Mike's Home Page

Mexico has national health care, just like Canada.

Mexico has even stricter gun control than Canada.

Mexico has easier access to abortion than Canada.

Mexico has readily available pot.

Mexico has a low cost of living.

Mexico has an economy that would benefit from their financial input (Assuming any.  Canada's better if you're a welfare leech, IF you can persuade them to take you. They're not as lenient as the US).

But, no.  Liberals who whine about elections always threaten they'll move to Canada because they're fucking racists.

Liberals are innately more logical and sciencey than conservatives, as liberals inform me all the time. So it's wonder they can't see the logical flaws in this claim:

"The US is very right wing. If you compare it to Europe, the most left wing American politician is still only center right."

A: This assumes Europe is the baseline, not the US.  Looked at the other way, every nation* in Europe is extremely left wing, which is obviously a far more reasonable conclusion (Because I say it is).

2: This confuses mean and median.  Do you even statistic, bro?

c} Why do you assume the US and Europe are even on the same scale? You're comparing apples and rutabagas here, given the cultural backgrounds of most of Europe--civic minded subjects of monarchies, vs the background of the history of the US--rebels, refugees, transportees, slaves and their descendents, and adventurers.

IV) Europe is a continent of smaller nations, with actually quite a variety of political orientations. Are you claiming Russia is left wing these days? Do you even know what Poland's politics are? Or are you focusing on Scandinavia--several very small nations, France, Germany and the UK to the exclusion of the rest?  Using that logic, California, New York and Illinois prove the US is actually quite a bit further left than your own claims.

E] What about all the other nations in the world? Why aren't they counted?  You're choosing majority-white Europe out of deep-seated, inherent racism.

A liberal can ALWAYS choose the postulates he wants to prove he's correct, even when he's talking out of his ass.

And will usually be racist in the process.





*The nations the liberal deems relevant, not those inconvenient non-liberal nations.

Way back in the early 1990s at a sci fi con I attended regularly, on a circuit I attended regularly, I was hanging out with a bunch of friends. One was a woman who we could call a friend with benefits.  Another would be later.  Three guys who also threw themed parties, a DJ and his assistant, two other women, and one who is the person in question.

She was mutual friends with my FwB, the guy she was with, and another. We'd interacted, hung out, been at convention parties.

That evening, it became obvious she was interested.  A couple of hours later, we were back in my room. Making out, chatting, making out some more.  I lost my shirt. 

A few minutes later, she was sitting astride my hips, and peeled her dress over her head.  No bra--she had the youth and stature that didn't need one, and she did not have small breasts, either.  She was quite well built in all dimensions.

We both finished undressing, and had sex in several positions. Oral each way, she astride me, missionary, from behind, missionary again.  A good time was had by all.

We lay there for a while, talking some more, quick rinse in the shower together, clothes back on, and back out to socialize with the rest.

She disappeared.

Two hours later, my FwB shows up with her current date.

"What happened tonight, Mike?"

"What, with ___?"

"Yes."

"What do you think happened?" (I generally try not to share specifics with others unless cleared to.)

"How did her dress come off, Mike?"

At this point I had a massive adrenaline surge. I mean, you saw the list, it was obvious to me it was all consensual...I thought. Did I miss a signal? No, she asked for several things specifically.

"Um....she took it off...while astride me."

There was silence, and I asked, "Is this going to be a problem?"

FwB says, sigh, "No, she's done this before."

Get that? She'd done this BEFORE.

I ascribe some of this to hangover societal puritannical bullshit (though the Puritans demanded sex be an active part of marriage both ways), compounded by Victorian bullshit.

You see, Nice Girls don't do things like that.  So if a woman has absorbed this belief, but actually likes a load of cum in her face, or being fucked in the ass, or shoved against a wall and her skirt yanked up, or two cocks at once, then she's a slut. 

But, if she wasn't really into it, and she was just going along with it, then she wasn't really a slut, so it's okay.

But there's a line between misplaced puritanical guilt over enjoying yourself and A FALSE ACCUSATION OF RAPE.

PART TWO:

An acquaintance is an EEO officer for a large military installation. Divorce is sadly common in the military due to relocations, duty cycles, separations for deployment, and occasionally for things like infidelity (less than you might expect. There's a half-joke about "Are you married?" "No, I'm temporary duty." And a lot of couples tolerate or enjoy that just to take some of the stress off, with the understanding that once those months or years of separation are done, they're a couple)(they're not asking for your moral judgment, so stuff it).

He reports that several times a MONTH, a woman (spouse) filing for divorce would come in, and accuse the service member of abuse, violations, etc.

He could immediately tell which ones were fake. They were literally word for word from a popular TV show episode about this.

But, every one of these cases must be "investigated," which pulls someone off duty for questioning, and impedes anything in their mission that involves a security clearance, and costs YOU, the taxpayer, tens of thousands of dollars.

Because some lying whore wants a bigger cut of a pension, or to fuck someone's career over and hurt them for life because they're angry at how their life isn't a fairy tale.

You know who else suffers from this?

ACTUAL VICTIMS AND SURVIVORS of abuse and sexual assault, who try to speak, and get a response of (eyeroll), oh, god, not this shit again.

