Apparently, “Town Hall Meeting,” is code for “lets all be belligerent assholes”

I have absolutely no problem with citizens in a democratic society vocalizing their concerns, opinions, or frustrations to their representatives.  What the hell would be the point of even calling them “representatives,” if people didn’t or weren’t allowed to tell them how to represent them?

That being said, I’m not a fascist, nor am I an “authoritarian,” Republican.  So when I say “how about you sit your dumbass down until you can conduct yourself like an adult,” you know it’s not because I want to stifle debate or silence opinion.

On the contrary, telling these morons that they need to shut the fuck up would increase the promulgation of opinion and enhance debate.  Of course, I’m speaking about the town hall meetings over the budget proposal, specifically the part that wants to turn Medicare into a voucher program.  By all accounts, the Democrat citizens going to these meetings are not just “asking questions,” like the folks at Crooks and Liars are claiming.  These people are disrupting these meetings by shouting, heckling, and booing the Representatives.

If there are any liberals who read this blog, I just want you to know that I am in no way, shape, or form, biased.  When the whole healthcare thing was going down, I thought that the people carrying guns to town hall meetings and shitting allover the congressmen and women were also fools.

These people aren’t fools because they’re angry or concerned.  They’re not even fools for wanting to be heard.  They’re fools because they are going about it in an entirely counterproductive way.  I’m sorry, but debate and persuasive speech do not include calling Allen West a war criminal, nor do they include shouting to the point where the meeting becomes pointless.

If you look at this objectively, this guy
is a moron.

Use a little logic, you fucking idiots.  Do you think the Republicans would even be holding these town hall meetings if they thought everyone loved the Medicare idea?  Don’t you think that they know full well that just about everyone thinks it’s an insanely shitty idea?  They’re not interested in your anger, your protest signs, or your bullshit.  They’re interested in your thoughts (supposedly).  They also want you to listen to what they have to say about it.  They want to answer your questions.

What’s funny about this is that Liberals shit allover Tea Partiers and others who angrily disrupted the town hall meetings over the healthcare bill.  Apparently, being angry and disruptive is only okay as long as it’s for your cause or political ideology.

What I find amazing with all of this is how these petulant children have basically vindicated history.  Over 200 years ago the Founding Fathers all posited that the people were fucking morons, “reptiles basking in the sun,” one of them posited.  They knew that representative government, a republic, was preferable to pure democracy because mob rule would surely have ensued, and then everyone would be screwed.

These idiots proved them right.  Instead of asking intelligent questions they shout and boo.  How is this reasoned debate?  How is this in any way indicative of rational discourse?  Let me remind my readers that I think all of these people have every right to be upset and indignant.  The Medicare plan sounds fairly horrible to me, and I think that there has to be a better way (what that is, admittedly I don’t know).

If you look at this objectively, these guys are morons.

So be mad, be indignant.  Ask questions, and press your Representatives for information and answers.  Let your Representatives know that this shit will cost them your vote.  But please, PLEASE stop acting like fucking jackasses.  Democrats, all you’re doing is circle jerking each other and making yourselves look like assholes. 

Let’s be realistic here.  They know you’re not going to vote for them anyway.  The only people’s opinions that they give a shit about are 55+ Republicans and independents.  And given the poor reception of this plan, they’re likely going to scrap it.  Oh, and if they do scrap it, don’t pretend like it’s some grand Democrat Party victory, because again, they already know you’re going to shit allover any idea that comes out of a Republican’s mouth anyway.

Keep your damn fingers out of my food

I love it when someone tries to prove to me that I’m an idiot by using a retarded argument.  On Crooks and Liars the other day, I got into a big argument with one of the regulars there.  I can’t even remember what the topic at hand was, but someone mentioned that Republicans are “authoritarian.”

I’ll buy that for a quarter.  It’s pretty damn ironic that the party claims they want government to stay out of people’s business, but at the same time tries to impose certain moral standards on people (gay marriage).  However, when I mentioned that Democrats are also authoritarian, I was met with a huge backlash.  Someone challenged me to produce an example of Democrats being authoritarian, so I mentioned how Democrats want to limit the sodium content in food.

Look, I understand that too much salt can be dangerous for your health.  I know that high sodium diets can lead to hypertension and other issues.  I am not trying to say that too much salt is a good thing.  What I am trying to say, however, is that we should not be told how much salt we are allowed to have in our food.  What’s more, the government trying to force a food manufacturing company to alter its food recipe is 100% authoritarian.

This is the average Democrat, prepared to
save us from ourselves!

There is no way to get around the logic on this one.  Sodium, while unhealthy in large quantities, is a necessary part of our diet in moderation.  A dumb ass woman who was trying to argue this whole point with me gave me a link to what Mayo clinic has to say about sodium, and even on the link it says that sodium is only unhealthy in large amounts.

The main argument she presented to me was that limiting sodium is akin to food safety standards.  Her examples of food safety standards?  Rat shit and bug parts.  She actually tried to compare limiting sodium quantities to limiting the amount of rat shit and bug parts.  It sounded fairly fucking asinine to me just on the surface, but the logic doesn’t even add up.

Limiting the amount of acceptable rat shit and bug parts in our food is a food safety standard that regulates the production standards.  Limiting the amount of sodium in food is altering the product itself, because sodium is an ingredient.  Last I checked, rat shit is generally not an ingredient in any manufactured food.  And I’m pretty certain that while salt is necessary for our diets in moderation, rat shit is never a part of a complete balanced breakfast.  Can someone please tell me I’m not going insane?!

