Avatar: A Humble Review

When I first saw the trailers for this in theaters (probably for Inglorious Basterds, Public Enemies, or District 9, I can't remember) I thought it was the Halo movie finally coming to production. Then there were blue aliens on flying birds and I thought it was something new. Then it said "AVATAR" at the very end and I was very very confused (thank you Kelcie Reid).

Regardless, it sounded pretty cool. Then Cracked.com wrote a review on the movie calling it "Horribly written, way too long, totally worth it." Quite frankly, the writing isn't as bad as has been said, and it's not nearly as long as Forrest Gump or The Shawshank Redemption, both of which are awesome movies. Besides, for the length of the movie, you are entirely entertained. Every. Fucking. Second.

You have no idea what's happening in this picture... neither do I.

1. Visuals

The human vehicles, again, make me think of Halo. And honestly, Halo rocks. The Na'vi make me think of StarFox, which also rocks. StarFox and Halo being completely awesome, the technology and opposing races in the movie are simply incredible... IMO. Although that's pretty much in everyone else's opinion as well. So far I haven't heard one bad thing about the visual effects which Cameron himself describes as 60% CGI. It's like a lot of Andy Serkises running around and being transformed into StarFox Adventure characters.

As for the moon Pandora itself... dear God. Dear God. Dear God.

Everything lights up. No seriously. The seeds from the trees are bioluminescent. The moss on the forest floor lights up when the Na'vi step on it. Even the Na'vi themselves have pinpoints of light on them! I'll be pretty much anything that the visual effects team was on acid when they were designing this world. It's pretty much a world made of light. Don't take the acid comment as a bad thing either. The world is AMAZING. You can't help but look and you freaking love it. Avatar would be a work of art simply for the effects in the movie that make you wish forests on Earth lit up randomly.

Sometimes, subtlety just doesn't work.

2. Story/Theme

I've heard two sides of this so far. The first side is that the theme is overused, albeit a good one. It's like Dances With Wolves. A heroic imperialist soldier joins a minority native tribe to learn their ways, reports back to military commanders, but suddenly feels a new-found respect for the tribe, joins them, and helps them destroy the invaders. The audience walks away a little wiser for not feeling as imperialistic as before. 'Twere this a average movie, then it'd be cliche and there would be nothing of note. But it's amazing to behold and a cliche theme that has a decent message is ok in my book. After all, "Stop being Imperialistic Swine" isn't such a bad message is it? It's basically an enlarged political thinking of "Don't Fucking Steal."

The other thinking is that the theme and story are liberal propaganda. As Hollywood is decidedly liberal, this really isn't a surprise, but c'mon, not killing the natives of a world just to take the shit under their houses is a step above polite. More or less it's kind of... moral. Imagine that?

Well I've heard the movie take flak because of the way they demean the armed forces by displaying them as trigger-happy pig-dogs.

Of course, being a history major the first thing that caught my eye was the parallel between European colonization of the New World and Avatar. It's basically the same idea in the future. Corporations (Virginia Company in America, RDA in Pandora) ask their governments (England in America, America [conceivably] in Pandora) to send ship on long voyages to take the resources and sell them at low rates at home. Of course, they encounter natives they need to take care of (Amerindians in America, Na'vi in Pandora) and the result is massacre after massacre (Wounded Knee in America to name one, Hometree in Pandora). The Na'vi, unlike the Native Americans, are physically more capable and have a weird bio-mechanical adaptation to Pandora that makes the sci-fi-ness much more awesome to behold.

Imperialism is bad.

Is that such a terrible theme?

If you have not seen the movie, you have no fucking idea how awesome this image is.

3. The Ass-Kicking

Story cliche. Theme simple. Visuals are as good as good can get. What's left? The preposterous amount of ass that is kicked. And I tell you, it is amazing. No seriously. Of the four movies that claim "Awesome" this year, Public Enemies sacrifices massive massive ass kicking for philosophical treatment and historical accuracy. District 9 is more scientific, and has realistic amounts of ass-kicking for taking place in urban South Africa. Avatar is right between District 9's realism and Inglourious Basterds' "HOLY SHIT" category. Of the four movies, Avatar is the only one with armies numbering in the thousands with aerial shots, ground movements, and giant robot knife fights.

Read that again.

Giant. Robot. Knife fights.

Human women don't look too bad either.

4. Conclusion

The point of Science Fiction is to bring us to new worlds to see things different. As I said before, not a lot about Avatar sees the world different if the point is to become another species and see the world through a minorities' eyes. District 9 does that from an alien perspective just as easily as Avatar does. One could argue that Peter Jackson did an even better job displaying the humanity from the prawns while making the prawns completely inhuman. Cameron on the other hand made the Na'vi on the other hand, are a cat/fox mixture with a lot of human thrown in. The Prawns are... bipedal insects. So... yeah.

But I think that's kind of the point. Cameron takes us back to earth by taking us to a new and entirely unbelievable planet... one you believe, frequently throughout the movie, that you're actually there. While you can argue that the Na'vi are more relatable than the Prawns because you can recognize the human in them by sight alone and thus less Science Fiction-y than District 9, it's beautiful to behold. All of it, the Na'vi, Pandora, and the strangely tasteful linked-up sex scene.

What?

Yes. Go see Avatar.

Gosselin Fan? You Need a Life...

I was originally going to do an article on the National Equality March. What's that you say? Well it's a mile stone in the gay right's movement. It's really not as important as people say it is. Granted, not discriminating against homosexuals is just as important as not discriminating against other religions even if it means violating the First Amendment. Still, it's a little overdone. I'd say give all 50 states a Proposition 8-style choice. The states that want gay marriage will have it.

You live in a state that doesn't allow it? Easy, just go to a neighboring state and get one. When you move back... you'll still be married! It's in the Constitution (Article IV, Section 1).

Anyway, what I'm actually doing an article about is John and Kate Gosselin: two people who need to shut the fuck up. Honestly, I don't understand the fandom that seemed to have materialized around these two completely normal people who managed to first have twins and then sextuplets. WOW. AMAZING. TELEVISION SHOW.

Honestly, I've never seen an episode of John & Kate Plus 8 so it probably detracts from my journalistic integrity... I guess I should take the time to do that now.

My Face Just before starting John & Kate Plus 8

OK, I'm still watching the show now. And I can honestly say that there are far more interesting things to do with my life. In addition to watching this incredibly boring show with a woman who has failed to realize that there are people in the world whose bodies refuse to have as many kids as she did and simply don't know how to handle kids as well as she can.

My face after watching the first video.

Kate takes her parenting like a woman who applied for the job of being a mother. John takes to fatherhood like a man who simply does not want to be there. For every word that John says, Kate says about 800,000 more. Her kids are like poor, little, money-making machines for the Gosselins. Kate seems to LOVE doting over her children... but I'm terribly sorry. There's no reason she gets to take millions of dollars from a bullshit TV show when my sister and her husband are an infinitely more interesting couple and my nephew is probably the cutest little boy to ever exist.

