People Are Stupid

So, this happened on Facebook and is living proof on why I don't spend a lot of time over there. Granted, I see Tea Party racists on Google+ and all over the internet, for that matter, all the time, but the level of idiocracy is overwhelming on Facebook, especially from people in Florida. Sure my answers are short and sweet until the end and that is due to replying from mobile (I rarely get on FB via desktop anymore). Please note: I went to high school with Nadine and Brian. I remember nothing from high school about Nadine except she was (and apparently still is) a bitch. I nearly didn't Friend her on FB except my policy was to befriend everyone from high school: we all change, right? At least we all should have changed by now. Brian I remember as being a class clown -- a goofy kid who didn't take anything too seriously. I don't know any reason for him to refer to President Obama as " a bastard from an whore mother" other than him being some sort of racist (which while his statement isn't inherently racist, I can think of no other reason for his hatred of the president.) Anywho, the whole scenario annoyed me and I thought I'd share.

[also, sorry for the formatting, but I copied/pasted into blogger and everytime I hit it makes one of those lines like the one above and below this sentence.]

Nadine Stewart shared Michael Savage's photo.

November 23 at 9:38am via mobile · 

• 

  ‎

  • 

    Jason O N Well that's one of the stupidest things I've seen all day. All those 'millionaires' create jobs, except for Obama who is a politician and aside from personal staff politicians don't create jobs. Or, are you insinuating that politicians should create jo...See More

    November 23 at 12:34pm via mobile · Like
  • 

    Brian Gibson Jason have you ever read about Obama? I don't consider him to be "self made"

    November 24 at 3:17am · Like
  • 

    Jason O N Well, let's see: born to a single unwed mother, raised in a less than middle income familyand he achieved what he achieved in life without money or opportunity provided by other's achievements. That is to say, he wasn't born with a silver spoon or connections from his family.

    Monday at 5:49pm via mobile · Like
  • 

    Brian Gibson Thank you for answering my question: no you have never read about Obama (except maybe in Entertainment Weekly or Rolling Stone)

    Monday at 7:47pm · Like · 1
  • 

    Nadine Stewart Jason did watch the movie 2016? And then explain to me how he went to Harvard law school without having connections or on a middle class income. Jason , only company that are already in trouble can and do get bought out by other companies. There is no...See More

    Monday at 8:21pm via mobile · Like · 1
  • 

    Jason O N Nadine, you work at a airplane company. That's not politics.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#Early_life_and_career Looks like he was legacy and that's how he got in to Harvard.

    

    Early life and career - Barack Obama - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    en.wikipedia.org

    Obama was born on August 4, 1961, at Kapiʻolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospit...See More

    Monday at 9:02pm · Like · Remove Preview
  • 

    Stephen Reiss Jason... Of course the Wikipedia article you reference is correct and true... It's on the Internet, therefor it must be true... Seriously Dude?!? Wikipedia is editable by anybody, anytime... It is up to individual "authors" to tell the "truth". that is why NO COLLEGE IN THE COUNTRY will allow Wikipedia to be cited as a legitimate information source.

    Monday at 11:47pm · Like
  • 

    Stephen Reiss Jason... didn't I ask you a couple months back, on another post from Nadine, if you had ever read "Dreams from My Father" by Obama??

    Monday at 11:50pm · Like
  • 

    Nadine Stewart Jason, I have worked for the Brevard election board since I was 20 yrs old , along with working at Rockwell Collins.

    Tuesday at 3:16am via mobile · Like
  • 

    Brian Gibson It is testimony to the dumbing down of America that it raises one's perceived fitness for high office to be a bastard from an whore mother. True that Barack's childhood has more parallels to that of Hitler or Stalin than of George Washington (upbringin...See More

    Tuesday at 4:39am · Edited · Like
  • 

    Jason O N Brian you sound like a lunatic. 
    Steven Reiss, I don't know. What I do know is this: while anyone can edit Wikepedia they instituted a bibliography feature a few years ago and editors must prove their source. Colleges and universities take internet references all the time and there is even a proper way to cite an internet source. Would you rather take as a credible source brarackobama.com? 
    And Obama is self made. I proved my point, prove he's not.

    Tuesday at 3:29pm via mobile · Like
  • 

    Stephen Reiss Jason... You proved nothing. You argue on the premise that "I don't have to prove anything to you... What I say is right until you prove to me that I'm wrong." The fact that colleges take Internet Sources means NOTHING to the fact that they WON'T TAKE WIKIPEDIA AS A SOURCE! And regardless of their "bibliography feature" there are still many "biography pages" that have wrong or missing sources. Next, Brian doesn't sound like a lunatic, he has stated facts and what little conjecture he has added is only because Obama has hidden his college records and lied about his past and then lied about the lies. Obama IS NOT self made. he is the product of Socialist mentors, Radical Leftist terrorists and Racist Social and Religious leaders that have carefully crafted his public persona ever since they realized they had found a charismatic "Great Black Hope" when they plucked him up off of the Harvard Commons... Wake up and put down the Kool-Aide there, my friend. You've only proved that you are regurgitating the Socialist Party line that has been spoon fed to you my The Mainstream Media in their attempt to Deify Obama... There, I Proved MY Point... Now, Prove Me Wrong!

