...the RIAA decides to sue a chronically ill girl (suffering from pancreatitis and depression) whose single mother makes $8.25 an hour, who is also facing mounting medical bills. The 19-year-old girl was, shockingly, unable to make it to court, earning the RIAA a default settlement of $8000. Apparently, she shared a criminally large amount of songs (10) over the internet while hospitalized.
Truly, RIAA has made the first bold step into a new era of internet justice. To avoid the same fate as the aforementioned miscreant, check out http://www.riaa.com/ -- you can download your very own "Young People, Music & the Internet: A Guide For Parents & Teachers About Digital Music & Downloading"
Make sure you check the link first though! Just in case you download a pirated copy.
Monday, December 29, 2008
Thursday, November 6, 2008
On Fighting Wars
So I was sitting in StraTechWar today (that's Strategy, Technology, and War), listening to this dude (I think he was an admiral or something) talking about the Nuclear Propulsion Program--basically putting nuclear engines and such into warships. This is pretty cool, especially since the first nuclear powered submarine was named USS Nautilus, which is the same name as Captain Nemo's famous ship. Yeah, it sounds like a dumb reason to like it, but I'm a fan of Nemo. The fish.
Anyway, I was sitting and thinking--why do we need such destructive weapons anyway? There's got to be better ways of fighting wars, that aren't as bloody or violent. I came up with several ways that I think should be considered in all future combat. The future of battle lies not with super lasers that can curve all the way around the world and hit yourself in the back (although that would be awesome for about 0.13 seconds before the laser travels around and hits you in the back.) No--the future lies in these:
1) Laughing Gas.
I was thinking about Harry Potter, and it hit me--there were so many ways to take down Death Eaters without using lethal curses, such as Rictumsempra (the tickling spell, which Harry used to pwn Draco in Book Two.) Why can't we just douse the other side with laughing gas, and have them laugh themselves into incapacitation? This way, even if the wind blew the gas back toward our own side, we wouldn't hurt ourselves. True, gas warfare is prohibited by the Geneva Convention but come on--laughing gas is nothing like mustard gas. It won't even kill anyone! Unless they laugh themselves to death, which is unlikely.
Convinced of the feasibility of such a method, I immediately conducted some research (e.g. Wikipedia) and learned, to my intense dismay, that laughing gas DID NOT MAKE YOU LAUGH. WTF?????????? It's just the colloquial name of nitrous oxide, which is an anesthetic that gives you a happy feeling ("euphoric.") I felt so cheated. But upon further reading, I realized that it could still work. If you make the other side so happy that they don't want to fight, then you basically win anyway! In true wannabe Mythbuster style, I am now declaring this solution PLAUSIBLE.
2) Tranquilizing Rain
I got this from Naruto (DON'T LAUGH.) There was this one chapter where this dude throws up an umbrella thereby causing a deadly rain of needles to pepper his enemy. Well, instead of raining needles, what if we use a cannon to shoot up lots of tranquilizing darts into the sky, and have them rain down on the opponenet? Falling darts are really hard to dodge. And since people wear helmets (usually) the darts would probably hit something like a shoulder. Gravity and impact might cause some broken bones, but that's better than death right?
But, upon further consideration, the darts would have to be shot pretty damn high, and who knows what kind of havoic they could cause. So instead of darts, I propose a tranquilzing rain. Launch giant bags of tranquilizer fluid into the air, then shoot them with a sniper or something, and have it rain tranquilfication (is this a word?) Much better than exploding shrapnel or fireballs of doom.
3) Foam Wars
This is pretty self-explanatory. Have airplanes drop foam bombs. They explode into awesome foaminess, encompassing the opponenet and disabling their movement and willingness to fight. Better yet, make the foam smell nice--it's proven that nice smells promote feelings of contentment. Even if this is taken to extremes, the foam still wouldn't really hurt anyone. What a great idea!
4) Ball Pit of Doom. And By Doom I Mean Awesomeness.
This is a bit trickier. It takes some more time. The opponents have to be surrounded for this to work. Perfect for fighting against guerilla forces where you know they are there, but you don't know where they are. First! You erect giant walls around an area. Or a giant fence. Same thing. Then you air drop lots and lots of ball pit balls into the area, filling it up! You only need fences about 5 feet high or so. The balls should be dropped in bags that explode (BUT WITH NO FIRE OR SHOCKWAVES) upon impact with the ground. This would quickly fill up the area with balls. This might even be seen as a gesture of peace, since you are providing them with fun stuff to play with.
5) The Bubble Gun
Sound familiar? It should. The signature attack of our favorite little turtle--no, not Squirt or Crush, but rather SQUIRTLE!!! This isn't as crazy as it sounds. Okay, maybe it is, but it's awesome. Create a gun that shoots out bubbles filled with laughing gas and shoot bubbles at the enemy! This will be perfect--it will simulate my concept of laughing gas. They will be so busy laughing at the bubbles that when the bubbles pop, they'll be put to sleep (literally, not euphemistically [is that a word?]) There can be a giant fan set up to help blow the bubbles. Even if bubbles are shot down, the gas will still be there and be blown to where it needs to go.
Wouldn't this type of warfare be awesome??!!?? I, for one, would totally be willing to be bombed by foam and encased in a ball pit.
