Gingerly Afflicted

Room for a Third Party

2012-05-24T09:00:00.000-05:00

The duality of American politics is an intriguing phenomenon. Anyone who has a decent memory of history knows George Washington was against political parties. Whether that had any bearing on the actions of future generations is clearly evident, we don't care what our forefathers think. In some ways. this is positive. For example, George Washington was also keen of slavery, not quite to Jefferson's extent but still not a good legacy.

However, Washington envisioned a split of many ways, but for twenty years there were just two parties. It was simpler back then so the parties had very similar ideas, so much that the first argument was simply I like Great Britain, you like France, let's get irrevocably pissed off with each other. The Federalist party suffered the fate of its only President and faded into political irrelevance and Washington's wish seemed to have come true.

Then slavery and bigotry reared its ugly head and from its debates sprung several parties, the Whigs, the Constitutional, and eventually the Republican party being the only to win electoral votes. In the Whig and Republican case, both won the Presidency in their second Presidential elections as national parties. Before the Civil War, the Whigs disappeared and with the exception of the strange partitioned election of 1860, their have only been two political parties of any clout the Democratic and Republican parties. Politically they have intermingled over the years even to the point where major shifts have occurred juxtaposition their viewpoints, most notably the Goldwater-Rockefeller and Civil Rights Act of 1964 which made the Republican party the de facto "party of the South".

Now, we find that the inter-mingling has ceased and each party is striking where their opponents are weakest and consolidated power by defeating the moderate members of their opposing parties. This is well-documented in the Senate by Five Thirty Eight here, but I would imply that their analysis would say the House as well if they went to such trouble.

The American system has never been fair to a third party. Essentially, you've already been bought out of any race you enter. Also, American third parties have always tended to come from far reaching ideologies: Nader's Green Party (Far Left), Libertarians (Far Right), Dixiecrats and many versions before (Racists). What is different this time is that the absence of power is in line with the country much like the Republican's quick ascent before the Civil War.

Where does public opinion lie? We are a conservative country. Unfortunately, we are also horribly concerned with moral issues and privacy that frankly doesn't concern us, but we are voyeurs, rubberneckers, and assholes in many regards. So where in the world could we find a legion of moderate politicians willing to try something new. Oh, right. We just voted them out of office, because they voted with Obama on the wrong issue or supported the war in Iraq. Mostly we voted them out of office because we have no idea what the hell we are doing in a voting booth.

The nuances between European political parties are much more subtle. There is much more common ground so things actually get done. Has this worked out for them? Not really, because they aren't nearly as comfortable with bankrupting their future as we are and certainly more intent on maintaining the general welfare in the present. Expensive social programs need money, and to get money in the world economy you have to borrow like well, Feudal European kings grinding each other into dust.

Back to the United States, how many of the voters are moderates that claim to be independents? Declaring oneself independent is the most soft sword answer to affiliation since scientists made up agnosticism to prevent themselves from being stoned to death by villagers for being an atheist. In reality, independents do align themselves with a party and it takes a significant push to get them to change their minds. It's why when one candidate is so much better from a political standpoint the balances never tip too far in the opposite direction. Obama should have won by more if independents were what they say they are, and on the same page Gore shouldn't have won the popular vote in 2000. People don't flip flop on their votes from cycle to cycle. Different people vote.

So what if we give these so-called independents a middle ground party. The party's platform is simple. They are fiscally conservative. In fact, the major party issue is lowering government spending and trying to manage the cinder block tied to our legs as we stand on the bridge's ledge. They don't believe in government welfare programs as a solution. They do not wish to privatize them, but rather to limit their use to situations of truly dire need. The same goes for health care. They aren't against Obamacare, but rather wish it to be used as a regulatory measure to maintain low cost health care. The specific aim to lower medical costs should be tort reform, the limitation of frivolous lawsuits, and malfeasance by insurance companies.