Another part of the argument (note, this was not her argument) is that people can just add as much salt as they want to their food anyway.  One guy says that it actually gives us more freedom, because we would be able to choose how much salt is in our rat shit.  Okay, that actually makes logical sense.  But how many people are going to salt their lunch meats?  How many people are going to salt their pretzels and chips?  Don’t we see how retarded and impractical that becomes?

My question is what’s next?  Are we going to limit the amount of sugar in manufactured products?  Better yet, lets mandate that only certain types of sugar are okay to use, this way we can cut down on diabetes.  Or how about we mandate that alcoholic beverages can only contain so much alcohol so we can lower the risks of cirrhosis or drunk driving?  Maybe we should make toy companies only manufacture toys that are impossible to swallow, so that no child will ever be in danger of choking on a toy.

Found this one when I image searched "FDA."  Perfect.

All of those examples, including sodium, are situations in which people need to exercise their own personal judgment, rather than the government telling them what’s best for them.  Guess what: I eat processed foods and shit, and my body reacts perfectly fine to the level of sodium.  My blood pressure is perfect, and I’m a fairly healthy guy.  Now the government wants to make my bologna taste like card board rat shit simply because someone can’t say “no,” and buy the low-sodium shit, or better yet pick an option that is altogether healthier than bologna?

Fuck that.

“One meal at Chili’s contains your entire required serving of sodium per day!!!”  Answer: don’t eat at fucking Chili’s.  Better yet, do a little planning with your diet.  If you know you’re going to be eating a salt block (like the ones people put out for deer) at dinner, then eat something low in sodium for breakfast and lunch.  Is it really that fucking hard?

Washington: stay out of food recipes.  Keep on limiting rat shit and bug parts through production safety standards, but stay out of how my food tastes.   And Democrats: I fucking get it, sodium can be unhealthy if not consumed in moderation.  You know what else can be unhealthy if consumed in excess?  Water.

Who the fuck is Albert Camus, and why the fuck should you care?

Short of sounding homoerotic, Harrison at Capitol Commentary seems to provide me some inspiration on some topics that I think are good.  He mentioned in his article yesterday that he's a fan of Albert Camus.  I thought to myself, "hey, I'm also a fan of Camus," so why not do an ode to him, eh?

I’m wondering if I’ve mentioned him before, and if you’ve asked yourself that question.  I know I asked myself that question not so long ago.  But now I’m totally gay for Camus.  If having a historical bro-mance with Camus is wrong, I don’t want to be right.

Camus happens to be one of my all-time favorite authors.  Although I’m not a huge fan of his fiction, I am a mega-nerd for his non-fiction stuff, particularly the stuff compiled in the book Resistance, Rebellion, and Death.  Camus is unlike any other writer you’ll read, because he totally blows your fucking mind.

“Jack, could you please get off Camus’ nuts!”  Eat my ass, HTNS.  Camus is ballin’ out of control on levels that you can’t even comprehend, and here’s why.

Camus is not the only guy that sees that life is absurd, but he shouldn’t be categorized as an absurdist.  I’m sorry, but the notion that we are supposed to spend eighty years on this planet, working our asses off to make ourselves happy, all to just die and not be able to take any of it with us is retarded.  It doesn’t matter if you’re a Christian or an Atheist.  If you believe in God and heaven, then nothing in this life matters except being moral, and being moral doesn’t always make us happy.  If you’re an Atheist, then, well, nothing really matters after die then does it?

So if nothing matters then what’s the point of life?  Camus asks that question in the Myth of Sisyphus, and he stops short of saying that we should just kill ourselves.  When you think about it, if life is pointless, then wouldn’t suicide be the only logical conclusion?  Why waste your time?

We waste our time because we’re human.  Being human means being able to shit on the face of absurdity and find enjoyment and happiness in life anyway.  I once wrote a paper on this very point and how this all pertains to politics when I was in college (being a political science major and all).  At the time I was struggling with Camus’ insight on humanity, let alone what it has to do with politics.  But I eventually got it.

Politics is about people.  And since politics is about people, that means anyone who even thinks about politics has to understand people.  We have to understand what it means to be human, and I think Camus got it right.

It’s our indomitable will to succeed and be happy, despite the joke that is life, that distinguishes us from animals.  We have the potential to impose our will upon the physical world around us, to make it our own so that we can thrive not just physically but emotionally as well.

So that’s why the first half of my pen name is Cam.  So who the fuck is Camus?  He’s he guy that reminded us that humans can be happy, even when they are being shit on by douchebags.

Halle-fucking-luja: Birthers, Pleas Shut the Fuck Up Now

It's sad that it had to come to this, but Obama had his official birth certificate released to the public today.  If you want to view it, you can go here.

If after this you still don't believe that he's a natural born citizen, you can go here.

Now please:

"All you fools care about is money"



Owned for sending her kid in a district

she didn't live in (she was homeless).

She felt the school he was in was under-

funded.

 The Joker, as psychotic as he was, had it right when he said that, even if he was just trying to be ironic.  We seem to have slid into this hole where we think that money can solve all of our problems.  We apparently have collectively decided that government, whether it is federal, state, or local must simply appropriate more public money to all of our problems in order to solve them.

Take school levies for example.  For a while, I thought that people who voted down levies were citizens who were unwilling to sacrifice at the present for the future.  I mean, who wants a future full of morons?  I mean, I guess we’re in a present full of morons, but shitting all over the schools hardly seems like a step in the right direction.

But then I started reading about school district reactions to the levies failing, and the logic of the situation became clear.  Right now, school levies are pointless.  It doesn’t matter if they are passed, the schools suffer either way.  Why?  Well, it all has to do with how the money is spent when the levy passes and what is cut when it doesn’t pass.

