Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Required Ultrasounds . . . no, that's not statist at all!

Honestly, it doesn't really matter whether or not you think abortion is moral or whatever.  The fact of the matter is that abortion is legal, and since it is legal all moral implications and culpability belong to the woman and no one else.  After all, that's what it means to live in a society where we advocate people following their conscience, right?  Just as well, people are free to violate their conscience provided they're not breaking the law.

So why are some lawmakers trying to influence people's decisions?  The better question is, why are Republican law makers trying to influence how people live their lives?  I thought being a conservative meant that you basically leave people alone to live their lives however they see fit, so long as living their life is within the bounds of the law.  Apparently I was wrong.

How is it even close to being within the purview of the government to force a woman to have a particular procedure performed?  Yes, I know that ultrasounds are super easy to do.  It's not like they're forcing women to get the vaginal sonograms (woops, they tried to do that, too . . .), but seriously, what the heck?

I get why it's being done.  Lawmakers who call themselves pro-life think that by making a mother listen to the heart beat she will be less likely to get the abortion.  All this does is further the perception that many Republicans today are completely out of touch with reality.  Let's just consider a couple of scenarios here.

Scenario 1 is the promiscuous mother who was too irresponsible to use birth control, and got knocked up by some random dude.  She's already made the decision to abort the baby, because lets face it, she feels like she could not care for the child, she definitely doesn't want to have a 1 night stand be her baby daddy.  The idea of abortion means nothing to her.

Scenario 2 is the woman who, for whatever reason, feels she has no other choice but to get an abortion, and it actually tears her up inside.  Is it right to make her feel even more pain and agony just because you think that it's somehow your right to choose for her?

And for people who say "there's always an alternative," I'm sorry, but that's a really stupid thing to say.  First of all, you're not the person, so you really don't know that person's circumstances--financial, emotional, logistical or whatever.  And to think that life hands us situations where there's always a good option is pretty dumb.

If you are about freedom of choice, why would you advocate taking a choice away from a woman?  If she doesn't want an ultrasound, then she shouldn't have to get an ultrasound.  Period.

Friday, February 24, 2012

Why Competition Won't Work in Education

"Blasphemy!!!  Competition works in EVERY situation Jack!  If people have to compete against each other, they will automatically increase their performance.  What we have to do to get better educated kids in this country, is make all the teachers compete against each other.  That will get our kids to learn!"

This is what I have to say to that line of thought.

American education is never, ever going to improve so long as we as a society keep blaming the teachers.  Go ahead and look up the statistics.  Most failing schools in America are in poor, urban areas.  You can look at Columbus just as an example.  Not every public school in the Columbus City School district is a failure.  The nicer the area, the more successful the school is.

"Well how can you really prove that Jack?"  The kids who perform poorly are generally the ones that have very crappy home lives.  Their parents don't care, they're surrounded by drugs and alcohol, and crime is rampant in their neighborhoods.  My son is in first grade, he's 6, and he can read.  Not only can her read, but he can actually retell the story in his own words.

Has he reached this level of competency and higher order thought because the teacher is just absolutely amazing?  Only partially (she better be amazing considering how much money I pay).  The key is that he always has either me or his mother to help him with his homework.  His homework consists of practicing reading, writing, and spelling.  If she and I never helped him with any of that then he'd likely be behind.

I remember vaguely when I was his age my mother doing the same thing, helping my brothers and me with our reading, spelling, and writing.  And we three are generally intelligent adults.  So what about a kid who doesn't have mom or dad to help them?  What about a kid who doesn't have anyone to read with after school?  How well do you think that kid will do in school with zero reinforcement from home?

Guess what: it doesn't matter how amazing the teacher is.  If a kid does not have a positive, supportive environment at home, that kid will be stunted, and no amount of instruction will help pull that kid out of that hole.

"But Jack, not all inner-city kids turn out to be useless.  Some of them go on to succeed even without a supportive homelife."  That's true, but given the drop-out and failure statistics, how many of those kids actually break out of the cycle of poverty and/or ignorance?  Statistically, not many.  And that's because we can't expect every child to have the amount of drive and tenacity it takes to overcome such potentially debilitating barriers.

