can be thrown away.

'Nuff said.

Never got that.

(???)

They seem to HATE EACH OTHER.

I'm hyper-rugged individualist "take some gaddamned responsibility" Generation X and me and the crazy "squeeeeeze every last minute out of your life with your bare hands!!!" Boomers and the heroic "just be kind and do the right thing" Greatest Gen, and even sensible, placid, unassuming "I'm not really sure what the fuss is all about" Gen Jones (who nobody ever listens to), and, like, everybody are all looking at each other thinking "shite dudes, we fucked all this up, the poor Gen Y guys are going to be so mad at us" and what Gen Y seems to do almost universally is point fingers at each other with accusations of "NARCISSISM!"

There's basically no guns. Well, there are some, but not in anything like significant numbers.

I suppose I just take it for granted that I can wander about without thinking "has that guy got a gun" or "oh no, another gun massacre".



Nobody where I live is bothered about protecting themselves. There's nothing in particular to protect ourselves against, really. Apart from the occasional drunken moron.

Don't you understand that you are all responsible for my emotional well-being?

How can I feel good about myself and the world I'm living in when I am surrounded by so many upsetting people?

Can't you see that my belief system only has any integrity if you all agree with it?

Sometimes I think you people and I simply aren't on the same page at all.

Don't you realise that when you disagree with me it's because you have a deep and unconscious personality flaw that distorts your thinking, a flaw that I can understand and you can't?

You must understand - I excel in standing on a sort of psychologically internal pedestal, from which I can make pithy observations about our conversation as a whole, whereas when you appear to attempt something similar you're just ignoring me.

Don't you realise that if you leave me with no way of contradicting what you've posted then it makes me look bad and consequently feel bad? That's kind of a jerky thing to do, isn't it? You're kind of a jerk.

There's one thing I'd like to draw particular attention to - when I make generalisations I do it properly because of the special vantage point from which I make them, but when you do it, the special vantage point from which you make them means you're in the wrong.

"My fellow Americans, tonight I want to talk to you about Syria, why it matters and where we go from here.

Over the past two years, what began as a series of peaceful protests against the repressive regime of President Bashar al-Assad has turned into a brutal civil war. Over 100,000 people have been killed. Millions have fled to neighboring countries, risking greater instability and sectarian conflict in the region.

The question now is what the United States of America, and the international community, is prepared to do about it. The answer is: not very much..."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/09/11/this-is-the-speech-obama-would-give-on-syria-if-he-were-brutally-honest/

Instead of shadowy, manipulative, super-powerful, super-clever forces carefully controlling your every thought for deeply nefarious reasons, Mr super-powerful, super-clever Wonderguy is carefully controlling everybody's thoughts for ultra-lovely reasons.

AND wrong when Obama wanted it?

....there needs to be a diplomatic solution...."

Then there IS a diplomatic solution...

And the same people who were originally supporting the bombing point at those who preferred the diplomatic solution and accuse them of not admitting that they were in the wrong.

That's actually very strange behaviour, isn't it?

Sorry. It's just true.