I will leave you with this thought--the best method of warfare, but one that I fear will never be given serious consideration. Launch towards your opponent lots of heart shaped boxes of chocolate. What kind of heartless individual would shoot at someone who sent mass amounts of heart shapped boxes of chocolate? Exactly--nobody would.
As the adage goes, make love not war.
Anyway, I was sitting and thinking--why do we need such destructive weapons anyway? There's got to be better ways of fighting wars, that aren't as bloody or violent. I came up with several ways that I think should be considered in all future combat. The future of battle lies not with super lasers that can curve all the way around the world and hit yourself in the back (although that would be awesome for about 0.13 seconds before the laser travels around and hits you in the back.) No--the future lies in these:
1) Laughing Gas.
I was thinking about Harry Potter, and it hit me--there were so many ways to take down Death Eaters without using lethal curses, such as Rictumsempra (the tickling spell, which Harry used to pwn Draco in Book Two.) Why can't we just douse the other side with laughing gas, and have them laugh themselves into incapacitation? This way, even if the wind blew the gas back toward our own side, we wouldn't hurt ourselves. True, gas warfare is prohibited by the Geneva Convention but come on--laughing gas is nothing like mustard gas. It won't even kill anyone! Unless they laugh themselves to death, which is unlikely.
Convinced of the feasibility of such a method, I immediately conducted some research (e.g. Wikipedia) and learned, to my intense dismay, that laughing gas DID NOT MAKE YOU LAUGH. WTF?????????? It's just the colloquial name of nitrous oxide, which is an anesthetic that gives you a happy feeling ("euphoric.") I felt so cheated. But upon further reading, I realized that it could still work. If you make the other side so happy that they don't want to fight, then you basically win anyway! In true wannabe Mythbuster style, I am now declaring this solution PLAUSIBLE.
2) Tranquilizing Rain
I got this from Naruto (DON'T LAUGH.) There was this one chapter where this dude throws up an umbrella thereby causing a deadly rain of needles to pepper his enemy. Well, instead of raining needles, what if we use a cannon to shoot up lots of tranquilizing darts into the sky, and have them rain down on the opponenet? Falling darts are really hard to dodge. And since people wear helmets (usually) the darts would probably hit something like a shoulder. Gravity and impact might cause some broken bones, but that's better than death right?
But, upon further consideration, the darts would have to be shot pretty damn high, and who knows what kind of havoic they could cause. So instead of darts, I propose a tranquilzing rain. Launch giant bags of tranquilizer fluid into the air, then shoot them with a sniper or something, and have it rain tranquilfication (is this a word?) Much better than exploding shrapnel or fireballs of doom.
3) Foam Wars
This is pretty self-explanatory. Have airplanes drop foam bombs. They explode into awesome foaminess, encompassing the opponenet and disabling their movement and willingness to fight. Better yet, make the foam smell nice--it's proven that nice smells promote feelings of contentment. Even if this is taken to extremes, the foam still wouldn't really hurt anyone. What a great idea!
4) Ball Pit of Doom. And By Doom I Mean Awesomeness.
This is a bit trickier. It takes some more time. The opponents have to be surrounded for this to work. Perfect for fighting against guerilla forces where you know they are there, but you don't know where they are. First! You erect giant walls around an area. Or a giant fence. Same thing. Then you air drop lots and lots of ball pit balls into the area, filling it up! You only need fences about 5 feet high or so. The balls should be dropped in bags that explode (BUT WITH NO FIRE OR SHOCKWAVES) upon impact with the ground. This would quickly fill up the area with balls. This might even be seen as a gesture of peace, since you are providing them with fun stuff to play with.
5) The Bubble Gun
Sound familiar? It should. The signature attack of our favorite little turtle--no, not Squirt or Crush, but rather SQUIRTLE!!! This isn't as crazy as it sounds. Okay, maybe it is, but it's awesome. Create a gun that shoots out bubbles filled with laughing gas and shoot bubbles at the enemy! This will be perfect--it will simulate my concept of laughing gas. They will be so busy laughing at the bubbles that when the bubbles pop, they'll be put to sleep (literally, not euphemistically [is that a word?]) There can be a giant fan set up to help blow the bubbles. Even if bubbles are shot down, the gas will still be there and be blown to where it needs to go.
Wouldn't this type of warfare be awesome??!!?? I, for one, would totally be willing to be bombed by foam and encased in a ball pit.
I will leave you with this thought--the best method of warfare, but one that I fear will never be given serious consideration. Launch towards your opponent lots of heart shaped boxes of chocolate. What kind of heartless individual would shoot at someone who sent mass amounts of heart shapped boxes of chocolate? Exactly--nobody would.
As the adage goes, make love not war.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Hilarious
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/26/navarrette.obama.mccain/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
This guy is so deluded. Political affiliation aside, McCain did nothing. And his "campaign suspension" was nominal and a farce. Who still sees his ads running?
I don't even want to talk about what a joke McCain's campaign suspension stunt is. He admitted that he knew nothing about economics, and then went to the meeting and said nothing, except to disrupt the process at the end.
If McCain's declaration isn't political grandstanding, I don't know what is. Anyway, I wasn't actually going to make any comments about the article, and let it stand on its own hilarity, but I couldn't resist.