So when Christine Ford can't remember if it was 2, 4, or 6 people present at a party where she admits she was drinking underage, or where it was, or how she got there, or how she got home, and didn't tell anyone, and 6 of the 4 witnesses say it never happened, and she couldn't get to Congress on Monday because she's terrified of flying, but has 100,000 frequent flyer miles from vacationing in the Pacific...

It's reasonable to assume she's LYING about remembering absolutely that it was a candidate she opposes politically, who belongs to a party she's publicly vowed to hinder in any way possible.

And stop with the bullshit that she has "nothing to gain," because she's already gained $500,000 from a gofundme, notoriety, headlines, and may even get a book deal. And most importantly, might fuck with our constitutional process to make it easier for her Nazi fucking Demorrhoid Party to control the government.

She's a lying whore, and anyone with any analytical sense has known that from the beginning.

This is a working hypothesis of mine and it's well supported by my research.

Recently:

Liberal: Trump is anti-semitic, and his son makes secret anti-semitic signs on TV!

Me: Wait, how do you know about these secret signs?

Liberal: We have a list!

Me: 70% of Trump's cabinet are Jews, so is one son in law.  He recognized Israel's right to exist, to have Jerusalem as their capital. How is he anti-Semitic?

Liberal: He's just using those Jews for his advantage.

Me: What advantage?  Why have a cabinet full of people you allegedly hate?

Liberal: He's only got Jews on the cabinet because they're good at banking strategies and money handling. They're making him rich.

Me: Wait, what? Did you just stereotype an entire religion and culture? And imply they're corrupt?

Liberal: No, not all Jews, just those Jews.

Me: Then why bother with Jews if he hates Jews? Are you saying he can't find other bankers?

Liberal: FUCK YOU!

 

~~~

Then there's the liberal claim that they're not anti-semitic, just anti-zionist.

Me: So, you don't oppose Jews, just a Jewish national state.

Liberal: Yes.

Me: But a Palestinian national state is okay?

Liberal: Yes, because they were there first.

Me: The Jews have been there for 3000 years.

Liberal: Yeah, but they left and came back.

Me: No, some of them left. There have definitely been Jews there for 3000 years.

Liberal: Well, they need to stop being terrorists.

Me: How many suicide bombs has each side set off?

Liberal: FUCK YOU!

~~~

Please help test my hypothesis.

FACT:  Kavanaugh and Christine Blowme Ford were minors.

FACT:  The crime of "sexual assault" did not cover groping in that place and time.  "Simple assault" or "battery" are the only credible legal claims.

FACT:  As they were minors, any such charge would have vacated by now.

FACT: Even if he was 18, statute of limitations is DECADES past.*

FACT: Per her own reports, they were both intoxicated.  We have no evidence to support her claim he was, but she has confessed to a criminal act.

FACT: 6 of her 4 witnesses call bullshit.

FACT: Without something more substantial than "somewhere, sometime, and I have no idea how I got there," no charges are possible.

FACT: She admits she went to a "party" with two or four, she's not sure, males and no females, to get intoxicated and...do what?  At a place with no chaperonage.

FACT: The FBI only investigates federal or interstate crime, and this would have been neither. They cannot investigate it.

FACT: Regardless of what may have happened, the claim is unsupportable bullshit.

FACT: We've now reached a point only seen in bad satirical movies of the 1990s (The Running Man: "She had sex with three, sometimes FOUR men in the same YEAR!") for condemnation of men.

FACT: If you believe any of her bullshit, you cannot possibly claim to be logical or deductive.

FACT: If you're "literally made ill" by this lying drunken slut's bullshit, you better be petitioning for Keith Ellison to be deposed on the ACTUAL POLICE REPORTS and ACTUAL HOSPITAL RECORDS of his ex girlfriend, and of the several women who have accused Bill Clinton of not groping, but FORCIBLE RAPE, and open the records on Teddy Kennedy's "forgetting" there was a woman drowning in his car when he crashed it in a river while intoxicated, and somehow was never punished, and ask your party WHY they re-elected Klansman Robert Byrd for life, and tolerated his utter racism to the end (he voted against EVERY black judiciary candidate, even when his party endorsed them).  Because if not, you're a vile, rape-endorsing, domestic violence-endorsing, fucking RACIST.

You are not logical, you are not deductive, you are not even human fucking beings.  You are utter fucking filth, and we really do need to invest in Caterpillar D9 bulldozers.

 

 

 

*FACT: In America, we don't retcon crimes to suit the modern day. Ex Post Facto.  It's covered in the Constitution, and you subhuman, anti-American, anti-intellectual, worm-ridden pieces of cholera-infected maggot shit need to read it. Ask an educated 12 year old (HINT: their parents didn't vote for the D) explain the big words to you.

 

A Timeline of Events
Sep 23, 201810:53PM

Category: Politics

1 January, 1991, 0130

That's a very close approximation of time I fought off sexual assault.

I'd been raped previously, but that's not this discussion.

About 1900 on the 31st, an acquaintance from the mixed group of gamers, SCAdians, SF fans and others called me at my Rantoul, IL apartment, asked if I was doing anything for New Years'. He was having a small party, he said. He asked if I wanted to come over.

I'm not naming the party because it's a common enough name I don't want anyone getting harassed or mistaken, and as far as I know he's never amounted to anything.

I drove down to Champaign, to an apartment I'd have to find on a map, if it's still there, but is easy enough to find. I arrived about 2000. He let me in, we talked for a bit, I had a beer that I opened myself.  I asked where the others were, he said they were coming later. He brought out some sandwiches and other snacks.

