Sunday With My Thoughts – Stuff That Bothers Me

I’m sure it’s related to old age. Or, maybe I’m just a jerk.

Things are finding it easier to get under my skin. Disperser, some say, you are getting worked up about really insignificant details in the overall scheme of things.

But, you see, the big things are outside of my control as items that I can directly affect. Then again, big things don’t just come into existence on their own, springing up out of nothing.

Perhaps, then, my sensitivity to the little things results from both the fact that little things contribute to the big things, and the hypothesis that I can affect, influence, an perhaps limit the contribution of the little things to said larger issues. At the very least,  I get a measure of satisfaction from venting.

For instance, and this happened on somebody else’s blog, a commenter linked to an article blaming the recent outcome of the U. S. elections on the irrefutable fact the Republican Party lies.

Well, I pointed out that there are a number of reasons why the elections went like they did, and that blaming it on one party lying was oversimplifying the issue while at the same time sowing the seed of divisiness.

The answer was a disingenuous “it’s just an opinion, just like yours”.

Aside the fact the two opinions are not the same in scope, my opinion was not specifically aimed at denigrating one of the two parties involved.

And why link to that specifically narrow and divisive article when there are a number of very good articles by reputable students of the US political arena putting forth in depth analyses of the election dynamics and outcome?

Since the guy blew it off, I’ll offer my own opinion because, you know, it’s just an opinion. He specifically sought to present a scenario not in the hope of resolving anything, but rather in the hope of inciting hate and mistrust for one of the political camps. In this case, Republicans.

I see the same thing happen when Republicans lose elections. The fault, you see, is not that Republicans are dicks who did not take care of the people they purport to represent and govern, but rather the Democrats stole the elections by cheating, which, as everyone knows, Democrats excel at.

So we now have Democrats who won’t admit they lost because they are dicks who did not take care of the people they purport to represent and govern, but rather maintain the real reason Democrats lost the Senate is because Republicans lied, which, as everyone knows, Republicans excel at.

Whenever I read these  arguments, the thought that comes to my mind is that  people do not want to take responsibility for their own action, their own destiny, their own faults, and would much rather place the blame for their failures on others, thus absolving themselves from having to address real problem with their policies and the real negative consequences of their actions.

Worse yet, in addition to blaming their opponents, they don’t admit the possibility they misinterpreted what the voters wanted them to do.

Whenever I hear or read of either political party blaming the dishonesty of their opponents for their own failure to engage voters in their cause, their own failure to enlist reasonable and rational individuals in support of their ideals, the thought that comes to my mind is they must truly believe voters are incredibly stupid. I mean,  why else would voters fall for the evidently transparent and blatant lies of the opposition?

We thus have a situation where, instead, people do not act as adults, coming to the table with ideas, compromises, and the desire to resolve differences and solve problems. Instead, we have a bunch of immature, politically ambitious, easily corruptible, and completely irresponsible individuals who like nothing better than to cast stones at each other while living it up on the taxpayers dime.

That’s bad enough, but when the voters themselves self-identify with one group or another and then actively engage in spreading the perception there is only one correct view, there is only one correct way of doing things, there is only one correct answer for every complicated problem, well then, those individuals are, in my book, and this is just my opinion, a waste of human flesh.

Those are a very strong words because even as I say them (write them), I can think of a number of individuals I otherwise respect but who do exactly that very thing; they actively engage not in bridging ideologies,  but with the help of misleading, insulting and simplistic sound bites, they aim to widen the gap between camps and do so to recruit the undecided to their side.

The tactic they use? They reinforce the idea their own position is sacrosanct, righteous, and immune to criticism, and all the while maintaining not a scrap of value can be found in any dissenting position or ideology.

Now, I would cut these people some slack were it not for one very important and depressing fact . . . often, when I point this out to them, that what they are doing is at best misguided, and at worst dishonest, their answer invariably is the old standby: yeah, but the other side is worse.