This guy is so deluded. Political affiliation aside, McCain did nothing. And his "campaign suspension" was nominal and a farce. Who still sees his ads running?
I don't even want to talk about what a joke McCain's campaign suspension stunt is. He admitted that he knew nothing about economics, and then went to the meeting and said nothing, except to disrupt the process at the end.
If McCain's declaration isn't political grandstanding, I don't know what is. Anyway, I wasn't actually going to make any comments about the article, and let it stand on its own hilarity, but I couldn't resist.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Gun Control
This is why we don't need gun control.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/05/17/church.shootings/index.html?iref=werecommend
A seemingly non-certifiably-insane guy with a specific motive.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/05/17/church.shootings/index.html?iref=werecommend
A seemingly non-certifiably-insane guy with a specific motive.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Brothers! Fight this injustice!
In today's world of equality, harmony, acceptance, and all that fun stuff, perhaps we should address something that has long eluded the jurisdiction of the spirit of fairness.
I am, of course, referring to the First Move, traditionally assigned to guys.
Woman, of course, should be afforded all rights and privileges given to men; in fact, to make up for all the time that they could not enjoy the roles traditionally enjoyed by men. In the spirit of affirmitive action or whatever, a total gender role reversal might even be in order. I hereby propose that men do the cooking and laundry, and women do the asking out.
There is one pioneer in this field, who's dearest desire is to be a househusband. Congratulations to you for being such a revolutionary. You know who you are.
Also, I propose a varsity women's football team. That way, there can be more men's varsity sports that get funding. Like volleyball.
PS: Anybody want to share a "couple's ticket" for the AASA formal?
I am, of course, referring to the First Move, traditionally assigned to guys.
Woman, of course, should be afforded all rights and privileges given to men; in fact, to make up for all the time that they could not enjoy the roles traditionally enjoyed by men. In the spirit of affirmitive action or whatever, a total gender role reversal might even be in order. I hereby propose that men do the cooking and laundry, and women do the asking out.
There is one pioneer in this field, who's dearest desire is to be a househusband. Congratulations to you for being such a revolutionary. You know who you are.
Also, I propose a varsity women's football team. That way, there can be more men's varsity sports that get funding. Like volleyball.
PS: Anybody want to share a "couple's ticket" for the AASA formal?
Monday, April 21, 2008
A Story
Once upon a time, something happened which may or may not have been the direct or indirect result of a prior event happening. The former occured during a weather condition that could have contributed to the happenings, depending on the percepective of the people involved in the event. The event was momentous to some, but unimportant to others. There were conflicts that were caused by other conflicts, which conflicted with conflicting conflicts. However, these were eventually resolved, somewhat, to the possible best interest of all parties involved, leading to a Happily Ever After.
The End.
This story was inspired by a conversation with someone who inspired the story.
The End.
This story was inspired by a conversation with someone who inspired the story.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Advancing The Knowledge Pool For All Mankind
In an earlier entry, I made the audacious claim of majoring in HowGirlsThinkOlogy (http://thepockymonster.blogspot.com/2007/10/what-i-learned-from-intel.html). To some of you, this seemed like a joke. To others, probably a whim that wouldn't last long. To most of you, I was nuts.
Well, I have decided, since then, to make significant steps in advancing this bold new field of study. To that end, based on the indirect direction of one-who-will-not-be-named-for-the-sake-of-privacy-but-whose-name-rhymes-with-Chessica-Jen-from-a-school-that-rhymes-with-Blontgomery-Mair, I have concocted a scheme that is sure to reveal all sorts of interesting information.
WikiHow, the how-to site that you can edit, provides a plethora of information--but how much of it is reliable? How much is written by a guy who thinks he knows things but actually doesn't because he's not a HowGirlsThinkOlogy major? That is the question that I will try to answer, through this scientifically sound process.
I will paste the entirety of one WikiHow entry--which I now declare is not mine, so that I can't be sued for plagiarism, not that anyone would want to since I have no money for people to win--and I plead, for the sake of science and the edification of the--as Peter Pan tells Wendy Darling--inferior sex (for one girl is worth twenty boys), that any girl/woman/lady/female reading this entry would confirm or deny the truth of the elements in the WikiHow article.
I know this imports to Facebook, because I didn't turn off the import option before taking my FB hiatus. So I know this will be a Facebook note. So, Facebookers, not just the very few people who actually read this blog, please also give your input, via Facebook, or on this blog. The end result will be, hopefully, a true and comprehensive guide to HOW TO TALK TO A GIRL.
1. Be yourself.
2. Bring something up but don't seem too obvious about liking them. When you talk just be yourself, then you can see if the girl likes you for who you really are.
3. Look in her eyes and be serious and not desperate. But if she looks away don't try it again. When she looks away, it's almost always her way of saying "oh great, I don't like you, but how can I be nice about it"
4. Comment on her sense of humor, good taste in music, or prowess on the dance floor. It's all right to compliment her clothes, hair, jewelry, etc., but you'll really win a girl's heart if she sees that you're into more than just her outside.
5. Don't tell girls — for that matter, anyone at all — they have a flaw unless you are obviously poking fun at them, even then only if you know they can take a joke, and know you well enough to know how to react to your teasing. Otherwise you risk putting them off.