I have to say though, in this video (about 4:48 in), Kate is once again going on and on about her extraordinarily ordinary life with a bizzare number of kids when she talks about how "I told John which parts need to be brushed better."

She looks at her husband as if he actually gave a fuck. He promptly wakes himself up and then says, "Uh... the back... and..."

Kate then takes over and lists every part of her mouths. In other words, Kate is a controlling bitch and John was pretty much doing nothing beyond sticking the brush in his kids' mouth and just wondering where these mythical things called "teeth" were. I'm serious, this show could not have been John's idea. He takes no interest in the show and Kate is the least interesting human being I've ever seen on camera.

My face just before I decided to start watching Sunshine instead of John & Kate Plus 8

Being a person who's life has been destroyed by divorce, the Gosselin children will probably see it as the saving grace of their childhood experience.

In keeping with the new and improved policy of updating this blog daily, I will now talk about something very dear to my heart...

Downloading music ILLEGALLY.

If any of you know me, you will know that I have amassed a music collection of absurd amounts (38,209 song and counting) gathered almost entirely through "illegal" methods. (I do own around 200 cds though.) I am proud of the fact that I download illegally, and no government agency is going to stop me.

Wow, thanks Jon. Didn't know that. Can I come steal some music sometime? Sure, but I may have had a change of heart.

I have recently run into arguments against downloading music that challenge my belief in the free market system. A poster on the forum I frequent by the alias "Nolan" has lately left me dumbfounded with his statements. Here are couple samples...

Pinkk - "Hey guys, I just downloaded a Beatles albums, guess Paul and Ringo have to live on the street now."

Nolan - "Let's all steal a Ferrari because they are a successful company and therefore we have no moral obligation to trade value for value.

Anyone who claims to be for individual rights and the free market cannot honestly be okay with piracy.

Or better yet, Pinkk, let's just tax the rich more because they can afford it, right?"

---------------------------------------------

Nolan - "Why should all art be free (ie: valueless). Money is a store of value, it gives physical form and measure to the abstraction of value.

What defines art? To me, a Ferrari is a piece of art. I assume you're saying everything should be free... That is not idealism, that is, at best, stupidity, and at worst pure evil.

If an album is not worth $10 to you, then please don't listen to it."

----------------------------------------------------------

Nolan - "If intellectual property is not protected, we will enter a second dark age.

Why should someone, for example, spend thousands of hours and millions of dollars researching new medication, when they won't be able to get any return on their investment?

Whether you want to admit or not (or think it's right or not--it is right), people are driven by profit and the potential for profit. Stated in a different way: People expect to be able to trade value for value.

If I do something that other people enjoy, and they want to enjoy it, I expect value in return from them.

This is not "evil", but rather it is the greatest good possible."

-------------------------------------------

Most of these posts are taken from this thread and this one.

Some of his arguments are admittedly shaky, but I feel everyone should take what he says into consideration. I myself, one of the biggest 'stealers' of music anyone knows, will be taking this into account myself.

I will leave you with a humorous shirt of an era long ago.



But will this be true for illegal downloading?

Do comment on this post. Let's get some discussion going.

Other Nobel Peace Prize Winners

Hello all!

It's been an exciting few days in the world of Lawrenceville, NJ. No really, it has. But things are more exciting in Washington, D.C.! As I'm sure people have heard, United States President Barack Obama has been nominated and will be accepting the Nobel Peace Prize.

Let me congratulate the Nobel Peace Prize commission for finally dropping the standards of an award that is supposed to congratulate leaders who make significant progress toward world peace to basically an "eh, well he's trying."

For those that aren't aware, Barack Obama has been President for eight months. In eight months what he's done has amounted to virtually jack shit. I've seen him on advertisements for George Lopez's new television show*, acting like a fool on Jay Leno, as well as on the Colbert Report (while of course, that's mildly acceptable given he was supporting the troops, still... shouldn't he be busy governing?). In addition to all that, he went to Copenhagen to proposition his home capital of Chicago for the 2016 Olympics (an important Presidential function) as well as remained completely ambiguous in regards to the Gulf War II. Saying we need to stay at war "as long as necessary" does not qualify one for a "peace prize."

*I saw a commercial while watching The Office two nights ago. I haven't been able to find a Youtube clip yet.

Of course, this isn't a recent Nobel Peace Prize phenomenon. Al Gore was awarded the Prize in 2007. Which makes less (if that's possible) sense. Al Gore was awarded for "promoting awareness of Global Warming." Which makes as much sense as the basis that Obama gets one for "promoting nuclear nonproliferation."

To help out the Commission awarding these nonsensical Prizes, I've compiled a list of candidates that SHOULD have received awards...

Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971)

Deserves the 1963 Prize for not engulfing the world into a nuclear winter.

Mao Zedong (1893-1976)

Deserves the 1959 Prize for trying extremely hard to help put China on the path of Stalinist prosperity. And succeeding!

Charles G. Dawes (1865-1951)

Deserves the 1924 Prize for marrying one of the least sightly women on the North American continent. Charles Dawes: the man who knows the value of charity.

Adolf Hitler (1889-1945)

Yeah, I went there. Deserves the 1938 Prize for not butchering the fuck out of Czechoslovakia and just taking it peacefully.

Fidel Castro (1926-Is it just me, or is he immortal?)

Deserves the 1960 Prize for overthrowing the vicious dictator Batista and liberating the Cuban people... wait, Castro's still alive! There's still time to give him the award! Hurry up Norway! Here's your prime candidate for 2010!

In other news: I now have a twitter. Don't ask what compelled me.

Tiglath-Pileser III, Shalmanesar V, and other cool names you learn in the Bible

Assyrian Kings have BADASS names. Seriously. Besides the two above, here are some other names you definitely should name your children after.

Sennacherib
Puzur-Ashur I
Shar-Kali-Shari
Ashur-Uballit II
Ninurta-Tukulti-Ashur
Enlil-Kudurri-Usur

Future generations should definitely consider using hyphens to add meaningless length to already absurd names.

Why do I know this? Because my Old Testament class has assigned me work which involves learning the names of EVERY CHARACTER IN BIBLICAL TIMES. I must have looked up about 200 names on wikipedia in the past hour alone. Thank god for Intro to the City.

Anyways, this blog has now earned me enough money to purchase a venti pumpkin spice latte at Starbucks. If you wish to indulge my obsession with Vanilla Bean Frappachinos, do continue to visit this blog. Follow it, bookmark it, click the hilarious ads, or just humor me with your response on Facebook once I post this.

I will leave you with a picture of me and my partner doing what we do best...



...act incredibly homosexual together. Cheers

Back. In Black... well Gray and Red.

Hey all, as my friend already said, yes it's been a while since either of us posted, but as you can see we have a wicked layout and tons of thought provoking professors (... kinda) to post new things about. Of course, while he's in the exciting world of New York City (Population: 8,363,710), I'm toughing it out at Rider University in the middle of Bumfuck, New Jersey (sorry, Lawrenceville, New Jersey. Population: 4,081).