Understand what that means; they, self-appointed good guys, be they Republicans or Democrats, conservatives or liberal, knowingly lie and misrepresent facts in support of their self-declared superior moral and ethical position.

To that I say . . . that don’t make no sense!

Their answer? I’m failing to see the Big Picture.

I think I’m seeing it very clearly, and are none too happy about it.


Interesting point of information . . . most of the above was dictated on my Samsung Note II using the voice option in the Google Keyboard. It was so because my foot is swelling up something fierce, probably from all the fluid and bleeding due to the injury to the thigh, and so I lay down a lot, with my leg elevated.

Dictation was transcribed remarkably accurately, and the program even suggested corrections. I did some manual editing, but not that much.


. . . and, perhaps, people can tell the difference between my written and oral arguments . . . or, perhaps not.


Note: if you are not reading this blog post at, know that it has been copied without permission, and likely is being used by someone with nefarious intention, like attracting you to a malware-infested website.  Could be they also torture small mammals.


Please, if you are considering bestowing me recognition beyond commenting below, refrain from doing so.  I will decline blogger-to-blogger awards.   I appreciate the intent behind it, but I prefer a comment thanking me for turning you away from a life of crime, religion, or making you a better person in some other way.  That would mean something to me.

If you wish to know more, please read below.

About awards: Blogger Awards
About “likes”:   Of “Likes”, Subscriptions, and Stuff

Note: to those who may click on “like”, or rate the post; if you do not hear from me, know that I am sincerely appreciative, and I thank you for noticing what I do.

. . .  my FP ward  . . . chieken shit.

About disperser

Odd guy with odd views living an odd life during odd times.
This entry was posted in Opinions and Stuff, Politics, Writing Stuff and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Sunday With My Thoughts – Stuff That Bothers Me

  1. pendantry says:

    I was with you up until “I think I’m seeing it very clearly, and are none too happy about it.” which, jarring enough itself, jarred even more with the immediately following technote about how good the dictation software was. I get the impression you like technology; I aspire to be a luddite.

    But one thing we do have in common is that you appear to be saying that Republicans and Democrats are as bad as each other (rather than their advocates’ positions of ‘the other fellah’s worse!’) which tallies with my appraisal of Conservative and Labour politicians here in Blighty.

    PS I promise to take down the copy of your site at and never to torture any small animals ever again.


    • disperser says:

      I’m actually saying there is no functional difference between the major parties.

      In further saying people who maintain there is a difference are often prepared to go to any lengths to support their views, and that includes, but is not limited to, lying, misrepresentation, and even denigration of viable options because they were not generated in “their” camp.

      As for your Luddite aspirations, the fact we’re having this communication seems to call that into question.

      Finally, don’t know what “assembler” is, but if you can hold to not torturing small animals ever again, I call it a win.

      If assembler is a type of reader, that is not a problem. That note is directed at people who physically lift the content and post it on their site (reblogging, depending how it is done, falls into that category).

      Thanks for reading.


      • pendantry says:

        “no functional difference between the major parties” (on either side of the Pond) — agreed. They’re all as bad as each other; their existence lulls us into believing that we have a democratic process, when in fact we lost that long ago.

        Re: ludditis: some might label me a ‘neo-luddite’, on the grounds that I believe in the appropriate use of technology. The excuse for ‘progress’ we currently ‘enjoy’ will come home to bite us soon enough.

        FYI ‘assembler’ is simply an antonym of ‘disperser’. I was trying to be funny (the link I offered is actually to your own site, not the one it pretends to link to) — clearly I failed. My bad.

        BTW on the subject of ‘disperser’ (referring to your ‘about’ page): a lone wolf always — assuming it survives its sojourn — returns to a pack.

        Liked by 1 person

      • disperser says:

        I’m going to blame the pain as addling my brain. Funny, yes. I did click on the link, but I was on the phone, and the format is one I had not seen before (I don’t go to my blog on my phone; I use the WP app).

