Hello Me, It's Me Again

Welp, here I am. Talking to myself and then transcribing it for the future to read.

Does the future still read? Hmm. I doubt it.

I know it's been awhile since I have wrote anything. My goal was (is?) to write more in 2026 on My Cousin the Carp than I have in any other previous year. 

I started out hot, but have since been frigid. 

That doesn't mean I've been exploring Antarctica, as Adrien de Gerlache did on the Belgica in the late 19th Century. It just means my writing has been colder than a witch's tit.

But that's alright. Nobody is perfect. Most goals aren't achieved. And the year isn't over yet. So don't give up on yourself.

Wait. Who am I talking to here? I'm playing poker and transcribing my thoughts simultaneously and have forgotten who my audience is. 

Oh, now I remember. I'm writing to myself so the future can know the mind of lunatic.

Isn't it kinda crazy how society devolved in the 20th century? I mean, in the realm of music, how does Geto Boys compare to Chopin or Wagner? 

I wonder how the Geto Boys would've faired on the Belgica?

Anyway, I just lost my poker game. I always lose at every game I play. This isn't a pity-party, it's so history knows that I was a loser.

But hey, it's not how you play the game, it's how you lose, right?

Was that the saying? I can't remember. I think it might be, it's not if you win or lose, it's how you play the game?

Either way, whoever came up with that saying was definitely a loser.

All games are explicitly about winning and losing. Anyone who says anything different is either a liar or a loser. That "humble" crap is just narcissism. 

Speaking of narcissism, I've concluded that only a narcissist would label someone a narcissist. It's kinda like calling someone a "racist." They're both terms of projection.

I assume by the time the future reads this they will already know that. I mean, it's obvious. But unfortunately contemporary culture has become spellbound with inferiority by the satanic social engineers of the status quo.

Yes, that really happened.

Even though I don't know you, I hope you have an amazing day.

Full-Man Fights Half-Man

What in tarnation is this?

I mean, is the AI?

Why would a full-man fight a half-man?

What does the full-man have to gain from this?

Is this just about money or what?

Seriously. In what scenario does half-man win this "fight"? Like what does he do to win? Arm triangle?

I'm not even sure what to say here. I just wanted to make sure the future is given an accurate representation of history.

This "fight" will be reminiscent of slavery or the holocaust or something. The future just won't believe it actually happened. It'll be mythical. The only reason we know it's "real" is because full-man won. If half-man would've "won" then we could say it was AI or some kind of weird publicity stunt. 

But nope. Full-man just basically walked around to the back of half-man and put him in a choke hold.

This video should say: 

Warning: For entertainment purposes only!

Maybe that should be the new motto of this blog.

I think I'll just go back to day dreaming. I mean, day drinking.

Emotional Fragility

I was scrolling social media and saw that some reality show got "cancelled" because the host said an offensive word.

https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/pop-culture-news/hgtv-cancels-rehab-addict-star-nicole-curtis-uses-offensive-racial-com-rcna258747

HGTV has canceled the home renovation reality series "Rehab Addict" after host Nicole Curtis made what the cable channel described as an "offensive racial comment" during filming.

I don't personally watch reality shows, or TV in general, so I don't really care about the show. But I find it so crazy that these "arbitrators of virtue" get so offended by words, while TV in general is pure filth from a moral standpoint. The plot of every show is sex, scandal, violence and crime.

It's no secret that these people in the television industry are satanic scumbags. Yet, they virtuously cling to morality by being openly anti-white.

I don't know what the lady said, nor do I care. But I assume it was something negative about blacks. 

Why can people not have a negative opinion about blacks?

Cancelling a show because someone said something "negative" about blacks doesn't make "arbitrators" virtuous; it makes them childish.

If anything this whole, "you better not say anything bad about black people cause it will hurt my feelings cause it might hurt their feelings" is coddling blacks as if they're children who can't handle being called a bad name.

I saw this meme the other day where some liberal white woman was saying how real ID is racist because black people can't figure out how to apply for it. And below was some smiling black guy saying, "lol oh really?"

