Category Archives: Uncategorized


Two is a natural counting number, and is placed between the numbers one and three on a directly-incrementing number line composed solely of successive integers.

Two is the lowest-value prime number; it is the first in the sequence of natural numbers that cannot be divided by a natural number to achieve a quotient that is also a natural number.

An integer is considered to be “even” if the quotient of dividing it by two would be an integer. Two is the only even prime number.

Two holds the third position on the Fibonacci Sequence, the previous two positions on the sequence being two occurrences of the number one.

It is also the number achieved when adding the multiplicative identity number, one, to itself.

In algebra, an exponent of two is used when a term consisting of a combination of variables and constants is to be multiplied by itself. This is of practical application when finding the area of a square when the value of the length and width are determined to be equal.

In trigonometry, the square root of two is the length of the hypotenuse when the opposite and adjacent lengths of a right triangle are both equal to one.

Interestingly, two is the only non-zero number where the sum of adding it to itself is the same as the product of multiplying it by itself.

Two is the base number of the binary numbering system, wherein each significant digit has two possible values (zero and one), which is of foundational importance in computer science, where the smallest element of data storage has two permutations, a high state (represented by a 1), and a low state (represented by a 0). Machine code uses the base-2 number system, whereas the base-8 (octal) and base-16 (hexadecimal) number systems are used as shorthand ways to represent binary numbers. The base numbers of these number systems are powers of two.

Remember: 2 + 2 = 4

What’s it take to find some smiles during a pandemic?

Have you found yourself wondering what it takes to find some smiles during a pandemic? Notice how the guy in the middle is the only one smiling? Maybe he has the answer.

”Paid for with Pennsylvania taxpayer dollars.”

If this is the kind of thing that Pennsylvania is doing with taxpayer dollars, they can make Pennsylvanians smile by giving them their money back.

Genius: Republicans propose bill to abolish political parties with racist histories

snoopy cheer.gif

In a legendary move of ideological checkmate, House Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) decided to ride the recent tide of anti-racism by introducing a resolution that would ban any political party that has historically supported the confederacy or slavery in the U.S.. Getting behind the resolution are GOP Reps Andy Biggs (R-Arizona), Andy Harris (R-Maryland), Jody Hice (R-Georgia), and Randy Weber (R-Texas).

“Wow, what are so many Republicans doing getting behind a bill that would dissolve a political party with a racist history?” you might be asking. And, for that matter, why wouldn’t every single Democrat get right behind it? After all, if the Democrats are anti-slavery and always have been, their votes should be magnetically drawn to any bill that wipes out any party with a history of slavery. Right?


You may even feel an impetus to look into the history of both the Democrat and Republican parties, and their respective histories with slavery and the confederacy. And you may have even come to some shocking realizations.

red pill

Which was probably one of the things the resolution was designed to do.

“A great portion of the history of the Democratic Party is filled with racism and hatred. Since people are demanding we rid ourselves of the entities, symbols, and reminders of the repugnant aspects of our past, then the time has come for Democrats to acknowledge their party’s loathsome and bigoted past, and consider changing their party name to something that isn’t so blatantly and offensively tied to slavery, Jim Crow, discrimination, and the Ku Klux Klan,”
-Rep. Gohmert

Ooh, snap! The sharp end of cancel culture has just been skillfully turned on it’s wielder! If the left can justify changing street names due to the connection of the names to pro-slavery figures in the past, the same justification could be used to change the name of the Democrat party! As for what to call them from here on, you could probably think of some suggestions.

Gohmert gave some solid examples of racism tied directly to Democrats. But you might be wondering, what about Republicans? At the time of the Civil War, the Republican party was freshly-founded by Abraham Lincoln shortly after the collapse of the Whig party. Republicans were a northern party that was strongly opposed to slavery, with black Republican Fredrick Douglass (whose statue was among those recently knocked down) being a key figure in the Underground Railroad, which freed slaves.

If you think Douglass was passionate, you’d get a kick out of Thaddeus Stevens, a Radical Republican congressman who was so anti-slavery, that he wanted to revoke the voting rights of slave owners! He was a driving force behind the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the U.S. Constitution, which today are used as foundations for civil rights legislation. Not only that, he pursued the impeachment of Andrew Johnson, a racist president. Johnson’s impeachment failed by only one vote, but reduced the racist president to being a mere figurehead for the remainder of his term. By the way, the racist Andrew Johnson was a Democrat.