Lawrenceville, New Jersey is honestly one of the worst places I've ever been. Actually, now that I realize it, I've pretty much hated anywhere north of the Mason-Dixon Line (this summer I went to Salisbury, Maryland for about 20 hours. It was gorgeous).

Seriously, I've been sick three times in the past month. One month. And this was after the doctor's appointment where the physician told me I'm one of the healthiest people he'd ever seen. It can't be just a coincidence... can it? I mean, how come I've only been sick once yearly, and now it's been the third time in a month? It just blows my mind.

So here I am, lost in the middle of New Jersey, attending a school that is trying so desperately hard to kill me. I finally realized why: I'm a writer. I'm doing anything I can to make a living doing what I do best: write. Technically, we're making money off this blog (like... .33 cents per click or something), and this Saturday I'll be competing for $500.00 at Rider's annual poetry slam. Meanwhile, I'm working on my novel that literally requires more effort than every one of my classes combined.

Unless one takes into account the effort it takes to stay awake for Science of Light and Color PHY-103. So far, I've stayed awake for two classes. One out of sheer will power and a good night's sleep. The other because we were taking a quiz and were allowed to leave as soon as we finished.

Speaking of which, can you believe there's an actual organization that's the "international authority on light and color." I'm dead serious. They're called the Commission internationale de l'éclairage, or CIE for short. To basically sum up what they do, they get to decide what's a color and what's not. Yeah, because that's not total bullshit or anything.

Whatever. Let the French have their colorful thought police and we'll do things our way. The American way. The Anarchist way.

Damn right. Justification is back, baby.

We're Back! (With a megalong book review)

Well it has been quite sometime since either me or my partner have written on this blog. A good 7 months has passed, and a LOT has changed for the both of us. I'll leave Louis to tell his own story but I'll gladly reveal mine.

In the space of a few months, I have graduated high school, worked all summer to save up money, and am now attending The King's College in New York City. I now reside in Midtown Manhattan, where Macy's and The Empire State building are literally less than a block away from my apartment complex. Studying Politics, Philosophy and Economics with some of the best professors I have ever encountered is truly a rewarding experience, but even more rewarding are the current students. Brilliant, bold, and innovative, I am constantly being challenged in ways I have never thought possible.

Since I rarely have free time to write anything personal of my own, I will take the liberty in posting a book review that I did for my Intro to Politics class. The Scandal Of The Evangelical Mind was one of the most pleasurable reads in recent memory, but I will let my book review speak for itself. As lengthy as it may be, do read it, as I got quite a high grade on it. Also remember this was done in a specific essay format, so it is NOT typical blog writing.



"The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (written by Mark Noll in 1994 and published by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing) focuses on the subject of declining intellect among the evangelical Christian population. Noll himself believes in evangelical Christianity, but he feels compelled to speak out on a subject that has bothered him for quite sometime. Throughout the book Noll devotes time to various parts of the scandal, the history of it, the influence it has on Christians, and whether or not evangelicals can hope to redeem the future of the movement. Above all, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind confronts the ugly past of the Evangelical movement in America, diagnoses its problems, and ultimately shows the path to restoring the movement back to its original glory.

As a professor of history and theology at Wheaton College, Noll holds nothing back in his opening statements. Perhaps the most biting comment of the book is when Noll professes that the main problem with the mind of evangelical Christianity “is that there is not much of an evangelical mind” (3).Also, Noll notes that despite the growing numbers of evangelicals, they have little to no influence on the culture of the country they inhabit. Noll has no qualms attacking fundamentalism, and he devotes an entire chapter to “The Intellectual Disaster of Fundamentalism.” Noll devotes his case chiefly to the fall of intellectualism through out the history of Christianity in America.

Accordingly, Noll builds his case chapter by chapter, much like a detective. He devotes the first part of the book to defining the scandal as it exists today and explaining why society cannot undervalue its importance. As the text progresses, Noll delves into the history of the evangelical movement from its beginnings with The First Great Awakening and an explanation of how Jonathan Edwards unknowingly paved the way for the future mentality of evangelical Christians. Noll reserves the third section of the book for the consequences this scandal has brought upon Western culture, especially with respect to science and politics. Finally, he dedicates the last portion of the book to determining whether or not evangelicals can resolve this situation. Noll masterfully writes all of these parts with great clarity and ease, though some would argue that he writes with an overly technical and heavy-handed style.

Ironically, though he directs his book towards an audience that has supposedly lost the majority of its intellect over several generations, Noll writes in such an intellectual manner that one would wonder if his style defeats the purpose of his work. Nevertheless, the book remains well written. Supplemented constantly by lengthy speech quotes, footnotes, and Scripture references, Noll’s arguments attack from every angle. He dismantles his opponents’ arguments with ease, and yet he has no problem admitting that evangelicals do have their intellectual strengths, though few. He praises and lifts up prominent intellectuals in Protestant history such as Martin Luther and Billy Graham but he looks down upon the right wing fundamentalists. Although Noll penned his book fifteen years ago, the text still remains relevant to today’s Christian culture. Although quite wordy at points, Noll never comes off as overly pretentious. In the end, Noll writes a well-supplemented, well-structured book.

Historically, Protestantism has fostered a long line of intellectuals. Arguably the most important theologian of the millennium, Martin Luther’s intellect served him well in his creation of the Protestant movement. The Anglican Church also played a key role in the pursuit of higher learning. And finally the Puritans, who laid the foundation for Jonathan Edwards and the beginnings of Christianity in America, were highly intellectual people, though some may question their methods and interpretations of Scripture. Noll describes that sadly, after Jonathan Edwards, the church declined into its current state. He argues that the emphasis on revivals in the church, something that Jonathan Edwards supported, spurred the decline of learning within the church. “Revivals called people to Christ as a way of escaping tradition, including traditional learning” (63), Noll writes. Noll argues that, through this gradual cycle of reliance on revivals for spiritual growth, evangelical tradition ultimately met its downfall.

Furthermore, evangelicals’ absence in science and politics troubles Noll the most. Noll outlines in great length the formation of modern creation doctrine and the theology’s relative newness. Unlike today, Protestants did not believe in the typical, seven-day account of creation for centuries. In the early twentieth century Seventh-Day Adventists invented the theology, which the evangelical movement gradually adopted into its own doctrine. In fact, Noll argues that "creationism has done more than any other issue except abortion to inflame the cultural warfare in American public life” (192). He also finds that evangelicals place far too much emphasis on moral activism in politics, while failing to see the implications and blessing of the separation of church and state. Noll also notes the absence of any evangelical college with the credentials to match the likes of Harvard and Yale, universities once devoted to furthering Christianity. Noll ultimately concludes that if we save the whole world, but do not save its mind, then we really have not saved anybody.

In conclusion, Noll’s book challenges both evangelicals and non-evangelicals alike. The challenges and arguments he makes to the evangelical community are not only inspiring but also stirring. Yet Noll offers great hope in his final statements. He maintains that evangelicals’ talk about Christ contains “potential beyond estimation” (252). Though evangelicals have abandoned intellect, Christ offers eternal hope and redemption. Overall, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind uses its thorough examination of the topic to greatly challenge the reader to think more critically about the intellectual level of the evangelical Christian movement."