What do they spend their money on when the levy passes?  Well it’s certainly not teacher salaries.  Of course, some teachers make really good money, but those are the ones that have been teaching for over twenty years.  Entry level teachers make around $35,000 a year.  That’s not too bad for a single person, but when you factor in the work that they had to put into it they are way underpaid.  Not only did they have to get a degree in whatever subject they teach (I guess I’m speaking more for 7-12^th grade) but they had to get certified to actually teach.

A school that's actually underfunded.  Where is it?  Nepal.

I mean sure, they don’t work for three months out of the year, but just think of the amount of work they do during the school year.  Imagine having to grade 150 essays, tests, and homework assignments every week or two.  Then they have to plan their lessons, and make sure that they meet all the bullshit requirements of the state.  And guess what?  They have to do all this after they put in an 8 hour day of work.  And on top of that, they are expected to be high quality, knowledgeable people.  With all of this pressure they only get $35,000 a year to start?

So what the hell is the money spent on?  Well there’s a big push to make technology more integral in school.  Do we really need to do that?  “Well kids need to be prepared for this technologically advancing world.”  No they don’t.  Adults over the age of 35 need to be prepared for it; kids these days are already prepared.  In short, the money is spent on shit that does not actually help our kids become better educated.  It’s all spent on the whims of a cult of technology that’s emerging in the education system (I’ll discuss this in a separate article).

"Levy passed?  Jokes on you . . ."

And if the levies fail, what is cut?  Do they scale back and say “well maybe we don’t really need smart boards in every classroom”?  Do they stop and think “well maybe the 2005 edition of this textbook is just as good as the 2011”?  Nope.  They fire teachers.  They get rid of the people who busted their asses for 4+ years just so that they can teach their unappreciative children for a paltry salary.  Think I’m wrong?  Well, with all the technology that’s been thrown into the classrooms, how come our education system is still failing?  Are they on the cutting edge of classroom tech in Korea?  Japan?

Instead of trying to make a movement to fix systemic and cultural problems that are screwing up education, lets just spend more money.  So lets continue to just spend more money on useless pieces of classroom technology and school programs that do little to enhance the education experience of our children, and lets fire more teachers.  After all, who needs a good teacher when we have smart boards!

Blame Canada! Or in this case, Sarah Palin!

Isn't this just a little ironic?

Now, I don’t have the highest opinion of Sarah Palin, but I’m actually going to come to her defense on something.  I was reading an article today about Gabrielle Giffords, the congresswoman who was shot by that psychopath Jared Loughner a few months back, and I got to thinking about the aftermath of that whole ordeal.

Some people, we’ll call those people jackasses, blamed Sarah Palin for the shooting, or at least insinuated that it was partially her fault, because of some campaign shit she did where she had a graphic depicting congressional districts in gun crosshairs.  Pundits posited that Palin’s graphic was partially to blame, because Giffords’ district happened to be one of those in the crosshairs.

So these asshats logically conclude that Loughner, a complete fucking psycho, was spurred on by Palin’s little campaign ploy.  Let me just say that although the logic of an assumption might be true, it doesn’t mean that you’re less of a dumbass for making the assumption.

I get it: Sarah Palin says some really dumb shit, she’s an agitator (akin to Wendell Phillips or perhaps more to William Jennings Bryan) and she says shit that instigates controversy.  But can we honestly blame her for the actions of a psychopath?

Fucking Psychopath

Jared Loughner is clearly insane.  While he was at college, he displayed erratic behavior including arguing with his math professor over the meaning of the number 6.  He was eventually kicked out for constantly disrupting class with his vitriolic messages about wild government conspiracies.  The man was unstable, or as I like to call it “jacked in the fucking brain.”  He was a ticking time-bomb waiting to go off, and it was only a matter of time and convenience.  Loughner had also apparently crashed public events of Giffords’ before he shot her.

Now, I’m fairly fucking certain that all of this was going on before Palin did her little crosshair bit.  And even so, do we honestly think that this guy would not have done what he did if the crosshair thing never existed?  This guy is a certified wack-job, and my keen intuition of human nature tells me that the crosshair shit had nothing to do with it.  I mean, did this guy even see the crosshair map?  Does he even like Sarah Palin?  He probably thinks that Sarah Palin is one of the grand conspirators.

The problem with all this is that we’re into this whole culture of accountability thing, where we try to blame as many people as possible for the failures of others.  Kids are sucking ass in school?  Well it’s gotta be the teacher’s fault, society, the parents, and the government for inadequately funding schools.  It can’t possibly be the kids’ fault, right?  It couldn’t be that the kids just don’t give a shit, right?

And with this Loughner situation, we’re trying to say that a fucking crosshair graphic in a campaign spurred this maniac to actually shoot the Congresswoman?  We’re trying to say that it’s Palin’s fault for making politics so spiteful and vitriolic?  I don’t believe that for a second.  Palin is a creature of the wind: she’s going to go whichever direction it is blowing, because that will get her the most attention.  I’m not a Palin fan, but lets not blame her for shit that is clearly not her fault.  What was that movie with Clint Eastwood where John Malkovich’s character tries to kill the President?  Clear and Present Danger I think (I could search for it, but I’m lazy).  Are we going to blame Hollywood every time someone tries to assassinate the president?

In short, fuck no.  Loughner is psychotic, and he did what he did on his own volition.  He likely would have done it even if Palin’s little crosshair map had never existed.  If you don’t believe that then you need to take a break from politics, because you’re clearly way too caught up in Partisan bullshittery.

How about we blame Loughner for being a batshit crazy nut-job rather than some hot Alaskan woman who gets her jollies from tweeting made up words.  Two words: Personal Responsibility.

