Absurd attitudes

Below is my response to this article about LDS canneries -- http://www.preparednesspro.com/breaking-news-lds-canneries-halt-canning-2/

I am LDS, and I have a hard time believing this is just some fed problem. And these excuses sound like the same junk my drug addicted dad gives. Don't take any personal responsibility for anything, blame everyone else. This just sounds like more republican whining to me. The same junk criminals say about law enforcement. Here's an idea, operate like proper LDS people ought to operate, well beyond and above the fed expectation. It's called "beating them at their own game." I've worked in food service in a hospital, then as a commercial electrician, doing medical, and federal installations.  I ALWAYS passed inspection, those are both difficult areas to keep up with, code changes from county to county, township to township. I think the LDS in the East have just gotten lazy, and whiny. 

Moreover, the fact that it isn't a national change tells me it isn't a national problem. What I'm reading is people aren't taking the service seriously, and are leaving things undone. It's the same reason the ward tools for lds.org in so many wards are left untouched, because people don't take responsibility to ensure they are populated with current information. Moreover, profit or non-profit, there are a lot more businesses selling preparedness goods. It could very well be that the cost is unjustifiable in the face of sound private sector competition. We no longer need to be the exclusive source of long term food storage, there are many sources now, everywhere.

The real joke is that their comments section is titled "state your mind" but they sensor out my comment. Seems more like they should have titled it "agree with us!" because that is apparently what they mean. They don't want a balanced view point, or a different perspective, what they want is sheeple. 

Post Turtle

I read the following today and my opinion follows the excerpt.

"The old rancher said, 'Well, ya know, Obama is a 'Post Turtle''. Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him, what a 'post turtle' was. The old rancher said, 'When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a 'post turtle'.

The old rancher saw the puzzled look on the doctor's face so he continued to explain. "You know he didn't get up there by himself, he doesn't belong up there, he doesn't know what to do while he's up there, he's elevated beyond his ability to function, and you just Wonder what kind of dumb ass put him up there to begin with.""

The above is really a better description of our current congress people. Technically speaking Obama has done exactly what "conservatives" claim the constitution expects of the presidential roll in government. He has limited his roll in public affairs, and law creation, and allows the congress to make the big choices as it should.

Lately it seems more and more like he exercises his roll more conservatively than any "conservative" republican would.

Aside from that, it still just sound like a nice way of making a racist statement. It's not like any of the first 5 presidents had any idea what to do, or what to expect. Technically speaking the role of president will make every man a post turtle. No amount of experience as senator, congress person, or business man can really prepare you for the responsibilities of that position. He has the highest clearances, the most knowledge of what really is, and the greatest number of batons to juggle. Nobody who hasn't been president can say what it's like, or what to expect. The position is like NO OTHER in the United States.

Beyond that that is the design of the postion. The who point of the method behind how we choose our president is to ENSURE that we put a turtle on the post. Why? you may ask. Because it ensures balance. It is the most intelligent thing you can do to put an "every day man" at the top. And Obama is the first one we've put up there in decades. It is important that we elect inexperienced people to president. It protects the interesest of the general public, and sets aside private special interests. It is the design of the position and you can no fault him for it.

And BTW, the title "I pledge allegiance to my country, not my President." really just sounds like a copout for not having the balls to say you wont vote for the popular guy.

Just Consequences

Intoxication is not an excuse for anything. People, even intoxicated, only behave within the capacity of who they really are. If anything intoxication just amplifies peoples more negative traits, but traits they have nonetheless. There are many people who do get drunk and don't rape anybody, why? Because it's not in their nature.


I don't think it is just or right for any court to ever place a gag order on a victim of such a crime that violates anthers person (body). I think anything the public learns from the victim is just consequence for the offender. Moreover, I would charged the parents of minor offenders with negligence.  Being young is no excuse for being a bad person, nor is being drunk.


Many young men are taught that not only life is for the taking, but women's lives are for their taking too.  Boys live thinking that it's their place to do whatever they want, and it's simply not true. There is this mentality that if you want it, take it. Because life is to short for social order, civil duty, or even just being a decent person. They are taught to find social chaos attractive because it lets them do whatever they want regardless of the consequence to others or themselves. Moreover this kind of gag order crap is a result of a society that is building toward this idea that you can do whatever, and avoid the consequence. Offender controlled consequence is just cosmically incorrect.


It is a just consequence that the victim "outs" her attackers. And I feel no remorse for thinking that because I know it is just and right.