Masked Vigilantism (Why So Serious Part 2)

When I was first asked to do the project on crime in America, I was excited. Why? Well I usually have one or two novels going at any given time. But recently, I was able to narrow it down to one story. This one had literally been in the planning stages for years.

Why? Well, many of the characters had names that I knew I wanted to use... but wasn't quite sure who they would be on paper. So a lot of scrap papers and bits of writing I have scattered all over my house and through my notebooks all contain extremely distinct characters... with the same names.

Other than that, I first got the idea for this story after seeing The Dark Knight. You can probably tell by now that I'm a huge fan of the movie. In fact, as soon as I can find out how to put video on this thing, I'm going to post a few Joker impressions (of which I'm told they are quite "banging").

Every time I see a superhero movie, it always gives me an edge to write something about a superhero... but I was never that good of an artist. However, my natural abilities include being very knowledgeable about history. So why not a novel with a historical perspective on superheroes?

Spiderman and Superman stories tend to concentrate on nothing more than the lives and the superheroes and their secret identities. They hardly go in-depth into the effects that masked vigilantes have on society as a whole. The Dark Knight was the first superhero film I saw that had that (Fantastic Four did too, but it was... just done wrong).

Another graphic novel that really showed the superhero world and the real world colliding was Watchmen. Reading Watchmen was as much of an experience as reading The Historian or The Bourne Identity (two of the best books you'll ever read).

Still, this superhero story hung in my mind for a long time... finally I picked up a pencil with a head full of 100 pages of notes, and just started writing. Soon after the first "chapter" (the story itself isn't divided into chapters, but the fictionpress account is), I wrote a seven page outline from the very beginning of the story to the end.

Eventually, I got a lot of my friends to read it. Only, I kept having to send it in an email as an attachment. And then I would get the email address wrong, yada-yada...

Finally, I decided to revive my old Fictionpress account and just post it there. So when my readers/reviewers want to check out the latest installment, I just hand them the link. If anyone's really interested, here's my take on the concept of masked vigilantism in the modern world.

The basic premise (the historical aspect) is that when the crime rate rises, so does masked vigilantism. The trend begins in the 1880s, during the period of mass immigration from southern and eastern Europe. The increase in immigration led to an increase in poverty which inevitably leads to more violent crime. More crime, more vigilantes wearing masks.

Why the masks? To avoid legal repercussions. To avoid any sort of fame or infamy attached to their names. Some would resort to killing criminals, others would beat them senseless and leave them for the police. Eventually, as crime went down and public opinion turned against the vigilantes, the mask rate would decline as well.

As it does, history would cycle. Crime rises in the 1920s and '30s, so do vigilantes. Another spike in the '60s, and a lull in the '70s and early '80s. And then of course, we have the crack epidemic. In our history, the decline of the crack epidemic could be attributed to Roe v. Wade (see below post, better yet, read Freakonomics). So say Roe never reached the Supreme Court. Abortion was left up to the states and the crime rate never fell?

Would the crack epidemic lead into the 21st Century? We may never know, but that's where my novel A History of Superheroes begins: September 28, 2000.

Note: Just to distance myself from making either Republicans or Democrats out to be the bad guys (which I would love to... but that would mean one of them would have to be the "good guys," which I don't want to do) I've replaced them with the Freedom Party and the Equality Party. Both have traits of the GOP and Dem, but you can decide for yourself which is which.

P.S. I would really prefer not to do this, but as a writer, I am very picky about authorship. If you're too crooked, too uncreative, or are just going to take what I write and claim it as your own, don't bother to click the link. I will prosecute you. Just respect the work and enjoy it.

Why So Serious?

Crime has been around since the dawn of mankind. And with crime, punishment was invented. In modern society, criminologists try to study crime trends. Using homicides as the standard violent crime, graphs from the Department of Justice make it clear where the trends lie:

(C) Department of Justice

I know the graph only calculates from 1950 to 2005, but the message is still there.

Basically, in the periods from 1920-1933 (Prohibition Era), 1963-1972 (Vietnam Era), and 1984-1993 (Crack Epidemic), the homicide rate spiked. In all three of these periods, the cause was obvious: reaction to the 18th Amendment, outrage over the frivolous war in Vietnam, fall in cocaine prices leading to the conversion to crack.

However, homicide and other violent crimes didn't disappear between those periods. It simply fell. Even though statistically, the United States is in a downswing in our crime levels, we're still the nation with the #1 homicide rate in the industrialized world.

Based on some observations, I've been able to narrow down three major sources of violent crime in Modern American Society:

1. Immigration

The FBI contains a list of most wanted murderers. Note, this is not the Top 10 Most Wanted, but this is simply a huge list of wanted murderers. Notice how at least 75% of them are Hispanic. Reading into their profiles, the majority of them are illegal immigrants who've murdered before coming into the US, murdered while in the US and are on the run, or murdered in the US and jumped back over the border to Mexico.

What makes illegal immigrants kill? Well, the majority of immigrants come here looking for cheap labor. Some aren't satisfied with the shoddy work and resort to dealing drugs. The underground drug world is a deadly game where oftentimes, desperate people will do desperate things.

2. Drug Use

About 30% of violent crimes are committed while the accused is under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

The solution wouldn't be criminalize alcohol. We tried that. It didn't work. But perhaps legalizing illicit drugs and regulating their trade could reduce the level of drug-related crimes and certainly bring down the amount of drug-trade related crime by some 90% just as it did bringing down bootlegging in the 1930s.

3. Homelessness/Poverty

This graph explains itself.

Solutions?

Now, it would be easy to say "If we could militarize the border, there'd be less crime," or "If people stopped using drugs, there'd be less crime," of "If there was no poverty, there'd be no crime." Unfortunately, those things are going to happen regardless of what laws are put in place. In fact, it's my firm belief that laws were made to be broken, and the harder the laws, the more people are going to do them.

But perhaps there are other solutions?

One item that people cite as a reason for the continuing drop in crime is the overcrowding of prisons. This creates an entirely new problem altogether, but with more murderers, burglars, vandals, and rapists behind bars, of course there's going to be a huge decrease in incidents. Of course, it also puts a greater strain on our already strained tax dollars.

What about thinking "outside the box" so to speak? In Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner's book Freakonomics (which I'm reading at the moment) they cite a very astute timing-related reason for the decline in crime at the time of the Crack Epidemic.

The average age for committing violent crimes would be 18-24. At the time of the Crack Epidemic, 18-24 year olds would have been born before 1973. In that year, a landmark Supreme Court case was handed down: Roe v. Wade. The plaintiff, Norma McCorvey (alias Jane Roe) was the poster-child for single-motherhood: drug abusing, no education, welfare using, and bitter. She fought hard for her right to "choose" but given the fact that legal precedings take too damn long, she ironically gave birth to the baby just before the Supreme Court ruled that abortion was legal in all 50 states.