This is the essence of "racism." It's virtue signaling by single white women and Jews, because at their core they are bad people who want to feel good about themselves.

If they would just put their faith in the Word of Truth instead of the "N word" they would find the hope they are missing.

God Bless!

Why Do You Drink?

Welp, I did it. I drank a 12 pack to celebrate the ending of dry January and I feel like shit.

You remember that old country song that goes something like:

Tell me Hank, why do you drink?

That was a real banger back in the day, wasn't it?

I can remember being in those Texas honky-tonks getting drunk and listening to music like this.

Y'all probably don't know nothing about honky-tonks. 

It's just another word for a country bar. 

I've pissed-out a pretty penny in many a honky-tonk listening to some country music.

Country music is the best. It's music for the soul. It's mostly about getting drunk over some woman. Who can't relate?

Remember this one?

You don't know nothing about no David Allan Coe. 

He was drunk the day his momma got out of prison.

I should be drunk while I'm writing this. Then I'd have an excuse for the poor content. It's pretty pathetic to crank out this kind of crap and admit that you're sober.

If you're still reading at this point, you definitely don't have ADHD. Maybe OCD. Or an elevated BAC. But, like, OMG! Who is your PCP? Do they prescribe TRT? Do they accept BTC?

See what I did there?

Pure genius.

I'm just rambling now. That's the cool thing about the autonomy of blogging. You can just type whatever you want. It's like your fingers have a mind of their own. 

Pure improve, I say.

I wonder if I was a rapper in a past life.

BRB.

Oh yea, I knew there was something I was getting at.

Why do you drink?

Bloggin for the Noggin

It's the last day of January. 

I'm sitting here drinking coffee at 6 in the evening. But, since January is over, that means I can drink something much stronger than coffee.

Dry January was OK. Nothing eventful happened. I did a lot of chess puzzles. I always do a lot of chess puzzles. 

Have I told you that I'm really good at chess?

I mean, objectively good at chess, not just thinking I'm good at chess. 

I was determined to be "good" at chess, therefore I concluded via objective reasoning that 1800 Elo was the criteria for one to claim that they are "good" at chess.

Your boy is 1900.

Your boy is good at chess.

Check out the game below if you want to destroy the King's Indian Defense.

I'm looking forward to drinking beer again. But it's weird. Because as much as I like to drink beer, I don't like the fact that it's a vice.

Everyone has vices. 

What's your vice?

Mine is obsessive chess and cold beer.

I suppose those vices could be much worse. Imagine if smoking meth was your vice? Or eating your boogers? Or blowing one of those whistles at ICE agents.

Those vices would suck.

I knew a dude in high school who admitted to me that his vice was sniffing women's dirty panties. He would literally sneak in their laundry room and look for the dirty panties and sniff them.

I've heard that some women make money selling their worn panties online.

Anyway, good for them. 

If I could sell my worn boxers for money, I sure would.

Beer time.

Cheers!

Why Are Leftists Obsessed With Anarchy?

Another anarchist recently got killed "peacefully protesting." This one had a pistol.

I don't think anyone supports people being killed by authorities. 

I also think that everyone supports citizen's right to protest. There's nothing wrong with that. But it seems so ironic to use the laws of a nation to protest the very law that makes it a nation: a border.

Without a border, what's a nation?

Anarchists are true believers, I'll give them that. They hate law and order so much they're willing to die for it. That's some serious devotion.

I think we all are subject to the biases of perception. But my perception is fueled by the question: How is the United States a better and safer place to live with millions of illegal criminals residing within it's borders?

Every other country on the planet has borders, with laws to the enforce them. That's the world we live in. Someday that might change, but for now the nation-state is the way of the world.

I recently wrote a philosophical piece titled Is The Search for Meaning Meaningless? The premise can be assumed from the title. 

These anarchists, who are mostly paid agent provocateurs, don't have any meaning in their life. Most of us can relate. The status quo is efficient at dulling the soul. This is why we need God.

Our desire for meaning is God's way of calling his sheep.

John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.

