|
Negative Nuisance |
|
People don’t seem to show much appreciation for Negative Nancy these days. Back when America was wholesome and oblivious, she was a welcome archetype to any robust set of friends, if only to mock her whining and lack of accomplishment. These days she’s more like an inflamed appendix, and people would rather see her isolated in a pickle jar on a dusty shelf in the den than making us all sick. And with good reason. If we can agree that killing an idea is easier than forming one, Negative Nancy is just lazy.
Nancy’s a perfect example of belligerent conflict in its most decrepit state. Argument, debate, deliberation, or whatever you want to call it, can yield fantastic results provided each side engages the other honestly and as equals. Regrettably, a revolutionary idea is almost never at stake during civilized discourse. One of the unfortunate side effects of our indoctrination into the civilized world is the sweet rush of being correct, perhaps a weak derivative of our natural desire to dominate our surroundings? At any rate, we attempt to dominate each other by partaking in these formulaic plays, refusing to acknowledge that two or more succinct scripts are being used for each performance. And whoever wavers from their respective script first shall be stripped of all pride, because how can we trust someone who stutters? Passion devolves into intimidation, anger fuels validation, and facts are carefully aimed at sensitive areas. Once a clear victor has been crowned, the issue is put to rest, not because it’s been resolved in a meaningful way, but because the strongest conversationalist has chosen which opinions should be applied to any given set of facts.
Bear in mind, the best ideas this system could conceive led to this suckfest economy. Maybe our leaders’ decisions weren’t all that great, and it was us, the citizens, that did all that hard work of building a great society. Or maybe the only way citizens will actually commit to a concept as ridiculous as society is if we are perpetually convinced by someone who appears to know how it should be done. There are about a million ways to twist and shuffle that scenario, but the root of the problem is people, and changing people is a waste of time, so we might as well try to overcome the system. And the sooner the better; evidence of failing governments is everywhere. Rebellions… riots… pirates… and you know it’s only a matter of time before we’re dealing with full blown Vikings.
Before that terrifying amount of Nordic realness occurs, I hope we can keep tweaking the system we’ve got to lower the general suffering of all. We’ve got a long way to go, seeing as how most first world governments have essentially thrown everyone except millionaires to the wolves… nevertheless I feel like classy citizens like us could manage it. But you can’t form a plan unless you have a strategy, and your strategy will be terrible without a powerful stance.
Before we figure out the best way to posture ourselves to endure the inevitable onslaught of zionist biblicisms and humanitarian guilt, it’d be helpful to understand why governments utilize such a subjective system. When faced with something as arbitrarily convoluted as, say, the US government, any logical person would go batshit insane. Society needs smart people to conceive and build cool stuff for us to buy at reasonable prices. This logic was used to create the nerd/bully phenomenon, a naturally occurring system of social stratification that’s passed down through the generations like alcoholism. The end result: intelligent people lack charisma, protecting their precious brains from being melted by politics. Generally the plan worked, but with the unwanted side effect of keeping logic segregated from democracy.
Which leads us to a more manageable problem, that smart people lack the ability to ignore stupidity, greed, and inefficiency. You can spout off about ten lies in the time it takes to state a single fact. So why not set up a system of deliberation designed to insulate and detach said individuals, removing the frivolous burden of having to succeed in an argument? Because people don’t enter arguments unless they feel like they can win. Unless, of course, they were to show everyone present that their opponents are unable to win. By refusing the opposing party any form of closure, your opponent will lose. But so will you. If you care about the subject of the argument, pride is a small price to pay to overcome a less logical opinion.
I don’t want to be deceptive, so let me give you the baseline for this battle stance: Every idea is flawed because ideas are made of rhetoric, and words can be endlessly manipulated. Therefore, every person can always be proven wrong in some way, so long as the person is human and you are given enough time to make your argument. Prove that it’s impossible for anyone to be correct. At best you’ll look like a nerd for a few hours, and at worst you’ll find yourself using bad logic to combat bad logic, and will inevitably feel exceedingly stupid when the emotional rush wears off, even if you won.
Surely if Negative Nancy learned how to use such a system, everyone’s day would be ruined. But rest assured she’s incapable of understanding it. If Negative Nancy would just give up her sad, lonely quest for respect and admiration, she could use her parade-raining instincts to help society by pulling bad arguments apart and showing the world what they look like on the inside. But she doesn’t care about the topic at hand, only the rush. And if she’s clever, she might have already realized the downside to my system… that it always requires more time and money while inhibiting action… but how’s that any different from the adversary democracy we’re plodding through now?