What do we favor spending money on? Infrastructure, Education, and Defense. Defense does not include interventionist policies nor fulfilling contracts that have never been delivered on. Nor does it include nuclear proliferation or idiotic policies to defend against nuclear incursions. If the worthless organization full of meaningless gestures we house in New York cannot find ways of ensuring peace, screw them. We are not the world's parents and while we have certainly made things worse; we are never putting them back together. What can we fix? Ourselves, by ensuring that our youth aren't as stupid as my generation is. God knows our pop culture isn't going to teach them shit (looking at you Bieber and CBS).

As for social issues, the official policy is: who gives a fuck? Let each politician speak his mind about whatever, we aren't legislating morality. Does that bother you? Become a Republican, they've got a stick up their ass about everything. Gay marriage? Who are we to define marriage? Abortion? Your call, but do it early and safely. Drugs? Stop using them, dumbass. Get treatment and stop beheading people, Mexico. There are so many things wrong with this country and I will tell you which aren't important: war, drugs, abortion, gay marriage, immigration, religion. All that matters is money, jobs, and education. If you take care of those three, then what do you have: an affluent, working, educated society. The rest of it falls into place (except for drugs/religion, we'll never quit you).*

*Also, we'll start using birth control which will cause us to be overrun by Catholics, Mormons, and immigrants. Or as I like to put it: booze, morality, and cheap labor.

The problem with this third party is I'm a nobody. I'm a poor aging adolescent just living his life. If I were some asshole legacy of a dead guy somewhere, this wouldn't sound like a bad idea. Or if my dad were a rum-runner with mob ties. That sounds like a brilliant plan. We'll call it the Rum-runner Party and somehow tie it into NASCAR. Thankfully, all the government money in the South/entire country was spent on sporting venues so none of them are educated enough to see this rouse coming.

Follow @GingerAfflicted

Election 2012: Obama Makes First Move, Republicans Bold Strategy, And What to Do With Ron Paul Supporters

2012-05-10T09:00:00.000-05:00

"I was watching "Will and Grace" last night, and did you know
homosexuals aren't too bad. I would punch Sean Hayes in
the face, but that's just because he's a shit actor."

First, of all let me apologize to my father for the style issues in the title, just a standard that SBNation forced upon me that has carried over to here. Second, let me apologize for ignoring politics for a while because it has been...boring as hell. The campaign had a lurch today as President Obama made a wish-washy statement which Americans think meant something. It did politically and didn't in the grand scheme, a perfect summation of Barack Obama the President.

Obama's "Bold" Move

The numbers will tell you what President Obama said was not revolutionary (more dead men and women will vote for Romney in November than homosexuals). This has zero effect on policy, there is no inclination that any move will be made by Democrats to legalize and nationally empower same-sex marriage. That is the note Republicans will continue pounding until we are deaf. The reality is President Obama was simply noting that (state) governments making it illegal was a violation of rights and goes against the principles embodied by the United States of America and perhaps acknowledging his own failures to previously state that. So essentially, he just echoed Joe Biden without making a idiotic reference to an NBC sitcom with gay characters.

I was hoping that this election was not going to be a referendum on social issues in America, but at this point, it is the most positive course for Democrats to take. Romney faces an uphill battle due to the far more likable opponent he faces (My dad calls him a robot; I think of him as more wooden like Pinocchio). He can't afford a slip-up, while the national party must take risks to put forth a platform that they like, (which most likely will hinder him in his run for the Presidency). That is for Romney to win it must be a team battle against Obama rather than just mano a mano. So for Obama to take such a calculated risk from a position of only slight power, it shows that perhaps 2008 Obama has returned. As as a President he has been a poor fit, but their hasn't been a recent comparison for oratory and campaigning that can beat him on those terms. Republicans may have to find another way.
My Electoral Map If This Becomes The Major Issue via 270towin.com

Read more »

The Bookend: May 4, 2012

2012-05-04T09:00:00.000-05:00

This is my first time doing this, so I will start out with an explanation. This isn't a guide to St. Louis per say, but more of a helpful push out the door. The idea came from something that EDSBS did called the Digital Viking, but I'll say this is far more regional and more down to Earth. Every week I'll give you a restaurant, book, a beer, a concert/show/event, and an album. Hopefully from there you can take the initiative to heed my advice or blatantly ignore it and either sounds good to me. For the first few weeks, we'll be going through my favorites and then after that, everything will be more like a critical review as I discover new things with you.