    Tuesday at 4:05pm · Like
  • 

    Jason O N Now you sound like a lunatic, Stephen. I rebutted Nadine's simplistic and naive post about hating rich people. Brian said he does not consider Obama to be self made. Obama was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth and he worked for everything he achieved in life. He's self made. Actually, everyone in the above graphic is self made except Romney.
    
    That all being said, I linked to a Wikipedia article outlining Obama's youth and the way he grew up. Instead of refuting the facts I provided by linking to the article you decided to counter with a logical fallacy, otherwise known as an ad hominem attack -- you attacked the source instead of the material. 
    
    And feel free to provide proof of your claim that " The fact that colleges take Internet Sources means NOTHING to the fact that they WON'T TAKE WIKIPEDIA AS A SOURCE!" Show proof that colleges, not one, not two, but enough colleges won't accept Wikipedia as a source for it to be considered a standard. Who's throwing around unfounded claims here?

    4 minutes ago · Like
  • 

    Jason ON Also, you said: "I don't have to prove anything to you... What I say is right until you prove to me that I'm wrong." I made a claim and I backed it up with a link to a non-biased source. You refute the source but you do not refute the argument. Neither you nor Brian do. You're the ones who are claiming you're right until I prove you wrong. And I can also see you're an idiot. You use false logic and simplistic argument styles to make your point. Nadine think's she's an expert by association and Brian is just an idiot. 
    
    I will give you this, though, you didn't feel the need to attack a dead woman's reputation like Brian did (which did nothing more than prove he's an asshat), you attacked me which proves you're brave on the other side of a computer screen and nothing more.

    a few seconds ago · Like

    
    

Read More

The Denver Library

I had to make  library run today to return a few items and pick up a few that were being held "On Hold" for me. I currently had 11 items out: 10 DVDs (or the maximum allowed out at once) and one music CD I mistakenly ordered On Hold. Unfortunately, over the week I barely had time to watch all the DVDs and took most of them back unwatched, intending to re-check the ones I didn't get a chance to see. 

When I arrived I placed the returning items in the RETURNS drop box and went to the HOLDs shelf to get the new items waiting for me. I then took the remaining un-returned items and new hold shelf items to the checkout stand and explained I'd like to re-check batch one and check out for the first time, this other batch. For the most part it was fairly straight forward.

Until ... The lady behind the counter told me I had a $5 fine. 

Um, what? What was so late that I incurred a fine much less a $5 one?

She then goes on to explain how, sometime a few months ago, I returned an item without the RFID tracking chip. I asked her what it was and she told me Denver Library doesn't keep records of checkouts. She then said "Woodsbury."

What the F was "Woodsbury?" But she went on to explain that an RFID was a microchip, something I already knew. She then demonstrated by choosing at random one of the DVDs I had on the counter, pulled the see-through plastic cover back and inside the marketing sleeve was a sticker: the RFID tag.

"So, what you're saying is I'm being fine $5 because you're sticker fell off? A sticker I can't even see unless I'm looking for it? Can you tell me if it was a DVD or a book or something?"

She couldn't.

And then I remembered a weird incident, possibly a year old, or more. A book I had checked from the library had a sticker resembling a RFID tag in the middle of the book, but it wasn't stuck to the book, it was in the pages of the book like a bookmark. I figured it was from the publisher for tracking shipments or pallets or something and by random chance ended up in the book I checked from the library.

"So, you're telling me I'm being fined because a sticker you put on whatever item fell off?"

She backpedaled then and told me she didn't put the stickers there and I had to explain the difference between 'you' and the plural 'you' to denote the Denver Library system and not her specifically.

She waved the fine for me since I'm such a good library customer (I always pay any fines  accrue) and sent me on my way.

But now I was annoyed: not only do I as the patron have to check the media before checking out to make sure the discs are there (since the library's policy isn't to check discs being returned or put on the shelves) but now I have to worry about a sticker not being attached? A sticker I can't even see in most situations?

(Oh yeah, the Denver Library forbade their employees from checking CD and DVD cases for discs. Apparently it was hurting their hands and the employees fought not to have to repeatedly open and close cases. However, if I don't visually inspect the disc before checking out, I'm responsible for the replacement cost, even if I haven't left the building yet.)

Read More

Blocked By a Guy Named Lenny

So, Lenny shared a post yesterday or the day before to a limited Circle view. He's since blocked me so I can't take a screenshot or anything but it went a little something like this (I still have it up on mobile so I can transcribe it here, punctuation and spelling as it appears in the G+ post):

Lenny:"Puerto Rico becming the next state? should consider addding three states. Since 53 is a prime number we would be "one nation, indivisible."
Me:"51 is a prime number as well."
Lenny:"yes I know but the joke was 53"
Me:"But Puerto Rico would be the *51st* state, not the 53rd and 51 is a prime number."
Lenny:"read the joke and stop being an ass"
Me: "I'm not being an ass. You're joke doesn't make sense. Puerto Rico would be the 51st state and '51' is a prime number. There is no reason for '53' to be in your joke at all, therefore your joke not only doesn't add up, but it's also stupid."