~The Vagrant
|
The Glass is Half Bull |
|
Gonna start out in left field here, so bear with me. You can’t oppose a concept without acknowledging that it exists. If you can’t accept this correlation, your life can only end in vindictive frustration. Just look at everyone’s favorite agro hipsters: the angsty Atheists. I get it. You don’t believe in God and your glasses serve no purpose. But that doesn’t explain how and why you feel compelled to keep shoving nothing in a religious peoples’ collective faces?
If a hypothetical Atheist uses the word God, then God exists. ‘God,’ can no longer not exist because most people who understand this particular English word share the same general idea, save a few arbitrary details. I understand that it’s a technicality, but it’s an important one. Maybe God isn’t an omniscient monster living in the sky controlling the universe with the flick of His beard, but at the very least you find yourself forming some idea of what a religious person thinks that God might be. And in committing to this logical process, you have to acknowledge that God exists conceptually, if not physically. Your average Christian or Muslim or Republican can’t believe that God does not exist if he and the Atheist continually talk about Him. I can’t speak for Atheists, but I’m pretty sure it has nothing to do with refuting the existence of a God that doesn’t exist. Seems like Atheism is the process of accepting the fact that intangibles have no bearing on reality. So if you deny intangibles, why would you need to argue against the existence of God? Can you argue against nothing?
Of course not. I’m certainly not talking about the majority of Atheists, who are fun at parties and love it when you rub their bellies, just the ones that are anti-religious. If you hate people, call yourself a hater, but don’t hate on a person’s beliefs and then believe in hating them. That’s just going to reinforce his/her faith at the expense of your own emotional and philosophical development, and it’s not going to make up for the billions of non-believers that have been slaughtered over the years. And it makes you look like an argumentative douche.
And so, I’ve developed the Atheist Need and Usefulness System, which helps you identify and void haters from your life before they can jam you up with their bullshit: 1) Write down “God Exists” and “God is Dead” down on two separate pieces of paper. 2) Ask the test subject to pick a piece of paper. 3) If they pick one, you are talking to a hater, and my advice is to end the conversation and run. You are about to get doused by a massive cooler of ice-cold hateraid.
If you truly don’t care about what happens in the pre-birth and afterlife because of all the real things to worry about, then religion isn’t a very interesting subject. But understanding this type of conflict can have substantial benefits when trying to understand why Republicans and Democrats want to slowly torture each other with paperwork and showmanship. If you set aside the urge to decide who should win, both Monotheists and Atheists are talking about a meta-being while failing to uphold their beliefs, which involves convincing the other party to convert or… I guess demoralize them to the point of suicide.
I don’t like change. It’s quite difficult. Switching from faith to logic, or logic to faith, regardless of which switch should be chosen, would be a catastrophic amount of work. You’d be forced to undermine the very foundation of your thought process. Like switching operating systems. Psychological reconstruction. Metaphysical mayhem. Other scary combinations of words... But I digress. Which is worse, an Atheist who spends all day talking about God, or a Christian that has failed to save a soul from hell? I can’t tell, they look too similar.
In the case of American Politics, we’re stuck with two distinct options that sit directly opposed to one another: Society should help those who help themselves vs. society should help people because suffering is pretty terrible. Now I have to pick a side. This is where I get always give up and accept the fact that both sides basically just want to shake the nation and see what falls out.
Put a different way, the question involves being prepared for evil or having faith in good. Idealism vs. Realism. Optimism vs. Pessimism. Again, if we avoid concerning ourselves with determining the superior belief, it becomes clear that both sides utilize a progress-by-morality mentality. It shouldn’t matter whether the glass is half empty or half full, because the quantity of liquid in the glass doesn’t have to be the only thing that the glass and water represents. In a materialistic world, quantity is everything, and one’s perception of quantity has a substantial effect on the quality one’s life, but if we step away from what we possess and start thinking about what the glass or water is, then every person will give a slightly different answer, especially if forced to talk at length. By this logic, if a group of people were forbidden from taking a side on any given issue, then they would be capable of coming up with solutions far greater in quantity and quality than, oh, say, a group of people who just waste resources while deadlocked in perpetual combat, fighting over the same barren theoretical frontier in slightly different contexts. And the problem is less abstract than it appears… it’s only a matter of time before we star fighting over water instead of oil…
I really need to stay on topic. The definitions of political parties are so long and convoluted that it’s impossible to decide what you are without years of study. So, to save time, American politics conveniently divides itself into two categories that aren’t different in terms of their actions, but in their perception of action. The actions themselves come from professors, lawyers, and scientists, but they have little pull without the proper and delicate application of perception.
