Gingerly Afflicted

Mitt Romney and Limitations

2012-01-10T15:25:00.001-06:00

Mitt Romney has won a primary, and will win the next one but in both states it has come as a Pyrrhic victory. The objective of the Romney campaign should not have been only to win, but to establish themselves on grounds that the whole party could get behind. Instead, the man who was easiest to defeat (Perry) has dropped out of the race. His doppelganger (Huntsman) still stands there indecisive but alive. Ron Paul still stubbornly hopes that reason becomes an American hobby, while masking his own demons that everyone seems to ignore. Newt Gingrich, somehow, still thinks he's in the contest as well. However, all of that pales in comparison to the ultras lining up behind Rick Santorum with Perry and Bachmann fading out of the picture.

The Republican party since the political switches of the 1960s has been a party defined by two sectors, business and wealth and poor rural America. The former is a vague category because it refers to a wide number of people. Sure, it includes the 1% that all us commie liberals have been complaining about, but it also includes people below that threshold who believe themselves to be rich. The suburbanites, who as much as anybody were destroyed by the foreclosure and bank crises of the last decade, still hold to the idea that the amount of debt they incur does not make them different than other people whose net earnings are more than their gross earnings. (Gross earnings are obviously a horrible way to distinguish a person's wealth, but bling counts I guess.) The second part of the party comes from rural areas that would seemingly benefit from liberal policies, but where the moral Conservatism is overpowering to the point that no one can vote for Democrats.

The best Republican politicians of the last forty years have combined the two. On one hand, a fear of God or an immense evangelistic view of the world, on the other, an Ivy league, Wall Street, or Murdoch friendly image. Reagan was much like Romney in the sense that he came from a Blue state as a Republican governor. However, Reagan possessed a charisma Romney will never wield, was far less willing to embrace centrist views, and was religious to the point of Millennial views. (Reminding me that we should never give nuke codes to anyone who thinks he's coming on the end times, and even more someone with Alzheimer's and those beliefs). George H.W. Bush was a Reagan disciple, less charisma but more pragmatic views. He was elected on Reagan's merits as much as his own, and even more on Dukasis being inept. Romney has no predecessor to legacy, and Obama is the best campaigner I've seen in my life. George W. Bush was elected, because he was a compassionate conservative, yet he was also a businessman (albeit a poor one) and an Ivy leaguer (also, an underachieving one). He was going to keep the country morally friendly, and also without the regulations that hamper economic development in theory.

Romney in private probably embodies the same principles that are needed to be a Republican candidate. He is religious enough to get the middle of the party and smug enough to please the 1% and raise far more than any other candidate. However, for many reasons he cannot get to the ultra-conservatives and Tea Party supporters. He might be the wrong religion, he might be too uptight and erudite, and he just might be too liberal. This is but a road bump for Romney; I maintain there is no way he can lose this nomination (Santorum lost a Senate re-election bid by 16 points), but when the general election comes where will he stand. The candidates remaining save Huntsman will destroy Romney's position with no regard to them losing.

Can he survive such a beating, with Obama already campaigning against him? Even worse, will he resort to McCain's tactics of trying to placate the ultras by nominating someone not worthy of the position, who can't handle the spotlight and is torn apart by some strong questioner (like Katie Couric?)? Or will he choose a VP like Huntsman so alike to him that he cannot possibly please the ultras? The problems that lie ahead for Romney are not impassable, but the reality is he attacked the wrong candidates in Iowa He allowed the race to open up to others, and prolonged a battle when his strength would be better used at later date.

Flaws in the Romantic Status Quo

2011-12-19T16:57:00.001-06:00

I don't write as much about women and relationships as I used to. The little eccentricities that so angered me years ago have now faded into acceptance. I used to be that guy who would try to help, try to explain the world, more specifically try to explain why men are as they are and why women enable that. Now, I don't care nearly as much, because the literal romantic inside me is horribly dead. That isn't to say that I am not romantic, but rather that I can only express my romanticism in literary form as opposed to anything literal. Nothing I see in real life is remotely touching anymore. Sex is cheap, children are products of misguided fantasies, dates/engagements/marriages are non-existent or contrived, women think they can't find love anywhere, men think they can find love in all the wrong places, and in general society as a whole is a jaded hole of numb existence where our figurative hearts used to be.

Truthfully, this has nothing to do with me; in fact, it seems to be a world aligning with my views. The majority I see a world as it is and sigh, and on occasion I seem miserable in the world that I so often perpetuated. It has gotten to a point where I will see a single mother in public and almost not notice her child, as if the products of our carelessness have become accessories to our excess. When I notice the child, I realize that at this moment the child is not the burden I used to think it was, but rather the idea that someone could love or desire you and then at any moment just fucking bail. We spend our whole lives as these casual lovers, desiring people we cannot have, having people we do not desire, and everything becomes hollow to a point that you are constantly swimming upstream in the detritus of our making.

Yet I used to speak up about this, say what was needed to help people but somehow I lost that necessity. People ask me for advice still, and I just broadly reply that this seems familiar or I have no place to comment. I might say "You're a fucking idiot.," which does not generally go over as well as you'd think. Generally, I blame the alcohol for this, but the temerity granted to the inebriated probably facilitates the majority of my acquaintance's romantic exploits. Dear God, if people didn't make out in bars, how would the rest of the world know how in love they are? It just at some point becomes a problem because everyone I know seems miserable, yet I have nothing to say to help them.

It's a problem that certainly comes with age. Misogynists pulled the "biological clock" cliche out of their asses to make it seem an inherently female problem. Yet it has nothing to do with procreation in my eyes, anyone (women) can find stability and then adopt a child or find sperm donors. No, that is not the problem, but age makes people interminably lonely. They start counting the days, months, years they have been single or celibate. They rush into marriages, despite not really being happy in the relationships they are in. They make public displays of affection, yet privately fight. They hook on to any man/women that will have them, then toss them away as disposable always longing for someone to love them that never will.

Age isn't everything though. Other factors come into play. Some people didn't plan well enough, others are planning so far ahead that they cannot possibly win. So I see women with children, wishing that someone would love them as much as they love their child. They find one of the inherent problems that people are jealous of even the smallest competitors for one's affection. I see men sticking out relationships for kids (sometimes their own, often not) that they love far more than their mother. I have friends who know how many kids they want, where they want to get married, somewhat of an idea to whom that would be, yet cannot function on a daily basis on even the same level that I an irresponsible jerk can do.

There are people who get it, who are patient or just know better. There are people who met their soul-mate when they are 20 or 15 or 5, and have never been happier. These people are wonderfully happy, and collectively every time when they enter the equation make things worse. I've found that married people, happy couples, or casual interlopers like me are instigators. The couples play cupid, and nothing is more annoying than being shot in the ass. I play the watcher, and just let this all play out to my utter amusement or disbelief. Sure, there are moments that the interloper joins the party, but for the most part these are calculated or designed. Even worse, sometimes we just get bored and instead of playing cupid simply are just evil, either enabling bad decisions or pouring lighter fluid on dry leaves.

Cynicism is the natural conclusion that one can discern I have already come to, but as with every problem there is a solution and one that I am willing to pursue.

For those of us that have an idea of perfection, stop looking for it. Too often I hear the word perfect thrown around about women. There is no perfect woman; in my case, I could find nothing more repellent than a perfect woman. Flaws are something to be cherished and dealt with. No perfect person will ever be with you, because frankly, guys, you are fucked up, and that's perfectly alright. Never settle because it's the right thing to do. Don't marry the woman you accidentally knocked up because it's the right thing to do. Be honest, because dishonestly making someone believe you love them is crueler than anything you've ever endured.

As for women, stop meeting guys in bars and take some of the initiative away. Guys in bars will do or say anything to make you happy, why not try approaching a man in a scenario where he isn't so inclined. Talk to someone in the morning on a commute, at a coffee shop or lunch where time is of the essence, and the sexual gratification is a sidestep. You might think this is weird, but nice guys don't care. One should know why anybody can have cheap sex, not many can offer a useful word or two in conversation. Don't be so quick to anger when you end up on the wrong end of a wishbone. If two people agree to something mutually, almost every time one person gets less than the other out of it. Life is not 50-50.

For both sexes, it's important to remember that nothing ever meets your expectations. Sometimes you are in the middle of a terrible relationship, yet when it luckily ends you wish it was still going. Sometimes, you meet the person of your dreams, and they want nothing to do with you or share no common ground. Some people attract clingers and in turn can't stand them. Others find stable people that don't cling quite enough. It's not a race, nor a game, nor a exercise in futility. One day you may find someone who will agree to make the schmucks around you miserable as all good couples do.

Lastly, let me start helping again, and stop making me into this psychologist who has to wrap his head around his world. It's hard enough being concerned with bills, women, writing, sports, and work. My brain works too hard on random bullshit for me to have to constantly help people discover feelings that have been made explicit. Next time, listen when I say, "You're being stupid," because I sure as hell will whenever I have these problems.

The Death of a Political Party

2011-12-06T15:30:00.001-06:00

I've been alive for almost twenty seven years, politically aware for nearly seventeen of them. In those there have been many peaks and valleys for each party. I've seen a President go from 82% popularity to 28%, and his predecessor's popularity rises even until this day. I've seen do-nothing Congresses, Congresses filled with animosity, soft Congresses who wilt under executive pressure, and Congresses who do everything in their power to lose their next election. Yet in all of this time, it has been individuals who paid the price, some men and women would lose elections due to their incompetence or something they were thought party to. This time around it is not going to be that clean.

I was a liberal by birth; now, I am a liberal by choice. However, since I've been young, I've been utterly fascinated by the Republican party. It is the party of Lincoln, and a party which after the 1960's somehow absorbed the Dixiecrats and no longer was a party of equality or civil rights. The party that is every year anointed by poor, mostly rural white, people, yet is dominated by the wishes of the rich. It is a party of correct economic and political ideals, and poor implementation. A party who fights too often on moral and religious grounds, sometimes hypocritically and always to the detriment of the American government. In a two-party system, I wish for the battles to be even, to be made on grounds of our ideas and our dreams, not upon our money or as it seems now ineptitude. The Republican party is dying before our eyes, and no one seems to notice.

People have been harping on Obama's poll numbers, without acknowledging they are exactly where they should be. He has done a bad job, even with no help from Congress and the worst economy in twenty years or if you wish to be dramatic since the depression. Even more importantly, the Republicans popularity has been dropping at a faster rate since this summer. Do polls really tell us everything? No, but national elections do. Currently, the Republicans are fighting a war of attrition where all of their flaws are laid bare. The only viable candidate Mitt Romney just was revealed to have spent money to destroy documents upon leaving as Governor of Massachusetts. Herman Cain, who I will say should have never been a leading candidate, went all Bill Clinton without any support or charm. Rick Perry might actually have a learning disability, and I'm saying that out of kindness to his family so they get him checked out. Michelle Bachmann is losing ground with the Tea Party supporters to..Newt Gingrich, that guy who was politically dead six months ago.

If Gingrich continues his improbable surge, and ends up the nominee, this will be the second election where the Republican party went with old blood, and found themselves outmatched. I wrote last election about the Republicans losing the Hispanic and African-American vote for good, what happens if they lose young voters? Is there a young Republican that can reverse either of those trends? Is there a demographic shift in which the Republican party can regain the losses they are sustaining in urban centers? I don't see it, as of this moment. The Republican party's most evident surges of the past three years came from libertarians and the party will never be a party of libertarians. Are we looking at a party that has to start over from scratch?

I wish that were so, but political parties are not the phoenix. They die slowly and take longer to revitalize their ideas. The Republicans died after Nixon and found themselves only mid-way through Reagan's administration. They have yet to change their theories since despite the rapid changes that occur in our technological society. The Democrats died after Carter and found another Southerner to rebuild the party, yet will never find its roots in the South again. The slow-death will not be apparent, except they will not win major elections. There will be no upsets and fresh blood will not come into either party and the government will continue to stagnate into irrelevance. Sans tragedy or collapses unknown, there will no longer be any action and the Eastern world will pass us by or laugh softly as their own problems destroy them as well.

The Republicans had an opportunity to regain the Presidency, and to change the fortunes of their political party. They have already failed, and the Democrats are better for it. Yet, I've never seen a Democratic Party that knew how to use power so I will just say that no one is better for it. The United States is mired in stagnancy and will be until either Obama finds courage post-election to fight for what he believes in or the two parties actually begin to care about America and work together. The former is certainly possible, the latter is unlikely. Five years from now, I hope this short rant is irrelevant, but nothing I wrote three years ago is yet. This is our democracy.

Hero Worship and the Human Delusion

2011-11-10T00:52:00.001-06:00

Thousands of students protested the firing of Joe Paterno this evening, yet nationwide others looked on in disbelief. To understand how many people still believe a man guilty of perhaps ignoring the most famous quote of all time ("The only thing necessary for the triumph [of evil] is for good men to do nothing"), one must understand sports in general. There is nothing outside sports to the delusional fan; it is an escape from the dim realities of life. The world is full of pedophiles, murderers, philanderers, and creeps, yet fans believe their heroes are above that. That money, fame, and power make the darkness that exists inside of us go away.

In fifth grade, we cheered when OJ Simpson was acquitted. He was in all sense of the word guilty, except beyond reasonable doubt. We cheered because he was a hero: a football star, a TV star, and a movie star. In 2000, we celebrated a man, Ray Lewis, who was found not guilty of murder, but from all views seemed complicit (a word which defines this scenario). He won an MVP and a Super Bowl and to this day is a symbol of persistence and hard work, yet that dead man will never feel anything near to the ecstasy Ray felt later that year on a podium hoisting a Super Bowl trophy. We love our sports heroes or heroes in general and odds are the majority of them are assholes.

This week has been defined by two horrible situations. One involved a man who until this week I highly respected, and the other involved a man I abhorred as a person and respected as an artist. The differences between each situation in my mind is nil and void. Both situations involved despicable human beings, who I find it revolting that they were never brought to a trial before more harm was done. However, each situation is at a different stage. Jerry Sandusky will come to trial, already guilty in the court of public opinion. Michael Jackson lies dead in the ground, yet never will be guilty to the millions of people who still worship stronger than any God.

When I talked about the man I respected in Joe Paterno, I meant that. He is the greatest coach of all-time, despite the senility that has seemed to creep in over the years. Yet he is just a football coach, he is not God (who for all intents and purposes is an asshole in his own right, if you believe in his omnipotence) , he is not even a great man as this saga tells us. He values winning and his ties above the welfare of the unprotected and for that he should have been fired at least. Yet people stand outside and say he didn't know or he shouldn't be responsible, but the Grand Jury charges as loaded as they may be, say he was in the know and also complicit. Complicity is not as bad as being a perpetrator, but is so much weaker and cowardly. I see the word every day as I walk out of my apartment, and it serves as a reminder. When anyone does something that is beyond moral reproach, report it and be their deliverance to the hell/judgment that such transgressions deserve.

Thousands of miles away others stand outside and support another pedophile, albeit one of a higher profile. Michael Jackson was a scumbag personally, yet people think his music absolves him of all his scumbaggery. When people stand outside demanding justice for the man who "killed" Michael, they forget the children who he "supposedly" took advantage of. A delusional star is much more deserving of a delusional fanbase, whereas in Paterno's case the assholes cheering for him do him a disservice.

I almost called it an American delusion rather than a human one. Yet it is something inherent in humanity itself, we need someone to lean on, to believe in. The problem is: there is no golden boy. Even the good man, like I strive to be, has his flaws. Someday, darkness will creep into our lives, yet the best we can do is fight it with all our might. The complicity Paterno showed is not as despicable as the act itself, but he should have the moral fiber to know better. He should have resigned immediately after this aired instead of having to be fired and then put the Penn State President through the ringer (Which if anyone noticed, they replaced the reporters with drunken wolves and he stood ground as the wolves shredded his clothes and he stood firm. It was a PR man's dream example.). The fans of Michael Jackson are worse than the Penn State fans. They spend their days and nights worshiping a dead man, and a worse man than Joe Paterno. There is a point where even the people not involved become complicit, and the fans no matter where their heart lies have crossed this line and now willingly or not have become fans of not only men but their dirty deeds as well.

14-3: Mizzou and Max Q

2011-09-25T22:11:00.001-05:00

During my senior year of high school, my head football coach would always refer to "Max Q". Since he was not an aerospace engineer, I'm sure he didn't grasp the concept perfectly, so his usage wasn't exactly correct. The key thing to remember is that max q is the point where the space shuttle underwent the maximum mechanical stress. For the shuttle to not fail, everything must be in perfect working order. So he would stress that our team get to the point where everything was clicking properly. In truth, he was accidentally referring to the maximum mechanical stress that occurs when you take 35 men who have run the option since seventh grade and hand them Mizzou's playbook. Meanly and truthfully, we dubbed his truck the Max Q truck for its ability to carry two lineman sized coaches down the hill to practice. Luckily, for them they now can see their teachings immortalized in a half-assed blog post about the Missouri team they emulated purposely or accidentally.

The Oklahoma game was penciled in as a loss on the calendar. The only ones who didn;t think so either are members of the team or highly delusional Mizzou fans. So when Oklahoma recieved the kickoff, my first thought was: can they improve and grow from this game? After the first Oklahoma possession, it was what the hell just happened. The Tigers defense just held the Sooners to a three and out, despite being essentially the same defense that Brock Osweiler torched from the beginning the Arizona State game. Had this been later in the game, it probably would have been more useful. Three-and-outs are demoralizing as a defense, since you just got off the field, but even worse if you are playing quick snap, no huddle spread offenses. In many regards, this would be the poison administered by Oklahoma during the second and third quarters.

Then, Mizzou did something even more unexpected, they dominated OU on their first possession. They made Oklahoma look just as bad as Western Illinois last week. Henry Josey, perhaps the best third-string running back in the country, tore off chucks of yardage. Interestingly, it was using the zone read which is essentially a single back option attack. The problem with the zone read is that out of the shotgun you have backs moving parallel to the line of scrimmage as opposed to downhill. Josey's speed negates that partially, and when James Franklin is making the correct reads, it is devastating. In the second and third quarter, Franklin missed some reads and thus had some short runs, and Josey was keyed to leading to Franklin getting more carries than he should.

Then, Oklahoma had a good gain on their next possession and the overwhelming feeling was "here we go, they woke up." Landry Jones, perhaps intrigued by the idea of a comeback victory, celebrates the play by throwing the most inexplicable deep ball ever. Not only was the receiver double-covered, Jones under-threw him by ten yards. It was embarrassing, and even outdid the one time where Franklin put some Kurt Warner spin on a pass out of bounds when throwing away and the ball fluttered as if graced with butterfly wings. Mizzou didn't get much on the next drive. They had three negative plays (penalty on 1st-10, -1 on 1st-15, sack on 3rd-5), and they punted. Oklahoma looked better and easily drove the field (slightly aided by penalty), but Mizzou's defense held and forced a field goal.

So Mizzou had the ball again, here's where the young man makes his first pressure mistake. (We are pessimists by nature of course) Nope, he passes for 29 yards to TJ Moe, and then Josey runs for two yards to the Oklahoma 45. About this time, Brett Venables caught wind of Jones inspiring idea and called a free safety blitz against a spread team. No, let's clarify a spread team whose quarterback is clearly more comfortable throwing vertically than horizontally. If anything, taking away the middle of the field and forcing those tough sideline passes is a must, but perhaps he thought Gabbert was still there throwing 35 yard bullets to the far sidelines. Venables leaves his defensive backs in man coverage with no safety help, which means if one slips when the receiver cuts they're smoked. And that is exactly what happened. In the old Madden games, this was called the Monster Blitz, and it always caught you eye. All of your DB's on islands, and you throwing the kitchen sink at an opponent. No good opponent has ever been sacked or even harried by a Monster Blitz.

That was Max Q, that was a team firing on all cylinders up against extreme pressure showing their potential. The score showed Missouri 14-Oklahoma 3. Then, reality set in. Oklahoma is one of the better teams in the nation. For two quarters, they pummeled the Tigers and scored twenty eight unanswered points. That was perhaps more indicative of the wide spread between a veteran Oklahoma team and a Missouri team dominated by sophomores. Then, Venables became bored again and decided to call defenses that essentially said "Henry Josey, you suck." When Josey punched him in the mouth for such a juvenile and epically poor insult, the game was out of reach but Oklahoma had to make sure and score once again to make the Vegas odds-makers feel better about the ridiculous spread of the game (An act of pointlessness given the Tigers next drive for a TD).

So here we stand, clearly a Missouri team on its best night can beat anyone in the Big ~~XII X~~ IX except Oklahoma on the road. However, to do that they must perform at a level equivalent to the first and fourth quarters, which they won 28-10. Doesn't that look so much better; it almost makes you forget that Ryan Broyles is still at Oklahoma. After watching the other teams play earlier, Missouri can beat Oklahoma State, if they don't beat themselves and Texas A&M is a less intimidating road environment than their two road games so far. As for the Texas and Kansas State, I have no idea how those teams will play on a week-to-week basis. Iowa State hasn't truly beat anyone, but they have played well. Henry Josey might set a single-game school record against Kansas. Texas Tech will somehow beat us, or beat themselves. Baylor has Hot Tub Griffin and he right now is the best quarterback in college football. Let's see how he fares with conference play, but I think that game is potentially the scariest.

So let's avoid any more pessimism, and look at the broad picture. At this rate, James Franklin will be unstoppable by the season's end. At some point, he has to stop looking better with each game. Arizona State just destroyed a USC team, that while on probation has a great deal of talent still. Oklahoma will not have another home game this year where the opponent will hit them like that first quarter. Grant Ressel will hit field goals again. Most importantly, when your team is starting a true sophomore who is only used to mop-up duty, they are not likely to go undefeated and win a national championship. However, they are going to show some flashes of what the future could hold, and given the results so far, this team is going to be amazing to watch both this year and the next two. Although, the pessimist says there's a chance the defense never learns ball skills. How can a Mizzou fan be optimistic after all these years really?

Social Media Overload

2011-09-22T01:18:00.000-05:00

I think it was Facebook. At least, that seems to be the best answer. I don't know how it started and frankly I blame women, my own lack of self-control, and Reno. Surely, Garth gets a shout-out as well as it was our contest and his eventual cheating that started my journey down the rabbit hole. Lets not get ahead of ourselves and establish this as a bad thing, but Facebook has not been kind to me or the world in general. It is at best, a time parasite; at worst, a cesspool of exasperation, misdirection, fraud, and death.

I joined Facebook back in Rolla; I assume the year was 2006 but time runs together when you are trapped in a continuum of liquor and melancholic absolution. The purpose was to contest who could get as many friends on Facebook without searching and adding people, me or Garth. No one knows who won because I assume we both began cheating at some point. Although, I'm not really the best at being creepy,* so my cheating was more by gaming the system and making myself as "Internet loud" as possible. This entails saying outrageous things to spark interest and just rapidly expanding your presence through an over-saturation of comments.** The problem was that I was enthralled with the ridiculous things I could permanently impose upon the world.***

*Except for the van, continual advances at platonic friends, and possibly my belly button
**This tactic is continued to this day with slightly more subtlety. See slanted rants about Republicans and God.
***Because Facebook would never change its format

My digital imprint traveled the world. I went to a back-hair forest. Hooked up on the Berlin Wall to Hasselhoff's singing. Visited the pedestal upon which Hook put the pussy. I found in a ridiculous amount of fake classes with people, and some who take the world seriously were also in real ones. Despite my vaguely boring and completely heterosexual lifestyle, I had dozens of Facebook hookups, including one with the aforementioned Garth, where it was alright but he was not the Tiger.* I had a toy to play with, another stage from which to perform, which I suppose despite my inclinations as a younger man was always something I liked.

*The Tiger remains to this day way more awesome than Garth and I. I cannot use his real name for fear that saying it will result in a sudden execution.

Then, I learned the truth; not many felt this way. They wanted to meet their high school friends (again), make hyperbolic statements, inflict pain, and in some cases vent sadness. Others just wanted me to farm with them. It was pretty fucking weird.* Well, it still is, but now it gives me other things. I import this shitty prose from over here. I post random ass music links in an attempt to stop the Bieberization of the young kids and hopefully remind the older folk that Nickelback still blows. I talk to some friends to help them get through the doldrums of life. I still haven't figured out how to use it as an effective stalking tool.***

*So I joined Myspace.**
**It is a social networking site. Yes, others existed before Facebook. Yes, it still exists. Yes, I still know my password, which for some reason is the safest password I have on the Internet.
***But I know some ladies who have.

Yesterday, I joined Google Plus for God knows what reason. Actually, I'm pretty sure I was already on Google Plus, which is creepier than me joining it.* Today, I joined Twitter. That one was more logical. Twitter is built like my mind; it is an amalgam of worthless crap, unfounded rumors, vulgarity, and sometimes inspiration. Facebook, obviously discouraged by my flirtation with other services, decided to revamp their site entirely once again. Now, it is like Google Plus, except you have no idea where anything is and you have hundreds of friends who you once again have to prioritize like cliques in high school.

*All hail, Skynet by Google.

Then, as I prioritize who I care to hear from and who I don't in a cold and calculated way, I realize something. It's not Facebook or Twitter or that Space that belongs to somebody or Our Overlord's Site for monitoring human behavior for the eventual war to come. It's human nature. When I sit at a bar loaded with my friends, I pick the ones who need me and often ignore the others. They don't understand, but it's cold and I have to live with that. I comment on the people's walls that aren't necessarily my closest friends but the one's who seem to need it. They might not care, but you have to live with that. We spread rumors, lecture on religion, and talk up our self-esteem because we are frail and needy. The only difference is when you say it to everyone, it feels like someone is listening. So, in my always frail mental state, I now have four distinct points from which I can yell and hear the echoes. Sure as hell beats that cabin I bought in Montana and all of those pamphlets I mailed before this digital revolting revolution to kill the time.

So here's my twitter feed, please abuse it and post hateful things. No, seriously I'm running out of things to rant about. God knows with the stability of the Big XII, the Republicans dicktripping (or what Bachmann's equivalent is), Palestine moving towards legitimate representation, Rhett Miller coming to town, some cooking baddassery of mine, death penalties being handed out like hotcakes, and religion never getting boring. Who am I kidding? I got tons of stuff to write about, but first I need to stare blankly at Facebook wondering why she won't love me.* Wait, that's retarded. Also, a post on claiming the word retard back because it is vague and useful when referring to people of extreme stupidity who do not have a medical condition. Really, I've got tons to say.........WHY AREN'T YOU LISTENING?

*I would never do this. I am a proactive man. I would send her a sexy private message. Or stalk with intent.**
**Also, through intense stalking I have found that my suicidal readership has gone on living, which is a big kudos to the power of psychiatry and my suggestions of alcoholism and God. Either or both works fine.

I'M LISTENING, JOE! PLEASE POST YOUR CURRENT LOCATION.

Shit, we're all gonna die.

What is Your Motivation?: A Republican Nominee Analysis

2011-09-18T16:33:00.000-05:00

It's a simple question that every presidential candidate should be asked: Why are you running for President? The answer is never obvious, despite the appearance that it should be. Everyone dreams of being the most powerful human on Earth at some point. Then as they wise up they realize that it is the most stressful job with overpowering pressure, horrible no-win decisions, and unrelenting opposition, embarrassment, and degradation. To become President, you must survive the slings and arrows of the press and opponents and you must make a majority of Americans believe you are fit for the job or at least better than the other guy. So in one word, why are you running for President of the United States?

Ron Paul- Principle.
He is unique and I've thought and wrote much about this. He will not win, he cannot win, but he must run. He has to establish a different line of thinking for fear that it might perish or be left to his ignorant son to carry the torch. His cause is just, if not hypocritical, so I concede that he must as always remain in the race as long as possible to continue his crusade for libertarians.

Newt Gingrich-Relevance
OOOOOHH......LOOK AT ME. LOOK AT ME. I STOOD UP TO CLINTON. NO, BILL. YES, THAT WAS TWENTY YEARS AGO. NO, I AM NOT A RELIC OF A FAILED ERA. WHY ARE YOU ALL LEAVING ME????? I CAN DO THIS. I CAN BE PRESIDENT. <>

Rick Perry- Hate
He hates homosexuals, Mexicans, old people, ~~cattle ranchers~~, the IRS, ~~his family~~, Obama, ~~Jesus~~, Washington DC (the city, not the politics), Federal Governments (both north and south of the border), and basically anything that you have to be reasonable to deal with. He does like killing people, but in a strictly legal sense. The idea that I would wish Michelle Bachmann to be President of the United States before this asshole should tell you something.

Rick Santorum-World Domination
People in glasses are not to be trusted.
Rick Santorum- Family
He is actually an earnest compassionate conservative. Sure, this means he has many views which are outdated and completely useless, but it doesn't mean middle-America, whatever the hell that vague term constitutes, does not find him suitable for their bleach-white Christian message that they wish to be reflected in government. He probably thinks a lot of the things his opponents are saying but says them in ways to not get normal Americans all terrified. Wait, who am I kidding? He says them louder from that high mount where he looks down upon the rest of us.

Herman Cain- Insanity.
The Republican party has recently had a problem with African American voters, and people might like to say that there are more black democrats than republicans. However, I think this isn't the case. I just think that African American Republican candidates are just incredibly unlikable characters. Herman Cain can't even pass the muted litmus test. You should try it for all political candidates. Watch them do an interview on television, mute your television set, and then decide whether or not he looks like an asshole when he talks, trying to ignore the bottom scroll which says Cain thinks Muslims are a cancer. If he looks like an asshole when he talks and you can't hear a word he's saying; chances are he's an asshole. No president since Nixon has been elected with this quality. For Herman Cain to say the ignorant things he says and then think he can be elected president, there is only one possible motivation: insanity.

Gary Johnson - Chronic, Ganja, Weed, Wacky Tobacky, Marijuana

I don't know much about this man in all honesty. He unlike Herman Cain passes the mute test, and also sounds quite reasonable when he talks. Though the topic he was being reasonable about was the decriminalization of marijuana, which puts his electability somewhere in the snowball's chance in hell range. His state being a border state to the Mad Max post-apocalyptic country of Mexico made this an important topic. He is a Ron Paulesque libertarian, but he obviously is not the standard bearer for that "Children's crusade." So he must be strategically separated by his affection for drugs, even if that is not actually the case and he is just a reasonable man. If you asked me would I rather see Ron Paul or Gary Johnson as the nominee or President, just based on their conviction, I would say Gary Johnson.

Michelle Bachmann-Exposure
I don't think we'll see a female President for a while, despite the obvious barrier that Obama broke making such progress seem possible. Michelle Bachman may be doing the whole female sex a disservice by burning every bridge she crosses. Like Sarah Palin, the other prominent female Republican, she's attractive and despite the words that leave her mouth, intelligent. In fact, people would say that every misstep of Bachmann's actually has worked out for her, almost like she knows what she is doing. The CPAC-driven direction of her party favors the ignoramus as opposed to a thoughtful eloquent woman, of which there are millions in this country to choose from. Her positions and her words point more to her pushing agendas that suit her than legitimate competition. On occasion, she has taken to grandstanding on issues that she really has no interest in, which screams Fox News contributor and propaganda books-on-tape. Also, she looks like an asshole in her still shots, so don't even ask me about the mute test.

Mitt Romney-Desire
He's running because he wants to be President of the United States, and thinks he can do it well. There are no ulterior motives, because even in 2008, he was always running as a frontrunner.Mitt Romney has always run because he was/is the most legitimate candidate for President the Republicans had/have. The problem Romney will always face is that he is too much like the current President. He compromises, he cares about human beings, he is different (Not that being Mormon and Black are like for like experiences), and he is smart. He doesn't come off like Dubya as this likable man, as the populists that vote Republican find affability to be the characteristics of a good President. I would enjoy having a beer with George W. Bush, but I sure as hell don't run him running anything larger than a rotisserie fantasy baseball league ever again.

John Huntsman- Doppelganger
Read above post again, and then say he speaks Chinese and everyone thinks he's a traitor. He's moderate compared to the shit show around him, and he's Mormon. Two strikes. HE WORKED IN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IN A VAGUE WAY SEEING AS HE WAS THE AMBASSADOR TO CHINA NOT THE SECRETARY OF STATE. Tres golpes.*

*No, Rick Perry. I can't be deported for using Spanish.

And what if these two ran:
Sarah Palin-Delusion
I've won things before and I can do it again. I have this cushy job where I get paid to rant polemically about complete and utter nonsense. I should give this up and try to beat a man who I partially gave the last election to with my miscues and inattention to common sense and detail.
Rudy Giuliani-9/11
That the country still cared ten years later says something about my abilities to lead. Or it said that Americans love anniversaries as depressing and useless as they are. Where we you on 9/11? Well, let me tell you a story.

So there you have it, boiled down to nothing it seems that the only two rational candidates are members of the LDS. Conspiracy or not? Discuss with your Republican brethren and then watch Obama be President for the next four years after you nominate a sociopath.

Collegial Conflagrations: Texas is Hamlet, the ACC is Dubya, and the Alamo is Burning

2011-09-18T14:40:00.000-05:00

Of course, this is a post about college football; the title may insist otherwise. It may sound as if I'm going to rant about Texans in a stereotypical way, but really, that's just shooting fish in a barrel. As of yesterday, the realignment talk just hit batshit preemptive strike crazy, which is just past tuck your tail and run into oncoming fire on the scale of unnecessary miltary references to sports. The first is the strategy of the ACC, the most unlikely of conquerors. They moved to allow Pittsburgh and Syracuse to join their conference, a conquest not seen since the British claimed the Falkland Islands and found that there was indeed no fucking reason to do that. The second of course is the first of many Texas A&M jokes that I will make to appease their middle child syndrome.

The Tragedy of Texas, A Prince of College Football

To understand this historical tragic-comic-history first conceived by Dan Beebe, you must first understand the players and remember the theme of this week is of course motivation.

Texas is Hamlet- Obviously, they have everything going for them. Of course, they also have an agenda that is half arrogance and half insanity. Will their plan work? Yes. Will they do it in the most destructive way possible so that every major character dies? Yes. Will they drag it out Kenneth Branagh style making sure to say every last annoying word on paper? Yes. Do they care? No. They will still be Hamlet, death doesn't reflect poorly in a search for glory.

Texas A&M is Laertes- Sure, Texas stabbed your father, thinks little of you, and is frequently implied to have despoiled your sister. That does not mean you should hatch up some plan with the help of the King that results in you dying. Alas, Texas A&M didn't go to university and instead went to France and pranced around with some whores.

Baylor is Ophelia-Deflowered by Texas (Allegedly), Then sort of manhandled by everybody, Finds comfort in insanity or having Kenneth Starr as your President, drowns in a river but looks good doing it. Everyone covers up the evidence, and gives her a Christian burial somewhere in the second-tier

Texas Tech is One of the guards- Has anyone had less of a part to play in this than Texas Tech? They however support the young prince and plan to follow him to certain death.

Oklahoma is Fortinbras- They are the only one benefiting from this madness. They already have credibility and are just leveraging to get back what they lost during the John Blake era to Texas. After the dust clears, most likely they will be the only completely victorious party.

Oklahoma State is Osric- Just a courtier. They have none of the power, some of the money (Okay, most of the money.), and are just hear to announce Fortinbras has kicked everyone's ass and would like to acknowledge us, his cohort in battle.

Missouri is Queen Gertrude- Basically shacks up with whoever will take her despite being one of the few reasonable characters in the story. She is somewhat responsible for everything and truly responsible for nothing. A story in Missouri athletics.

Kansas and Kansas State are Gravediggers- Particularly talented during the winter months. Nobody thinks much of him though when the ground is not hard. Witty tongue, but alas too infrequently used. Good for a lashing of Texas once in a while.

Iowa State is Polonius- Just as likely as anyone to get stabbed behind a curtain when no one is looking.

Colorado and Nebraska are Rosencrantz and Guildenstern-Oh, they used to be friends of Hamlet, but really it seems they really fucking hate that guy. Always beating them to a pulp and then flashing his sword at them whispering, "I can strangle you both in your sleep." Now, off to happier places. No better for it, but happier. Most likely going to be killed on the field of battle by Fortinbras or Hawaii in the future.