Exhibit A, I guess

Dumbass Idea of the Week

ROFL Waffle!

Apparently in some governments, animal sacrifice is still kosher.  Members of Kyrgyzstan's parliament slaughtered 7 rams to banish evil spirits.  I guess someone forgot to tell them that we're no longer in 800 B.C..  Lots of luck to their parliament, I guess . . .

Boy what a mess this would have been . . .

Ji-freakin-had: What the hell do we make of it? Part 2

Keep in mind that I am a man who seeks to unite rather than divide.  As part of the Catholic Intellectual Tradition, I have to view all things in the world as things derivative from God, and since all things are derivative of God, all things inherently contain Truth.  That is not to say that all things in the world are true, but rather something about them contains a part of the whole that we, as flawed human beings, cannot see in its entirety.

So the debate between me and my cohorts raged on in a discussion on whether Islam is a religion of peace or one of violence.  There are a lot of sayings in the Quran that call for violence.  Some are calls for defensive violence, that they are to defend themselves and their faith when they are persecuted by non-believers.  Some are calls to offensive violence, and they are definitely disturbing.

The thing is that some Muslim theologians have said that the Quran is eternal, that it’s always applicable and is not meant to be understood only in the context of its time.  That is a dangerous interpretation of the meaning and efficacy of the Quran, as that very meaning has been used by radical Muslims to say that the call to violence was not only meant for Muhammad in his time, but for Muslims in all times.  Those who interpret the Quran, and subsequently Islam, in this way are men who have sought to pervert the religion to achieve their own goals.  Those goals are to see the realization of their ideology across the globe, and also to grab a larger piece of the prosperity pie that Arab nations have been denied for the most part over history.

Just as Christian clerics and clergymen have had political goals, I believe that these radical Muslims also have goals that go beyond worldwide Muslim conversion.  They may be Muslims, but they are human.  To assume that all they want is for the entire world to convert I think is to ignore the lessons of history.

Look at Christianity, for example.  Horrifying things have been perpetrated by Christians, and they used the bible to justify these things.  The Crusades, the Inquisition, slavery, the conquest of the New World by the Conquistadors, the Salem Witch Trials: all perpetrated in the name of God—all to win souls for Christ—all supported by the words of the bible.  I submit to you that it was never Christianity that was at fault, but rather the men who used it for their own earthly gain.  Christianity has never needed reform: it was Christians that needed reform.

There are millions of Muslims all over the world today who live peaceful lives and abhor the violence that their brethren commit.  Most adherents of Islam live in North Africa and the Middle East, regions that have had long, bloody histories of violence long before Islam, and barbarism largely due to how the harsh climate shaped the minds of the inhabitants.  Is it any wonder that Radical Islam is rooted there, and those who seek peaceful existences are in Western Civilization?  I posit that Radical Islam is not Islam; that it is a product of an archaic form of Arab culture that has gradually regressed ever since the Renaissance.

I’m sure that most Christians know that there is no difference between Yahweh, God, or Allah.  They are the same deity, but each branch of the Middle Eastern religions claim that he favors one over the others.  So what do we make of that?  We have three religions who all claim, with absolute certainty of truth, that this one deity has revealed to them the fullness of his will.

I see it this way.  All three iterations contain one central message that is important for everyone to understand.  There is a God, one that created existence itself, who is not entirely comprehendible yet one that has revealed himself to us through various channels.  That God wants us to be happy.  That God wants us to experience the fullness of human life, because this life was given to us as a gift.  We will only find true happiness, and only experience the fullness of what it means to be human when we seek a relationship with him.

This is why the ministry of Jesus becomes important, because it gives us a different message.  We’re not to be militant for God, because that leads to human misery.  If we’re to be happy, we are to love one another and live in peace.  We must submit ourselves to God’s will (interestingly enough, “Muslim,” literally means “one who submits to God”).  That doesn’t mean that God has a plan for all of us, or that we’re supposed to listen to what we think is God speaking.  We’re humans, created in his image, who have the capacity to be free and to choose the best way to live a happy life.  God’s will is for us to be happy. 

We can’t be happy if we’re forcing each other to believe in a specific interpretation of his nature.  We can’t be happy through violence, bigotry, or persecution.  Jesus’ message is important because it is at once both human and divine.  It is human in the sense that it is a pathway to leading a fulfilling life, and it is divine in the sense that it calls us to act against our human nature.  God is infinitely loving and merciful, and that sort of God is not one that desires violence or hatred.  Humans are imperfect: we are violent and spiteful, and it’s only through empathy and compassion that we learn to tame the imperfection of our humanity.

I can’t say that Jesus fulfilled some sort of blood debt that humanity owed to God, because that sounds like we’re placing a human constraint on something beyond human comprehension.  I think his death and subsequent resurrection mean something far more complex than the ancient idea of a scapegoat.  He taught us that we must transcend our humanity to enjoy it fully; in a world of sin and death there is still hope; and that life is fragile, easily broken by the evils that surround us, but there is something more to it.

There are evil Muslims in the world, evil Christians.  But neither Islam or Christianity are inherently evil.  When you decide that one or the other is wholly wrong, you are no better than an atheist.  Atheism signifies defeat, giving up the search for Truth in deference to gaiety of heart.  That, to me, is no different than closing your mind to theological contemplation.

God gave us reason for a reason, and I urge all people of all faiths to use it.

Ji-freakin-had: What the hell do we make of it?



