you narcissist son of a bitch, I'm talking about you. And yes, despite the fact that you outrank me by one lousy paygrade, you know, you decided to look past the fact that the United States Army entrusted me with the rank fo E5, not you who treated me like a PFC (his own words), I'm going to consider the fact that you have no business leading troops and you were an E6, not a non commissioned officer. There is a difference. Therefore, kiss my ass. I don't respect your rank because you sure in hell didn't respect mine. Your job was to mentor me, great job on doing that. Hell, I learned more about what not to be in a leader from you then how to be a leader.
There, I said it. Though I doubt SSG Dipshit no longer reads my blog (I would definitely not put it past him though), I can now get over the fact that I am officially over that whole incident. I've let it eat away at me for to long and I gave him the benefit of the doubt for bothering me for as long as he did. I can take comfort though, that I got to him too. I know I did. How he treated me when we demobilized back to the states confirms that. That bastard was on his guard, and he knew I was just waiting for him to cross the line because I would have been all over his sorry self.
Well, maybe I should start at the beginning. Being a Drill Sergeant Candidate that leaves for school in less then a month, I had to take a Behavioral Health Evaluation to be sure I was fit for training troops. I wanted to be honest with it because I had some issues where I was worried with how I behaved during my deployment.
My psychiatrist was great. I've been diagnosed as a dysthemic, though I haven't had any real issues since my deployment, just the usual mood swings that accompany hormones, and in my case, it will probably help me as a Drill Sergeant. Drill Sergeants (especially females) are supposed to be pissy. She looked at my mental health evaluation and pegged me as a dysthemic right away. Being a dysthemic does not bar me from drill sergeant school. See, I've got a clean record. I've had some mental health issues like depression before, but I've never truly acted on it other then at times crying my eyes out. And the last time I had a real break down was in Kosovo. I've looked back and have realized that I've never had issues like that before with other commanders and NCOICs. Just the one. And its because of him that I needed to be medicated there when I've never needed it at any other time in my life, before or since.
The psychiatrist pegged him right away as a narcissist, and told me that having those feelings and how I acted was completely appropriate for the situation. In fact, she told me the best idea for dealing with narcissists is to avoid them completely. And how do you peg a narcissist? She told me a great way. If you run into somebody that makes you feel like you're stupid, get away from them. Believe it or not, he did that to me. I know I'm not stupid, heck, I was an A student in high school and did awesome on that ASVAB, having the pick of any non combat MOS I wanted. Why oh why did I pick preventive medicine to this day I do not know. But I remember feeling like an idiot when I was around him. And it wasn't that he was really that intelligent (in his eyes he surely thought he was the world's smartest person and knew more then General Schoomaker) but he did make you feel like a dumbass. That is one way to peg a narcissist. She described a narcissist to me and I thought 'holy hell that's him!'
There are some other feelings I had towards him that I won't discuss in detail, but imply what you will, and she said those were appropriate too. And I think those feelings was what made me dwell on it for so long, that I had the capability of actually thinking that. The important thing was though I had the thoughts (it is not uncommon for people to have these types of thoughts at some point in their life), it was the fact that I did not act upon them and kept my reason. Good thing, I wouldn't want to end up in FT Leavonworth because of his pathetic ass, he wouldn't be worth it.
I hope that guy turned in his 20 year letter, because he has no business deploying in a real hostile environment. He has no business being in the military during war, he'll get his soldiers and himself killed. And for himself, it would likely not come from enemy fire.
This topic is dead, this is my one last rant about it. I'm in a kick ass unit now that I love, with people who give me a hard time (what do you expect, they're drill sergeants!) that I can actually respect. When they get on my case, I truly deserve it. And instead of hanging me out to dry by explaining in detail how I'm being punished, they actually tell me what I need to do to correct it.
PS - Everyone that has looked at my NCOER since coming off my deployment has told me that one ate up as hell NCO wrote it. And they don't even have to hear my side of the story to make that assessment.
5.08.2007
Advice before Jumping on the Bandwagon: Don't
So, show of hands, who here has gotten an email about May 15th, telling you that we are going to crack down by telling those big bad oil companies that we aren't going to buy their gas for one full day. Yeah, that'll show them.