If you still don't believe me, then you must answer me this one question: if money is the solution then why do well-funded districts still fail?  Is it any coincidence that those well-funded but still failing districts are largely located in urban areas?  Why does Worthington City Schools continually outperform Columbus City Schools with comparable funding?  Well, for those of you who've never been to Worthington, OH (it's a suburb of Columbus) all you have to do is just look at the neighborhoods to tell the difference.

So sure, fire all the teachers and pit them against one another.  Let's ignore the real problem, because we know the real problem is politically incorrect to articulate and it's likely unfixable anyway.  Let's punish the teachers for factors that are completely out of their control, because that's what we're all about in America: finding someone to blame other than the individuals actually responsible.

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Mardi Gras: Lent is Almost Here

It might be shocking for some of you to hear this, but I actually participate in the Lenten restrictions set forth by the Catholic Church.

The only actual restrictions placed on people by the church during Lent are fasting and abstinence.  On Ash Wednesday and every Friday during Lent, Catholics from age 14-60(ish) are required to fast.  Fasting, for the church, stipulates that only one full meal be taken during that 24 hour period.

Abstinence doesn't mean abstaining from sex, but rather abstaining from meat on Ash Wednesday and Fridays.  The church generally allows the consumption of fish, but I personally take it one step further and I try not to consume the flesh of any once-living sentient creature.  So I stay strictly vegetarian on Fridays.

The third thing is generally more Protestant in nature, but Catholics do it all the time, and that is making some sacrifice.  The idea is that you give up something you really love.  It's symbolic (in a small way) to Jesus' ultimate sacrifice for all of us, and largely about the temptation he faced during his 40 days in the desert.  All the fasting and sacrificing is supposed to teach us something about temperance.

So what am I giving up for Lent?  Cussing.  Foul, profane language.  Some of you might be laughing your asses off right now.  People who know me IRL likely believe I'm doomed to fail.  The way I see it is, so long as I don't give up and continue to try, I haven't failed.  But, as they say, we learn more from our failures than we do our successes.

And why set myself up for failure?  Why sacrifice something that I know I have only the slightest chance of actually accomplishing?  Well, my opinion is that if you're sacrificing something you absolutely know you can do without for 40 days, then you're not really sacrificing a whole lot.

That sounds mighty judgmental, but that's only how I feel for myself.  If you find meaning in making a small sacrifice then that's great.  Whatever helps improve your own spirituality is great.  But for me, the sacrifice must be great, and it must be difficult.

So on this Fat Tuesday, the day we are to gorge on what we will give up, I'm going to gorge on profanity.  Here is a list of words that I will not allow myself to say.  My faithful readers, please feel free to add to the list in the comment section.  Make sure the words are those that are *actually* considered to be profane.

Ass
Asshole
Anal (coupled with some other word. Anal sex is a technical term and thus safe to use)
Asshat
Assclown
Ass-anything really
Bastard (I will use the term "illigitimate child" if referring to a bastard child)
Bitch
Box (used in the context of slang for "vagina")
Cock
Cock sucker
Cock monger
Cocksmith
Cockgobbler
Cock-anythingelse
Cunt (yes, ladies, I'm sorry to admit that I've legit dropped the "C" word)
Damn (unless it's in the Bible or some other text)
Dick (unless your name is Richard)
Dildo (only in the sense of name-calling, ie. "you dildo."  Naming the implement does not count.)
Dong (unless it's some Chinese name.  Dong salad anyone?)
Dyke (unless it's a ditch)
Dipshit
Dumbass (dumb, idiot, moron, stupid, ignoramus are all acceptable substitutes.)
Douche
Douchebag
Faggot (and fag.  Yes, I'm guilty of this one, too.  But *never* towards an actual gay person.  Sorry.)
Fairy (see "Faggot")
Hell (ie "what the Hell.")
Jackass
Pussy
Prick
Piss
Queer
Shit
Shithead
Shit-brick
Shit-storm
Shit-ton (this includes the phrase "metric shit-ton.")
Slut ("promiscuous" is an acceptable alternative)
Tits
Whack-off
Whore (can be substituted with "prostitute.")
WTH
WTF

And of course, my personal favorite . . . FUCK.  Also, no profane gestures.  So here's the last of this you'll see for the next 40 days.  Wish me luck!!!