But who is Claudius, who is your grand villain? (Or is Hamlet the villian?) For the sake of argument, ESPN is Claudius. They are the usurpers, they are the driving force, they are the one giving Hamlet their freedom to be an ass, they push Laertes to madness, and they most certainly put the Craig James/Jesse Palmer poison in our ears. And what does that make us, the dead king.

The situation always has revolved around Texas. They are the Pac Man Jones of College Football always making it rain and watching as bystanders are shot by bullets intended for them. Nebraska couldn't beat them on the field or off, and smartly realized that and took off to greener pastures. Colorado was always the odd man out, and bolted as well, although they won't be cheering about greener pastures just yet. Then, the Longhorn Network happened. Now, Texas was getting a direct advantage that only two other teams have: a stage solely for their school. However, Notre Dame and BYU are both independents, and they each have something Texas lacks: standards, either moral or academic.* Texas recruits on a level above even more successful programs. They already were on national TV for a majority of their broadcasts and now all of their games are televised no matter the opponent.

So, Texas A&M takes offense to this notion and shoots themselves in the face. Let's remove the other sports and academics from the equation, as everyone but the Big Ten has done so as well. Texas A&M is/was the third best program in the Big XII, a traditionally good football conference. Barring a collapse, they would always be one of the top five programs every year. I would say it goes Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma State, and Missouri. While an occasionally foray might be made by the other teams, these teams are stable and viable programs. So Texas A&M would be the top at best and fifth at worst in this conference. So they move to the SEC, which is the cream of the crop for football, even worse they join the West division. Here is where they stand there. Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State/Texas A&M/Arkansas, Ole Miss. Based upon program talent, coaching, and stability, they are the fourth best program at best in their own division. I really cannot separate them from Miss St. and Arkansas. They have better tradition, but worse coaching and no experience SEC recruiting patterns. People will tell you that football is no different, but the emphasis on defense in the SEC will not suit Texas A&M at first. Now, add Florida, sleeping giants in Tennessee and Georgia, possibly West Virginia or Missouri, a team which gutted them last year, and where does that put them. Possibly, they could be the tenth best program in a fourteen team conference. Then, they can ask Rutgers about playing basketball in the Big East and laugh on their piles of tear-stained money.

The ACC? Really?
Forgive me for asking, but where the hell did this come from? And why does it feel logical and basketball related for the conference. This move fills in a growing divide in the Big East and ACC rather quickly. It allows the conference, who now realizes that Miami-Florida State do not need separate divisions to make a logical North-South Division. If they add Rutgers and Connecticut as well that makes Boston College not look like the one kid at the dance without a date anymore.

North-Boston College, Connecticut, Maryland, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, Virginia, Virginia Tech,
South-Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, NC State, Wake Forest

This is an actual logical super-conference. The travel in cut down, it regionally agrees with the conference name, and it seems to have a purpose. TCU in the Big East is idiotic. Oklahoma in the Pac-Whatever is also ridiculous. This can be practically implemented for all sports, which brings up another point.

College football is no longer healthy for the NCAA. It shouldn't even be discussed in the same page as any other sport. Sure, college basketball makes some money and has it's own disgraceful practices, but it can be contained by it's own gloriously perfect tournament. College football is about money, and with the money it generates, there is no reason Oklahoma can't afford flying to Seattle once a year to play Washington. But they can't afford to do this with the non-revenue sports. The conferences are not only for football, they provide teams with steady competition amongst equally talented programs nearby. This keeps competition high and costs lower. These new abominations will have to sacrifice one or the other. Either you abandon the conference in other sports and play worse teams that are closer weakening your team for the postseason or you throw financial caution to the wind and play a schedule that bleeds your school dry. This is why the independent schools all play in conferences for every sport but football. This is why traditional conferences are antiquated. Only the ACC has put forth an idea that doesn't bleed of the idiocy in this mess we have created.

Texas Stands Alone

Nobody cares what happens to Texas at this point. They dug their grave and here they will lie until they go all Lazurus on us and destroy the world. But to be honest, arrogance does not pay, and Texas will be hurt by this in the short-term. In the long-term, no one can stop them. But at this moment, several men are surrounded and are going to die. This is their Alamo, where they decided that they were invincible and taught in the worst way that they are not. Texas is that guy or girl that has it all, and likes to tease everybody and lead them on, only to find nobody gives a shit. There's other shows on in town, yours just happens to be on the Worldwide Leader.

They will ultimately be the losers, because they ignored the way college football works. College football despite the money and the greed, is still a sport built on tradition. It's for this reason that kids go to Notre Dame and sportswriters still respect them, despite the high academic standards and recent failures. It's why a kid will take time signing a multi-million dollar bonus to play baseball while considering playing a football game on a Saturday in Memorial Stadium. It's why anyone would go to Nebraska in the first place, or Oklahoma for that matter. Texas has that tradition, but it's tied to Red River shootouts not the programs aura. They can't abandon Oklahoma, A&M, and maybe even Tech and feel the same as when they abandoned SMU, TCU, Rice, and Houston. No matter how rich they get, they won't dominate the sport they truly wish to. To get to the top of the mountain, they needed a transcendent college quarterback in Vince Young, and then a steady reliable one, Colt McCoy. As of this moment, they do not look to have either.
Summary
So here we are, the whole Big XII ship is burning as the captain laughs. Other ships are considering taking on the crew, as their own crew abandons ship. The SEC and Big Ten watch with concern and disinterest. The PAC-Billionty now has added Hawaii, Louisiana Tech, and SMU and is calling themselves the NEW WAC. The ACC calmly picks apart the Big East, and ensures that at least one of these monsters has a decent idea of what's going on. The Sun Belt plans world domination. Conference USA moves to Mexico, and is killed over Tulsa's drug addiction. The MAC continues to mock everyone by existing at the FBS level. The Mountain West sues Versus, then realizes that they have been a part of every cable package in the United States and still no one watches. The WAC facepalms. Then, Mizzou loses another blouse and the mess starts all over again.

In the meantime, here's a reminder that I care not for your conferences and would dastardly tie them to railroad tracks as I play with my fabulous mustache.

The Ron Paul Conundrum

2011-07-27T12:56:00.000-05:00

Swearing is industry language. For as long as we're alive it's not going to change. You've got to be boisterous to get results.
-Gordon Ramsay

The foolish and wicked practice of profane cursing and swearing is a vice so mean and low that every person of sense and character detests and despises it.
-George Washington

I would stop cursing so much, but most people are too annoying to justify a witty response. It's easier to say, "Fuck off", than say "Your head is so far up your ass, you look like Ouroboros."
-Me

I feel that is better than my usual language warning. You should have parental blocks on your computer by now anyways.

Now, let's be honest, anyone who isn't a libertarian think they are nutjobs. However, I have found that a great deal of libertarians are reasonable people, at least if they are educated enough to understand the vagaries of their positions. The reason I bring this up is that the educated section of the generally imbecilic Tea Party movement, have been better explained as libertarians. I prefer to call them the Disciples of Paul, because it is cooler sounding and the policies are not so much libertarian as Texas crazy.* Now, don't get me wrong, Ron Paul is exactly right; it is his job to strictly use the Constitution to make judgements on what he is able to support. However, the Constitution is both malleable and at times, horribly outdated. I will tend to defer to Ron's positions since he is some kind of messianic figurehead at the moment.

*Yes, if you are an actual Libertarian, you do not belong to this group. You are in fact disturbed by me describing you as such. Congratulations, the rest of this has no pertinence to you, I apologize that Ron Paul has hijacked your beliefs and injected them with good ole Texas bible thumping.

Libertarians do have strengths, diamonds in the collective pile of batshit; they are extremely anti-war. The truth is all human beings should be so anti-war; however, the motives behind this should be more honest. Libertarian politicians are against paying for war; they have no problem killing people. This is not true of libertarian citizens, who mostly find the two go hand in hand. Their opposition to conscription is a peasant fantasy that angers most veterans and makes other (conscripted) veterans like my father happy. It is brilliant of course, but then again do people fight conscription during major crises like the World Wars? With the progress(?) of modern warfare, I doubt this ever is an issue again, and, if it is, we're fucked anyways.

Let's all jump on the capitalist bandwagon, like we just got out of the McCarthy witch-trials. Government intervention in business is Stalinist. Why don't we all just go live in communes and dig ditches until the sun goes down? Then maybe we can lie in the ditches with our comrades after we are shot.* Deregulation is like dating the hottest chick in town; everyone thinks it's a great idea, until some douchebag comes along and ruins it for everyone. Sure, it would be great if Americans were honest, hard-working do-it-your-self people, but we're not. We're get rich quick, fuck everyone else, grade-A douches. Sure, that doesn't apply to everyone, but think of it this way, for every philanthropic billionaire named Gates, there are ten thousand Bernie Madoffs. People don't get rich and then tend to the world; they get rich by screwing over everyone and then continue to screw over everyone until they die and leave their legacy to whatever trophy-wife sired demonspawn they created.

*Obama's plan for job creation. Actually, this may be the best unemployment solution ever. In every game I played where I had high unemployment, I created an army and sent those peasant bastards to their death.

I believe in free enterprise and self-employment, small business and entrepreneurship. Hell, I'm all for a guy finding a way to manufacture steel better than everyone else and stepping on the little man on his way. I'm not for cheats doing nothing at all, and then everyone else paying for it. That is what regulation should be deterring, instead our government (including the colossal waste of God/Parental/Midi-chlorian-given charisma and intelligence that is our President) insists on pouring money into our financial albatrosses self-inflicted gunshots to stop the bleeding. I'm all for deregulation if it means that we stop helping everyone, from the smallest business owner looking for a loan to Wall Street who sucks at the government's teat until it is run dry. The balance that is there is apparent, but deregulation and lowering taxes has never been about balance. As a Republican and not an honest Libertarian, the policy has always been rich people get richer and poor people get shit on. That is the official messianic policy of Ron Paul's presidential campaign.

Now, if you believe the government should not be regulatory in economic manners, what justification is there for regulation of social issues? Why is is okay to trump up the second amendment and piss on the first? Also, the idea of passing the buck comes to mind as Paul tends to favor letting states settle matters that they have proven incapable of doing. Time and time again, the civil rights of Americans are trampled by states with a voting block of morons and Christian extremists*, so we should just let them decide manners. This is why Ron Paul is strictly against government intervention into private affairs, because he knows the good state of Texas will share his views and he won't have to deal with all the gays and abortions that plague his neighborhood. I believe that a man so adamantly against government intervention into privacy should reflect these views on a national scale. The reality is that libertarians would gain much ground with independents if they just said across the board, "We don't care what you do in your homes, as long as it does not infringe upon the rights of another citizen." The general idea that you oppose the Patriot Act for it being invasive and unconstitutional, but still think states should dictate whether gay people can marry or what sexual positions are legal is ludicrous.

*It should be noted that these two are separated for a reason. I do not believe all Christians are morons nor extremists. However, those who are extreme in their views are often intelligent enough to articulate those views, which may be worse than morons trying to do so. Also, this is not just true of Christians alone, but for the United States they are the majority, and the ones who openly channel the majority of vitriolic hatred that burdens us as citizens and as human beings. Atheists and secular folk are just as bad, but at least they don't attribute their beliefs to a higher power.

No regulation of commerce. No armed forces. No control over education. No public environmental regulation. Although, no one brings it up, we should include every manner of service that protects the public: food and drug administration, aviation standards, consumer protection, the FDIC, the ARMED FORCES for fuck's sake. So if the Federal government has no power, what should it do? Twiddle their fucking thumbs while collecting checks for the miniscule taxes only remaining to ensure our hard working upper-crust public servants are still taken care of, especially those Senators who were appointed by the state legislature.* That is not the fucking Constitution; that is the Articles of Confederation. Our country tried twice to form a Confederation, and both times were complete disasters. If you want the states to run the show, look at the state governments. California is essentially a paper doll cutout that a first grader cut the wrong way. Missouri's congress thinks it needs a colon cleansing, because of how far it's head is up it's ass. Texas thinks kids should know that blacks are not only peaceful but militant also (Like every other race on the planet), St. Thomas Aquinas is a founder of the United States (Thomas Jefferson, however, is a douche and likes brown sugar. -Actual textbook phrasing), and THE DINOSAURS WALKED THE FUCKING EARTH WITH US! New York is a giant shill for the governor's prostitution habits. New Jersey is still a landfill for New York. Utah...well, it's a desert filled with jolly people with morals, who spend most of their tax savings canvasing California with diatribes on their sinful ways. I could do this for every state, suffice to say that we are all fucking morons (I always include myself, if you think I'm being high and mighty). Like Kay says in Men in Black, "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."

*Yes, that was a major mistake of an amendment. Good one, America.

So after I highly offended everyone with poor language, insulting what are commonly accepted as imbecilic notions of science,* and a generally vitriolic tone, let's be honest. Ron Paul cannot be elected President.* He will not come close to getting nominated, and neither will his son in future years. The reality is that they have some ideas that are quite mainstream and correct. Affirmative action has been a mistake. The war on drugs is costly, racist, and ineffective. Every war this country fights, and has not been fought for a justifiable reason (every one but WWII), is not justified and simply wrong in many cases. The federal government had no right to infringe upon the privacy of its citizens. Spending should be cut, and taxes should be as well. We should be able to do drugs and buy prostitutes.***These are ideas that we can get behind.

*CPAC thinks he can. CPAC attendees also think THAT WE WALKED THE EARTH WITH FUCKING DINOSAURS!!!** I can't state enough how stupid people who believe this are.
** "It is possible that some specimens may live today in remote areas." Okay, maybe they can do it themselves. Perhaps they are in Costa Rica, and Crichton is writing his memoirs.
***Wait, what?

But then, we realize that you aren't a libertarian, and Republican voters realize you aren't a Republican either. You vote consistently for socially conservative ideas, while stating that is no place of the government to dictate such policies. You vote against the party you belong to, angering voters who have no idea why you voted down funding to our troops (Because their state set their school standards?). You fight for prayer in schools, when separation of church and state is specifically stated in your glorious constitution. You voted against flag burning bans, because it wasn't a federal power. Who will elect you in the end? Pot smokers who didn't get into law school because of affirmative action and now work on Wall Street running ponzi schemes that cheat honest people out of their money, who also happen to smoke cigars lit with American flags since burns and cancer are covered by their private health care. Shit, turns out that is a pretty powerful demographic these days.

On Tap For Next Week: Blogger Announces Run For Republican Nomination, Says Age Discrimination and Campaign Spending are Core Problems His Candidacy Will Tackle

Or Maybe: Bachmann Controls Migraines, Finds Brain's Ability to Control Her Thoughts and Vocal Cords as Well

The Aging of Tastebuds

2011-07-24T16:05:00.000-05:00

Being the youngest child, I didn't ever have the luxury of knowing my grandparents the way most people do. I know this is a grand assumption that is certainly case specific but I have sparse memories of them from my childhood even though my last surviving grandparent passed when I was 21. Thing is you don't really appreciate them like you should at a young age. My family has always been spread far and wide, or at least distant from each other, whether this is emotional or not as well is another story. Grandparents to me were birthday checks and holidays, the September visits on their way to Illinois or trips to see my grandma in Cameron. Vague memories at best. The interesting thing about my father's parents though is I can see practically where my father came from, which is where I'm going here in a roundabout manner. (On the other hand, my mother seems to have more in common with her parents than my dad does, although due to my youthful ignorance that may be a complete falsehood)

Cooking was something my family has always been good at. We seem to have a knack for the practical aspects and also enough loose screws to perpetuate accidental brilliance which is the best way to describe my father's cooking. However, as a child, you seem to lack the ability to comprehend what is happening before you. I love taking care of my nieces and nephews because I know my sister can cook yet they all exhibit the childhood penchant to eat chicken nuggets and corn dogs until they grow fat, old, and happy. Times like those remind of how I was as a child and I look back and shudder.

My parents and grandparents are/were gardeners. Most people hear that term and assume a plant here and there. In my family, this means building fortresses to protect the corn and having vegetables, to my best recollection, planted somewhere random in the country in Iowa. We can the vegetables and hold to a horribly hot* summer life of subsistence. The problem with gardeners at that time in my life was they seemed completely indiscriminate about taste. So my parents would feed me beet greens, spinach, 25-lb zucchinis (shredded into to every dish so as not to waste them), and other numerous things that I didn't like. Then again, I hated lots of things when I was young that are ridiculously delicious: pork steaks, fried chicken, cooked tomato, dark meat in poultry. It got me to thinking about something.

*If you have air conditioning, canning is fine. If you don't, it's awful.

I have developed a curious liking to horseradish and somewhat to garbanzo beans. I say curious because it sticks out as two distinct childhood memories from my grandparents house, trying horseradish and thinking garbanzo beans were some kind of magical pickled peanuts. I despise cocktail sauce to this very day because it combines horseradish with the most overrated condiment ever created, ketchup. The flavor never worked for me, but lately I just throw it on everything beef I cook as if I'm possessed. I don't know why, sometimes I even see myself doing it and hesitate. It's part of a deeper problem which I'm convinced of.

I remember the first beer I drank. It was piss water. Now, of course, we would not want to defame the glorious folks at Anheuser-Busch, but Busch Light still sucks* It helps to work in a brewery, but now my tastes are fairly well developed and I drink IPAs** more frequently than any other beer.*** When I even bring up the idea to younger folk (21-my age), they throw up a bit in their mouths. Even the APAs draw derision from Joe Public as being too hoppy and therefore unfit for consumption.

*Commence immediate Carrollton and Rolla anger
**IPAs are to beers as horseradish is to condiments
***Statistics show this to be untrue, but given market adjustments for my salary base, it would be. "CEO-payscale Joe drinks IPAs the most" is more to the fact.

This may be a winding road we've taken, but it brings me to an idea that has no scientific bearing nor any gravity in the grand scheme of things.* Do our tastebuds and tongues age significantly? I feel that after a while we either find ourselves diving into more flavors out of opportunity, but also because the ketchup and french fries of our youth no longer do anything for us.** Our mainstays become bland, like the Bud Light no longer having any taste not even a bad one to chicken nuggets being that food you only dare eat after consuming too many Bud lights. It gives me hope, because that means by the time I'm forty the women my age will have acquired some modicum of taste and stop being as picky a eater as I was when I was ten.*** Or perhaps not.

*Therefore making it a perfect topic for me to consider.
**One thing is for certain though: we do lose feeling in our tongues, because old people cannot get their food or coffee hot enough. I suppose that is akin to me burning myself repeatedly
***Holy crap, I just wrote that many words about my tastes and it became an one-line indictment of all females. Somebody's got issues. I left it because that one line could mean half a dozen things and I love ambiguity.

The American Take on the Beautiful Game

2011-07-21T16:08:00.000-05:00

That was an interesting result Sunday to say the least. The Americans actually started the game playing decent possession football and perhaps the nerves of the occasion wracked the Japanese team. When the US took the lead, it was not surprising nor was it enthralling, it was just destined to happen. Then, the wheels came off and the US reverted and became an American team. The equalizer was cheap, and resulted from a poor decision and a worse first touch on the ball. However, this seemed to fit the storyline of this World Cup defined by the resiliency of the two teams matched in the final.

When the US took its second lead off of the majestic head of Abby Wambach, it was far more dramatic, but when Hope Solo went down with an injury in the 116th minute, the clouds parted and doom seemed to creep into the stadium. The injury or cramps that she suffered did not affect her play (she made the pk save needed from her); it just seemed at that moment that something bad was going to happen. Sure enough, on the ensuing corner the Japanese skipper beat her marker near post and equalized. As anyone who has watched knows, late equalizers are morale destroyers. So Shannon Boxx went the exact same way with her pk as she did on both her miss and make in the Brazil game, and predictably the keeper saved it. Carli Lloyd, who possesses a cannon of a shot sometimes to her detriment, unleashed her shot and just as my mind predicted launched her kick over the top. Then, after a Solo save to keep it close, Tobin Heath's effort was saved and the result was basically ensured.

This tournament was both an indictment and celebration of the American women's team. I can't speak as in depth about their future or past as I can the men's team, just because I am not a journalist and do not possess the time or access to do so. However, I can tell you what I observed in the tournament, and give some insight into the team. The United States is still the most imposing athletic team in the world. Both our men's and women's team possess excellent fitness that allows them to be just as dangerous in the 90th minute as they are in the opening minutes. However, as time passes, that will no longer be enough. The women's game has vastly improved since the United States famous triumph in 1999, where there were a handful of quality squads in the tournament. Now Germany, France, Brazil, Japan, and Sweden possess teams capable of playing quality possession football with the deft passing and movement to break down even the most resolute American squads.

Despite their two knockout wins, the United States in both games played the kick-and-run, counter attack football that American men are whole-heartedly abused for. The formation resembled strongly the empty-bucket formation used by Bob Bradley, leaving the team to attack on the wings but exposed in midfield with no attacking central midfielders. Wambach on occasion would retreat back to receive the ball, most often drawing fouls to allow free kicks, where the Americans physicality is best used. Amy Rodriquez, often maligned for her lack of an impact in the tournament, cannot be expected to make an impact when so separated from her teammates. (However, it must be noted that Alex Morgan's activity was much more positive when placed in the same situation). For the women to succeed, the creativity that Cheney, Rapinoe, and Morgan all displayed on occasion must be harnessed more effectively and combined with the lethality of Wambach's finishing.

Defensively, I would comment that if the United States wants to play with holding midfielders that their backs should freely move upfield and join attack and allow the central defenders to fan out and cover the wings more in their absence. The speed of Rampone allowed LePeilbet to advance forward more and granted her even more help after a shaky start to the tournament. Assuming Rampone's career is almost at an end (Even at 36, given her fitness this is just an assumption at best), it will be interesting to see how they fare in replacing her, with Becky Sauerbrunn being the most obvious replacement. The goals in the final were just mental lapses, a poor ill-advised desperation pass/clearance in the six yard box and being beat near post to a corner. Overall, the positioning was better than the group stages, but the lapses still occurred. Hope Solo was overall just as impressive as booked, so there is a steady spot in the next cycle.

As you might tell, these are just amateur observations. Overall, the United States showed poise and heart, and at times brilliant football. I'll keep an eye on them as I can, hopefully with coverage being slightly better with the success of this tournament in the United States. Now onto the men whom which I am painfully more familiar.

The Gold Cup Conundrum

There is a question that I have always wondered the answer to: would you rather tellingly lose a match before the World Cup or squeak out a win and learn nothing? Sure, I would rather the United States never lost to Mexico on any occasion, but this loss should have demonstrated the skills and deficiencies of the American team. The ultimate downside of the loss is the United States misses out on playing in the Confederations Cup, a serious challenge with Brazil, Spain, and the other continents' champions competing. However, this also means that if Mexico is run off the field, their over-reactive federation might blow up what is becoming an intriguing young squad. As for ours, it is strangely set and also incomplete. We have major holes at some positions and depth at others.

Goalkeeper

The final was not one of his better, world-beater games, but he's Tim Howard and he's one of the world's best. It's his goal until he retires or like most American keepers is replaced and pouts about the whippersnappers. However, American goalkeeper depth is not going to be a problem as young keepers are shining in MLS at the moment. (Links to Daily Soccer Fix, Steve Davis's SBNation blog, a must read for MLS and US Soccer aficionados)

Defense

Right Back is stacked with depth. Steve Cherundolo is the mainstay, and it was obvious to see what his loss did to the US defense. Eric Lichaj is the backup here, but might find himself in the gaping hole on the left despite being right footed. Timmy Chandler is the intriguing prospect in the group, just getting through with his first season in the Bundesliga and for all purposes he appears to be the successor to Cherundolo. Jonathan Spector rounds out the group, and while I don't think he should be playing anytime soon that he is fourth in the pecking order says a lot about the depth here where he was first/second choice in 2009.

Central defense is a mess. Onyewu and Goodson are the same age, neither young. Bocanegra is the linchpin when they are gone, but is in the twilight of his career. Tim Ream is the young upstart but his Gold Cup was shaky. He's young but also not quality enough to compete against the best. While these guys are not going to frighten anyone, they certainly don't inspire the mouth watering that left back does.

What to say about left back? Bocanegra isn't fast enough, Bornstein is a turnstile offering slight resistance and directing one-way traffic towards the goal, and Lichaj simply doesn't have the experience to be consistent. The best hopes for the United States are using Brek Shea or hoping Freddy Adu's partner in witness protection, Edgar Castillo, finds playing time and the US actually notices. Lichaj was decent in defense, but needs to work on crossing to be capable of successful overlapping runs. I assume he'll be the temporary solution here, as the depth at right back leaves him free to play on the left.

Midfield

The United States need not worry about midfield depth. Whether they possess the talent or consistency required to compete with the world's best is a different question. The switch to the 4-5-1 was a great decision, as the United States was overrun in midfield in the last World Cup match against Ghana. However, the United States has an interesting quandary as to where any of these players go. In a game that has increasingly leaned towards having a midfield destroyer/defensive midfielder, the United States have one in Jermaine Jones. However, he seems to be making the runs that Michael Bradley should be making, given Bradley's skills as a box-to-box midfielder and deficits in defense at times. Maurice Edu also is a more traditional CDM, but didn't see the field much in the tournament. They also lack traditional wingers, perhaps their best crossers both are right backs Steve Cherundolo and the absent Timmy Chandler. What they do have is three attacking midfielders who play best as deep lying strikers. Donovan and Dempsey are now common ground and we have good ideas of what they bring, but wingers they are not neither possessing the same inclinations or defensive responsibility. Freddy Adu, who reappeared in this tournament, is definitely never going to be confused for a defensive specialist, but he offers the kind of creativity and calmness on the ball that no United States player possesses. It will be interesting to see if he gets enough playing time to stay in the picture.

Now, this doesn't even mention Bedoya or Kljestan, but they are auxiliaries. More intriguing is Stuart Holden, who missed the entire tournament after being cut down like every talented player in the EPL is. He is Bolton's cog and the drop in form (and the standings) after his injury is telling to how much he means to Bolton's squad. Funnily, the bite he has acquired in the EPL makes him better suited to both be the stopper and deep-lying play-maker for the team. He was one of the best players in the world's deepest and most talented league before his injury, so I would hope Bradley makes him the centerpiece of his 2014 squad. Since no one in the midfield is out of their prime, not much fresh blood so be expected. The only young players (aside from Adu who somehow is only 22) on the fringes are Mix Diskerud, a Norwegian-American who plays in Norway also, and Brek Shea, who has been wonderful for FC Dallas this year (Also he can play LM and LB, both problems to say the least), will also be in the mix.

The depth here is best exemplified by the US starting the final with essentially six midfielders and no strikers. The fluidity of their movements up top both shows their versatility and the lack of a proper formation to put their talents to optimum use.

Forward

Vomit.

Jozy Altidore is a physical presence and the rest of the US strikers are young. Bradley needs to stop bringing in MLS stars to play forward. Some guys just poach in the physical but technically lacking MLS, and Cunningham, Casey, Findley, Wondolowski, and the next striking star are not solutions to the dearth of strikers. Agudelo will improve, but people need to stop declaring him a savior. Perhaps Davies will return to his pre-wreck form, but other than that the depth here is shocking. However, with the attacking midfielders the United States possess, I think this is severely over-analyzed. Dempsey, Donovan, and Adu are all capable of playing as withdrawn strikers in a two striker partnership or as wide forwards in a 4-3-3 if the United States possessed traditional wingers to play behind them.

The Future

Defense is such a question mark that I can't give a prediction on the teams starting four. I will say that until they retire Cherundolo and Bocanegra will be there. If Bocanegra is in the center, Lichaj is the most likely candidate to join them. Ream and Goodson are the central paring, until Gooch recovers form or someone better arises. Midfield will most likely feature Donovan, Dempsey, Jones, Bradley, and Holden, but I assume Adu, if he continues to play, will feature in. Bedoya seems to be a decent like-for-like switch if Donovan or Dempsey is hurt. Forward is Jozy and then a deep chasm filled with developmental shame.

In the grand scheme, both the men and women need better ball skills, both touch and passing. This is a developmental problem, perhaps due to an American obsession with scoring and offense. While our current talents make bunker and counter attack a successful tactic, it can't be relied on to win matches consistently. Until American coaches learn to teach their players how to play without goals, it won't be enough. The best club and country in the world are fueled by both an unrivaled youth system and the brilliance of high pressing and the calm, slow devastation of short passes and perfect control. It's foolish to think the United States cannot succeed as a pressing team, given their fitness, but it is also foolish to assume they can play the possession game to an equal extent.

Overall, it will be interesting to see where the team heads coming into qualifying for the World Cup. I wonder whether Bradley is excited about the depth in midfield being so great or terrified at the lack of depth/quality at forward and defense. I assume that both will keep him up a night, until he finally succumbs to madness and fields eleven midfielders in a match.

How to overuse question marks to piss off God?

2011-07-17T21:36:00.000-05:00

This post was written on May 26th, 2011. At that moment it was pertinent, it should have been edited and posted by it's author, but he is absent minded. Most of the ideas I write about have been brewing for a while and like any honest writer I have twice as many drafts as posts. Sometimes, I clean the posts, editing and posting some and deleting others. This one I chose to do neither, since I find it to be properly angry, uninformed, inane, and of a "ranting maniac" quality. As I find all four qualities hilarious, here is me talking about raptures.

It's an honest question. What if your God returns and deems no one worthy and leaves us all to wallow in our own mire? It's not a philosophical argument as I have nothing to gain from either occasion, as I am neither chosen nor terribly established in the status quo. Surely, we will eventually destroy our planet and ascend(descend) as may be, but what if we did it on our own time? Would that lessen the miracle of existance, if God simply didn't think you were worthy of rapture?

It just makes me wonder, because simply of all the crazy things to come out of humankind is the determination to predict our ultimate demise. I'll give everyone a hint it's after the next rapture prediction (Oct. 21, 2011 apparently, what a jackass) and before the sun goes all red giant and eats our planet in the cosmic sense, an ironic ending to the special planet that we live on given the perfection of our distance from the sun. The Mayans didn't get it right, and frankly they couldn't see their own demise much less that of a grand humanity they didn't even know existed. Unless the Earth explodes.........

Yes, that also is ridiculous. In 2028, there is a good chance an asteroid may head for us and Bruce Willis will not be able to do anything about it. But we should by then be able to, and also have enough people off planet to avoid the extinction of the whole human race. Or technology to knock the asteroid off course. Which brings me to another point: does the rapture apply to the moon or Mars. What about all of the universe? Is it human specific or will God take animals two by two so they can ethereally reproduce in Jesus' thousand year rule and we can hunt them mercilessly until the end of time. There can't be enough Ambrosia for all of the faithful, as there are lots of Mormons these days. God always wished he picked the Shakers; now, those people knew how to keep Heaven from overcrowding. Nazis and Jihadists also excel at this, but that has nothing to do with reproduction. If everyone has to eternally subsist on gruel, what kind of Heaven is this? Why isn't there high-fructose corn syrup? Why am I concerned about getting a good meal after I die?

Why? Because the idea of Heaven overcrowding or me sitting there asking God why he didn't put a Jack in the Box across the street is just as ridiculous as predicting a certain date for divine intervention. If God had a watch (digital of course, so he remembers the day and can time his daily jog), then maybe it would make sense that he/she/it would plan his raptures in Eastern time, but might be off an hour because Ben Franklin (Or more plausibly, the Kaiser) forgot to implement Daylight Savings Time in Heaven.

Now, what if the rapture did come? But there was no apocalypse. Even better what if all the "believers" ascended and the horrible people were dragged to a fiery hell. What if all that remained were the balanced people who lived good lives, but weren't all self-righteous about how others live their lives, what day we secular folk are all going to burn in hell, and when God was coming to justify their pathetic existence. Then, at that moment, would we realize that heaven wasn't so far away after all?

Things you should be worried about more than a Rapture:
1. Bills
2. Glee!
3. Your Health
4. Deviled Eggs Recipes
5. College Football
6. Macho Man ascending when no one else did
7. Actually helping your fellow man
8. Anything
9. Me not knowing anything about raptures
10. Rapture

If Life Had A Soundtrack: My Favorite Eleven Musical Acts

2011-07-10T22:40:00.000-05:00

I have a much more promising concept for next week, but I would like to dig deep for that one as it is actually somewhat intellectual and requires some research into my musical catalog.

This one is for those who don't know me. It is not a list of the best eleven bands of all time.* As you can see below that list is completely subjective and hard to argue right or wrong. First, what consists a band. Do they have to play instruments, because the Temptations are a better group than Nirvana to me. That's why I changed the title to musical acts, and I'm not talking best careers, the one's with the most albums in my collection, or even the hippest ones as most of these acts are mainstream enough that no one can accuse me of being one of those pricks.*** I'm saying if I had to pick eleven concerts to go to in the next year I would see these bands, and you will see I have seen many of them. Of course, I would love to see the Beatles in concert, but they are alas dead or still incredibly awesome single acts.

*The Beatles, The Beach Boys,The Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, The Clash, The Who, Pink Floyd, Radiohead, Coldplay, U2, Nirvana**
**Main points of contention here are the last three. I hate U2, but they are the only great stadium rock band of the past two decades. Metallica hasn't made good albums since the 80's. Nirvana isn't better than Pearl Jam, I know. but one is far more important than the other. Look at Coldplay's Discography and picture them having ten more years to make music, maybe more. Tell me who puts out more consistently great mainstream records in the next decade. If you say Lil' Wayne, murder is your gift.
***Hey, I'm going to see a concert tonight.
"Who are you seeing?"
"Sid Stabbing Nancy****, they're a fusion of trip-hop and death metal who dress up as cheerleaders and flash their genitals at people. I'm sure you've never heard of them."
****Not a real band as far as I know, but I'm sure someone thought this name up before me for their Sex Pistols cover band. Although, covering the Sex Pistols would be pretty shitty considering their short lifespan.

List after the jump:

1. Murder By Death
Favorite Song: Fuego!

This is by far my favorite band if you didn't know already. Picking a favorite song is basically a day to day thing. If everything is hopeless, "Three Men Hanging" is a good choice, though a tad suicidal. If it's a rip-roaring good time tonight, "Brother" is the song. "Foxglove", "Shiola", "Spring Break 1899", "Steal Away", and "As Long as There is Whiskey in the World" all come in at different times.

2. The Airborne Toxic Event
Favorite Song: All At Once

The two albums TATE have released have both been solid from top to bottom. "All At Once" is the title song off the second album, and is simply epic. It starts off soft and builds as the song goes through life and just like life fades out. It's a brilliant song, where they just decided to go for it to magnificent results.

3. Bon Iver
Favorite Song: For Emma

I haven't talked about the new album yet, but I'll get around to it when I see them live. The old album is built around this song and it's theme. It is the lifeblood of the loneliness and heartbreak of "For Emma, Forever Ago", and it also has the coolest video making French people look crazy for not stopping, but of course English falsettos may not go over as well in Paris.

4. The Black Keys
Favorite Song: Next Girl

The video with the dinosaur. The artists that seem almost at odds with their fame, although that just might be an act as well. This song is a follow up to Tighten Up to me. Their videos are hilarious; their songs would be out of a different era, if anything defined the current one except shitty pop music; and most of all. they kill with just two instruments and sweet lyrics.

5. Grace Potter and the Nocturnals
Favorite Song: Big White Gate

I almost like her better when she was singing less mainstream music. That sounded douchey as I wrote it. I just think that the songs where her voice is more gospel and the tone almost sounds like a hymnal is interesting. "Nothing But the Water" is another one of my favorites, and while I admit not perfectly recalling her concert, I could imagine it not being sung much as she gains popularity. Big White Gate is more accessible so I could see it being in future set lists. Don't mean to complain; the newer stuff is pretty awesome as well. That's understatement; it's sex, covered in kickassery. (Yes, I have the right to make up words)

6. Florence and the Machine
Favorite Song: Howl

It might just be the line, "I drag my teeth across your chest to taste your beating heart." I said enough about her in my last post, so I hope I don't need to reiterate her skills.

