Adam is known for his weekly list of links and instagram chicks. But this week he apologised that he had not the energy to find such a beauty or two. He'd been hammered at work. What it shows is that when life is hard it gets pared down to essentials, and a fair amount of our entertainment and distractions get cast aside.
You do not dream of the current star or starlet of the day when you are hanging onto the mast during a storm. All your effort goes into remaining in the ship: I know people who have lived through this, but most of us now have this understanding. At present, you do your job with all your energy, and praise God for every pay check.
Because our leaders are being tested, and found wanting.
Dr Young has her position not because she is the best man for the job, but because she is not a man at all. Her lack of qualifications combined with the fact that she is a woman means that when faced with a genuine need for her to perform her role with competence she instead reverts to a form of schoolyard female warden whose only weapon at her disposal is to place children in the time out naughty corner if she perceives for even a moment that there is any inherent risk in their play.
She is but a single example of hundreds of thousands of these hopeless women, deluded as to their abilities and forthright in their conviction that the general population must be taught a lesson for their own good. Male colleagues and contemporaries go along with the charade because that is what they have done for their entire careers in order to fight and claw for their own positions. With the eyes of the world on them at this moment there is no way on God’s earth that they are going to deviate from the program.
We have lived with this reality for decades. Our societies are smothered in a bewildering array of rules and regulations designed entirely under the constant matriarchal concern that people may die. We are the frog in the pot that has finally woken up to the fact that the water is very warm indeed. The hostility towards Trump is entirely based upon the fact that he is patriarchal. The embittered women and neutered males that have run our nations hate him with a passion because he is the kid in the playground that won’t follow the rules and that matron can’t control.
It’s past time for some of the other kids to not follow the rules either, and to get rid of those little boys who collaborated with teacher.
Thinking about this, intersectionality, diversity, and that entire progressive programme have now been obsolete since about half way through lockdown, which my my accounting is four weeks ago. They do not add a single thing to the net wealth or happiness of the people, instead they make us miserable and less able to earn our crust in what is going to be a very hard six months or so.
We won't be looking at movies. We will be clawing to earn, and Adam knows this.
My IQ is 140 and I took a year of econ in college but macro never made sense. I have something bordering on a learning disability in understanding this stuff. Maybe it is because I am a bottom up thinker, needing to anchor to reality then build on that. I do not understand debt deflation or even money for that matter. Is there any help for me? To a person on the ground in the US what does debt deflation mean incrementally? How about long term?
"Speak as you might to a young child, or a Golden Retriever." - Jeremy Irons in Margin Call
If we are struggling to earn, we do not care about feelings. We would prefer to be with our beloved. We do not want to be where it is dark, risky, filthy, and do a job where we our bones ache (Yes, I've done such, and wised up. I studied hard and got into a profession). We don't want to put ourselves on the line to protect others. But we do, for the money, because of our duty. And when people protest that their feelings were hurt there will be no one left to listen.
Which is why I have more time for Brian Tamaki than I do for half of the Catholic Heirarchy (the Anglicans are now better, because that generation have retired).
Stop for a moment and reflect on what must happen in the mind of a Bishop who goes above and beyond the already cowardly attitude of his Bishops’ conference and gives a public order to deny communion on the tongue. Really, we are talking here of stuff who would not have been believed, would have been considered an absurd, and not even funny, joke only two generations ago.
What we have here is a Bishop who self-appoints himself as the ultimate health expert and pretends to “protect” his flock from this most dangerous practice, the reception of Our Lord as this has always been practiced in the history of the Church before the Age Of Effeminacy. It really is beyond stupid, it goes into the realm of outright insult to the Sacrament. The fact that the Bishop pretends not to see it (I think he does it very well) goes to show what an irrelevance Christ has become in his eyes, and how great is his need to signal virtue and to show how very aligned he is with the current madness. What do I say, aligned? He wants to show that he is better than everybody else!
Truly, this is of Satan, and no discussion allowed.
Still, what I want to discuss today is a trick used by liberals, women, and more or less gay bishops all over the world: the deflection. The Bishop complains that the angry trads have insulted his own telephone operator, who is so saintly and has just lost her husband! What cruel Nazis these trads are!
Give me a break.
Firstly, the saintliness of the operator is nothing to do with the facts at hand, and is merely an emotional handle to make people look bad, or worse than bad. It is certainly wrong to abuse anybody on the phone who is innocent of denying communion on the tongue to faithful Catholics who actually care for Christ and the Sacraments. But this is wrong irrespective of the saintliness of the person abused. This is a deflection.
Secondly, I very much doubt that said, saintly switchboard operator said to the person or persons on the phone, “my dear Sir, can you please kindly consider that I am not only a saintly person, but have recently lost my husband?” Consequently, the sad bereavement of the saintly operator should really not be part of the conversation. This is, also, a deflection.
But the third, and most important, deflection is this: the Bishop should have addressed the matter at hand, instead of throwing mud on his critics by lamenting an episode totally unrelated to it. We all know there will always be the occasional intemperate person, and we all know this controversy is not about that.
This deflection and accusation of rudeness is, by the way, the passive aggressive stuff often seen in women: “blablablabla HE WAS RUDE!!! blablablabla”. The issue at hand is not addressed; but hey, you are supposed to lose, because you hurt her feelings.
Some weeks it is going to be brutal. Some times we will not have the energy to to anything but to sit in the pew, and pray for mercy, for we know we are sinners.
And those who do not see this, forget that being offended, like intersectionality, is a luxury good. It is offensive to the poor and starving to flaunt it.