Which is all fine, and abstract, and impossible to prove, so why mention it? Because there is no right or wrong thing to do. There are only things to do, the way these things are perceived, and their measurable consequences. Therefore what you believe is completely irrelevant, and it prevents you from focusing energy and resources on what really matters, which is finding the best solution to any given problem based on all available information. Optimists or pessimists, believers and non-believers, it’s all just group think that’s designed to get everyone focusing on a very primitive form of conflict so they can easily accept commands. And when you’re mentality is constantly darting back and forth between two extremes like a tennis match, it’s impossible to focus on the infinite amount of options and possibilities that populate middle. So let’s stop treating the country like a treasure box and start treating it like a test subject in some crazy experiment. It’s better than the status quo, corruption masquerading as morality… which is still better than corruption that makes no attempt to hide itself, but not by enough…
But one thing I can’t figure out why group think needs to be cultivated in the first place. Back in the old days, a king could slaughter his serfs, chock it up to God’s will, and collect taxes like that shit didn’t just get real. A nation full of empowered consumers needs to feel like it’s making a difference, so its government sets up the epic choice between two polar opposites, Red and Blue.
Which doesn’t even make sense, by the way, it should be either Red vs. Green or Blue vs. Orange. None of it makes sense. As a skeptical, cynical jerk, I have been discriminated against by my government for long enough. Ideas coming from both sides of the spectrum are absolutely terrible. I need a political party that considers every idea to be inherently flawed because it came from a primitive human brain. And we’d be in love with stuff like filibusters, because it pushes the pause button on the well-oiled spectacle of politics. Attacking politicians simply because their reputation and credibility is artificial, or better yet, because they’re straight up wrong 90% of the time. Buying infinity beer for hackers and freelance journalists. Demanding sincere transparency. Would we be pessimists? Cynics? Contrarians? Deconstructionists?
Screw labels, time to come up with some policies…
~The Vagrant
|
The Man in Me |
|
You may remember this one from The Big Lebowski. Rich helped me record this a couple years ago, forgot to post it. The end.
The Man in Me (Originally by Bob Dylan)
Also worth noting, the song is about a hundred times less awkward than the title...
~The Vagrant
|
How the Earth got Wet |
|
1) Global warming heats up our planet’s atmosphere.
2) Warm air is capable of holding more water.
I thought the contradiction would be the result of magic or the epic combination of pretty good CG and really bad acting, so I was kind of underwhelmed when I first heard it. Setting aside how easy it is to hook up knowledge on wiki, I can’t believe that this information isn’t in the first paragraph of every newspaper article about global warming. Apparently a threat only gets air time if it’s sexy, and there’s nothing sexier than humans slowly choking the planet to death (snuff sexy, in this case). And even though the issue gets substantial air time and column space, some of us still can’t decide if it even exists. To make matters worse, the devout are starting to split up into unproductive sects that spend more time fighting amongst themselves than sticking it to the Repos. Since I feel uncomfortable using a phrase unless I’m sure it’s a real thing, let’s just agree that the weather is getting weird.
But weird is a relative term. It seems like millions of articles have been published that claim to have found the scientific proof supporting global warming. They’ve been washing over the public since Al Gore first sunk his teeth into Wally Broeker’s sweet coinage, and most of the studies they’re based on have relied on data that’s been collected over the past 50 to 100 years. Then, feeding this information into the same computers that caused the stock market to explode a few times since the start of the Great Recession, the “unprecedented warming” that the computer models predict is always, “the worst on record,” which, I would imagine, is designed to scare the masses into believing that humans have put the planet in peril. This is the vagueness that conservative skeptics like to point out when they cry anthropocentrism. You’d think that the nerds in charge of this nonsense would have found the one piece of evidence that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that our emissions are giving the planet emphysema. Why don’t environmentalists have a silver bullet?
Like most problems that occurred after the year 2000, this one can be blamed on Al Gore. Global Warming should be a phrase that describes the empirical evidence of too much damn rain and snow falling all over the world, but it’s not. The word has been turned into the scientific equivalent of hell, only it’s worse, because it’s a hell that we have to worry about before walking into the light. But like hell, the post-global-warming globe occurs in the future, at some point that is not the present or the past, and therefore cannot be proved. And since it can’t be disproved either, the media has a certain degree of factual malleability when advertizing their environmental headlines. Newspapers and networks would much rather present their advertisements a shivering majority than the 5-6 Americans who might be convinced by a fact or statistic.