Restaurant

Omar's Restaurant

10111 St. Charles Rock Rd. St. Ann, MO 63074
Open 7 Days 11 AM-10 PM
http://omarsstl.net

I will probably bore you to death with my love of pizza on this blog. The same applies to a good gyro, and Omar's is a place that has both so we might as well get it out of the way. You'd be surprised by this restaurant mainly due to location or a lack thereof. However, being a smaller family run establishment with fewer employees, the consistency here is fantastic. While the restaurant itself is a no-frills type joint, the food is a solid blend of Mediterranean cuisine. The owners are Lebanese Muslims so you may not like the absence of pork sausage at a pizzeria, but the pizza itself is good enough that my American pizza staple can be left out.

My quest in life is to find both great deep dish or Chicago style pizzas and gyros and they collide here with a vengeance. The deep dish is comparable to Pi's and I would say that I like the sauce better as Pi's can be overwhelmingly salty if you add the wrong topping (kalamata olives is a no-no). As for the Gyro, they add a pickle spear to it that gives it an unfamiliar crunch, and adds to the dill of the tzatziki sauce. I haven't been back yet to try the Shawerma, but it's one of their featured items. As for appetizers, both the hummus and falafel are fantastic, but hopefully you aren't alone because they do fill you up as does the bread.

I've seen some complaints on Urbanspoon about the service, but then again restaurant reviewers are typically impatient assholes. Don't expect to be coddled, but expect to be well-fed and you'll be happy.

(More after the jump)

Read more »

If Life Had a Soundtrack: Finding Your Religion

2012-05-03T13:01:00.000-05:00

To be honest, there has been no blasphemy against God higher than Christians making rock music. If you believe in all that, I assume you need to know that your devil listens to Creed. Why? Because no group of Christians has utterly repelled non-Christians from the faith more than Creed.

Gospel music has its moments, but the power of gospel music isn't in the words but rather in the ability of a group of people to harmonize in such a powerful way. In this way, hymn that sound weak when sung by a regular group of people are given power. Which is one of those reasons, I think religions underestimate music.

Now, there is one example of good intentional church music and that is certainly classical music, the majority of which was written for liturgical purposes before the 19th century (the most obvious example is Handel). However, I don't deal much with classical music, which always sounds better in person than on YouTube or a CD. Same goes for Gregorian chant, which I'm also fond of in an uncool way.

George Harrison - "My Sweet Lord"

Sure, he's a Hare Krishna, and most anybody can find that mockable. However, this is just a fantastic religious song, and really if you can ignore the straight up chanting for Krisha. More and more, I'm finding a fond remembrance for the "forgotten" Beatle. The key to this and most of the songs to follow is the absence of grief even in hard times, which if religion doesn't help you in that aspect I don't know what you're in it for.

(Lots more after the jump)

Read more »

If Life Had A Soundtrack: The Wedding List

2012-04-12T09:00:00.000-05:00

In honor of a friend's wedding, I put this little ditty together a year ago, but never completed it. Since tomorrow will probably be my last wedding for the next six months, and after that probably even longer, it is prudent that I write it now, or people may have to go without my vague and unintentional wisdom. Now, it's not typical wedding fare; more first dance type songs or background music. Everybody needs "Shout", that's obvious. This is a list built out of sentiment and high ideas, not the late wedding fare of "Can I get drunk enough to take home one of the bridesmaids?"* To be honest, weddings aren't the most romantic occasion in life. They are slightly narcissistic, obligatory, and sometimes just a formality in the relationship's progression. This may differ for some people, but mostly it's an excuse for old friends to get together and admire one friend's happiness while getting sloshed on somebody's dime. So consider this a dose of romance, from a man who stands out as cynical at his atheist convention.