There is another email making the rounds stating that if we can boycott the two biggest middle eastern oil suppliers, Exxon and Mobil, they will be forced to lower their gas and everyone else will follow suit.
You know what I plan to do? On May 15th, I'm going to go find an Exxon or Mobil station and get some gas. I bet the lines won't be that bad and it will make for a quick fill up.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm frustrated with the skyrocketing gas prices as much as the next person, and any fiscally minded person oughta be. But there is a better way to try to combat rising gas prices then to skip a day to buy gas or to bypass one specific station completely.
If you continue to do your errands and use your car the same as you always do, it doesn't matter if you skip Tuesday, you still used the gas and you still need to fill that tank up, whether it be on Monday, Wednesday or Thursday. In other words, you're still consuming the same amount of gas! Maybe people should clue in that this shouldn't be a day where everyone just waits to fill their gas tanks. Instead, maybe the consensus should be that to solve the problem, you simply need to bring the demand for gas down.
Boy, what a concept.
If everyone participated in an event where instead of DRIVING their cars to wherever they needed to go, they found alternate modes of getting to their destinations. For instance, carpooling, public transit, WALKING, Bicycling, or a bunch of other items that cause us to use less fuel. Really, the way to crack down on rising gas prices is to stop using so much of it.
Onto the other popular idea making the rounds. The boycott of Exxon/Mobil (or whatever other gas companies). The problem with this one is the unique industry that is the oil industry. Exxon and Mobil don't buy their gas from one specific place. They will buy it from wherever they need it, and in turn sell it where the demand is. If they aren't selling their gas, and everyone instead hits the Shell station across the street, well, guess what? The demand for gas at Shell will go up, they will run out of gas, and they will turn around and buy it from the Exxon that people are boycotting, which in turn, will raise prices even more. Brilliant strategy.
Furthermore (and correct me if I'm wrong) but most gas stations are franchised out, so when you boycott an Exxon station, you are hurting the family that owns that specific gas station. The head honchos over at corporate might feel a little dent, but hey, they'll turn around and sell their gas wherever they have a buyer. But who will get hurt is the owner of that station, which will lose their revenue.
More information over at Snopes. -
Boycotting Exxon/Mobil
May 15th
I'm doing a persuasive speech on this topic, so I'm doing as much research as I can on it.
There is another email making the rounds stating that if we can boycott the two biggest middle eastern oil suppliers, Exxon and Mobil, they will be forced to lower their gas and everyone else will follow suit.
You know what I plan to do? On May 15th, I'm going to go find an Exxon or Mobil station and get some gas. I bet the lines won't be that bad and it will make for a quick fill up.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm frustrated with the skyrocketing gas prices as much as the next person, and any fiscally minded person oughta be. But there is a better way to try to combat rising gas prices then to skip a day to buy gas or to bypass one specific station completely.
If you continue to do your errands and use your car the same as you always do, it doesn't matter if you skip Tuesday, you still used the gas and you still need to fill that tank up, whether it be on Monday, Wednesday or Thursday. In other words, you're still consuming the same amount of gas! Maybe people should clue in that this shouldn't be a day where everyone just waits to fill their gas tanks. Instead, maybe the consensus should be that to solve the problem, you simply need to bring the demand for gas down.
Boy, what a concept.
If everyone participated in an event where instead of DRIVING their cars to wherever they needed to go, they found alternate modes of getting to their destinations. For instance, carpooling, public transit, WALKING, Bicycling, or a bunch of other items that cause us to use less fuel. Really, the way to crack down on rising gas prices is to stop using so much of it.
Onto the other popular idea making the rounds. The boycott of Exxon/Mobil (or whatever other gas companies). The problem with this one is the unique industry that is the oil industry. Exxon and Mobil don't buy their gas from one specific place. They will buy it from wherever they need it, and in turn sell it where the demand is. If they aren't selling their gas, and everyone instead hits the Shell station across the street, well, guess what? The demand for gas at Shell will go up, they will run out of gas, and they will turn around and buy it from the Exxon that people are boycotting, which in turn, will raise prices even more. Brilliant strategy.