7. Blind Pilot
Favorite Song: Paint or Pollen

Why do all DJs on indie stations feel the need to have the effing NPR voice? Speak dammit, we won't stab you for having emotion, and you aren't doing the news. However, this song is beautiful after you get past the DJs voice. Their new album coming out later this year is one of the things on my reasons to live longer. I gave this CD to a woman once and told her it is the best CD to go to sleep to. It's like a forty minute lullaby for adults, but you don't really sleep but rather fall into a relaxing trance.

8. Old 97s
Favorite Song: Rollerskate Skinny

Like Murder By Death, it's hard to pick a song as I've been listening to Old 97's for half of my life. This one sticks out, because they always seem to play it at shows and it's lyrics are amazing. The part where he says he wouldn't be here if the Athenia hadn't sunk (His grandma was on the ship and survived) is sentimental, and then he follows it with "Or if dear ole Dad hadn't got so drunk." It's a feel good song, it's a lament, it's Old 97's. It's also a Catcher in the Rye reference, if you didn't catch it.

9. Edward Sharpe and the Magnetic Zeros
Favorite Song: 40 Day Dream

If you've ever seen them perform this live, then you know why. If you are a Republican, you probably don't approve of this at all, because their music seems drug-induced, fun, and hippie crazy. I've found most conservative people don't approve of hippies who might think they are Jesus, or at least think that if Jesus returned he would get distracted and start chasing women. Then again, maybe we can all agree that having a commune for a band isn't the worst concept especially when you put ten people on stage. Nobody better pinch me, bitch I swear, I go crazy.

10. Admiral Fallow
Favorite Song: Squealing Pigs

Like the last song, this one was featured in Chuck, but I actually heard this first on Chuck so the video linked will be from Chuck. I apologize to the guys, it's a female friendly video, but it also features the stunningly beautiful Yvonne Strahovski. Winners all around. This also was the first album I ever bought using British Pounds for what it is worth. Yeah, this song has a Mumford and Sons quality, but they are not nearly the same.

11. Broken Social Scene
Favorite Song: Texico Bitches

Eh, I guess NPR voice could be this douche. Maybe Florence and the Machine beat them for best live performance I ever saw, but these guys are a hell of a live act when their sound technicians aren't retarded. They played an extra thirty minutes at LouFest last year, and that couldn't have been any cooler. This song is smooth. One can imagine the chaos capable when so many guitars are on one stage, but this is magic. I'll include the official video as well, because it's a wtf'er.

Why eleven bands? Nigel will tell those that have forgotten.

My list goes to eleven so it's obviously one louder.

Notes: Those that missed the cut, but I still would love if they came to St. Louis to see me when I'm not broke:
Adele, Matt and Kim, Mumford and Sons, The Shins, Cold War Kids, Cee Lo Green, Paolo Nutini, Joshua Radin
(Yeah, most have come to St. Louis but I was either broke, occupied, or they are Mumford and Sons popular.)

As always, those reading on Facebook, sorry about the lack of embedded videos. Facebook controls and fails to understand the interwebs.

Concert Review: Florence and the Machine

2011-07-06T21:32:00.000-05:00

I did this a long time ago for Neko Case and Brandi Carlile, and I should be fair and start doing it again, so the Internet can bask in my completely subjective love for musicians, or at least the ones I love. As usual, I showed up late for the intro act with the typical case of "the other person". I've gotten in a habit of going to concerts with other people which invariably results in me worrying about them and showing up late, I would complain but I bought the tickets so here is where my bitching must stop.*

*The only concerts I was on time for: Neko Case, Old 97s (The first time), Brandi Carlile, Pete Yorn and Ben Kweller all have something in common. I make the mistake of implying that concerts start at 8 when I am a firm believer that doors if the open at 7, concert starts at 7.

However, who needs an intro act when you have Florence and the Machine. My assumption coming in was that this was going to be a spectacle, rather than the straight-forward rock concerts I've gotten this year from Pete Yorn, Murder By Death, Old 97s, The Airborne Toxic Event, and Toad the Wet Sprocket.* Their videos are strange to be succinct, and before you go also crazy indie rock elitist douche, I should tell you how I came upon them, and it is a dirty tale. I found them in a Touchtunes jukebox, and I had one credit left. I was like, "I have no idea who the hell this is, why not?" This was the result.

*This is not a knock on their performances. It's just four quarters in one hand and a dollar bill in the other. Worth the same, just different.

Ok, now you know I'm going all indie cred and ginger support group on you. But let's be honest here, they remove our souls at birth and give us some kickass pipes. Men like me are given boisterous, inappropriately loud bar voices and the women get angel's lungs and larynges.* As for indie cred, I have none, so don't worry about me starting that.

*I'm not kidding. Look at the best female vocalists around, and do you notice anything disproportionate to the rest of society.

For the first time in my many trips to the Pageant, there is a curtain up on stage. Curtains are sometimes overlooked in musical productions, but in general they are unnecessary. The bands are usually set-up in perfunctory fashion: a lead singer up front, a drummer behind him, percussionists, keyboardist, bassist, and guitarist on each wing varying which each band. Now, this is not to say the setup defied such concepts, but in this occasion, the band was removed from the front of the stage. It implied that this was not a band, but rather Florence...and the Machine. However, this is not a diva act; it is just obvious who here is the showstopper despite the talent of the musicians around her. Also, it allowed the performance and fluidity of Florence's movement, which was key.

The crowd was as much the star at this concert, as I have never seen one nearly as raucous as this one. Before the curtain was even down, the music died and out of the encompassing silence came the slow ascending roar of the packed concert hall. The Pageant isn't the best place to see a concert acoustically, but that moment the crowd noise was angelic in its anticipation. When Florence's silhouetted figure appeared on the curtain, the steady roar became a deafening scream, the women drowning out the men as they always do whether it be a choir, a crowd, or any argument. As the curtains fell the music began.

This is about where I lose track of time at any concerts. I could not tell you a set-list to save my life. I could tell you exactly which tracks off of Lungs were not played, and which song she most obviously used for the encore. I can just tell you what I heard, which is probably unlike what some heard. My friend Kathy was with me and I assume she heard her singing, which even for a new initiate is a wonder. However, she would understand what I felt if she though more about how she felt at Toad the Wet Sprocket, a band she was more "intimate" with. I get a feeling at concerts, almost a euphoric feeling, that I assume is how people feel when they are in love.* It's the exact opposite of the pit of the stomach sickness you feel when breaking up with someone, assuming you still have some feelings for them. There is something to this that brings me to music. I have no musical talent, as I don't really know what my voice is capable of or suited for, and don't play an instrument.** It is the opiate of the masses like Captain Murphy was.

*I also distinctly remember this feeling coming from two movies as well. The first was The Fast and the Furious. I remember leaving the theater and just wanting to drive fast, reckless, and free. I know, it was cliche and slightly moronic, but I was 16. The second time was after 500 Days of Summer. It was the first movie that was about me I felt, (again, cliche) and something about it hit a nerve in a good way. The movie is so much about me, that when I write autobiographical fiction it is hard to avoid the story set out in that movie. Maybe you'll see what I mean.
**This being said shitty poets make great songwriters, so if you need a songwriter I'm your man. I actually do have a brilliant concept album, but it's years or musical practice away.

When I talked about Neko Case, I mentioned how clean her voice was, hitting each note perfectly, never breaking. In this case, Florence was hectic and energetic, just as powerful but purposely reckless and tearing into us with abandon. I am amazed by artists who give up their careers in music, because the power of their voices to uplift and amaze the broken masses such as myself is clear. The performance was as much about her dancing, not with grace, as she freely admits but with intent. While performing, she was eating up the moment, taking in everything the crowd would give her. Then, she stopped to talk.

Two things everyone should know about gingers: we are incredibly shy by nature, but once comfortable are effervescent, clever, and perhaps even gregarious. Secondly, we are born into self-deprecation in a society that increasingly values a leather hide more than our alabaster skin. I love how as the crowd screamed as she tried to talk she seemed taken aback. An act or a shy acceptance, it was amazing to see from a successful singer. Then as she first spoke another amazing thing happened, she had a tiny voice. Other singers with the same powerful singing voices also had incredibly powerful speaking voices, and hers was almost like a whisper compared to her songs. As for the second point, she mentioned that obviously with her skin if she went outside she would turn to stone. I object as this furthers the notion that gingers are trolls. She obviously may have a problem with the shyness in the future, but obviously needs to get over the self-deprecation as she is a beautiful woman. I get to keep it as I am, of course, a troll.

The problem may occur that she will become too popular to fit in such small venues in the future, so I suggest you see her in one while you can. While I complain about the acoustics in the Pageant, it is not the cave that Scottstrade and Chaifetz can, so I rue that moment not for my indie rock douchey sake but actual musical reasons. Amphitheaters should work better, but remember that the sun is a deal breaker.

Get Your Torches and Pitchforks, We're Burning This Bitch's House Down

2011-07-06T19:49:00.003-05:00

Americans are some sick folk. I could be more blunt* with this but perhaps it wouldn't get the point across correctly. We are the disciples of Hammurabi, believers in ultimate justice despite a legal system set up to establish guilt rather than imply it. So when I see Nancy Grace, the Grand Succubi of HLN, run a witch hunt against a woman (even one who is so obviously guilty that I really feel nothing for her), I cringe a bit for the American people who watch this drivel.
*Several f-bombs are probably deserving here.

Currently, there are three countries where our troops are involved in active military operations. Even more countries in the Middle East are going through political upheaval that has consequences for both the aforementioned troops and average citizens paying out their ass for gasoline. The Republican Presidential campaigns are underway, and for the lack of quality, they certainly don't lack for topics of discussion. Hell, baseball is more important than one effing murder trial. Instead, the HLN (This at one time stood for Headline News) caption demands justice. But then, they got none. Now, the moral outrage begins.

There have been many people who have gotten away with murder. Is this right? Certainly not. But in a age of television, Internet, cell phones, and even tabloid bullshit, is there ever an innocent person? Does being declared not guilty of a high profile crime matter anymore? Look at the Trial of Last Century.

Sure, I cheered when OJ got off. I was young; he was Nordberg, the Hertz guy, a football analyst, and he was the Juice. Did I think he was guilty? Hell yes, and so did everyone else. All it took was an incredibly mishandled prosecution and he walked free, but still as a guilty man. So, OJ found himself in a civil court where he was found liable for the deaths of two people he did not by law kill.* He was broke, so he wrote a book about how he would have killed the victims. That was taken from him, thankfully, by the Goldmans. Other men wrote about it, and others grew rich selling his auctioned merchandise. So, OJ Simpson, hall of fame running back, quite possibly the most well-liked football player in the country up until his arrest, found himself in a hotel room robbing a man at gunpoint for his own stuff. OJ Simpson's life was over as soon as a camera entered that courtroom, as soon as he stabbed those people, and that is cosmic justice for a man we, the people, found innocent in court.

*This is still in my mind double jeopardy, and completely ridiculous. It's like saying, "Dr. Richard Kimble, I know you're innocent of killing your wife, but your assets which frozen upon your conviction of murder and condemnation to death are still gone. Sorry. You are one broke ass doctor. Shouldn't have even been in the position to be found guilty, dumbass." Innocent is innocent. You can't be innocent of murder/manslaughter and still responsible for someone's death, unless it was an accident. I'm pretty sure stabbings do not follow under an accident. God, our legal system is messed up.

So, those people are all up in arms about Casey Anthony getting off: don't worry, her life is over. People say she deserves jail time or death. There are worse things in this world than jail or death. She is a pariah. Whether or not she feels remorse for her actions, whether it is murder or just incompetence, she has nothing left to live for. Imagine interviewing for a job when Nancy Grace has attempted (and mostly succeeded) in making you the public enemy. Imagine trying to ever have a meaningful relationship when you are a child murderer. She can't do these things, and that is justice. But is it fair? Should technically innocent people be required to suffer for whatever they did in the minds of others. Sure, it is just a logical progression from batshit crazy to suicidal that she forgot to take after committing the murder.

Even better, if it was a closed trial and nobody had access, do you think the jury would have scrutinized the moment as much as they did? Every one of those jurors knew they were going to be on the spot, and when you are publicly condemning someone reasonable doubt becomes increasingly more apparent to your eyes. Would we now have a condemned woman, that no one gave two shits about? The world would be better if she were found guilty in a vacuum, without the glare and the intense hatred. Now, we have a dilemma, do we believe in our justice system, or burn the bitch's house down?*

*Hopefully, by now you realize, this is said in jest. Some idiots might not think this is unreasonable, grounds enough to imprison her until this shit-show blows over. Also, burning a prison down is a major crime, despite the casualties being slightly more morally acceptable. Lastly, I need to apologize to my mother here for the use of the word bitch, she hates that, but it is not my words.

As for the justice for the child: if you believe in God, she is in a better place. If you don't, there is no justice. Life balances out. Killers die. Lovers hate. The evil find evil done to them. The good find the grace of others. You lighting a fucking candle will not bring justice nor fix the ineptitude of a system controlled by human whimsy and incompetence. You cannot change what has already happened in this world, whether through bitching, moral outrage, or the goodness of your heart. The child is dead, the mother is (essentially) dead, the trial is over.

Maybe you should channel your rage into something worthwhile, like searching for another outrageous over-the-top murder trial to follow. You are lucky (I guess) that people do stuff like this everyday, because humans are capable of unimaginable cruelty and stupidity. However, the chances that a photogenic white girl kills her cute baby, are slim. Let's just hope a pretty white girl gets kidnapped soon, because Nancy Grace and the sick fucks who watch her are still seemingly outraged, but in actuality completely bored.

Disclosure: I did not follow this trial, if you cannot tell. This post is full of other people's thoughts. I have no opinion upon or desire to know the facts of the case. I only care about the verdict and the reaction of people to the verdict. If you care to comment on the ineptitude of the prosecution, I don't care. If you think I am unfair in saying that she is guilty in lieu of an actual guilty verdict, that is only the view being expressed by everyone not involved in defending her. If you would ask me if I find what occurred in this circumstance abhorrent, I would reply to the affirmative. But remember that things like this occur everyday, so I deem this abhorrence to be static disapproval of the sickness in human beings, not a condemnation of a single action. If she were my close relative, I would have distanced myself from this case just as much as I have now, which goes to my point that her future is now a blank page but she has nothing to write with. Like most of my serious posts, this is a plea for reason, nothing more, nothing less.

I’m Not Lonely, I’ve Got My Imaginary Friends

2011-05-26T22:14:00.000-05:00

Again, profuse apologies go out to those who enjoy reading these. I have been slightly awash with work and vague hopeful intentions that I forget from time to time to analyze the things that happen in the world and give you playlists to help you through this cruel existence that is life. A thousand pardons my good sirrah or madame.

I will start writing things more frequently given that my phone is gone, and I now have no way of text stalking young women and getting them to agree to meet me in shady bars (or nice bars for that matter).

As for the things in the world you expected me to write about, I have thoughts but they are short.

Obama is a U.S. Citizen, who would have thought? I'm running for office in 2012 because obviously they don't check shit when you choose to run. /End Sarcasm

Osama Bin Laden died. Good riddance. This affects my day to day life about .15%. I won't go all 9/11 hoaxer like Rashard Mendenhall, but I will say that instead of celebrating his death; I would prefer the people spent more time thinking about the men and women who died not only in his attacks, but in our fruitless search for him in a barren wasteland. I will write about Afghanistan though soon, because that ending will be nowhere near as anti-climatic as finding the world's most wanted man living in the suburbs in Pakistan.

Sports:
Go Dirk! I hate LeBron that much.
Freddy Adu!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Wait, this isn't 2004.
Hosmer is here to stay or at least on lease for the next six years.

I love rain, thunderstorms, and tornadoes, but give us a break for once. Tornadoes missed me and my work by ~~less than a mile~~ not enough earlier this spring, and no one was hurt despite hitting St. Louis county. Then, in the next month, larger tornadoes hit smaller towns but kill hundreds specifically in Tuscaloosa, AL and Joplin, MO. If you can do anything for those people, I'm sure someone will look kindly upon that.
*Note: Money and time are actual currencies, prayers, while thoughtful, don't put food on the table. That of course is one the first principles of Gamp's Law of Elemental Transfiguration.

And last but not least, some actual writing. Although, the warning should be well understood by now, the language may be offensive much like Twain but without the profundity. For background, this is a chapter, a vignette if were pretentious and it didn't require me to tell you the man involved is named Jeremy and pines for a girl named Megan. Four may just be a vague number, because as any asshole like myself would say; It is currently in progress and due to fluctuate from time to time. It may never get done as I spend time writing a screenplay based on my family, because my brother James and I realized how hilarious this would be on Saturday.*
*Slightly sarcastic. It really is a brilliant idea.

I wrote this on the train back from Thanksgiving, but in no way does it reflect upon my time home save maybe two lines. In fact, I didn't have Thanksgiving dinner this year due to inclement weather, so I had fish with my parents and youngest brother Ryan. I will tell you it was some of the best fish I have ever had, but Carrollton can be slightly lacking in excitement compared to my ordinary life as a lush. The character is perhaps my alter ego, but even worse given that he is an orphaned only child and I can't picture anything worse. It should read fine without background, although missing characters are briefly mentioned. Enjoy the story after the break...or don't. This isn't an oppressive Pakistani suburb.

Chapter 4
I’m Not Lonely, I’ve Got My Imaginary Friends

My mom always told me that loneliness was contagious. I never knew what she meant by that. Loneliness was surely lacking options for other hosts when you were alone. So I asked her one day to explain the quirky phrase. She replied, “It’s simple. For every person that chooses to be alone, another person unwillingly makes the same choice.” I laughed aloud at the thought, but like many times before found she wasn’t joking.

As I stared down that poor bird, it all came back to me. On Thanksgiving, I spread loneliness like a plague. I could lie and say that it was the way I wished it was, but I would only stop for her and no other. I knew that well enough now. The dog and I waited patiently, basking in the odiferous air longingly by the stove. We shared a hunger, both of us tied to our basest desires. Yet, I doubt we hungered for the same thing.

Every year, this is the misery I choose to live by. I cook a dinner in memory of a family long gone and in preparation for one that will never come. This never really bothered me before; I hadn’t given it a second thought. But this year felt different, maybe I felt that I wasn’t bound to my horrid fate anymore and perhaps it was just naiveté. It had always been the expected, a norm, and an inevitability for me to spend Thanksgiving alone, just as certain as another Detroit loss.
I basted the turkey again and my dog barked at me. His patience with me was wearing thin on all fronts. I’m sure he could detect the sadness creeping in, but I think it was more of a turkey problem for him.

“Hey, shut the fuck up! How many dogs get Thanksgiving dinner?” He just stared blankly at me and panted, like a Lohan after a night’s revelry. Look at me: I’m picking a fight with a dog. Next, I’ll put a Christmas sweater on him; fuck, this is ridiculous. He turned his head almost inquisitively, perhaps he did understand me. Then, he scratched himself in a very indelicate manner. Just like having dinner with a regular man, I guess.

I fought my urge to laugh, but why? Who was here to care? Nothing with this day could possibly get better or worse for me. It was like the cranberry sauce: delicious, well-designed, customary, but molded, artificial, and cold.
People may understand my seclusion on other days, but not Thanksgiving. This was a day for families and friends. My friends had a large variation of Thanksgiving celebrations, each one specially tailored and not perfectly reflective of the bullshit Thanksgiving meal that the American image propagates.

Damien was a father and like any good father would he spent the day with his children. This normally does not pose much of a problem, but as Damien had managed the embarrassing feat of fathering two children with women he did not love it could be awkward. He didn’t make the two women get together and compare stories, because that would be likely to promote acrimony and despite his apparent disdain for sexual intelligence, he wasn’t an idiot. People simply did not hate Damien, and there was no reason for him to try to find ways to change that. The awkwardness existed still in copious amounts, because the women still loved him. They loved his casual looks, his even more casual demeanor, and mostly how he took to being a father and simply mastered the hardest job a man is ever given. Feelings like that were complicated for anyone to corral, but even worse companions for a single mother who just wished the man loved them as much as he loved his progeny.

Edwin was the first generation of his family to live entirely in the United States, so they didn’t celebrate Thanksgiving in the same respect and we did. Yet, due mostly to employee customs, he observed the holiday and took it as an opportunity to see his family. The chances just don’t occur if you cruelly impose a six-day (sometimes seven) work schedule upon yourself. I note often that self-employment isn’t freedom, since the axe comes down hardest upon you upon failure. For a workaholic, Thanksgiving is a needed refrain from the constant churning of your butter and allows you to escape your troubles for a while.

For Edwin, it meant jumping out of the kettle and into the fire. There was no longer any Alicia to be his shield. She was his wife and therefore he was living a traditional life, and she was half-responsible and more strongly attacked for the “conspicuous” absence of children. Now, it was all Edwin’s fault, he was weak and should have kept her in her place. She was not at fault for abandoning him, for she had taken the path of tradition where a wife needs intimacy, both practically for conception and emotionally. His ambition was his demon. Although I thought he would have made mention that ambition brought his parents to America, his ambitions were made possible by their sacrifices working two jobs a piece at minimal pay. But what did I know? I am 27 and alone, so in their estimation upon meeting me was that I’m obviously a homosexual.

Steve’s family by contrast was positively delighted that he had never reproduced, not implying that he hadn’t had his share of close calls. The hell spawn that would come forth from him would certainly be worse than never holding a grandchild for his parents. Steve had the conflicting ability to brighten up and destroy your days. Therefore, his family hoped to limit his damage by rationing their relations. Steve had Thanksgiving as his day to see them all and hopefully burn as few bridges as possible.

Merrill spent the day with his young family. Neither he nor his wife was a talented cook but they took the effort, because that’s what families do, right? They have no clue and neither do I how it all works, because they have just started and I have forgotten. However, despite the always experimental dinner, this was one of their good days, where the trappings of marriage and parenthood weren’t so frail, even seemed worth it.

I didn’t fret much about my friend’s absence; we would have our days more often than our families, and I understood how fleeting and few between these moments can be. They had given me too much for me to cast blame at them for my loneliness, and I would never dare join in their celebrations. It’s not out of kindness that I would decline their generosity. I knew no one cared if I tagged along, except maybe Edwin’s family who would most certainly declare him a homosexual as well or at least fuel their suspicions.

I think briefly of what it would be like to celebrate a Thanksgiving with another person in my life. It was inevitable, as my mind is prone to flitting in and out of my subconscious. Some told me I was introspective, but I think that implies a level of depth that doesn’t exist in my estimation. So I stood there and dreamed of a Thanksgiving with a family, but as dreams go, it was murky and vague. A woman crossed the dining room with a child in her arms bobbing happily. The child looked like me, so many years before: happy, unworried, even excited. The woman, however, was not my mother, but had a familiarity I couldn’t grasp. A grandfatherly man takes the child from her arms, but again I never knew my grandfather and the woman carrying in the turkey was certainly not my grandmother either. As the woman turned to see the turkey come into the room, the brightest of smiles crossed her face and I thought I knew one just like it.

Yet there was no me, so this wasn’t my family: this was someone else’s dream thanksgiving. A dog barks at the table, and some familiarity creeps back into the image. That is my dog; that is his bark, his mannerisms, and his aged figure. The woman looks down upon the vagabond and a tinge of sadness betrays the beauty. I never wish to see that look on a face again, cringing with fond yet sad remembrance. I wait for myself to appear in the dream or for myself to be addressed, but I was not there. The dog barks again, and it seems all too real. The dog approaches and licks my hand, but no one acknowledges me. Of course, he must be licking me because I made the turkey that sits before me. He continues to lick furiously upon my hands…dragging me back to consciousness.

“Sonofabitch!” The dog was very real and shocked by my sudden outrage. He had been there in the dream, and I had not. It’s funny how things work out in your head sometimes. Confusion and abstraction are not the norm for me, even my dreams make sense. However, this one gave me pause: why would the dog be somewhere without me? Why was I a child and who was everyone else? And what longing and grief could darken such beauty so? Maybe I was over-analyzing it; I had to be in the kitchen, I am a good cook. Yet it wasn’t my house, wasn’t my table, wasn’t my family, just my dog.

The same dog stared at me, hoping I would break out of my funk long enough to give him a treat. Why else would I be in a kitchen? Fuck you, dog. You aren’t my master?
But am I yours? You’re the one with purpose whose whims are catered to. You sleep, play, and eat when you want to. I do all of those things at the times Mom set out for me, scheduled and consistent like any responsible adult. Suddenly, the urge to abandon my cooking and go out entered my mind, but it was as lasting and corporeal as a ghost, the idea returned in the deep nothingness from which it sprang, blowing away with the slight exhaled gust of wind.

The sweetness of the air wiped the mental slate clean: sweet potatoes and brown sugar caramelizing to perfection as much a childhood memory as the sweet honeysuckle draping the verge in our backyard and the bedtime stories they used to read me. The turkey and stuffing decide to compete for my affections, sage filling my nostrils as I mixed the pumpkin pie ingredients together. Maybe that was why I am alone. Maybe this is my boyhood paradise; a kitchen bulging outwards with plenty and an enduring faithful companion in symbiosis with me. Not a place for longing wishing, or sadness. A place for me to be at peace, accepting, and coldly indifferent.

Here was my sanctuary; here was my home. Outside my lonely apartment is the cold, uninviting November air. Past the looming Arch, the Mississippi flows eternally persistently towards its grave, picking up others along the way that died earlier, carrying their burdens and past to the vast beyond. Outside was the trappings of fate and the inevitability of my demise, in here were my life and my shield, but fate did not scare me and death was so remote that it wasn’t a factor. Why then did I require a shield? What did I need protection from?

Was it losing someone?
Pain?
Tragedy?
Love?

Well, I guess loss, pain, and tragedy are all a part of love anyways, so that must be it. Nevertheless, why fear love? In my case, it was just as remote as death, just as unlikely, though not as certain and unavoidable. By my own estimation, I had tried and failed and wasn’t sure what I was supposed to do. I had never been in love, and from my friend’s exploits wasn’t entirely convinced of its efficiency.

I had seen their hearts broken, seen them break more, seen them celebrate, and seen them struggle. Even for my neuroses, perhaps specifically because of them, I don’t think love is the cure-all that movies and pop songs told me. Love was more Okkervil River than Snow Patrol, more about the loss than those fleeting perfect moments. The fights and breakups, not the light refracting perfectly off of her silky hair, the warmth of her supple skin, and the touch of her affectionate lips. It’s more the way her hair flows as she walks away, my clammy skin as my stomach turns and I try to say “Sorry.” Or “Don’t Go.” The tears running down her face past pursed lips. I feel the tears running down my face as well, and turn to the judgmental companion sitting next to me.
“Onions,” I said to the dog. Why the hell do I justify my sadness to him? He either has seen it before or just doesn’t give a fuck. I’m sure if he thinks about it, he is lonely as well. Instead, here the two bachelors abide, sharing a platonic dinner together in our lonely house. I pulled out the roasted bird, now bronze in its glory like the Colossus at Rhodes and just as doomed to be stripped indiscriminately despite the master work done in its creation. Unceremoniously, he had been stuffed and cast into the oven, a sacrifice to the whims of my gluttony and those of my companion as well. I thought for a moment on the perfection of an American holiday defined and celebrated for its gluttony. The dog barks angrily at my insistence to pause for my inner monologue. As I continued to remove the fixin’s, I tossed him one of the giblets set aside on the counter. He devoured it in his appreciation, a fitting picture of our existence together if there ever was one.

The Old 97s crooned in the background, so much a part of me that I had hardly noticed before. For irony’s sake, “Lonely Holiday” belted forth from my stereo system piercing the air and capturing my attention. It was always a fitting song for my sorrow, though not perfect, nothing ever is. I didn’t have imaginary friends and wasn’t suicidal in any way, but my loneliness was beginning to approach a need for epic poems just explore its nuances and many characters. Rhett burst through my monologue on cue…

“And if you don’t love me, would you please pretend?”

I don’t believe much in fate, instead relying more upon coincidence and happenstance as those to be blamed for it all. Half-mockingly and half-cruelly my phone buzzed its way across my table as a text came in.

Happy thanksgiving!
I’m thankful to have you in my life.

Huh…what the fuck?

If Life Had a Soundtrack: The 2011 First Half Concert Season

2011-02-17T12:44:00.002-06:00

I actually have already been to a concert this year, but judging upon how that turned out; let's act like it never happened. I love concerts like normal people love other people.
(Videos after the jump)

Friday- Old 97's, Those Darlins

The Old 97s are one of those bands you need to see in concert to get the whole picture. Rhett Miller is one of the best troubadours, belting love songs like no other. The band gives him and Murray a more rock and roll feel to their very Texas and country voices. So a band who have many albums that could be defined by most as country or bluegrass in sound, evolves into a rock band before your eyes. I will guess that the happiest moment of my life occurred was their last concert in St. Louis, but I don't really put a price on happiness. Or how many people you have to fight to see Tricia Helfer...

Feb 27- Pete Yorn, Ben Kweller, The Wellspring

I once joked that if I had to mimic a voice for indie rock it would be Pete Yorn's. I joked that I sing in Pete Yorn's voice when I'm making fun of other songs. Then again, I'm just jealous I can't grow that much hair. This is one of those indie lineups that tools like myself drool over, and other people are like "Who the fuck are they?"

March 16- Murder By Death

Now, here's a show fueled by whiskey, a cello, and pure energy. I've seen them twice, once in Columbia at Mojos and once at Off Broadway where this show is going to be held. The shows are intimate, they are hot, they are smoky, and the brown spirits pour freely. I'm absolutely in love with the way the cello drives the songs, and Adam's voice has evolved into a gruffer Cash-like quality. Their musical concept has no boundary or definition so it's hard for people to say where they are musically, but hopefully they continue to find new fans

March 26th-James McMurtry, The Bottle Rockets

This is the one where I'm taking a flyer. I haven't seen either of these artists and own no albums from them. So take a look at the videos and decide along with me. Those of you from Carrollton may recognize the McMurtry name, as I remember "Lonesome Dove" being well liked by us hill folk and James's father Larry wrote it.

April 26th- The Deftones

My friend Robyn likes the Deftones, so I might go to this concert. Personally, I can't get over how many times the above song was played on 96.5 when I was in high school and how much I grew to loathe it. From what I've heard since, they are growing on me, I even like Minerva, and everyone seems to like them, and I like the fact that DJs are hesitant to play them proving that their music must be good.

April 27th The Decemberists.

They got the Colbert Bump. Isn't that how everyone becomes popular?

The Colbert Report

Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c

The Decemberists - The Wanting Comes in Waves

www.colbertnation.com

Colbert Report Full Episodes

Political Humor & Satire Blog

Video Archive

May 4th- Colin Hay

You may know him as the lead singer of Men at Work, and his single handed advancement of Vegemite. Younger people may remember him from Scrubs cameos and his songs being used often in the series. The song "Waiting for My Real Life to Begin"(above in the video) is my second favorite of his; my favorite is "Maggie"...

TBD-The Airborne Toxic Event
;
I'm just assuming they'll tour later this year. They have their second record coming out in April, and they tour without breaks. They were on the road every day for a whole year promoting their first record, and judging by their statements, I foresee the same occurring with this record.

TBD- LouFest
Last years, LouFest was pretty sweet despite work making me late on Saturday and my ex making me leave early on Sunday because she is a woman and they tend to disappoint. First lesson, leave the significant other at home, and risk their unhappiness for your unbridled joy during the concert. Second lesson, sunscreen, water bottles, chairs, and money are your friends, bring them.

TBD-Bonnaroo, Lollapalooza, Austin City Limits
I was going to go to Lollapalooza last year, but I didn't have the money to pay for two people. Should have left the girl behind in hindsight. This year I'm going to one of these concerts, because I don't have anything else to spend money on. There are advantages to being single and liquid assets are one of my favorites. If I go to Bonnaroo, I'm keeping this van for longer, because it might as well be an RV. The others are farther off and I don't even have a lineup for them yet.

On Jobs and Ambition

2011-02-16T15:00:00.000-06:00

When I was a boy, I dreamed of being a professional athlete, dreamed of catching a pass in the Super Bowl, draining a fade-away like Jordan. That is a common dream among young men, a dream of unrealistic proportions. I always liken it to little girls dreaming of being a princess; the Disney syndrome, as I call it. Yet it is much different, little girls, whether they know it or not, are already someone's little princess as all great fathers look upon their daughters in such a fashion. They also see their son's as athletes, but rather as extensions of their own failures and successes in that arena. The dream also says a lot about young men, and why athletes need to be careful in their lives. We worship them, more than our parents, more than our teachers, more than our siblings, and certainly more than men worthy of adulation.

People may scoff at this, but I wanted to be a professional athlete for two reasons: money and how I could help people with that money. I'm not a material man, and never have been. I could live with a one-bedroom apartment, a computer, my books, and I would be happy just spending money on food and libations. So, if I were a millionaire, I would have lots of money left over. Besides the obvious things I feel my family needs, I would probably blow the rest on charity and investments. I dreamed as a 12 year old kid of ways to help the homeless; I even dreamed about playing for the Lions so I could help out one to the most economically depressed, violent cities in the nation. Then, my dreams shifted to the more practical.

I dreamed of being a lawyer, for no reason at all, and to this day I can't understand it. I was just behind the idea of helping the defenseless, but more and more I saw the case being the indefensible and I grew wary of the idea. I don't even like the idea of putting men away, because I don't think I could choose only to try crimes against women and murder cases, and I don't feel too strongly about drug crimes and misdemeanors anyways. Still, the dream was about money, and it was vain and self-serving.

Throughout high school, the new dream was in computers. I didn't specifically know what I wanted to do. Something in programming I assumed, and I always wanted to make computer games, but I wasn't particularly good with code at a young age, not to the extent I even am now despite my four year removal from programming. I wanted to fix them, I wanted to build them, and I wanted to code their programs. I was a mess, lacking any focus or direction.

I tried to study to be a Computer Engineer, but I hated it as it was mind-numbingly dull. I would get Cs in class because I would ace tests and refuse to do homework. I would get As in class carrying men and women who now make assloads more money than me. I would get Fs in class, because I would get bored and stop attending after five weeks. My failure there on most scales has never bothered me; I learned a great deal about life and avoided becoming a corporate drone I knew I would hate. I switched to History, but found that I cared very little for learning in a scholastic environment, though I continue to this day.

I didn't work at all until I was 21 years old, so I really have no idea what being a professional meant. At 16, I got a small cup of tea working for my brother, which incidentally pointed me in a direction I couldn't discern at that moment. I had a job offer to work a summer internship in Kansas City before college, which I foolishly did not take because I was in the middle of some serious puppy love. At 19, I found myself in a field pollinating corn, because I was a drain on my parents income and was, to be frank, a worthless piece of shit at the time. At 21, I was a college dropout essentially, living with my girlfriend in a city I knew nothing about except that they had a free-to-attend Zoo.

When I began working at Ozzie's I was that sixteen year old kid again, head down hidden away in the back of a kitchen, a mind racing but words scarcely escaped my lips. I would meet people in the next few months several times, because frankly I didn't take the time to learn their names. The job was hot, messy, and strangely lonely. My girlfriend would leave town, and I would sit at a bar alone, no friends but my beer in front of me. I am not that great a cook or chef. I lack focus, I daydream, I forget, and I wander, but as Rilo Kiley said, "Sometimes when You're on, Well, Your're really fucking on." As time passed, I talked to people, I learned more of the kitchen, and I was comfortable. In my time there, I did everything but smoke meat and cut steaks (which incidentally I have made up for ten-fold at my new job). I was still in school, but for what purpose? I didn't really make much there, but as I said, what did I need money for? No girl, no kids, no house, no car payments. Just rent and sustenance.

Cee Lo Green says, "I'm often asked 'What I do for a Living?' And I answer, 'I do what I want.'