Hope you enjoy Lent as much as I will =(

Monday, February 20, 2012

Quick Post: Please Thumbs Down

Please visit the youtube video posted in today's dumbass idea of the week and give the song a thumbs down.  This guy needs to stop making music, and as long as he thinks it's good he'll never stop.

Here's the link, just for ease.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Fo44fogNic&feature=player_embedded

Dumbass Idea of the Week: The Worst Song Ever, Ever

(The names have been changed to protect the innocent.  Note: This is the only time I will ever edit anything I've written.  Please don't ask me why, because I will not answer.)  What makes this so hilarious (to me at least) is the fact that this guy is totally serious about what he's doing.

Here it is.


I can't really figure out what's the worst part about this whole thing: his singing, the actual lyrics (which are insanely bad), or his hair.

Sunday, February 19, 2012

Jack Camwell: Selfish, Immoral Fascist Part III

We've finally arrived at part III dealing with how I'm a total fascist.  Silver, I answered your question from Part II, and I'm really sorry for the delayed response on that.

Anyway.  Fascist?  Really?  First of all, she called me a partisan hack and I'm pretty sure no one who has a shred of intelligence would ever consider me to be that.  When you consider the fact that I'm thinking about abandoning the Republican Party to be a Libertarian, I think partisan hack is pretty far fetched.  So if she doesn't understand what a partisan hack is, my guess is she has *no clue* as to what fascism even means.  It's a very complex term, and I'm not convinced that complexity is something she can handle.

I generally hate citing Wikipedia, but here it is.


For a more academic source:


So according to these there seems to be a common thread that runs through fascism.  The big one is that fascists believe in the idea of a dominant race, or people, and that race should rule everyone else.  Also, according to the britannica article fascists generally could be characterized by "extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism."

Jack Camwell

Woah woah, they had a contempt for cultural liberalism?!?!  That makes Teresa and dmarks calling me a fascist even more ironic than I originally thought.  They probably consider me to be culturally liberal, and if that's the case then who is more like a fascist?

Teresa claimed that she's read my work all over the internet, and she knows what I'm all about.  I guess that's how she came to the conclusion that I'm a fascist.  Let's take a look at some of the work I've produced in which I show contempt for liberty, justice, other races, and the democratic process, shall we?


Political Conversion: I think I'm a Libertarian

If You're Famous, Don't Show Your Religion

Only Americans Get Rights  (note: the title is meant to be sarcastic)

Ron Paul 2012

I guess it's time I shit on Unions

Americans Are So Civilized

Villains and Heroes: A stupid way to view politics

In a shocking turn of events, the Westboro Baptists still suck

Putin to run for president again . . . man this seems familiar

Let's Make Life Taste Like Shit

Why Are We Such Prudes? Part I

Why Are We Such Prudes? Part II

A Movie Everyone Should See: Network

Education Is Not Just For Citizens

Budget Cuts Aren't a Bad Thing

Apparently, Australia sucks just as much as France

Live Free or Die

Liberty?  Freedom of Choice?  What the fuck ever!

If you're a relativist, prepare to get pwned.  Hard.

Even without the slippery slope argument, torture is bullshit

Keep your damn fingers out of my food!

Jesse Jackson and Other Racist Assholes

Please, by all means, be gay

Libya Free or Die!

Okay, so I definitely don't expect anyone to re-read all of that stuff, but the links are there just in case you feel inclined to read the articles, or if the titles are not sufficient enough to prove that I love liberty.  For the past year now, all I have done is advocated for people to be as free as possible to live their lives as they see fit, so long as they are not causing any real harm to others or infringing on the rights of others.

Teresa and dmarks, if neither of you can see that, then you are both clearly retarded.  Disagreeing with another person's view points is not what makes you retarded: it's your value judgments upon me.  You dumbasses seek to take choices away from women.  You also decry gay marriage, as if what two consenting adults do is any of your fucking business.