Furthermore (and correct me if I'm wrong) but most gas stations are franchised out, so when you boycott an Exxon station, you are hurting the family that owns that specific gas station. The head honchos over at corporate might feel a little dent, but hey, they'll turn around and sell their gas wherever they have a buyer. But who will get hurt is the owner of that station, which will lose their revenue.
More information over at Snopes. -
Boycotting Exxon/Mobil
May 15th
I'm doing a persuasive speech on this topic, so I'm doing as much research as I can on it.
1.31.2007
Blogging, Myspace and the Military
Oh how nice, I'm glad to see that the entire freakin' hospital in Kosovo was doing this and they were cracking down on me for having a tradtional blog. . .
And for the same reasons too. . .
My idiot NCOIC didn't bother enforcing the blog rule with the other two soldiers in the section, who both had active myspace acccounts. But me, well, because I had a fairly well known blog (not so much now) I was the exception to the rule.
The hypocracy kills me.
I mentioned a long time ago that MySpace fell under the same jurisdiction as blogs, I even mentioned this to several people in the chain because I felt I was being unfairly singled out. Not only that, people were accessing their Myspace accounts all the time and posting pictures on them all the while doing this on government computers.
But no, I was the one singled out.
And people wonder why I came back from my deployment rather sour and grumpy.
Been home for just over a year now and I still look back on lessons learned from that experience.
And for the same reasons too. . .
My idiot NCOIC didn't bother enforcing the blog rule with the other two soldiers in the section, who both had active myspace acccounts. But me, well, because I had a fairly well known blog (not so much now) I was the exception to the rule.
The hypocracy kills me.
I mentioned a long time ago that MySpace fell under the same jurisdiction as blogs, I even mentioned this to several people in the chain because I felt I was being unfairly singled out. Not only that, people were accessing their Myspace accounts all the time and posting pictures on them all the while doing this on government computers.
But no, I was the one singled out.
And people wonder why I came back from my deployment rather sour and grumpy.
Been home for just over a year now and I still look back on lessons learned from that experience.
1.11.2007
iPods are Stupid
Let Me Explain.
I had a ton of songs on an external harddrive that went capoot right about when I got home from Yellowstone. That in itself was infuriating. However, it wasn't a complete and total loss because I had about 20 gigs of songs stored on my iPod.
And there they sat, waiting for me to figure out how to get them off of there and back onto my harddrive. I wasn't sure about how to go about this so I just kept them there.
Well, with nothing really to do, I decided to get my computers all updated and running (including my new and improved Desktop which I only use for school at the moment, and not for surfing the net as that's what my little laptop is for).
My mind went back on my music dilemma, and how I can get those 20 gigs of songs off of the iPod and onto another harddrive. So I just plugged it in to see what would happen and low and behold, iTunes came up, hooked up Fuji the iPod, and the proceeded to DELETE MY ENTIER LIBRARY OFF OF IT! Further more, it stated that my updates were complete, even though there was nothing to update onto it.
???
What is the matter with Apple? I had a couple of songs that will be impossible to replace on that thing that I was grateful I still had, when it turns out that once I plugged my iPod in, I would have lost them anyway. I don't get it? What's the point of the freakin' iPod? Why do people think these things are so awesome? I hate them! They're rediculously Expensive and they Suck! GARRR!!!!!
Well, now I have to find a way to replace my iTunes Library that I lost, and I think the best method to do this is not entirely legal.
MP3s are now officially a pain in the butt.
I had a ton of songs on an external harddrive that went capoot right about when I got home from Yellowstone. That in itself was infuriating. However, it wasn't a complete and total loss because I had about 20 gigs of songs stored on my iPod.
And there they sat, waiting for me to figure out how to get them off of there and back onto my harddrive. I wasn't sure about how to go about this so I just kept them there.
Well, with nothing really to do, I decided to get my computers all updated and running (including my new and improved Desktop which I only use for school at the moment, and not for surfing the net as that's what my little laptop is for).
My mind went back on my music dilemma, and how I can get those 20 gigs of songs off of the iPod and onto another harddrive. So I just plugged it in to see what would happen and low and behold, iTunes came up, hooked up Fuji the iPod, and the proceeded to DELETE MY ENTIER LIBRARY OFF OF IT! Further more, it stated that my updates were complete, even though there was nothing to update onto it.