I often tell women that I'm good at five things, every one can make me lots of money under extraordinary circumstances as many of the ships have sailed. I can teach, but they make nothing and I don't like being pigeon-holed and prodded to conform. I can cook, but I have no money to start a restaurant or the patience with ignorant people to do it for the rest of my life. I'm a one-liner machine, but I'm no comedian. I can write, but what good are words that no one reads and no one reads. And the fifth thing, you'll just have to find out for yourself, but I don't look good on camera. (I assume they get the last one is a joke, and apologize to anyone who is working that image out in their head right now.)

But what's wrong with what I do now? It's an honest question, as I saw one of the Tekes post he got a promotion to which another replied "What from fry cook to grill?" Obviously, my job has no glory, and certainly isn't ever going to impress a woman or lead to exciting new opportunities. But everyday, I get to use my hands, I get to sweat, and I get to stand on my feet. Honest labor, which I respect far more than sitting behind a desk. There is no romance in business, no romance in Engineering, no romance in Law, no romance in politics. There is romance in cooking and writing; In creating with your hands and mind things that make people happy, for however short a moment. So that is what I do for now, it's not a career, but I have purpose. I create nourishment for the body and for those of you who can read hopefully nourishment for the mind, and I can't think of anything that makes me happier. Well, maybe a woman's smile, but that an extraordinary circumstance.

Now, on the subject of ambition, I come across a problem in human thought. Everyone assumes ambition is forceful and forward. That ambitious people have to tell you what their intentions are, and that just isn't my style. My ambitions are large and cloaked, waiting anxiously for the moment to strike. Of late, I've found myself more open about them, but still no one really knows what I plan to do with my life and I like it that way. It's not entirely practical to hide your intentions from women you like, but I find it quite hilarious so i guess there is that. As for a career, I can tell you this; I'm making everyone's happiness, including my own, my career, and I doubt anyone will be in opposition to that.

If Life Had a Soundtrack: The Valentine's Day Mix-Tape

2011-02-13T14:27:00.001-06:00

Oooh, a holiday special edition and I guess the second year of me making these, and obviously a wretched holiday at that. Christmas and Valentine's Day are the only holidays that successfully split the world into two camps of happy and unhappy people. Valentine's Day is much more artificial though, and as the singular example of men's ineptitude is bound to make some women incredibly happy and others wondering why men can't be all gooey and giving the other 364 days of the year. Well, they can be but why do so when we can acknowledge women with specific holidays designed to placate them throughout the year.*

*Valentine's Day, Mardi Gras, Mother's Day, Flag Day, Bastille Day, V-J Day, Labor Day, Halloween, Black Friday, Christmas, Kwanzaa at Tim Meadows house
**Presents involved: Roses, Beads, Appreciation, Bitchin Flags, Wine (Preferably boxed), Sushi, Football, googly Eyes or freedom to express themselves, Something expensive and without meaning that is on sale, Things of great meaning that are corny to give on Christmas or lingerie, Bushels of corn or a Lexus

However, I am extremely giving so I am presenting you with my supposed to be weekly mixtape, and supplying two lists just in case you aren't all head over heels tomorrow.

(Videos after the jump)

The Title Track
Sam Cooke - "Cupid"

First, let's acknowledge the brilliance of Sam Cooke songs by making him the only artist to get two tracks on each list.* Simplicity is something that I don't cherish anymore, as it tends to be the modus operandi of the bubble gum pop music being unleashed upon us today. This song however is perfect in it's simplicity. It is a song about longing, full of earnestness but also incredibly playful. No man ever put loneliness and happiness on such an equal plane, but Sam Cooke songs seem to meld the two to create a harmony of the two themes pervading Valentine's day: Love and loneliness. So no matter the playlist, this is the first song.

*Let's also acknowledge how he is probably the last musician to be robbed by a hooker and then shot for being a large naked black man in his hotel lobby. That is not only a rock star weird death, that is a 1960's death, as every artist from the early rock and roll days seemed to die in strange fashion.

For the Lovers:

Sam Cooke-"Wonderful World"

Simple magic. In fact, the song doesn't make any sense, although perhaps being an A student leads to a better romantic life and that might explain a few things. I think to go deeper it is a song about having to impress women to get them to love you, but Chuck Berry would tell me it's a third grade ditty and I shouldn't think too much about it. Sam Cooke would tell me like all of his songs, the dude in it is incredibly desperate, but it does make me happy and maybe that's enough.

Murder By Death-"Foxglove"

I talk about this song too often, as these guys don't do love songs. This in essence is a beautiful song, but the name has always grabbed me. The foxglove is a beautiful flower, but is also highly poisonous. I'm sure that was the idea they went with when naming the song. However, name aside I think the sentiments in the lyrics are perfect for Valentine's Day, just don't say anything about the beautiful poison part, especially to a woman.

Jack Johnson- "Bubble Toes"

Romance is in many ways not loving a person for their perfections, but for their imperfections. Like a strange birthmark,* or in the case of this song the girls tar covered feet. "Her beauty will follow her wherever she goes" is a strange line as well, as women worry far to much about how we feel about their appearance. I think the sentiment expressed tells women that their looks are probably the last thing we think will disappear.**

*A butchered appendectomy or maybe my grotesque belly-button in my case. Lafayette county doctors aren't the best, but I am alive I guess.
**Everyone knows the charming disposition disappears first, followed by the sex, and then the man hangs himself on accident while practicing auto-erotic asphyxiation. Or so I've heard.

Adele-"My Same"

"Favoritism ain't my thing, but in this situation. I'll be glad to make an exception."

Mumm Ra- "She's Got You High"

Love is a feeling that you feel somehow in your gut, a euphoric condition. This song epitomizes that euphoria and how you get it before your brains catch up to your "heart". It also it the closing song to the anti-romance "500 Days of Summer", but it fits the ending perfectly. If you haven't seen it yet then you need to get off your ass, and go pick it up.*

*Netflix on demand is probably what you kids do these days, and also doesn't require your effort

Buddy Holly and the Crickets- "Everyday"

I can't hear this without seeing Ewan McGregor stand in a field of daffodils, so thanks "Big Fish". I put the Big Fish scene on here instead on the song, because it is one of the best romantic scenes and much more fitting. Like the Sam Cooke song, "Everyday" is incredibly simplistic, but then again what else is needed to be said with this song?

The Drifters- "Save the Last Dance for Me"

If you are getting the drift, we don't do love songs like we used to. There's a reason that the same songs get played at every wedding; it's because we did love songs their due back in the early 60's.* The Drifters were the best, and it does stand to reason, that they are the only of these early 60's artists that I have a CD from. I could add all of their greatest hits to either list. "There Goes My Baby" is awesome depressing, and not for tomorrow unless I was trying to make people suicidal or alcoholics.

*Followed by protest songs (late 60's), album rock (early 70's), dance music (disco), androgyny (80s), heroin and self-loathing (90s), boy bands and bubble gum pop (late 90s-present), and hip-hop auto-tuned songs. I predict in tens years music will be dead to mainstream Americans.

Wait, who could I think of that can write love songs and be mainstream in America?

Cee Lo Green- "Satisfied"

Baby...
Where's the road taking us
And maybe that's why they call it making love
And darling I will do my best
I'm falling at the feet of your highness
Don't need to ask the answers always yes

Well the least I can do is try
I want you to think your satisfied
Oh let me satisfy you
The least I can do is try
I want you to think your satisfied
Oh let me satisfy you

This album is sex, oozing hot sex. That's all I can say about it and I hope it suffices.

Stevie Wonder- "You Are the Sunshine of My Life"

Admit it you get some perverse pleasure also from a blind man using the expression "apple of my eye". No, maybe I have a problem, but at least admit that you get some pleasure from Stevie's songs. He probably would have done some baby making damage like the next man if they weren't contemporaries.

Al Green- "Let's Stay Together"

You didn't honestly think this list would omit Al Green. Yes, most black people I've met think I have never heard of this man; yes, that is incredibly racist and nearsighted. The looks I get in the city singing this song are worth more to me than you could understand. Half the children born in the 1970s are this man's fault, because even his sad songs are baby making songs. The night's over, better end it with some Al Green.

For the Hopeless Romantics:

Old 97s-"Valentine"

I'll let the middle verse's lyrics speak for themselves.

True love, I knew some thought of leavin' you.
Bad thoughts I had, when valentines were due.
Of all the many ways a man will break his heart,
Well there ain't none meaner than he pulls his own apart

Valentine, the destroyer, Valentine, you belong
In the stars, where you are, always rollin' on.
Cried, I've cried till I couldn't carry on.
It's a lonely, lonely feelin' when your Valentine is wrong.
It's a lonely, lonely feelin' when your Valentine is wrong.

Rhett Miller-"My Valentine"

I could make an entire Old 97s/Rhett Miller/Murray Hammond play-list of these songs, and you would realize that his songs usually fit in either list. Reason this song makes the list is two lines:

"Sex in wartime is better than peace."
"We've gotta smoke some grass, we gotta shake our asses right this instant."

Okkervil River-"Girl in Port"

Oh, the song for the wandering eye and steady heart. Okkervil River's songs are lately more about the rock star life than this one. The lead here is a man much in my mold, constantly searching for someone who is never bound to come or hoping that someone can mold themselves into such a person.

Dire Straits-"Romeo and Juliet"

I'm posting the Killers version, because it's better quality video, I like it better and I find the sacrilege hilarious, but it is a Dire Straits song. Romeo and Juliet is the most amazing story, as the romance of it has been overblown.

Broken Social Scene-"Texico Bitches"

This song has nothing to do with love or Valentine's Day, so I why include it? Because it's fucking Valentine's Day and you don't have to wallow in pity. Rock out, and be happy. Drink some beers with some friends, have casual sex*, don't commit any crimes, and live to tell about it.

*Safety first kids

If you never learn else anything from me, learn this lesson that I never learned well enough. Fuck scheduled sentimentality. Give women flowers on Tuesdays or St. Patrick's day. Buy them chocolates on a Sunday. Make them breakfast every day. Tell women how beautiful they are even if they don't want to hear it from you specifically. Love them always. Don't be that dick who one day out of the year pretends he's Prince Charming. Be the man who women know exactly how you feel by the look in your eyes, the feel of your touch, and the words on the tip of your tongue. Be honest, be forthright, be daring, be romantic. Don't be a tool.

My Internal Border War

2011-02-07T15:23:00.000-06:00

I was born and raised a Kansas Jayhawk fan. I don't know how this happened specifically. My mother cares little for sports that her children are not on the field for, although she may be a baseball fan if she had to pick. My father is from Iowa, grew up with the Cardinals and from what I could tell some devotion to Nebraska football, which I have rooted against from day one. However, we have always watched Kansas basketball.

My first sports memories are of the 1991 Final Four. I remember Dean Smith being ejected and Kansas winning. I remember going out back and pretending I was in the final four on a hoop too high with gravel as the pavement. Then again, none of this might be true; it's just a memory. I don't remember the loss against Duke, and I guess that means I was selectively optimistic at the time, purging those things that were not happy to recollect. Now, though not the Kansas fan i used to be, I still remember the losses.

My dedication has never come close to my childhood adoration of Kansas. I cried once when Eric Piatkowski and his Nebraska team beat Kansas, but I cried a lot when I was younger. I loved Kansas basketball so much, that when I wrote KU on the side of my bike helmet and went out to pretend I was a football player, I pretended I was Rex Walters or Adonis Jordan playing football against Jevon Crudup and Melvin Booker. At the time, this probably wasn't as ridiculous as it sounds, since both Mizzou and Kansas had abysmal football teams. Then, Glen Mason came around.

For the first time in my life, Kansas and Kansas State were relevant and Missouri was coming around under Larry Smith. I remember eagerly awaiting the Aloha Bowl in 1995, and Kansas didn't disappoint beating UCLA 51-30. That was the first time a team I rooted for won a bowl game, and it wouldn't happen again until 2005. I had always rooted for a team, but not for the whole season, but rather on a "Who is playing Nebraska this week?" basis. It wasn't that I didn't care for college football (I once recorded part of a Colorado State-Utah game.); the local teams just sucked. But things were happening that would change me as a fan.

Glen Mason would leave Kansas for Minnesota in 1997, which seemed like an extremely lateral move, but both a more rewarding salary and a greater challenge given Minnesota's ineptitude make that seem wiser in hindsight to me. But I wasn't too into football yet, so this was met with indifference whose ferocity was surely unmatched. Why was I indifferent? Paul Pierce, Raef LaFrentz, Scot Pollard, and Jacque Vaughn made up one of the greatest teams of all-time...to not win a championship. They were upset by an underseeded and highly deserving championship team from Arizona in the Sweet Sixteen. With the exception of Lin Elliot's playoff choke job, no loss has ever bothered me as much as that one. I felt that the Jayhawks were never going to win the championship under Roy Williams, not that it was necessarily his fault. Nothing like being proved right to your dismay, which happens a great amount I have found with sports and women.

Nothing changed between 1997 and 2002 in my fanhood. I saw Corby Jones ignite a small fire in the Mizzou football program and Norm Stewart retire. Fresh blood in the form of Quin Snyder gave the Tigers basketball some hope for a while. Kansas football returned to its rightful place at the bottom of the conference, and Kansas basketball resumed its unrelenting consistency of winning, but not in the tournament culminating in Hakim Warrick blocking a last second shot and Roy Williams leaving for North Carolina, in what might be the most mutually beneficial coaching change in College Basketball history. But 2002 changed everything.

I had never been to a football game before save the ones at my high school, and I played in half of those that I attended. My friend Zach Famuliner took me with him to the Oklahoma game with two other friends Eric Paris and Justin Hancock. I say took, because I'm pretty sure I never paid his mom for the ticket. This wasn't just a game for me; it was a coming out party for that desire to have a football team to root for. The desire came in the form of Brad Smith, one of the most athletically gifted players I have ever seen, and probably even with the Maclins and Alexanders of the programs future the most gifted to ever grace Faurot Field. Smith ran and passed at will against the third-ranked Sooners totally 391 yards, 213 of them on the ground. But it was the Sooners, so Mizzou lost as we thought they always would.

I would return later that season to watch Mizzou play Kansas and realize how far that game changed me. Justin and I were without mercy in mocking my high school girlfriend and friend Megan Miller about the pounding Kansas was receiving. Doubly cruel was the belief I'm sure they both had coming in that the lifelong Jayhawk fan was on their side. No, there was no coming between me and Brad Smith. Then, he was enigmatic for the next two years, and I found that his performance could. I was done with him, and a promising freshman showed him up in a comeback at Iowa State. Then, as a parting gift, he brought us one last piece of magic in getting the Tigers their first bowl victory under Pinkel and probably boosting the program to the heights that 2007 would bring.

My Kansas basketball fetish had not subsided though, it just became a side-story. The program continued to have regular season success, but still lacked a breakthrough for a championship which the tradition rich school longed for. Missouri had fallen into an abyss with scandals and violations plaguing the program and Quin Snyder and his greasy mane getting the axe. I had always respected the Tigers and with the exception of two games every year rooted for them, but by then it had become too much. Mike Alden was on perhaps the hottest seat that any man has been on and survived with his job. In retrospect, that was the smartest decision that Mizzou made.

Before we get to my Mizzou lovefest, we must acknowledge that Kansas has been the only team of mine to ever deliver me a championship outside of soccer. The game in 2008 is one of my favorite memories of being a fan, and I experienced it as so many precious moments as a Jayhawk fan in hostile territory, alone. I jumped off of my couch and screamed to the heavens when Chalmers hit that three; I didn't care who heard me because that was a magical finish. Not since Saberhagan shut down St. Louis had one of my teams won a championship (Again, not counting the Wizards win in MLS in 2000), but I was only four months old when that happened. I doubt any will come close too soon, but the Chiefs, Royals, and the two basketball programs meeting tonight all seem to be headed in the right direction. That was a good day for me, even if I didn't share it with anyone at the time.

As for Mizzou, there was 2007. There was Chase Daniel, Jeremy Maclin, Martin Rucker, Chase Coffman, Pig Brown, and there was Oklahoma. The Sooners, as always, were there to ruin the party, and would again next year at the latest Mizzou game I saw in person. Kansas, incidentally, rose to new heights that year as well, even undeservedly beating Mizzou for a bowl after losing to them on the field. Both teams went out and won handily to both justify the decision for the Orange Bowl, and show Mizzou fans why Mizzou deserved it more. However, Kansas's bubble burst and they sank to new depths, a victory in the 2008 Border War game only a brief respite from their struggles. Mizzou, however, has become one of the most consistent programs in the nation, not elite but second-tier which is all you can ask in the current FBS climate.

However, it didn't stop there, Mizzou did not only build a perennial top-25 football program, they instilled an entire athletic program of excellence through smart coaching hires. Look at Mizzou sports now. Mike Anderson has brought a unique style to men's basketball, and made a team that is better than the sum of its parts. Ehren Earlywine, or as RMN calls him Tremendous Stubble, has built a top-10 softball program. The wrestling program is building on the success of the Askren brothers, and continuing to produce All-Americans. The volleyball program has been to two consecutive elite eights. The baseball team has produced first-round pitching talent in Aaron Crow, Max Scherzer, and Kyle Gibson and has been on the cusp of a CWS appearance. Kansas has scandals and basketball, and is rebuilding its athletic department from both Al Bohl and Lew Perkins awful management during their tenures. Which school would you rather support?

So here I have come to the point where I don't even have a side when my boyhood team meets their hated rivals. I am a neutral and not disappointed either way. If Kansas wins, they are supposed to and Mizzou will recover. If Mizzou wins, they are talented enough that it isn't a shocker anymore, and Kansas will move on. I have nothing riding on this anymore, as I am as big a Mizzou fan as any of my friends, probably more obsessive about the whole and more reasoned about the little things. But deep in my heart, Jayhawk pride seems to linger waiting for the proper time in March when I can sit by myself and scream with boyish pride when they win. That is my curse, to always love those who are always at war.

Note: On that note, I make one last plea as a history major and a fan of both squads. Let the Border War name remain, and the history side of it die. Both sides featured cowards, racists, cutthroats, and scumbags. Neither side has anything of pride to look upon in the Civil War. Missouri were the racists and the Confederate sympathizers, and I don't think natives fully realize how awful Quantrill's Raiders were or they do and still harbor racism of their own. John Brown, while an abolitionist and correct in stance, was a bastard, terrorist, and used abhorrent tactics to get his message across. Of all the fronts of the war, none was more personal and none was more pointless. I get the idea, but aligning yourself with such people is like saying you are on Hitler's side when rooting for Germany against France in Euro 2012 or saying you want to go all Nanking on China when rooting for Japan.

Reason No. 2,872 That I Cannot Be President: A Fake State of the Union Address

2011-01-25T00:30:00.001-06:00

I am proud to be an American. There are many things to be proud of. The Declaration of Independence and our Constitution are two fantastic works of art when it comes to democracy. They were written 230 years ago. Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR were men of action. They are dead. Baseball was a fine sport that for years represented clearly the American desire to never see a person of color in their midst. Thankfully, it is now a sport that has lately embodied the American spirit of bottom lines and cheating to get ahead. The automobile was a symbol of American prosperity in the early 20th century. Now, reckless business practice, a reluctance to change, pollution, white flight and subsequent urban decay, and the country's desire to tap every last drop of the world's oil has made the automobile the anchor around our necks. We were the greatest country in the world.

We live in a country where a man can buy a gun whenever he wants to. We also live in a country where that same man can walk into a Safeway, gun people down, and smile about it. We live in a country where we can choose to live wherever we please, but government money and infrastructure is only provided to a select few communities. We can work any job we want, but none of these jobs exist. We have upward mobility, if we have talents that 99% of other Americans don't like running a 4.3 forty or playing the guitar behind our backs. We were built on the backs of immigrants, now we hate people for fleeing a country where death by beheading is more likely than economic success. We are democratic in name alone, run by corporations and fear. Most of all we are afraid.

Our grandfathers ran through jungles, forests, open fields, rain, and snow, not to mention gunfire, to liberate people we didn't even know from tyranny. Our grandmothers kept the country running while they fought. Our parents stood up to the inequities of the United States. Some of us continue to fight literally and figuratively for what it stood for. But in each situation, that only accounts for a few of us. Most of us wouldn't help a homeless man we pass on the street. Most of us judge people not by their character, but by the color of their skin. Most men think women are inferior, and most women think all men are that big of a douchebag. We are scum and for some reason damn proud of it. So we pursue a course of action that shows complete indifference to the turmoil, destruction, and chaos we are sewing.

We neglect essential areas of our society to pursue economic and military dominance, mainly education. Now, our children don't know mathematics or science. They can't write correctly, because the teachers aren't good enough. Most couldn't identify China on a map, much less the world's problem areas like Darfur, Afghanistan, or Iraq. But there is no money for education, so teachers get cut. Then, we cut the arts. Who needs to sing, paint, or play an instrument, when they have a college degree that is worthless in a dying society. So we have no spirit, no creativity, we have become a mind-numbing drone society, serving the queen of capitalism until we meet our doom. Some of us get lucky and get to mate with the system, only to find that in bad times, the economy turns and kills whoever drove it to the abyss. It is a rough world out there, but we are making it worse by handicapping those who need the help the most.

I am not a man who believes anyone deserves a handout. You are an adult and therefore should be capable of getting a job even if it isn't the one you want. However, you are not capable of beating a corporation. The corporation enjoys now not only the benefits of being incredibly wealthy, emotionless, and cruel. Now, it is also deserving of the full rights of citizenship. I understand fully that precedents exist that give this decision reason, but the action itself is spitting on the grave of Theodore Roosevelt. His actions at the beginning of the 20th Century helped curb the growing power of corporations, who used the 14th amendment as means of applying citizenship to their companies. So when you go to buy health care insurance that does not even give you the basic options of visiting a doctor or buying cheaper prescription drugs, where is your next step? Do you not buy insurance, or do you take the hit at no benefit to yourself, save the misfortune of you actually needing the insurance at which time your service will be dropped as a means of cost prevention? No, because now that cannot happen to you. And you said I did nothing for you last year.

Yes, we passed a bill that was watered down and most likely will not stand the test of time, but it began the process of us realizing that we are not a third-world country and should be willing to sacrifice some of our opulence for the benefit of the entirety of America. If you care so little about your fellow Americans, what standard does that set for your children? Why should they give a fuck about anything? We sacrifice the health of the less fortunate to save money, we sacrifice the education of everyone to save money, but we spend money on many things that will ultimately lead to the destruction of not only America, but humanity and the planet Earth itself. Our country refuses to acknowledge global warming, despite the ever deepening disastrous results of global climate change. We refuse to acknowledge pollution, despite the growing incidences of childhood disease, carcinogens in our water, and just the filthiness of our country. We refuse to change our lifestyles, to the point that America is facing a epidemic of gluttony or obesity. We refuse to even have reasoned discussions on topics, because we are all so fucking right.

I am not always right, in fact my humanity implies that I most often wrong, and therefore fallible. No one that has ever come and will ever come again is not subject to fallibility. We all make mistakes, and in doing so learn how not to make them again. When we repeat our mistakes, it is not an ignorance in which we do so but purposefully and, in our case, an act of malfeasance. To continue to cut programs which are vital to not only the economic growth but cultural growth of the American people, is not only idiotic but also a betrayal of the American people. Even those Americans who understand the justification for bailing out companies which essentially were poorly managed at best and criminally irresponsible at worst, cannot justify expenditures without return on investment. Even the richest men in the world do not cut blank checks to shady figures likely to dispense it as a child dispenses candy from a pinata. So our Congress and myself who both take money from corporations, get a big fucking pat on the back from those CEOs who got their year-end bonuses, but can't explain to a 20 year old from a low income family why he won't have enough money to cover the public education which somehow became more expensive despite no growth in the actual economy itself.

Deficit spending is not something new, and I assume that anyone in my position would have done what I did to try to save the economy. I assume a weaker and less stubborn man may have left Afghanistan to the dogs, and just given up trying to bring civilization and order to a place where neither have ever belonged. Maybe another man would have spend more money on immigration and less money on our old, sick, and poor. Maybe the country made a mistake in electing an idealist rather than a dinosaur. Maybe hope was not what the country wanted, but rather a scapegoat for their own incompetence. There are a whole lot of maybes always coming from us, and not a whole lot of action. While we wallow in pity that we are quickly becoming a modern version of the vast British empire, the rest of the world grows up without direction. China will continue to grow, and without us leading the way, will most certainly stray to the Earth's ruin. They will industrialize, pollute, and mismanage and someday will find themselves like us, but without a chance to redeem themselves.

But there are tough roads ahead, and I fear none of us are man or woman enough to take them. Taxes must at the least remain the same, if not increase. Americans will have to spend more to make more, giving up what makes them comfortable to save ourselves. Our industries must go forward, our innovations must come faster, and our corporations must stop leeching the heart and soul out of America. America was built on sweat, an axe or a shovel and our Manifest Destiny. We were the nation of immigrants, a heterogeneous society, a nation of firsts and lasts. As the 21st Century dawned, our destiny was still clear; we were the beacon for all of mankind to follow. In hindsight, it made us a target, but we made ourselves a victim. We have spent the last decade a shell of ourselves, living in fear of the outside world as the outside world passes us by. We have been wasteful, we have been ignorant, and we have been weak. The path of the nation is unclear, perhaps even worse through your jaded eyes, and we must do everything in our power to make sure that tomorrow is brighter than today. For at the current pace, fear may not be enough to save us from our ultimate demise.

I am proud to be an American. Proud of the standards set forth by our forefathers. Proud of the men and women who held off the British when they denied our freedom. Proud of the men and women who fought to remove the scourge of slavery from this land. Proud of the "fascists/commies" who championed the uplifting of the common man in the Progressive movement. Proud of the women who fought tooth and claw for the right to vote. Proud of the men and women who fought in both World Wars. Proud of those who had to live through the Great Depression, and found themselves in the greatest country in the world after. Proud of those who refused to give up their seats, and those who marched for civil rights. Proud of the men and women who gave their lives for their beliefs, or for their country despite their beliefs. Proud of every man and woman who has ever served our nation in any capacity, whether it be taking up arms, serving in office, or just a government job. Hopefully, the future will bear more worth being proud of, but we as a nation must do the heavy lifting lest it be too late for pride.

Note: I apologize if this comes off too angry, but this actually is slightly toned down version of something else I wrote which pointed out the flaws of the American psyche. This hopefully was more directed at governmental flaws, but I feel the individual gets it pretty well after reading it through a couple of times. It's important to realize that government flaws are a product of a complacent citizenship in a democracy. We acknowledge the flaws but constantly retain men and women who have proven no ability to govern successfully while removing those of reason who vote with a backbone as opposed to a wallet. Now that I've thrown my soapbox through your car window, I suppose I cannot take that back.

If Life Had a Soundtrack: The "If You're Into Bangs" Mixtape

2011-01-20T02:35:00.000-06:00

First, this is not a fetish or requirement of mine; I think it's important to get that out of the way. Every woman has something beautiful about them, and I doubt many of them owe their beauty solely to their bangs. If you happen to owe every head turn to your bangs and it's not because you poofed your hair up and we find your plumage strange, rock them forever, I suppose.

It's just a weird coincidence that I made fun of a girl for having bangs one day and the next day realized that every woman who exists solely to give my mp3 player less-y chromosomes has bangs in their music videos or rocks them all the time. Yes, I will continue to use the phrase "rocks her bangs" for the entirety of this exorcism of forehead follicle demons.We will present the ladies in order of how sexily they rock the bangs, or randomly. Like it matters either way. As always Facebook will not post the videos, so follow the link to get the entire picture; they are linked if you hate embedded videos.

Carla Bruni - "Quelqu'un m'a dit"

Yes, I'm obsessed with this video. Yes, I may think women in men's dress shirts are one of the strangest accidental discoveries that men have achieved in their efforts to make ourselves more putty-like. Yes, I realize that this partially has the opposite effect in first-person. No, I will not stop answering questions that no one asked. Just watch Mrs. Sarkozy, the French First Lady, otherwise known for being smoking hot, and I think banging Mick Jagger.* Then comment on how much you either love me or despise me for making you watch it. If you love me, manhood is awesome. If you hate me, you hate France; I can't see any other reason to despise this.

*But who hasn't, I think Keith and him have accidentally done it at least a dozen times.

Grace Potter and the Nocturnals- "Apologies"

I saw her last week? Kind of. I was there at least, but I was too busy dancing with lesbians and old men. She didn't play this song, but then again, it is a huge buzzkill and she rocks live. Rocks the bangs, that is.* In all reality, the song really is a good way of describing how douchey a boyfriend I am, and how even douchier I get afterwards. I'm such a douche, but I rocked some kickass bangs in 2002.

*Bullets can be sent through the mail. I promise to shoot myself in a non-vital area for writing that. Somewhere below the waist, away from major arteries.
**Dammit, can't stop writing it. Your reward is more of Grace Potter.

Rilo Kiley- "The Good That Won't Come Out of Us"

I like this video, both for the song and the old very plain Jenny Lewis. On there older tours, she didn't look quite as glamorous/forward as she does now. Even by the song I was gonna first post, she had done herself up. She is an effortless beauty even without though.* I always wanted to see her in concert, but the restraining order is pretty straight-forward.

*Despite the unavoidable case of the Gingeritis (Which is apparently a recognized word on my site)

For your taxidermy fetish.

The Bridges- "Pieces"

Three women with bangs, and four total. Sold. Now, of all the female musicians I love, I'm not really entranced with any of them. I love Neko Case's voice, but I don't really crush on her. The lead singer here is my one free crush on a rock star. No matter the situation, if I meet her I'm allowed to be completely awkward and off-putting as I am towards every woman I find interesting, or as I like to call it my irresistible seduction technique.* Now, if the freakin' dude wasn't making that o-face in the background, this video would not be remotely creepy to watch repeatedly, but I can't stop thinking that he does that when he plays drums two feet from his sisters.**

*Italics are the only way you could hear me saying that in a sexier voice, which, I learned yesterday, is also my morning Starbucks voice. Hey, don't knock it, I got my coffee for free.
**Insert Alabama incest joke that is slightly less disturbing than having Lynyrd Skynyrd sing your state song.

Feist- "Mushaboom"

Mostly, this entire play-list is the soundtrack for (500) Days of Summer, which is canon for the bang enthusiasts.* You can tell by now that the women aren't always my type. Leslie Feist looks like Karen Allen, and Karen Allen was smoking hot in "Animal House" and "Raiders of the Lost Ark". She looks like Karen Allen in "The Sandlot".

*If there are any. My ego hopes so.

Diane Birch-"Nothing but a Miracle"

Tiny woman with a large voice, bare shoulders, faux gospel music about things that are pertinent to living as opposed to religion,* and a brunette. This rocks my world. What are the chances that I would be up watching Letterman and see this performance? I hate Letterman, but some things are just fate and his musical guests are always top shelf. I love this album, and accidents like this need to happen to me more often. Wait, I'm a glass half-full kind of guy; awesome stuff happens to me all the the time because I'm awesome. However, usually not in the form of attractive talented women, that would be wonderful though if you actually care Santa.** I was good this year, relatively.

*Not that it isn't pertinent to death, what do I know?
**Never too early to begin Christmas shopping for yourself.

Murder By Death-"Brother"

The obligatory reference to my favorite band with a cello. Of course, the cellist has bangs for this video which has the best description ever. Bangs make her silence even more mysterious. Seriously, the first time I heard her speak was freaky, because she always looks this intense when playing. Women with that sort of intensity reek of danger.* Which meek men like me love, and watch from a safe distance.

*My middle name is Nathaniel, which means danger in the old country, Ireland. Or Jameson means danger, I can't remember which.
**Most likely, Jameson.

She and Him-"Why Do You Let Me Stay Here?"

Obviously, the list had to end with Zooey. Most men's lists do.*

*Only makes sense if you think of Dave from Ozzie's.

Congressional Etiquette or Congress of the Cow?

2011-01-17T12:32:00.000-06:00

Thank you, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. for the time today to actually accomplish something other than living out my New Year's resolution of not being so nice to everyone. I write about politics on Mondays but I really have nothing to say about the biggest political story of the past week. Giving myself license to write about gun violence would only result in me making inappropriate jokes and most likely going off on Sarah Palin, which by now should be recognized as laziness. I also won't tell you the tale of my dream from last night where Obama was walking by me and I got in a conversation with Spike Lee instead. Instead, let's make another turn and talk about the action of government in the new year.

The last year was marked by inefficiency in government. The Obama administration will tell you how much was accomplished. DADT was repealed, but that was a completely obvious decision made partisan only for shits and giggles. The Health Care law will be scrutinized and most likely drawn out, or rejected by some Podunk state I reside in. Every measure taken by the government to alleviate the stress of recession was seen as negative or self-serving resulting in the always inevitable midterm victory by the stronger party, despite the GOP lacking anything resembling leadership or intelligence. So 2010 was a failure, almost epic in every fashion, and 2011 started tragically in almost the worst fashion possible, save Gabrielle Giffords also perishing in the shooting. However, it gave the idiots something to look at, and time to refocus their views.

I'm not predicting 2011 to be all peachy keen in the grand arena of Congress, but perhaps the ever-building vitriol will dissipate slightly at least for the near future. I'm not a Congressional historian by any means, but I would say that during my lifetime the feelings extended across the aisle have never been as hateful as now, even during the farcical impeachment proceedings of the mid-nineties. Certainly, no one is being caned so it hasn't quite matched the Antebellum Congress, but I don't foresee a civil war anytime in the near future either.

With the ousting of many moderates on both sides, the circumstances that have fueled such political hatred may have actually got worse. Even worse some of the new congressmen are the types that will bark loud with little political bite, deepening the chasm that the majority of the country resides in. However, I will accept that there are certain ways to cross the chasm to find agreement. However, some of the bridges are treacherous, some are one-way zip-lines that cannot be traversed back to your side. Both sides want to lower taxes, neither should and specifically not lowering taxes to those same men we bailed out financially over the past couple of years. Both sides wish to lower the deficit and do away with deficit spending. Republicans and Democrats both wish to make cuts in essential programs Medicare and Education specifically. (I would include Social Security, but that dinosaur isn't long for this world the way we spend now so no use trying to save it.)

Where can the sides safely agree? How about a simple act? Civility. Etiquette. Reason. Fair political discourse. These are simple things, second nature. You're taught in first grade or even before that "if you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything." Now supposedly, as adults, we have learned how to criticize each other constructively. This allows us to change our views, our actions, and our beliefs to better suit the purpose that each side wishes to achieve. The problem is that no criticism of the past year has been constructive. I for one never offer any, preferring to criticize John Boehner spray tans rather than policy faults, but I also am not a US Congressman and therefore have no higher standard or responsibility thrust upon me. We can only hope that at some point both sides realize that they are adults and their petty rhetoric, ridiculous stalling, and immature finger pointing are childish at best and destructive at worst. Or they can hope again that the Taco Bell Supreme Court manages to make another idiotic ruling that makes their year look productive. Either way, I'll be delightfully disappointed.

The Gift of Eternal Nerdiness

2010-12-24T21:58:00.000-06:00

I try not to be too personal in my writing. Even when I write about myself or about my experiences, I prefer to look at them from a detached perspective. Strange enough, when I write about fictional situations I may be more honest than when writing about myself. To be honest, I don't think that I personally am very interesting, but rather that the people around me are the ones behind the wheel while I offer commentary in my Howard Cosell-voice like the Asian brother in Better Off Dead. Given my own actions to end up in situations unfamiliar to other people, this might just be me trying to downplay my own originality. However, I read other people's stories, and in them I find that perhaps my story is not unique but perhaps a grotesque form of another.

This is the original post by Joe Posnanski, who I would have had the pleasure of seeing on a panel last month if Washington University didn't have twenty identical buildings and my roommates wouldn't have broken my Internet. Joe is one of my favorite writers, but is in all ways not like me at all. He's a journalist, he meets deadlines, and as he mentions often in this story lacks imagination in the sense of fantasy and science fiction. I am a man who hates deadlines and deals so much in imagination that his real life always pales in comparison to the worlds I create within my head. But this story is familiar to me because it is my story, except I was the nine year old child.