Miss USA 2010, a Muslim.  Her Sharia
can creep up on me any time =D

So people seem to be on pins and needles about the whole radical Islam thing, and I think it’s taking its toll on American society.  I got into a lengthy debate with the folks over at Capitol Commentary about radical Islam and the whole “creeping Sharia,” idea.  This is going to be a two-part post because this is a fucked up issue.  Part one is going to deal with the politics of this whole mess, and part two will deal with the actual religion itself.  I’m sure that both parts are going to get me shit on by various groups.

So lets talk about the political side of this whole cluster fuck.  We’ve got a problem in America, and it’s not Islam itself.  The problem is that Radical Islamists are plotting to pwn our shit, and we need to do stuff to keep them from faceraping us.  The problem has been that while we want to be able to investigate radical Islam in America, we run the risk of stereotyping and lumping in non-radical Muslims in with the shit heads.

This has caused some serious flak for politicians lately.  Apparently, someone was going to conjure up some indictments on some dudes that are accused of funding/donating to Hamas, a radical Islamic terrorist group.  What’s troubling, to me at least, is that someone at the Department of Justice apparently shit-canned that idea, and called off the investigation.

My initial reaction was: WTF?  I think it goes without saying that if we know someone to be funding a terrorist organization, we should probably stop that person from doing so.  Last I checked, not only is terrorism illegal, but I’m also pretty sure that funding terrorism is illegal as well.  So why in the fuck-shit would the DoJ halt the indictments?  Well, it’s political (just like everything on this shit planet).

Maybe he's looking at a picture of Rosie O'Donnel naked?

As the article states, Eric Holder, the guy calling the shots, doesn’t want to create a political shit storm.  So if he has any doubt whatsoever that American Muslims are contributing to terrorism, he says fuck it for the sake of not looking like a bigot.



I have to say that I don’t blame the poor bastard.  I’m a thoughtful guy, and Albert Camus taught me that you have to put a lot of contemplation in something before you act on it.  Although I personally believe that the guys investigating radical Islam in America are probably not bigots, we do need to tread carefully with this who ordeal.  I would wager to guess that most American Muslims are not radical, and that they think what’s going on in the Middle East is retarded at best.

I mean let’s just think about this logically for a second.  American Muslims have two options.  Option 1: they can continue to lead prosperous lives, free to believe or do whatever the hell they want without fear of the government stoning them (so long as they’re not hurting anyone or conspiring to do so).  Option 2: they can advocate a radical Muslim theocracy where they would likely be disenfranchised by Islamic Despots, and they’d most assuredly not be able to live out their lives in prosperity and freedom.

Who has tasted prosperity and freedom and wants to give it up?  Now we can say, “oh well for Muslims, Islam is more important than all of that.”  Whatever.  They’re humans just like the rest of us.  When I was over in Dubai, I saw several Muslims, in traditional Arab garb, downing beers at the Hard Rock Café Dubai.  If a Muslim is given freedom, he or she will live his life the way most people do in Western Civilization.

How can I be sure?  Well, I have some Muslim friends who are as normal as anyone else.  Some former neighbors of mine were Muslim, straight from Israel, and I had to constantly come over to help them set up their new technology shit (computers, baller LCD TV, etc).  The woman was so nice and so generous, and she always felt bad because she had nothing to give me for my time (not that I desired any compensation).  That woman is obviously a terrorist.

Definitely a terrorist.

So the point of part 1 is that we need to be very, very careful when we go around accusing people of being into radical Islam.  There might be a lot of nut-job Muslims in America, but my guess is that most of them just want to lead their lives unmolested, if only so that they can enjoy the fruits of Western Civilization. 

I don’t blame the government for trying to tread carefully on investigating this shit, but I also think that they need to be somewhat courageous about it.  They’re going to hurt some feelings, they’re going to be called bigots, but as long as their hearts are in the right place, and they’re not trying to disenfranchise all American Muslims, then I think we can cut them some slack.

Tomorrow, I’m going to talk about how radical Islam is a perversion of Islam itself, and how just as nut-job Christians, throughout history, have interpreted Christianity to justify their horseshit, so too have radical Muslims interpreted Islam to justify being douche bags.

Time to bring it on home with the Top 5

Seriously, how many times do you think he jacked off to her,

in 3-D no less.

5.  James Cameron:  Not only did he make me puke my fucking guts out with Titanic, a steaming pile of shit love-story that took focus off of all the baller ship sinking shit, but he had to make another high-grossing steaming pile of shit.  This son of a bitch made a movie about blue aliens and how we evil humans tried to grab some mineral called “unobtanium.”  Fuck you for insulting my intelligence.  What makes me mad is that people liked it.  It was all critically acclaimed and what not, and now he’s got the highest grossing movie ever, ever.  The fact that a movie with a moral as intellectually deep as a fucking puddle in a bath tub was so widely accepted as “good cinema,” means that I was right to posit that 80% of Americans are functionally retarded.  It makes me mad, and he deserves a full-on kick to the balls for it.

4.  A worn out internet literary device, Strikethrough:  Okay, I know that I’m shitting on many of my cohorts who give me some decent traffic, but I’ve been meaning to say this to you guys.  In deference to your feelings (and your pageviews) I’ll be as nice about this one as possible.  C’mon, we need to stop.  I get it.  It’s clever because it’s like we get to look into your thought process.  I admit, the first time I saw it I chuckled, but then I realized that 98% of people who post on blogs or forums do it.  It very quickly lost its novelty.  You’re all intelligent people and good writers (trust me, I don’t throw around the good writer compliment often).  So as a group of bloggers, lets collectively agree to just fucking quit drop strikethrough.  We’re better than that.  And, I asked nicely, which is not something I’m akin to here in my little patch of internet space.  (I <3 all of you).