???
What is the matter with Apple? I had a couple of songs that will be impossible to replace on that thing that I was grateful I still had, when it turns out that once I plugged my iPod in, I would have lost them anyway. I don't get it? What's the point of the freakin' iPod? Why do people think these things are so awesome? I hate them! They're rediculously Expensive and they Suck! GARRR!!!!!
Well, now I have to find a way to replace my iTunes Library that I lost, and I think the best method to do this is not entirely legal.
MP3s are now officially a pain in the butt.
11.24.2006
Spammers
You know what I don't get? Spam.
Why do these automated emails try to sell me crap? How many sales do you suppose a Spam Email can generate? Enough to make them keep doing it I guess, because they KEEP DOING IT. I am guessing that if you could find a way to trace those emails back to the spammer who originates them, that person will find their life expired shortly thereafter.
What I REALLY don't get is the people who date their emails for four years ago so when it arrives in your inbox, all you can see is an unopened email but you don't know where it is and you have to surf through your mountains of emails to find it and delete it (and I have a full inbox that never gets answered or shifted down) *sighs*
What is the point of dating a spam email for 2003 anyway? Isn't the point to trick the person into opening it? Or is there some kind of attachment that tells the person who sent it *yes, this email is still sitting in their inbox, tell all your spambot friends to send MORE emails to them!*
If I seriously discovered that one of my friends were responsible for a spam email, I would disown them from friendship and swear blood vengeance (or at least egg their house) becuase they can only be aligned with the devil if they can stoop so low as the use of mass produced and badly done emails to sell prescription medications and informing me on elongating the penis I don't have.
*Grumbles*
Why do these automated emails try to sell me crap? How many sales do you suppose a Spam Email can generate? Enough to make them keep doing it I guess, because they KEEP DOING IT. I am guessing that if you could find a way to trace those emails back to the spammer who originates them, that person will find their life expired shortly thereafter.
What I REALLY don't get is the people who date their emails for four years ago so when it arrives in your inbox, all you can see is an unopened email but you don't know where it is and you have to surf through your mountains of emails to find it and delete it (and I have a full inbox that never gets answered or shifted down) *sighs*
What is the point of dating a spam email for 2003 anyway? Isn't the point to trick the person into opening it? Or is there some kind of attachment that tells the person who sent it *yes, this email is still sitting in their inbox, tell all your spambot friends to send MORE emails to them!*
If I seriously discovered that one of my friends were responsible for a spam email, I would disown them from friendship and swear blood vengeance (or at least egg their house) becuase they can only be aligned with the devil if they can stoop so low as the use of mass produced and badly done emails to sell prescription medications and informing me on elongating the penis I don't have.
*Grumbles*
11.10.2006
Death to Comcast
I've been getting these phonecalls from an area code i don't recognize, and overall I've been kind of ignoring them because I don't get a message or anything. Well, finally I answered one of these calls and low and behold its Comcast on the other end. The conversation went something like this.
Comcast: Hello, this is Comcast, is Kami there?
Me: Speaking.
Comcast: I would like to talk to you about paying a part of your bill to avoid a disruption in your service.
Me: Excuse me? I have it set up so it takes the bill out of my paycheck automatically!
Comcast: Oh. Well that takes about six to ten weeks to go through.
Me: Why didn't the website say that then?
Comcast: It says that on the following page when you sign up for the recurring service.
Me: *goes to comcast payment site and scrolls through the terms of service which mention nothing about this.* No it doesn't. It just tells me to pick a 'One time Payment' or the 'Recurring payment and forget about it!'
Comcast: Well, did you want to pay that now?
Me: I wanted to pay it last month! I set up this thing to pay my bill automatically as soon as I got my billing statement!
Comcast: So did you want to pay it online or over the phone?
Me: Can you scrub my late fee?
Comcast: We can do that once as a customer courtesy.
Me: Damn right you will. Can you also tell your higher ups that this is bullcrap? When it says Recurring Payment, I expect to be able to sign up and forget about it!