My parents are pragmatic people, at least from my view. My father worked over thirty years as a teacher. He worked late nights coaching Junior Varsity and Junior High sports, putting on musicals, putting together a yearbook, time keeping basketball games, and grading papers. I don't want to make it seem that my dad wasn't there when I was young, but I seem to remember quite a few nights where he wasn't. This isn't typical complaints as you will see. But if you have six kids someone has to put food on the table, and teaching by itself will never do that in America. Then again, he was there almost every night to tuck us in to bed; we never do anything quite like the normal family

My mother taught as well, but not that much. She occasionally did work when I was young. I remember her teaching GED classes before I was in school. Just like my sister, she had six kids and worked hard every day to be the best damn mother she could. Given how we turned out, omitting professionally, I would say she did a fantastic job, but most sons look at their mothers with such praise. Both her and my dad have incredible senses of humor and are incredibly social people, but I don't think they ever really were the social creatures their children became. The funny thing was I think they raised better friends than I will ever find.

My parents raised their kids and set them on straight paths. We all went to college. The eldest children graduated and moved on. The middle ones took a while and found their callings or at least a place to call home for a while. Ryan and I are still stuck in interesting quagmires, certainly for different reasons. None of us are bad people, though we all have our faults. As I write this, I really have no idea how our parents did this. I don't remember them ever really getting angry with me or teaching me, although as I get older I can hear sighs across the state. Then, I remember subtle things that others wouldn't notice. My parents wouldn't let me sleep with the lights on, even if I was terrified of the dark. They got angry with me for getting a ride from a "stranger" once. It was my brother's aide. They didn't make me get a job in high school, because I was a decent kid who didn't kill them financially. They sure as hell "implied" that I needed one once I became a worthless leech in college. These are small things that don't really mean much to me, but just simple parenting tips for everyone: don't talk to strangers, make something of yourself, conquer your fears, you pussy (Don't curse). Then, I think back to the one thing I'll never forget about my parents: they read to me.

My parents read to me every night for so long that I don't remember them starting or stopping. I could be laying in a bunkbed right now listening to the stories with my brother. Particularly, I remember them reading me four books, "The Hobbit" and "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy. Back in their frivolous days (if my parents ever did have such), my dad belonged to a science fiction book club. I remember this distinctly because science fiction books will always have distinct and completely moronic looking covers. Usually, half-naked men hold aloft swords while three-quarters naked damsels cling to their massive calves while fire, brimstone, and hydras dominate the background. None of these books were suitable for children, and I was an above-average reader by this point so children's books were my domain for personal reading. So my parents started with the Hobbit, an afternoon stroll of a book to start off my science fiction adventure.

*I remember listening to tapes in seventh grade on the bus, and this album while reading "The Hobbit"

**Kinda of like how Michael Gambon's Dumbledore seems to be a dick, but then we learn that maybe this is the correct way to view Dumbledore, as a dick with good intentions.

Every night, my pragmatic parents would read a chapter of a book to me, and take every ounce of pragmatism away from us. We became part of the world for a while, immersed in the story, so much that I can sing the dwarves song about breaking Bilbo's plates. But I don't remember my parents singing, and the books are full of songs. Maybe my father, ever a closeted poet, read the lines poetically, making the Elven songs even more somber. Maybe my mother actually sang them, because she's the one who would. Or they both snag; people who have a dance night probably sing as well.

However, this is where the story departs from Harry Potter. After the Hobbit, there is no more happiness, no more jest. In all honesty, it is a tale of despair, failure and struggle until the ring is destroyed. The wonder of the story of elves, dwarves, hobbits, and wizards has all come and gone, and now it is a war. I was always fascinated by war as a child: plastic army men, color maps in encyclopedias, gray faces on PBS, and now good and evil. Now, I have no fascination, because that same imagination that can picture orcs carrying hobbits to Saruman can picture Japanese soldiers carrying women through Nanking, the Russians in Germany or Americans committing the same atrocities in Vietnam. It's sad to think of the innocence that is lost to us and the wonderment to be found in fiction.

With every chapter the chances became bleaker even as the destination got closer, evil got stronger as good strives farther. I think sometimes this was my parents gift to me, not the creativity. I think the book teaches you that the right thing becomes harder as you try to achieve it. It's so true, that it is a generic saying. The road traveled had been walked upon and paved by better men, but none had ever done what he was doing. However, these were things I picked up later when I read the books. At the time, it was wonderment, sadness, elation, and confusion (There is a lot of stuff in those books).

I think about Christmas and don't really find my gifts to have been memorable (because they were toys and toys have expiration dates), except my dinosaur that was cruelly kidnapped by my nephews and will be repossessed at a proper time. Birthday gifts are the same; I just grow less enamored with material wealth by the day. But when I sit and listen to music, drift off into daydreams, suffer from delusions of grandeur, and put pen to paper, I realize that my parents reading to me was the greatest gift a child could ever receive.

My dearest possession sits ten feet from me right now: three books my parents bought me for my sixteenth birthday. From the outside, they appear to be in pristine condition. Truthfully, the pages are coming away from the binding; perhaps, I shouldn't have slept with the books in my bed or read them so often. I'm sure there are stains from water, beer, or snow that blotch some of the pages, but the books are there, a permanent reminder of the gifts my parents gave me and of the wonderful parents I was blessed to have. For that, I will be proud for every day that I live to be called a nerd and thankful that at least in one aspect of my life, I am one of the luckiest men alive (despite having to share that luck with five others).

The Beauty in Sadness: The AirborneToxic Event DVD "All I Ever Wanted"

2010-12-23T13:38:00.000-06:00

I know my obsession with this band can be overbearing at times. Like me comparing them to a woman that you wish to spend the rest of your life with. However, given my obsessions with other things: women, beer, sports, and trivia mostly, I find that this may be my most healthy obsession. So here's a review of the DVD "All I Ever Wanted", a concert video filmed at the Walt Disney Concert Hall in Los Angeles.

Let's start by exaggerating: this was the most overblown rock concert ever. The Calder Quartet , bassist Noah Harmon, and violinist Anna Bulbrook give the concert an operatic or classical feel. Mikel Jollett makes it feel like a lonely lounge act. Steven Chen's guitar and Daren Taylor's drums make it a rock band. Together, who knows where the act falls? I could tell you that they are a rock band, but so much of it is undefinable. Sure, they may have the instruments, but they don't exactly hit the songs as hard as other indie acts. It's not a matter of passion, but rather just the feel of the songs loaded with melancholy. Jollett despite hundreds of shows, still sees himself as a writer, and perhaps he is right (He confesses that he can't read music, but admittedly has an ear for it).

The concert both contains a DVD and CD for the concert. The DVD is far more disconnected, providing back-story for both the band and the preparations for the concert. Being a one-album (with only ten songs) band putting together a seventy minute show with an intermission requires some additions. Eight of the self-titled debut album's tracks feature, but they fill out the set with other bonus tracks and covers. Guest musicians pay homage to the band's Los Angeles roots, and give a playful feel to a concert that could have been overly dramatic given the classical feel of the concert hall.

The opening allows the Calder Quartet to show their talents, which maybe someone who sees them doing shows with a rock band would automatically and wrongly assume were lesser. The band's entry leads to a transition into "Wishing Well", arguably the saddest song off of the album. Following a song about a lost woman with a song about a relationship past it's expiration date might bring the concert down, but it's expected and the beat of "This Losing" is anything but sad. This might be how I feel specifically about this show: epically depressed but dancing inside. The next song continues the sentiment almost driving home the loneliness of a man not alone, but together with someone who cared for him little.

The next song, "The Book of Love" is my favorite cover on the new album. Personally, the perfection of Peter Gabriel's cover of this song by the Magnetic Fields is hard to beat. The song's use in the finale of the original Scrubs was so perfect that it almost brought me to tears. This cover sounds much more like the original, but unlike the Magnetic Fields cynical love songs seems deeper because of Mikel's story about singing it to his grandmother. It's simply a beautiful song, when the person singing it isn't jaded about love. I would highly recommend it on my mix-tape for the hopeless romantic (soon to come, but not too far off of my breakup mix-tape). The tone of the show changes deeply on this song, as the next song "Something New" drives home "the hopeless romantic who wants to dance" feel this band has perfected.

"Duet" is one of the other new songs that the band had worked into the tour, but not the album. "Duet" is a loose term in this case, as Anna's voice rarely dominates Mikel's. Again, this might just be an implied emotion as it is written from Mikel's perspective. The whole song is something I've always thought wasn't sung about enough. Lots have songs have been written about hating a lost love, or still loving them. But why not write about a lost love that just is lost. The whole song is a man saying that losing a woman was the best thing that ever happened, even if he sees her from afar and wishes that weren't the case. Painting love in black and white is never the best way to project what actually happens in most cases.

The next two songs are out of place in a concert hall. Each is a lounge song in essence. The first "Gasoline" is teeming with jealousy, the second "Happiness is Overrated" with the regret of a missed chance. The concert which was before dominated by melancholy, now has become playful, almost exuberant despite the continued theme of failed relationships. This sets up well for the song after the intermission, when the band walks in with an entire high school marching band. The choice of having a marching band behind the short and sweet "Does This Mean You Are Moving On?" is excellent, both logistically and aesthetically. This is the album's most fun song despite the depressing background, it demands the greatest amount of exuberance from the band, and having the whole marching band performing adds to the whimsy of the songs situation. Personally, I hate the next song "Rock and Roll Radio", but I understand its choice for these same reasons.

show's beginning, but I would say that the songs aesthetically improve from here on out as well.

Next is the always creepy "Goodbye Horses", if you don't know why, then you probably never watched "Silence of the Lambs". Luckily, for those of you who can't listen to then song without imagining transvestite serial killers making lady suits or Jason Mewes tucking his penis between his legs, the song itself isn't particularly bothersome here. It leads into "All I Ever Wanted", as much a love song as any this band has ever sang. The song again isn't perfect, but when is love? The implications of telling a lover that he/she's all you ever wanted and that not being enough are perhaps the scariest to anyone in a relationship. The song reeks of desperation, but instead of the others before it ends with the relationship together instead of irreparable. "Innocence", destroys all that this accomplishes, by bringing the wrecked man back to the forefront, so that we can see how fleeting the happiness is between the sorrows.

To end the show, they bring out some young LA girls to sing "Missy" with Mikel and then everyone joins them to finish the show. Missy is the cute ending that shows that this band isn't all doom and gloom. The roar of the crowd as the girls join in is as perfect as a live album can get. I've seen them live before and really the show doesn't match the sadness of the lyrics. The DVD amplifies this by zooming in on the strings and Mikel's expression. Live, it seems much more detached, and this song embodies more of the spirit of the band.

Two thoughts always come up, when I listen to this band. I always laugh when the album is referred to as misogynistic. Of course, it is misogynistic, it's a breakup album. Why would someone write something positive about a woman who cheated on him and then rubbed it in his face (as the songs imply)? It in no way implies that women are worse than men, but in this particular case the women tend to be worse. Although, "Innocence", "Something New", and "Does this Mean You're Moving On?" all imply that the man is just as much at fault or worse in the case of "Something New".

Lastly, this album has been my companion over the past few weeks; certainly outplaying the Band of Horses, Arcade Fire, and Murder by Death albums which have dominated my summer hours. The reasoning is simply due to a need for melancholic aural relief. The lyrics themselves are incredibly downbeat, depressing and hopeless in many ways. However, the delivery both Mikel's voice and the instrumental work of Anna, Noah, Steven, and Daren (plus the Calder Quartet and the many guest musicians) makes this album and the band sufficiently fulfilling as if they understand the emptiness that exists inside and fill it with beauty that tears the soul as well as uplifts. It's a mixed bag of emotions for me, and for a man who rarely expresses his emotions, verbally or physically, it exists as a catharsis that perhaps is only matched by sports in my life. Really, that's extreme value for a DVD/CD you bought yourself for Christmas.

If Life Had a Soundtrack: The Breakup Mix-Tape

2010-12-23T01:34:00.001-06:00

The next few posts will be personal ones. I've been a wreck for a while (from that time I didn't do my homework on the first day of third grade setting up a precedent of failure to the Present), so my writing absence may have been noticeable. However, I never stopped writing; I stopped posting. Rambles tend to occur when I am slightly buzzed and fully emotional, two things which rarely occurred during my life (implying that I probably skipped the slightly buzzed stage) and recently have become common ground. They will be a series of posts essentially connected about my two indefinite loves, my family (obvious) and music (This one is more of a dirty little affair).

I'm gonna be writing pretty often in the next few weeks, because simply I have no idea what else to do with my time (Work?). I have literally watched every episode of Chuck a dozen times, I have wasted over one hundred hours in bars the past month, and I really don't know anyone in this city who shares any interest of mine outside of drinking. I am going to spend the next 23 days resolving my existential crisis by writing, playing sports, and enforcing a state of cold, bitter sobriety. Then, I'm going to fall off of the wagon partially, just for the laughs.

We'll start with my typical Thursday format, and bring back an idea I started earlier in the year after the jump

The Breakup Two-Disc Mix-Tape

I have been channeling my inner Rob Gordon for years, a loathsome man whose inner monologue addresses him as Rob addresses the viewer. This idea is most likely inspired by High Fidelity and says enough about how I feel about the movie. In my eyes, it is the story of a narcissist who loathes himself, and who better to represent me that a self-loathing narcissist as there is something to writing things that only make you happy that you personally think very lowly of. Hilariously, despite the subject, this will be the most comedic and irreverent writing I will do this week.

I'm using a unique pseudo-psychology format, which some of you might recognize but no need for you to gloat. Then, I'll give you a few of my personal favorites.

Denial

You're down in the dumps, you can't believe what just happened. You're so in love; you're an idiot. No, it never happened; someday, he or she will be back. You look through my music catalog for something to ease the pain:

~~Taylor Swift -~~
No, bad bad fingers, don't you dare type in Taylor Swift. Dammit!

The Rolling Stones - "Beast of Burden"

Okay, you are obviously crazy. You picked a song about being used, that's good; there is progression towards anger. What was that, all you want is to make love to him/her? Okay, next song, this denial is gonna hurt some.

Carla Bruni-"Quelqu’un M’a Dit"
The French know their love songs. This isn't a French lady singing, but she is their first lady. So, I guess her French qualifications are passable. More pressing, she's hot and for the men, the first way past this step: go somewhere with hot women and lots of them. Sounds shallow, but really one men's dress shirt and guitar and look what she did there. Significant other? Who?

What? You just listened to the song? You heard it on (500) Days of Summer, when they are still together. You have at some point become lost in translation; it's over, none of this half-hearted maybe bullshit.

Joshua Radin and Patty Griffin - 'You've Got Growing Up to Do"
Here's what I like to call a lyrical transvestite; it may appear to be a love song, but this is a breakup song for the hopeless romantic with a giant bulge of denial. It sings to you about weddings and the future and you being an idiot fail to notice the whole premise. He's calling his ex immature, and how many times has maturity issues ever resolved itself romantically in a happy way. Romeo and Juliet? Anybody who marries someone drastically younger? Anyone married in their teens? [Insert Name] and [Insert Name]. (Giving personal examples would be hilarious, but slightly petty)

Jack Johnson - "Flake"
Progression is the key to any process. If you don't move onto the next step, there is no way you can get over the relationship. This song is the bridge song to anger. You need to hear this song to get past denial, and of my collection this is the song that does it. Funny enough, it devolves into a song for step three, but you aren't there yet. After all, "maybe pretty much always means no".

Anger

Damien Rice- "Rootless Tree"
Now, we're getting somewhere. Remember the key to anger is to minimize the time in this step. Quick songs that cut deep and make you incredibly sad, as opposed to angry. Sadness is the key to the next two steps, so start with Damien Rice. You may even skip bargaining and head straight to depression, but don't combine anger and depression because that most likely results in violence or masochism.

Cold War Kids - "Hang Me Up To Dry"
Okay, screw you: I'm cranking the bass up a notch and doing whatever the hell I please. That will show you.

Beck - "Lost Cause"
What the hell did I see in you? Okay, maybe I'm just playing this song because it's depressing. No, I'm playing it because you suck. (Did I tell you that during the anger phrase you lose the ability to make complex sentences, draw conclusions, think creatively, and reason). This is a beautiful song, and the beauty should help you progress to bargaining since your booze is running out.

She Wants Revenge - "True Romance"
If you are a man, do not watch this video. It will convince you that hot women find their average neighbors attractive and will set you down a road of delusion which will ruin your romantic life more than your old flame. Here's a key part of anger: combining it with denial to make your relationship seem implausible. This song merely makes it seem as though the relationship was hollow. This is fantastic as a key part of acceptance is acknowledging the absence of such love. But there you go again, bargaining for more when it is clearly dead. You've progressed to the next step in grieving.

Bargaining

Paolo Nutini - "Last Request"
So you managed to avoid a restraining order being placed against you, congratulations you may now experience the sudden urge to ask for your lost love back. This is that put into song. Will it work? Possibly. You might be at the same step in the process. Most likely, they are somewhere ten miles past acceptance, and you are only striking for pity here. But don't let it dissuade you, you want to fail miserably in this stage. So, "One last time, let's go there!"

The Temptations- "Ain't Too Proud to Beg"

You failed miserably didn't you? Awwww, that's special. Now, is the nadir. Beg, beg for your life. Offer a kidney, your collection of Magic the Gathering cards, your virginity, your youngest sibling, and, most importantly, your dignity. Hopefully, like the Temptations, you will have friends backing you up, because this is pitiful.

Band of Horses - "no one's gonna love you"

Now's a good time for a backhanded compliment. Imply both that he/she will never be happy, and insist that you are the love of their life. Combine the statements, and see why you're here in the first place? If you feel incredibly bad, you're on your way to depression. Kudos, pardner.

Snow Patrol - "You Could Be Happy"
Insisting that happiness is directly in correlation to your relationship is a clever plan. Except you've already established that this isn't true when you broke up.

Rhett Miller - "I Need to Know Where I Stand"
At some point, probably drunk and lost you will demand satisfaction and answers. They will certainly result in you getting the latter and skipping the former. Welcome to depression, shockingly an upturn from your sad and disturbing groveling.

Depression

Coldplay - "Warning Sign"
"AND THE TRUTH IS...I MISS YOU!!!!!!!!!!!" (Sobs into unwashed disgusting t-shirt that was left behind.) Okay, this is slightly pitiful, too.

The Airborne Toxic Event - "Sometime Around Midnight"
Really, any Airborne song will do (I'll expand upon this in my next post), because somebody did a number on him. This one is more appropriate for those whose ex is far into acceptance and has moved on to jealousy inspiration, which is the first step of the "Vindictive Coping Process" which I teach to every person I meet. They are probably just dangling eye candy out there, so you can be pissed off. However, the jokes on them because you've already been pissed off. Now, you are being an adult and finding the nearest bottle of whiskey/warm milk (I forgot to ask my sister about how non-drinkers deal with breakups.), turn this song up and hold up your middle finger to a complete stranger. Now, your ex thinks you are deranged.

Soul Asylum - "Runaway Train"

If you are depressed and you don't play this song, you are faking. Who said I'm not melodramatic?

Old 97s - "Color of a Lonely Heart is Blue"
I'm a dick. It's my fault. Look what I have done. Depression mixed with acceptance. We're almost done, liver. Only one more hill to climb and song to listen to. Like the Airborne Toxic Event, Old 97s have a plethora of breakup songs at their disposal. They just seem to be more playful and happy about it. (The best part about the above video is that a man proposed to his girlfriend, and this song followed that up. That's something that would happen to me.

Okkervil River - "Calling and Not Calling Your Ex"
Here we are: the grand finale of depression. They have moved on; you are still a mess. Here is the song to teach you a lesson. There were good times, maybe you shouldn't have done what you did, but in the end are you both better off. Yes. Welcome to Acceptance, where you can now be a dick and move on.

Acceptance

The Black Keys - "Next Girl"
Now, officially there are no rebound relationships, you are clear. State this emphatically by hooking up with someone not even remarkably like your ex. If you are working on my Vindictive Coping process, make this significant other more attractive, wealthy, and/or cool. If you are a reasonable human being, just pick someone who fits better to your whims.

Cee Lo Green - "Fuck you"
You are not a reasonable person, sing this karaoke style at the bar he/she frequents. Laugh maniacally after you say key lines. Make out with the closest attractive stranger. If possible, make it rain.

Murder By Death- "As Long As There Is Whiskey in the World"
You are a reasonable man, but you have a drinking habit. Have a rousing good time, and toast to all the women who didn't work out and continue to disappoint you. Drink away the heartache and drink away the girls.

Bon Iver- "For Emma"
You don't drink; she walked all over you. Just play Bon Iver for a while and you'll be at peace. Do not grow a beard, wear plaid, and move to a cabin in Wisconsin to record a album.

Eric Hutchinson - "All Over Now"
Dance to this song with your new love because the song feels happy, and laugh at the foolishness of the past four steps. Be prepared to do it again at some point, but know that now you have an outline and template for dealing with the worst.

And if this didn't help, find your own songs and just deal with it however you please. Just try to keep the pathetic parts to yourself and perhaps you may emerge with both happiness and dignity, which I always seem to misplace around bargaining.

My personal favorites for no particular reason that anyone knows of:
Old 97s- "Melt Show"
Neko Case - "People Got a Lotta Nerve"

The Patron Saint of Broken Men

2010-11-23T00:26:00.000-06:00

Note: The country's politics are a stone's throw away from being completely batshit crazy. So for a week, I will substitute one of my short stories. I'll preface this by warning you: it's not pro-God. Me and him/her/it have had our bouts over the year, but I'm pretty sure the majority of my problems are highly genetic. See my face/general disposition. I'm not particularly fond of this one (as a writer I feel this is one of the shitty ones you keep to yourself), but the last line: that is my opus.

"The bourbon tastes like dishwater."

The bartender stared him down, contemplating for a second how ludicrous the last statement was.

"Dishwater? That's certainly a new one."

He looked down to his glass and back to the bartender and stared hard. The taste just wasn't there; every drink was turning him down this road. All of the feeling had left his bones, and the senses had numbed. There was no pain, no hot, no cold. He smelled, tasted, and heard nothing. His voice spoke words but they were not his own. Only, the burning remained; the fire inside that could never be squelched. But he'd made his decision and lied down on the tracks and let the train run over him. His non-existence was his only tie to reality.

God had failed him in his time of need, but no. There was no God that intervened and chose your path. A man chose it, and the choices that were not his belonged to fate, or genetics in his case. He was born too weak, too frail to handle the expectations thrust upon him. Where other men had looks or money to turn to, he was blessed only with his ability to understand, to comfort, to please, and to serve. But if there was a God, he had a sick sense of humor.

That is what he was born to do, unconditionally relinquish what made him human: his free will. He was God's pawn, and doing so reduced to two moves: sacrificial offerings or suicidal attacks. First, he gave God his ambition; traded it for a mere pittance of the happiness of another. Then, he gave away his pride; for God felt it was holding him back. Then, God demanded his love, but found that another had already stolen it. Thus, God was angry and rejected his son for his perfidy.

But the son acquiesced to God's every whim and found himself a miserable wreck of a man; he was broken and no one could understand why. The bartender so kindly asked, "Why?" Of course, she referred to the bourbon and not the man's problem.

"I gave away my life for the lives of us all."

Sure this was overly-dramatic, and completely ridiculous. Who was this man to compare his sacrifice to those that had come before him? Great men they were. Racists, philanderers, homophobes, popes: they were all scum. God had favored them, that's why they were saints. Not because they were lifted upon the shoulders of the damned, but because the damned believed they were worthy of such horrible acquiescence. No, this man believed he had done greater, given up all that was good for him so that others could live their lives unimpeded by his presence. He was a blip on the radar, not one worth considering and this was how his life was to work out.

Then, why was he so down? He knew this eventuality, even though his life had been wonderful for a short time, he always thought back to Malcolm Reynolds and Anara talking upon the Serenity.

"Mal, you don't have to die alone"
"Everybody dies alone."

This was his fate; he was not a saint by any means, but he had a purpose. He was to live out his life as the sacrificial lamb, always giving everything as nothing was returned. Then, when he found himself at the gates, he would respond:

"I have done all that you asked."

God would respond, "Not enough."

And as his glass of dishwater emptied, so did his soul. He was worse than dead, but still had many years to live. He was a ghost dominated by the emptiness inside him. A friend patted him on the back, and drunkenly shouted, "How are you, old man!"

God snickered; the drunk saw what he did, a man older than his years, older than the receding hairline, older than the liver that had seen a lifetime's degree of degradation, older than his weak heart. "I am nothing," the broken man responded and the drunk just laughed. He laughed because he was care-free; he had everything from a drink to money to love. And what was left for the stranger? Pity. He pitied the poor fool, alone upon the barstool which was his only support in this world. He had a wife, children, and a job; he drank away the doldrums of life. The stranger drank in its sorrow.

The stranger did have one gift left though. As he had nothing, he could give all he owned. God envied this. He had everything and could give nothing good. Suffering was his gift, ignorance was his advantage, and damnation was his weapon. There was only the system he created, bound by laws and only changeable on a mass scale. If humans neglected each other, he would make them care. If they hated each other, he would make them fight. If they loved each other, he would make them die. Marvelously he balanced the horrible perfection he had created in humanity.

The man continued out of the bar, and stumbled home. His brain washed with thoughts of what was, but it was all an illusion: tricks made to make him submissive, to abandon his will. He thought to that smile and saw the devil in it finally, but it was too late, the devil had his way. He found death a likely outcome, but not willing him to join do soon. So he walked and walked, constantly trying to wonder how he came here. He found an answer in the heavens. It was cruel, inevitable fate that led him here. Genetics, instincts, and habits all bred to make him life's sacrificial lamb.

As he laid down on the cold pavement, he knew what would happen to himself. He was to become a saint in his own right, a patron to all of those who like him were born without hope. Born to serve a God they did not know, and did not care for. They were created to bring happiness into this world and leave none for themselves and thusly God created balance. These men and women would die cold and alone without the rest of humanity, but in their wake would leave a warmth that God himself only had power to destroy. But he was not made to die like this; the cars never came and the man just laid staring up into the abyss of space and time.

There he found peace, for space shared his soul's great emptiness. The bourbon forced him back to Earth, back to the life he was familiar with, and he stood up again. But no longer did his feet work, he was dead except for his steady heart which cheated his soul. It still beat with the same vigor as it had for the man long ago when he was young, naive, and gifted. Now, he was sodden and broken and the heart kept him going, but not for him. He left his own good back in the past, and now was determined to find others for his was forsaken. Yet he still felt the burning, and it turned his insides to ash: hot and failing by the moment. Once everything had burned away he would be free, but that was never possible. Even the greatest flame leaves some ash, and that ash was his burden to carry forever.

God laughed at this; a broken man concerned with the past. The past to God was nothing. The gift of being infallible is even your mistakes are great victories. However, this was God's mistake. The stranger heard his laughter, for the only thing that remained for him was God. At that moment, God hesitated; his greatest admirer and his most loyal servant was lost. The inevitability of his fate at once became clear, and the stranger realized that he didn't give a fuck.

There was no God, but two Satans. Perhaps one disguised it better, but each had the same purpose: to destroy what made the stranger human. Whether the devil did it with a woman or God did it with indifference, each showed no concern for him, so why should he concern himself with the rest of man. Sheep didn't need a shepherd; they needed a wolf. And from that moment the stranger was no longer a saint, he was a sinner. He was not the patron saint for the broken; he was a man of sin and the one who would lead them to earthly happiness. When God judged them, they would respond:

"We acted with morality and righteousness and you cast us into oblivion. We expect you fully to respond the same, when we come to you as righteous men and women who acted upon good will as opposed to your will."

And in that way, hell was paved with the souls of good men, and the broken man walked alone as he was bound faithfully into the maws of fate. However, he had not created this feeling and therefore was unworthy of such worship. Being a good man, he relinquished all credit to the one who had broken him and represented the breaking that each and every one of us would experience. In that way, a women, not the stranger, became the patron saint of broken men. Who else would broken men pray to, but an unfeeling woman unconcerned with their prayers.

A Solution to the Conference Problem in College Football

2010-11-09T23:06:00.003-06:00

Sure, it's starting to get old. A SEC fan gets in your face, angered almost enough to come to blows. How dare you say Boise State deserves the chance to play for a title, even if they have their fourth undefeated regular season in five years. A Missouri fan complains that Iowa State or Kansas gets to go to a better bowl game despite losing to Mizzou and having a worse record. The complaints get louder and louder: corruption, insanity, and overall destruction of "college" football.

The Problems

The constant background noise you hear is the shuffling of the athletic conferences, specifically Bowl Subdivision conferences. This shuffling is a byproduct of the BCS. Big Ten teams don't have championship games, and scheduling sometimes makes it so the two best teams do not meet. Modern conferences don't have co-champions. Boise State plays in a conference of nobodies and Nevada, not to mention the cost and toil of having to fly to Hawaii every other year (Or any of Hawaii games for that matter). BYU is going independent because their brand is worth more than the entirety of the Mountain West. Utah and Colorado are joining the Pac-10, because Utah caught a shooting star and they figured Boulder had better weed than the current members. Nebraska and the Big Ten have some mutual love as Nebraska is a historically powerful football program and the Big Ten also consists of an extremely beneficial academic consortium. Yes, I just talked about academic benefits as a motivation for college athletic policy.

The SEC cares little for the expansion, because simply they're better than everyone else. The ACC jumped the gun and now finds itself a (recently) mediocre football conference. Now, the Big XII is doomed, because it lacks both equality and the same academic benefits. It was and always will be a marriage of convenience, where Texas acts as an abusive spouse. The Big East is now desperately trying not to become a non-BCS conference and failing miserably, even trying to add another eastern team...Texas Christian?

None of these changes will fix anything, especially for the fans. They want a playoff, but is that fair to the players? Adding a 16 team playoff to the current system, means the champions will play 16 games, and subjecting amateur athletes to such punishment isn't extremely fair, especially to these athletes wishing to pursue careers in the NFL. I will acknowledge Missouri high schools currently play 15 for champions, but a great percentage of the kids will never play again and most won't take the punishment that a college athlete gets in five games. But every sport has a playoff, even the lower divisions of college football and it works. They also have shorter schedules, which I'll get around to.

A Solution

My solution is outlandish and perhaps worth loathing. An SEC fan would hate it, but then again why doesn't said fan have a rooting interest in a team rather than a conference. The solution is eliminate the conferences and run college football independently of the other sports.

The conferences should remain for the other sports and the academic partnerships that currently exist. The money generated by football can also be used to support other sports, in fact the budget should not even be changed except for one matter: money that previously went outwards will now come in. How about eliminating the bowls? Sure, you may hate the idea, but how does a corporation making money off of amateur athletes feel to you? Wouldn't the money be better served going to the programs for which the athletes play? However, if you want to keep the bowls, go ahead. Just choose from the eighty-eight schools not playing in the playoffs, or wait to pick until the third round and have your pick of everyone but the last eight teams.

My solution not only eliminates the Boise State/BCS argument, it eliminates the BCS/Playoff argument and lowers the travel costs that major conferences are not taking on to form these super-conferences. By establishing regional conferences, it allows teams to budget better and eliminates the Hawaii problem that small schools like Utah State and Idaho are currently dealing with (at least better than a 13th game).

Before I detail the new conferences, I would like to make some notes on scheduling and a decision I made on who should be in this group. Every team has twelve game schedules, and each one can schedule one FCS opponent. Some would like these games eliminated, but in reality these games are a major boost to FCS athletics who get major cash influxes to support their entire program.

I propose 12 10-team conferences with everyone's ugly step-sister Notre Dame remaining independent. If I eliminate the independence of Notre Dame, I feel it's necessary to increase the division to 130 teams. Essentially, this means promotion of teams from two football weak areas, the Northeast and Northwest. I'll go over the Notre Dame independent scenario, since it is the most logical.

Southeast	SE Coastal	Sun Belt	Carolinas	Northeast	Great Lakes
Alabama	Florida	South Alabama	South Carolina	Boston College	Pittsburgh
LSU	Florida State	UAB	Clemson	Temple	Penn State
Auburn	Miami (FL)	Arkansas State	North Carolina	Navy	Michigan
Ole Miss	South Florida	Western Kentucky	NC State	Connecticut	Mich St.
Miss St.	Florida Atlantic	Tulane	East Carolina	Syracuse	Cincinnati
Tennessee	Florida Int.	Louisiana Tech	Wake Forest	Buffalo	Ohio State
Kentucky	Georgia	Louisiana-Monroe	Maryland	Army	Indiana
Vanderbilt	Georgia Tech	Louisiana-Lafayette	Virginia	West Virginia	Purdue
Southern Miss	Troy	Memphis	Duke	Rutgers	Wisconsin
Arkansas	Central Florida	Middle Tennessee	Virginia Tech	Marshall	Northwestern

Let's go over the "eastern" half of the country first. Obviously, the Southeast still remains the strongest of the conferences. Even without Florida and Georgia and the addition of a mid-major Southern Miss. The depth is still good. The Sun Belt is basically a conference made to fill in the gaps, since none of these teams are good enough to even compete with the other southeastern teams. However, I threw this out in Florida. The talent exists to negate this advantage much faster, and FAU and FIU will get better every year because of it. This is the almost perfect conference 1)Travel is confined to three states; 2) UF, FSU, UM, GTech, and UGA are solid top half 3)The bottom half given economic opportunity and a solid recruitment base will be quickly competitive. The Carolinas grouping has the same advantages minus the elite football programs.

Now we are approaching the tough part. The Northeast/Mid-Atlantic doesn't have a strong football base. The best way to fix this is to have the teams masquerading as I-AA programs step up (UMass, Villanova specifically). But that would only allow a preservation of the Big Ten and weaken the overall quality so I'll show that later. This conference is traditionally weak, but with a AQ for the winner and the possibility of success for the other teams; it provides ground for growth among programs that have lacked lately. The Great Lakes is the Big Ten+Pitt and Cincinnati-Minnesota/Iowa/Illinois. In football terms, that currently goes as a small loss as Iowa is a near-elite program, but Pitt and Cincy have more traditional strong markets to grow within.

MAC	Midwest	Southwest	Mountain West	Pacific NW	Pacific South
C. Michigan	Illinois	Texas	Utah	Washington	Arizona
E. Michigan	Louisville	TCU	Nevada	Wash. St.	Arizona St.
W. Michigan	Iowa	Texas A&M	BYU	Wyoming	San Diego St.
Akron	Iowa St.	Texas Tech	Tulsa	Boise St.	California
Bowling Green	Missouri	SMU	UTEP	Idaho	Stanford
Miami U.	Nebraska	Baylor	Utah State	Oregon	UCLA
Toledo	Kansas	Rice	North Texas	Oregon St.	USC
Ohio	Kansas St.	Houston	New Mexico	Air Force	Fresno St.
Kent State	Minnesota	Oklahoma	New Mexico St.	Colorado St.	San Jose St.
Ball State	No. Illinois	Oklahoma St.	UNLV	Colorado	Hawaii

Obviously, the west, being more sparsely populated both with people and d-I schools, is going to be more problematic. There is only one small travel conference out west, the Southwest. Even worse is the problem that is the MAC. There are sixteen teams in the current MAC, and to this day not one school has stepped forward to control that conference. Therefore, no team really would be able to even compete, even on Indiana's level, in the Big Ten. So like the Sun Belt, the MAC continues to hold teams not worthy of other conferences. Like Troy, Northern Illinois is a sacrificial lamb in this policy. Geographically, this is much better. It eliminates Hawaii-Louisiana Tech road trips, and counters the Hawaii problem by adding it to schools with higher athletic budgets and presenting opportunity for Hawaii and their opponents to make more TV money from those games.