These poor anarchists are mostly overweight, unattractive, single white females and homosexual men.

They have no meaning in their lives. And they seek to fill that void by taking on the struggles of the oppressed. On the surface, this is a noble cause. They are doing what they believe is right, while consequently adding meaning to their life.

In my piece on meaning, I briefly discussed the philosophy of Camus:

Camus concluded that struggle itself providing the meaning to live. That we should accept that life is meaningless and revolt against it.

So our meaning becomes: struggle until you die.

Sadly, our societies have devolved to the point that the youth want to lay down their lives protesting the rule of law. 

These women should be at home, married with children. Smiling and happy. Sad and struggling. Living life as God meant it to be lived.

These homosexual men should be married. Repenting. Working. Struggling to provide. Being a positive example for his children.

It's easy to be divisive, and look at people and pass judgement. 

These anarchists are sad and lonely, desperately looking for a reason to keep on living. Looking for meaning in their life.

They've turned their backs on God. 

It's not my place to speak for the Lord. But maybe God has reciprocated. 

Not everyone will be saved. In fact, most won't be: 

Matthew 22:14: For many are invited, but few are chosen.

We don't choose God; God chooses us:

John 15:16 You did not choose me, but I chose you...

It's not a coincidence that most of these anarchists are coincidentalists. They don't believe in God. In fact, most hate God:

John 15:18–19 If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.

Scripture has all the answers you're looking for: 

Matthew 7:7–8 Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened. 

Don't think for a second that we aren't in the midst of a spiritual war. Satan has an immense legion of minions.

Ephesians 6:12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

Put on the armor of God:

Ephesians 6:11 & 13 Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes... so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground.

May God have mercy on your soul.

All Glory to the Truth!

UFC 324 Recap: Paddy vs Gaethje

The Paramount+ era has officially begun for the UFC.

Doing away with the PPV model is long overdue. 

$100 to watch 5 fights was always a ripoff. Besides, in the digital age anyone who wants to watch something for free will just find a bootleg stream anyway. I'm not sure what kind of money and resources the UFC put into fighting PPV piracy, but I doubt it was free.

Paramount+ is like $9 a month, or $90 a year. If you're an avid UFC fan, and the UFC will put out quality cards every week, that's not a bad deal. 

Speaking of quality, if you didn't watch it, the Paddy vs Gaethje fight was a real banger. It'll be a fight of the year candidate come December. 

Pimblett came in as a 2-to-1 favorite. I think most people thought Paddy would walk through an aging Gaethje, mostly based on what Pimblett did to Chandler. But he didn't. It was a very close, violent and entertaining fight. 

If you have a chance to rewatch the fight, you should.

Gaethje is aging (37), and has been in a ton of wars. I wonder how "punch drunk" he will be a decade from now. 

Have you heard Chuck Liddell talk recently? I think he might be the poster child for retired fighters staying retired. Luke Rockhold, I'm talking to you.

Nonetheless, Gaethje was in great shape and took it to the younger Englishman. 

Paddy battered Gaethje's with 48 body shots and 25 legs kicks, but they never seemed to take a toll on Justin later in the fight like I thought they would. That was surprising to me.

I remember when Paddy first came on the scene, I couldn't stand him and thought he was way overrated. I thought he lost the fight with Jared Gordon.

I think Pimblett has proven to be quite a bit better than everyone expected.

One has to wonder what the future holds for Gaethje as the interim champion. I didn't think he would beat Paddy. I thought he would look old. But, he obviously has quite a bit left in the tank. That being said, I just don't see him beating Ilia or Arman. 

But he was a 2-to-1 dog to Pimblett. And I think he is 8-3 as the underdog. 

I'm not a gambler, but if I was I wouldn't bet against Gaethje against either of them. In fact, the oddmakers will probably have Gaethje at least a 3-to-1 dog against either of those two. 

I'll leave you with this advice: if Justin fights Ilia or Arman on the White House card and is a big dog (at least 3-to-1), put a few shekels on Gaethje. When you win big, don't forget me. My BTC address is in the sidebar :)