Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022 Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022 OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published.
Contact OrangeEnt for info: maildrop62 at proton dot me
This is weird, right? The creepy emails pretending the Obama's are your bosom pals who desperately want to have dinner with you, the newest one suggesting Obama is essentially your husband... It's a very weird and very Stalinist conception of the president not as a worker you hire (and, sometimes, fire) but as a member of your family -- the most important member of your family, of course.
Meanwhile, another bit of similar creepiness -- ads have been on blogs (including this one!) noting that it's Elizabeth Warren's birthday, and won't you sign her birthday card?
Why would I do that? Why would a supporter do that? We don't know her. When did Elizabeth Warren join the family?
This strikes me as similar to stalking. Stalkers believe they have a personal connection with people they often haven't even met. There's a strange hallucination of some deep relationship with the target.
In this case, the "targets" are actively encouraging such a false belief, and the attention they seek is a positive one, rather than the typical stalker's negative one. ( Though most stalkers do start out sounding rather positive, too. It's only when their targets fail to respond that they become menacing.)
This just seems very weird to me, and worth some kind of sociological study. What sorts of lonely people are being targeted here, to imagine they have some kind of personal, nearly familial connection with politicians they've never met?
And-- is it fair to target the sort of people who'd actually fall for this? It's like a steeply progressive tax on desperation for human contact.
I suppose the targets here are the Bitter Enders, those who really believed Obama was a Lightworker, an actually religious figure, and so in a real way their fortunes (and the world's, and all the souls on earth) are tied to Obama.
As Obama's political career comes to a painful end, I find old angers being replaced by pity. Pity for this man, whose legacy will be of catastrophic failure, and pity for those who sought something like the transcendence afforded by God Himself, and thought they would find it by voting for a shifty Chicago politician.
Thanks to Dr. Spank.
"God is dead." -- Friedrich Nietsche, 1882
"Mitt Romney has won Wisconsin." -- CNN, election night, November 7, 2012
Many people are naturally religious. They have an attraction for the supernatural (or supernal) and religious transcendence.
The thing is, this is true even of many people who describe themselves as non-religious or barely religious or even atheist. They still have the urge for some kind of Great Cosmic Transcendental Experience; they just neglect the general satisfaction for that urge (God, conventional religion).
This urge doesn't go away; it just gets redirected towards something... absurd.
Obama is absurd. This cult is absurd. People believing that their lives will somehow be better if a Stuttering Cluster***k of a Miserable Failure gets re-elected is absurd.