http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2016/08/j-reacts-to-right-wing-medias-play-on.html

again: i knew those lights were going to be a problem for the electrical, i just underestimated it. i should have looked at them more closely.

so, i'm going to need to replace all of the lighting in the bathroom. in addition to the 175 W bulb, it turns out that the two fixtures both have type j bulbs in them, of 100 W and 130 W, respectively. so, even taking that big bulb out still leaves me with over 200 W worth of lighting in the bathroom. it was over 400 W initially...and, together, this may have been the cause of the spikes....

i can't just put a bulb into those type j fixtures. i think i can order led replacements, but i'm running a test right now to see if it's cost effective.

i might also be able to get a better replacement for that 175 W bulb.

that will be the last thing to do in the bathroom....but i really want to get through august, first.

http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2016/08/j-reacts-to-challenge-of-low-functional.html

i don't want to watch his videos.

i don't want to read his writings.

i don't want to debate his ideas, or debunk his nonsense.

i simply don't want to acknowledge he exists - because he shouldn't exist. not in the 21st century, anyways. the 1st, maybe - but not the 21st.

call me post-millennial, but i'm baffled that anybody could take him seriously - and i refuse to do it.

i would rather impale myself with a rusty umbrella than suffer through the pronouncements of a fundamentalist buffoon like jordan peterson. i've been clear about this in the past: i have better things to do.

he is in the category of demagogic troll that is best left ignored until he goes away.

http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2016/08/j-reacts-to-liberal-egalitarianism-from.html

http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2016/08/j-reacts-to-elizabeth-may-distracting.html

http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2016/08/j-reacts-to-potential-of-trump-being.html

http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2016/08/j-reacts-to-who-is-at-fault-for-vote.html

http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2016/08/there-have-been-persistent-rumours.html

http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2016/08/j-tries-to-react-to-trumps-taxspend.html

http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2016/08/j-reacts-to-way-to-understand-why-tpp.html

the reality is that cenk is a republican, so the fact that he's arguing from the right here is not surprising - he usually argues from the right of the spectrum. and, the reason tucker carlson is so dangerous is that he isn't stupid. but, however disingenuously, or however capriciously, or however tactically, tucker is actually taking the left side of the debate, here. and, i'm left to wonder - how much of a pattern is this? are the post-ideological nihilists in the republican intelligentsia actually purposefully taking advantage of the democratic party's re-embrace of conservative values, to try and reposition themselves as the populist left, as they were in the nineteenth century? has the spectrum flipped that dramatically?

i mean, i'm used to recoiling against cenk for pretending he's a representative of the left, and coming off as a liberal republican - because that's what he is. but, i'm also used to being revolted by tucker carlson for being a post-ideological nihilist. so, i should know better. but, i can nonetheless see the truth as clearly as it exists.

but, it's typical of a post-modern epistemology to ignore the facts and focus on the perceptions, isn't it? this rovian idea that the facts don't matter, that masquerades on the left but belongs to the hard right.

you will excuse me for reasserting enlightenment values and insisting upon a return to empiricism; if you want to change perceptions, you really need to focus on changing the facts that produced them.

but, i've pointed this out repeatedly - we should not be looking to the liberals to support social housing, or take advantage of the surge in refugees to fix the pre-existing housing crisis. we should expect the liberals to sound like liberals, and push for what benefits capital - and excess population levels always benefit capital by driving down labour costs.  that's why the democrats support migrant inflows. this is all very easily understandable. at best, we should expect the liberals to put in place social systems that benefit capital, and that benefit all of us in the process - because we should at least expect the liberals to be smart about it, from a capitalist perspective.

nor are the conservatives going to do anything for the poor, either; that idea is comical.

we should be looking to the ndp for this. and, it's their rhetoric - which is trying to outliberal the liberals - that is what is so staunchly disappointing.

there was a great opportunity to take advantage of a crisis here, and they squandered it.