Looking around, he had Kodak pictures of a couple of the teenagers (I was 23ish.  I don't give out my exact birthday) in the youth fighting group he helped sponsor. It seemed a bit odd to have photos of a single teen standing in a field, with no context or activity.

There was the usual TV New Year's entertainment, and about 2200 I opened another beer.  I asked when the rest were showing up, and he said they were going to be last minute, doing stuff.

About 2300 he brought through a drink for me.  I don't recall what it was supposed to be, but it was liquor and mixer.  It tasted slightly strong, but not out of line.

Then I started feeling completely plastered drunk.

I remember asking when the others were arriving, and him saying, "I guess they're not coming."

Midnight, the ball dropped, and I was half asleep.

He sounded so supportive as he said, "Look, if you're that tired, you should just sleep here."

He suggested I undress, but I'm actually quite comfortable sleeping in a field jacket--years of military experience.  I lay down on the only bed and passed out.

I have no idea what he did until 0130 to amuse himself.  I'm afraid to speculate.

I remember being rolled onto my back, a fat, sweaty, half-bald-half-stringy haired thing I wouldn't touch intimately even if I swung that way, shorts halfway down the crack of his ass, sitting astride my chest and unbuckling my pants.

I woke up very, very fast.

I said "No. Stop." Rather loudly, in fact.

"I'm not going to stop, Mike, so you may as well enjoy it."

In nine seconds, I was able to express the point that even if he outweighed me two to one, I was going to put his face through the wall in five seconds, and he'd already used up three.

He sighed dramatically, flounced off the bed, and shouted, "FINE!" 

Then he turned on what he apparently thought was the guilt trip.  "It's not fair. I invite you over, feed you, then you come to bed in a field jacket, for Christ's sake. Do me a favor and lose my number!"

Yeah, we have to remember who the real victim is here, right?

I drove home, half asleep or intoxicated, I'm not sure which, very carefully because I'd be the one in jail, through very quiet streets, in subzero temps.

I did not file a police report because what would be the point? There wasn't a mark on me, and no witnesses.

I did tell a close friend the next day. I told the boss I contracted to (now deceased), who, being in the same circle, called the guy who ran that youth combat group (still alive). I told him.  Mr X was then told he was no longer affiliated with the group. The next convention, I told another friend of mine.  The next year I had a long-term girlfriend, eventually a wife. She knows. (Though she may not remember due to memory loss from a medical condition.)  My current wife knows (and has known for some time).

Several years later, (this is slightly hazy because I did a LOT of conventions professionally then, but I can certainly date it from their records if need be) I was in the dealer room of a Midwest convention and I heard, "Hey, Mike!"

I turned around and it was the vile fat fuck who tried to molest me, apparently having forgotten the "Lose my number!" bit, or maybe he'd been hoping it would cause me to beg to come back to his greasy hands, or maybe he was just desperate at that point.

He was selling gaming supplies and sounded very cheerful and just thrilled to see me.

I unassed the area, found friends on staff, and informed them, "That asshole drugged me and tried to rape me. Now, I don't expect you to remove him based on my say-so, but I would recommend watching him very carefully around teenage boys and young men."

They took the advice seriously. He was watched.

So if there's ever another incident, not only can I testify to his (lack of) character, a dozen other people can testify that I told them.

Which is why when a certain professor says, "Oh, yes, by the way, sometime between 1978 and 1982, I'm not sure, but I was 15, I was drunk at a party somewhere with 2 or 4 guys, but I don't remember where, or how I got there or home afterward, but anyway, one of them tried to force himself on me, and I don't know why none of the several witnesses say it never happened, but it didn't matter until 2012 when some 'therapist' recovered the memories, but then she wrote them down wrong, but I don't care that this guy's a federal judge, my only concern is that he not get to SCOTUS because I say he was a drunken ass in high school,"

I say, "Bullshit, you politically-motivated whore.  There are REAL victims out there, and you're degrading all their credibility with your narcissistic ploy for attention and money."

Because I guarantee there'll be money, even beyond the $350K gofundme she has.

So here's the text of the petition, interspersed with my comments:

Our names are Amanda and Sophia. One day in science class, we came upon an article on plastic straws. The article stated that Americans use more than 500 million straws a day- and throw them away. That is equivalent to 125 school buses filled with plastic straws. We also learned that by 2050, there will be more plastic in the ocean than fish.

Well, Amanda and Sophia, one of the first things you should learn is that most of these so-called "articles" are bullshit. If it's on youtube, assume it's bullshit.  On a petition site, assume it's bullshit. Twitter: Bullshit. Any kind of pop-news site: bullshit. The latter are especially bad.  They only want ad dollars. In fact, the "article" you read was written by a 9 year old girl.  As far as studies done by 9 year old girls go, it's probably an A for effort, C for results. As far as an actual science article, F-. About like listening to a Kindergarten choir and thinking you heard music.  When people start believing 9 year old girls are experts on thermodepolymerization and marine biology, we as a society are fucked.

You probably saw that touching picture of a turtle with a straw in his nose, right?  And assumed that had to be pollution.  Well, you'd be wrong.

I also read a science article, and it gave a number of alternative reasons that turtle might have a straw up his nose:

The turtle may be a coke head, and used that straw to snort cocaine.

