Sunday, April 29, 2012
This whole satire is about the fact that employers are now demanding to see they're employees. Facebook Passwords, to see what they are up to on Facebook. And perhaps what they are up to online as a whole. What videos they post of themselves, as well as other videos, what they are doing while they are not at work. To me this is a invasion of privacy, which is currently legal but I believe it should be illegal. Employers will argue that they need to know this info, to be able to judge they're employees. To get a better idea of they're character and how they conduct themselves in they're free time. And that they represent the company and organization, even when they are not at work. But unless your a Public Official, Law Enforcement officer, a doctor. Something like that, your not always on call, you have your work time and your free time. You have certain control over your schedule and your time. And what you do on your time, is your business, what you do on your employers time. Is also your time but your work time is also your employers time. And that they can and should be able to use to judge you as an employee.
With the current system as it, everyone out there who Social Networks, be careful what you post. And how you carry yourself in public, because now unless this is changed. Could be used to hold against you, now and into the future. Its not longer Uncle Sam and Aunt Jane as I would call her but Big Daddy and Big Momma, the people you work for. That have they're eyes on what you do in your own time. Perhaps having spies out there patrolling they're employees. That they feel may be suspicious of what Rick Santorum would call, Immoral Behavior. And a threat to our National Morality, another words having a good time. Getting drunk, going to wild party's, having your photo taken of you as your doing these things. So the next time your at a party like this and you see someone with an Iphone. Taking a picture of someone at the party, keep in mind, this person my be a Corporate Spy and you should be on your best behavior.
Unless your a Republican and your thinking about running for office in the future. And you may need Religious and Neoconservatives to vote for you. The Republican Cult as I call them, who by the time your looking at Public Office. Would've by then had hopefully of died off. I wouldn't worry about what you do now, as long as you stay out of trouble. And don't hurt anyone, as far as it hurting a future career in Public Service. But if your not looking at Public Office and work in the Private Sector. Think twice about being drunk in public and what you say online. It could come back to bite you in the ass. A Big bite from Big Daddy and Big Momma, the people you work for.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
I don't have a lot of experience on writing Political Satire or any form of Satire. I've only written Political Satire on my blogs but the purpose of Political Satire to me. Is to critique something or someone or people but in a humorous and constructive way. To me Political Satire is a humorous form of Constructive Criticism. I don't just write Satire about someone or something or people, just to put them down. Because that would just make me a jerk to put it mildly but I do it in a way. That yes lays out in a factual way and I try to stay as close to the facts as I possibly can. The flaws in whatever or whoever I'm critiquing about but do it in a way. That people will yes find funny, even the subject of my critique will find funny. And perhaps even throw it back at me, I believe people with glass chins, shouldn't be throwing punches. To use a boxing analogy but my whole point is to do it yes to be funny. But also to get the subject to change they're behavior, I do it in a way to help them improve themselves.
I'll give you an example, I've been critiquing Mitt Romney a lot in this Presidential Election. Nicknaming him Flip Flopper and saying things his positions change as often as the Washington weather. You might need to be a Washingtonian or at least familiar with the area to get that. But I do it in a way to say yes, Mitt is Flip Flopper but I know enough about him. To know where he basically is on the Political Spectrum. Which is a Northeastern Republican, a Reagan Conservative. Which ironically is why the Republican Party isn't in love with Mitt. Because its become a Religious and Neoconservative Big Government party. And my whole point about Mitt is, that when he takes some of these positions to appeal to the Far Right. Even though thats not where he is on the Political Spectrum. Otherwise the Republican Leadership would've never backed him. He's being something other then he is and where he's been in the past.