While there are some racist people who call themselves Republican today, their racist stances aren’t officially held by the party, and the rest of the Republican party regards them as outliers.

aye laffs.jpg

So, this particular resolution puts Democrats in a pretty bad spot. They are notorious when it comes to virtue signalling on race issues, apparently due to guilt over the skeletons in their closets. Therefore, one might expect them to vote in favor of the resolution. But if they do, they’d be voting for the dissolution of their own party! But if they vote against it, they’d be disappointing their constituency, and would risk losing minority voters, on top of the many voters who would have learned something about them, in light of this resolution.

This is trolling on a scale never before seen. If Rep. Louie Gohmert were one of the bad guys, he’d be an Avengers-level threat.

Wrong, Pelosi. The U.S. is a republic.


While some would make the case that those in government should not use social media for fear that it would make them look silly, I think it’s great. The very nature of the internet as a free and open marketplace of ideas is expedient to the discovery of those who don’t know what they’re talking about. Twitter is just one outlet that enables people to open their mouths and indicate a deficit of much-needed enlightenment.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, in a gaping gaffe, declared the U.S. “a democracy, not a banana republic”, as expressed in the following tweet:

“We live in a democracy, not a banana republic. We will not tolerate the use of Americans as props in President Trump’s political games.” -Nancy Pelosi on Twitter

That the U.S. is a democracy is something that they tell elementary school students because there’s not much expectation that they would comprehend the nuance behind how the U.S. is run. It’s easy to see how the mistake is made: democracies involve voting, and Americans vote, so one might assume based on limited information that the U.S. is a democracy. As a sad side-effect in this shortcut in teaching, you have adults who don’t understand the proper classification of the U.S. government.

Because they didn’t learn any better, there are people going around speaking of democracy as though it were virtuous. It actually isn’t. A democracy is mob rule.

The U.S. is not a democracy, it is a constitutional republic. The constitution was especially intended to protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority, as expressed by James Madison in The Federalist #10. What’s more, the federal government grants substantial authority to states to govern their own affairs. Very much a republic.

The use of the term “banana republic” is interesting, considering that a banana republic is a small, politically-unstable country whose economy depends primarily upon a single export. That doesn’t sound like the American economy. In fact, the U.S. economy was rockin’ until Dems shut much of it down over a weak virus that mainly only kills people who were already being killed by something else. But I get it, she used the term because bananas sound silly, and because “republic” sounds like Republican, a group that Pelosi seems to take issue with. That the word used to describe the U.S. sounds like something she doesn’t like is a petty reason to mislead anyone as to the true nature of American government, especially for the Speaker of the House, who should understand American government better than most.

But can we really expect better from a leader who makes excuses for violent rioters while getting into Twitter slapfights with the President when he does something to make the situation better?

Civil Suit Alleges Involuntary Human Experimentation in America


It’s been nearly a day since first hearing of this story. I’ve calmed down quite a bit since, but it might be hard to tell. When I hear about things like involuntary human experimentation, my gut reaction is to get a fire going that’s big enough for some sickening human beings to be thrown into.

What’s important to consider is that the complaint is of an alleged wrongdoing, meaning it’s veracity is still yet to be determined in a court of law.

According to a civil complaint filed in the state of California, a minor in a detention center was prescribed estrogen in an experimental treatment with no medical basis, and was compelled to take it. The complaint also alleges that other minors in the same facility have received the same treatment. The complaint also alleges that the treatment resulted in psychological damage, and physical damage requiring surgery for correction.

It would be surprising to me if there weren’t also criminal complaints, considering that the alleged offenses constitute grave crimes against humanity, and shouldn’t go unanswered. The civilized world has already gone to war against depraved science decades ago, and won. If we have to, I’m for doing it again.

Those behind debased science usually prey on the vulnerable among us, which includes the prison population, which can do little to resist. Also among vulnerable targets are the handicapped, loners, those with mental illnesses, and religious and racial minorities.

Considering the outrageous nature of the crime of involuntary human experimentation, which goes against the spirit of humanity, the penalty of death seems the most fitting for it given America’s constitutional framework. Anything else doesn’t adequately reward it for the transgression it is.

But while we’re considering fitting punishments, what would seem the most appropriate punishment for someone who conducts experiments on inmates, even going as far as altering their sexual characteristics, especially as they are made to join the prison population? There is one idea that comes immediately to mind. Pouring Head and Shoulders directly onto his eyes.