6. Be funny. If you can make her laugh, you've as good as got her number then and there.
7. Don't try too hard. Girls will see you as needy and will not be attracted to you.
8. Be confident in yourself and don't be afraid of saying something stupid. If you're not afraid then you probably won't. If you have been friends with her for years, and are comfortable talking pretend you are just talking to her about another girl you like.
9. Make her laugh. Tell her you like her ear rings for example. Maybe if you are sitting next to her you could put an arm around the chair or something. If she clearly does not want you... give up. You will be made fun of by every single girl if she doesn't like you and dumps you in front of everyone. If you want to ask her out,do it in private, people spread rumors.
10. Stop her in the hallway just to give her a hug and tell her she smells nice. Smile and walk away.It will show her that you care enough to stop her and pay attention to details like smell (that makes girls feel uncomfortable when you do it randomly).
Tips
· Always be yourself.
· Never insult a girl unless you know she will take it as a joke.
· Do not touch or talk about her stomach, most girls no matter how thin think they are fat. This is definitely a no-go area as far as girls are concerned.
· Try to get on with her friends as without them on your side you've got no chance.
· No matter what don't leave telling her how you feel for too long. If you think she might like you then ask her out. After all, she can only say no.
· Don't approach her if you know she has a boyfriend, as it is a lost cause (for the time being) and you don't want to offend her boyfriend!
Warnings
· If she doesn't seem happy with you, leave her be for two days without approaching her, that will give her time to cool down and think straight again. After a couple of days she will be ready to talk to you again.
· Never make a comment about her weight! Unless you are incredibly smooth and can turn this into something good.
· Don't talk about other girls in front of her, and never compare her to other girls.
· DONT talk about guy stuff. Most girls would rather you not talk about disturbing topics while they are present!!!!
----------------------------
Gentlemen, your input is also appreciated. Responses will be duly noted, but generally ignored.
For the sake of science! Let the great pooling of knowledge commence!
Well, I have decided, since then, to make significant steps in advancing this bold new field of study. To that end, based on the indirect direction of one-who-will-not-be-named-for-the-sake-of-privacy-but-whose-name-rhymes-with-Chessica-Jen-from-a-school-that-rhymes-with-Blontgomery-Mair, I have concocted a scheme that is sure to reveal all sorts of interesting information.
WikiHow, the how-to site that you can edit, provides a plethora of information--but how much of it is reliable? How much is written by a guy who thinks he knows things but actually doesn't because he's not a HowGirlsThinkOlogy major? That is the question that I will try to answer, through this scientifically sound process.
I will paste the entirety of one WikiHow entry--which I now declare is not mine, so that I can't be sued for plagiarism, not that anyone would want to since I have no money for people to win--and I plead, for the sake of science and the edification of the--as Peter Pan tells Wendy Darling--inferior sex (for one girl is worth twenty boys), that any girl/woman/lady/female reading this entry would confirm or deny the truth of the elements in the WikiHow article.
I know this imports to Facebook, because I didn't turn off the import option before taking my FB hiatus. So I know this will be a Facebook note. So, Facebookers, not just the very few people who actually read this blog, please also give your input, via Facebook, or on this blog. The end result will be, hopefully, a true and comprehensive guide to HOW TO TALK TO A GIRL.
1. Be yourself.
2. Bring something up but don't seem too obvious about liking them. When you talk just be yourself, then you can see if the girl likes you for who you really are.
3. Look in her eyes and be serious and not desperate. But if she looks away don't try it again. When she looks away, it's almost always her way of saying "oh great, I don't like you, but how can I be nice about it"
4. Comment on her sense of humor, good taste in music, or prowess on the dance floor. It's all right to compliment her clothes, hair, jewelry, etc., but you'll really win a girl's heart if she sees that you're into more than just her outside.
5. Don't tell girls — for that matter, anyone at all — they have a flaw unless you are obviously poking fun at them, even then only if you know they can take a joke, and know you well enough to know how to react to your teasing. Otherwise you risk putting them off.
6. Be funny. If you can make her laugh, you've as good as got her number then and there.
7. Don't try too hard. Girls will see you as needy and will not be attracted to you.
8. Be confident in yourself and don't be afraid of saying something stupid. If you're not afraid then you probably won't. If you have been friends with her for years, and are comfortable talking pretend you are just talking to her about another girl you like.
9. Make her laugh. Tell her you like her ear rings for example. Maybe if you are sitting next to her you could put an arm around the chair or something. If she clearly does not want you... give up. You will be made fun of by every single girl if she doesn't like you and dumps you in front of everyone. If you want to ask her out,do it in private, people spread rumors.
10. Stop her in the hallway just to give her a hug and tell her she smells nice. Smile and walk away.It will show her that you care enough to stop her and pay attention to details like smell (that makes girls feel uncomfortable when you do it randomly).
Tips
· Always be yourself.
· Never insult a girl unless you know she will take it as a joke.
· Do not touch or talk about her stomach, most girls no matter how thin think they are fat. This is definitely a no-go area as far as girls are concerned.
· Try to get on with her friends as without them on your side you've got no chance.
· No matter what don't leave telling her how you feel for too long. If you think she might like you then ask her out. After all, she can only say no.
· Don't approach her if you know she has a boyfriend, as it is a lost cause (for the time being) and you don't want to offend her boyfriend!