So that was basically the condensed version. Please, tell me, when you see a page that looks like this. . .
. . .that you assume that if you click 'make it a regular thing' that it will automatically take it out of your checking account?
Granted, I should know better about making assumptions, but in this case, I didn't expect to be getting a call about a possibility of disruption of service when I set up my Comcast payment over a month ago!
Yep, that's Comcastic!
What? Me Highstrung? Whatever gave you THAT idea???
Comcast: Hello, this is Comcast, is Kami there?
Me: Speaking.
Comcast: I would like to talk to you about paying a part of your bill to avoid a disruption in your service.
Me: Excuse me? I have it set up so it takes the bill out of my paycheck automatically!
Comcast: Oh. Well that takes about six to ten weeks to go through.
Me: Why didn't the website say that then?
Comcast: It says that on the following page when you sign up for the recurring service.
Me: *goes to comcast payment site and scrolls through the terms of service which mention nothing about this.* No it doesn't. It just tells me to pick a 'One time Payment' or the 'Recurring payment and forget about it!'
Comcast: Well, did you want to pay that now?
Me: I wanted to pay it last month! I set up this thing to pay my bill automatically as soon as I got my billing statement!
Comcast: So did you want to pay it online or over the phone?
Me: Can you scrub my late fee?
Comcast: We can do that once as a customer courtesy.
Me: Damn right you will. Can you also tell your higher ups that this is bullcrap? When it says Recurring Payment, I expect to be able to sign up and forget about it!
So that was basically the condensed version. Please, tell me, when you see a page that looks like this. . .
. . .that you assume that if you click 'make it a regular thing' that it will automatically take it out of your checking account?
Granted, I should know better about making assumptions, but in this case, I didn't expect to be getting a call about a possibility of disruption of service when I set up my Comcast payment over a month ago!
Yep, that's Comcastic!
What? Me Highstrung? Whatever gave you THAT idea???
11.07.2006
Slave No Longer
I have an Announcement to Make.
After a few short weeks of making a confession that I actually shop at Walmart despite my frequent proclamations that they are run by the Devil himself, they have gone back on my Crapper List.
The reason for this is that they have made themselves decidedly inconvenient by selling crap products. Who knew?
Actually, I did know, I just didn't know to what extent.
I got sidetracked from homework quite a bit last week when one day I went shopping at the devil store itself and saw a TV stand that looked perfect for what I needed it for. I recently bought a flat screen LCD TV and I really didn't like the entertainment center it was currently on. This entertainment center looked perfect for what I needed. I literally stood there staring at it for probably fifteen minutes debating in my head whether or not I should get it. After careful consideration, the fact that I own Ferrets made up my mind and I put the thing in my cart and took it to the front.
This specific stand actually looks pretty nice for a Wal Mart Product. It also has a piece where you mount your flat screen from for more space, and right now I needed a little more space.
The screen however, came with no screws to screw the TV into the stand. The instructions insist that these screws come with your TV.
No, the TV instructions insist that these screws are provided by the stand! TVs don't come with a wall mount, the wall mount provides the screws.
So I went to Walmart to figure out if they sold these screws. Procede with the Wild Goose Chase. When I went to the Hardware department, they sent me to the freakin' place that sold me the TV! From there, it was confirmed that the mount provides the screws, so I had to find out what kind of screws these were so I could go to an actual hardware store and get them. But low and behold, the screws don't fit quite as well as they should into the back of the mount, so I had to get a Washer as well.
I spent probably a good five hours putting together a stand and running around town trying to get the parts when I could have been using this valuable time working on homework! And WalMart was completely unhelpful.
Despite the fact that Walmart is about a one minute car drive away, I have decided that I will be a slave to conveniance no longer. If I want something, I'll actually drive five minutes to get it instead.
After a few short weeks of making a confession that I actually shop at Walmart despite my frequent proclamations that they are run by the Devil himself, they have gone back on my Crapper List.
The reason for this is that they have made themselves decidedly inconvenient by selling crap products. Who knew?
Actually, I did know, I just didn't know to what extent.