Fastforwarding to 1993, the crime rate suddenly dropped while all the experts (including President Clinton who warned of a generation of youth who would terrorize America) said it would rise exponentially. No one considered the fact that those who were fostering the Crack Epidemic simply grew up... and the next generation who would be in prime condition for committing crimes (lower class, careless parents, drug-abusing families) simply didn't exist thanks to Jane Roe.

(Ironically, Norma McCorvey later converted to Baptist Christianity and became a firm Pro-Lifer dedicating her life to overturning Roe v. Wade.)

So, aborting babies who are more prone to a criminal life style is one option. Capital punishment is another option.

The graph doesn't lie. Capital Punishment was against public opinion in 1963 (just as homicide levels began to spike) so the courts struck capital punishment down, bringing the total numbers of executions to 0. As you can see, the result was that murder didn't seem like it was punished so badly any more. When Capital Punishment was reinstated in 1972, the number of executions rose dramatically, inversely proportional to the amount of murders being committed.

I'm being increasingly convinced that humanity is a problem that can't be cured... except through death. The only conceivable solutions to curing the homicide rate only end in... more death. If you can come up with a solution to begin curbing our homicide rate, I welcome the proposal. Otherwise I don't see how there could be another solution.

P.S. Based on the timing of the last spikes, watch out for the next homicide spike around 2020.

I'm Illy

Apparently T.I. is "Illy". Now I love hip-hop and rap more than most kids who listen to brutal death metal, but what is with modern day rappers taking old school lines and acting like they created the line and all of a sudden they have the flow to take over NYC?

"Wrist so frosty
Neck so chilly
All on my mind is to get more millies
Niggas talk shit that's silly
Shawty he ain't about that
Really? Is he?
Nigga I'm illy
Yeah! Haha haha, hey
I run this city
Clearly
Tell em get lost I’m busy really
Nigga I'm illy"


T.I. is at the top of his game here...

(I actually like T.I. and his new album Paper Trails. Check it out.)

Or we could look at Wu-Tang Clan, probably the best rap group to ever exist.

"[Verse Four: Ghostface Killer]

Slammin a hype-ass verse til ya head burst
I ramshack dead in the track, and that's that
Rap assassin, fastin, quick to blast and hardrock
I ran up in spots like Fort Knox!
I'm hot, top notch, Ghost thinks with logic
Flashback's how I attacked your whole project
I'm raw, I'm rugged and raw! I repeat, if I die
My seed'll be ill like me
Approachin me, you out of respect, chops ya neck
I get vexed, like crashing up a phat-ass Lex'
So clear the way, make way, yo! Open the cage
Peace, I'm out, jettin like a runaway slave"

Now I've certainly heard better lyrics in rap, but clearly Ghostface is more "ill" then T.I. In pretty much every aspect. Suck it commercial hip-hop.

Albums That You Won't Believe Are Free

Lets start by saying that downloading music is awesome, and we haven't quite seen anything like this hit the music industry since CD's first came out. Whether or not piracy is really hurting the CD industry is something that will be discussed later, but for now here's some awesome free, LEGAL CD's, that are not only good, you'll probably feel like paying for them.



Nine Inch Nails - The Slip

After pretty much telling off the record companies and telling all of his fans to download his music illegally, Trent took the next big step and released The Slip online for free. Oh yes of course you can pay for it, or donate to him if you want, but hey 10 NIN tracks for NOTHING? Yeah you definitely gotta grab this. Not his best album by any means, but definitely worth checking out.

http://theslip.nin.com/

Explosions In The Sky - The Rescue

Wildly hailed as the frontier band of the post-rock genre, EITS are probably not the best post-rock band, but they certainly have a very distinct, if somewhat mainstream, sound to them. Regardless, a free album of tunes from these guys is not something you want to pass up. The concept of the album is just what it sounds like, a rescue operation. It's totally left up to the listener as what exactly is happening, which is the beauty of this record. For a price, this album is a great addition to a great bands discography. For free, it's something no music listener should be without.

http://www.explosionsinthesky.com/albums.html
Just click on The Rescue and download the mp3's one by one.




Bulb - Best Of Misha Mansoor

While this isn't an album per say, its definitely some free music some people would most definitely be interested in. Bulb is a guitarist from the D.C. area who writes technical, instrumental, experimental metal pretty much all by himself. Most of the songs on this compilation are produced and recorded by him, with the help of the members of his main band Periphery. He puts all these songs on his soundclick site for free, and of course this is a compilation of all his best works. Pretty heavy stuff for the most part, but with a touch of softness to really make things stand out. Definitely recommended for people into experimental, or generally heavy music.

Bulb - Best of Misha Mansoor [2009]

The most expensive free sub Quiznos ever made.

Hello! As said before, the previous posts were done by zilver, and all posts from me, will be from jdsarge91 from now on.

So in an article that is a slightly intentional ripoff of a similar maddox article (actually its PURELY intentional), lets discuss the subject of the free Quiznos sub giveaway. (It's still going on, check it out here at http://millionsubs.com/ )

I've never actually had a Quiznos sub, nor ever even been in one of the sandwich shops chains. Still, after being alerted by a forum I frequent that today Quiznos was giving out coupons for free subs, the promise of a FREE meatball grinder from any food place was enticing. So, after school me and Louis planned to hit up Quiznos and share a delicious snack.

Of course, neither of us had bothered to print out the coupons yet, but neither of us realized this until of course, right afterschool, the library about to be flooded by storms of angry faculty members wishing they could be drinking at home.

I had already sent the coupon to my email during one of my many study halls during the day, but the coupon required one to have a photo id, and with me STILL not having my license, I figured
that I would just have Louis print his own coupon out and we would be set.

Which was my second mistake. Louis was yet not 18, and the coupon required one to be 18 and have a photo ID to get a free sub. Louis then of course, just lied about his birth date on the coupon. Brilliant as this was, and as much as I doubt the intelligence of a Quiznos worker, something told me this was NOT going to work.

This all was happening rapidly as we scrambled to get to the library to print our coupons. Teachers were already quite present throughout the room, so we quickly found a computer that worked and set to work.

Which brings us to the main point of this post. School computers. Imagine an 90 year old blind lady attempting to navigate a spiral set of stairs and you have somewhat of an idea of how slow our school computers are. I can literally sign into a computer, run two laps around the school, go to my locker, get hot lunch from the cafe, talk to an assorted number of staff, and probably read an entire novel before a school computer will load. And that's not even loading some basic applications.

Which brings us to the deeper point of this post. Why are these computers STILL using Internet Explorer? Granted, we are up to the latest version, which means we FINALLY get tabbed browsing, but that still leaves us with the slowest loading homepage I've ever seen. Why in god's name would you have a browser load up the homepage of the school? Lets see, I'm school the school IT guy, I could either have all these computers load Google and maybe actually let them get some work and research done before 24 hours pass, or I could have the homepage be a crappy .org site which is probably only run on one server.

That being said, the computer EVENTUALLY did load Internet Explorer and we quickly went to Louis's email account. Only to find out he had tried to print the coupon before hand during school, and that had failed miserably due to the library printer acting up. So of course we did the next logical step, we tried to print it again, from the same printer that had failed us before. Disaster. Coupons can only be printed ONCE, and since Louis had already tried to print his, his coupon was replaced with a lovely ad telling us to send coupons to our friends. And of course my coupon was kaput as I too had sent it to the library printer. It dawned on us that we were NOT going to be having free food today.