The sad part is that you morons won't even really listen to anything I've said.  You'll just ignore it, and immediately reject it as false because admitting that you're wrong is way too uncomfortable.  When you two are capable of having reasoned, logical discussion then we can talk.  Otherwise, I strongly suggest that you both go fuck yourselves.

/endrant

Saturday, February 18, 2012

Jack Camwell: Selfish, Immoral Fascist Part II

Teresa, according to Teresa
Let's talk about the "immoral," part.  My question to her was "by what standards am I immoral?  Yours?  The Catholic Church's?"  I'm not a relativist, and anyone who accuses me of being one is going to get shot down fairly quickly.  But exactly how am I immoral?  Does being pro-choice make me immoral?  Or am I immoral because I was in the military?  Or am I immoral because I think it's okay to drink alcohol?

Hopefully those questions helped to illustrate my point.  In case they didn't, the point is that there are a lot of people who consider me to be immoral for various reasons.  To a hard core fundamentalist Muslim, I'm immoral just for being Christian, let alone the fact that I'm totes okay with drinking alcohol and eating pork.  To some Protestants, I'm immoral just for being Catholic.  I'm immoral to a lot of anti-war asshats because I served in the military.  Similarly, I'm immoral to a lot of hard core Christians because I'm pro-choice.

Yesterday, Silver made a very good point.  He said that since I reject many of the moral standards set by the Catholic church then I am immoral according to their rubric.

Morality is, in actuality, a very gray thing in most cases.  I know a lot of people like to think it's black and white, but anyone who has ever been stuck in a shitty situation knows that black and white is usually not the case.  Let's use abortion for an example.  Is it moral to tell a woman she must keep her rape baby?  Is it moral to tell a woman that she must give her life to give birth to her child?  Is it immoral for a woman to choose her life over that of her unborn baby?

Fortunately, some other guy, dmarks, jumped in on this discussion and tried to support Teresa.  He said that because I'm "okay" with abortion, then I'm the type of guy who thinks "violence is okay so long as it doesn't affect me."

Wow, okay, well thank you for joining on the "let's make completely retarded and erroneous assumptions about Jack's moral character so that he can shut us down and make us look like morons" train.  No, you dumbass, I don't believe that.  What that guy and Teresa are doing is applying the logic of a very particular situation to other situations that are not the same.

"You're opposed to hunger, but it's okay for people to starve."

Question: when is it ever justified to let someone starve?  Follow-up question: is it ever justified to take a life?  Of course there are a lot of nuances with the notion of taking a human life, and not every situation is the same, but that's the point.  Just because I think it's sometimes justified to take a life doesn't automatically mean that I think everything is morally permissible.

Me, according to Teresa
It's nice to know that Teresa is the grand arbiter of all things moral in the world, and I must say I was pretty shocked to discover that I'm apparently "immoral."  I was even more saddened to discover that I'm totally okay with all sorts of immoral behavior so long as I'm not affected.  You know, I should probably just throw myself at the mercy of whatever God Teresa believes in and follow her moral code.  Or, I should throw myself at the mercy of Allah and follow the principles of Islam.  Or maybe I should become a Mormon and follow their shit.

Hopefully you all see where that is going.  I'm not going to throw myself at any religion's mercy.  What I am going to do, however, is do what I think is right.  I believe in liberty and justice, and the things I do with my life are directed towards making the world a freer and more just place--a better place.  If some high-horse moralist assholes have a problem with that, well then you can simply blow it out your asses.

Can you really blame me for following my conscience Teresa?

Friday, February 17, 2012

Jack Camwell: Selfish, Immoral Fascist Part I

There's been a fairly sizeable debate going on over at Western Hero, a blog I frequent operated by Silverfiddle, a pretty stand-up guy.  Well, one of his readers, and I think someone who also publicly follows Christian Fearing God-Man, was apparently very upset with something I said.  Teresa called me a "selfish, immoral fascist."  Let's explore this point by point, shall we?  (The exchange can be found near the end of the comments thread on that post).

