Fall Of The West Reason #49596677: A Dark Age Is Upon Us

Superstition has never fully disappeared. It persists right to our day.

We are, in fact, witnesses to a modern form of superstition. One that wraps itself in science and scientific language decorated with experts (sometimes not even of the field). A pop culture superstition if you will.

I sometimes wonder if hyper-partisanship is a form of superstition. It's often said both the right and left engage in partisanship - which is true. However, I've freely taken the plunge into arguing what we call the 'right' are pikers to what we see from the progressive left.

Here's an example:

"Everyone is missing what is happening here.
Trump's Muslim ban getting slapped down by courts, the media condemning it, protesters coming out, politicians from both parties finally starting to speak up about it, all tee up something. 
Now, with Steve Bannon on the NSC, and the DNI and Chair of the Joint Chiefs sidelined, the ONLY thing that needs to happen is for a big terrorist attack by a Muslim refugee, especially a green card holder. No previous president would ever have done this, but we've gone through the looking glass. That attack would give Trump and Bannon rhetorical space to say that not only are Muslims the problem, but also, politicians from both parties are a problem, the media is a problem, protesters are a problem, and the courts and judges are a problem. They've already prepared all of this. Kellyanne Conway was on TV this morning saying that the ruling of the "Obama appointee judge" doesn't affect the executive order, because the order is "preventing not detaining" and it's only a small percentage of people affected. They're TRYING to cause a Constitutional crisis and tee up the idea that national security, and executive law enforcement, trumps EVERY other consideration. Almost every Latin American country that copied our constitution fell to dictatorship because of that argument that national security trumps court rulings at some point in the last hundred years. 
And since Trump's national security establishment has been hollowed out by purges and hiring freezes, and since the Constitution forbids military deployment within the US, Trump can say that government law enforcement isn't working, we need to contract out to private law enforcement. 
Erik Prince, the former CEO of Blackwater, the private army that occupied Iraq, is reportedly "advising Trump from the shadows." His sister is Betsy DeVos, one of Trump's biggest donors. There is already a mercenary army waiting in the wings. 
Russia won this election for Trump for a reason, and we are failing to appreciate the gravity of it. We are so much closer to zero hour than anyone in Washington seems to realize. Trump is already in violation of the emoluments clause. He MUST be impeached before it's too late."

Before I move on. Here's some background on the so-called 'Muslim Ban' at Legal Insurrection.

And a bonus from Bill Clinton on illegal immigration:

It doesn't excuse anything but this is how politics works - as a continuum. The countries chosen didn't come out of a vacuum and actually came from Obama (to which it was met with complete silence from the left) who (along with Hillary) had a role to play - a big role actually - in destabilizing the region that gave rise to the refugee crisis. Know what else? Trump is giving priority to Christians who are heavily persecuted in Muslim countries.

Never mind ISIS has made it clear they want to use the refugee crisis to infiltrate 'infidel' countries to attack them from within. Just like there wasn't anything mysterious about Hitler's plans (he had written about it), we kinda know what ISIS is up to. So it's not irrational to take a deep breath and slow down where immigration is concerned from Muslim countries. It's a tough bind because the West does want to help legitimate refugees but it's important to ensure national security is paramount.

Okay. About the Facebook post. Never mind it's not a 'Muslim ban'. What's important is to to throw as much mud at the wall as you can in effort to, well, I'm not sure what they want. It's not like they've articulated much.This is what it's come to. You know you're on the right side of things when celebrities back you up.

It's quite enjoyable watching progressivism implode. Their behaviour is patriotic nor is it rooted in any sense of logic or even morality. It's just reactionary blind partisanship devoid of any reason.

Facebook is apparently dealing with, get this, MediaMatters on how to deal with 'fake news' - You know, the one that gets spread around by CNN and The New York Times (where narratives come first).

I can but think of Karl Klaus's 'To know nothing and be able to express it! (Or more to the point: The making of a journalist: no ideas and the ability to express them.)

Of course the media is going to concoct some bull shit about 'fake news'. They ARE its purveyors. Journalists are not the freethinking independent minded objective word wizards who search for he truth on our behalf.

Sure, there are some but they fly outside of the mainstream media hell. All what you see on the networks and in the papers is BULL FUCKING SHIT.

So whenever I see posts like the one above, I just see another useful idiot incapable of keeping their partisan emotions in check.

They're no ally of reason; they betray it. 

I can but impart my views and call out what I perceive to be madness. This blog just its voice in helping to fight this virus.


Speaking of madness, did you see the NHL's Top 100 List?

The Blue Ribbon committee really left objectiveness on the shelf.

How a list can exclude Chicago Blackhawks defensemen (a three time Norris winner) Pierre Pilote off it is beyond me - and inexcusable. Ditto Zdeno Chara. Especially considering they ridiculously added Tim Horton to the list  with this gem of a babbling blurb: Anchored Maple Leafs defense, was 'strongest player in hockey'. Did he bend goal posts too?

Tim Horton?!

But for some strange inexplicable reason the love fest for Joe Nieuwendyk and Brendan Shanahan continues. Other dubious inclusions are Mike Modano, Patrik Kane, Dave Keon, Pat LaFontaine, Mike Gartner and a couple of others.

I really don't care Lafontaine was a 'classy player'. That's irrelevant.

One of my favorite all-time soccer players was Giuseppe Giannini. Il Principe was a silky smooth and classy midfielder who could thread a pass as good as any principally for Roma and the Azzurri but I recognize that naming him among the greatest of Italian or world midfielders is a bit of a stretch.


Peak and career dominance as Bill James taught us.

If you're not dominant in at least or both of these criteria, you're just a very good player.

Nothing against these players. They were all great in their own right but none fit my conception of what constitutes greatness. Besides, you just leave yourself open to a debate about including other near-immortals like Cam Neely, Jerome Iginla or Dino Ciccarelli. If Kane why not Malkin? It makes no sense to pick one over the other. Why Adam Oaters and not Joe Thornton? Again, is there something I missed where Oates dominated more than Thornton since they were similar players? Corey Perry? Ryan Getzlaf? Geez, Dale Hawerchuk too!

But the Pierre Pilote one is the one that sticks out of my mind.


And why set arbitrary limits? Why stop at 100? If you find 102 players that fit the criteria it's only fair and logical to include them or else you find yourself cutting off players.

An incomplete and poorly constructed list as any I've seen from any sport.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.