I got sidetracked from homework quite a bit last week when one day I went shopping at the devil store itself and saw a TV stand that looked perfect for what I needed it for. I recently bought a flat screen LCD TV and I really didn't like the entertainment center it was currently on. This entertainment center looked perfect for what I needed. I literally stood there staring at it for probably fifteen minutes debating in my head whether or not I should get it. After careful consideration, the fact that I own Ferrets made up my mind and I put the thing in my cart and took it to the front.
This specific stand actually looks pretty nice for a Wal Mart Product. It also has a piece where you mount your flat screen from for more space, and right now I needed a little more space.
The screen however, came with no screws to screw the TV into the stand. The instructions insist that these screws come with your TV.
No, the TV instructions insist that these screws are provided by the stand! TVs don't come with a wall mount, the wall mount provides the screws.
So I went to Walmart to figure out if they sold these screws. Procede with the Wild Goose Chase. When I went to the Hardware department, they sent me to the freakin' place that sold me the TV! From there, it was confirmed that the mount provides the screws, so I had to find out what kind of screws these were so I could go to an actual hardware store and get them. But low and behold, the screws don't fit quite as well as they should into the back of the mount, so I had to get a Washer as well.
I spent probably a good five hours putting together a stand and running around town trying to get the parts when I could have been using this valuable time working on homework! And WalMart was completely unhelpful.
Despite the fact that Walmart is about a one minute car drive away, I have decided that I will be a slave to conveniance no longer. If I want something, I'll actually drive five minutes to get it instead.
11.02.2006
Angst From LiveJournal
So I'm a member of this LJ community called FerretAttitude. The moderators asked as a courtesy that people do not edit their posts mostly to help reference later.
So a girl gets on and asks a question about ferret foods and how to prevent her ferret from tipping over the food bowl. And people gave her the answer.
Feeling that she got the answer she needed, she edited her post to say that she had the question answered.
In light of this, the mods asked her politely to not do this in the future, so people can reference the post and know what it said. Maybe three people actually made this suggestion.
And what does she do? She freaks out. She starts cursing everyone in the community and leaves, but not before posting a picture of a fat guy whacking off about thirty times.
The mods were able to delete the post, but the girl obviously has severe social problems. If you have a Live Journal, feel free to flame her until she deletes this post.
So a girl gets on and asks a question about ferret foods and how to prevent her ferret from tipping over the food bowl. And people gave her the answer.
Feeling that she got the answer she needed, she edited her post to say that she had the question answered.
In light of this, the mods asked her politely to not do this in the future, so people can reference the post and know what it said. Maybe three people actually made this suggestion.
And what does she do? She freaks out. She starts cursing everyone in the community and leaves, but not before posting a picture of a fat guy whacking off about thirty times.
The mods were able to delete the post, but the girl obviously has severe social problems. If you have a Live Journal, feel free to flame her until she deletes this post.
10.22.2006
Things That Shouldn't Be Boughten Cheap
I have learned that there are some things you shouldn't be cheap with. Like when buying a digital camera, if you go ahead and spend the few extra bucks (or in this case, the few extra hundred bucks) you'll have a great camera that will take great pictures and last a while. If you skiff on this kind of stuff, you'll get grainy and crappy pictures. you might as well stick with the disposables, they take better pictures then a cheap digital camera does.
There are things that you can save a few bucks on by getting a bargain brand. Clothes come to mind (you usually have more then one outfit anyway), or whatever.
But don't be cheap with your Toaster.
We didn't have a toaster and at the time I didn't feel like spending a lot of money on something I may use once a week if that. So I went to Walmart (yes, I'm still convinced they are evil, but conveniant, see earlier post) and got a deal on a Toaster for like $6 bucks!
The thing is, everything that I toast tastes like diesel fuel. I was hoping it would go away after multiple uses, but you have to toast something three or four times to get a charbroiled crisp (because if you toast it once or twice it will come out slightly warm) and by then the smell is saturated.
I guess for now, it will sit on the counter and I will eat gasoline flavored toasted sandwiches if I feel the need until I buck up and buy a better toaster. And then it can go into the Garage Sale Fodder for next Spring.
There are things that you can save a few bucks on by getting a bargain brand. Clothes come to mind (you usually have more then one outfit anyway), or whatever.