The turtle may be mentally retarded and attempted to snort the straw directly.

The turtle may be a domestic abuser and the straw was the only way his spouse had of defending herself, since liberals have already made it illegal for turtles to own firearms for self defense.

In all these cases, he should not pass his defective genes onto his species.

Being serious, however, it's one picture of one turtle (who probably is retarded, even by turtle standards) (which are even lower than the standards we use for people who believe "science" "Articles" written by 9 year old girls) (Though just barely).

Those numbers concern us. So when we joined the Earth Club at our school, the leader suggested using change.org, which is how we came upon this website. All 500 million of these plastic straws end up in a landfill or worse, the ocean. When plastic straws get into the ocean, the fish mistake it for food, eat it, and get sick or die. In fact, science shows that when you eat fish, you might as well be eating plastic!

In fact, science shows nothing of the kind, and your club leader is a fucking communist.  I recommend studying the aerodynamics of falling leftists for a far more productive science project.

We both think that Dunkin Donuts is a very tasty and an influential company. By choosing this business, we hope to make them take this issue very seriously. These shops have a lot of people coming in every day, almost all of them getting cold beverages containing plastic straws. However, those straws add up to landfill and get into the ocean. Dunkin' Donuts is a very successful company, so if they start banning straws, won’t others follow their lead?

Ah, I see you know as much about business as you do about science.  No, in fact there's a good chance that by jumping on some bullshit tree-hugging hippie-crap trend they'll lose a bunch of customers. Then, next week when you find some cool new "science" to follow, that says a boiled egg and pepper diet is the best way to lose weight, you'll be all over that, and demanding McDonald's sell boiled eggs with extra sized pepper packets.

In fact, here's an actual (pop, meaning dumbed down for normal people) science article about how eco-communists are in fact fucking the ecosystem with their bullshit:

https://newatlas.com/shade-balls-water-usage/55499/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2018-07-18%20142600%20USA%20Daily%20Basic%202018-07-18%20143340%20Could%20water-saving%20shade%20balls%20have%20a%20shady%20side&utm_content=2018-07-18%20142600%20USA%20Daily%20Basic%202018-07-18%20143340%20Could%20water-saving%20shade%20balls%20have%20a%20shady%20side+CID_9fc4b4906c100b3b934b24a32834bd2c&utm_source=Campaign%20Monitor&utm_term=Read%20more It 

So please sign this petition and share it with your friends to help the environent, and the world we all live in. Remember, #StrawsSuck! Thank you!

No, I will not sign your bullshit petition. This will be one of your first lessons in the disappointment of life.

Seriously, it's great that you're concerned, but the first thing you need to learn is that documented facts, properly interpreted are science, and "Trends" on the internet are bullshit.

Please write that 1000 times and then get back to your homework.  Also, ask your parents to find a better school, that also knows this difference.

Oh, and I'm making sure Dunkin knows I like plastic straws and they shouldn't bow to stupidity.

Robert Mueller must be convicted of treason and executed.

Liberals may now close the window and scream about how insane I am, maintaining their belief in Trump's Russian birth certificate and the Easter Bunny.

Mueller indicted 12 Russian intelligence officers for developing software, under orders from their leadership, in Russia.

Not for using it against us, which still wouldn't be a crime (since US law does not apply in Russia), though it might be an act of war.

For DEVELOPING it.

And in the process he's exposed them to the world. They effectively can never leave Russia without a diplomatic discussion and guarantee of their safety in any nation they might stop in.

Now, anyone capable of basic rational thought (apparently, not-liberals) realizes this is a precedent for Russia, and any other nation, to likewise file charges against any and all of our intelligence community.

Or, really, anyone at all who has done anything that is restricted.

My wife contracts to a defense contractor who produces products for aerospace. She has in fact had Russian sites taken down, sometimes simply by calling the host and saying, "Hey, this server XYZ is sending out a ton of malware, could you?  Thanks."

At this point, Russia could say, "That server was conducting operations for our Ministry of Defense, and you have interfered with it. We issue a warrant for your arrest."

Certainly it's bullshit.  In response to Mueller's bullshit.

Now, let's move to second order effects, which everything since the election has taught me are impossible for a liberal mind to comprehend.

What if, and I expect they will, the Russians send lawyers on behalf of said agents, as they did for the corporation Mueller charged with something or other, for a timeframe months before said corporation existed? (Yes, he's that much of a shithead, and always has been, and even noted right-winger (/sarc) Alan Dershowitz says so: 

http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/14/record-proves-robert-mueller-clown-prince-federal-law-enforcement )

The lawyers will commence discovery, demanding all of Mueller's information regarding the case.

Which almost certainly includes intelligence information we don't want them to have. Otherwise, how did he find out about what Russians are doing in Russia in a secret context?

Third order effect (try to wrap your brain around this. I know it's hard) is that the Russians use THAT intel, and that admitted precedent (because just because you do something, doesn't mean you admit it, but once you do, the rules change) as an excuse to then actually hack our defense apparatus or, (GASP!) our elections?

And now we have him arresting a student for "failing to register as an agent of the Russian government," because AS A STUDENT she talked to the head of the NRA.

FUN FACT for liberals and other shitheads:  The NRA is not a political organization. It's a tax exempt non-profit educational organization. The NRA-ILA (Institute for Legislative Action) is the 501(c)4 political arm, donations to which are NOT tax deductible.