*In hindsight, not a bright tactic.

(Videos after the jump.)

Ideological Stagnancy In Elections

2012-04-09T09:00:00.000-05:00


Have you ever just stared hate through someone while they talk? If not, you should spray tan some more. It drives people mad.

In 2008, I was mobilized and enthusiastic. It was the first time I voted in a national election (out of three chances, give me a break.), and for good reason, there was a candidate on the ticket I actually liked. President Obama was destroying the Republicans with rhetoric, and at that moment I should have realized it was mostly void of any power. As he took office, he took on the hardest of his goals, and had mixed results. Despite the death of Osama Bin Laden, Afghanistan has worsened significantly. Most now realize that the Taliban may have been the lesser of two evils, but we cannot back down because they enabled terrorism. Also, the little problem that Republicans would paint the President as weak, while secretly agreeing with withdrawal. He also passed a health care bill, but due to both his lack of resolve and the eternal weakness of congressional Democrats, they passed a version that is weaker and most likely going to be short lived. Everything since has been gridlock and useless debate.

The stagnancy of the current America government is hard to accept. I'm fascinated by numbers and polling and political machinations, but at some point it has to be for a reason. Sometime, the two sides have to sit down and think of what they agree on past terrorism bad, defense good. However, that can't ever happen. The election cycle of the United States doesn't allow for that time. We knew in 2008 that Romney was running for President again, and he would be the favorite. That hasn't changed much, although it has from time to time been less apparent. Freshman congressmen take office and immediately have to think about reelection campaigns. Incumbent congressmen in most of the gerrymandered districts have their districts down, and can rest a few months before crushing an opponent while hoping for style points. Senators have six years, and turnover is so ridiculously low that who really pays much attention to their races.

The realization is that ideologies do not change in America overnight. The largest single policy change ever made by the American government was the Emancipation Proclamation. It took seven years to pass the required amendments to ensure black equality. It took 101 years for the government to clear out the loopholes the South and Supreme Court created so that this wasn't possible. At this point, there are still Americans out there trying to stop African Americans from voting and some who think that they shouldn't. That is 150 years of American history in which our greatest ideal of freedom and liberty is still being questioned in some minds.

That segue illustrates that change, as Obama so often invoked, does not come naturally to Americans. Unlike the rest of the world, we still are a very insular society and haven't been thrust into grand changes by world events. The Great Depression changed how the government works, but really did nothing to change the ideals of the people who elected the government. The wars of the 20th Century changed our standing outside the United States, but changed little about how Americans view foreign policy. Even when we took an interventionist stance on foreign policy, the mishaps in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq have reenforced the general isolationist stance of the American public. Policy changes can be made overnight, but general opinion does not change rapidly.

Americans inherit their political beliefs mostly from parental advice or behavior. The way your parents voted is most likely to be the stance you take up. In families, where the parents differ, you may have an amalgam of ideas, but this again just reflects your parents beliefs. The only way this changes the demographic if parents of different parties have more children than others. Don't worry, this isn't true. The only examples of vast shifts in politics are the creation of the Republican party and the reversals of Democrats and Republicans during the 1960's as the Rockefeller and Goldwater split occurred. With the exception of extreme party changes, the electoral map doesn't change often. The United States remains a center-left nation, and if we lived in harmony our politics would reflect that. However, we essentially live in voting blocs created by our race, affluence, and ideologies which inherently create a divisive political system.