Warnings
· If she doesn't seem happy with you, leave her be for two days without approaching her, that will give her time to cool down and think straight again. After a couple of days she will be ready to talk to you again.
· Never make a comment about her weight! Unless you are incredibly smooth and can turn this into something good.
· Don't talk about other girls in front of her, and never compare her to other girls.
· DONT talk about guy stuff. Most girls would rather you not talk about disturbing topics while they are present!!!!
----------------------------
Gentlemen, your input is also appreciated. Responses will be duly noted, but generally ignored.
For the sake of science! Let the great pooling of knowledge commence!
Friday, February 29, 2008
Leading By Example
Prince Harry, third in line to the British throne, saw combat in Afghanistan.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/02/29/prince.afghanistan/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
Can we say the same for our leaders today? How many of our leaders who support the war in Iraq and/or Afghanistan would willingly allow or--heaven forbid--even encourage their children to serve in active combat?
It's one thing to make passionate patriotic pronouncements on the legislative floor, but quite another to set a patriotic example to demonstrate that those pronouncements aren't just empty words and political maneuvering.
What does it mean to lead by example?
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/02/29/prince.afghanistan/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
Can we say the same for our leaders today? How many of our leaders who support the war in Iraq and/or Afghanistan would willingly allow or--heaven forbid--even encourage their children to serve in active combat?
It's one thing to make passionate patriotic pronouncements on the legislative floor, but quite another to set a patriotic example to demonstrate that those pronouncements aren't just empty words and political maneuvering.
What does it mean to lead by example?
Friday, February 8, 2008
Berkeley Protests
Edit:
Thanks Jung, for the comment. But the city is not kicking out the Marines. The city only said that the Marines are unwelcome. As the article said, the Marines have no intention of leaving. This is not like kicking out NCLB officials, this is like officially saying NCLB is a dumb idea.
At any rate, like I said, the Marine Corps has the moral high ground. They have their right to stay and express what they want, but they also respect the protesters right to free speech, and the Marines should be honored for their defense of the Constitution.
---------------------------------------------------
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/07/berkeley.protests/index.html?iref=mpstoryview
What really disturbs me is not the issue being protested--whether the Marine Corps should be allowed to recruit, what methods they should be allowed to use, and the places they can recruit from. What is most disturbing is the action Congress is taking.
In particular, this passage: "Republican lawmakers in Washington fired back this week, threatening to take back more than $2 million of federal funding to the city as well as money designated for the University of California-Berkeley."
What is this saying? This is the federal government threatening a city and its residents for excercising their freedom of speech. The only thing these people are guilty of is expressing what they believe is right in the form of protests. What right does the government have to punish them for it? Threatening to punish the city for expressing the beliefs of, apparently, the majority of its citizens is telling them that they can't say it at all. This country, founded on the basis of freedom of expression, is now telling protestors to shut up or suffer the consequences?
I think the Marine Corps has the moral and constitutional high ground here. Says one Marine official: ""The Marine Corps is here to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, which does guarantee the freedom of speech," Franklin said. "In terms of the situation in Berkeley, the City Council and the protesters are exercising their right to do so." "
The Marine Corps cannot like the way they are being treated; yet, they understand the Constitution and the rights that it gives, and are accepting that these people are allowed to express what they believe. And yet, congressman Jim DeMint, R-South Carolina and David Vitter, R-Louisiana and their cohorts, who are supposed to know such things, cannot comprehend this simple fact, and try to sugarcoat their actions by taking advantage of the pride people feel in the military. All I can say is this is some political BS. There is no way such a bill, punishing Berkeley for peaceful protests, can be allowed to remain in existence, even if it is passed. The unconstitutionality of it is so blaringly obvious--punishment for a deed is as good as censorship--that any support for this violation of the Bill of Rights should be a stain upon the honor of all lawmakers.
I would also like to address the statement made by Senator Vitter, as quoted here from CNN: ""...I really get disturbed when taxpayer money goes to institutions which proceed to take votes, make policy or make statements that really denigrate the military," said Sen. David Vitter, R-Louisiana, a co-sponsor of the bill."
Well Sen. David Vitter, R-Louisiana, I really get disturbed when taxpayer money goes to representatives of my fellow citizens--representatives who believe and decide that stifling freedom of speech is the right thing to do.
Whatever your belief, it is not right to suppress the beliefs of others merely because you don't like it.
The bill is no longer about Berkeley protesting; it is about protecting freedom of speech.
Thanks Jung, for the comment. But the city is not kicking out the Marines. The city only said that the Marines are unwelcome. As the article said, the Marines have no intention of leaving. This is not like kicking out NCLB officials, this is like officially saying NCLB is a dumb idea.
At any rate, like I said, the Marine Corps has the moral high ground. They have their right to stay and express what they want, but they also respect the protesters right to free speech, and the Marines should be honored for their defense of the Constitution.
---------------------------------------------------
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/07/berkeley.protests/index.html?iref=mpstoryview
What really disturbs me is not the issue being protested--whether the Marine Corps should be allowed to recruit, what methods they should be allowed to use, and the places they can recruit from. What is most disturbing is the action Congress is taking.
In particular, this passage: "Republican lawmakers in Washington fired back this week, threatening to take back more than $2 million of federal funding to the city as well as money designated for the University of California-Berkeley."