Do you want a Cold War? Because this is how you get a Cold War.

And aren't you the same fucking shitweasels who were screaming about Iraq, accusing Trump of risking a war with North Korea, a nation who is outgunned by several metropolitan police departments, now willing to risk a war with Russia, that, paraphrasing Trump "Also has a button and it's bigger and it works"?

It's small comfort to me that most of their bombs will vaporize urban liberals, which no rational human being regards as a loss, but there are fallout effects.

To reiterate:

1) We have Mueller going Full McCarthy. Of course, in the long run, McCarthy's fears were proven valid, even though his techniques were wrong. Mueller is simply full of shit.

B: We have Mueller pulling the same shit the Soviets did during the Cold War of arresting students and tourists as bargaining chips, accusing them of being spies for taking photos or meeting with people.

c] We have the entire Demorrhoid Party cheering this on, because who gives a shit if South Korea gets shelled, or Russia bombs another country, or who cares, because FUCK TRUMP! FUCK FUCKING FUCKITY FUCKING TRUMP! (Actual quote from the Shithead Wing of the Demorrhoid Party, which is apparently 143% of them at this point.) My god! Can you imagine how the universe will END if Trump is seen to do anything positive?

So:

Mueller has risked US intelligence assets.

He has compromised at least some of them just by naming these "suspects" who are suspected of doing their jobs, because obviously someone at THIS end IDed them, and just knowing THAT is useful intel to the Russians.

He has raised the risk of an actual shooting war with the only nation that could actually harm us in a shooting war.

He has interfered with the President's ability to negotiate peacefully and to our benefit (OUR.  Americans AND liberals both).

Had a single shot been fired or a declaration made, that would constitute treason, for which the penalty is death.

And since he's done so with blatantly partisan intent, I'm calling it "good enough."

Drag that sack of shit out back. Put a 9mm through the base of his fucking skull.  Toss the corpse into a trash burner, because we don't want to pollute American soil with it, and get on with the business of NOT STARTING WARS WITH RUSSIA. They'll believe we're serious, and we might actually make headway.

Of course, if you're cool with pissing off Russia, preventing any kind of discussion with them as long as Trump is president, and risking a war...

You liberal shitstains are responsible for this mess. And you are disgusting.

I Have A Better Idea...
May 09, 201811:59AM

Category: Politics

http://www.pantagraph.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/if-illinois-legalizes-marijuana-what-happens-to-pot-sniffing-dogs/article_6d67b6d3-cc27-5053-ba8c-eb641611c28b.html?utm_content=bufferfc6d6&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=LEEDCC#tracking-source=home-top-story 

 
 
If Illinois legalizes marijuana for recreational use, law enforcement officials fear job losses for hundreds of officers — specifically, the four-legged kind. 
~~~
 
I don't see the problem. Dogs like sunshine and balls.  They'll find things to do.
~~~
 
opponents say they worry about cannabis acting as a gateway to other, harder drugs for some users, noting that federal law prohibits marijuana use and classifies it as a schedule 1 drug, the same category as heroin and LSD.
~~~
 
Riiight.  Just like a plastic stock is a "machine gun." a muffler is a "firearm" and a show horse trailer is a "Commercial vehicle."  Here's your first problem: You're fucking retarded and think government definitions are real.
 
And of course, the sheriff's $22 million "foundation" won't suffer at all, right? It's not as if he's getting a salary and huge tax breaks for his efforts.
~~~
 
Because many K-9s are trained not to be social so their work won’t be affected, Larner said a number of dogs would likely have to be euthanized.
~~~
 
Wait, are we talking the dogs or the cops?  Because I'm totally cool with euthanizing narcs who can't socialize with normal people and don't have other useful skills that don't involve harassing and abusing people.
~~~
 