So we did the thing we should have done in the first place. Got Subway.

We (Have) Moved!

Ok, just a disclaimer because being an aspiring writer, authorship issues bug me: all the posts before this one were not posted by my fellow writer jdsarge91, but by me on www.facebook.com as notes. Just a disclaimer. He just set up this whole thing before I did and then told me to make an account. Just in case anyone was wondering...

Anyway!

As many of you know, I work as a waiter at a nursing home. Now, my friend Kelcie constantly reminds me how I work with the dimentia patients... only she's never been to Covenant Village to know that she's wrong. 90% of the residents I serve are simply old people that don't want to live in their own homes.

The reason she tries to remind me of such a thing is because working at Covenant Village just makes me HATE the elderly. Here's 5 reasons why:

5. Personal Space

The only reason this is #5 is because this hasn't happened in a long time. I used to have this happen a lot though. The name tag I would wear on my uniform was attached to a retractable holder. Only, the tag would easily pivot and turn over... covering my name.

When the oldies would come up to reserve a table with the hostess, they would look at me. Try to find out my name (you know, they couldn't just ASK me) and reach out their hand going straight for my chest. Meanwhile, my heart is pounding and my adrenaline is pumping and every Puerto Rican instinct in my body is telling me to break said old person's arm before he strangles me to death(!). But finally the moment passes and they just flip my name tag over so they can read my name.

Mother of Mary, haven't these people ever heard of PERSONAL SPACE? I'm sure it's located somewhere in the employee rights section of the handbook. And if it's not, then I'm adding it. Because honestly, there is nothing quite like the terror one feels when seeing a lizard-esque hand coming at you for an unknown purpose.

As of today, my swivelling name-tag has been replaced with a simple clip tag. This actually is a step down from my old tag which was extremely easy to slide in and out of the time-clock. Now I have to nearly hump the wall just to sign myself in and out. The reason for the change? Not because of the personal space issue (which hasn't happened for months actually) but because apparantly, my supervisor was getting emails from residents that they couldn't read our name tags because they kept getting flipped over.

That's right, old people had nothing BETTER to do than to sit around and think, "Hm... I want to read my waiter's nametag." but since they can't, they take the time to learn how to use the internet, set up an email account, spend the next seven hours typing an email, and then actually care enough to send the email to my supervisor informing her about something that in reality, doesn't matter for more than three seconds.

What bitches.

4. Patience, and lack thereof

Me: Tonight we're having peach yogurt for desert tonight.
Ol' Bitch: What kind of peaches are they?
Me: Peaches? It's yogurt.
Ol' Bitch: Yes, but what kind of peaches are they?
Me: Ma'am, it's yogurt. Not actual peaches.
Ol' Bitch: Yes, but are the peaches freezedried? Or are they fresh?
Me: ... they're peaches. It's frozen and comes in a tub.
Ol'Bitch: But I'm asking if they're fresh or freezedried.
Me: I know, but it's all frozen. It's yogurt. I don't know how to answer your question.
Ol'Bitch: All I want to know is if they're fresh or freezedried. Can you tell me that?
Me: The answer is NEITHER. It's YOGURT.
Ol'Bitch: Ugh, nevermind, forget it, you're useless.
Me: ... *walk away*

3. Coffee?

I have two hands.

"Excuse me, can I have some coffee?"

Sure, one second. Just let me serve these to Table 23. Anyway, I have two hands a list of priorities when it comes to serving the residents. Hot food first.

"Excuse me, decaff coffee?"

Yes, just a moment please. Like I was saying, Hot food first, cold food second, hot...

"Excuse me, we need some more coffee over here."

Sigh... cold food second, hot drinks afterward. Just before cold drinks. So that means desserts...

"Coffee!?"

PLEASE. Just. Wait. I'll be there in a second. Coffee has priority over only one thing: juices. So just excuuuuse me if I don't drop an entire plate of melting desserts just to satisfy your caffeine fix. Well, 90% of the coffee they ask for is decaffinated. So I have no idea why they want to drink it.

Interesting note: 80% of the people that ask for coffee ask for decaff. 90% of the people that ask for decaff are complete bitches. Of the 20% that ask for regular coffee, 75% of them are actually really nice. This must be because they need the caffeine to operate normally. Which must mean that if you give the bitchy decaff people regular coffee, they get really bad.

2. "He never smiles."

I had to seat this woman and her husband once. For some reason, she simply could not remember me for the first six months I worked there. She would ask how long I worked there. I would tell her six months. She would say, "Oh, I don't know you. What's your name?" and I would tell her.

Finally, I told her that I've seated her many times and I have no idea why she didn't remember me. I've learned to regret that decision. Because she's hasn't really remembered me by name, just as the waiter who never smiles. Well, you've just finished three reasons why I wouldn't smile, now here's the fourth.

It just... for some reason, pisses me off when people have to point out that I don't walk around wearing an ear-to-ear grin all the time. I'm tempted to believe that despite organized crime, the Great Depression, World War II, McCarthyism, race riots, and nuclear scare, people from 1920 to 1990 walked around smiling their asses off. Because they sure don't now.

1. Tartar Sauce

The number one reason why I hate working at Covenant Village: tartar sauce. It's the single most disgusting piece of shit I've EVER had the displeasure of having near my nostrils. I've never tasted it, but dear God, I don't ever want to touch it.

For unknown reason, the elderly MUST have tartar sauce with their seafood. If your only source of knowledge about tartar sauce is Spongebob Squarepants, let me explain the ingredients for tartar sauce: eat loads of crab, wait five minutes, puke, and add ranch dressing. Voila. You've just made tartar sauce.

Now put that on some delicious baked salmon... and you've just destroyed a perfectly fine meal.

I have no problem with what the elderly eat, I just hate the fact that I have to actually pull a huge jar of this shit out of the fridge to serve it.

"It's not that bad. You don't have to eat it!"

Yes, but it doesn't just look like puke and rance dressing, it SMELLS like it. The scent simply invades your nostrils and assaults them like Operation Barbarossa.

Conclusion: the elderly suck.

The Most Dedicated Fans 02/10/09

Geek. Nerd. Dork. They all describe someone who has social skills bordering those of the common pencil. Usually these Geeks/Nerds/Dorks have something to concentrate their fanaticism on: a particular video game, a movie and it's "universe," or perhaps a TV Show. Often times, it's a book, something far more mobile and able to carry around in one's laptop case.

One famous fan activity is writing fanfiction. Fanfiction is just what it sounds like, stories written about the characters from a particular game/movie/book/comic series, etc.

I used to be in this category. My particular favorite was the Star Fox series of games. The greatest of which being the 1997 classic StarFox 64. To be honest, there are a lot of StarFox fanfictions I could find that are written better than a lot of books on the shelves. One could probably say the same about almost any other fanfiction category out there, but I never visited any.