What is this saying? This is the federal government threatening a city and its residents for excercising their freedom of speech. The only thing these people are guilty of is expressing what they believe is right in the form of protests. What right does the government have to punish them for it? Threatening to punish the city for expressing the beliefs of, apparently, the majority of its citizens is telling them that they can't say it at all. This country, founded on the basis of freedom of expression, is now telling protestors to shut up or suffer the consequences?
I think the Marine Corps has the moral and constitutional high ground here. Says one Marine official: ""The Marine Corps is here to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, which does guarantee the freedom of speech," Franklin said. "In terms of the situation in Berkeley, the City Council and the protesters are exercising their right to do so." "
The Marine Corps cannot like the way they are being treated; yet, they understand the Constitution and the rights that it gives, and are accepting that these people are allowed to express what they believe. And yet, congressman Jim DeMint, R-South Carolina and David Vitter, R-Louisiana and their cohorts, who are supposed to know such things, cannot comprehend this simple fact, and try to sugarcoat their actions by taking advantage of the pride people feel in the military. All I can say is this is some political BS. There is no way such a bill, punishing Berkeley for peaceful protests, can be allowed to remain in existence, even if it is passed. The unconstitutionality of it is so blaringly obvious--punishment for a deed is as good as censorship--that any support for this violation of the Bill of Rights should be a stain upon the honor of all lawmakers.
I would also like to address the statement made by Senator Vitter, as quoted here from CNN: ""...I really get disturbed when taxpayer money goes to institutions which proceed to take votes, make policy or make statements that really denigrate the military," said Sen. David Vitter, R-Louisiana, a co-sponsor of the bill."
Well Sen. David Vitter, R-Louisiana, I really get disturbed when taxpayer money goes to representatives of my fellow citizens--representatives who believe and decide that stifling freedom of speech is the right thing to do.
Whatever your belief, it is not right to suppress the beliefs of others merely because you don't like it.
The bill is no longer about Berkeley protesting; it is about protecting freedom of speech.
Global Warming: The Next Step in Evolution
A source of constant debate and controversy is global warming. On one side, people are arguing that it is happening, along with a host of other problems, and on the other people are arguing that there is no such thing and the former side is being alarmist, etc etc. These sides will not be named.
However, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, I'm going to have to go with the opinion of the latter. Whatever it is that's happening is essential for the survival and betterment of humanity--it is the next step in evolution.
We are killing our atmosphere, killing our planet, killing our people, but there is a reason, which is that those who can survive the upcoming catastrophes will be a newer, stronger, better breed of humans. What doesn't kill us as a species can only make us stronger.
There really isn't a point in fixing these problems. The only reason we got to this point is through surviving through hardships, such as the bubonic plague. Such as the Ice Age. And so, the latter group, by insisting nothing bad is happening, is merely preparing for the genetic advancement of all of humanity. Those left will have better heat tolerance, better disease tolerance, stronger resistance to UV radiation, eyes that can see through smog, stomachs that can hold acid rain, and lungs that convert carbon dioxide to oxygen thus eliminating the need for fresh air.
All in all, it would lead to a race of super humans, perhaps dubbed homo sapiens sapiens sapiens or something.
So, in conclusion, the people who believe that nothing catastrophic is happening and who refuse to cut emissions or make any effort to protect the environment are forward thinking people who have the best interest of humans as a species in mind, since humans as a species have stagnated without disease and natural disasters to wipe us all out once in a while.
However, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, I'm going to have to go with the opinion of the latter. Whatever it is that's happening is essential for the survival and betterment of humanity--it is the next step in evolution.
We are killing our atmosphere, killing our planet, killing our people, but there is a reason, which is that those who can survive the upcoming catastrophes will be a newer, stronger, better breed of humans. What doesn't kill us as a species can only make us stronger.
There really isn't a point in fixing these problems. The only reason we got to this point is through surviving through hardships, such as the bubonic plague. Such as the Ice Age. And so, the latter group, by insisting nothing bad is happening, is merely preparing for the genetic advancement of all of humanity. Those left will have better heat tolerance, better disease tolerance, stronger resistance to UV radiation, eyes that can see through smog, stomachs that can hold acid rain, and lungs that convert carbon dioxide to oxygen thus eliminating the need for fresh air.
All in all, it would lead to a race of super humans, perhaps dubbed homo sapiens sapiens sapiens or something.
So, in conclusion, the people who believe that nothing catastrophic is happening and who refuse to cut emissions or make any effort to protect the environment are forward thinking people who have the best interest of humans as a species in mind, since humans as a species have stagnated without disease and natural disasters to wipe us all out once in a while.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Letter From Beyond The Veil
Dear Friends,
I regret to say that I write this letter from somewhere that is unfathomable for you, you who are still mere mortals and clinging to the threads of life. I have ascended beyond.
But, here now, what am I saying? I am not here to promote more strife, but merely to clear up some misunderstandings. Recently, a series of books have been published by one J.K. Rowling detailing the exploits of a young boy by the name of Harry Potter. I will not accuse her of libel--since I am dead, your legal system does not apply to me--but I will insinuate it.
Ms. Rowling took some extreme literary license with the facts. Although I do admit that I did commit some--okay, most--of the actions she attributed to me, I believe everything was misconstrued.