I think he raped a chick . . .

3.  Julien Assange: He’s the greatest intelligence analyst ever who, by his prowess and ability to understand everything in the world all at once, is able to know what classified information will cause no harm through its release.  Why would I want him to go away?  Oh right, because he’s an arrogant asshat who thinks he can discern what qualifies as “sensitive,” intelligence that might get someone killed.  Thank god he blacked out any names though.  I’m sure Tehran would never suspect the aid to their foreign minister as a spy as long as you black out his name.  For anyone who might use that to detract me, that was hyperbole.

You know what team I'm on?  I'm on
team "Twilight can go fuck itself."

2.  The Twilight Movie Series:  I don’t know if there’s supposed to be another sequel or not, but either way I want to slit my wrists.  Have I seen any of them?  Fuck no.  I’m not married and I don’t have a girlfriend.  So that means no one has forced me to endure 6+ hours of horrifying intellectual torture.  From the commercials I discerned that none of the actors were capable of displaying anything that resembles emotion or talent, so I opted out.  I don’t have a problem with vampire flicks, hell I love the True Blood series on HBO; it’s visceral and dirty, and it’s how vampires should be portrayed.  This Twilight crap, however, is nothing but a steaming pile of hormone driven teenage angst.  And not only that, but the actors seem to have the emotional depth of a giant pile of elephant shit, like the pile that suffocated that one zoo handler guy.  Yes, I realize that piles of elephant shit are incredibly deep, but they are also made of elephant shit.  Twilight is elephant shit.

I'm sure this is what Jesus had in mind as he was being
nailed to a fucking cross for this bitch's sins.

1.  The Westboro Baptists: I would rank these douche bags among the worst people on the planet.  As I have mentioned before, soiling the memory of the noble dead historically has been considered to be one of the lowest forms of human behavior.  And I’m sorry, but the First Amendment does not change the fact that they are hateful, ignorant, hypocrites who are the absolute worst examples of what Christianity is all about.  These fucks are the lowest of the low, the scum of the earth, and they deserve to be beaten fiercely.  I fully realize that this makes me a hypocrite, seeing as how I claim to be a man of God, yet simultaneously call for the caning of his sheep, but I don’t really care.  They are like the guys that loot the bodies on a battlefield after the fighting is over: Fucking scumbag pieces of shit.  Eat my ass.  Eat everyone’s ass.  In a just world, you fucks would be used in place of canaries in coal mines.  A guy you worship endured the most horrifying torture and death, for your dumbass sins, and this is how you repay him? by shitting allover his message of peace and love?  You all are fine examples of why coat-hangers are an excellent tool for keeping the gene pool clean.

Well folks, I hope you've enjoyed this little list.  As you might be able to tell, I got angrier and more pissed off as the list went on.  I'll do another list like this some other time, but for a while I'll get back to shitting allover current events and what not.

And by the way, I've reached over 2000 pageviews as of like 2 days ago.  Thanks to everyone who has given this awful excuse for literature a chance, and please get more people to read.  The message of "Morons, go fuck yourselves," will never promulgate if we keep it to ourselves.

Thanks =D

Top 15 List of Douches, 10-6



Oh yeah, this screams "I'm down with
Civil Rights."

10.  Confederacy sympathizers: If you are proud of your ancestors standing up for states’ rights to hold men, women, and children in bondage then please, drown yourself in the Mississippi.  I explained this whole line of thought at length the other day, but I despise these people enough to mention them in a Top 15 list.

9.  Evolution disbelievers: Yes it’s only a hypothesis, but just because you’re not old enough to have perceived it, does that mean it’s absolutely wrong?  Were you there when Moses parted the Red Sea?  I mean c’mon, there’s like zero actual evidence of the existence of God and you believe in that, right?  So why the hell wouldn’t you believe in something that actually has some physical evidence to it?  And if you think evolution is the ability to willfully grow wings or some insane shit like that, then, you need to stop listening to your pastor and actually go out and read some scholarly shit about evolution.  And remember, knowledge of science doesn’t necessarily conflict with belief in God.


A Swamp Monster

8.  Michael Moore: Not only is he fat and ugly, but he also makes horribly shitty movies based on little more than theory and conjecture.  I mean, why the hell would you make a movie about a horrifying shooting and call it “Bowling for Columbine?”  And what’s worse, you made it into a fucking political rant about the evils of Wal-Mart.  You’re right, you disgusting fuck, it’s Wal-Mart’s fault for selling them ammo.  It’s not their fault for planning the whole thing and blowing away a bunch of their classmates.  It’s called personal responsibility you ugly swamp monster.  Please go fuck yourself to death.

Fucking cunt.  Sorry, couldn't hold it in any
longer.

7.  Snookie: This one is self-justifiable.  If you seriously need me to back that one up with a witty remark, then you should be sterilized.  Well, just in case, here goes.  Snookie is a fat, ugly, annoying, mentally handicapped human being who does not deserve to earn the shit on a farmer’s shoes, let alone $100,000 per episode of Jersey Shore.  She is the living embodiment of everything that is wrong with this country.  Kids think she’s the greatest thing because she gets paid beaucoup bucks just for being a loud, obnoxious fucking moron.  Why work hard when all you have to do is act like a stupid whore?

Someone in California dug too deep . . .

6.  Nancy Pelosi: Thank fucking GOD she is no longer Speaker.  The sad thing is that I even know a lot of Democrats who are reluctant to associate themselves with her.  If I knew that I didn’t have any women readers, I’d drop the C word on her, but out of deference for the sentiments of the fairer sex (because I want you to keep reading my blog) I will refrain from that.  But in all seriousness, Nancy Pelosi might be the real life lich king.  She fucking looks like a lich . . .