I was originally going to make this one big post, but I've decided to make it a four-parter.  Disclaimer: You all might think this childish, immature, and just plain wrong.  Anyone who thinks that is absolutely right.

Anyhow, on with the show!

The first thing that struck me was that she called me "selfish."  I was seriously at a loss for how this woman could call me selfish given the fact that she's never even met me personally.  She has zero clue as to what I'm like as a person.  People who know me IRL would probably tell you that I'm one of the most selfless people they know.  I put other people's needs ahead of my own all the time.

Hell, I was in the military for Christ sakes.  Yes I got paid really well, and yes I took advantage of the GI bill, but there's still an element of selflessness in serving one's country, I think.  I dunno, maybe I'm wrong?  But she knows me, right?  She knows me better than I know myself!  So because some dingbat on the internet judges me to be selfish, I must be selfish!  So let's take a moment to talk about how awful I am.

I am so selfish that I make sacrifices to afford to send my children to Catholic school.

I am so selfish that I always make myself available to my friends if they need someone to talk to, even if what they need to talk about is some seriously personal shit, and even if it's an inconvenient time for me to talk with them.

I am so selfish that I want to be a teacher.

I am so selfish that when I was younger, I volunteered in a nursing home for over 3 years.

I am so selfish that I recently found a new job in which I will be a job coach for adults with disabilities.

I am so selfish that when I have dinner with a close friend of mine every now and then, I offer to pay sometimes knowing that he is wealthy and doesn't need me to buy him anything.

I am so selfish that I never ask anyone to ever pay me back.

I am so selfish that I volunteered to run a 60+ person LAN Party for three years without any pay or compensation of any kind.

I am so selfish that when Larry over at Political Realities lost his mother, I agreed to help fill in content during his time of need.

I am so selfish that when he thanked me and told me he owed me, I told him that he didn't owe me anything.

So you're right Teresa.  I'm a selfish shit head.  I'm a huge piece of dog shit that doesn't understand the meaning of sacrifice, altruism, or selflessness.  Thank you for helping me realize what a giant fuck-ass I am!

In part II, I will address her asinine assertion that I'm somehow "immoral."  Stay tuned!

Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Eff you blogspot, late Happy Valentine's Day

So I fucking told it to post a happy Valentine's day post at 8:30 am yesterday, 02/14/12, and it just plain didn't.  Sigh.  Anyway, I hope that everyone who has a special someone had a lovely Valentine's Day, and here's the picture I would have posted yesterday.

Sorry if this offends you Jersey, but you have to appreciate how hard it was for me to find a picture under the search terms "sexy valentines day," that wasn't totally obscene.

Monday, February 13, 2012

Dumbass Idea of the Week: Call me "Fruit of the Loom"

Some professional Luger thought it'd be a good idea to change his name to the brand of one of his sponsors.  So when we watch the Olympics coming up (assuming he makes it there), we should be on the look out for a Tongan named "Bruno Banani."

What's wrong with that, other than the fact that he named himself after a brand?  It's an underwear brand . . .

Now of course it's less ridiculous than changing your name to, say, "Dick Fruit of the Loom," but just imagine if someone's last name was Hanes.  You might not snicker, but you'd think about it.

Anyway you look at it, this guy changed his name to his sponsor's brand, and that's pretty stupid.  I guess we can look at it this way: how often does someone from Tonga make the news?

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Why Am I Still a Catholic?

There's nothing like wafers and wine on a Sunday morning!
All this talk and argument about the birth control thing got me thinking the other day.  There are four big issues on which the Catholic church and I completely disagree with.

1.  Abortion: I'm pro-choice, and apparently as a Catholic I'm supposed to be pro-life, whatever that means anymore.  I guess the Church thinks that abortion is wrong in all cases, even rape, incest, and danger to the mother's life.  Well, the church neatly sidesteps the mother's life issue, by saying that aborting the baby to save her life is simply a "life saving operation," rather than an abortion.  Please.