First of all, I would like to make clear that my position on blood purity was nothing more than a whim--you may have noticed all the (true) rumors of me being a half-blood. I ask you, would it make sense if I only approved of pure -bloods? I'd have to kill myself! Seven times! No, to me, pure-bloods were more like a collectible, much like Professor Horace Slughorn's vautned "Slug Club." Pure-bloods are much easier to collect than any other Wizarding group; after all, they take so much stock in blood purity that they practically complete my set for me! The Averys, the Malfoys, the Parkinsons...easy as stealing the Philosopher's Stone from Hogwarts!
Well, if it weren't for that blasted Lily Evans, bestowing that stupid ancient blood magic.
Anyway, I wasn't a psychotic madman, only a misunderstood collector. And now, to address the second issue: Muggle massacres.
Now, this is hardly an objective term. Massacres imply something horrifying and monstrous. But, if you take only a moment to think, my actions are no different than those of others. For example, do Muggles not hunt deer? Do wizards not hunt nogtails? And the answer is, by the way, yes. Similarly, I went hunting for Muggles. It was merely sport.
And, of course, in light of seven whole books of "evidence" against me, I realize that my supposed "crimes" will probably never be absolved. That's okay--I didn't do what I did to be accepted. What you must understand is the true nature of a Dark Lord.
A Dark Lord does not exist to spread what those propagandists call "evil" and "darkness;" no we exist for a far nobler purpose. Dark Lords exist to establish an institution, something that will last far longer than themselves. Grindelwald helped to cement the legends of the Deathly Hallows, Morgana le Fay left the downfall of Camelot, most miraculous kingdom of all time. And I?
I leave the question of life and death. What is life? What is death? Is a fragmented soul truly alive? Is it truly dead? Should death be fearsome or, as the esteemed Albus Dumbledore put it, merely the "next great adventure?"
I know it will be hard for you, but please for the sake of justice, read the stories with an open mind, unfettered by prejudices.
Thank you.
With great love,
Tom "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named" Marvolo "You-Know-Who" Voldemort "The Dark Lord" Riddle
I regret to say that I write this letter from somewhere that is unfathomable for you, you who are still mere mortals and clinging to the threads of life. I have ascended beyond.
But, here now, what am I saying? I am not here to promote more strife, but merely to clear up some misunderstandings. Recently, a series of books have been published by one J.K. Rowling detailing the exploits of a young boy by the name of Harry Potter. I will not accuse her of libel--since I am dead, your legal system does not apply to me--but I will insinuate it.
Ms. Rowling took some extreme literary license with the facts. Although I do admit that I did commit some--okay, most--of the actions she attributed to me, I believe everything was misconstrued.
First of all, I would like to make clear that my position on blood purity was nothing more than a whim--you may have noticed all the (true) rumors of me being a half-blood. I ask you, would it make sense if I only approved of pure -bloods? I'd have to kill myself! Seven times! No, to me, pure-bloods were more like a collectible, much like Professor Horace Slughorn's vautned "Slug Club." Pure-bloods are much easier to collect than any other Wizarding group; after all, they take so much stock in blood purity that they practically complete my set for me! The Averys, the Malfoys, the Parkinsons...easy as stealing the Philosopher's Stone from Hogwarts!
Well, if it weren't for that blasted Lily Evans, bestowing that stupid ancient blood magic.
Anyway, I wasn't a psychotic madman, only a misunderstood collector. And now, to address the second issue: Muggle massacres.
Now, this is hardly an objective term. Massacres imply something horrifying and monstrous. But, if you take only a moment to think, my actions are no different than those of others. For example, do Muggles not hunt deer? Do wizards not hunt nogtails? And the answer is, by the way, yes. Similarly, I went hunting for Muggles. It was merely sport.
And, of course, in light of seven whole books of "evidence" against me, I realize that my supposed "crimes" will probably never be absolved. That's okay--I didn't do what I did to be accepted. What you must understand is the true nature of a Dark Lord.
A Dark Lord does not exist to spread what those propagandists call "evil" and "darkness;" no we exist for a far nobler purpose. Dark Lords exist to establish an institution, something that will last far longer than themselves. Grindelwald helped to cement the legends of the Deathly Hallows, Morgana le Fay left the downfall of Camelot, most miraculous kingdom of all time. And I?
I leave the question of life and death. What is life? What is death? Is a fragmented soul truly alive? Is it truly dead? Should death be fearsome or, as the esteemed Albus Dumbledore put it, merely the "next great adventure?"
I know it will be hard for you, but please for the sake of justice, read the stories with an open mind, unfettered by prejudices.
Thank you.
With great love,
Tom "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named" Marvolo "You-Know-Who" Voldemort "The Dark Lord" Riddle
I Object! Promoting truth in comics
First, the comic in question:
http://xkcd.com/380/
By the esteemed Randall Munroe.
Basically, the untruth is simple. Munroe's comic indicates that a basilisk's eyes have the ability to kill through computer screens. However, as we learned in J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, a basilisk's stare cannot, repeat--cannot, kill through some other medium, such as a ghost or a camera. What does this mean?
It means that, even with the basilisk emoticon, it would be conveyed through the computer screen and CANNOT KILL SOMEBODY. It can only petrify.