Overall, this new alignment and playoff produces obvious winners and losers.
Winners: All non-BCS powers. Nebraska, Iowa, BC, West Virginia
Losers Initially Due to Superior Competition: San Jose St., SD State, Hawaii, Troy, No. Illinois, Idaho, Cincinnati (?), Rice, So. Miss

Essentially this alignment will produce a regular season and tournament like college basketball. The MAC and Sun Belt would most likely only have one automatic qualifier and they will be seeded low. The Southeast would have four and most will be seeded high. If you think this plan would help my team, I think if Missouri played in that conference they would finish behind Nebraska and Iowa, and most likely be first team out-last team in or around there. A playoff would usually consist of the top-30 ranked teams, and the Sun Belt and MAC champs. Notre Dame would most likely get in with a 9-3 record at least, and an 8-4 record on occasion. Oregon and Auburn would still win their conferences and be seeded first, getting an easier draw.

Now the main argument against a playoff is the assumption that teams will schedule patsies for their three out-of-conference games. Now, I already said each team should/can schedule a I-AA/FCS team. Notre Dame will still be playing Mich, Mich St. Purdue, BC, USC, Stanford, and Navy. As the conferences even out, this will become less of a problem. Also, losses to a good program won't look as bad as near wins against bad ones. So Va Tech losing to Boise is a non-factor, but Mizzou almost losing to San Diego State would look bad (That is if SDSU is actually bad, they might not be). Twelve games for the regular season, with most teams playing 12-14 and the better teams playing 15-17. Remember, the better teams should have four or five game a season where their starters don't play full games, including their opening playoff game against a weak opponent, so the playing time for individual starters should be no more for a championship team and a 13-14 game season for a "cinderella." Now, the wear and tear might be a factor if "cinderella" never stops winning.

Of course this eliminates the bowl games significance, and how horrible of us to destroy an illustrious tradition of private companies making money off of college athletics once a year. The other problem is it eliminates the conferences input into college football, and how awful would that be: NCAA officials, not conference specific ones; no money grabbing championship games; no unbalanced schedules; and no conference re-alignment chatter in the off-season. Win your conference and you're in. Get second in a tough conference, you're in. Consistently win as a program, and you're in. From there, it's anybody's game.

Author's Note: This is essentially the end of the plan; I will talk about FBS expansion for Notre Dame conference play on Friday and respond to all of the negative feedback on this plan. The following is explaining the TV situation for college football and deals with specifics just to emphasize the value of changing the game.

TV

The specter overlooking this is the television money. I propose that each conference has regional TV packages in certain markets and then ESPN, VS, Big Ten Network, and CBS flex schedule games like NBC in the late NFL season. Basically, this allows the conferences to do what they are about to do now. Essentially, the money from the flexed games is distributed with 30% going to each team and 40% (5% per team) being split among the rest of the conference and then the regional contract money is distributed equally. Remember that this flex plan helps maintain the status quo somewhat. CBS will air Southeast games, BTN games involving Big Ten teams, VS midwest and western teams, and ESPN the biggest names and best matchups.

Here are the regional sports networks and the proposed conferences they will cover.

Southeast: Fox Sports Tennessee, Cox Sports Television

SE Coastal: Fox Sports Florida and Sun Sports, Fox Sports South and SportSouth, Catch 47

Carolinas: Fox Sports Carolinas, Mid-Atlantic Sports Network

Northeast: Comcast SportsNet New England MSG Plus Yankees Entertainment and Sports MSG Network New England Sports Network Time Warner Cable SportsNet

Great Lakes: Fox Sports Detroit Fox Sports Indiana Fox Sports Ohio FSN Pittsburgh Fox Sports Wisconsin

Sun Belt: Fox Sports Tennessee Cox Sports Television

Southwest: Fox Sports Houston Fox Sports Oklahoma Fox Sports Southwest

Pacific NW: FSN Northwest FSN Rocky Mountain Altitude Sports and Entertainment

Pacific South: Fox Sports Arizona Prime Ticket and Fox Sports West Comcast SportsNet Bay Area Channel 4 San Diego

Great Plains: Fox Sports Kansas City, Fox Sports Midwest, Fox Sports North, Metro Sports

Mountain West: Fox Sports Oklahoma, FSN Utah

MAC: Ohio, Michigan Fox Sports Detroit, Fox Sports Indiana, SportsTime Ohio, Comcast Television (Michigan)

Essentially, this plays out to a contract with Fox Sports to broadcast all non-nationally televised games. Fox Sports would essentially be broadcasting every conference's games. Ideally, Fox would start showing at least one game a week on its network channel in the afternoon or evening.

Even without it, ESPN has 12-18 slots to air games (ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU: each 3-4, ABC: 2, and perhaps ESPN Classic 1-4). The reason I say 11-17 is I don't see them airing games on ESPN Classic and airing one to three west-coast games at the 10 EST timeslot. Some of these conferences don't seem to have many affiliates and they overlap viewing areas, but let's make an example.

Southeast: Five games

CBS Game of the Week 3:30 EST , ESPN flexes two games (8:00), Fox picks up two games one at 12 PM EST, another at 8 PM EST

Sun Belt: Wednesday Night ESPN game, Fox Sports Thursday Night, Fox Sports game Friday Night, Fox Sports 2:30 EST (two games, split viewing area, perhaps usage of FSN alternates on dishes).

This doesn't change much from now. The Sun Belt gets less exposure and plays non-traditional schedules. In turn, they have every game televised in some manner, giving them both opportunities for exposure and financial reward.

The typical week consists of no more than 80 games involving FBS teams, and as the season progresses this hovers around sixty.

The Coverage breakdown (no. of games and time-slots in EST):
ESPN: 7 games Thu-Fri 8 Sat. 12, 3:30, 7, 10:30
ESPN2: 3 games 12, 3:30, 7
ESPNU: 3 games 12, 3:30, 7
ABC: 2 games 3:30, 8
CBS: 1 game 3:30 or 7
MTN: 3 games 12, 3:30, 7
VS: 4 games 12, 3:30, 7, 10:30
BTN: 2 games 12, 3:30
=25 nationally televised games

FSN regional-Remainder of games

The main conferences will still get the national exposure, but the new bonus will be the addition of TV coverage for the other teams. Some of those networks listed you may not know of, but they only come into play as alternates. The northeast has many networks listed, but most situations will be carrying the same game broadcast by one network's team, most likely Comcast. For example, Missouri is playing on FSN Kansas City and Metro Sports picks up a FSN feed of K-State or Kansas. Or SD4 picks up San Diego St.-Hawaii when USC-UCLA is on FSN.

Author's note:

Yes, I realize this seems extremely in-depth and time consuming. The reality is it was quite simple to think up, and essentially is a relapse to the traditional conferences of the pre-TV era. HTML tables blow, but they were necessary since I know the same amount of HTML and computer knowledge that I did when I was 19. The most time-consuming part and the reason this was posted so late tonight is the analysis of the TV areas and networks capable of broadcasting the games. I actually have a more reasonable and subtle change that would change college football in the western states, that I will write about on Friday.

Some Men Just Want to Watch the World Burn

2010-11-08T02:57:00.002-06:00

Nationally, I am Indifferent, but Missouri is a Joke (Like most of mine, completely unfunny). Also, Obama is a bad president.

Now, that I got your interest piqued, I will leave that point for last. Look at the last time this happened in the United States. A sitting Democratic president with majority in both houses inherits a broken economy, passes one major legislative victory, fails epically otherwise, and then is overwhelmingly defeated in the midterm elections. This leads inevitably to the prosperity of the late 90's and millions of dollars wasted upon both whether a man should be able to use his penis for pleasure and whether or not when asked about his penis, he should respond by asking for definitions of common words. Now, none of this is going to reoccur; although, I'm sure the Republicans may accuse the President of point-shaving in his weekly basketball game and then impeach him for attempting a hook shot like it is 1969.

Now, don't get me wrong. The Republicans, like 1994-2000, will accomplish absolutely nothing while in control of Congress except a huge waste of government money and time. This is not my hope. I think cuts are in order in certain departments.* Obama will be re-elected, because like 1996, the Republicans will give us the most vanilla candidate possible, both racially and ideologically, and lacking in charisma. Luckily, for Obama, the most charismatic Republican is often mistaken for Mr. F and is completely off the reservation.**

*Mostly the number of Republican congressmen.
**If you don't get the joke, watch Arrested Development and thank me later.

But the economy won't get better, the deficit will grow, our war in Afghanistan will continue, and the middle class will continue to evaporate as another nation rises to destroy us economically. Simply, we are out of ideas and lacking in men willing to propose them. The men with conviction enough to stand out from the others politically and actually vote and legislate responsibly and wisely are all gone. Now, we still have the weaklings of the Democratic party and the spray-tanned buffoons of the Republican. The Republicans will certainly target certain departments and ideas in need of trim. Health care, education cuts, tax cuts mirroring the Bush cuts, reduction of public sector employment at the exact moment when private sector jobs are rare. None of these will pass, but in reality: should we be outraged solely on the basis of the cutting of non-military budget as the US involvement in Iraq wanes and our military's focus should be solely on Afghanistan? Even more frightening, if you gave one of the new Republican legislators the choice between putting money forward to support our troops directly or honoring unfulfilled military development contracts, which do you think our new government supports? Each one of these departments and ideas directly affect the poor and young specifically, the two voting blocks who apparently took the election off or can't stop tripping over their own feet.

There's a Reason The Crappy Joke I Include In My Site Name Keeps Growing

Ugggh, we are dumb. Incredibly dumb. Six republican congressmen in a state that votes 50-50 in presidential elections. Gerrymandering is awesome. Why do papers even endorse candidates or give evidence as to why they endorse candidates? There wasn't a snowballs chance in hell that any of the five sitting Republican representatives were going to lose; despite the fact that Sam Graves is a succubus and Jo Ann Emerson is a eunuch.* And to top that off, voters in central Missouri apparently have no idea what the voting record of their representative is, voting out a moderate legislator because DEMOCRAT=EVIL. Voting Republican is not bad; voting against a candidate because you think he's responsible for the actions of another man, in this case Obama, is lazy.

*See how I made that not sexist.

Missouri wisely chose Roy Blunt, ignoring the political nepotism of the Carnahan legacy, now maintained by arguably the worst of the bunch who almost lost to a tea-party candidate in Dick Gephardt's district.* He's not a complete nutjob at least, and luckily for the country, most of the nutjobs were defeated, luckily allowing us six more years of Harry Reid impersonating a jellyfish. I think Blunt will do his best Kit Bond impression, being relatively silent nationally while voting strongly conservative along party lines, until like Bond he gives up his seat and finds a pair of testicles waiting for him.

*Not that the Blunts aren't a political family in its own right. But seriously, listening to Russ Carnahan speak is enough to request an execution by pressing Giles Corey-style.

We, the people of Missouri, also have no idea who makes up our state legislature, both houses have strong Republican majorities. I assume that explains away almost half of our state voting essentially in favor of animal cruelty, because we either are farmers (very few of us) or for some reason associate our values and voting preferences with farming. Your cows are safe, or not, depending on which way you took that. Dogs, in case I didn't state this emphatically enough before, are not livestock. It's akin to voting against a ban on shitty, rotten apples in Florida which twelve douches grow, when you are an orange farmer in a state known for it's oranges. One of our major cities is known for it's barbecue, steaks, and cow-town persona and we, as a state, are going to come down on livestock farmers? I usually don't get angry at our state, but that is ignorance and tea-party bullshit. If you thought this would affect crop farming, just go out and end it all. Monsanto is headquartered in St. Louis and we have an obsession with ethanol power plants, so I'm pretty sure the state has plenty of incentive to support farming of crops.

We also heavily voted for allowing voters to decide democratically whether cities could charge an earnings tax. This will not turn out well, but who cares? Best way to keep the cities as they are is to abandon them. Look at Pompeii, it's buildings are just starting to collapse and it was destroyed two millenniums ago.

Obama the Failure and the Lack of "Conservative" Conservatives

This harsh introduction is by no means a fair representation of President Obama. Well, progressives, he's not a magician, and apparently like every other politician cares more about winning than being right. He took a stance fighting first quite weakly for a tough health care bill, then was a tough fighter for a watered down version. He still hasn't rejected DADT, which means the other stain on the Clinton administration still is there. He has committed to Afghanistan, despite there being no historical precedent for success or general human progress in that barren wasteland of a country. He has been just as tough on domestic terrorism as Bush, but deserves criticism for observing laws and rights which any Yale grad knows aren't useful in prosecution. He doesn't have a bad-ass ranch to spend time on while his country gives him 80% approval ratings for being the idiot unlucky enough to be President when we are attacked by not-particularly subtle terrorists. His predecessor did not leave him a steady economy and refused to bang any interns for the good of the country, so he's not a stand-up idiot like Bush. Most notably he hasn't had to survive any daft attempts at assassination by snack foods...yet.

To be blunt politically he was screwed from the start, and it doesn't help when people wholeheartedly want you to fail. Republicans, most notably those firmly entrenched in Confederate states such as my own, wished failure upon him, and were granted failure by their dick of a fairy godmother. Don't underestimate my revulsion towards conservatives, but I always wish their leadership heads this country in a positive direction and then they can be re-elected based upon their merits. I predict often that they will fail, but I do not wish that were the case.

Conservatism is at its base a belief in responsibility, inaction, and liberty. Our founding fathers were radicals only in their decision to create this country; otherwise, our country began as an extremely free, slightly uptight democracy. With money and necessity, we have adapted into a far more socialist nation, helping the poor, elderly, and unfortunate while keeping the powerful somewhat in check. To say I believe in conservative spending would not be untrue, but at what cost? Is the general welfare worth saving a rich man 1% on his taxes? The Republicans will get a chance to try and persuade you.

They will do things that in no way benefit those angry constituents by which they were just elected. Then, they will blame the President for "crippling" the government with vetoes, judicial appointments, and the daily "What the Fuck Does This Matter? Subpoena."* Then, they will nominate someone who is not controversial for President.

*Sponsored by the all-new KY Grape Jelly, For the Congressman Who Needs a Good Mouth Lube to Start the Day

Then again, who's electable nationally for this party anymore? Here's who they get to choose from and why they aren't GOP Presidential material:

Sarah Palin: Dumb, vitriolic, a woman, represents 2% of Americans(White idiotic tea party females), and quite possibly a polar bear sniper
Mitt Romney: Too open to listening to reasoned arguments by Democrats, bigger issue to GOP that he's Mormon, first name is appropriate for 1950's bully
Eric Cantor: Looks like a dick, sounds like a dick, is most certainly a dick
John Boehner: Limited spray tan budget for election cycle, secretly a Muslim
Mike Huckabee: Jesus thinks he's too religious, Arkansas is still a hole after both Clinton and he were governor
Newt Gingrich: Who?
Rudy Guiliani:Taking credit for your cities response during 9/11 makes Cantor look likable, Everyone hates the Yankees
Bobby Jindal: Heh, tea-party voters (who aren't racists) voting for an Indian-American, Apu jokes getting old
Lindsey Graham: Look at his eyes and tell me you don't see a sociopath, kills transients, making a skin suit out of fat co-eds
Chris Christie: Has grown fat off of eating spray-tanned guidos which terrifies Boehner, most likely Jabba the Hutt, most people still consider Jersey to be New York's landfill

So congratulations to whomever comes out of that cluster-fuck, as Jon Stewart would put it, they get to lose to Obama by a large margin when the GOP commits seppeku with a Frisbee* to retain its honor. And for all that Obama has failed at doing, he still has six years to correct it, and I'm just hoping he will fail because he's a Democrat.** But he might not get the chance if this guy runs...............

Now that's change we can believe in.***

**But mostly because he's Kenyan and addicted to shoot-arounds
***Much funnier if you think he's referring to.

Your Vote Doesn't Matter for National Politics, But Do It Anyways (Plus Rundowns of Ballot Measures)

2010-11-01T19:27:00.000-05:00

Now, I am prone to diatribes about the lack of political action or general usefulness in any matter. The title may suggest it is one, but I would say it's not. It's a primer of sorts to the ballot measures and a slight rant about how any national office vote currently is a vote for political nihilists. If you can see the title, I obviously wish you to exercise your democratic power, but I really don't feel that how you vote on national candidates will effect the current standing of our government.

If you don't vote, due to forgetfulness, here's a reminder. If you don't vote because you don't care, I will try to give you reasons. If you don't vote because you feel uneducated about the choices given, wing it or if that does not do it, read here and get angry at me or agree, either suits me just fine. Hell, plenty of politically moronic people vote every election, and this year we're lucky to have a few running as well. If you don't vote because you are lazy, well that's just awful. I vote and my laziness has yet to find a match on this Earth, save the dead and Republican "lawmakers".

Frankly, you can vote for whomever you choose for US Senator or representative. The Democrats will most likely lose the House and keep a slight majority in the Senate. Neither one matters since Democrats have not had a successful run in Congress since the 1960's. It means a great deal when I say the best Democratic choice in the state of Missouri is a moderate at best; this is not a state for ideas to thrive in. We like our guns, our ignorance, our puppy mills, and most certainly we do not like taxes. Sure, Lacy Clay and Emanuel Cleaver will win, but if you can't win as a liberal in an urban district; you obviously have committed murder or been convicted of a felony (This is no matter in Chicago or D.C.). Now, why should it matter who is projected to win. Well, some people only vote when the elections are close, and the only relatively close race in Missouri is in Missouri's 4th District, only because Skelton has the cajones/loyal following to run in that district as a Democrat. So if you live there, your vote should have much more leverage.

And predictably, Robin Carnahan seems to be dead in the water against Roy Blunt. Now, this wasn't totally unexpected as I stated already our state continues to project further away from its heritage of moderate, reasoned voting into a state of constant political douchebaggery such as the grandstanding involved in the Aug. 3 Health Care vote and the teabaggers who think it's within our rights as Americans to treat dogs inhumanely (These same people probably however think a black man with a dog-fighting ring should burn.). I apologize for not using a more reputable site, but just look at the ballot measures that were rejected. We are edging closer and closer to being a backwards state, but at least we will have English spoken in our government and state sovereignty. I won't tell you to vote for Carnahan, because frankly it's insignificant who wins.

Roy Blunt is not a teabagger, so I don't think his particular stances are detrimental to our country as a whole. If the Democrats maintain a majority, the Republicans will still control the Senate's action, so who cares who is the majority. Nothing will get done, whether it is helpful for either sides constituents. Taxes will not be lowered for the rich, and services will not be extended for the poor and needy. The United States politically, economically, and ideologically has stepped into a stage of arrested development, and is no longer capable of doing what we did in the past century. Innovation will come from other places, as we devolve into a European nation in stature, holding our guns as symbols of our past glory while the world passes us by.

Now, I'm off my soapbox. Here's a synopsis of the ballot measures for tomorrow, and what your vote means. Of course, snark is a given, since I am prone to it, but mostly I will be honest. Ballot measures are not straight-party issues.

Amendment 1: Requires that county assessors in chartered counties be elected, not appointed.

Yes: You believe that a government official should have to be elected to hold this position.
No: You like the idea of appointing your own assessor from within government channels.

Straight-forward question with no right or wrong answer. If you are a believer in pure democracy, vote Yes. If you hope to be appointed assessor later in life, vote no.

Amendment 2: Property Tax Exemption for Disabled Former POWs

Yes: You hate taxes, and love veterans. You care not that this is redundant, since low income senior citizens (these are Vietnam vets at the youngest) get tax credits.
No: You love taxes, and hate veterans. Just kidding. Maybe you hate redundancy in government.

I seriously could care less about this one as well. It affects such a small demographic that it really means nothing other than to add another caveat to Missouri's already ridiculously managed property taxes. I will probably vote like my mother here and say no just because it's a political play made by politicians to grab sympathy for themselves by helping those deserving. It was sponsored by my state representative, whom I now am considering voting against just to shake things up since I didn't pick her for the Democratic primary anyways.

Amendment 3: Eliminates sales tax on housing/real estate sales and transfers

Yes: You can read and have to/will have to pay property taxes in the future.
No: You can't read or vote contrary to the general will always

Let's see, you pay property taxes and a sales tax. Wouldn't you rather just pay one? I argue often in favor of taxation; this one is certainly a valid idea for removing a tax.

Proposition A: Earnings Tax Initiative

Yes: You wish for the earnings taxes to have to be approved by voters. You probably do not care that voters will vote no on these taxes, because you do not live in St. Louis city or Kansas City. You do care that if you are shot in the future run-down St. Louis city that there are services available to save your life and catch the shooter. So......

No: You realize that putting cities already at a disadvantage due to the low median income of their citizens at further disadvantage is risky at best, and if you continue to wish to use the entertainment and economic benefits presented by those cities it is wise to keep their budgets maintained as well as your local communities.

Will what I stated happen? Yes, but not too quickly. The ballot measures for the taxes will be poorly worded and they will fail. The cities will make Detroit look like Disneyland, with slightly more pedophiles. This is tied more to St. Louis due to the fractiousness of the municipalities that govern the city. All of the money that flows through St. Louis flows through the county where the richer people live; taking away earnings taxes from the city takes away one of the few ways for the city to compete from a public service standpoint. Kansas City will do better, but their idiot mayor has already stated that if this measure passes he will have to raise other taxes (hurting the poorer citizens of Jackson county as opposed to the richer ones paying these taxes).

Proposition B: Dog-breeder amendment

Yes: You have a heart, and do not over-breed your dogs. You are not a complete tool.
No: Well, down the road we may decide to take your cows away, and then eat them at our liberal beef buffets. You hate dogs, or love inbred dogs. You are a complete idiot who thinks that dog breeding is agri-business (It is in Korea. Not a racist joke, they literally breed a certain type of dog for consumption.) or vital to the freedom of the United States citizens.

Will this amendment help eliminate the puppy kennels? Maybe. Will it lead to further attacks on animal husbandry in the state? No. This is simply a vote where the state would look stupid for voting it down. Voting for it in no way hurts the state of Missouri, and even if it just like the POW bill is unnecessary and redundant, it would help if for once we don't vote like we have never had a single moment of compassion or reason in our lives.

Dancing, the Indigenous Tribal Leaders of Kansas City, and some good ole racist teabagger talk

2010-09-27T01:56:00.000-05:00

Well my loyal readers,* I am back. Well, I was never gone per se, but I was away for a while in the land of eternal sunrise. Where this is my imagination refuses to tell me, but I'll tell you it can be quite chilly so bring a coat.** So here's me back to my usual, finding hilarious things in the mundane and horribly disturbed ways of my life. Where to start, well I haven't given a Palin credit for while or been completely abhorrent so let's get it out of the way. And this time (quite illegally), I have pictures,video, and completely insane asterisks to help everyone along the way.

*Hi Melissa, maybe Dad, family members finding themselves bored, and you too random college friend
**This is coming to you from hell, where Satan promised to air condition the place if the Chiefs and Rams won today. His energy bill will be hilarious.***
***This in no way implies my landlord is Satan, unless Satan is a giving yet stingy Chinese professor from St. Louis.

Bristol, Oh How I love Thee

Not in a romantic or sexual sense of course, but as a perpetual butt for my jokes*
*Puns are awful

Here's my thought process:
A is for Abstinence
A is also for Adultery
The Scarlet Letter was a Red A
Red signifies passion and not purity
Dancing is considered immoral by many faiths
Dancing is considered passionate, perhaps the only other form of shared unbridled passion between humans.
The other is sex.
So when you dance on network TV wearing a sexy red dress, after promoting abstinence to teenagers, what is the logical conclusion?
That you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

But guess what after seeing this, you'll know how wrong I was.

This was the greatest plan in the history of abstinence campaigns. First let's go to the real-time effect: millions of young men swore off sex for a few minutes to pleasure themselves to you Bristol. Kudos, you have done what your mom could only do to republicans* and the entire state of Alaska, effectively stop them from having sex with others by inspiring them to self-pleasure. Now, some have warned you that sex leads to dancing, so you headed them off at the pass.

*Maybe they didn't have enough urinals at the convention to serve their needs

Why not skip the foreplay and head straight to the action? If you convince the kids to commit other acts of unbridled passion, they will obviously have no time to commit violations of each others purity vows. After all it worked in Dirty Dancing...

Dammit, maybe not, but at least the sinning in it killed Swayze.* Wait, I thought Swayze was this awkward Weird Al-Random extra from Friday* mash-up group

*Harsh I know, but doctors in [redacted] have found links between pancreatic cancer and premarital sex. They also have found that the [redacted] folk have weaker genetic makeup than whites and that draft animals are sufficient sexual partners when a man is lonely, but hell they have a education from the University of [redacted] just outside of Jackson, [redacted]. Note: Apparently honesty even in the form of downright defamation of character is not appreciated by the government. Now if I were to write something honest, they certainly wouldn't do the same. Never mind, books with redactions kick ass; they're like those shitty crossword puzzles without clues I tried to do as a kid.
**Obligatory racist comment to cater to tea party readers

Maybe purity rings are the way to go as a way of solidifying the pledge like the Jonas Brothers, after all they were successful. Now Joe is dating...

Seriously, this was the most modest picture I could find from this painted swimsuit album. I think her eyes might possibly destroy innocence, quicker than OJ can telling a story. Hell, vampire or no, I would walk my Chastity ring to Mount Doom for Ashley Greene.* This abstinence education thing is a complete crapshoot, unless you can turn everyone into ugly ducklings until we marry one of them, the libidos will win. I hope you obviously have a better plan like actual parenting or perhaps honesty, but until then try to teach your kids lessons they will not heed one bit. Then perhaps years down the road they can mock you openly on TV and get it on (figuratively) with some hot sweaty professional seducer/seductress.

*And I am the biggest nerd ever. Although I still have not seen nor read a word of the cancerous lecher that is the Twilight series.

And yes this is the last chance you will ever get to read about Dancing with the Slightly Desperate here.

Dancing With the Stars*

*Dammit!!!!!!!!

Okay, maybe the title is a little overblown, but ask me how I felt at about 3:15 today and that is the explanation. The Temptations called it Cloud Nine. I was in a cigar-smoked bar with my girlfriend; simultaneously eating and squinting to death. The Chiefs won ~~31-3~~ 31-10 against the 49ers. They didn't just win, they throttled the 49ers.

To rate them I will compare them to Chinese gymnastics teams

Offense: Balanced like a Chinese gymnast before a meal.
Defense: Starving, Feral, like said gymnast until she is too old to compete successfully or 12 (whichever comes first)
Special Teams: Slightly off, like the routines performed by Chinese gymnasts in individual completions
Coaching: Unhinged and reckless just in case one steps out of line and he has to have her sent to work camps/ Wal Mart factories for the greater good

Sadly, we look at what Mike Singletary has become. He was a great player and continues to prove his motivational/psychotic threat skills. However, if you let Jimmy Raye call plays for you, you might as well have Carl Weathers stand in and make a stew.* Literally, racist fans** think African Americans can't coach, because of what happened today. What happened then that was so bad head coaching wise? Only his comment in support of Jimmy Raye. Other than that, his players were violated and dominated by the Indigenous Plainsmen of Kansas City.***

*Tobias Fünke: Do you see me more as the respected dramatic actor or more of the beloved comic actor?
Carl Weathers: Whoa, whoa, whoa. There's still plenty of meat on that bone. Now you take this home, throw it in a pot, add some broth, a potato. Baby, you've got a stew going.
Tobias Fünke: Yes, that's fine, but I would like to focus on my acting, Mr. Weathers. I did give you my last $1, 100.
Carl Weathers: Let me tell you a little story about acting. I was doing this Showtime movie, Hot Ice with Anne Archer, never once touched my per diem. I'd go to Craft Service, get some raw veggies, bacon, Cup-A-Soup... baby, I got a stew going.
Tobias Fünke: [pause] I think I'd like my money back.
**See SEC fans
***Injuns or redskins, my tea party aficionados.****
****No, using Spanish is not a deportation worthy offense in Missouri

You may think that was overblown, but they were literally violated by the Chiefs. In every aspect, minus that Chinese gymnast misstep of a field goal, they were dominant and unrelenting. Matt Cassel showed he still has two testicles, and can throw a pass in the NFL without constantly shivering in fear of not becoming Tom Brady. Jamaal Charles is the same ole eight yards a carry running back that the league gets every year, and Thomas Jones is the "give me the ball and I will pretend we can power run" polar opposite to Charles. The defense harassed a man who already has enough trouble gripping the football with his midget hands, and got the turnover that started the onslaught. And let's just say: I hate the SEC, but they can just keep sending their players our way. Same goes for the Big Ten/Eleven/Twelve, who gave us an injured hopeless cause that we turned into Tony 2.0. Only one bad moment: remember Succop, your name isn't cool enough for you to miss easy field goals, somebody boo that man.

Now, I'm not going to make correct conclusions upon the whole season, but I will try to. The Chiefs have a bye and then two games against Indy and Houston. Either game is winnable, both teams are better than the 49ers, Browns, and the September Travoltas* So, at worst, the Chiefs will find themselves at Week Six's end with a 3-2 record, and 5-0 and 4-1 are not out of the question. Even with only three wins the Chiefs will have ten games, six at home with only one "tough" home opponent, Tennessee. Four of five wins puts them up to seven to nine wins. And their four road match-ups are against Seattle and their division rivals. I'll predict a split there. So there's 9-11 wins, and I think ten wins this division. Now, if the Chiefs pull upsets either against their AFC south foes or the Chargers in San Diego that figure jumps to 12-win territory. But I really think this is a ten win ballclub, that will sweep the NFC West, win 4 of 6 in division, beat Cleveland and Buffalo, and perhaps get one away from an AFC south opponent. There is 11 wins, and a first round exit after we get trounced by Indy or New England who are the wild cards. But baby steps are the key.

*I just like this name better. I know it's all "six degrees": Chargers-Bolts-Travolta did the voice for Bolt who was a dog-that's what the Chargers are in September, dogs.
**Also another note, Phillip Rivers is the most boorish quarterback in the league until Ben the Rapist returns to action. At 0:20, here is Phillip being portrayed by Harvey Korman dealing with his teammates/peasants.

It's better if you pretend Norv Turner is the piss boy.

Ha, you got to this point expecting something of substance about the teabaggers, but until they provide something of substance, I doubt they deserve me worrying about them. I'll be more frequent from today on as I'm getting ready to pleasure this blog like a Bristol Palin cha-cha. Until then I'm off to write complete shit and then sell it to the general public, like Nicholas Sparks.

A Bad Week For Bigotry

2010-08-05T12:47:00.000-05:00

I haven't paid much attention to politics lately; let's just say it's antipathy instead of apathy this time. I really don't live or die for this like many I know. Change is gradual and in America gradual is somewhere around fifty years time. Health care was introduced by Harry S. Truman, it passes in 2010, and nobody notices until 2012. It took 97 years for our government to enforce the 14th Amendment in the case of African Americans. Yet we all hope something is happening, and maybe you share my grief at the wasted term that will be Obama's first term in office. Yes, he will be re-elected and possibly then be willing to make the politically-suicidal but correct decisions to run this country.

But this week, you can feel change in the air. In California, one man said what the rest of us either don't have the balls to or just don't have the capacity of reason necessary to agree. There are certain rights that each lawful citizen of this United States is free to do: vote, live where they choose, marry whomever they choose, worship how they please, and whatever they so choose with their bodies that doesn't infringe upon another citizens rights. There are more, but these are important in a sense. All of the above have one thing in common, they are matters of privacy.

The American people are both inherently concerned about their privacy from other people and completely blasé about their privacy from the federal government. The problem this creates is that big brother is ultimately just a faceless person that makes human decisions just like that other person you wish to be private from. So when a judge decides that the voters of California and the proxy morons from Utah supporting them are idiots, it shocks me that a human being can make a justifiably sane decision regarding the private lives of people he does not know. The Constitution, its amendments, and ever subsequent modern rulings specifically state that marriage is a right that every citizen possesses.

Read the full text of the ruling here, the ruling starts on p. 109

The brilliance of the decision's careful wording is likening gay rights to black rights. The creation of separate domestic partnerships/common-law marriage or whatever you wish to call it is unconstitutional under the ruling in Brown v. Board that "separate but equal" was unconstitutional. The same laws to prevent blacks from marrying whites in the past that we (hopefully) find foolish today run parallel to the belief that two same-sex people cannot marry.

Then, he proceeds to just rip into the proponents of the law. This is probably the most thorough lambasting of a defendant I've ever read in a court case, and it's all done with precedents cited and reasoned controlled language. If you state man and woman have been being married for ages due to God/nature's intention, how can you explain homosexuality in man and nature? Is God making mistakes, because if he is, he is fallible and therefore not God. See where that argument takes you theologically; legally, it's just as detrimental to the proponents case. Second, never statistically argue the sanctity of heterosexual marriage and its benefit to the state. Third, arguing that marriage is solely for procreation is archaic and takes away all reasoning for getting married. Procreation and proper child rearing can occur outside marriage, so what purpose does marriage serve? That the proponents tried to argue that same-sex marriage violated their first-amendment rights, because they wouldn't be allowed to criticize it is the most hilariously awful argument ever presented. First, it's untrue; second, it's petty; third, it's downright intolerant. Idiots are free to go around talking about the dangers of homosexuality, but not to restrict the rights of other citizens to practice their rights to marry another person.

But here are the kickers:

In the absence of a rational basis, what remains of
proponents’ case is an inference, amply supported by evidence in
the record, that Proposition 8 was premised on the belief that
same-sex couples simply are not as good as opposite-sex couples.

Try in your mind to fundamentally argue this point legally: that two people trying to enter into the union of matrimony are unequal to two other people.

And farther back, to my full point, which I took too long to get to:

The resulting evidence shows that Proposition 8 simply conflicts with the guarantees of the
Fourteenth Amendment.

Which brings us to more idiotic old white racist males, the Republican caucus.

The idea of repealing part of the Fourteenth amendment has been proposed by some Republicans to disallow the citizenship of those born to illegal immigrants in the United States. The Republicans are the "party of the family" and "values", and what they are proposing would not just eliminate the rights of Hispanics to citizenship but to all future native-born Americans. It is a plan to amputate the arm of liberty to remove the bullet of illegal immigration.

Now, the 14th Amendment is vague, and probably the most used, discussed, and misinterpreted amendment to the Constitution. But this is clear, all native-born citizens regardless of race are entitled to the rights declared to all Americans in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. It's interesting that in the Prop 8 ruling, the case against free-schooling for these children comes up, because it ruled that the children's families contributions and their under-utilization of state facilities actually made the schooling financially prudent. That the state had no reason to suspend these rights, as they had no bearing on the operation of the state.

In this case, the Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot, not just for today but for the future as well. There is no way that any modification or repeal of the 14th Amendment would get near the required votes. In an attempt to garner votes from a small racist minority, the Republicans are alienating the fastest growing voting demographic in the United States. For the same reason that Republicans who fought against civil rights lost the African American vote, these Republicans are going to lose the Hispanic vote. Possibly, until another great shift in politics, but none like the 1960s shift is likely to occur soon.

But hell if the party of Lincoln wants to piss on his greatest legacy, I'm game to watch them torch their house while inside.

Note:
Jason Linkins makes two hilarious points as he known to do: 1)I want to see Louisiana Governor and upcoming Republican Bobby Jindal's reaction 2)When Alan Keyes is the sane one, something is out of kilter.

Here is an opinion by Rep. Luis Gutierrez
Why We Should Welcome McConnell's Demand for Hearings on Rescinding 14th Amendment

Here's a post more up my sarcastic alley:

Finally, It's Time to Shred the Constitution

And I didn't mention it, but another significant blow to bigots was the statement made by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Most Americans have no idea about the tenets of Muslim nor care to understand the difference between a terrorist and a member of the Islamic faith. I would hope though that all have a concept of religious freedom in the United States.
Defending Religious Tolerance: Remarks on the Mosque Near Ground Zero
Another Linkins post about the Conservative reaction to the ruling
Best excerpt:

In fact, the two men -- Joseph Nassralla and Karam El Masry -- were not Muslims at all. They turned out to be Egyptian Coptic Christians who work for a California-based Christian satellite TV station called "The Way." Both said they had come to protest the mosque.
"I'm a Christian," Nassralla shouted to the crowd, his eyes bulging and beads of sweat rolling down his face.
But it was no use. The protesters had become so angry at what they thought were Muslims that New York City police officers had to rush in and pull Nassralla and El Masry to safety.
"I flew nine hours in an airplane to come here," a frustrated Nassralla said afterward.
The incident underscores how contentious -- and, perhaps, how irrational -- the debate over the mosque has become.