”There are things in the universe that are simply and purely evil. A warrior does not seek to understand them, or to compromise with them. He seeks only to obliterate them.” -Thrawn

Amazon Still Going After Anime

no game no life sad face.png

Online retailer Amazon has previously gone after anime figures that they deemed objectionable, even though a basic observation shows that there wasn’t anything objectionable about them. It seems this trend is continuing, as they’re halting sales of the light novel series, No Game No Life.

If you’re wondering what a “light novel” is, it’s related to Japanese comic books called “manga”, except they’re mainly text with intermittent illustrations.

I’m not familiar with the series No Game No Life, but from what I’ve seen in passive browsing, it’s far from the most offensive series out there. I suspect that the bannings are being carried out by a member of Amazon staff who isn’t strongly familiar with anime.

I’m not a huge anime nerd, but I’ve watched quite a bit. From what I’ve seen, the thing that makes anime appealing is the same thing that some people find concerning about it: some anime can have surprisingly mature themes. The fact is, anime isn’t a single genre, it’s an animation style used mainly in Japan. The anime style and its many variants can be used in Japanese shows that appeal to many different audiences, with some made for children, some made for teens, and some anime is made for mature audiences.

The fact that anime can touch on mature themes or have cultural references specific to the Japanese can result in anime being viewed with suspicion by certain western viewers who are more familiar with the idea of cartoons being primarily geared towards children.

An interesting point that’s related to this is that the Japanese aren’t obsessed with the idea that entertainment media can be used to inform a person’s worldview, or that cartoon characters be used to teach the values that parents should be teaching. The Japanese are morally unaffected by entertainment media because they can understand the difference between fantasy and reality, and are strongly well-behaved as people. The Japanese can consume mature entertainment without adverse effect because they are mature people. They don’t relegate child-rearing to the television set.

Because anime can have mature themes and even be adult-centric, it has plenty of potential to be viewed as weird. What’s more, while many western cartoons have simple plotlines that conclude in 20 minutes, anime can tell long stories that can take many episodes to reach a conclusion. Because of this, those accustomed to western cartoons can find anime very challenging. Considering this, anime is often unfairly criticized, and so are the people who consume it, in spite of the fact that anime fans tend to keep it sensible.

Though Amazon has blocked sales of No Game No Life, Amazon hasn’t given a reason for doing so. But I’m hearing that Amazon has also blocked sale of anime-related items that depicted characters bathing and characters in bed with only bedding. There seems to be a theme of vilification over depictions of nudity, as though there were anything intrinsically wrong with that. Nudity isn’t wrong, it’s a state of the human body (the most natural state). However, depictions of the sort are a typical target for busybodies out to score moral-superiority points.

The stated goal is usually “to fight objectification”, as though a fictional character’s plight were equivalent to that of a real human being. A fictional character can’t be further objectified because fictional characters are already objects. In any case, the busybodies don’t seem aware of the irony that they’re creating in speaking out against the objectification of fictional women, when their cause would victimize real women. The fact is, the Japanese entertainment industry employs and is cultivated by women. If the Japanese entertainment industry were to cave in to the demands of non-Japanese busybodies, many women that the industry employs might find themselves without income, and the busybodies’ endeavor against fictional women would have victimized real women.

When it comes to entertainment media, the best course of action is to allow mature, responsible people to make choices for themselves. If something doesn’t appeal to your sensibilities, you can make your choices based on that. What makes the busybodies problematic is that they’re not content with making their own choices for themselves, they want to make everyone else’s choices for them based on their own personal hang-ups. They don’t trust other people to behave maturely. While they pretend to be about liberation when they stand up for fictional people, they aren’t about liberty for real people.

When it comes to consuming mature media in a responsible manner, anime fans do surprisingly well. It’s too bad that there are people out there that don’t understand that.

Why are feminists so bad at dating?


It’s hard not to notice an uptick in the number of feminists who are attempting the dating game, but it’s not going very well for them. It’s not a surprise when you consider that they are a fad ideology that actively tampers with the gender dynamic.

While conservatives have been mischaracterized as old-fashioned and unscientific, their approach to courtship is actually strongly scientific, in that they’ve made observations, formed hypotheses, and rigorously tested them in a manner reminiscent of the scientific method. When it comes to courtship, they were really early to the science, as their approach has been battle-tested through the ages and determined to be axioma, found fit and is beyond dispute.