And then I saw a G+ notification with a small bit of his next post saying something along the lines of he's tired of me something or another and he blocked me. I love being blocked after the other person gets the last word in, it makes them seem so mature.

I will admit, my calling his joke stupid was a direct response to him calling me as ass, but it doesn't matter now since he got the last word in and prevented me from having a say. He's a stand up guy.

I nearly unfollowed him a number of times for being a Tea Party/Libertarian type who posts a number of items throughout the day that have no factual basis, but I didn't. I think everyone should be entitled to their opinions, even when I disagree with them. Besides, if we only surround ourselves with like-minded people our breadth of knowledge and understanding would never increase.

I'm noticing a lot of this on Google+ lately: people not wanting to have a discussion, they want to say their piece and then have validation of their opinion/story/photo/etc. I've been blocked by a few girls for nothing more than disagreeing with them, I even had their "white knights" jumping all over me because I wouldn't sympathize or empathize without more facts. And I'll gladly admit, I'm not a sympathizer or empathizer, I am an understander. Give me something to understand and we'll be on the same page, but if you make some blanket statement and expect people to fawn over you without allowing them to disagree or ask for clarification then you really shouldn't be on social media, especially not Google+. You should be on Facebook with your friends or on your blog with your followers.

Why post to an open social network when you have no intention of having a discussion of the topic and yes, sometimes discussions mean other people aren't going to agree with you? It just doesn't make sense.


EDIT: Apparently 51 isn't a prime number and I was wrong in that regard. However, Lenny didn't argue 51 wasn't a prime number, he argued his joke was funny and that I was trolling him.

Read More

Romney's Credit Card Scandal

The plus has been abuzz today over the "Romney Credit Card Scandal." Everyone seems to be on the Romney-bashing bandwagon.

But while everyone is running around talking about how big of a jerk Romney is being because some staffers had to pay their own cab fair, people clearly aren't looking at this though objective eyes.

One, this is a very small sampling of credit/debit card holders in the campaign.

Two, it is very reasonably to assume that the staff credit cards were applied for with a termination date and it's perfectly reasonable to conclude that date to be election day, Nov. 6 this year. This means, after the Romney concession speech on Nov. 7. (in the wee hours, for sure) those cards would be automatically turned off. 

Three, Romney himself probably didn't micro-manage campaign finances. That's why campaigns hire CFOs and campaign managers. These decisions aren't made from the prop-head, they're made by staff and managers. Does the candidate take a beating in the press when these scandalous leaks happen? Absolutely, but we have to remember, people are candidates, campaigns are people. A campaign, like any organization, is comprised of many people working together for one common goal.

Is it normal policy to terminate campaign credit cards like this? Maybe, maybe not. I've never been the CFO of a national campaign. I've never had to be concerned with fraud and waste of this magnitude. Chances are, neither have you. Would we even know about this if not for social media? Probably not, because no one would care enough to report on it, if any reporter cared about the state of the loser's finances anyway. Heck, right now we don't even know anything about these anonymous "staffers." Are they first timers or veteran campaign workers? Were they drunk and disgruntles when they went home "hours after the concession speech?" Were they told in advance the cards would expire at DATE/TIME? The fact is, not a single article I've seen so far has said anything more than "Aides taking cabs home late that night got rude awakenings when they found the credit cards linked to the campaign no longer worked."

But, if you run a campaign message of being fiscally conservative, without wasteful spending, it's perfectly reasonable to conclude safeguards would be put in place to protect the campaign from fraud by their staffers.

Having a termination date of staff credit cards is a fair and sensible, if unpopular, procedure to have in place if you're responsible for campaign spending and FEC oversight. If there had been a per-card spending limit would people still be having a fit? 

Let's also not bash Romney as though he was calling Visa and AmEx at 12:01am on the 7th to have each card number cancelled. Like I said before, this was probably set up in advance by either his campaign manager or campaign CFO. Chances are it was someone with authority over campaign finances who controlled this, not the candidate himself. If the candidate ultimately responsible? Perhaps in the public eye, but campaigns are generally created as a not-for-profit organization. Legally, this makes a campaign an organization, not an individual. This is why you see news stories with lines and headlines like "So-And-Such Campaign..." or "The Campaign of So-And-Such..."

But people like  or everyone at this Google+ thread seem to be more intent of bashing Romney than looking at this situation critically.

That kind of annoys me. More than likely Romney is not personally compliant in this decision, like a CEO does not micromanage a mid-level manager. Romney is a tool. but he doesn't deserve this blame, even though as the face of the campaign he will get it.

Read More