        As for Dispersers . . . it was my impression (from reading) they don’t return, and are often killed by the packs if they try to return. If they can find a mate, they might form new packs of their own.

        I searched for the original article I read, but that site is no longer active. I found other brief mentions, but not as in-depth. I’ll keep looking, but in the meantime, here’s something:

        Regardless, I have found my monicker and assumed a purpose (real or imagined) . . . to late to change now.


  2. First, Lou Reed. He was a she, but you know that now.

    Knowing NN, I think it was just a link to a post she thought relevant. I seriously doubt she aimed to engender any feelings, she’s far more open-minded than I am.

    To turn the tables, what would it take you to be convinced that there is no reason to carry a gun (big bears, so avoid big bears), eat vegetarian (uh? that’s for lefty hippies, and it doesn’t really help the environment, and animals are there to eat anyway … ) or even consider using gender neutral pronouns? ie NN was not a he …

    I don’t for a minute deny my views are rigid, but aren’t yours too?


    • disperser says:

      Yeah, I did not bother going to (insert non-gender-specific-appellation-here) site specifically to not be drawn into potentially making more comments. Now I know (insert non-gender-specific-appellation-here) is a (insert non-gender-specific-appellation-here).

      I’ll repeat it again . . . relevancy involves the examination of issues, and seldom is confined to accusations. Then again, that’s my opinion.

      As for the rest . . . the whole gun thing is a long discussion, but the short answer is this:
      I would consider not carrying if there were a fundamental change/shift in human nature.
      That only addresses the carrying. There are reasons to have guns besides the potential for self-protection, and if we assume a change in human nature, than the argument for NOT having guns also goes out the window (i.e. they are fun to shoot, ergo, entertainment value with no downside). If that interested, I’ve written extensively on guns, gun control, and why I will argue to keep mine.

      Vegetarian – been there, done that. I’m still not convinced vegetables do not suffer; recent experiments point to plants reacting to other plants being “hurt” as well as to themselves suffering injuries. Levity aside, we don’t eat a tremendous amount of meat, and buy from places we check out or other concerned individuals check out (not always, but it’s rare when we don’t) as at least making the attempt at humane (whatever that means) treatment.

      Understand, I’m not making excuses here . . . I would hunt if needed, and we’ll be in a cruise soon, and we will not shy away from whatever food they have (although I suspect the pastries are in much more danger than meat dishes).

      That said, there is a difference between looking to change one’s own way of living, and changing the planet’s. Cultural and economical issues, distribution, education, etc. etc.

      My hope rests on synthetic meat as someday replacing animal meat (except where, as we often do now, exclusions are made for cultural and religious reasons).

      Really, I see my responsibility, like with most issues, is more to drive the legal system to force changes in food production. A few people going vegetarian is not going to do squat other than give those persons a sense of satisfaction (and a fair amount of smugness; just accidentally get one talking about it and you’ll soon . . . oh, wait; nevermind).

      Unfortunately, the other 6 billion people (and growing) are still going to drive demand. The answer, as always and as I see it, is to push awareness and drive changes to the industry.

      Personally, I would be happy to live on pasta alone, but I think I would need to supplement that with Nutella.

      As for my views being rigid . . . fairly so. I am, after all, 61, and while many might point to evidence to the contrary, I am a thinking being, and I do, sometimes to the exasperation and consternation of others, like to examine both my and other people’s reasons for doing anything. Constantly.

      I can confidently state I change my mind all the time, but there better be compelling, well-reasoned, and sound reasons for doing so. There is one caveat . . . that whole “it’s my responsibility to change the world” thing.

      Like you, not a procreator, so if something benefits humanity 30 years after I am dust, and if humanity is too stupid to fight for the benefit for themselves now, well, then, it’s not going to be a high priority in my life.

      . . . never said I was not selfish . . .


Voice your opinion

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.