On the other hand, left-wing idealists, while eager to champion their ideas, are bringing ideas that are relatively untested and therefore by their nature risky. Their attempt-first-ask-later approach is reckless, and is nowhere close to as scientific as they are given credit for. What’s more, what of their ideas for which significant data exists determines that their flagship relationship approaches are adokimon, having been tested and found to be debased and unfit for the intended purpose.

Yet, they still continue to foist their ideas on the body politick. The continual failures of their approaches coupled with their fanatical insistence upon them gives fuel to the idea that the far-left is in league with an insidious population-control movement which uses mass misinformation to further it’s agenda. The irony behind such an endeavor is that it’s primary victims are leftists and the gullible, thus breeding out such groups, and autolyzing the movement itself. Among the victims of the theoretical movement would be feminists.

Because feminists have been indoctrinated into a worldview that treats the male-female relationship as adversarial in nature, it should be no surprise that they aren’t faring well in relationships that require compromise with both the opposite sex and their own expectations. Couple this with the fact that the concept of love has long been mysticized to the point that people find themselves doubting that it’s the “real thing” when they experience it, and the cards are really stacked against feminists when they finally get around to putting their fad ideologies to the test.

Some people are their own worst enemies. The hang-ups that they’ve taken on were usually foisted upon them by someone else, and internalized to the point of being self-reinforcing, making it much less likely that they’ll properly identify them as the cause of their problems.

The fact is, there are generalities that apply to women which can have a significant impact on their dating lives. Related to this is the fact that as women become more successful, they tend to notice fewer men who they find suitable for themselves. This is because women are naturally hypergamous, meaning that they tend to marry upwards on the social scale. Successful women can overcome loneliness by compromising with their inhibition and accepting men who aren’t as successful as they, but in so doing, they might find it difficult to resist their own natures.

What renders leftist movements self-defeating is that they teach men to be weak-willed and accommodating to the point of self-deprecation, and women to be aggressive and dominating to the point of being hard to approach, thereby making the two unlikely to find one-another appealing. The sad consequence is that politically-compatible leftist couples start families with decreased frequency, and if they were to date outside their own political sphere, there wouldn’t be much expectation for their success.

Simply put, feminists are bad at dating, and their own political ideology and philosophical notions are the cause of their own plight. If they had the introspection necessary to properly identify the cause of their own problem, they wouldn’t likely remain feminists. But if they were to continue on their course, it might become the hill that their dating lives would end on.

The Parable of the Ice Cream Boy


Suppose you’re presented with two pictures, one after the other. The first picture is of a young boy, sitting and smiling. His hair is neatly-parted, and his clothes are clean.

You might see him and think, “What a well-behaved child!” and think positively on what you see.

Then you see a picture of another boy, his face smeared with ice cream. He’s laughing, and his clothes are similarly smeared with ice cream.

You might see him and think, “What a misbehaved child!” and come away thinking negatively on the sight.

However, perception isn’t everything.

The reason why the one boy had ice cream smeared on his face is because he had ice cream. The boy who was neat and clean was smiling because he was told to, because someone had to take his picture. The boy with the ice cream didn’t have to be told to smile because he had reason to.

I don’t know about you, but between the two I’d rather be the boy with the ice cream. He’s enjoying a simple pleasure in life rather than being made to put on a charade for someone else’s amusement.

The boys in the comparison above can be likened to many real-world people in a variety of circumstances. Do either of them remind you of anyone you know?

What’s the Deal With Raymond (that cat from Animal Crossing)?

Since the release of Animal Crossing: New Horizons on Nintendo Switch, one character in particular has gathered a disproportionate amount of attention, with some players declaring him the rarest character in the game. This character is Raymond, a cat villager.

What’s the deal with Raymond?

Raymond is a gray-colored cat in office attire. An office cat motif is amusing to begin with, but players have pointed out that he’s the only cat in the game with a “smug” personality, which is odd given how independent and aloof housecats can be in real life. This combination of traits already makes Raymond an appealing character.

But there’s something more that makes him stand out. Raymond has heterochromia, a rare condition in which both his eyes are different colors. Heterochromia is considered appealing in certain creative communities, particularly those influenced by Japanese media. Many in such communities who make their own original characters give their characters heterochromia because it’s one way to make a character seem more special.

If players were to visit Raymond’s house on their island, they would find the interior decor has an office theme. This immediately appeals to those adapting to working at home in light of the recent coronavirus epidemic, as Raymond’s home office indicates a character that a portion of the Animal Crossing community can relate to. More appropriate still is that Animal Crossing: New Horizons was a game that people made a point of obtaining before widespread shutdowns took effect, to the point that people were grateful that GameStop resisted the shutdowns long enough to allow them to obtain a copy of the game.