If that conclusion pisses you off, rest assured I felt dirty writing it. Please don’t try to smother me with research, I’d much rather hear a reason to correct Global Warming that doesn’t rely on threats and intimidation. I am an American. When I hear people rant and rave about the enviropocalypse that will cause our grandchildren to curse us, I want to resist the threat, because my psyche revolves around the freedom to choose. Fear may be enough to get liberals to rally behind sustainability, but a fat wallet is the only conclusion that will yield unanimous support.
In today’s twisting financial landscape idealism is a hard sell, and ordinary ideas only affect society as a whole if they can be made profitable. Instead of coming up with a business model, environmentalists plan to change the world by assuming a century’s worth of meteorology is infallible. Step two is just as easy, dismissing everyone who disagrees. Conservatives, who will never be outshouted by anyone, will always welcome a fight, as tradition is under constant threat by (ghost noises) progress. So instead of seeking truth and determining right from wrong, liberals and conservatives argue about what’s right. If we can’t agree on the definitions of words, the resulting arguments will always be fruitless (well… not for media outlets…).
I honestly don’t care if Global Warming is true or false. That being said, I think efficiency is one of the most underrated concepts of all time. I would be really proud to be a part of a utopian society that could turn my poop into fertilizer for corn, which could be fed to cows, which could be turned into delicious burgers to be digested and converted into more poop. For the cherry on top, we’ll capture all the cows’ farts and pipe them to a brewery to help ferment my booze. It bums me out when I see a deuce spin away into the vortex… what a waste…
But the profitable mindset has its price. Currently, our best and brightest technology firms have all decided to make the same tablet pc. Pills are favored over permanent medical solutions because they transform ordinary citizens into gold mines. Every form of art has been reconfigured to allow for maximum appeal and minimum effort. Not that I’m complaining. Over the last two hundred years, humanity has done a remarkable job gradually alleviating collective suffering. But as overpopulation turns consumption into a serious issue, the mentality of profitability determining the course of business needs to be abandoned or evolved to account for a finite world. The Earth is a zero-sum game, not a magical resource generator. However, CEOs have their hands full keeping people working and spending. Fighting global warming with the concept of efficiency would have to start with a government.
I hate contradicting myself, but the reality is that Americans’ growing fears are exactly what the government needs to act. Fear of death or dying led to Social Security and Medicare. Fear of poverty helped spawn welfare. And fear of explaining things to our children gave us the FCC. Impending consequences aside, this fear is the perfect vehicle for change. With the weather screwing over the world’s food supply, now is the time to start a government agency devoted to cutting down on loss and boosting efficiency.
I don’t like being two faced, but the simple fact is that fear is just as evil as it is effective. But if evil isn’t your thing, it’s just as easy to justify efficiency in terms of a society’s connectivity. Philosophically speaking, modern governments are designed to connect people so they can be more productive and pay more taxes. But as they connect more individuals, they have to try harder and harder to suppress the anarchy that would be unleashed should survival-of-the-fittest be reinstated. For example, the government is responsible (well, at least when the economy doesn’t suck) for maintaining the roads and bridges that connect us. With government incentive, corporations could kick start the painful process of piping waste to other factories or processing plants instead of landfills and rivers. Decades afterwards (assuming the government keeps pushing sustainability and efficiency) industry will start to reposition itself based not only on where they can maximize profits from products, but where they can maximize profits from waste.
The ambitious goal of this ridiculous pipe dream is to make waste as profitable as consumer goods. If we connect all the inputs and all the outputs, maybe we can get closer to a society that evolves based on perpetual motion instead of swarming resources like locusts. But don’t blame the corporations; they get all their cues from the general population. They embrace profits because humans still think collecting possessions leads to higher status. Just remember, the more stuff you collect while you’re alive, the more stuff you’ll lose when you kick the bucket.
But don’t worry; they have a pill for that.