My whole point about Mitt Romney is that he should be himself, screw off the Far Right. Target Conservatives, Independents and Libertarians. And he would be a much harder Presidential Nominee for Democrats to beat, which I expect we will anyway. My Flip Flopper jokes about Mitt, have to do with his weakness's as a Presidential Candidates. I critique them in a satirist way but then I lay out what he should do instead. To me thats what Political Satire should be about. Not to destroy someone or something but to lay out the flaws in a factual way. And what they should do instead.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
"Democrats: Obama Has Dicked Us Around For Four Years, Now It's Our Turn": Why Progressive Democrats are Disappointed with President Obama
Progressives are stereotyped as intelligent, well educated, open minded, reformers and willing to look and try new things. As well as living in either a big Northeastern City, like Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York, Boston. Or living in Chicago or San Francisco or Los Angeles and look down at people who don't. I'll grant where Progressives tend to live. Which is why their Political Candidates don't tend to do very well outside of these areas. But the way they treated President George W. Bush, someone I voted against twice. And consider him to be the worst President, at least in my lifetime. Its hard to label Progressives as a group, open minded, as well as things like on Education Reform and other issues. Where they tend to be for the Status Quo. As open and reform minded, as well as supporting someone like Barack Obama as strong as they did. In 2008, because they saw him as a Progressive Democrat, thats common in Europe. Someone who would try to make America like Europe, which is what Progressives have been trying to accomplish since the 1930s at least. They saw Candidate Obama as the new George McGovern or Dennis Kucinich. But someone who could get elected.
If Progressives are so intelligent and open minded as a group and I'll admit they have their share. Of intelligent people, as well as ignorant people who say the wildest things. And have their own Conspiracy Theories, they would've done their research on Barack Obama. And instead of finding the next George McGovern, would've saw Bill Clinton or Jack Kennedy. Someone who doesn't believe the Federal Government has all the answers. And that we have to be creative and intelligent and how we deal with these issues. And that raising taxes or creating a new Federal Program or spending more money on a current Federal Program. Isn't always the best way to solve these problems. You would think with all the Progressives that go to Ivy League schools. They would've bothered to of do their research on then Sen. Barack Obama. And wouldn't now be so disappointed with him today.
I have my own issues with Barack Obama, he's not Liberal enough for me on Social Issues. And doesn't have enough respect for Civil Liberties on National Security. On things like the Patriot Act and Indefinite Detention and the War on Drugs. But I didn't vote for him in the Democratic Primary in 2008. And had a pretty good idea what we were getting from him as President. I've never seen him as a Saint or a God or voted for him because he's cool. Which is the main reason why a lot of young people voted for Sen. Obama for President. I feel no remorse for Progressives that worked as hard as they did and voted for him as President. And are now disappointed in him now.
Saturday, April 14, 2012
Charles Manson has been in prison for his current sentence of forty-two years. After being convicted for his part in the Manson Family murders of the late 1960s. He is now 77 years old, so just for is current prison sentence alone, he’s been in prison for more than half of his life. And the last time he was a free man from the mid 1960s, after being paroled from prison in Washington State, to the time he was arrested in 1969, for his role in the Manson Family murders, that’s really the longest stretch he’s ever been free at any point of his life.
It’s not just that Charlie Manson has spent most of his adult life in prison he’s spent most of his life period in prison. He’s exactly where he belongs, he’s never shown the ability to be productive on the outside, without hurting innocent people, or having them killed. Charlie Manson is not in Prison for actually physically committing the murders. He’s in Prison for conspiring the murders, for inspiring others to do his evil work.
Charlie Manson was originally sentenced to death for the role in the Manson Family murders from 1969. So were his co-defendants Leslie Van Houten, Patricia Krenwinkel, Charles Watson and others. But then California outlawed the death penalty shortly after their sentences. So their sentences were changed to life in prison with the possibility of parole. none of the convicted murderers have been paroled and they will never be.
But imagine that, you’re responsible for intentionally killing not just one innocent person, but innocent people and not only is your life spared, but you actually have a shot as small as it is, of one day being free. Even though your victims will never be free from the crimes you committed against them.
The Manson Family is lucky to even be alive right now and that’s the best they’ll ever do. You can make a good case that sparing the lives of Leslie Van Houten and Pat Krenwinkell, was a a good move. Both have made productive use of their prison sentences. Both completed college in prison, both hold good prison jobs. Both have shown they are now rehabilitated and probably no longer represents a threat to society. And both have shown remorse for their crimes. But Charlie Manon is exactly where he belongs and is lucky to have whatever time he has left to be alive in Prison. He’s shown no remorse or admitted any responsibility for his crimes.