Other law enforcement groups, including the Illinois Sheriffs' Association and the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police, also are opposed to legalization efforts. 
~~~
 
Yes, all that lovely payoff money, and "Asset forfeiture" from stealing property and never filing charges. That's the headiest drug of all, isn't it? And you'll even threaten to kill dogs over it.


A large problem facing the SF community, and many others today, is the mere existence of Twitter and Fecesbook.  The problem specifically is that people believe these are real, and matter.

I have noticed since my first SF publication Freehold https://amzn.to/2Fz5XNi that conservatives who don't like something tend to just ignore it and go away, though they may argue at length on some matters.

Modern American liberals (As opposed to real liberals), however, don't stop there. It's not enough to argue.  Anyone who disagrees with their rightthink must be destroyed. It shows in the book reviews.  CONSERVATIVE: "This had a bit too much sex for my taste and I don't think it's a workable society long term."  LIBERAL: "This guy is a monster who wants to exterminate the homeless for his utopia!"

I'm argumentative online.  I have argued vociferously FOR same sex marriage, FOR gays being able to serve in the military, FOR legalization of pot, AGAINST pot as "medicine," AGAINST male genital butchery, FOR free speech and expression of faith, AGAINST any form of gun control, FOR reproductive choice.  I've explained, at length, how reproduction works, how sex and gender disorders work, how firearms work, in attempts to educate people.

I'll freely argue with anyone, though on occasion someone is either so stupid or obnoxious I unfriend or block them. This happens to conservatives as well as liberals, atheists as well as Christians.  I don't dislike people for their demographics. I dislike them for their stupidity.

Some conservatives will note that, "He's an asshole and I had to unfollow him."  Fair enough. Some liberals have said the same.

But, we come to the Modern American Liberals.  Those are a special case.

This first came to a head two years ago at a convention I regularly attended for about 20 years. Said convention shrunk year by year and completely failed last year, in a surprise to no one rational.

I received an IM on Fecesbook from one of the people peripherally involved in it and her on-and-off-husband who I was barely aware existed.  They "Had some concerns" and "wanted to reach out to me" to clarify things.

I hate "reaching out."  Say what you need to say.

Shortly it became clear it was concern trolling that I'd be offended by the "liberal" nature of the convention.

After all, I was "pretty conservative" (I am not in the slightest, and I'm constantly amazed at the binary POV of "liberals." Either you're liberal or you're conservative, and you have to be liberal ENOUGH in the right ways.)

The concerns were:

They were going to have a gender neutral bathroom, and that might offend me.

They were going to have a "safe space."

They didn't want me getting "political" at my table.

Some people might be wearing their "Solidarity pins."

In order:  I spent 25 years in the military, much of it in the field or on convoys. Bathrooms don't bother me.  At that moment, I'd just come back from Europe. Belgium public restrooms typically have male stalls on one side, across from urinals, sinks as a divider, and female stalls. So a man can be standing there taking a leak while a woman is washing her hands next to him.  In parts of the Netherlands, they have public urinals with a partial screen about 2' wide, in the middle of the plaza.

Bathrooms don't bother me.

As far as a safe space, if someone has a safe space, that's up to them.  I generally find the notion silly when there are cars, hotel rooms, bathrooms, bars, etc, but if the convention has designated such a space there's likely no reason for me to bother with it.

This person was obviously aware, or should have been, that I don't get political at my table, except in regarding specifics of my books, or if I'm asked a specific question. In which case, I remember I'm in public and exercise appropriate manners, as my "conservative" parents taught me growing up in the UK.

It doesn't matter to me if someone wears a diaper pin on their clothes, through their septum, or their ear. Through their eyeball would probably make me twitch, but if it's consensual, it's not my problem.

I made all the above as succinctly clear as that, and noted, "I do expect the same courtesy. I don't wish people to harass me at my table over some false perception of where I stand."

Well, I was told, "But you do have to allow that. These people are hurting. They've been hurt so badly. They're afraid."

Were I to reasonably point out that I've disliked pretty much every president and every politician of my lifetime, and that there's been contentious elections before, so anyone bleating like this is a worthless fucking pussy, I'd have no doubt been banned at once.

But notice the double standard. YOU can't bring politics into it (even though I never have), but THEY have every right to and I must sit there and take it.

This bizarre fear of Trump bothers me.  There have yet to be any death camps, and won't be, because he's not a Nazi or a Democrat, who ran the only concentration camps in US history.

SCOTUS has supported most of Trump's actions, though I hope to god they strike down a couple of his well-intentioned but insanely dangerous gaffes.  Especially as the next president will probably be a "liberal" Nazi and will be all in on exploiting them.

Now, I don't actually talk about politics on convention panels, unless they are relevant to a specific universe or presentation. And then, I'm smart enough to realize CONTEXT matters.  Monarchy can be desirable vs anarchy.  Slavery can be preferable to starvation. (I don't endorse slavery or monarchy. I'm referencing them IN CONTEXT to certain stories.  I shouldn't have to repeat myself, but then, modern American liberals aren't really capable of grasping "what if?" Everything can only be taken as a statement of belief in reference to RIGHT NOW.)

In fact, I've had some very enjoyable panels about SF world building and political structure with my friend Eric Flint, an actual Communist. I find actual Communists to be far more rational, reasonable, and NICE than modern American liberals.

The person seemed reassured over their bizarre concern that I would for some reason do something I've never done before.

NOW FOR THE PUNCHLINE:

A: They had one restroom marked "Gender neutral," and pretty much no one I saw fit any criteria that would necessitate them needing it.  I used it when I was in that area of the hotel because, you know, it's a bathroom, and biological entities need one now and then.

2) The so-claimed "Safe space" was actually designated a QUIET ROOM with couches, and requests to not talk to anyone present. Now, since I have a wife and a good friend who suffer crippling migraines several times a week, a QUIET ROOM actually seems like a really good idea to me. I'd encourage conventions to have one if they have space. And nix the fluorescent lights.