Now, with be specter of extreme partisanship looming, the lines have been drawn even farther apart. Political change does not come from extremism but rather from moderates. The only way parties are allowed large policy shifts is by joining with people already on the other side. It's how Joe Lieberman essentially became a Republican, or how Ike Skelton got elected as a Democrat in a Republican heavy district for over twenty years. However, the men I listed are gone, and the other moderates are falling away. Olympia Snowe is retiring opening a seat to most likely a Democrat, but she was a moderate to begin with. John McCain stopped his amazing roguish ways to run for President and failed epically when Sarah Palin tipped his moderate boat over. No democrats are moderates anymore because the Republicans target their easy to pick districts, because they prefer divisiveness to actually helping America.

So while I try to talk about the key elections this year, always keep in the back of your head that none of them really matter, because come January 20th, the status quo will be maintained.

Some Changes and Things to Come

2012-04-06T09:00:00.000-05:00

One of the problems with me is I've always been a bit unbalanced. This has the benefit of allowing great room for creativity, but also limits productivity to a minimum.

If you read this a lot, and I'm guessing you don't, the page may look different. This is an effort to streamline my blog a bit, that I learned somewhat from blogging elsewhere. Gone are the days of 2 AM posts and off-topic straying. I'll try to keep to a few subjects and if I'm writing about something else; it's probably personal. I'll keep writing those personal rants that tell my family so much and so little about myself. I'm sure it helps them feel better or worse about me.

If you are familiar with my writing, the best stuff is on politics and music. Since the election cycle is coming around, I've got a lot of ground to cover in a short period of time. I've got a fun mixtape thing I do with my computer that I'm hoping to do weekly, with some help from my friends. If you have a suggestion for a mixtape, just comment here or tweet me @GingerAfflicted. It can be anything from the mundane ("The weeding the garden mixtape") or important (This week will be a wedding mix.)

My writing that is posted here (poetry, short stories) is never likely to be published. Every person who writes should have a corner of the room filled with failures, instead I use this blog as my corner and let you judge what I deem to be poor writing or in some cases just exercises I went through. Generally, all of my poetry goes on here because I'm a shit poet and poets that can't play an instrument are both lonely and poor. If you go back, some of my writing may be missing. There is a theory that once something's on the Internet it cannot be destroyed, but in essence I tried to wipe some of my writing off the Internet. I also added tabs to better help navigate to the stuff I write about.

Read more »

Once Again, Americans Choose Race Over Common Sense

2012-04-02T13:59:00.000-05:00

The big story the past week has been the Trayvon Martin shooting. It goes to say that any time a young unarmed black man is shot by a white man, the country is going to go on a month long rant about the inequality of America and then forget whatever they intended to teach others or learn from others. The problem of this is simple, but we keep looking at it through the wrong lenses. Racism is a major problem in America, but simply boiling this case down to that is stupid.

For example, change nothing about the circumstances, but make Trayvon Martin white. He's still shot, still dead, and still the man who shot him is innocent according to the local law enforcement. How does the situation read now? Is it a hate crime? Does the man hate teenagers? No, it is a murder.

That is where the simple truth lies. The problem isn't that he was black, the problem was he was shot and killed by at best a vigilante and at worst a premeditated asshole. I don't give two fucks if his friends think he's a nice guy; he shot and killed someone. There is an evil needed to kill a man, even in self-defense that luckily most people don't possess, even some of those trained to kill have trouble with it. To kill someone, especially in circumstances such as this, gives pause to the idea of George Zimmerman as a good man.

Americans are terribly fascinated by race, and naturally are drawn to the conclusion that this is the most important part of this story. In reality, the most important part is that some neighborhood watch jackasses are walking around with guns looking to shoot the first stranger they see. I'm not one to preach on gun control; liberals are spineless on it and conservatives have no idea of the concept, therefore it is not a talking point. The best method of gun control has always been the euthanization of the entire human race, and I can't even argue that one. Then, chimpanzees would eventually find our guns and start the whole thing over, smart little buggers that they are.

