It is the tendency of the human mind to take more comfort in an orderly world that makes sense. This being the case, I think it makes intuitive sense that a person can take comfort in the concept of a typical life, even if one’s own life is comparatively atypical.

When a person visualizes the concept of the ideal of the typical life, they can attain an introspective understanding of their own variance from that ideal. Though a variance from the ideal may be recognized in one’s own life, a comfort in a more sensible world may be attained with the intellectual acceptance of the concept of a typical life.

A person with an atypicality, such as a mental disorder, or a history of criminal behavior, or even victimhood of circumstances, can have the comprehension that there is a typical human experience. In having this understanding, the atypical person can find a comfort in knowing that a typical human experience exists within the realm of possibility, and with this understanding, a certain sanity can be achieved in accepting the existence of the ideal.

The reason for this is because the human brain continually strives to make sense of the world. The more consistent the world appears, with less apparently-conflicting information, the more comfortable that the brain seems to be, even as the person lives in a state of continual pyrasmos, transitioning from one form of struggle to another on a near-continual basis.

Where there is perceived inconsistency, there is more potential for cognitive dissonance, and a person feels less comfortable with the reality that they perceive as there is a higher possibility of simultaneously holding conflicting viewpoints.

However, when a person perceives a more consistent world, the world itself seems more sensible to them, and they can continue with a clarity of mind that enables them to maintain sanity even in a more difficult life.

For this reason, the intellectual acceptance of the idea of a typical life can help a person to maintain their sanity, even as the person understands that their own life deviates from the typical model.

Based on the general culture of western life in the 21st century, it seems like the model of the typical life would resemble as follows:

• Being born to a married mother and father,
• Starting to attend school at around the age of five or six,
• Moving to a new home perhaps only once or twice prior to adulthood,
• Obtaining a driver’s license at the age of 16,
• Experiencing one’s first kiss during high school years,
• Graduating from high school at age 18, not having been held back,
• Being accepted to a college, and attaining a degree by about age 22 or 23,
• Being gainfully employed shortly after graduation,
• Buying one’s own house while in one’s twenties,
• Being married before one’s thirties, perhaps to the person that they first kissed,
• Having a number of children that’s around the population replacement rate,
• Saving a consistent amount of money for one’s retirement,
• Eventually moving to a smaller home as the children move out,
• Perhaps at some point taking a vacation to Europe.

As one reads through this list, they might notice some variation between this model and one’s own life. They might even find no similarities at all. Yet, an understanding and acceptance of the existence of this norm can lend one the comfort of a sensible world, even if one doesn’t live up to it. In fact, it’s possible that surprisingly few actually do live up to that model of a typical life, as presented above. Even so, it’s the acceptance of the concept of a normal life that enables the mind to perceive a stable world.

The human mind’s preference for a stable world is one of the reasons the case can be made that the human mind is well-adapted to the acceptance of cultural norms and religious ideas.

Perhaps also the case can be made that too much exposure to novel ideas challenging one’s worldview might have the potential for affecting one’s mental health. If true, this might challenge the conventional thinking that continually cramming one’s head with new worldviews, ideas, and concepts would be the ideal way to develop. It might even be possible that continual learning from the internet might be stressing people in ways they aren’t aware of, as humanity as a whole didn’t in previous ages have the kind of access to information that they do today!

Your life might not be typical. But on the bright side, it’s typical for someone. And there’s comfort to be had in the fact that the world does make some amount of sense.

Article the twelfth… The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

What you just read is the 10th amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. It was an addition to the Constitution which was considered redundant because it was implied by the language of the rest of the Constitution, but was added anyway to satisfy those who didn’t want the Constitution’s intent to be vague.

The 10th amendment grants states significant authority to govern their own affairs, and limits the federal government’s ability to interfere.

You now have a better idea of how the USA is run. Why do I bring this up? Because, apparently, not everyone gets it. This includes Presidential hopeful, Joe Biden.

In a recent speech, and repeated in a political ad, Biden points out that the recent mayhem we’ve been seeing (from left-wing groups) are not legitimate protests. Sounds like something I can agree with.

But as the advert continues, Biden blames President Trump for the mayhem, saying that he’s not doing enough to stop it. In saying so, Biden indicates that he’s not aware of the 10th amendment, or how it’s applied.

