Saturday Geeking Picard, Sinking Who, Batwoman Crisis, Where’s the Orville? John Wayne vs Baldrick and Two Down Four to Go

Posted: January 25, 2020 by datechguy in comedy, culture, entertainment

I haven’t taken the time to watch Picard because I refuse to sign up for CBS all access and it seems to be the general consensus is that Patrick Stewart is excellent and while it’s a tad woke it could have been a lot worse.

I really get the feeling that there are a lot of Stewart fans who really WANT to like the series because they want to like him, combine that with the fact that he’s a generally good actor playing an iconic character the he originated and you get fans almost desperate to cheer it.

What does it say about what the woke have done to a series when “Couda been a lot worse” sounds like a victory lap?

Meanwhile Doctor Who continues to crash and burn with rating sinking to McCoy era numbers and worse. The fact that rotten tomatoes keeps clearing out bad reviews makes it even worse in terms of appearance that they have somehow decided to sign for yet another series after this one.

It seems the woke folks at the BBC are determined to purge the last of the old fan base to leave the series pure without it to the point where we are actually seeing people say it’s beyond redemption at this point and better off cancelled.

I have a feeling all of his was avoidable but you get a real feeling that these guys hated their customer base more than the liked the franchise, and frankly the didn’t like the franchise all that much.

The same crashing and burning is taking place in Batwoman. The rating weren’t all that good to start and Crisis on Infinite Earth’s Crossover managed to eat up a lot of oxygen (the whole multiverse idea which now allows the possibility of every single person who ever played any DC character to cross over is big, particularly when you consider that there is at least one comic “universe” where the DC & Marvel heroes co-exist) but once it had to stand on it’s own woke feet the burn began again and the rating are finding new frontiers of holes.

Now it’s possible that even the lousy ratings it has generates enough funds to pay for the series and if it does then they can continue to play the woke game as long as they want (sort of like Doctor Who) where it continues to be a niche show for a niche market, but if that’s not the case and it remains the CW version of the WNBA only surviving because the larger franchise is willing to take a hit to prove its woke credentials it remains to be seen how long it can go on.

With so many longtime franchises committing woke Seppuku the wait for the 3rd season of The Orville has been excruciating. You would not think that one of the wokest lights in Hollywood would be producing practically the last show that can be enjoyed just for being good but McFarline has done it not allowing his woke message (yeah it’s there we all see it just like we did in every series of Doctor Who Pre-Whitaker ) to overwhelm actual storytelling.

The wait is harder because I’ve actually reached the point where we don’t know if the temptation to go full woke is there. He’s reached a point of wealth and celebrity where it doesn’t really matter but I get the feeling he hold just enough of the geek/fanboy inside of him that he doesn’t want to screw over others the way the other franchises have.

Hope I’m right.

Was looking for a free movie on Amazon Prime and settled on Brannigan one of the last pictures John Wayne made where he plays a Chicago Cop to travels to England to pick up a fugitive, John Vernon of Dean Wormer fame.

There is one scene particularly made for comedy geeks where Wayne the acting icon meets encounters someone you would not expect to see in a John Wayne Movie

Yes that’s a very young Tony Robinson before he became a comic icon as Baldrick in the Black Adder series doing a comic pratfall for Wayne. You never see him asked about it in interviews which I find rather strange, but just seeing the two of them together given their histories is enough to make me laugh

Finally with Terry Jones dead the Pythons now have two down and four to go. Combined with Neil Innes recent death it’s a big blow to fans however given their ages not all that surprising.

I suspect it will cause a lot more interest in John Cleese’s visit to Worcester in a few weeks as the realization that the number of chances to actually see these guys in person is dropping exponentially.

I must confess that when I heard he had Alzheimer and Dementia all I could think of was him in the fourth series of Python in drag with a weird umbrella like hood over his head doing an odd dance in the street and ask “given the characters he has played over the years how can anyone tell the difference?”

It’s Time to Play “Name that Speaker”

Posted: January 24, 2020 by datechguy in Uncategorized

Yes it’s time once again to play Name that Speaker where you the reader are given a quote by us the bloggers and invite you to Name that Speaker:

Our quote today comes via former Newspaperman Don Surber quoting a Washington Examiner Piece and is from a person whose face most Americans would recognize instantly but it’s now ifor YOU to read a quote from that person and without any other clue, NAME THAT SPEAKER:

Today’s quote:

I think the Democrats make a mistake when they cry outrage time and time again. If everything is an outrage, then nothing is an outrage.”

Who could that speaker be? Is it Lindsay Graham? It it Donald Trump Jr. Is it Rush Limbaugh? Well all you have to do is click on the More button and you can find out if your guess is correct:

Read the rest of this entry »

Hey Hey Ho Ho this Cultural Marxism has got to go

Posted: January 23, 2020 by Jon Fournier in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , ,

Political correctness and social justice are both designed by the political left to dismantle all of the institutions that built the United States into the freest and most prosperous nation that ever existed.  Both of these darlings of the left, which have been embraced by the modern Democrat Party, are based on the philosophies of Karl Marx.  His philosophies have now been applied to all aspects of culture rather than economics.  The Marxist roots of these leftist philosophies is explained in great detail in this American Thinker article Economic vs. Cultural Marxism: The Most Important Distinction

In this quote the author explains the roots of economic Marxism. 