However, the idea of the neighborhood watch is something Americans can start to examine. Arming yourself in your home to protect from invasion is great. Chances are you shoot one of your family members or hopefully yourself, but that is perfectly legal and acceptable behavior. Walking the streets looking for dangerous folk is something Charles Bronson did in the 1970's. The world isn't pretty but it isn't a giant Jeff Goldblum rape and murder machine either like the Death Wish movies. The reason it is called neighborhood watch is because you watch and then call the police. At worst, you completely ruin a person's evening; at best, you prevent crime. In only one scenario, does anyone die and that is a fight between your suspect and the cops. Blood isn't on your hands for this.

That is the problem. I couldn't care less that a young man is black, but I care that he is dead. The two things are key components of this case, yet one seems to be getting all the attention. Fact is, you shoot someone and all evidence points towards malice on your part, that's murder and his race shouldn't have anything to do with your arrest, trial, or sentence. Once again, Americans got it all wrong, but then again the media has been shooting first and asking questions later for years now.

Carrollton, MO: In retrospect

2012-03-11T16:45:00.000-05:00

I've put this off for a long time, perhaps longer than anything I've ever considered. Since I first asked myself the questions, I've written many things, grander perhaps in scale, more intimate but less personal, more inane than this will be. Certainly, it is the romanticism that we place upon our homes, even more so for those of us who have only ever had one. I assume military kids or even someone as close as my sister who lived in more than one house and raised a family in two different cities would have a different feeling about home.

For years, it was an ideal. I would come home and walk the streets at night in the bitter cold of winter. At first you remember the good things, this is true with everything that you lose. Lovers remember tender embraces not bitterness and spite though the latter often outnumbers the former. I remember the first timed I kissed a girl, remember how little it mattered or changed things, but how much it meant to life. I remember underage beers with friends that by now is the least of the sins I committed. I remember the decrepit school building that no longer looms over south Carrollton. Fondly remembering the first time I went to the principal's office in Adams and the last time sitting across from David Sugg in junior high when I was a foolish rapscallion. You look over that football field and remember the touchdown you scored.

As the years go by the facade wears away, and you are left with reality. Reality is a cold dim existence. Jenny Lewis perhaps said it best in "A Better Son/Daughter"...

The lows are so extreme that the good seems fucking cheap.

You treated that girl like shit. The beers were nasty and the good feelings short lived. The building still having kids in it was a travesty. You were a dick to everyone especially those janitors who had to rip off locker doors after you jammed them with wood blocks. The worst games as a team were always your best. Loss in Boonville, loss to Grain Valley, loss to Pleasant Hill.

Read more »

Romney's Religion and Atheism in Modern Politics

2012-02-18T13:41:00.000-06:00

I promise that I will stop talk about religion for a long time after this, but this post has been coming for a long time. I have continually stated that conservatives will be wary of supporting Mitt Romney because he is a Mormon. Consistently, I have also said that this is a poor reason to not support a candidate, and that Romney is the best candidate the Republicans can field. Due more to Obama's failures than his merit, he actually polls favorably in national polls. Also, it may say that people are more comfortable with a spineless Mormon as opposed to a spineless African-American. The problem with politics is that neither Romney's Mormonism or Obama's attendance of a church with a hyperbolic preacher should be part of the news cycle. However, the news cycle never stops now and has even more time for worthless debates over the inherent value of a candidate's faith and how the American people are affected by it.

Right now, the nomination for the Republican ticket is far from over. Specifically, Romney has not won a single Midwestern state, which considering the way the country votes is alarming. The Republicans will win the South, Obama will win the northeast and California, and the West is too sparse to make great changes in the electoral count. So it stands to reason, that the electoral votes in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Missouri are of the most importance. Romney hasn't won any of these states, and is polling far behind Santorum in Ohio.

He has failed in several ways that are holding him back. He lacks the charisma that almost single handedly carried the last three presidents to victory. Even poor Republicans aren't fond of Wall Street, so his ties to Wall Street aren't going to play well in the current environment. Simply, he is a typical Republican in a party that has shunned the typical candidate since their loss four years ago (even before if you consider Sarah Palin). His candidacy for President certainly isn't all about religion, but his most fervent challengers are all cut from the same cloth. None of them are more suited to be President, all of them are more suited to be chosen by the evangelical base of the Republican Party.