I apologize for all of the links being to Huffington Post which posts mostly liberal pieces. I would post links from a right-oriented website, but I prefer to keep my lunch down and limit any exposure to ideas which make me lose all faith in mankind.

The Week In Review: The One Where Joe Gets a Yellow Card (Part one)

2010-07-14T14:10:00.000-05:00

I have a lot of stuff to write about so this is the first of many things. I'll start with sports, because as foolish and childish as it may seem, my heart floats here more often than other places. Take that as you will. Many crazy things happened this week and most of them were awful, embarrassing, and generally shitty as sports goes. Probably one of the worst sports weeks ever where lots of momentous events occurred.

The King and I

Many people have analyzed the ridiculous and overblown spectacle of Lebron James' "decision". My favorite comments, as always, came from Joe Posnanski, who has a personal stake in the future of Cleveland, but also as a realist expects such for his hometown. Before I get to my point, I'd like to make two general points. The NBA gets no publicity between the Finals and the All Star break. I would argue that hockey gets better overall coverage, anything like this despite the horrible awkwardness of it all gives the NBA a chance to improve. People who don't care about pro basketball, mainly anyone who doesn't hold season tickets and isn't African-American, talked about this, and the NBA has lacked in interest since Jordan's second Chicago retirement.

Second, I marked that the money generated from the special was going to charity. This made me less aggravated by the spectacle. Then, they go and hold in at the Greenwich, CT Boys and Girls club. I get it, the kids aren't affluent, but Greenwich is. I guess you want a neutral site. So why not get some kids from all of the potential suitors cities and fly them in, and show them a good time. I bet of all the Boys and Girls clubs, the kids in Greenwich have it pretty good as opposed to kids in Cleveland or Miami.

But these are beside the point, I'm going to stretch your abilities by comparing Lebron to myself. I saw me in this decision. There is a big difference between being egotistical and confident. Sure, you can be Jordan-like and be both, most great men and women have both giant egos and self-confidence. Lebron isn't there yet, and perhaps never will be. I don't think this experiment will go down as successful as Boston's triumvirate did. Not because the players don't fit, each is uniquely talented and none hog the ball, but this may be the problem. Who puts the daggers in the opponents? Where is their Robert Horry? Derek Fisher? Or even more Kobe Bryant? Wade possesses the will, but isn't a perimeter scorer and driving at Howard in a conference final isn't going to win the game. Now, Lebron's decision showed me something, he won't.

Now, I'm not questioning his ability, I would argue he is more talented and more rounded than Jordan was, but he lacks something. He has the ego; he just had six hours of ESPN time dedicated to himself essentially, but he lacks the confidence in himself. People show Kobe winning when he got Pau Gasol, but that makes it seem as though Gasol made the key plays to win the games. Kobe willed his teams to beat their opponents. People always said Jordan didn't win until he had Pippen, but this is stupid. Jordan would have won with anyone they put out there. Pippen wasn't one of the top five players in the league either; he was good but not Dwyane Wade, who when healthy is probably the third-best perimeter player just below Kobe and Lebron. I look at Lebron and see a man who doesn't believe he is capable of winning a championship on his skills.

He is the direct opposite of myself, and I could see that. I am horribly hard on myself and self-deprecating, but I have confidence in my abilities to do whatever I set my mind to (of course, this happens rarely as one should note). Lebron should have stayed in Cleveland, not because winning championships isn't important, but because struggle and disappointment make the championship's sweeter, the personal growth stronger, and inevitably the Lebron brand is defined differently. As of now, all people see is a man who thinks he is a piece of a championship team, not it's talisman, and Jordan didn't make his name that way. Let's hope he succeeds and finds the confidence to match the ego, because a failure may haunt one of the most entertaining talents of our generation.

The Boss
Speaking of egos, yesterday George Steinbrenner died and as a Royals fan one would expect me to be happy. First, who gets happy at death? Sure, I don't shed tears for murderers and rapists who die, and all of us have a bastard inside of us, but he was a man with the flaws and abilities inherent in all of us. People tend to forget that the Yankees and Royals were rivals in the late 70's, even more so than the Red Sox which is what happens when you have two teams ran by men who deeply care about their teams. Now, these were two plainly different men, in two plainly different situations. Ewing Kauffman wasn't just a great owner; he was a great man. Something funny about the Royals is they typically have a organization full of great, likable men (except that douche Limbaugh) who lately just don't have any baseball acumen. Kauffman lost money on the Royals at times, which Steinbrenner didn't because they were the Yankees and that's a cash cow. But both men spent, so much that the Royals had the highest payroll in baseball entering the 1990's despite the obvious financial gaps between them and other clubs.

Kauffman, and the Steinbrenner. (This obviously leaves out the city of Green Bay, but I doubt most cities would like to foot the bill for their sports teams. Hell, Kansas City can't build freaking light rail. They would have probably given Jason Kendall a five-year contract.) The Rooneys are the Pittsburgh Steelers, and as much a Ben the Rapist (which I will forever refer to him as for the progeny's sake) tries to harm this, they have always as a organization represented class and winning. I would argue the Mara's and Clark's are like this, and baseball has too few historical ownership ties. Baseball owner's are too often larger than life. On that note, let's skip Kauffman and talk about Steinbrenner. Since he bought the Yankees, the teams value has increased from $10 million to $1.5 billion. He fixed Yankee stadium, then made the city of New York build the monstrosity that is the new Yankee Stadium. They won the most games, World Series Championships, World Series Appearances, and made the most playoff appearances playing in the best division in baseball. Sure, he swindled the city for that new stadium, but New Yorkers would say the World Series titles are worth the expense. But no owner, even considering the resources the Yankee brand supplies, put as much into his club, whether it was his heart or money.

So I lament the loss of a character, and ultimately a man who I wouldn't have minded running my team, but I was spoiled. My hometown owners through the beginning of my childhood were great men, who also cared deeply about their clubs. Ewing Kauffman was both the local family owner and Steinbrenner, he wanted to win and not just for himself for Kansas City. Same went for Lamar Hunt and his son, not win at all costs, but win with class. Unfortunately, the money has gone to the point that there are more Georges than Ewings, and that ultimately will be Georges legacy that he upped the ante and therefore made everything else much more shallow.

A Karate Kick to the Chest of Football

I was late on the scene to soccer, but I wouldn't call myself a casual fan. I am deeply devoted to the Yanks and even now can find myself leaning into a long and sad torturous relationship with Fulham FC. The World Cup was the most viewed ever in the United States, and what the people found is either soccer is gripping, cynical, or resembles the Mafia more than sport.

First, why might have one thought is was gripping?
Close games, especially the US games, were dominant, except for the Portugal/North Korea and basically any game Mueller and Klose both played for Germany. The best thing about soccer is the rarity of goals makes it exciting. Some people don't understand this, but when something is rare, it's way more important. So if you don't get soccer, compare it to sex. Say you, don't have sex, but once every couple years (Don't ask why; pretend you're Will Turner). These times are much more important to you than if you were Cristiano Ronaldo and not even exaggerating, we could make a SI swimsuit issue out of your ex-girlfriends and we would have to leave out some ladies. For American football, think about scoring a touchdown in the Super Bowl, that's how every World Cup goal, no matter the game, feels.

Is Greg Louganis coaching the Spaniards?
Ok, maybe I shouldn't single them out, but diving is part of the sport. To a casual fan, this can be incredibly frustrating. To an American fan, it is even worse, because we don't get the concept. Our players don't fall upon contact, and the heavy-handed nature of both the MLS and EPL, make the English and American teams far less likely to go down to light contact. Once a ref calls one light foul he must continue, and players take advantage and at times just look ridiculous, such as Torres falling when his two feet tangled which resulted in Chile going a man down (and then having to face Brazil in the second round) or Mesut Ozil not going down against Australia when fouled because he was afraid he would get another card for diving. The varied calls changes the nature of the game, and therefore officials play too big of a part.

So mistakes happen, offside calls are missed both ways like the US-Algeria match and the Argentina-Mexico match. Balls cross the line like Lampard's strike. Howard Webb ends up in WWE match and Nigel De Jong tries to hit him with a steel chair, and he cards half of the field for generally being a douche, which leads us to the next point.

Cruyff would have turned in his grave had he been dead

See what I did there. Dear God, all I want is teams to play football, and preferably for referees to give automatic red cards to anyone who plays a destroyer in midfield. The Defensive Midfielder is the bane of football; I get the pragmatism, allowing goals are bad. Seriously though, are players that worthless in their skill sets that they can't play box to box? England played Gareth Barry as a CDM: Failed. Brazil played two CDMs: Failure. Argentina played Mascherano and no real defenders: fail. The US put in Ricardo Clark: epic fucking fail. I'm not against playing midfielders who care about defense, but at least play someone with some sense of what offense is and how to make a tackle without putting your studs through a shin (On purpose, I realize occasionally, it's a accident). Or a chest.

What the Dutch did in the final was an abomination. That it almost worked, because the Spanish take siestas in the final third, is even worse. To play as if you are beaten before the game started, despite you fielding a team that is almost as talented as your opponent is awful. That Van Bommel and De Jong didn't receive red cards in the game was ridiculous, and the Dutch deserved the endless stream of quick cards that resulted from Spain's diving to add to their ridiculous fouling. The most beautiful football, in my opinion, has been the Dutch's style, even better than Brazil (excepting 1982) for style. Of course, we have seen that the more beautiful team doesn't win, outside of Barcelona's Guardiola lineup, so teams more often rely on brutishness than skill. However, I saw more ineffective brutality as opposed to the stone wall that the US put up last summer against Spain which was the prescription for beating Spain. You force them wide and then use your size to limit their attacks, as opposed to attempting to break their spirits by breaking their sternums.

As a final point, here's to Spain winning the World Cup. While they played incredibly negative for a team with so much talent, and I despise the way they play, I admire the wins in 2008 and now. They will go down as one of the greatest squads ever, and I don't know how I feel about that. The Spanish lacked a quality in the final third, even Villa despite his great tournament. Also, they lacked that killer instinct. They would score a goal and then play keep-away for the rest of the match. It dragged down the football, and the opponents desperation resulted in the chippy-play and general apathy from viewers. Barcelona, who essentially was this team, would have kept pressing and stomped on the lesser teams. But, Del Bosque just had them hold up the ball and limited their attack, which ultimately prevents this team from being the greatest that ever played. I said before the German game that if Spain scores first it will end 1-0, and if Germany scores first 4-1 to Germany. Unlike the other teams, this instinct makes me feel that complacency will breed within the Spanish ranks, and in 2012 in Poland and the Ukraine, Germany will be holding the trophy aloft after dominating with the typical German pragmatism but now also beautiful football.

The American (Soccer) Spirit and Our Own Emile Heskey

2010-06-24T00:50:00.001-05:00

Today was an interesting day for me. It was the thirteenth consecutive day where I was awake at 8 AM which probably hasn't occurred since 2003. I either am dying a slow slightly boring death or somehow managed to contract a chest cold in the middle of the summer, which I blame on Marley's, Hill Brewing Company, and Shakespeare in the Park. So the lack of sleep concurrent with the spectacle that is the World Cup, has left me slightly broken. I haven't seen every match of the World Cup as I selectively missed some, and was so bored to tears by others that I took morning power naps. Yesterday's "elimination" matches, while containing intriguing, left much to be desired. Mexico still can't score, France still was a train-wreck, Argentina's backups are better than Greece, and Nigeria misses chances that clumsy dolts like myself could put away. Then, today happened.So here are my two cents (Possibly dollars, I'm long winded.).

The Finish

I've been literally watching the US team since 2001, but casually aware since the '94 World Cup. To say that this team is underwhelming and at times almost comically inept is worth noting, but watch France's three games. Here is the team who was ranked two spots higher than the United States when the draw for the tournament was made; they are a team of world class talent, but without a single leader. They simply quit on the coach (who I admit is a complete moron and apparently an asshole, too), but more importantly their fans and country. Unfairly, their country has the label of capitulation and whiny behavior, and so their team enforcing stupid stereotypes decides to whine and capitulate. Good job boys.

The Americans, at least as soccer goes, have a different stereotype: phenomenal athletes and fitness without the talent. We are ragged on for our never say die attitude almost as much as it is praised. This week, the world learned how dangerous this really can be. The Yanks (as the English so aptly call us condescendingly) showed that with the endless determination, they now possess the skill to match the will. The English knew this. Even their casual observers could notice Landon Donovan running rampant against Chelsea and Ashley Cole during his short stint at Everton where Tim Howard is staking his claim to best EPL goalie. Those who closely watched Jozy Altidore could see the promise, but should have realized that playing for Hull got him exposure and nothing else. Slovenia and Algeria apparently didn't get the memo.

Look at the late goals scored during qualifying and realize how well this team of Chicago bartenders (If you haven't read about Jay DeMerit, I suggest you do) and upcoming professionals realize the necessity of the moment, and not only create chances but finish them. Not just only in important games...all of their games, such as the 2-2 draw in DC that sent Honduras to the World Cup. No other team already qualified would have fought for an equalizer in the 92nd minute, but we see now that practice makes perfect. Even if the other teams didn't see the qualifiers, look to the friendlies this year. The US went a goal down in three of four, and gave up a tying goal in the fourth. Against the Dutch, the US scored on a set piece deep in the match and even pressed to equalize. In the Czech game, we twice came back to tie the game, only to concede another goal in an increasingly common display of defensive ineptitude. The next two friendlies had the US follow up their conceded goals by burying two more in each game to win.

So I won't lie, I was tense as the game went past 90 minutes considering we dominated play for most of the match, but the creeping feeling that the American team wasn't out still pervaded in my mind. Of all people, the listless Donovan who drifted in and out of play today came through after an amazing throw from Howard, Donovan's own touch, and the patient and steady work of both Altidore and Dempsey. This was the moment when other teams realized that there might not be a harder out in the World Cup, not for talent but for sheer will and guts. Donovan said it's the American spirit to not bitch and moan and just finish the job.* But that's not true, we love to bitch and moan and sometimes just quit, but it is the American Soccer Spirit and for another match, that'll do.

*Loosely translated, since I was on the verge of breaking things and declaring a undying man crush on him, I vaguely listened.
**It's times like this that I'm glad we didn't quit when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor.

Young Emile Heskey

Heskey is widely derided by English fans, especially after his replacement today sent the English on to the next round. The reasoning is simple: Heskey doesn't score goals and strikers are supposed to score goals. Never mind that the assist on England's best goal of the tournament was a Heskey special, and Defoe's goal was another example of the terror Handonivich feels when a ball approaches his face. The English loathe footballers that slow the game down and maintain possession, a sick Guardiola-like tendency, only more loathed by South Americans who have no concept of useful role players when there are five No. 10s on the field. But I'm not going to go into Heskey's career as useful and boring as it is. This is about Jozy Altidore.

I'm not pigeon-holing the young man into the Heskey mold as of yet, but let's note that as of now, he is exactly what Capello wishes Heskey was and Heskey is when at best. Altidore has zero goals so far at the World Cup, and still has been the best US player up to now. He dominates possession with the ball at his feet, and slows the game up so the US midfield can join the attack. As much as the Bradley goal against Slovenia was a product of Altidore's efforts, today's winner was his making: his run and his dangerous cross. He has drawn a sick five yellow cards in this tournament already, and players have found it much easier to foul him rashly than watch the young man turn them and bear down on goal like he did Jamie Carragher in the England tie.

So he already has a grasp of the physicality and speed that his unique soccer frame possesses, what remains for Jozy? Finishing ability, to simplify everything. The shot against Spain last year was deflected by Casillas, just as Green deflected away his chance in Game 1. He needs to beat the keeper 1v1, and not leave it up to chance. When balls come out to him six yards out, he can't sky it over the top, he must put it on the frame. But this is a relatively weak complaint, as he has shown he has the striking ability before if not the nerve necessary yet.

Dear God, Not Jonathan Bornstein

This is an apology. Jonathan, you somehow disproved my theory that you lacked any capability to defend or even play at a level worthy of CONCACAF competition. Thank you for that, and for not giving up another PK like the Netherlands game.

Ok, a half assed apology, but he did have a decent game and as his games go an excellent one. The defense for once looked good, but I give some credit to the hapless offense Algeria mustered this tournament. The US still almost managed to concede early, because again our defenders proved their inability to use their feet to corral the call: Demerit whiffed and Cherundolo also would later in the first half. The omission of Onyewu may not be permanent, but was necessary in light of his lack of match play. His physical presense won't be missed against anyone in this part of the draw anyways.

The Draw

Did anyone just see the Red Sea part upon Memut Ozil's game-winning goal against Ghana? I was rooting for the Black Stars as I was hoping for complete European failure at the Cup to serve a blow to their well-earned egos, but the result was magic for the US. A second round fixture against a team that the US owes payback for dumping them out four years ago is brilliant motivation for a team that often comes out flat. For the sake of argument, let's ignore the matchup and predict a US win. Their next opponent would be Uruguay or South Korea, both reasonably likable opponents for the Americans. That's two matches against teams ranked near or below the US to advance to the semifinals. Then just boldly hoping the US win again, it's a bit tricky. The top three teams in the world all are in the other quadrant if Spain finishes second in their group. So the US would be facing Spain (Hopefully not, for revenge's sake), Brazil, or the Netherlands in the semi. Let's not joke, this is harder than the final. All of those teams are better than every other side in the second round. I actually think the US style suits better when playing the Argentines, Chileans*, Germans, and the English, but Brazil is just too good at both ends.

*Seriously, this is the second best team on that side, although they probably will lose to Spain and in some convoluted way not make the next round, and then, Spain will be in this spot.

Although after what transpired today, every game is just gravy, and it seems more than a few of you might be coming along for the ride after that.

Words of Wisdom From the Unwise: Six Rules of College Etiquette

2010-04-12T02:46:00.000-05:00

Let's face it, I'm not the best at giving advice. It's not because I don't have tons of life experiences; my life experiences just don't match up with the normal experiences of everyday people. Let's be simple and just list things that happen to me that no one can hopefully relate to: I've won multiple syrup races, I've woke up on the Fourth of July and walked 12 miles because the buses weren't running on a holiday...in a thunderstorm*, I was once picked up by the police for walking dressed up as a Mexican and had to call for a ride at 2:30 because the police thought I was an "at-risk individual", and just to top it off I was evicted in a snowstorm and wrecked my truck just to top my sundae with a $150 cherry. Today, I will try to relate to everyone with simple words and a few jokes, because I'm bored as hell and one can only play Mass Effect 2 so many times.**

*About 10 miles in I broke a sandal and just kicked the other one away and walked barefoot. Yes, I was doing this in sandals, and I had a backpack on.
**I'm at four, because I had to play with all of my Mass Effect 1 characters. I need a "life."

Six Rules of College Etiquette
Editors's Note: Yes, I am my own editor. Certainly there are more than six rules, but here's a start. These rules generally can be filed under the subtopic of "How to not be a douche in an academic setting"

1st Rule of Etiquette
If you want to join our conversation, join it.

Life is not one big Twitter for you to share your crappy two cents. My video group partner for my Shakespeare class and I were talking about the writing process. We shared our thoughts on it: how we loved writing spontaneously, but couldn't see it as a job. We shared some ideas, and I talked about how I really hate letting people see my serious writing before its completion. Then, some dude just walks up and starts talking about how he's written two novels. Now, this is perfectly fine, I would invite him to join our discussion, but he is just kind of jittery. I ask what he wrote about, and then upon his answer (something about Arthurian legends in a modern era) and my partner gave the usual "Oh, like this and that."* We weren't judging his writing, but trying to relate to it and he seemed put off that we would try to understand. I'm one of those guys who can't picture fantasy in its own right, my creativity is in language not in imagination. You'll never get a terribly novel idea from me, but you'll certainly get it in a new way. So if the guy wanted to fill me in he could have tried, but instead just kind of hijacked the conversation and then disappeared to an non-extradition country to scrap our conversation for parts.

*I have a horrible attention span, and don't really absorb conversations unless they can be used
a)to blackmail or insult someone later
b)they are important
c)generally, anything a woman says (for multiple reasons)**
**They might care or call you on it, they're attractive so you might need to feign attention at least, and it never hurts to learn more about women to shove it in their faces when they say you know nothing

2nd Rule of Etiquette
Don't Be That Kid

We get it: you're smart and so socially awkward that this might highlight your day (No, I'm not going to rant about myself). Please don't answer every question without raising your hand in class and generally, don't be loud in any way. The correct procedure is to meekly raise your hand as if you are unsure; the teacher being an asshole will pick you*, then wow the class with the brilliant answer that you obviously knew because you are obviously brilliant. When you were in second grade, the teacher loved you blurting out answers and laughing aloud to their shitty jokes. When you are 20 years old and the teacher is trying to teach a class to thirty other students who dropped a grand on the class, you're a douche.**

*Not because they are really an asshole. It's just a normal reaction, you pick the least eager student who seems to want to participate.
**Is douche a gender neutral word? I've always used it as a male-only noun (the subject who caused this rant is female though), but generally because more men are douches. This may be because women are more generally referred to as bitches or sluts (generally female to female slander), but I still think being called a female dog or whore is far worse than a feminine hygiene product. Douche is also my go-to word, and probably the most used noun (person), action noun (douchebaggery), and adjective (douchy) on this site. I may have used it once or twice as a verb (douching it up).Therefore, its usage is of great concern to my musings.

3rd Rule of Etiquette
Professors: Make Class Interesting and Act Like You Give a Damn

Now, here's a novel idea. I've had a decent semester. My teachers have done a fine job presenting classes that are harder in nature in a fun way so as to keep my attention peaked. I had a teacher in Rolla who actually made the French Revolution boring...seriously. You know political upheaval, arguably the first "World War," and beheading galore and she made it sound like Pride and Prejudice.* Mostly, act like you became a professor to teach. I understand high school teachers being disgruntled and unhappy, they get paid nothing and most high school students are rat bastards with an overdeveloped sense of entitlement because their parents didn't raise them right.*** Professors, even the ones just starting, get paid reasonably well to teach at most ten hours a week, keep maybe 4-6 office hours, and work on research to further themselves and their university for a reasonable amount of time. Figure in maybe two-four hours of grading and lessons plans, and you have a twenty hour week of teaching and then whatever time you spend on research and staff meetings. Teaching, as one of my professors said, was the fun part; he'd do that for free. If you spent six-ten years of your life learning about a certain subject, you should have the enthusiasm to give your acquired knowledge back to others seeking the same satisfaction. I always believe that teaching a willing student is not a job, it is a pleasure and a privilege that few people will ever experience.

*I like Jane Austen, but the only way anybody of the next generation (not raised by my sister) hears of it, is if Michael Bay does a version where Darcy goes crazy and blows shit up. Nothing like a story where the main male character is a dick, on occasion has no personality, has a family of dicks, and the female lead still wants this guy who she most obviously despises. Nothing like powerful women who lower themselves to be with dicks.
**Apologies, I was writing about a Detective, a bird, or a dude named Richard.
***Oh, I was a rat bastard as well, but not due to any failing of my parents.

4th Rule of Etiquette
There is no need to Brag About a College Party; We Were There and It Sucked

College is defined in American culture by the party, in particular those held in fraternities. Now, I'm a fraternity man, but I agree wholeheartedly with my Korean professors sentiments on attending his first college party. Our parties are depressing. Two problems: We don't understand what fun is and secondly we have no idea what individuality is. Think back to your best moments in college. Were they done in large groups or small ones? Did they involve close friends or strangers? If you answered, large groups and strangers, you are either a serial rapist looking for anonymity or possibly the one guy who fist pumps to Miley Cyrus which the douchy DJ was playing ironically. It's the whole aura of kids sitting around drinking their worries away, but simultaneously creating more worries. Have you ever looked around at a party and noticed that no one is really having a good time? It's because they aren't.

5th Rule of Etiquette
Women: Don't go to Previously Mentioned Parties Alone or Abandon Your Friends There
Men: If you cross that line, you get what you deserve

A kid from American University caused a stir a couple weeks back when he said women who go to parties to get wasted are asking for it. This isn't a new position, as a female columnist wrote for a school newspaper last year the exact same opinion. I think the guys involved still should be castrated. Sadly, we are all right. This isn't a judgment on women only, nor fraternity parties either, but college students need to understand the consequences before they take actions. Date rape is a serious problem with two obvious sources: idiotic, reprehensible males and idiotic, careless females.* Drugging a woman is obviously a straight forward discussion, where prison is the most obvious solution. However, I think taking sexual advantage of a drunk woman no matter what her slurred speech might say is just as awful, but it's a gray area that no DA would want to cross. Trying to prosecute rape a charge on a man, who was probably also heavily inebriated** and did not cause the mental state of the victim, is not something that can be easily done. Rules: 1)Buddy System 2)Don't Bring the Douche Buddy 3)Don't Be A Douche 4)Tape Recorders 5)More dancing=Less Drinking=More Awkward Sober Sexual Advances

*The Female initiated date rape is either an urban legend or just accompanied by shameful feelings of regret by men. Usually reserved for fatties and ugos. (I swear it's not me talking, it's Bob Kelso You'll need to fast-forward to 1:20)
**If you are sober and you have sex with a drunk person who you are not currently or previously sexually active with I would advise: 1)Putting a retainer down for an attorney 2)Video taping consent or the entire thing 3)The Sex Contract.

6th Rule of Etiquette
College is Not a Job, Don't Make It So

College can be the best 3-15* years of your life. Go to class, then occasionally drink a martini and pretend you have some. Don't worry about B's, worry if those are the biggest boobs you've seen lately. Don't fight for attention, fight the guy disrespecting women at a party. Don't take advantage of people's weaknesses, find use of their strengths. Most of all, just take a deep breath and look at yourself. Don't ask what can I do to get money, women, power, or whatever you think is cool. Do something that makes you happy in the moment, and plan to do something that will make you feel fulfilled later in life. Life is a shitstorm of multiple dimensions, and the only way to glide through it happily is to find your calling, not your job. On the other hand, I wouldn't advise doing it my way; take it serious enough that one day you don't find yourself as a career student, because hell even Van Wilder graduated someday.

*By the time I'm done:
I will have certification to deliver: horses, babies, nuclear weapons, and sermons.
I will be able to marry you, divorce you, bury you, and claim your assets after death to pay back taxes
I could teach you Calculus, European History, Theology, Shakespeare, Creative Writing, and Jujitsu.
(Sadly, I could do all of those first five seriously as of now.)
I will have had class with your parents, you, and your children.
THERE WILL BE NO PAPER...OR TREES!!??!??!!?!!!?!!!!!

Bonus:
Short and simple phrases without explanations or use

No shirt, no shoes, why pants?
Class before 8AM is unacceptable
Alcohol before 8AM, Only If Breakfast Drinks are Involved
Caucasians are Mestizos
Breakfast, The Meal of Overachievers
Lunch, the Business Meal
Dinner, The Meal of Friends
Midnight Huddle House, the Meal of Stoners and Drunks
Mountain Dew and Cheetos, the Official Meal of LAN parties and WOW
Pizza is Not a Food Group, But It Is Five Out of Six (Bread, Cheese, Meat, Vegetables, Fat)
Regular School+Nursing School=More Hot Chicks
Nursing School Students+School-Hotness=Nurses in Real World
It's not Chinese unless it's a buffet and followed by a overpowering sense of gluttony
If your English class teaches you nothing else, hopefully you learned "rain on your wedding day" is just shitty and not ironic
If you sit through a Calculus class as a non-Math major and think "I hope I can use this practically in the real world," getting your head start on eHarmony and possibly any sort of roulette (the game, Russian, Chat is in your future).
Philosophy is the major for people who don't know what they want to do with their lives, but want to explore why they feel that way.
Psychologists make you pay them to repeat that exact same experience.
History majors either like History or just douchy enough to like stating their opinions on anything and listening to themselves.

Sexting While High Should Be A Crime Only in Combination

2010-04-06T01:24:00.000-05:00

Note: My brain doesn't work particularly well on occasion and needs a spring cleaning, so here is as random and probably off the hook post as you may get from me. As a person unlikely to ever be convicted of the crimes I mention, I feel I have grounds to rant about them.

The War on Efficient Drug Enforcement

Now, there are many things you can't do in this country. A few are universally despised, frowned upon, and prosecuted vigorously: Murder, rape, assault, theft (from shoplifting to Madoffing), drug offenses, and traffic violations. Essentially these are felonies and in the case of traffic violations, money grabs that normally cannot be defended anyways. One of the above does not fit. Violent crimes (murder, rape, and assault) are no doubters; we just can't allow this to happen. The borders of where these occur is a greater problem than the idea, but I'll touch on that another time. Thefts are certainly something worth curbing in the support of property rights ordained by our law. Traffic stops "save lives" and "reduce accidents", and are not in any way just another tax upon drivers nor do they put public servants at unneeded risk standing upon busy highways. Now, drug offenses are somewhat of a mystery to me.

I won't argue that drugs are good. Certainly some, even in their purest form, can kill you, but that is a choice to be made. Neither do I think it would be wise to legalize drugs across the board, nor to make them regulated by the government. I don't think you should allow children to do drugs whenever they please, but as I often say parenting and education should be a better means of prevention than fear of arrest. However, currently our jails are full of young men who were caught in possession of drugs, and some for intent to distribute marijuana. To our south, people are just disappearing and murders are rampant, due to the trade of drugs into our country, chiefly marijuana.

Marijuana is the interesting starting point for decriminalization of drugs. The side-effects of marijuana are essentially similar to those of alcohol, with the exception that alcohol while acting as a depressant, stimulates risky behavior. Marijuana is the official drug of those who like couches, fast food, naps, and if you're up for it maybe some sex or TV. Now, marijuana has been labeled a gateway drug. To me, this implies that the use of marijuana increases the chance of doing harder drugs. In fact, this is product of the way marijuana is distributed. Drugs do not typically lead to each other, but a man who is already willing to illegally distribute a relatively harmless drug might be willing to distribute a harmful drug for more cash. Already a criminal, what is to stop one from just amping it up a bit.

Again, we should put restrictions on it, but reasonable ones. Driving while high, still not a good idea. Want to put an age limit on it? Fine. To criminalize someone who either smokes it or grows it for themselves to smoke, is ridiculous to all ends. I would even argue that criminalizing its sale is ridiculous. The world's drug trade, whether marijuana, poppy, or cocaine, is driven by United States demand. Therefore, the criminal results of this (cartels, Afghani warlords) are the responsibility of the United States. While poppy derivatives and cocaine/crack are certainly banes to society, the effect of marijuana on a hostile, violent society which is overdependent on the vastly more harmful alcoholic beverages is not something to be overlooked. The realization is if the 17-year old kid who died falling over a balcony was high and not drunk, chances are he's not dancing on a ledge.

Now, harder drugs are another issue. They destroy bodies, families, entire countries, and our coffers. The failed war on drugs attacked both the distributor and the user, when in reality the second did not need that. I always remember the story of Willie May Aikens, who was jailed for twenty years after receiving a life-sentence for possession of crack-cocaine with intent to distribute. This came as result of the lowering of possession laws to where almost any amount constituted intent to sell, and led many men, mostly African-American, to serve longer sentences than their crimes deserved. The government could have invested the money needed to imprison these men into state-run rehabilitation facilities; perhaps, some would get better, some wouldn't and would continue their spiral until they were re-convicted or dead. Instead, we have men serving their time, clean as a whistle, but unable to ever escape the bondage of their sentences. Even if released, none of the others would be as fortunate as Willie, who had the Royals fan-base and his family behind him. These men would be jobless, listless, and most likely eventually homeless if released, so prison is probably a better place.

The distribution of such drugs should remain illegal, but without having to spend the time or money going after users, the police forces would have more time to actually go after the drug trade. If marijuana, by far the most widespread and most important drug when it comes to the Mexican Cartel wars, is decriminalized, even more resources are available. Certainly, the cartels focus would also shift further towards marijuana, eliminating some sale of smaller quantities of far more dangerous drugs.

If you think I'm suggesting Americans get high as opposed to drinking and smoking cigarettes, you might be on to something. If you think I'm advocating the legalization of heroin, you probably need to loosen up a bit (a blunt would be efficient). I remember the trouble that the stigmatization of marijuana created in college. As uncool as it may sound, some of my fraternity brothers wanted to smoke a hookah on our front lawn. We disallowed it on the grounds that someone might imply that they were smoking pot. Oh the humanity, dudes sitting on a lawn getting high in a vaguely Middle Eastern manner. Do you know what that leads to? If you answered either nothing, something vaguely homosexual, or mass calorie consumption, you are a bloody genius.

Sexual Deviants
First off, sexting between teenagers should not be a crime. Do I think the teenagers should be having sex? No Do I find them sending dirty texts creepy? Yes Do I think close up shots of genitalia are more likely to produce abstinence? Certainly. The problem with Americans is constantly the fear of intimacy, whether that be emotional or physical. We are people of space: that's why people get divorced, have separate bedrooms, and cannot seem to grasp the idea of safe-sex. The idea of sex as pleasurable is highly illogical to the American psyche, so when presented with it we act as if the idea never occurred to us. So kids, who have no idea what a proper set of genitals look like, send pictures to each other to answer questions that should have been taught years ago. Meanwhile, we condemn their actual interactions, while promoting ideas which instigate these actions (teen drinking, cheerleading skirts, 300). Let the kids have their fun, but teach them responsibility and you may find that the horrifying close up of a penis keeps your daughter a virgin well into her first semester of college and your son well into his mid-20s, maybe early 30s.*

*If you need me to explain this, don't worry I'm going to write about it tomorrow or Wednesday, in my weekly sex column, this week to be titled "Why the All-Girl Threesome is the Butler of Threesomes" At this point, I hope my parents have been so disgusted they checked out, because this might be awkward.

Erykah Badu, we salute you. I don't find her remotely attractive, and there aren't many women who I can say that about. But if she wants to get naked in public, who cares? Now, again I'm not suggesting that public nudity be completely legal, but come on. The human body and the body of any living creature for that matter is a beautiful thing (except for you opossum and mole rat, you're hideous), but for some reason we find it dangerous. Now, male nudity is another matter to me, and I can somewhat understand that you have to convict both sexes or you are committing to a double standard. The penis is an ugly and dangerous appendage to have floating around out there. The realization that nudity is something that sexual offenders do is completely ridiculous. So if you want to put up areas where you can't be naked, I'll go along. Churches, schools, restaurants with kid's menus, sporting events, and anywhere essentially where children frequent shouldn't have frequent nude visitors. But anywhere else, why not? Are you worried about adults seeing naked adults? You should be more worried if that offends them, as they are probably somewhat deviant themselves. Are you worried about a random child seeing someone naked? If parents can't explain sex to their children, then the next rant is more than likely to concern them.

Sweet Tea Bourbon

Jeremiah Weed has been around for a while, and it blows my mind. But Firefly Sweet Tea Bourbon is the subject of today's discussion, because it's quietly marketing itself. Yes, it's sweet tea, but with bourbon effects on inhibition. If they don't institute mandatory chastity belts south of the Mason-Dixon line, there might be a pregnancy epidemic. What's funny is this isn't a joke entirely? Every person who hears of this immediately thinks, there are going to be a lot of pregnant teenagers out there. Sure, there have been flavored vodka and wine coolers and occasionally actual wine, but never before have we combined the two most flavorful drinks common to the American South with such brutal perfection. The inherent result is surely not going to contribute to the advancement of society, but perhaps will strengthen the Republican voting base for their 2028-32 campaigns. We might have to refer to this next generation as the Firefly kids, and not in the way I'd hoped.