As Marx phrased it in Das Kapital, “[i]n order to establish equality, we must first establish inequality” (1).  By finding the inequalities of the world, the Marxist can then begin eliminating the obstacles that impede equality.  The more of these sources of inequality the Marxist eliminates, the closer we move to an equitable socialist utopia.  This is why Marx was so adamant about abolishing certain fixtures of society.

Among the ills of society perpetuating inequality that need abolition, according to Marx, were history, private property, the family, eternal truths, nations and borders, and religion (2).  By destroying these sources of inequality, the Marxist is one step closer to the equitable world the Marxist knows is possible.  Marx believed that economic issues are the driving force of conflict in the world (3).  Eliminating class structure was the central goal of Marx’s Communist Manifesto.

It is obvious if you’ve studied the cultural wars that have been raging in the United States over the past few decades, which are all about implementing political correctness and social justice, the goals of Cultural Marxism are the same as Economic Marxism.

One person was most responsible for the transition from Economic Marxism to Cultural Marxism.  That person was at the Frankurt School.

György Lukács, is credited as the first person to advocate for the application of Marx’s economic principles to cultural struggles: “he justified culture to the Marxists by showing how to condemn it in Marxist terms.

Like Economic Marxism, Cultural Marxism is all about the destruction of the individual

The modern social justice advocate uses the abolition of individuality as a tool to strip human beings of their individuality and bifurcate society.  A bifurcation is a logical fallacy where a person makes things one or another, with no area in between.  For example, a bifurcation would be the faulty assumption of saying a person is either a Trump-supporter or a Hillary-supporter.  What about those who like Bernie Sanders or Ted Cruz?  What about those who like both Trump and Hillary?  What about those who like neither?

For Marx, his bifurcation was the bourgeois versus the proletariat.  You were either a rich person or a working stiff.  There was no in between.  For the social justice warrior, you are either privileged or oppressed. 

This bifurcation fallacy has been spread by our education system, Hollywood, and news media.  It now effects all aspects of our culture.  I have encountered this many times when I debate liberals on social media.  It is not much fun to be accused of supporting child molestation because I don’t embrace transgenderism, or being accused of supporting slavery because I embrace the Constitution.

You can see from this next quote why abolishing individualism is so important to Cultural Marxism.

Social justice is not just about living individuals involved in the current world; rather, it is about abstractions, generalizations, and the past.  Sowell explained that “cosmic justice must be hand-made by holders of power who impose their own decision on how these flesh-and-blood individuals should be categorized into abstraction, and how these abstractions should then be forcibly configured to fit the vision of the power-holders”

The social justice–Marxist strips the individual of individuality and then turns the person into an abstraction.  If a human being is an individual, then we can be held accountable only for our own actions; we cannot be held accountable for the actions of another person, let alone the actions of a group of people who lived and died long before our time.  If we are not individuals, then we can be turned into abstractions.  As abstractions, we can then be blamed for the actions of others who classify as members of these abstractions.  Those in power are the ones dictating the terms of these abstractions.

For an example of this, take race relations.  If I am an individual, I had nothing to do with slavery, Jim Crow, waging war with the American Indians, or anyone who did anything hundreds of years before I was born.  However, if my individuality is abolished, I am not a unique individual with specific characteristics.  I can be broken down into an abstraction designated by those in power. Individualism is something I embrace with every fiber of my being. 

I rage at the destruction of individualism that is at the heart of political correctness, social justice, and all other leftist philosophies.  Writing articles such as this is my way of fighting back

Answer: Greta’s not in China For the Same Reason Human Shields Aren’t in Israel or Hong Kong

Posted: January 23, 2020 by datechguy in Uncategorized

At Summit News (via insty) Paul Joseph Watson notes an interesting question being asked by Niall Ferguson about St. Greta of the Climate.

“60% of CO2 emissions since Greta Thunberg was born is attributable to China… but nobody talks about that. They talk as if its somehow Europeans and Americans who are going to fix this problem… which is frustrating because it doesn’t get to the heart of the matter,” said Ferguson.

“If you’re serious about slowing CO2 emissions and temperatures rising it has to be China and India you constrain,” he added, noting that while Greta travels to New York and Davos, “I don’t see her in Beijing or Delhi.”

Particularly since the West has actually done a pretty good job in this department.

“Britain’s CO2 emissions peaked in 1973 and are now at their lowest level since Victorian times,” reports the Spectator. “Air pollution has plummeted since then, with sulphur dioxide levels down 95 per cent. Britain’s population is rising but our energy consumption peaked in 2001 and has since fallen by 19 per cent.”

The answer as to why Greta is not in China or India is the same as the answer as to why “anti-war” human shield never deploy in Israel when terrorists are targeting it or never deploy in Hong Kong when China is targeting it.

The target isn’t the health of the planet, the target is the west and Greta is just another inexpensive investment in asymmetric warfare against said west.

Compared to traditional methods of warfare, reporters, bureaucrats and ignorant teenagers are are really cost effective.

And anyways even if Greta’s just an ignorant teen being used as a pawn rather than just anti west, if the NBA is too afraid to stand up to China why would one expect a 17 year old Swede?

Older Entries
Newer Entries