Thank you.
http://xkcd.com/380/
By the esteemed Randall Munroe.
Basically, the untruth is simple. Munroe's comic indicates that a basilisk's eyes have the ability to kill through computer screens. However, as we learned in J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, a basilisk's stare cannot, repeat--cannot, kill through some other medium, such as a ghost or a camera. What does this mean?
It means that, even with the basilisk emoticon, it would be conveyed through the computer screen and CANNOT KILL SOMEBODY. It can only petrify.
Thank you.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Mirror, mirror, on the ground
This entry is dedicated to my only dedicated reader who wanted an entry like a month ago, and is only getting one now =)
Blearily, I got up this morning, totally not looking forward to today. Having not gotten fewer than five hours of sleep since my last Math 230 (which I thankfully dropped) all-nighter--my pre-break all-nighters don't count, but that's another story--I didn't know how I'd handle going through today. After printing my Perspectives homework, I stumbled into Commons and grabbed a quick breakfast. Unfortunately, due to my lagging and reluctance to get up with my alarm this morning, I was a little late to Math 120 anyway.
I struggled to say awake through the class. It was a tough battle, which I almost lost. Twice, I left the room on the pretense of going to the bathroom or getting a drink, and crashed for a couple minutes on the padded bench right outside the room. Yeah, it's kinda scary how low my sleep-deprivation-tolerance has dropped. Four-hour-sleep-weeks used to never faze me. And how--wow.
And then, after getting out of class, as if to make things worse, it began to rain. It wasn't just rain--the rain drops were icy cold, each strike sending a chill via impact. Bitterly, I vowed to never procrastinate again. Even more bitterly, I realized right away that I'd fail.
But as I was walking up Hillhouse feeling sorry for myself (how would I ever get through my disliked Chem class?) I happened to look down. And the almost-smooth unevenly-cut stone walkway with its veneer of water had the most beautiful reflection of the sky above. It was like a shadowed mirror, everything was shaded, there wasn't really color. But the sight of the leafless branches arch across the sidewalk, the gray sky broken only by cracks in the walkway was somehow serene and uplifting. It sounds unbelievable, but I actually felt better after seeing that. I wasn't as tired. In fact, I even stayed completely lucid for the first ten to fifteen minutes of Chem! But, as the event lagged further behind me, I relapsed into an alternating semi- and un-lucid state. Oh well.
Anyway, so this wasn't really an exciting story, but those stone blocks on Hillhouse are actually really cool. On a rainy day, drop by sometime and see the reflections. It's actually really amazing that those dull, prosaic slabs of stone can turn into mirrors on the ground.
MORAL OF THE STORY: DON'T PROCRASTINATE
Edit: So. The time is now about 3 or 4 hours after the post was first written. The rain is unrelenting. On my way down from Science Hill, I saw at least 10 enormous puddles. Like, practically ponds. I half-expected to see little crayfish swimming around. Wow. It's kind of amazing, but also kind of depressing--that rain could have been snow =D
Blearily, I got up this morning, totally not looking forward to today. Having not gotten fewer than five hours of sleep since my last Math 230 (which I thankfully dropped) all-nighter--my pre-break all-nighters don't count, but that's another story--I didn't know how I'd handle going through today. After printing my Perspectives homework, I stumbled into Commons and grabbed a quick breakfast. Unfortunately, due to my lagging and reluctance to get up with my alarm this morning, I was a little late to Math 120 anyway.
I struggled to say awake through the class. It was a tough battle, which I almost lost. Twice, I left the room on the pretense of going to the bathroom or getting a drink, and crashed for a couple minutes on the padded bench right outside the room. Yeah, it's kinda scary how low my sleep-deprivation-tolerance has dropped. Four-hour-sleep-weeks used to never faze me. And how--wow.
And then, after getting out of class, as if to make things worse, it began to rain. It wasn't just rain--the rain drops were icy cold, each strike sending a chill via impact. Bitterly, I vowed to never procrastinate again. Even more bitterly, I realized right away that I'd fail.
But as I was walking up Hillhouse feeling sorry for myself (how would I ever get through my disliked Chem class?) I happened to look down. And the almost-smooth unevenly-cut stone walkway with its veneer of water had the most beautiful reflection of the sky above. It was like a shadowed mirror, everything was shaded, there wasn't really color. But the sight of the leafless branches arch across the sidewalk, the gray sky broken only by cracks in the walkway was somehow serene and uplifting. It sounds unbelievable, but I actually felt better after seeing that. I wasn't as tired. In fact, I even stayed completely lucid for the first ten to fifteen minutes of Chem! But, as the event lagged further behind me, I relapsed into an alternating semi- and un-lucid state. Oh well.
Anyway, so this wasn't really an exciting story, but those stone blocks on Hillhouse are actually really cool. On a rainy day, drop by sometime and see the reflections. It's actually really amazing that those dull, prosaic slabs of stone can turn into mirrors on the ground.
MORAL OF THE STORY: DON'T PROCRASTINATE
Edit: So. The time is now about 3 or 4 hours after the post was first written. The rain is unrelenting. On my way down from Science Hill, I saw at least 10 enormous puddles. Like, practically ponds. I half-expected to see little crayfish swimming around. Wow. It's kind of amazing, but also kind of depressing--that rain could have been snow =D
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)