What does Biden want, for Trump to send in the feds at the first sign of rioting? Is that how it should be handled? It would be great if states had their own institution for law enforcement, that could step in to restore the peace when things get tense. What would such an institution be called?

The police.

You know, The institution that radical leftists are going full-tilt to try to abolish, so there won’t be anyone to stop the looting.

So Trump can’t just send in the feds when state and city governors should be deploying the police. But (left-wing) governors seem hesitant to deploy police for some reason. So, what is Trump supposed to do?

One idea would be to make the offer to governors for the feds to be sent in to restore order. That way, the governors would have the opportunity to accept or decline assistance, and in either case, the President would be respecting the states’ 10th amendment protections.

Sounds like a great idea, right? As it so happens, that’s just what Trump has been doing, and (left-wing) governors have largely declined. Therefore, Democrat politicians are to blame for their failure to protect the people. And this they continue to do in spite of Trump’s repeated offers of assistance.

Kinda makes you want to vote out the governors that don’t want to cooperate with the President in bringing a bunch of dangerous marauders to justice.

I know it’s tempting to be hard on ol’ Joe, but please be understanding: How can we expect him to uphold the Constitution if he doesn’t know what it says?

It’s a sad thing, but left-wing rioters are making America a more dangerous place. Thankfully, there are many creative ways to defend your home, one of which involves a decent set of speakers.

Just a little disclaimer: Use this method responsibly. Do not use it to annoy kids in your neighborhood who are just taking it easy.

So, along comes Antifa, or BLM, or some other left-wing extremists, marching down the streets and threatening home invasions. You can deter them with sound, and here’s how you do it:

Play the following video, with the sound going to your speakers.

You might not hear it, if you’re a tad on the older side. However, younger people can hear it, and they can hardly stand it!

How does it work? The video plays a high-frequency sound wave (15khz). This high-pitch screech is highly annoying, to the point that many hearing it simply can’t concentrate. However, people lose the ability to hear at that frequency as they age. If you play this from your speakers, the younger rioters won’t be interested in hanging around, and the few older people among them would likely follow them away.

There are a few points about this to consider:

• If you’re on the younger side, you might not like it, either. You and your kids might want hearing protection.
• You might not hear it, but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t have some kind of effect on you.
• This should not be used to annoy kids that are minding their own business. Using this to harass people is likely illegal.
• The idea that this frequency drives mosquitoes away is a myth. It’s annoying to one kind of pest, but ineffective to another.
• Obviously, this won’t do more to protect you than your second-amendment implements.

So, there you have it. Use responsibly.

Remember when a conspiracy theory surfaced that now-President Donald Trump benefited from Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential Election? You likely do, seeing as the corporate media ran with it for a long time, in spite of having nothing to show for it, and nothing came of it but yet another waste of taxpayer dollars by Democrats.

So then, we’ve established that foreign meddling in an election is something that the left takes seriously.

With that in mind, consider a prank phone call that recently surfaced targeting Kamala Harris, currently running for VP alongside the presidential candidate, Joe Biden. The fact that she was pranked wasn’t as exceptional as what the prank revealed about her.

The pranksters were a pair of Russian comedians, with one of them posing as popular young environmentalist Greta Thunburg. During the phone conversation, the impersonator offered Kamala a likely-nonexistent recording of Donald Trump disparaging Greta’s efforts, suggesting that it could be of use to Kamala as she campaigns against the incumbent President. Not only did she accept, Kamala said that one of her associates would get in touch with her and work together with her.

Greta Thunberg isn’t an American; she’s Swedish. And Kamala Harris was willing to accept a recording the Swedish girl would have secretly acquired of words that the President spoke to her in confidence. Kamala Harris would have happily cooperated with a foreign entity interfering in an American election.

Of course, this is far from the scariest thing about Kamala Harris, who…

• Kept people incarcerated to exploit them for cheap labor, even paying them $1/hr to fight wildfires,
• Put parents of truants in legal trouble, then laughed at their distress,
• Attempted to prevent a DNA test of a man on death row when the test might have exonerated him, which it did,
• Then demonstrated her accountability by blaming her subordinates for the attempted obstruction.

There is a recurring pattern of abusing and exploiting those who are powerless to resist. While Kamala might not have necessarily been involved, it was the California prison system that decided to experiment on male juvies with involuntary estrogen treatments. Something seems to be viciously wrong with the California criminal justice system.

