Why do I bother? I mean, seriously...

I guess it's the entertainment value.

Just read a little Delaware Liberal this morning: Late Night Video — EXXON Hates Your Children

Didn't bother reading the comments yet... i.e. the decentralized media of the decentralized media itself.  Who reads that?  The 1% of the 15% that actually reads blogs or the decentralized media in the first place?  Ironically, they're often more accurate than the "main stream" of information.... even within the decentralized media itself. 

In any event, anyone could be framed in that hateful way by socialists and fascists seeking central control (For the central, private banking cartel that finances it all?).  For instance, Obama and his Solyndra cronies could be framed as hating your children because they just wasted wealth and had the private banking cartel create more money/debt to enslave them with debt (by happenstance, and not because "caring" Obama is conspiring with his banksters, thugs and thieves in occult ways (cough).).

Plus, anyone who actually produces energy, wealth and therefore liberty or things of value in reality could be framed that way by socialists or fascists seeking control over others. I.e. if an independent energy company not under the political control of fascists was creating windmills that actually produced energy in an economical way then their line of attack would be: "They hate birds. So, more control for us!" Etc. All it really seems to amount to is political control or its absence.  So ironically the higher one goes in each organized collective or in the government then the less people care about the birds, the kids and the environment (Or ambassadors that have to be left to die even when patriotic CIA agents refuse to get the memo.).   Because as psychopaths (like the preening peacock Petraeus) rise to the top of each organization or collective as naturally as the polluted sheen of oil on water, the organization becomes about establishing and maintaining their power over others. And that's the extent of it.  So the best answer seems to be to try to balance one psychopath against another and leave it at that.

Fortunately some of the people at lower levels (like the lemmings at Delaware Liberal) probably do think that they're saving the children (Those that they haven't aborted, anyway.  Psychopathic lemmings? ) or the birds and all the rest of it.  But even there, they probably don't really care half as much as they say they do.  So even if there were essentially free sources of energy without risks and trade offs and everyone could have a free pony pooping rainbows of tolerance and love for them there would probably still be a "rainbow tax" instituted to supposedly protect one poor little pony from "exploiting" another with their rainbows, etc. (After all, there wouldn't be enough space for each rainbow.) Same old excrement... no matter how much wealth people have, they'll still want to control each other. 

On a random note, it's curious how people have been conditioned to deny that a global flood and great cataclysms and catastrophes generally created the "fossil fuels" that they're using to create wealth and more tolerance these days. And this, despite the universal or global evidence in all mythologies that is exactly what happened.  So they reject the evidence of a global flood but on the other hand, they readily accept the framework of a new sort of apocalypse and even use a stigma word like "denier" for those who disagree about the nature of the uncovering of the destruction of the world by fire or "warming."  Yeah, it might get a bit toasty at some point.  Apparently everyone agrees then... so why does everyone seem to be heated with hate for each other? 

Anyway... there may be some irony in progressive "flat earth"/"flat mind"/lemming ideas about "deniers" too, given that the hidden dimensions to the apocalyptic or revelatory Jewish "six" number for the "holocaust"/sacrifice made by fire to create a political "right of return" actually doesn't add up  in reality either.  There's really no way it could all add up to the symbolic six.  And reality is rather complex. So it seems unlikely that anyone is "right" in the way that they're trying to account for things, not the Holocaust "deniers" on the one hand or the Zionist promoters of Holocaust/sacrificial propaganda and the "six million" number on the other, either.


If you happen to be reading this (still?) then you can take the concept of not being right about much for what it is worth, given that it's unlikely that I'm right in my writings too. All I would say is that I have little use for the "art of persuasion" typical to lemmings and my goal is to write and describe things accurately in my own mind or engage others in a dialectical process with the same goal in mind.

Is it wrong to use other minds as a tool with little to no concern for the art of persuasion or marketing and so on and so forth?  Probably.  But the result of tending toward the "cerebral psychopath" side of things (Only here in these dead letters and scripts of law, though... much better to try to be full of care and love in reality, seems to me.) might be that I may be closer to describing reality accurately than others in some way. After all, it's unlikely that all the masses of people who have turned into low level propagandists for other lemmings are interested in the transcendent truth of things in the least.