~The Vagrant
|
State of America |
|
It feels good to pacify your brain with a skilled public speaker every now and again. All the stress of an uncertain future and a bitch ton of collective debt is putting the US on edge, so it’s nice to finally have a leader who sounds like he knows what he’s talking about. President Obama uses this talent to numb your inner skeptic, which is a vast improvement over a president who constantly validates your inner skeptic. I was hanging on to every word right up until he spoke directly to the legislators, closing his statement with a heartfelt, “I know there isn’t a single person here who would trade places with any other nation on Earth,” which received thunderous applause and a unanimous standing ovation. After the effect wore off I started thinking… what kind of jerk politician is going to disagree with that line? No, sorry, I’d rather be in Germany right now, but given the circumstances I should probably get Colorado some money, eh fellows? Impressive… concoct a misleading blanket statement that forces everyone in the audience to agree, thus portraying yourself purple (the bipartisan color). Well played sir.
I hope everyone turned off the TV before the Republican response. While the President made it clear that his focus was on the people and pipedreams, Senator Ryan Paul made it clear that his focus was on President Obama. The majority of his response consisted of criticism of the President, what can only be described as rhetorical terrorism designed to scare up votes, and a pompous lecture about how government works in Teatopia. Not to mention this little gem that could have just as easily been delivered by a ransom victim holding today’s newspaper with a gun pointed to his head, “In all the chapters of human history, there has never been anything quite like America.” I only pray that local authorities seek out justice for the defenseless eighth grader whose history paper was ruthlessly plagiarized by this monster.
While democrats looked up at the President with glistening eyes, Republicans seemed to be writing down battle tactics. Good public speakers can overthrow governments, equalize civil rights, and initiate genocide, but I find it hard to believe that a bunch of really great words will convince our politicians to crave bipartisanship more than being reelected. Since explaining a political victory takes twenty minutes and insulting the other guy takes about twenty seconds, it’s just more cost effective to get elected based on your list of enemies rather than your accomplishments. All of the GOP’s energy will be spent making sure the President contradicts himself so that he won’t get reelected. Then they’ll try to get me to vote for a conservative, which I don’t understand. Why I should vote Republican if their idea of a constructive use of taxpayer dollars is to spend two years reversing two years of progress in a particular direction before anyone has a chance to see if said progress was effective? I hate the idea that life is all about avoiding failure and minimizing loss. Trial and error is much more satisfying than praying that richer/smarter people will kindly hold our hands and guide us into the future.
But forget all that nonsense, because here’s what you need to know. The President wants us to innovate and put some work in. Paul Ryan wants you to be afraid so his party can pitch a bible thumper in 2012. John Boehner looks funny on paper and claps how he wants, when he wants. Joe Biden has the best serious face EVER.
~The Vagrant
|
The Palin Defense |
|
One thing I’ve learned from years of consistently putting my foot in my mouth is that trying to explain your racist/sexist/idiotic blather will only make things worse. Sarah Palin gets paid millions of dollars to do the thing that has wrecked havoc on my self-esteem for decades. For giving us gems like, ‘lamestream media,’ and other phrases reeking of Hollywood cliché (*cough* *cough* MANSOUR *cough*) (I would also like to point out that it’s not fair if her last name is already an obvious word combo). I wonder how many more times the tea partiers, birthers, and boarder vigilantes will turn to their Alaskan Idol before they realize that she’s nothing more than a manchurionette puppet in desperate need of a Cheney to pull her strings. Once she finds that special someone that will tug on her pantsuit whenever she’s about to drop a Biden… game over man… game over. America may have freedom of speech, but I like to believe that most of us want to keep it classy. Not Mrs. Palin… no apologies and no regrets.
It’s easy to overlook the subtle beauty of calling everyone who questions with you a liar/heathen/portmanteau, which will someday be known as the Palin Defense, but think about it… don’t you know somebody that can’t be swayed by even the most brilliant last-words? You try not to get suckered into it, but every so often they lure you into an endless lecture until they’ve repeated the same point so many times and in so many different ways that your brain literally roasts inside your skull. Liberal media loves to laugh at her crazy eyes and Springer-esque family shenanigans, and they’re making a killing off the defenseless little words that she destroys in her wake, but the scorn seems to be the only fuel that powers her political career. Scorn and mediocre dancing…
After all, if someone is important enough to have enemies, they might be important enough to follow without question. While Mrs. Palin doesn’t have any clever answers or accomplishments, she is without a doubt an expert in the field of marketing. Ditching her civic duty was the right choice, seeing as how she cashed out on speech after speech and cemented herself into popular culture by allowing her loved ones to be reduced to tabloid fodder. While she may seem ignorant, Mrs. Palin can play the game with about two tons of cajones.