Oh, do you need 2032 Republican campaign statements?
"We Proved Global Warming Was a Myth. Now, where can we find Savannah, Georgia?"
(I could have used any city but I figured a Southern one would be more appropriate. Saying Florida would have been melodramatic)
"We would have never needed so much children's healthcare, if it weren't for that damn Firefly epidemic"
"Ummm...what deficit? When we dropped bombs on the newly democratically elected government of Iran, you weren't demanding transparency."
"Thank God we cut Social Security, because we needed the elderly to rejoin the workforce and make the country great like their prime in the 1980's"
"Four more years of President Haliburton"

Unless of course you vote for me in 2028, which would result in:
*this assumes society has taken a nosedive at some point
"Everybody just chill the fuck out. Oh, you're already high, good."
"Cure for global warming? One word...Annihilatrix ."
"I'd like you to meet my vice-president, Jesus. Jesus, say hi to the people."
"Hola!"
(Shots fired)
"Oh my God! They've killed Jesus!"
"No, the cool one."

If you made it this far, feel free to lash out at my pro-marijuana, pro-sex, and anti-sweet tea bourbon tirades. Perhaps suggest other ways Frisky Dingo could help the world.

Remember, if they wouldn't have let the gifted kids skip D.A.R.E., I wouldn't be a raging alcoholic with an addiction to smack.

The Downside of Freedom

2010-03-25T01:35:00.003-05:00

“To know how to free oneself is nothing; the arduous thing is to know what to do with one's freedom” -Andre Gide

“Freedom is a package deal - with it comes responsibilities and consequences” -Anonymous
(I think I'm going to claim this one.)

"Freeeeeeeeeeeeeedom!" -Mel Gibson
Except for the Jews, he says.

We laud ourselves on our freedom, almost to a point of arrogance and stupidity. When we attack other nations, it is to protect our freedom, not to promote theirs. When other nations don't agree with us, we simply replace their identity with ours. We didn't call them American fries; they were freedom fries. Freedom has become the American buzzword; no one else sells freedom like we do. For example, the French want to ban traditional Muslim clothing. Sure, it might be because it's degrading to women and other good reasons, but the idea is still there. They are oppressors, while we allow anything and everything.

Our country's government is founded upon two incredibly vague documents: The Constitution and the Bill of Rights. One could argue that even the majority of our amendments contain vast loopholes to be explained and deliberated in federal courts. Ironically, our founding document, the Declaration of Independence was not vague; it was just as brief but specifically stated what we wanted to express. I'm not arguing that the vagueness of the documents is a failure. In fact, the brilliance of our Constitution is it's inherent flexibility, and the room it allows for deviation upon interpretations. However, the things it guarantees to us aren't always used positively and it doesn't always wear its years well.

The Second Amendment is the most straightforward of any amendment, yet millions of people still vote Republican because they think Democrats don't believe in it. The right to bear arms is a fundamental right to protect oneself, one's family, and our country. No one is calling you out for owning a gun for protection or to hunt with. However, the amendment does not give you a right to own an assault rifle or conceal a weapon. Assault rifles aren't for protection or game; they're meant to kill lots of people. Concealing a weapon does not make one safer; it just adds another variable to a situation which already had the possibility of someone coming to bodily harm. That being said, this amendment should have exceptions. Threatening someone with gun violence should be punishable by removal of one's second amendment rights. To own and carry a firearm is a responsibility that requires senility, sound judgment, and caution, as the gun is just as likely to end up committing violence or malice towards its owner (or on behalf of its owner) than it is to someone intending harm. I understand that the Constitution guarantees your right to possess firearms, but it doesn't grant the right to use the guns to murder, maim, or even threaten your fellow Americans. Gun owners like to say "Guns don't kill people; people kill people." It always confused me. Was anyone ever implying that the guns were the problem?

The First Amendment protects speech, press, religion, and assembly. But at what cost? The so-called freedom that our young men died for in Iraq and Afghanistan legalizes the protest of their funerals by fundamentalist Christians. People spend their time worrying about the separation of church and state, while not realizing that it protects their church from government interference just as much as it keeps the Ten Commandments out of courthouses. The ideas behind freedom of religion are simple, you don't bother us and we won't bother you. But what happens when a group goes out of their way to attack public servants for doing their duty? Nothing, because we live in a free country where being a dick isn't a liability, it's a necessary component of Americanism.

The freedom of speech they fought for allows disgruntled Americans to yell nigger at black congressmen and faggot at homosexuals. I'm not one to be bothered by words, but these same people spit on a man for voting on a bill. Sure, the bill may turn out to be complete shit, but in essence they spit on a man for trying to get health care for the poor, children, and the sick. Who in their right mind reads the Bible, the Declaration of Indepedence, or any document Americans hold dear and thinks that helping the young, poor, or sick people is counter to American ideals.* Actually, scratch that because none of the current protesters have ever read any of those sources, or tried to understand them. Where is the accountability in American freedom? Truth be told, there is none. One could argue that defamation, libel, and slander are illegal, but for the most part, ridiculous statements are constantly paraded around by ALL Americans and no one gives a damn, which leads me to my next point

*Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

(If you don't know where this is from, I reserve the right to box you up and extradite you to a place of my choice, probably Western Morocco or the Sudan.)

Freedom of the press has evolved as well since 1787. The way television has revolutionized our way of life is incomparable, even considering the current impact of the Internet on daily life. Even radio and the ability to hear a speech while not present, changed the political and social aspect of America. In 1948, a newspaper incorrectly picked the winner of the Presidential campaign; now John King plays with some map that updates the voting by county with relatively constant updates. So the accountability of media should have gone up, due to the immediate scrutiny faced by them. Instead, we have three 24-hour "news-channels" that spew constant garbage at viewers. CNN gives opinions from all sides, just not good ones. MSNBC is one large Obama talking point, and FOX News literally has one hour of news programming a day. So this brings up another question, what do we constitute as press?

Does a TV host meet the same standards as a newspaper columnist would have to meet? Does an opinion delivered that directly incites a crowd already showing tendencies of intolerance and violence constitute an offense? Hilariously, no, it doesn't. Just because I told you to kill someone and you did doesn't make me a murderer. Sure, I'm still responsible from a moral standpoint and someone could charge me with conspiracy, but if I just yelled "Kill someone" into a crowd of people and someone did do it, I'm certainly not going to be held liable for that. The responsibility does not lie upon the press to make sure that it is not purposely inciting riots and violence, but rather upon the assembled group of people. When the people themselves are incapable of weeding the bullshit out of their news garden, it leads them to act upon bullshit as if it were fact. These same people know somehow that they are also allowed by the Constitution to assemble. Unless...

They are assholes. The First Amendment does clearly state that the assembly must be peaceful. This is where shady oppressive men like myself should step in and state that peaceful is in no way defined by the amendment. Coming to assembly armed could be construed as not peaceful, berating other citizens could be construed as not peaceful, being a general dick to anybody and everybody could be construed as not peaceful, and bringing propaganda (signs, pamphlets, shirts, anything sold by Freedom Works, which ironically opposes a government which protects their rights to be dicks) implying the need for violence is certainly over the line. In cases of assembly, free speech can take a back seat (like it does on college campuses).

Hateful speech to no one is nothing; hateful speech to a crowd of hateful people is as much a weapon as a gun is. Tomorrow, I will write more about how eerily similar our current "popular" movements are to those in Munich back in 1924, but suffice to say if you get a group of disenfranchised people, give them a pulpit (FOX News) and a purpose (Fighting against their "oppressive" government), and you are asking for trouble. Men flying into tax buildings out of protest are just a beginning to what sheep with ideologies are capable of. If you don't believe me, think of how many sheep dug and filled the graves in Eastern Europe in the 1940's with just xenophobia as a companion.

Let's Abort this Health Care Argument Right Now: Checklists

2010-03-22T14:55:00.000-05:00

Okay, so a watered down bill was just passed. (A Progressive's Case Against This Bill (Liberal with a Backbone) or read Congressman Weiner's response. We did it, but not good enough.) It will help millions of poor Americans but not exactly be universal, it will certainly cut back on insurance refusal to those who need insurance, and it will cost us billions of dollars. How does that make you feel?

Angry?
Are you a Republican/Nihilist? Do nothing, offer nothing in return, watch as something happens, decry those who acted, yell random fear words into the air, hope the next group continues to be your voting base.
Are you white, fundamentalist, perhaps a bit insane? Blame the black people.
Are you against abortion? Completely ignore the facts on abortion and gloss over the Americans are a bunch of rubes factor.
Do you think the government is going to use this as a means to steal your children? Ha, if we thought your children were worth something, we'd have education reform instead.
You are CEO for an HMO/PPO? Nobody gives a damn, go jump in your Scrooge McDuck gold pool and swim in for money for a while. Even better, get a job in banking, I heard that they are paying well these days.
Are you a libertarian who believes in small government? You may have something, but you're still a rich or paranoid ass.
Are you honestly concerned about government spending as it pertains to the country's future? Bingo, that one counts.

Happy?
Are you a bleeding heart liberal who thinks this is great no matter what? This bill is weak and built mostly on a bed of stupid compromises and weak hopes that it will pay for itself.
You believe it will pay for itself? We as a country are suffering from an epidemic of obesity. Yes, we found a way to make a condition in no way contagious an epidemic (which I know is hyperbolic). Our health care costs will continue to go up, even if government controls help keep costs down.
You like abortions, if it was up to you, you'd get one every day? Ummm...seek help.
You have an unhealthy love for Obama? He's not God. We can only hope this works, and he doesn't end up being the Millard Fillmore of black presidents. Although, technically he's think of Black presidents.
You currently have no insurance, because someone busted the economy two years ago, your student loan bills are eating away at your paycheck, you have a shitty job, or it just isn't cost effective for you? Congratulations, we might have something to help, except for student loan kid...you're still fucked.

As a citizen of the fine battleground state of Missouri, I have a vast variety of friends to choose from. I have Liberals like myself, born and raised that way. Then, there are some who a liberals by socioeconomic status, that is they are poor and reasonable. Others found the way because they have what I like to call a heart or empathy for their fellow man. At the same time, I have Conservative friends of all kinds. Engineers, who firmly are anti-tax and anti-helping people, because they are rich and don't give two shits about their fellow man. Racists who hate Democrats, because black people are Democrats. Fiscal Conservatives who actually grasp what is the greatest Conservative principle; libertarians act as their batshit wing to make them look even more credible. Gun and bible toters, who think that government is not trustworthy, and spends its entire existence trying to disarm and sodomize them. So I get it, health care is a contentious topic. Here's what I don't get.

All of you. Republicans spent two terms calling us un-American because we don't want to blow up other countries. Now, they don't want to help their fellow Americans out, and it becomes pot-kettle black. Democrats spend our whole time saying we are the party of ideals, and we come out with a weasel of a bill that caters to our special-interests while attacking ours. We'll see how that plays out when Pfizer is running against Aetna in the 2020 Presidential election, sponsored by the Taco Bell Supreme Court. The funny thing is all of the ideas listed under the "angry" above were real concerns voiced by my friends, and my friends aren't dumb. Most hold college degrees, and the ones who don't have a good head upon their shoulders. But this time, I'll call you out.

1)This bill might help some Black people, Tavis Smiley generally does talk to black communities about ideas that help them, and that is fine. It will help more white people, so race doesn't have anything to do with it. Obama isn't going to create a Nubian master race; we already tried that and Northern Iowa, St. Mary's and Cornell still won. (I apologize, but I had to go there)
2)Abortion is going to continue at the exact same rate as before. The people who get abortions usually aren't smart enough to know they can get it, kids will still throw babies in trash cans, and parents will have their child's mistakes washed clean. Abortion rates are not higher in countries with universal health care, because they have proper sex education and we don't.
3)This is not the end of mankind; this isn't even socialism. Stop yelling the phrases that FOX News tells you. The same pot-kettle blackness of screaming against the tyranny of the US government comes from the same people who thought the Patriot Act was a good idea.
4)When I saw the children being taken away comment, I died a bit inside. The government can't support the foster children program at its current state. Someone has to take children who the government takes away. Of all the claims, this was the most ignorant and most sad.
5)The world tomorrow will be just as the world was today: a big lumping piece of human destroyed shit, and we will live our lives the exact same ways. Except now, some poor people won't. Their children will be healthier, and they will live longer. They will in turn either contribute more to further the American dream or become completely worthless, but they'll at least have the option to get treatments for sickness. Republicans will still ask Obama to shine their shoes when they see him, and liberals will still walk with a cowardice towards all living things, but perhaps brighter days are here.

Now, that we have dealt with the elephant(s) in the room, we can move on to issues that matter before coming back to health care when it's begins to cost too much in Obama's next term (find me someone to beat him). Jobs, education, the "myth" that is climate change, oil dependency, irrational wars in inhospitable places, and the bigger elephants, China and India.

Because I'm sure after reading that you want more, here are some fun links to my views that I brushed here and probably didn't elaborate enough on.

What I Think We Should Be Focusing On
What Your Affiliations Imply
Why American Hegemony is Ineffective
My Takes on Abortion and Sex Ed

The Progressive Insurance Commercials Are Making Our Children Facists

2010-03-20T03:13:00.000-05:00

Sure, she may just seem like an annoying Molly Shannon clone, but trust me she is inundating us with communistic rhetoric. You get to compare prices. Who the hell decided this was a good idea? Usually, some jackass would just tell you what you have to pay and then saddle you with as high of a price that could be deemed feasible to the value of the average car on the road, but these bastards went over the line. Now, you may say its just a commercial, who gives a rat's ass? You know who, St. Augustine. When he founded our nation back in the 4th Century, he set down rules.

Rule One) Fuck the poor. They are just a bunch of Manichean freaks, whose heretical values inherently lead to mistresses, gay sex, and heavy snorkeling, whatever that is. Sure, I may have been a Manichean once and I may have never worked a day in my life, but that doesn't excuse those of you who weren't born into such entitlement.

Rule Two) Progress is dangerous. especially if it involves public safety. Specifically, meat inspectors get in the way of everyday Americans, as do health inspectors, and fireman. We should be free to sit on our ass all day, sometimes pausing to have sex with the woman with whom we fathered a child out of wedlock, then philosophize about God and Jesus, hoping that eventually our message will be used by Texans to completely destroy the minds of children.

Rule Three)Who gives two shits about your health. I lived 76 years, and as I mentioned I was a whoremonger. Dying is fun anyways; God's waiting on you. Of course, I know this as I am dead, but you should blindly follow my lead anyways. Chances are you are going to hell anyways, but why wait? Damnation can be a hell of a time, and if your lucky maybe I'll let you purge yourself in the fires and then come join me for whatever the hell we do here.

Rule Four) No market controls and no commercials with facist ideas like price comparison We had market controls in Rome; it was the gladius. If someone cheated you, you stuck him like a pig. I assume that similar business deals occur in your time, and therefore, no one need protect you. You can always kill your Jew banker and drop him in the extensive sewer system. What your bankers aren't Jews, they're just pricks? Hmmm, I don't know if killing a Christian is just; try giving them more money.

Now, one might say Augustine's ideas are harsh, and others might say that I completely made that all up and I'm going to hell. Honestly, Catholic hell is ten times better than America for a poor man like myself, and the weather is more predictable. Sure, the whoremonger comment was harsh, but when you father a child with a concubine you get what comes to you. However, this shouldn't discount the fact that I should be able to completely re-invent history. If Glenn Beck can tell his viewers that Teddy Roosevelt was a fascist and Texas can change their curriculum to support conservative and some false principles, I can say that the man who is highly responsible for modern Christianity was kind of a dick.

Now for Progressivism being fascist, I can tell you that Beck isn't completely off. No, I take that back he is batshit crazy. The United States enacted many laws during the first World War that directly contrasted with the First Amendment. You could have led with this being the reason Woodrow Wilson was a fascist, but no you decided it was because there were "fasces" on the dime. Yeah, because Roman law has nothing to do with American ideals. Now as for Teddy Roosevelt, someone should be taken down a notch.

First off, anyone who disparages Teddy Roosevelt needs a firm ass kicking, because if Teddy were here, he would gladly provide it. Teddy once gave a speech with a bullet lodged inside him; Glenn can't make it through a TV show without crying. He also made this the country the horrible place it is with meat inspections and regulations on food and drugs. He was also kind enough to reserve some of the country, so that one hundred years later Republicans will have new places to drill for oil.

Progressivism was borne out of the strangest of people: Christians. I know how awful it is for women to vote, work hours to be regulated, companies to be held accountable, and our natural beauty to be preserved for our children. Sure, blacks were still treated despicably to which slightly racist Teddy said:

"I have not been able to think out any solution of the terrible problem offered by the presence of the Negro on this continent, but of one thing I am sure, and that is that inasmuch as he is here and can neither be killed nor driven away, the only wise and honorable and Christian thing to do is to treat each black man and each white man strictly on his merits as a man, giving him no more and no less that he shows himself worthy to have."

(Okay, he might have been a dick, too.) Overall, however the state of the American republic was stronger from a human perspective at the beginning of the 1920's. Glenn likes to say Progressives want to lead us to a Socialist utopia, without even realizing that both of those words are positive. Jesus himself was a socialist, and interestingly enough communist would probably be a better term considering he lived in a commune with a group of comrades who supported each other spiritually, emotionally, and physically. Socialism is the direct result of human empathy, an emotion not found in rich people. Utopia is the unreachable goal, because as I have previously stated utopia cannot exist with humans living in it. Symbiosis is not in our genes. If we created a place with low crime, high literacy, hot chicks, and universal health care it wouldn't be a utopia. It would be Sweden.

Athletes are Human (Until the Inevitable Robot Conquest), and We Could Care Less

2010-02-23T19:03:00.000-06:00

I let this one marinate a while so by now anyone who has ever watched ESPN has seen Tiger Woods apologizing for his infidelities. I, being one not inclined to public apologies, did not watch it live, and still have not actually watched it in its entirety. However, because the news cycle was incredibly slow on Friday, I caught the entire gist and analysis on ESPN's simulcast of The Herd on ESPN-U, and later on the Scott Van Pelt Show. Let's not get into whether or not his apology was earnest. In essence, the act of apologizing is far more important to human beings than the apology's message; frankly, no one gives a damn if you are sorry as long as you attempt to say so. The obsession with apologies and the idea of his "betrayal" to Americans is what I want to get into.

Americans are strange beings when it comes to sports. Not because we build athletes up, everybody does that. We, and the British, take as much pleasure in tearing them down. However, the British let them lie (Compare the treatment of American athletes to English fullback John Terry who bedded his teammates girlfriend: no apology and no forgiveness. Jokes and shame galore followed by piss-poor form from Terry for Chelsea.), and we insist that we must redeem our heroes and build them up again. So, athletes publicly apologize for transgressions that are obvious, unless they are unpleasant people to begin with where apology would never be accepted (see Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens). The necessity for apologies in grown from a naivety towards the lives of athletes. The most blatant example was my fifth-grade class cheering when OJ was acquitted; it was obvious that OJ was a murderer, but we couldn't come to grips with Nordberg renting a Hertz in Chicago after he murdered his wife in LA. We're shocked when athletes risk their health and integrity to hit a few dingers and make more money, despite knowing that it was both legal and at the time cheering their exploits.

When a young man stands in front of us and tells us he thought the rules didn't apply to him, guess what: they don't. Tiger Woods can do whatever the hell he wants within the law, and only Elin should be concerned with it. But we want all of our athletes to be Payne Stewart, Cal Ripken Jr., or Larry Bird, white and uncontroversial. Tiger was the exception, but not because he was black. He was the exception because he was a robot, a man who never gave any feelings unless we photographed his backswing. Why should a man who has earned over a billion dollars with his hard work and determination be judged for overdoing his social life? Perhaps the problem is that he never lived properly. He's been on a regimen for so long, that he skipped important steps, and then found himself married with a family because that is how life is supposed to progress. However, he is an athlete and isn't human, and thus we condemn him for his faults. By destroying him personally, we are taking claim for his success, which is highly illogical.

Every successful athlete is so because they work hard. We applaud this work ethic as a penultimate version of the American spirit, and when they show signs of slacking we attack them. They are, in a sense, no different than a race horse. Sure, we pay them lots of money, but in return we ask for their bodies, time, and most importantly to dispense with their backgrounds, unless it makes for a good story. For some athletes, this means a departure from the urban lifestyle to a suburban lifestyle we more readily accept. It's why NBA players have to wear suits, and the story of young black men being taken in by white families are glorified. For Tiger, it meant nothing; he was a golfer and that was his identity. So when asked to portray this role, he was already there, but he had another problem. He was never allowed to live life properly as a normal man would. This doesn't mean sleeping around; it implies a level of freedom that making yourself into the best individual athlete in history doesn't afford. What reasoning does one have to be the greatest, if personal gain is not allowed?

His situation doesn't tell all. Another falling from grace occurred with Michael Vick, and his is more formulaic for an athlete. Athlete grows up poor, gets money, takes along poor friends, poor friends and athlete make bad choice, and athlete gets thrown under bus as an example. I'm not saying what he did wasn't wrong; it just is understandable if you value human beings well enough to note their faults. We're appalled that a rich black man had a dog fighting ring, while we have ignored for years that poor people of all races do as well. We think killing animals is a horrific crime, while giving our money to an organization who thinks it's much more humane to kill the animals than to temporarily house them until a home can be found. Every day animals die in fights, little white kids light cats on fire, mistreated animals kill children, and PETA kills animals because it's "humane", yet our pin-up child for animal mistreatment is a rich African-American, hardly a standard case of abuse. If a white man was found to have done the same things as either of these men, it still would be controversial, but an onus is put upon young black men to be not just upstanding, but perfect individuals because white society likes to imply that all young black men are criminals.

To my next point, one of my friends noted that she wouldn't watch the Super Bowl, because athletes are criminals. However, the same laws which govern normal people govern athletes. The same crimes that they commit are committed by thousands of other people in the United States. Her view, more common in women, stems from a deep problem of athletes being thought to be role models. Sure, lots of young boys say they want to grow up to be like a famous athlete, but in reality, how long do these dreams extend? Most young men find the idealistic view of athletes to be a falsehood, as adoration for any human should be. We find their flaws charming, ways to make them personable to losers working 9-5 without their poise and success. Detractors, however, use this as an excuse to chastise us for our fandom. They believe that it isn't possible for us to simultaneously acknowledge the faults of athletes while praising their achievements. I lament that little credit is given to fans which can accept flawed humans. We forgive because we are their harshest critic.

The sports fan doesn't feel betrayed by these athletes with the possible exception of baseball fans who don't know how they feel because they are robots, too. The people who feel betrayed are non-fans (which sometimes overlap with excessive animal love), who think this man used his status to deceive and manipulate women, his wife especially. This bothers me, because I fully believe women to be of equal if not greater intelligence than men, so they don't get to claim manipulation is a male tactic. Flashing money is, but I don't think Tiger Woods goes all Pac-Man. The women had to know who he was, and knowing that knew he was married, this is in an affront to his marriage as large as his actions. In comparison, fans feel betrayed if they already despise the person. Atlanta fans hate Vick, because he ruined the franchise for one year. They also hated John Rocker because he sucked, not because he was a racist douchebag. Production is the name of the game, and as long as you produce we don't care. That's why I don't get the betrayal; if we don't really care, they don't owe us anything.

Aside: After being so harsh upon these men one would think we would judge them more fiercely, but we sometimes give them more credit than is due. Ray Lewis was obviously involved in a murder at a night club in Atlanta, yet a year later he's the Super Bowl MVP and we could care less. Marvin Harrison, as it appears, killed a man in Philadelphia or at least had him killed, after being the best WR of the 00's. When it happened, despite evidence to the contrary, we believed Marvin as we did OJ. Len Bias, died tragically of a cocaine overdose, which we lamented because he was an promising athlete, but we couldn't give two shits for a young black man in the ghetto suffering the same fate.

Note on Tiger rumors: The stories that have come out are some of the strangest ever. First, as a man, I would like to question: If you had a billion dollars, don't you think you could find a mistress as attractive as your wife? This isn't a Tiger thing necessarily, look at a long history of political mistresses and flings. Aren't there attractive women attracted to power, or is their attractiveness power enough? Secondly, a porn star stated that Tiger got her pregnant twice. Now, if I'm understanding this correctly, we have a porn star not on birth control, which is akin to someone saying while riddled with bullet holes, "They've stabbed me." Victimization should stop as soon as publicity becomes involved. The only victim at this point is anyone dumb enough to pay to read about this. Last, I'm pretty sure his wife did hit him and the car with a golf club, but to say so would directly be implicating her with assault. While charges wouldn't result, I think Elin has taken enough shit up to this point having a husband who obviously can't see that she's a freaking Swedish model.

If Life had a Soundtrack: Gooey Duet Version

2010-02-14T15:26:00.001-06:00

Note: Videos do not appear on Facebook. Sorry.

Relationships don't work they way they do on television and in the movies. Will they? Won't they? And then they finally do, and they're happy forever. Gimme a break. Nine out of ten of them end because they weren't right for each other to begin with, and half of the ones who get married get divorced anyway, and I'm telling you right now, through all this stuff I have not become a cynic. I haven't. Yes, I do happen to believe that love is mainly about pushing chocolate covered candies and, y'know, in some cultures, a chicken. You can call me a sucker, I don't care, because I do believe in it.

Last year, I basically showed you my cynical side, and don't be afraid it is still there. I still fully believe Valentine's Day is a holiday which is only good for women in relationships. The men hate spending money, single people hate those attached, and some clever women realize this is the only day that they feel fully appreciated. I still believe that men and women should be more willing to express themselves romantically on days which are not predetermined. However, this year I'll do something different. Here's some duets for the day, since nothing says "I love you" better than a song (or lots of money in our culture).

Today's scene: Love and Duets aka Awkward Karaoke Songs that Make Single People Hate You

Let's start with a simple question: who had the greatest duets of all time?

Now this isn't the song I wanted, but it's necessary to convey the idea of their duets being the best

Marvin Gaye and Tammi Terrell - "If I Could Build My Whole World Around You"

As a man, always think of this song from Marvin's perspective. It's short for sure, but the three verses are nothing short of amazing. Their voices are very much in love, whether this extended further, I'm not one to say. It's very clear that Marvin hit a personal down time when Tammi died of a brain tumor at 25. I think that she was his muse for these songs, and with her gone, he went another direction: first, social commentary and later romantic soul numbers which created the "quiet storm" genre. Two extremely tragic stories wasn't quite fair for these two, each who brought us so much happiness with their music.

Watch their faces on that first performance, and then watch this next one and you'll see where I'm going.

Edward Sharpe and the Magnetic Zeros - "Home"

This is far cuter and sappier than even Marvin and Tammi achieved, and Motown was built on cute and sappy. Albeit, these two may look more like they went tripping together or live with Charles Manson, but it doesn't stop this from being a great love song. Simple lines say more than eloquent soliloquies sometimes.

"Home is wherever there is you."

Weezer ft. Sara Bareilles- "I Want You To"

This wasn't originally a duet, and it sucks in a "Weezer nerd-rock doesn't age well" sort of way (The video did have Megan Fox, who is probably the hottest woman to ever necessitate a hand double.). Now, if they would have done it originally this way, they would certainly have hit on something. I also won't complain anytime you decide to include Sara Bareilles on your album. The idea should probably be credited to some other nerd rocker for this happening though, but Weezer perfected it by actually letting her sing. Listen to the one Rivers sings by himself, and it's pretty strange even if you hear the duet first to illustrate that he's singing a conversation between two people.

Sappiest part:
Rivers:"Your mom cooked meatloaf, even though I don't eat meat."
Sara:"You love me so much, you took one for the team."

Swell Season (Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova)-"Falling Slowly"

I accidentally left this out of my first draft and it was the whole reason I thought about this. The whole movie "Once" is based around this duet, and the romance between these two vastly different people. This song won an Oscar for original song, and stopped the deepening trend of our film's music being rap songs. The movie itself is basically a long music video for Swell Season. A song more about just finding love than having it, as opposed to the previous ones. The way they situate it in the movie is perfect. You could include more songs from movies, but just go see Moulin Rouge as opposed to me explaining the "Elephant Love Medley" to you.

Note and Movie Spoiler Alert: One of the best scenes in films I've ever seen is in this movie. The two are standing on a cliff over the ocean and Glen asks Marketa how to say in Czech "Do you love him?" He says it, then she replies in Czech without the audience understanding what she said. She smiles and walks past him. To ruin it, yet explain my point, she's say "No, I love you." As the movie plays out with both getting back with their significant others, that moment is stand alone the best in the movie. It is probably the only romantic movie you'll ever see without a kiss exchanged, but this was something much more intimate, and explains something about music to serious musicians

Brandi Carlile ft. Elton John- "Caroline"

Take all of the possible sexual tensions of the previous duets and toss that out the window as both are openly gay. Now, take two artists worlds more musically talented than the previous acts (If I said vocally, Marvin could probably win alone, but with Tammi, no contest). When I saw Brandi in concert, she talked about this duet and the best part for her was when Elton showed up in hot pink sunglasses took off his sunglasses. He replaced them with an identical pair of hot pink reading glasses. This is more a song about longing than the others, but no less poignant. Especially true to those who experience long-distance love, which as much as Nicholas Sparks makes you think it's romantic, it's not.

Sappy Verse:
Now I have seen things in the sky
Stars and lights and birds and I
I've been rocky mountain high
Told them all about you because
You are still the only thing
That constantly amazes me
I love the road and I've been blessed
I love you best

Snow Patrol - Set Fire to the Third Bar

Honestly, I didn't realize how perfect this transition would be. Apparently, they used this song for the "Dear John " trailer, and it's apt. It's not all roses and chocolate covered candies; sometimes life sucks and you don't get what you want. This song is about still wanting it, but there isn't much hope here. Funny thing about the video is the distance being eliminated, where the distance is far more figurative in this sense. I figured that since I was incredibly sappy for this, and this better reflects the tone of my play-lists, this was a good place to end.

But no...I have an awful example, which isn't even a true duet
Louis XIV-"Paper Doll"
This is a song completely about using people, but is incredibly awesome nonetheless. The duet is sung by one guy, and it does a fine job of illustrating the fears of people using each and being used...that is from a chauvinist point of view. Politics are so much better when there is sex. They were actually banned from playing in Alabama, and they're all white.

Lyrics | Louis Xiv Lyrics | Paper Doll Lyrics

Now, if you think these guys are lewd and uncouth, here's a video of them covering my favorite Beatles song.

Bonus: Damien Rice - "The Blower's Daughter"

Sure, it's a little creepy, and probably doesn't qualify as a duet since Damien sings for the whole time, but really I couldn't include "9 Crimes" because it's about lost love and creepier.

Note: Videos do not appear on Facebook. Sorry.

Term Limits Across the Board

2010-02-08T17:31:00.000-06:00

Americans amazingly elected a man who campaigned on the idea of change in 2008. Alas, we have learned that he was joking, and meant by change solely that he would be a different person than George the Second. However, we couldn't be happier, because we secretly fear change deeply. You can see this easily in how many Congressmen we re-elect every cycle, rather than adding fresh blood to the proceedings. Note that this is not a partisan idea of mine, which is rare indeed. The reason I started to think about this was certainly started by Strom Thurmond and reestablished by the deaths of Ted Kennedy and John Murtha. Death is only another problem to add to being a geriatric Congressmen. This is not a statement of ineffectiveness, rather an indictment of trying to establish policies from a standpoint fifty years north of the median age.

The policies of of nation are currently being dictated by people averaging 61 years of age (Senate, 56 in the House). This means they were alive for the Vietnam War, College students during Nixon's administration, probably highly confused by computers and the Internet, and sort of amazed by cell phone sizes. (Yes, I recognize that some people are less resistant to technological advances, and some older people can be tech-savvy.) I admire the level of dedication (or resistance) that these men have for serving the nation, but I don't believe they serve the nation's best interests. The policy decisions made by the Senate, House, and Supreme Court reek of antiquity with a lack of foresight and general care for their progeny. Fifty-nine years ago, we decided that a President should be given no more than two terms, holding to a standard that had existed for 148 years of history. This was a move made more out of resistance to the power Roosevelt had accumulated rather than his aging while in office. Why not accept the same for Supreme Court justices and Congressmen?

The idea of collecting power does not apply only to the President but Congressmen as well. Look at the amount they allow an obviously senile Robert Byrd to speak. He's 92 years old, even past shuffleboard age, and they still have him as a legislator. He was born during World War I for Christ's sake. Ted Kennedy was probably the most highly revered Democrat at this passing, but in 46 years of service, one could expect that. In the Supreme Court, it's different. It's not an issue of power, but an issue of distance from the actual modern age. Their last decision was the worst in history, and really outdoing Plessy v. Ferguson or the Dred Scott decision was almost impossible. The idea that they cannot logically look at a problem at make a reasoned decision reeks of the indifference of age not the wisdom supposedly gained.

Let's begin with the House of Representatives. I said the median age of a Representative was 56. This incorporates a wide range, and I'm okay with the idea that younger men should first be Representatives then Senators. However, it doesn't eliminate men who have been here forever. John Dingell was in Congress during the Eisenhower administration; he started 54 years ago. My father was ten and he is now eligible for Social Security. Obviously, we cannot put age limits on office as it is discriminatory, but capping the number of terms at something reasonable would be wise. Ten terms (total, consecutive of not) is a good starting point. Twenty years is longer than any President gets, and would allow both a level of continuity necessary and limit excessive spirit or vanity (Or whatever causes a man to make his whole life a public display) If a Representative wanted to remain in service, he could still run for Senate, President, become an ambassador, or take a cabinet position. And if you're elected in your twenties, like the guy from Angel and Bones, by your forties you should be ready for bigger shoes anyways.

Now Senators long terms piss me off to no end. There are only 100 Senators; we can't afford for ten of them to be on life support during crucial debates. Obviously, Robert Byrd is the grand example of longevity (and of former Klan members in Congress), Frank Lautenberg is in his fifth term and is 86, and amazingly Hawaii has two 85 year old Senators (Inouye has been in Congress for his state's entire statehood). While these men are still alive (and probably for their ages, well-to-do **cough, cough** government health care) and doing their jobs, they all have viewpoints that come from a completely different era. Notably, they are all also Democrats with conversely different views than the President's own age demographic. The most debated issue of last year was health care and to think the views on it don't differ with age, look around. Look at the age of Tea Party activists; they are senior citizens who don't care much for what happens in twenty years. I propose a four-term cap, because again twenty-four years is three times the President's max term length. It allows longevity, but minimizes disconnect from generational gaps.

Any changes wouldn't affect the current configuration of Congress, as all would be "Grandfathered in", but in the future would hopefully minimize such long stagnation in politics. No one is likely to have meteoric rises like President Obama had, so reasonable rates of retention could be expected and also these men who have served our country wouldn't have to live out their final years as punchlines to jokes about the elderly. The simple fact is that policy is being dictated by men in their fifties and sixties, whereas the country's leader is in his forties and his electorate much younger. Mostly I wish Democratic dinosaurs would step aside and let the younger generations, who actually believe in their platform, sell the ideas. (Funnily, the only Representative with longer than 20 years service for Missouri is the one I agree with politically more often .) It's ridiculous that we didn't establish this at same time in the 22nd Amendment, but for some reason people didn't see Senators as powerful then (McCarthy?). Nevertheless, this is just an idea coming from an American youth, and thankfully, as it is, those will never matter.

Sidenote since I said across the board:
There aren't any egregious age problems within the Supreme Court. The longest serving and oldest is John Paul Stevens, and age certainly doesn't make him less than the others. The cap here is more of a future idea, because the current court's problem isn't that they're out of date. The problem is they're a bunch of morons, and I say this from a respectable viewpoint that all of them are much more accomplished than I will ever be. They simply don't understand how their actions affect the outside world, and by "their" I'm referring to Thomas and Scalia; originalism is a short-sighted and at times useless basis for rulings. Hilariously, if the Constitution is dictated this way, judicial review should not be a part of the Supreme Court's duties, and precedents shouldn't ever be applied. While the latter is their idiotic purpose, the former would be a much easier solution to having these men decide anything important. So when I meant across the board, they should have a limit of twenty five years (again arbitrary), that would put the newest justices under 80 years of age, and that seems reasonable. At youngest, Thomas would have served until 68, and I don't see another 43 year old justice coming anytime soon. Again, this isn't applicable to the current Justices, as they wouldn't be held to policies that followed their appointments.