So, is Raymond really the rarest character in the game? Not really. Whether at the Campsite or through Nook Miles Tickets, Raymond has the same odds of appearing as each of the other potential villagers. However, he is the current most desirable villager, and considering that there’s hundreds of possible villagers, there is high demand for this one character.

The demand is so high, that some players are stocking up on Nook Miles Tickets in an effort to get more chances to obtain this character. Some players are willing to exchange valuable in-game assets, such as millions of bells (the in-game currency) with other players on sites such as Discord for the opportunity to have Raymond move from one player’s island to another. In some cases, players are willing to spend real-life money in excess of the cost of the game to obtain Raymond from another player.

Of note is that because Raymond is a new character, an Amiibo for Raymond was not available at the time Animal Crossing: New Horizons was released, so players couldn’t simply scan it for the guarantee that Raymond would appear at the campsite.

Expediting Raymond’s popularity is that because players notice other players going to great lengths to obtain this character, there is an increased perception of value to him. On top of that, he gets noticed just for all the attention that surrounds him, similar to how the first result of a search engine favors results that get more traffic, and placing higher in search results results in yet more traffic.

There are many other popular villagers in ACNH. Among these are Marina, an octopus (there are only three octopuses in the game), Ankha, a cat that resembles King Tut’s sarcophagus, Lucky, a dog that was heavily bandaged, and Marshall, a squirrel that resembles a marshmallow.

What’s my favorite villager? Maybe I’ll reveal that in another post.

Killing Snoke


“You will not bow before Snoke.” -Rey, Star Wars: The Last Jedi

As I examine the character of Snoke, it becomes apparent that he is a stand-in for the kind of psychological turmoil that would be experienced by a person in Ben Solo’s position. While it’s apparent that Snoke in the Star Wars universe is a personal entity that is adversarial and interacts with the other characters, it seems to me that he’s an allegory for something experienced by those with mental illness and emotional trauma in the real world.

Snoke seems to be a stand-in for unwelcome, demanding voices as experienced by someone with a psychosis.

While the cause of such voices is still not fully understood, it seems they are caused by thoughts in a person’s own head, which the brain wrongly interprets as audible. This phenomenon can be caused by, among other things, prolonged stress or perhaps just inadequate sleep.

In persons with obsessive-compulsive disorder, a person’s unwanted thoughts can “take over” making them believe that they have to do certain things. At first, it’s usually trivial and ritualistic tasks, like how a person washes their hands. But conceivably, these thoughts can develop into “voices” that can “guide” them into some poor life choices. There are cases where the voices have a spiritual meaning to the person experiencing them, and they might wrongly attribute them to the divine!

Considering this, the allegory of Snoke becomes much more apparent. For one thing, his voice sounds almost exactly how a judgmental internal voice would sound: wise enough to sound like they’d have answers to the person’s problems, but can even be loud and abusive if there exists even a minute flaw.

Also noteworthy is that Snoke demanded continual sacrifices to placate him, and what’s more, what he demanded was whatever could give Ben hope outside of Snoke himself. Evil voices demand similar sacrifices! It was Snoke who pressured Ben into killing his father, who was a connection to Ben’s old life. When Ben did kill his father, it still wasn’t enough. What’s more, the fact that Ben felt conflicted about it was enough to invalidate the sacrifice as far as Snoke was concerned!

Ben then felt pressured into killing his own mother, and to his credit, he didn’t go through with it. However, Ben’s conflict was noteworthy enough for him to bring up again when meeting Rey. Snoke was willing to condemn Ben for his mere thoughts!

But it’s interesting that Snoke would have such direct access to Ben’s thoughts, especially considering that he couldn’t do the same to Rey without the assistance of a force-ability designed to that end. For some reason, Snoke had more direct access to Ben.

Snoke has been manipulating Ben for a long time. Ben was coming to realize that, if Snoke had his way, the abuse would be continual.

So Ben killed Snoke.


For a long time, Snoke pulled Ben along with the idea that he could bring out Ben’s potential. But the reality was, Snoke was intent on continually using him. With Snoke dead, Ben ascended to the position of Supreme Leader of the First Order, and in so doing, he began to rise to live up to his potential.

”The Supreme Leader is dead.” -Kylo Ren

”Long live the Supreme Leader.” -Armitage Hux