The tea party introduced the idea that you can change America by plugging back into the exact same political system, but with a cool new badass attitude. Sarah Palin spearheaded this rage-into-the-machine approach to recruiting voters, whereby citizens too agitated to vote under normal circumstances are plugged right back into the politics that they hated and farmed for votes. And their reward is a symbolic repeal of healthcare that’s going to get shot down like… damn, already used a Cheney... Thanks GOP!
For all the homies out there who cringe when they hear that batty voice, take comfort in the fact that she hasn’t really done anything, and probably never will (other than making money off people who believe she does something). Around half of the candidates she backed were elected, which makes it hard to tell if she had any effect. If she does run for anything, rest assured that an unscripted debate would knock her out cold.
I don’t even feel like going into the Arizona shooting, because I hope to God that Sarah and Rebecca aren’t even 1% responsible for inspiring the shooter. I wouldn’t wish that kind of pain onto anyone’s conscience. Mrs. Palin went on the defensive by denying responsibility for any effect her downright mean speeches have on weaker minds. This shifted the inevitable debate back to the political game, in this case campaign rhetoric, instead of something that matters.
I wish I could blame the politicians or the media. But the problem is us. Instead of facing the painful conversations about responsible gun ownership or the way we treat the mentally ill, we would rather just hate or love different parts of this red vs. blue garbage. Politicians play infinity tug-of-war, expending maximum effort and refusing to go anywhere. The media puts it up on various screens because they need the ratings. And I feel like a moron for wasting my time watching the necessary amount of advertisements that will allow me to be annoyed by Mrs. Palin when I could be making friends with my mail man to see if he’s a cool dude.
~The Vagrant
|
12 Down... |
|
12,898 to go…
Since all the people who significantly benefit from CITI turning a profit are busy getting down with debutantes at the Champagne bathhouse, something like '12 billion dollar return on federal bailout' seems like a waste of headline space. That’s what, two nuclear power plants? I mean it’s pretty good… but it still feels like pushing in black jack... it probably would be more cost effective if we just cut out the middle man and bamboozle everyone who currently owns over one billion dollars. My proposal breaks down like so:
Bailing out a company doesn’t change its management. It stands to reason that saving Magoo Corp can only yield mediocre results in the long run at best. But if we use the government to forcibly remove all excess funding to the people just pretending to be stressed out, they’ll have no choice but to earn all that money back. You only rob personal fortunes, so the lesser CEOs won’t complain as they scoop up all those cushy top spots. Since you can’t go back to spam once you’ve had filet mignon, all the smarties will have no choice but to work for their former pions at an insulting six figure income. Then, drowning their sorrows in workahol, they save America.
This plan is so completely and utterly foolproof that I am going to avoid a lengthy digression about how more things should be wrapped in bacon. If you’re still not convinced, here’s the short version: Rich people… hamster wheels… America.
But for the rest of us who know that the gray clouds aren’t going to clear up for a while, there is one preposterously slim hope for feeling better. America has been in debt since the beginning. There’s no way George Washington could have punched King George in the face without all that delicious cash flow from England’s enemies. So Americans and America kept going into more debt because of war and inflation and, miraculously, 200 years later, other countries have not broken our legs in retaliation. Maybe it’s all the bombs and tanks, but I’d like to think it’s because the world knows that when it comes time to buckle down, America will pay off their debt and celebrate by innovating some crazy new product. We’ve sold pet rocks for Christ’s sake. Successfully!
But on a more serious note, I would envelope a grilled cheese sandwich in bacon if I could afford to brazenly waste bacon.
~The Vagrant
|
Suffering Suffrage |
|
Only a heartless bastard would turn down the moist eyes of a beggar. The Democrats are smart enough to know that, which is why they took a hint from those old ladies with the bells and the puppy dog eyes that end up finagling the change out of my pocket every single time I leave Stater Bros. Don’t vote angry, they say. Its good advice in a general sense, but it’s hard to stay calm when our sophisticated political process has become tabloid fodder for Europe. I guess they want to know why the US population is shocked that a six year overindulgence issue wasn’t wrapped up in two. Sure the Republicans got everyone drunk on low interest rates and bogus war contracts, but the Democrats let it happen and seem to only want to throw money at every problem.