Read more »

A Half-Hearted Apology and Secular Thoughts

2012-02-07T01:23:00.001-06:00

I really should apologize sometimes, because I can get overboard with my generalizations. For a man who preaches about how there is no black and white in life, I frequently find myself drawing up battle lines out of anger. In my last post, I was quite angry with theists for perhaps the wrong reason, for in their minds it is not outrageous to uphold the words written in the books they hold canon. This is not something to be laughed at, derided, or as my last post did, completely shit on. My own beliefs should not attack your beliefs and it is not a goal of mine to have anyone trumpeting my views. I am not an idealist who seeks converts; I am an idealist who gives people opportunity to see the world through my [sometimes jaded] eyes and I seek nothing more.

If you grew up in my family, first and foremost you would acknowledge the individuality of religion. We don't discuss it, we don't demean it, and we don't drown ourselves in it. It has led to a variety of conclusions. My sister, as you can read here, is a highly intelligent, well-read theist. For the sake of this post, it makes no difference that she belongs to the Church of Latter Day Saints, but she, as anyone who joins a faith should be, is completely devoted to the faith. If you read her blog, you'll find that she doesn't always have the easiest time teaching it, but the earnestness in her beliefs will never be mistaken. The same can be said for my brother Rick, who for the majority of my life has attended church. He is the family member who coughs when you take that first bite at family meals, and he is the one who makes the long prayers that make you wish he knew you view time as precious. As for the rest of us, I'm going to make assumptions. I haven't seen my brother Bryan in so long that I couldn't tell you much, but he was married in a church and worked for churches so he can't be completely against them. It also wouldn't shock me if he were an atheist, but I honestly don't know. My brother James is an out-and-out atheist from either something he said to me or just my feelings, but perhaps he is just like my parents and agnostic to the point that there isn't a difference.

Read more »

Jesus vs. the Mammogram

2012-02-02T04:11:00.000-06:00

Just a warning, this is February, which at this blog is celebrated by fierce denunciation of moronic behavior. If you feel like being a moron, please do not inform me by email as so many morons choose to do. Instead, please publicly do something completely repellant and allow me to comment on it. If you do it in the name of our Lord and Savior, you get double points. Also, not your God, but the other God that we don't talk about allowed me to start swearing again, so apologies and take it up with him. Yes, I know he only speaks to me, but that is of course only coincidental.

Dear God,

I have no money, obviously because I am a total fuck-up. My life hasn't gone as planned, in fact you might say I'm like every person who has ever lived on this god-forsaken planet. I'm sorry, i know you care but more and more it seems like everyone who believes in you, as I do, is a complete and utter asshole. In fact today, I was worried. I don't have insurance, since my mother for some reason thought it was better to bring a child into her drug-addled world and try to raise her.

I know at some point I should have pulled myself up from my bootstraps and found myself a better life, because I know tons of Americans who have risen up and joined a social class above their parents standing. Okay, maybe not, because they are all actors, musicians, and athletes; something that a kid raising her little brothers and sisters can't really become. I have many excuses, but I would like the chance to redeem myself.

Thankfully, seeing the pitiful plight of my existence which at best would result in me being a minimum wage worker in a society that doesn't accept the value of inflation for the poorest mother fuckers out here, you gave me a gift. Thankfully, my cancer which with proper screenings which I used to be able to receive had progressed beyond that point and now I am going to you Lord where you can take care of me. If Susan G. Komen's foundation hadn't made a ridiculous decision based on at best conservatism and at worst racism and sexism, then I would still have to live and be miserable like the rest of you. Thank you, God.

Amen

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.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

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.
Read more »

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.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

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 existence, if God simply didn't think you were worthy of rapture?

Read more »

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:

Read more »