The last time I wrote any sort of fanfiction was... 2006. Three years ago. I used to post my fanfiction on THE place to post it: www.fanfiction.net

I was recently browsing the site after receiving some inspiration from The Dark Knight and upcoming film Watchmen (opens in theaters March 6). Just for the hell of it. And what I noticed for the first time were numbers next to the categories. Turns out they represent the total number of writings posted in the category.

So who has the most dedicated fans? In parenthesis is the number of fictions with over 100,000 words.

Watchmen: 34 (0)
Catcher in the Rye: 57 (0)
Tetris: 66 (0)

It pleases me to know that while Watchmen may not have as dedicated a fanbase as Catcher in the Rye, they still don't beat Tetris.

Star Fox: 1,539 (29)
Bible: 2,643 (0)
Mario: 2,855 (16)

I think Star Fox still qualifies as the most dedicated fans since they have more "extremely freakin long" fictions than Mario. But Mario obviously has a much wider fan base. I find it interesting to see that the Bible has a wider base than Star Fox, and even Catcher in the Rye for that matter. Take that JD Salinger.

Batman: 3,112 (16)
Zelda: 13,145 (125)
High School Musical: 15,674 (71)

Batman scored kind of low. But Zelda jumped up there, with what surprised me to see that High School Musical beat out Zelda. I was just like, "What?" are there THAT many 13-year-olds without anything else to do?

Pirates of the Caribbean: 17,142 (107)
Star Wars: 20,970 (209)
Lord of the Rings: 41,708 (273)
Twilight: 62,774 (122)

Here are the high scorers. Star Wars has the highest fan population, but I wasn't really surprised to find that Lord of the Rings and (dear god) Twilight had higher numbers.

Harry Potter: 389,307 (1,623)

And of course, Harry Potter has 4x the amount of the 2nd place winner. Not only do they have breadth (largest amount of fictions) but depth (LONG fictions). Hats off to Harry Potter fanatics for being the most dedicated fans!

02/10/09

10. Lincoln 01/05/09

I compiled a list of the 10 most important people in history. Whether you think they are or not is your job to debate, I'm going to do my job and subtract them completely from history and examine the Alternate History that follows.

Note: "Important" qualifies as having a profound enough effect throughout the world to affect centuries politically, culturally, economically, socially, and in some instances scientifically and religiously.

#10. Lincoln

Let's start in 1808. A newborn baby dies on his first day of life in Kentucky.

The effects of Lincoln's absence aren't noticed until 1845. Lincoln would have been a Representative from Illinois to protest the Mexican-American War. He would have demanded to know which exact spot American blood was spilled on American soil. Instead, that job is left to Georgia Senator Robert Toombs and former President John Q. Adams who lead the rest of the Whigs against the war.

No big changes.

1858, Senator Stephen A. Douglas is up for reelection in Illinois. He wins decisively against a rather unknown candidate without any huge formal debates he would otherwise have had from a certain Republican.

1860, a big election year. Senator Douglas seeks the Democratic nomination for President against a southerner: John C. Breckenridge. The Democratic Party splits. The southern wing nominates Breckenridge while the northern wing nominates Douglas. A compromise forms under John Bell with the Constitutional Union Party while the Republicans are still debating a candidate to nominate.

It's hard to determine who the Republicans might have picked otherwise. The other three nominees, William Seward, Salmon P. Chase, and Edward Bates, each found a way to divide the party against themselves. Lincoln became a compromise candidate. However, perhaps Seward, the front runner in 1860, might have gotten a little smarter and not given such a radical speech. Either way, a Republican is sure to win in either 1860 or 1864. Economic and political conditions are just too in place for it to happen.

This means a Civil War is inevitable. Since the signing of the Constitution, it was evident. The only guess work is, how does such a war play out?

Probably in much the same way. If the war takes place in 1864-1869, then we can be sure that the north will win. There are plenty of immigrants recently come over from Europe, which in turn increases the industrial capacity of the north, giving them more weapons, and more resources to fight a rebellion.

So let's go with that. The Republicans finally decide on William Seward. The Democrats play up a war scare, "If you elect the Republicans, we'll go to war!" There's no clear cut winner (with four parties, that's pretty easy) and the election is thrown into the House, thanks to the Constitution. Since Bell cannot run (only the top 3 candidates) his states switch to Douglas. Douglas wins 14 states over Seward's 8 and Breckenridge's 11.

Douglas has a fine Presidency. Balancing north and south, passing legislation for popular sovreignty. However, as we've already discussed, political and economic forces are at work and a Republican (certainly a more moderate candidate than Seward) is elected. The south secedes, realizing they didn't cast a single vote for the Republican and feel powerless. The Civil War begins.

Does this new President issue an Emancipation Proclamation? Perhaps. Perhaps not. He might not issue it as eloquently as Lincoln did: ending slavery only in the states still in rebellion, instead including all states. Or he might issue it at the wrong time. But what's most likely is his top concern would be saving the Union, not defeating slavery. So the Emancipation Proclamation is put on hold.

The War is won in 1869. Many slaves have been freed, but not all of them. One by one in the 1870s, the states now under Reconstruction abolish slavery. However, without an Emancipation Proclamation, the basis for Constitutional Amendments banning slavery, granting citizenship to freedmen, and black suffrage may be lost for decades.

America would become an official apartheid state.

Of course, this seems to affect only the United States. But looking at the wider world, not issuing the Proclamation and subsequent Constitutional Amendments could prolong slavery not just into the 1870s, but maybe even the 1880s in some states. Or perhaps the new governments in the south see slavery as the only profitable way to recover their lost economy and work through the system to keep it.

Either way, this changes the way all other "civilized" countries look at the United States. Britain and France especially, who were becoming the big Imperial players as colonization in Africa heated up.

Without Lincoln, a more conservative Republican government could take hold of the nation well through the 1870s through to the 1900s. America may just stay out of the European War in 1917, condemning Germany for the submarine warfare, but wanting in no way to get involved. We probably wouldn't even want to send weapons to Britain to get involved in the first place.

Without the United States entering World War I, our military never gets the boost it needs to earn the name of a World Power. Our relations with Europe decline as the war drags on well into 1919 and 1920 when Germany finally breaks through the Allied lines and marches into Paris. Britain gives up and concedes to the Kaiser's wishes, granting them certain African colonies as they take plenty of French and Belgian territory as well.

American involvement with Europe is barely reduced to formalities as we continue to grow a more prosperous business relationship with Japan. Both Japan and the United States are concerned about the Soviet threat and invade the Russian Far East. The war is short-lived and a failure but it effectively creates a Red Scare in the United States. The booming American economy, based in Japanese investments, continues through the 1920s and 1930s, not keeping track of the blatant oppression taking place on their own soil south of the Mason-Dixon line.

Meanwhile in Europe, the investments that Germany put into defeated France fails. A Depression falls heavily onto Europe and Africa, but since America investments weren't in France, it passes North America.

The Japanese are slowing their purchase of American oil. American's aren't very pleased, but times are still good. Soon enough, purchase begins again as the Japanese wage war on China.