Truth be told, Mr. Clinton has a point when he tells us that an angry decision will be a wrong decision eighty percent of the time. It’s a homely little sentiment that’s designed to distract us from the fact that he’s referring to the belligerent anger you’d find at an intervention or in the hearts of Chargers fans. It’s some grade A begging, to be sure, but I’m not falling for it. I mean don’t get me wrong, Billy’s a nice guy, it’s just the arrogance that rubs me the wrong way. To hold that position, you’ve got to first assume that Republicans are either irrational or evil. This is the spark that sets off a chain reaction that wastes everybody’s time.
When someone as important as the Commander and Chief of the United States talks, I want to believe that he’s powerful, like Santa or John Stewart, and that with a mere lash of his rhetorical whip he can destroy evil. But when President Obama started talking about fear and anxiety clouding the voter’s judgment this election, the band playing the Star Spangled Banner in my head started to slow down in a humorous fashion. How does he think we ended up in this uncomfortable position? Our country has stagnated economically and socially, the healthcare legislation that was supposed to let America finally fit in with the rest of the free world is going to be strung out over twice as much time(rendering it irrelevant in the face of exponential growth in cost of care… I think…), and the economic stimulus would have helped more, but apparently Republicans cut a hundred billion or so right before go time, rendering the whole thing flaccid.
What does all that even mean? Maybe us poor, lowly serfs are shivering in the fields because the mighty political oligarchy won’t explain what’s happening without resorting to some vindictive argument or imaginary enemy that lives next door (no, not terrorists, other political parties… maybe even independents… *shudder*). Maybe we’re angry because our own government allowed the financial sector to set traps for its customers that fueled a bubble under cover of two wars. And maybe… just maybe… everyone’s sick of politicians that can’t move this country ten steps forward without dragging it nine steps back.
Which brings us to California Governor hopeful Meg Whitman, who believes that a shot of vitamin business is all the state needs to get back on its feet. Once the golden state’s efficiency goes up, the books will no longer bleed, and the state will untangle itself. Then what? Setting aside the fact that she paid many tens of millions of dollars out of her own pocket to buy the office, it’s naïve to assume that an entire society is dependent on economic factors alone. The social issues that Californians currently face range from drugs to marriage, not to mention that little issue of evaporating property rights that will soon cause the US and its governments to forfeit its liberal democracy status. These are all topics that a good CEO would simply ban from workplace discussion. Jerry Brown, on the other hand, gives off a Lex Luthor vibe that makes me uncomfortable on a personal level, so the whole thing is still a coin flip. This is exactly why I’m constantly finding myself wishing that I could vote based on which candidate I revile the most.
Time, energy, and, more importantly, tax dollars are being wasted because we lack solid leadership. Without a leader, we aren’t being pushed towards a common objective, which leads to a country with no clear direction, which translates to a slow and painful recovery. It’s the vacuum of political leadership that allows the crazies access to politics, not an oversight by voters. If Democrats are worried that candidates like Sharron Angle might get elected, they’re probably better off giving the President a few pointers on how to make his accomplishments look a little less timid. Crazy only seems like a good idea when you’ve exhausted every alternative.
If Democrats want me to stop being upset, either buy me a beer or do your job so I have no reason to be angry in the first place.
~The Vagrant
|
Appeal Bias |
|
Let me start by saying I don’t have any kind of personal vendetta against the media. That being said, I’m not sure how they decided that tragedies should be ranked in terms of public interest. I guess overpopulation has sort of led to an overabundance of life being overextinguished by natural disasters and fear-mongers, and thus news distributors, left with too many delicious units of suffering to devour, turn to the guys who keep track of ratings to decide what the public needs to hear.
It seems like mining and oil disasters where dozens to hundreds of lives are at stake outweigh the millions of disaster victims in countries that the rest of the world can’t quite pronounce (not their fault, lack of practice you know). There’s no easy solution to that little quandary, since the Internet is doing a good job of utterly routing profits from the newsies and they just need to stay afloat, but what’s the deal with the people who watch this stuff?
The cynic within would like to blame it on guilt, as every aspect of our lives has been involuntarily designed to bleed resources from the bowels Earth. It’s a stretch to believe that people are deep enough to connect consumption with industrial disasters, but subconsciously it’s worth biting your fingernails over. We all know that our planet will soon be hollow, and tragedies in fifty years will probably result from nervous governments trying to cram minerals and fuels back in there. And that’s the best case scenario, keep going like this and we’re going to have to drag ore out of the Earth just so we can reinforce other parts of the world that we dug up for ore.
And why the hell don’t we build buildings downward?