Top 15 Persons, People, and things that need to GTFO, 15-11

So I was reading about how to promote a new blog the other day, and one little bullet point suggested that I should do a multipart post.  Apparently, people like top (insert #) lists, so I figured I’d try my hand at one.  Because I’m all about symmetry, and because I want to make my life easier for the next three days, I came up with a Top 15 list of douche bags, assholes, and shitty groups or insitutions.

So without further ado, here is 15-11.

Nancy Pelosi

15.  World of Warcraft:  Those who know me personally know that I played this game for a little bit.  I think I played it for about 9 months or so.  I stopped playing about a month ago because it just got boring and repetitive.  I also have some serious philosophical issues with the game.  WoW is a bleeding heart liberal’s wet dream.  It’s a game that forces players to capitulate to the herd mentality, and the way it is structured ensures that everyone has an equal shot at being just as good as the next guy.  The game is easy, and it’s made low-expectations the standard for MMOs.  Blizzard hates the souls of men.

Might as well be a pentagram

14.  Electronic Arts:  I know, I’m a huge nerd because I love video games.  But as I’ve said before, video games are awesome and important, and you can eat my ass for thinking otherwise.  Anywho, Electronic Arts, or EA, ruins every fucking game they get their slimy little fingers on.  They only care about making money, and they sacrifice the quality of their games for sales numbers.  They are the biggest threat to quality games today, and they seriously need to die in a fucking fire.  The bad thing is that kids these days wouldn’t know a good game if it kicked them in the taint, so EA will probably live on the souls of the young for a long, long time.

13.  People who permanently live in America and have no intention of learning English:  I know, some of you bleeding hearts will likely consider me to be a huge racist or intolerant, but if you do then that means you’re a moron.  Am I seriously the only person that finds it frustrating when someone tries to conduct business but doesn’t know a lick of English?  I am all about diversity, but holy fucking dog shit if you want to live and work in a foreign country, it is out of courtesy and respect for the country housing you that you should learn its dominant language.  Learning English is not going to destroy anyone’s cultural identity.  Many, many people in other countries speak more than one language as a general principle.  So I’m sorry, if you want people to be less annoyed with you, then learn a little bit of English.  Pro-tip: you might not be able to do that by watching only telemundo.

Oh I found plenty of pictures of Bill Donohue, but this one

is perfect, I think.  It's one of my favorite episodes of

South Park.

12.  Bill Donohue:  You fat fuck, you do not speak for Catholics.  You speak for the Catholic League, a collection of nut jobs and morons that view Catholicism through the lens of a child.  This is a guy who actually defended pedophile priests by saying that the boys they violated were “not boys, they were adolescents,” and that they didn’t rape them, they just touched them inappropriately.  As a father of two, Bill, you can officially go fuck yourself.

I honestly have no idea who this is, nor do I care.  This is

what came up when I image searched "birther."  So

whatevs.

11.  Birthers:  Please, PLEASE STOP.  For the love of Christ, all you fucks are doing is making the Republican party look like it’s filled with a bunch of fucking wackoes.  You’re no better than Truthers (the weirdoes who think 9/11 was a U.S. government conspiracy), and your bullshit is just as baseless.  Obama had his birth certificate certified by the governor of Hawaii.  What the fuck more do you want?  You know what the sad part is?  Even if Obama released his official birth certificate, most of those shit heads likely wouldn’t believe it anyway.  They’d cry “forgery,” and that “forgery,” would only perpetuate the conspiracy in their minds.  Do you asshats enjoy giving Democrats something to laugh at?

To Satisfy Harrison from Capitol Commentary . . .

It has come to my attention that the tag line "Mila Kunis is fucking hot," was a bit misleading in my article today.  Since Harrison expressed his indignation, I will now rectify this greivous error on my part immediately.

Enjoy =)

Oh, and read today's actual article below!

Yanks don't commemorate the Civil War, Mila Kunis is fucking hot

Tooling around yahoo! yesterday, looking for an article for today, I came across this one talking about the 150^th anniversary of the Civil War, and how northern states seem to care a whole lot less than southern states.

My initial reaction was “well no shit Sherlock, why the fuck would we want to celebrate a war that saw 600,000 American lives extinguished?”  That was me being a dumbass and assuming that everyone thinks just like I do.  But then I remembered that most Americans don’t have a good grasp of American history (or anything for that matter), so I figured I would go off on a diatribe about the Civil War and how the history of it has been raped over time.

And when I say rape, I don’t mean like America wanted it, but the guy pissed her off and then she accuses him of rape (I’m sure some idiot women are going to shit on me for that one, but guess what ladies: it happens).  I mean full on rape, like no-means-no type shit.

Enough imagery.  It’s not surprising that the American South is all about celebrating the Civil War.  I don’t have anything against battle reenactments or shit like that, but they also throw like huge galas and what not.  What that says to me is that the South cherishes a different time in America, where white men dominated the lives of black men, and they were more profitable from slave labor.



How many of them are thinking, "man, I really dig Martin

Luther King Jr.'s style"?



“That’s just inflammatory bullshit Jack!  They’re just celebrating Southern heritage.”  Well, how the hell can you celebrate southern heritage and ignore the fact that about 200 years of their heritage involved brutal slavery?  Those rich planters owed their entire way of life to the bondage of their fellow men.  Why the fuck would you want to celebrate that?

