So how do Americans REALLY view Trump?

My patriotic American friends and I were recently one day enjoying some american beer drinks and making barbecue cooking animal steaks outdoor in typical american backyard, when we talked that how much Donald Trump has make America strong in the world. Everyone said so, and agreed it is hes strength that is making Americans so joyful that now they have strong leader and not weak democratic party lady. Other country agree that they fear his making strength and hope weak lady wins not strong man. This are the ordinary talks we americans are doing with our neighbors now. Trump stronger for USA.

I don’t know who said this, but believe me, Americans think the next four years are going to be tremendous.

Copyright: badmanproduction / 123RF Stock Photo

Elihu was right about this election

I am young in years, and you are aged; therefore I was timid and afraid to declare my opinion to you. I said, ‘Let days speak, and many years teach wisdom.’ But…it is not the old who are wise, nor the aged who understand what is right. –Job 32:6-9

Oh, Elihu. If you could follow the United States election of 2016, it would only confirm how right you were.

Mentally, I am aware that humans (including me!) have biases which bind us, override rationality, and prevent us from gaining insight from people with opposing positions. But to see so much of it in action…

(Incidentally, like Elihu, I also fear sharing my opinion. But it has nothing to do with age. First, there is no intelligence and wisdom And I like to be right about things.)

Fast food restaurant fails to clean bathroom for at least 3 days

In Australia, there’s a fast food joint called “Hungry Jack’s”. Sure, it looks like their logo is merely ripping off Burger King’s, but they are actually Burger King in Australia. Sort of. At least they started that way; go read some Wikipedia if you care about that stuff.

I desperately want burgers and fries now.
I desperately want burgers and fries now.

Anyway, a fairly unusual event occurred in a Perth Hungry Jack’s. I.e., there was a dead body in one of the stalls. Which was there for 3 days.

Curious minds will start to wonder: “Seeing as this was Australia, was the death caused by a crocodile, kangaroo, or rabid wombat?” The actual cause of death was your standard drug overdose, demonstrating that there are other ways to die in Australia besides dangerous animals and ridiculously hot summers.

These same curious minds will likely be drawn to the fact that the corpse was hanging around for 3 days. It’s expected that public bathrooms have more aggressive cleaning schedules.

I will also note that it’s improbable the cleaners overlooked the corpse during the course of normal maintenance. “Sorry, boss, I must have missed a spot” doesn’t fully explain the facts of the case.

The actual scene was slightly less sanitary than this.
The actual scene was slightly less sanitary than this.

But maybe the restaurant isn’t completely to blame here. “Check for corpses in all stalls” is rarely part of a restroom cleaning checklist. And fast food workers are not necessarily hired based on their penchant for initiative.

Source: Body lay in Perth Hungry Jack’s toilet for three days

Neutrality

Yesterday, the UK voted on whether to leave the EU. Most of my reading came from the BBC on this, where the sides were dubbed recently as “Leave” or “Remain”.

I try to be wary of bias from media, even from sources that I like. I’d wager that more BBC writers voted Remain, and maybe this was inadvertently reflected in the coverage.

Interesting quote from Brexit: David Cameron to quit after UK votes to leave EU:

Yesterday seemed to offer a fork in the road: one path (Remain) promised it would lead to a modern world of opportunity based on interdependence; the other (Leave) was advertised as a route to an independent land that would respect tradition and heritage.

Immediately, I was struck by how this sentence seemed to cast the Leave path as backwards-looking and regressive. But I value modernity (progress) more than independence, and have little use for tradition. Could it be that I was reading too much into it?

Well, the very next sentence:

Which path people took depended on the prism through which they saw the world.

Ha! Maybe my prism also distorted how the statement read. Would your average Leaver or Remainer feel the same way I did?

What if they had switched the order, with the Leave clause first? Would it read the same way?

Yesterday seemed to offer a fork in the road: one path (Leave) was advertised as a route to an independent land that would respect tradition and heritage; the other (Remain) promised it would lead to a modern world of opportunity based on interdependence.

Even the imbalanced phrasing could be scrutinized, one side described as an “advertisement” and the other as a “promise”. The words are similar enough, but not exactly right if the clauses were to be truly parallel. I’d expect advertisement to be evaluated as more negative of a word than promise.

Or maybe the average Brit evaluates the words differently than me, an American.

It’s understandable that the writer wouldn’t want to duplicate the word, but there were probably better choices.

Editors can’t have an easy job. If they want to be good editors, that is.

The desperation is real

So I’m in Miami on business. I get this ad:

A vote for Kasich or Cruz = A vote for Trump (Rubio's in there somewhere, right?)

You get a quick glance at it as you’re browsing the internet. Who does it want you to vote for?

1. Trump is smiling, in full color. His picture gets the most retail space. The others are in grey-scale. Smells like a Trump ad!

2. “Kasich” and “Cruz” are the first names you see. But Trump’s name is the biggest. Surely, it’s a Trump ad.

3. In fact, “A VOTE FOR TRUMP” is the most prominent text. Must be a Trump ad!

4. Your eye is drawn to Trump’s color photo with the bright red “SEE WHY” just below him. They want you to “see why” you should vote for Trump!

This feels like a Trump ad that didn’t even deign to mention the increasingly irrelevant Rubio.

Of course, if you bother to read it, you might figure out it IS a friggin’ Marco Rubio ad. Naturally, Rubio’s face is nowhere to be seen, even though his relative attractiveness would be an advantage. And his name is in a smaller, harder-to-read font. Even the little lens flare interrupts the flow of “Marco Rubio for president”.

I’d bet $20 this ad was the brain-child of a couple middle-aged men, one of whom happened to have a teenage son who can dabble with Photoshop a bit.

Coming soon: an Election 2016 roundtable with the Eggs!

Mass killing of eggs in French farmer protest

The Western legacy of slavery, colonization and abuse continues in our “enlightened” society.

Despite lip-service to equality, you can walk into any human supermarket and purchase dozens of eggs. Brought up as slaves by humans, these eggs have nothing to look forward to except being caged and frozen, only to later be fried and scrambled. As if humans asked the eggs whether they wanted to be eaten.

So when French farmers protested that they could not abuse eggs profitably, perhaps it was a mercy that they did so by committing mass genocide against 100,000 helpless, innocent eggs.

Still, even the “progressive” EU seems to care about poultry being treated humanely, but not eggs. It’s a disgrace.

Source: French farmers smash eggs in fury at costs

A surreal expectation about gay marriage

Here in the United States, the Supreme Court is hearing a couple cases about gay marriage. We should hear an answer by June and the smart money is on some expansion of who can legally get married.

Comment sections of articles have a wealth of poorly formed arguments concerning gay marriage. This took the cake:

Furthermore, the forces behind gay marriage have a hidden agenda.
1. Legitimize religious persecution and bigotry.
2. Assist 3rd world dictators in oppressing their people by linking homosexuality and western democracy.

I am also amused by the people that are mentioning that gays DO have the right to marry already…as long as it’s someone of the opposite gender.