c} No one wore any diaper pins.

IV. No one brought up the election for any reason.  It wasn't relevant, and like me, most people wanted to avoid the issue.

So, these two "Social Justice" wankers attempted to create an issue where none existed, failed miserably, and have apparently held a grudge about it since (based on their sidewise glances and comments at other conventions).  They WANTED a political convention, and DIDN'T GET IT.

In a surprise to no one with a brain, this convention started sliding when that crowd took over, and disbanded this year. I expect another event they run will end this year, too.

"Get woke," go broke.  No one attends for your politics, not even the people who agree with you.  They show up to have fun and get away from busybody assholes.

~~
I and several other writers have recently been harassed by professional victims and virtue signalers.

It starts with some concern troll post to some forum or convention or otherwise by someone who very frequently fits the demographic of socially awkward, marginally employed, perpetually aspiring as an artist with no success and borderline homeless. 

You know exactly what they're going to say:

"I wouldn't feel safe at a convention with this person as a guest."

Now, at the risk of offending this person's feelings, they're arrogating a lot of significance to themselves. The statement assumes that I either know this person or will seek them out, and have time allotted for the purpose of interacting with them, any desire to do so, and such interaction must be negative.  All of which are utterly false assumptions. Which is why I take the risk of offending their feelings here, because it doesn't matter to me one way or the other how they feel.  Their statement alone makes it clear to me that interacting with such a person is of utterly no interest or consequence to me.  I can find much better people to interact with.

Or...are they well aware they're perfectly safe, and attempting to drive opposition into the shadows?

Well, no one ever accused Nazis of honesty.

They're failures at life, and are jealous because some of us are not.  They could forgive that if we were the type of fellow traveler who'd vote to give them a chunk of someone else's pie, but since our attitude is, "Get your own damned pie," we must be scourged.

Now, the recent fallout.

I'm not posting a link to the OP because I'm not in the business of giving free publicity to Nazis. And the person IS a Nazi.

Let's define how this person is a Nazi, because the Nazis are going to scream, and continue to insist they're not actually Nazis, anyone they disagree with is the Nazi!

I have to do this because most of them actually don't know who the Nazis are. I had a recent conversation with a "liberal" friend and referenced the National Socialists and was asked, "What do National Socialists have to do with it?"

With Nazis?  Oh, sweetie, they have EVERYTHING to do with it.

Nazis support NATIONAL SOCIALIST policies including health care, increased governmental support for perceived victim classes, from the pockets of the perceived privileged classes ("Bankers." "Jews." "White Males." "The Rich." "Big Pharma.")  As an aside--when a "liberal" talks about "Bankers" and "The 1%" and "Zionists," he means "all Jews." Five minutes of conversation will prove it.

Nazis support this being implemented with a strong central authority, using violence "liberally."

Nazis support a scapegoat class. Everyone remembers the original Nazis hated Jews...but they also hated Gypsies, "antisocial women," trade unionists, Communists...

So, here is the relevant statement from the Nazi, who does endorse all kinds of social and economic central planning, and here's the scapegoat:

"If we make gun ownership illegal for PEOPLE LIKE YOU, and the government comes to take your guns, what will you do?"

If, hypothetically, we make a SUBCLASS OF PEOPLE WITH LESSER RIGHTS THAN THE REST, and COME TO STEAL THEIR PROPERTY WITH NO COMPENSATION, AT GUNPOINT, what will you do?

"You people."

What are you going to do when we pass a law to come after you people.

We people who are law abiding, but have a different philosophy.

Now, it doesn't matter if he meant gun owners, union members, Jews, Muslims, gays, bankers, anarchists, Jay Leno fans or Communists.

What are you going to do when we pass a law to come after you people with armed force?

He specifically wants laws against one group of people. No equal protection under law.  This "tolerant" "liberal" wants to create a new underclass, like the slaves, or "Indians not counted," or the Jews, or "dissidents against the state."

I told him exactly what that hypothetical would lead to.

Now, he stated a hypothetical.  I stated a hypothetical with the word "If."

"if."That's a very important. word. 

"IF you come on my property, I will have you removed you by force."

"IF you harass my children, I will seek legal protection."

"IF you come after THOSE PEOPLE, you will be met with violent resistance."

None of those are threats.

But, because I dared say that I would confront the Nazi the same way we confronted the previous Nazis--with violence, the Nazis insist I made a "Threat."  I dared offer hypothetical resistance to the utopia they crave, that will not tolerate my independent existence.

That, as any thinking person has deduced, makes them terrifyingly dangerous. That's the cop pounding you in the face shouting, "Stop assaulting me!"  That's the crazy ex calling at 3 AM and screaming, "Stop harassing me!" That's the stormtroopers knocking on your door and breaking your knees while screaming, "Stop wasting national resources with your dissident actions!"

And, as with the previous Nazis, they not only believe they're in the right, they believe any action they take is without criticism, and only "dissidents" and the like would dare speak against it.

Ask yourself: After they've come after people like you using armed force, what's to stop them coming after people like them once the precedent is established? Then people like those others.

He probably also believes the cops are violent, racist thugs who unfairly target black people. So he wants to give them more power to go after another group as well.  With sanction.

I was very clear, on purpose. IF that were to happen, the response should be the same as it should have been as soon as the Nazis arose in Germany. Scorched earth. Kill every fucking one of them, and yes, their families, because that is what they plan to do to you.

In the meantime, before they achieve their masturbation fantasy of having legal sanction to kill you, they're willing to doxx, swat and otherwise harm or kill "people like me." But they can't understand why I'd be "violent"? (HINT: I haven't actually been violent.)

Hmm.  I can't imagine why anyone would want a gun, can you?

Fortunately, at present it's still low key. How low key? How many of this Nazi's followers actually did anything I could see?