Northerners tend to not give a shit because the North was just doing what it was supposed to.  Those southern fucktards had the audacity to try to secede from the Union, which by the way, was illegal.  And not only that, but we know that most northerners didn’t even really give a shit about slavery and were every bit as racist as the South.  The abolitionist movement was not as ubiquitous in the North as we’d love to believe.  In fact, most abolitionist agitators like Wendell Phillips rolled around with body-guards because they were rabble rousers.

Any Southern who refers to the Civil War as the “War of Northern Aggression,” should be hit in the face with the heaviest history book within reach.  Not just for the sheer philosophical reason that Constitutionally they were not allowed to secede (“We the people . . .” not “We the States . . .” you ignorant assholes), but because of the plain historical fact that it was they who fired first.  Sure we can say “well Lincoln provoked them,” but if you read Richard Hofstadter’s American Political Tradition, you’ll see that Lincoln had little choice to go about things the way he did.



So I'm guessing the guy that made this shirt doesn't get

the concept of irony . . .



Any person who believes that the Civil War was justified because slavery was wrong (whether or not it was fought over slavery specifically), or because the southern states were not within their rights to rebel and try to leave the Union, would not celebrate the Civil War.  Anyone who believes that war sucks ass, and that the massive loss of life is always a bad thing, would never celebrate a war.

“Oh well they don’t celebrate it Jack, you moron.  They commemorate it.”  Bullshit.  Those fucks celebrate it, because deep down they still believe they should have been allowed to secede, and they view their ancestors as heroes who defended their rights.  In essence, they’re celebrating the defense of their right to take away the rights of others.

I mean, that’s what Southern culture was like during the Civil War.  Now who in the fuck would celebrate that?

Dumbass Idea of the Week

Moron

This guy owned himself.  He goes to a bank, presents the teller with two forms of ID, and then proceeds to try to rob the bank . . . Needless to say, it didn't work out for him.  Congratulations, you've earned this week's:

Technology: The gateway to the worst parts of the bible.

It might be too small to read, but the text in the little window
says "fuck yourself."  I couldn't help it =)

Hopefully, by this point, my readers know that I am about as far from a bible thumping fundamentalist as Ellen DeGeneres is from having sex with Russell Crowe, or any dude for that matter.  I am, however, Catholic, and I take the Catholic faith fairly seriously, at least the non-hypocritical parts.  So when the current pope, Benedict XVI, says something, I tend to take heed.  I don’t listen just because he’s il papa, but because he’s an intellectual.

At Palm Sunday mass at the Vatican today, he warned listeners that “man will pay a price for his pride if he believes technology can give him the powers of God.”  I’m sure that hard-core, science worshipping, pedantic atheists everywhere just shat themselves as they guffawed at such a statement, but I think the pope may be right.

I’m not a technophobe.  Some of my friends make fun of me for not having a facebook page, and they accuse me of being behind the times, or afraid of technology.  I know they mean it in jest, I mean my computer’s primary purpose is not to grace the internet with my literary and intellectual prowess, but to play computer games at a fairly high level of graphical quality.  I’ve got a PS3, an X-Box 360, a fairly baller PC, and a nice 42 inch flat panel LCD television.  I think that qualifies me as embracing technology fairly well.



They look pretty happy considering they could have a

cloud of mustard gas floating their way.



So although I don’t fear technology and the things it can do to improve the quality of life, the pope still has a very valid point to make.  Let’s take WWI for example, as it is a prime exhibit for how technological advancement has not always been a good thing.  WWI was the first large-scale slaughter the world had seen.  The problem was that military tactics had not changed, but technology had.

The old idea of war was that you stood in a line and shot at each other, and whoever was left standing would be the victor, and you occupied that territory.  With the birth of trench warfare, armored vehicles, flame throwers, and chemical warfare, stalemate became the word of the day.  They sat in their trenches, not moving an inch forward, slaughtering each other.  If 10,000 men died, they were replaced with 10,000 more.  And this went on and on, with little end in sight, and it became a war of attrition rather than one of territory.  Technology had outstripped the way humans wage war.



Science has done many wonderful things for us.  We’ve made so many advances in the field of medicine and agriculture that life expectancy today makes that of previous generations pale in comparison.  But humans are proud, and we figured out that we are capable of doing things that we should probably not be doing.  Before we figured out that we can actually create and manipulate life, we discovered something far sinister.

"I may or may not have figured out how to
facerape the entire planet . . ."

We discovered that we could harness the power of the atom, and with that power that we could actually bring about the destruction of life on this planet as we know it.  “I am become death, the destroyer of worlds,” said Oppenheimer when he realized the magnitude of what he had achieved.

As the pope said, technology has ushered in entirely new levels of evil into the world.  Atomic warfare, chemical and biological warfare, and other weapons of mass destruction; all things that have changed the world forever.  For these scientists, such advancements might not be a quest to create god-like powers.  They are scientists, curious, and dedicated to understanding the mysteries of this existence.  I would argue that these advancements are not the products of the sin of pride, but perhaps the ridiculously unfortunate consequences of dangerous curiosity.

In the Lord of the Rings (I know, I’m a hard core nerd), when they reach the mines of Moria, the narrative takes some time to allude to the fact that the greed of the dwarves was their undoing; that their lust for mithril had driven them to dig deeper and deeper into the earth.  Gandalf suggests that they dug too far, and because of that they unleashed something that should have remained buried, which we eventually discover is the Balrog.

That’s an allegory for the greed and curiosity of man.  We can’t help but push ourselves to the absolute limit.  We want the capability to manipulate existence as much as possible.  We want to shape the destiny of the universe.  So perhaps it is hubris.  I’m guessing that hubris mixed with insatiable curiosity might not be such a good thing, but I guess we won’t find that out until we blow ourselves the hell up.

Woops . . .