2.  Birth Control: Personally, I think it's the best thing ever made.  I mean c'mon.  Fucking with zero consequences?  That's pretty amazing in my book.  For couples with a lot of steamy passion in their marriage, but small pocketbooks, birth control is a blessing.  It means they can be intimate without having to worry about creating more little mouths to feed that they can't afford.

3.  Gay Marriage: Why not?  Doesn't it seem a little retarded and hypocritical to tell people that they are free to live their lives however they choose, but in the same breath say that if they're gay they can't be married?  "Well we can't change the definition of marriage, Jack!"  Why not?  The definition of "Republican" has changed over the last 150 years.  Dude on dude action is not my cup of tea, but then again neither is BDSM.  How is it my place to tell someone that he's not allowed to be in a legally recognized relationship with a man he truly loves?

4.  The Nature of God: This is not a political thing, but it's something that could technically get me excommunicated.  I'm a Freemason, and Freemasonry is heavily deistic.  I'm a deist, which most of you know means that I believe God created the universe, its proceses, and it's laws of physics, and that's it.  God does nothing to impact life as we know it.  I mainly believe that because I believe that God loves all his creation equally, and showing favor to some and wrath to others completely contradicts that.  That is a human quality that we've placed on God, a quality that doesn't stick for me.  The Church believes deism to be a heresy.

So considering I disagree with the church on some pretty serious issues (all of which could bar me from partaking in the Eucharist, the last making me eligible for excommunication) why the hell am I still Catholic?  In a way I don't really know, but it has a lot to do with tradition and the fact that I am totally down with the Catholic Intellectual Tradition.

The Church might still be stuck in the Middle Ages in a lot of ways, but anyone who has studied the history of the church would know just how much it has changed over the years, and its precisely because the religion allows for change.  Unlike some religions, that have set dogmas that will never change, Catholicism supports thinkers in developing new ideas and exploring the old ones in greater depth.

And of course we've got sexy Catholic school
girls.  I mean, who doesn't love that?
Also, there is a heavy element of sacrifice and imperfection in the Church.  Why do we sacrifice things during the Lenten season and forgo meat on Fridays?  Why do we place such a heavy emphasis on stewardship and good works?  The idea is that this life means something.  Whereas a lot of Protestant religions view this existence as a mere waiting room, Catholics focus on this life because God wanted us to.  We understand that we are flawed human beings, and through sacrifice and stewardship we can be closer to what God wants us to be.

Catholicism focuses on this life and it sanctity.  So although I can, and probably should be, excommunicated, I still stick around.  It's better than believing that alcohol is evil, and it's certainly better than believing that all you need to do is accept Jesus as your personal savior and your pass to heaven is granted regardless of what you do in this life.

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Why I Write? To end the circle jerks, of course

Yesterday I made a post about the Komen Foundation and how retarded pretty much everything surrounding the whole ordeal was.  The point of my post was that the Komen Foundation is a private charity, or whatever, and this not being Nazi Germany or Commie China, the foundation is allowed to donate its money where ever the fuck it wants, and it's fairly stupid that people criticized them and politicized the whole damn thing.

Well, Jersey thought it necessary to inform me that Planned Parenthood doesn't perform a ton of abortions each year, and that abortions only represent a small portion of the services offered at Planned Parenthood.  My response to Jersey, in a nutshell: So fucking what?

I don't care if Planned Parenthood did zero abortions a year.  I don't care if they performed a billion abortions a year.  That factoid, that point that was brought up, had absolutely nothing to do with anything that I wrote in my article.  It was so beside the point of what I was trying to say, that I broke my rule and gave an acerbic response to Jersey, who is a faithful reader.

But don't think for one second that this is just directed at Jersey.

Why do any of you blog?  Some of you truly just want to get your message out there.  But more often than not, your message is going nowhere.  Why?  It's not your fault.  It's going nowhere because most people don't like to argue, and they don't like to feel as though they are wrong.  So they're going to visit blogs that more closely resemble their beliefs and what not.  Take Crooks and Liars for example.  I used to visit that site often, but I don't anymore.