“Fail with honor rather than succeed by fraud.”
-Star Wars, The Clone Wars

I know that tech companies and social media platforms have oodles of coders that are out to justify their collective existences, but more should be done to prevent them from fixing what’s not broken.

If you’ve attempted to use WordPress lately, you might have had issues with widgets. That’s not as big a deal for me as the fact that the numerous tools used to edit a post have vanished into a non-intuitive interface, assuming that you can still access the media you’ve uploaded through all that mess.

What really stinks of turgid ethics is that to access the classic editor, you have to install it as a plugin. All that would take from you is $300 per year for their Business Plan.

It seems as though it’s not enough for WordPress to intersperse our content with gross-out ads, now they want us to pay to use an editor that we’ve been accustomed to for years.

I’m curious about who is desperate enough for the older, better editor that they’re willing to reward WordPress financially in spite of the fact that WordPress 5.5 is breaking sites.

Let’s consider some of the biggest mistakes that a person can make: In many cases it involves committing a crime. Or it might be investing too much in the wrong stock. Or hurriedly marrying someone only to find out that they’re abusive. Or buying a house in a crime-riddled neighborhood.

Those are some big mistakes, but here’s a whopper: majoring in Electronics Engineering Technology (EET).

If you’re planning on becoming an EET major, here’s an idea of what you can look forward to:

As you get into it, you might have the idea that you’re joining “the winning side”. It’s not like majoring in English or some other elective, you might tell yourself. This is STEM we’re talking about, which all the science people speak of as guaranteeing a bright future. Once they have you believing that, they have you indoctrinated, to the point that it will be hard to change your mind.

For example, if you’re considering an EET degree, you might see someone attempting to warn you against it and you might dismiss them as being someone who made some bad choices.

Once you begin the program, it might actually be the fight of your life. Most college programs flood their students with assignments, but your EET coursework will easily eclipse your rudie-poo electives in terms of difficulty and perhaps even volume. You’ll really be in for it if you have a professor who likes the idea of “weed-out courses” which are filled with arbitrarily advanced material early on in an effort to process out the less-serious students.

In a 25-student class, you’ll likely see a couple students drop in the first week. By the end of the first semester, the class is likely to have been reduced to nearly half, and usually only around eight or nine students make it to second year. Most of the ones left usually graduate.

In case you’re curious, the students that carry on typically make fun of the ones that don’t make it, in some cases as far as a year after they drop.

Considering the challenge involved, and how few students who attempt it actually graduate, one might imagine that there’d be a bright and sunny future awaiting the student that overcomes the hurdles. If that’s what you think, consider the following number:

17

That’s how much money that you could expect to make, in dollars per hour, putting an EET degree to use.

Are you in disbelief? I’ve held three jobs since graduation that paid about the same rate, and I’ve seen another student from my class in the same position, so it seems like that particular rate isn’t extraordinary for EET grads. For comparison, I met an auto mechanic in the 90’s who made more than that even before accounting for inflation. To make the matter hurt more, a grocery store near one of the places I worked at had advertised a non-managerial position that started at about $15/hr.

With that kind of money, you can pick between a car or a one-bedroom apartment. You might even be able to squeak by with both if the apartment is a slum and the car is used. But you’d probably find yourself doing as I’ve done: using the company’s free coffee as an appetite-suppressant so you’ll feel less tempted to spend more money on food.

While this is going on, your dad might wonder why you’re not buying a house, your mom might wonder when she’s getting grandkids out of you, you might feel tempted to convince your friends that everything’s fine, everything’s just fine, and you yourself might be struggling to make sense of what’s going on.

At that point, you’ll realize that you weren’t on the winning side. STEM majors don’t guarantee success, hard work doesn’t always lead to a desirable outcome, and it is possible to work yourself raw for years and have little to show for it. Kind of like with most degrees.

If you’re considering majoring in EET, don’t do it. If you love your children, don’t sign them up for it. As for me, I don’t know what I’m going to do now. I know that I thought EET was a great idea in the past, but sometimes a person’s opinion changes over time and when presented with more information. Obviously, my opinion is different, now.

“What society does to its children, so will its children do to society.” -Marcus Tullius Cicero

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

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?

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.

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.

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.

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?

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