6.  Out of 50,000. (CORRECTION: It turns out the Nazi has a quarter million followers, most of whom identify as "liberal" and are totally tolerant as long as you agree with them. They're all in on using violence to control groups they don't like.  IOW: Nazis. That's a lot of organized hate in one forum.)

(This assumes most of them aren't trolling for laughs or aren't Chinese bots looking for clients, as is true with several other famous liberal fora.)

None of the six were capable of communicating a coherent thought.

Three of them made homophobic statements to me.

Seriously, if you want me to believe you actually support equality, attacking someone by accusing them of being gay--drawing a direct parallel between dislike and homosexuality--pretty much proves you're the fucking homophobe. Yet, "Tolerant" "liberals" do this all the time.  By which I conclude that most liberals are homophobes (like the Nazis).

One of them hilariously claimed that "Gun control has been so watered down it's not effective," as if it was ever effective, and as if it's watered down. He was unable to provide a cite to support this claim, and when I countered with the list of major national gun control laws that have been in existence longer than he's been alive, he claimed I was "cherry picking." I may post that conversation later. It was facepalmingly stupid.

One of them announced, "One star reviews are in order!" and went to Amazon to give 1 star reviews to four of my books.  She's never read the books. In fact, according to her Amazon reviews, she's never READ a book. She gave two word reviews such as "Author sucks," which aren't actually reviews, and of course, were done in bad faith (typical of liberals and Nazis, but I repeat myself). To be fair, her positive reviews were comments such as "so cute," so clearly, intellect is not her strong suit.

At least one of those reviews has already been removed under Amazon's TOS for being abusive.  The rest will follow.

One of them went to a forum for convention runners to try to get me banned from this "threat" that I made nowhere near a convention. Big surprise--the two concern trolls from the local convention were on there concern trolling.

Which is about what I expected from Nazis. Competence, reading comprehension, context. These are not things Nazis understand.

I am not afraid to call a Nazi a Nazi.  They're welcome to prove they're not. So far, they're right on 110% goosestepping.

Yes, I really did copy my lawyer and local police chief--who's been forewarned that some liberal Nazi piece of shit may try to doxx or SWAT me, as they have done to other law abiding people they disagree with.

Had I an in-person contact at FBI, I'd have contacted them, too. However, it's been several days and they've said nothing.  So, if they were called, they either ignored the issue (as they did the shooter in Florida, but liberals would rather blame the uninvolved NRA than the involved government, because Daddy is never wrong! But I digress), or, having people able to read for content, looked at it and said, "So, some internet asshole called out an internet Nazi. Fine."  Or, it was never reported because the Nazi just wanted attention he could wave like a red flag to his Nazi followers to froth them up.

And that's the fascinating part--not a single one of them I've seen said, "Specifying one group to single out legally is wrong."  But they all said, "Challenging such Nazism is VIOLENCE!" even though I've done nothing but type words.

These ARE the same people who riot, burn things, beat people with blunt instruments and murder them passive-aggressively via SWATting for holding different opinions.  But they claim WE're violent.

Once again, you will see that exact behavior by the Nazis in Germany.

This isn't the first "liberal" Nazi I've had a run in with.

They have stalked and harassed me. I have allowed them to post on my wall within certain limits, and anyone crossing that line--regardless of political leanings--is blocked. I couldn't even tell you their names. I have far better things to do than harass people I disagree with that vehemently.  If there's no reasonable discussion possible, go elsewhere. That is what mature adults do.

But, they've http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/index.php?itemid=369 stalked and gotten me banned for years old comments, harassed my child, in another case stalked my teen daughter, and are actively attempting to get me banned from conventions and other work because they don't like what I have to say.

But they feel perfectly justified in their low-level violence against me and others.

By the way, it's an ongoing amusement to hear someone insist, "I've never heard of you." Again, this arrogates to them a lot of relevance they don't have.  Them not having heard of me has zero impact.

This is often followed with, "But I've never read anything of yours and never will."

I'm perfectly cool with this. This type of person is incapable of comprehending my writing. I know this because if they attempt to, they leave reviews claiming I'm trying to write a "utopia," which I have never claimed and never attempted. Because they don't like it, it must be my utopia. This is 163% wrong.

Further, they are incapable of reading for content. They won't and don't read what I wrote. They read what they want me to have written so they can be offended by it and shriek in their echo chambers.

I do not write for modern American liberals because they're too shallow, bigoted and stupid to comprehend or appreciate the work, and authors who attempt to write for that crowd tend to be broke. I enjoy my expensive steak dinners, exotic gun collection, fine Scotches and spoiling my youngest daughter with toys. Therefore, I write for people who wish to be entertained and can comprehend a message without being beaten over the head with it. http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/index.php?itemid=422 Modern American liberals can't grasp a message even then.

But let me be perfectly clear:

IF the Nazis pass a law that enables them to come after PEOPLE LIKE ME, or THOSE PEOPLE, or PEOPLE LIKE YOU, with not even pretense that everyone is equal under the law, I will kill as many of them as I can.

Now we wait for the Nazis to show up in comments so we can recognize them.

ADDENDUM: A couple of the threads insist "Williamson says he wants to murder all liberals."

No. I have never said anything like that in seriousness.  I do jest about being elected World Dictator, which is obviously a joke. I suspect these idiots would take "A Modest Proposal" seriously, if they knew what it was or who Jonathan Swift was.

I said I would kill certain individuals if they acted in a certain way that violates the Constitution, in a violent fashion.  In other words, reactively and in self defense.

However, if these "liberals" believe ALL liberals would endorse laws treating one group as a lower class, and sanctioned violence against that group as a collective assumption...once again, we've found the fucking Nazis.