"What's the matter Jack, were they too good for you?  Are they too smart for you?"  I don't doubt that many of them are well educated people, but I also know that 99% of those people are so entrenched in their beliefs that they long ago abandoned the ability to actually listen.  They believe in the truthfulness of their facts and statistics, and when presented with a fact or truth that is contrary to what they believe, they dismiss the contradiction as false or mere propaganda.

Why?  Because they're afraid of being wrong.  They're already stressed and shitty enough believing that they have the answer and hoping that their answer wins out because of how awful everything is.  How much worse would they feel if they suddenly realized that they're all full of shit and don't have the answer?  Not only would everything be shitty, but they wouldn't be able to feel the comfort of being "right."

Most people only want to hear what they want to hear.  They read what they want to read.  They don't care about your message, or my message.  All they care about is proving some point that makes them feel warm and fuzzy about their worldview.

So why do I write?  Well, I do it because so many of you have given up on listening.  An article by John Carey on PR yesterday really hit it home for me.  We get to thinking that we've got it all figured out.  All of intellectual history as culminated into this moment, and magically, John Carey and others have the solution.

You all know what America is supposed to be.  If only everyone would listen, all of our problems would be solved.  Your vision of America is it.  It's the pinnacle of human existence.  The whole damn world would benefit from following your plan for prosperity.  Let me engage in a little experiment.

I'm right and you're wrong.  Everything you believe is a lie perpetrated by (insert political party/person/group) in order to subjugate you and destroy every last shred of liberty you may hold.  All of my facts are based on 100% truth, and they are irrefutable.  All of your facts are complete falsehoods.  I know, with complete and utter certainty, what this country needs to survive and prosper, and any deviation from that is an indication of ignorance and lack of education.  If you believe anything other than what I say, you are a moron and worse, a sheeple.  Fuck you, you (Liberal/Conservative) douchebag.

How does that sound?

Monday, February 6, 2012

Dumbass Idea of the Week: The Komen Foundation

This will probably be a bit perplexing for some of you, especially since the title is ambiguous.  "Does Jack agree or disagree with them pulling funding from Planned Parenthood?"

Well, it's complicated.  I think Planned Parenthood provides a service that women need, especially low income women that get knocked up.  So that should sufficiently piss off all the pro-lifers that read my stuff.

But, I think it was pretty stupid for everyone to blast the Komen Foundation for pulling the funding.  "But Jack, how can you say that?"  Simple.  The Komen Foundation should be free to do whatever the fuck it wants with its money.  What they believe is really none of your business, nor is it mine.

So honestly, who gives a shit why they pulled funding?  Last I checked, abortion is legal (to a certain extent), so it's not like you're fighting to legalize it.  Also, was that funding really going to hurt Planned Parenthood that badly?  Probably not.  They've got quite a bit of funding from the government and other sources.

The Komen Foundation, which is a thing for breast cancer or something of the sort, should have told everyone to go fuck themselves.  It's their money, they can donate it wherever the hell they please.  The reasoning for pulling the funding was because PP doesn't do mamagrams.  Hmm, so a breast cancer foundation pulled funding because a facility doesn't provide mamagrams.  Pulling funding had NOTHING to do with abortion?  Go figure.

Let people spend their money where they please.  After all this is America, isn't it?

Saturday, February 4, 2012

Catch me on PR today: Why You Shouldn't Fear Iran

To help give Larry 7 day coverage while he is dealing with the passing of his mother, I've agree to post on Saturdays.

So check me out on Political Realities today, discussing why we shouldn't be so afraid of Iran.

And, because I'm an evil man who objectifies women, here's a picture of Scarlett Johansson, a close 2nd to Mila Kunis in my "future wife," category.

Friday, February 3, 2012

For Larry at Political Realities

Larry lost his mother yesterday, so please visit Political Realities and pay condolences to him and his family.  He wrote a wonderful tribute to his mother that I encourage everyone to read.

Thursday, February 2, 2012

Dear Feminists: Maybe this will shut you up

Do feminists even exist anymore?  You'd think in this day and age that a ridiculous cause such as that would have died out.  I'm probably going to catch a lot of flak for that statement should any of my readers be down with feminism, but I promise if you keep reading I might make you think twice.