But don't be cheap with your Toaster.
We didn't have a toaster and at the time I didn't feel like spending a lot of money on something I may use once a week if that. So I went to Walmart (yes, I'm still convinced they are evil, but conveniant, see earlier post) and got a deal on a Toaster for like $6 bucks!
The thing is, everything that I toast tastes like diesel fuel. I was hoping it would go away after multiple uses, but you have to toast something three or four times to get a charbroiled crisp (because if you toast it once or twice it will come out slightly warm) and by then the smell is saturated.
I guess for now, it will sit on the counter and I will eat gasoline flavored toasted sandwiches if I feel the need until I buck up and buy a better toaster. And then it can go into the Garage Sale Fodder for next Spring.
10.03.2006
Slave to Conveniance
I admit, I must make a confession. It pains me to say this, as I have sworn a blood oath to defy this in all ways I can muster. But I gave in and must admit to being a slave to my own petty needs.
I shop at Walmart.
Its not that I actually go out of my way to shop at Walmart either, its just that, well, its so freakin' conveniant! Walmart is about a half mile from my house so if I need something and I need it now, its easier for me to hop in my car and drive to Walmart to get whatever as opposed to driving three times the distance to get to, say, Fred Meyer.
There are some things that if its specific, I'll shop at another location. Like, say, Food items, I tend to go to Safeway or Rosaurs, and anything for the Ferrets usually brings me to Petco. Computers, TV, any kind of electronics brings me to Best Buy and if I want movies I tend to go to Hastings. But if I have a hoj-poj of items that I need and I don't want to be driving all over town (last I checked, Gas was still expensive) I tend to go to Walmart, and sometimes I pick up a few things there I would usually buy elsewhere.
I guess I will still say that Walmart is in its own way evil, and if I can resist the urge I will try not to shop there, but lets face it. Sometimes you are a slave to your own conveniances and I don't think I will completely write off any store as a shopping experience.
I mean, I did go back and get a cell through T-Mobile after swearing blood vengeance, didn't I? And I still use Microsoft products despite cursing the company to have the fleas of a thousand camels rest in their armpits.
I'm a slave to conveniance. Like any other red blooded american. I need it, and I want it now.
I wonder if Walmart has it?
I shop at Walmart.
Its not that I actually go out of my way to shop at Walmart either, its just that, well, its so freakin' conveniant! Walmart is about a half mile from my house so if I need something and I need it now, its easier for me to hop in my car and drive to Walmart to get whatever as opposed to driving three times the distance to get to, say, Fred Meyer.
There are some things that if its specific, I'll shop at another location. Like, say, Food items, I tend to go to Safeway or Rosaurs, and anything for the Ferrets usually brings me to Petco. Computers, TV, any kind of electronics brings me to Best Buy and if I want movies I tend to go to Hastings. But if I have a hoj-poj of items that I need and I don't want to be driving all over town (last I checked, Gas was still expensive) I tend to go to Walmart, and sometimes I pick up a few things there I would usually buy elsewhere.
I guess I will still say that Walmart is in its own way evil, and if I can resist the urge I will try not to shop there, but lets face it. Sometimes you are a slave to your own conveniances and I don't think I will completely write off any store as a shopping experience.
I mean, I did go back and get a cell through T-Mobile after swearing blood vengeance, didn't I? And I still use Microsoft products despite cursing the company to have the fleas of a thousand camels rest in their armpits.
I'm a slave to conveniance. Like any other red blooded american. I need it, and I want it now.
I wonder if Walmart has it?
8.31.2006
Hypocrits Among Us
You know, say what you want about the war in Iraq and this presidential administration or whatever your views may be and I'll respect them, even if they're different from mine.
But come on people, you do realize that when you put a 'oil bad' sticker on an SUV, you look like a flippen retard, right?
I shot this at a stoplight as I was following behind this guy and went 'huh?' I had my camera ready and tried to snap the picture, but it still blurred a bit. If you can't tell what it says, it says "Grand Oil Party" with the republican elephant logo looking a bit like a gas pump.
Come on, if you're going to put a sticker on your car that says something like that, make it a fuel efficient vehicle and not a gas guzzler. Gees.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)