In Europe, the defeated French and British turn to more conservative hard-line governments that demand retribution for the humiliation they suffered in the Great War. America has no issue with Europe, and profits are coming straight in from the Japanese. Times are good in America going into the 1940s. But the world around us is aflame.

Of course, all that isolation makes the rest of the world jealous and things could easily turn heads if the Japanese think we should be out of the Pacific completely, or if the Germans think we need to help them against the Allies.

While we avoided the Great Depression, America could be facing a worse war than the real-history World War II. And to top it off, with no military to back it up.

01/05/09

As We End 2008: One Way America is Better than the Rest 12/31/08

Damn, it's been a while since I've written an article... ANWYAY

2008 was a year of firsts. Well, A first: the first black President (and the first Catholic VICE President. Ooh! Shiny!)

Not only that, we had the second female Vice Presidential candidate and the first woman to be considered on the Republican ticket (I'm pretty sure after the second try, a woman will NEVER be nominated for Vice President... who knows? Maybe 3 times' a charm?)

Still, between a black man winning 53% of the vote in 2008 and an openly racist candidate winning 13% of the popular vote only 40 years ago, I'd say that we've come along way. But like Hitler and the horror of the Weimar Republic, Obama is more of a sign of the times than a true factor in and of himself. At least in this respect. The racial one that is.

Obviously, racism still exists in America. But obviously not enough to keep a black man from the largest position in the American government.

Although recently, we're reminded of racism on the other side of the planet: the Middle East.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is nothing new. It's been happening since at least 6,500 B.C. So I'd say by now, we're pretty used to it. I mean, I logged on to my Yahoo! mail address and saw the headline "Palestinian Rocket Accidentally Kills 2 Children." Big surprise. Honestly, I didn't even bother to read the article.

The next day, turns out the Palestinians blame the Israelis. Following just headlines and not even reading articles, it turns out the Israelis sent troops to the Gaza border to prepare for a Hamas attack. Leaders are considering sending "peace-keeping" forces to Gaza, just in case Israeli forces enter the useless strip of land.

And this is where America kicks every other country's ass. Race relations.

During the Cold War, America obviously had a big hand over the USSR which sent political enemies to work camps in Siberia. In several instances, sending American nationals to the gulags. Bringing this up usually heralded the response, "Yes... and you lynch Negroes."

The appropriate American response would be, "Touche."

Of course, 40 years later and we've changed a lot. But have the Russians? As far as I'm concerned, the so called "collapse" of the Soviet Union was in name only. Russia's no more Communist than Japan. Yet, they still have an extremely low freedom rating.

How does this relate to the Middle East? Well, I can understand race relations in America. I mean, Blacks and White's aren't the same race. Differences usually are inherently conflictual. But Arabs and Jews are the SAME RACE. They're BOTH SEMETIC. So you can't really say Arabs are Anti-Semetic. They'd be hating themselves.

Honestly, it's a good thing the Arabs have the Jews to hate. Otherwise they'd all hate each other. Why do the Egyptians, Lebanese, Jordanians, and Saudis want to dump the Palestinians in Palestine/Israel? Because it's a shitty piece of land and they don't want them on theirs.

If it wasn't for the creation of Israel, then it would STILL be a shitty piece of land. The Israelis came in and used their crazy horticulture science and made it a prosperous nation. If the Palestinians were in control, then it would be another nameless Middle-Eastern nation we easily forget among the coups and civil wars.

Think of America without the whites. Sure, we did horrible things to the Indians, but we also developed the land into an incredibly prosperous nation. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to justify the genocide of Native Americans any more than I'm trying to justify the Israeli concentration of Palestinians onto even shittier pieces of land. But still, Natives and Whites have learned to get along? In a modern world where communication is instant, technology is growing at an exponential rate, and we have enough nuclear energy to destroy solar systems, can't we all just get the fuck along?

I'd like to think that the 21st Century would have that sort of a ring of hope to it. Maybe someday we might.

But judging how 2009 is starting off... not this year.

12/31/08

The Separation of Thomas Jefferson and the Constitution 12/21/08

There's nothing that irks me more than someone arguing their case of First Amendment abuse as separation of church and state. After all, it's written in the Constitution.

Of course, being the genius I am, am within every legal right to smack him (or her) upside the head and say, "FAIL!"

The term "Separation of church and state" was first coined by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists. His actual reference was how the First Amendment creates a "wall of separation" between the two entities.

The only way I can illustrate this point is with alternate history...

The year is 2008. The moral decline of the nation is quickly becoming #1 concern on everyone's mind. Even over the economy, War in Iraq, and terrorism (go figure). After all, it's amoralism that caused all these things.

The country quickly converts. A new political party springs up, for lack of a better name, it's called the Christian Party. They vow to win the War honorably, recover the economy with integrity, and return the nation's morality to accepatble standards. Their candidate is the illustrious (roll your eyes here) Mike Huckabee.

Despite being a third party, most Americans are tired of the oligarchy the Democrats and Republicans have created. So the Christian Party wins an electoral majority. Here's our first roadblock: can they do that?

Can a Political Party (a Faction, to use Madison's word) that identifies itself as religiously oriented be elected to any office above the state level? To put it simply: yes. Article VI of the Constitution states, "... no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

So... we can't have a polygraph test for a President (or Senator, Representative, etc.) to admit that he's an atheist. After all, 537 Congressmen (out of 538) are self-proclaimed non-atheists (including Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Mormons, and a Muslim). So in reality, a man who's party is dedicated to Christian principles CAN become President.

Christian President Huckabee is elected to office. He starts prosecuting the war, running plans through Congress to fix the economy, and then tries fixing morality by proposing laws to Congress. What kind of laws can Congress pass?

Well, assuming Congress is now a Christian majority, Congress can pass any law. Including (but not limited to) for example, closing the doors of every Mosque in America to "help fight terrorism."

The problem with this is that it violates the First Amendment. In a matter of days, a Muslim will get arrested for trying to open the doors to a mosque. He'll demand a quick and speedy trial, bring his case all the way to the Supreme Court, and the law will be shot down. Muslims can attend worship freely again.

How? How on Patrick Henry can a religious party legally get elected? When the Pilgrims first came to Massachusetts, their grievance was with the fact that the English government wasn't allowing them to worship in the ways they wanted to. The founders of Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maryland and Pennsylvania faced similar influences. Massachusetts, being one of the leading states in the Revolutionary War, almost completely rejected the Constitution without a Bill of Rights.

The First Amendment reads these exact words, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ..."

This clause was put in the First Amendment to keep the government out of religion, not vice versa.

But there's a measure of common sense to bring up in this. The above scenario sounds ridiculous. Doesn't it? Do you think there will ever be a 51% majority of people in the nation who would vote for a religiously oriented political party?

And I'm sure someone will come on here and say, "They do all the time: the Republicans!" Well if the Republican Party was... then there wouldn't be a branch called the "Secular Right."

As I've just demostrated, even a religious political party couldn't ruin your own religious expression. No Congress, and no Supreme Court would ever allow it.

Case closed.

12/21/08