So, my guess is that feminists today probably advocate for allowing women to be in combat roles in the military.  They should be afforded the same opportunity as any man, right?  Because a woman who is dedicated enough can be just as good a trained killer as any asshole man, right?  Okay, I'll buy that.  You're right.  Any woman with the drive and perseverance can be just as good as a man in any role, even killing.  Here's where this might get a little hairy for you though.

If you want women to be allowed in combat, and you want women to be held to the same standard of equality to men, then logically women should be made to register for the draft.

Yes, every woman in this country should be made to register for the draft when she turns 18.  Why not?  Every male American citizen has to register, so why not women?  And yes, feminists, that means you, too.  If you're between the ages of 18-35, you should also be eligible to be drafted, just like every man.

"Woah, woah, Jack.  That's a bit much."  Why?  Is it because it's a lot harder to train the average woman to be a stone-cold-killer, honed to physical perfection, than it is to train a man?  Or is it because people generally don't want to force young women off to die?

You're just going to have to face facts: women are treated differently in society.  You're held to a completely different standard.  No woman in this country is expected to go die for it should the need arise, but every able-bodied man is.  I've got a son and a daughter.  I know that one day, my son will have to register for the draft and my daughter never will.  And you know what?  I'm okay with that.

That might sound awful, but it's not.  It's not that I value my son's life less than my daughter's.  I love him as much as I love her.  But he's my son, and he'll grow into a man.  Every man has a duty to his country, and in a free society, the men of that society may be called upon to fight for it.  Do I want my daughter--small and fragile--to be forced to go off to war and potentially die?  Hell no.  Maybe she'll become some hard core killing machine, but she's pretty girly.  She doesn't even like playing in mud.

And you know what?  That's okay.  I'm a man, and I've got a soft spot for women.  I don't like to see women beaten or brutalized, and I certainly wouldn't be able to handle my precious little daughter being forcibly subjected to that.

News flash, feminists: gender differences are okay.  If you want true equality in this country, then advocate for all women to be included in the draft.  And don't give me some line of bullshit like, "oh well the draft is immoral even for men, so why would I advocate for something that should be abolished?"  Whether or not you agree with the system makes absolutely no difference.  That's how the system is, and equality means that everyone is subject to whatever standards the system holds on groups of people.

When feminists advocate for women to be included in the draft, then I will start to believe that they're not completely full of shit.  Until then, well, you know what I think about it.

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

America's Future: Dishonest Morons

I guess the same could be said for the present and past, but bear with me for just a moment.  I read an article the other day about cheating amongst high school and college students.  I have to say, I was fairly disheartened.

According to a study done at Duke University in 2005, approximately 75% of students actively cheat whether it be cheating on tests or plagiarizing their papers.  Of the students they studied, 40% of them said that they found nothing wrong with their cheating.

"Holy shit" right?  That's what I said anyway.  I actually never cheated on anything in school.  I do have a sense of integrity, and I was always afraid of being caught.  Plus, I felt like the only ones that cheated were the dumb kids that couldn't hack it.

But the kids cheating today are the so-called high achievers.  Their justification?  They say that it's impossible to meet the unrealistic demands and expectations placed upon them by society, their parents, and colleges.  Entry to college has become so competitive, that these students simply can't make the necessary grades to continue on with their education.

Hopefully all of you see this as a big problem and join me in weeping for the future.  Not only are we doomed to have a bunch of morons one day running things, but they're going to be dishonest morons who think it's okay to cheat in order to get ahead.  Sure, it's already like that, but at least the liars and cheats are somewhat educated.

So what the fuck?  What do we do with shit like this?  I don't rightly know.  Somehow, the kids have the idea that it's okay to cheat.  Is it any wonder when we see people getting away with cheating the system every single day?  And it's not just the mega-rich that did stupid shit to tank the economy: it's the welfare cheats as well.

I think we might be boned.  Maybe you think differently.  What do you all think?

Edit:  Lo and fucking behold, this comes to light.  College administrator resigns over fake SAT scores.  There is little hope, I think.