As IF Times

Source: Enough votes to remove Confederate flag, survey shows

I blame Oprah.  Who knew that our dysfunctional society was chock full of offensive and insensitive symbols representing oppression of virtually every subset of society? The confederate ‘stars and bars’ flag is claimed to be a symbol of  slavery and oppression from a long bygone era and as such should be eliminated from public display.  Hmm.  In Oklahoma, a monument inscribed with the Ten Commandments is also targeted for removal because of its religious symbolism and therefore offensive to some.  For those not familiar with the Ten Commandments, they describe some of the most basic rules about living in a society; practical things such as not killing others, not stealing etc., perfectly reasonable (to most) and not the exclusive purview of those with religious leanings.

We recall the manufactured outrage over the Washington Redskins name last year when apparently people could barely live with that offensive label.  Somehow they have.  The Outraged and Offended racket (O and O racket) is coming into full bloom with the aid of sensationalist and ratings hungry media and of course the usual endless cast of litigating lizards.

Virtually everything we can think of these days is a Rorshach test of sensibilities, like people seeing evil messages in a bowl of alpha-bits. One can easily interpret the Apple logo as one which represents evil and sin as in the bite taken from the apple in the garden of Eden.  Years ago, the stars and moon in the logo for Proctor and Gamble was interpreted as symbolism for witchcraft and paganism.  What about Underwood devilled ham with the red guy and the pitchfork on the can?

It’s so easy to be offended by something these days that if you can’t find something that offends you, you’re not trying hard enough.  What is most interesting is the bullying aspect of those who are offended by a given issue.  That is, if you don’t agree with their views, you must be a hater.  What if you really don’t care?  Why isn’t that option B? So if you don’t really care about gay marriage, you’re a homophobe.  If you don’t recycle, you’re a polluter.  If you don’t eat organic chickens, you are contributing to cruelty.  If you don’t buy fair trade coffee, you are contributing to oppression in other countries.  Somehow, the self righteous  who universally have IPhones don’t seem too concerned about the sweatshop conditions that exist in the countries that manufacture them.  Or the designer clothes that they wear.

Of course, some people have legitimate claims to be offended.  For example, the husband of Joyce Mitchell, the woman who helped the two inmates escape from a New York prison has every right to be offended since he was actually targeted to be killed in the original escape plan. But, even he forgives his wife.

Unless you happen to be a basket of kittens, you are going to offend somebody and something is going to offend you.  Suck it up. You could be living in the African sub Sahara where you can be offended by a lion trying to eat you.  Let’s be practical and  be offended about  things that really affect us; such as media stupidity and body odor.

link:  Obama warns Coast Guard cadets global warming a national security ‘threat’ | Fox News

So in essence, the President is claiming that the weather is the greatest threat to national security.

The weather.

A nation that’s been around since 1776, one that has been instrumental in advancing the cause of civilization, of expanding markets, of creating novel technologies, of expanding education and which has acted as a magnet for ambitious people throughout the world is being threatened by… the weather.

This is analogous to the homeowner who worries about vines growing on the brickwork as his house is being inundated with flood waters during a storm.  The flip side to his thesis is that the success of the United States through its almost 250 year history may have been attributable in large part to benign weather.  Any school child making that claim would not only be held back a few years, but would also be monitored for signs of mental stability.  He would be spoken to slowly in monosyllables.

And yet, the person who notionally wields the most influential position in the world is making this exact claim…with a straight face.  It’s as if he’s been smoking too much of the same stuff as his vice president.  The correct response of the media to this utterance should be, “wait, what did he say?” instead of general indifference.  If this isn’t Chauncey Gardener in real life, I’m the uncle of monkeys.

We wonder if this might cause some wheels to roll in the minds of those who had bought into the ‘vision’ of the President when he first came to public light.  If nothing else, perhaps there should be a new policy created whereby political aspirants should be asked a few simple skill testing questions before being allowed to be set loose on the public.  They wouldn’t have to know what a prime number is or calculate the square root of a fraction, but they would have to correctly answer the question of whether or not the weather will cause the demise of western civilization as we know it.  A wrong answer would cap their political aspirations at dog catcher.