I’m just sayin’, is all…
Of course a more logical explanation is that everyone directly involved in the tragedy stands to profit from the exposure. The citizens of Chile can’t get enough media gossip from the people stuck down in that dirt pocket, and now anyone with a stake in public influence is practically tripping over themselves to get involved. Then all the local gossip fed international news and resulted in better coverage (and possibly better action). But at the center of this runaway carnival of web cams and endorsement deals is the frightening reality that this whole effort is at the mercy of the shifts in the Earth.
Whatever happens, those miners can easily be classified as maximum butch. Arguing over who will get out last is manly enough to get them into a domestic beer or finely tailored suit commercial. Well played, miners…
Hope is never a mistake. I could complain all day about how rabid resource consumption leads to abandonment of safety standards or how news coverage should be determined by the Utilitarians instead of the Capitalists, but that would be boring. I think it’s comforting to know that this is the first time in history that a potentially deadly tragedy like this can be averted and actually leave victims better off (if all goes to plan). For all the glaring flaws the plague the international media, we have to give them points for reaching billions of people with random bits of information within days. That’s almost like magic. Once they see daylight, these guys will earn thousands of moneys and a hefty pile of job offers…
Just for the record, I’m thinking about becoming a Chilean miner…
~The Vagrant
|
The Sickle of Life |
|
The media needs to come up with a new fear blitz, and I’m not talking about something weak like some sort of animal flu or health care reform. Americans are known for their perilous gluttony and insatiable thirst for pointless hobbies; it’s what makes us great. So if Lionfish1 are slapping around the inhabitants of the Atlantic Ocean, it seems only logical for the consumption experts to step in and see who can overcompensate by catching the biggest one. We did it to the buffaloes, and that was probably because we ran out of tin cans. Gluttony… for good. America.
And I don’t want to seem paranoid, but animals are out of control. Elephants stomping through villages… baboons stealing food from cars when people forget to lock them… Shamu… It seems like the no-thumbs don’t appreciate us humans as much as they used to for some reason. It’s almost like they’re jealous. How was mankind to know that the price for building ridiculously cool stuff was the destruction of many places and animal friends? Cut us some slack, beasts, or we’ll go all Wes Werbowy2 on your face.
Zooming out a bit, I’m almost positive that this is just a small expeditionary force. The Earth is trying to rub us out. Sure we could blame something logical, like overpopulation and lack of infrastructure… but doesn’t it make more sense to wake up and realize that the circle of life is trying to give us the ole flat line? Like a Succubus she tempts us with her voluptuous resources, but now that she’s lured us in, let us prosper and multiply, its black widow time. Even the mighty dinosaurs were whipped out by a much larger force: Nature (or the Universe). I know because if it wasn’t for their fermented remains, I wouldn’t be able to complain about sitting in traffic. We kill and maim each other thinking this big, complicated planet is going to run out of stuff… we inch closer and closer to a nuclear apocalypse… and not a single person realizes the truth…
That’s what this big blue bastard wants! She’s not going to pull the trigger, but she’ll mix everything up just to watch humans tear each other apart... WELL I SAY ENOUGH. It’s time to declare war on the planet. Blowing it to bits is too easy, we need to put it to work for our capitalistic machine. Every ten years or so the United States is ready to go to war to protect something like freedom or kill something like terrorism (or count money), but when it comes time to make an easy moral choice like help people who get completely screwed, everyone prefers to let the situation fester.
It breaks my heart that the country that gave the most aid to Pakistan is about to resume the use of unmanned bombers against them, but that’s the kind of world that we live in. So instead of “helping” people by bringing a war and Pepsi to their doorstep, maybe we should commit a slight portion our impressive bullet budget to figuring out how to build strong shelters and distribute resources quickly in any disaster response scenario.
Huge populations with terrible infrastructure have made natural disasters a bigger threat than arbitrary conflict. And to assume that Nature's hissy fits couldn’t be profitable is just naïve. I’m a little disappointed in our Republican/billionaire friends for lacking the patience and the foresight to strike when the iron is hot. Come on oligarchy, instead of making tough moral choices that turn into quagmires, lets change into a big ole red, white, and blue counter-puncher every time the Earth tries to go all haymaker on our collective kissers.
It’s time to figure out which parts of Nature could pose a threat to us as top dog, because I’ll be dammed if the essence of my being is going to end up fried, drowned, exploded, shaken, or in the fuel tank of the submarine that some Lionfish bought to visit the ruins of the Titanic on the weekends thousands of years from now. Let’s hook Ted Nugent up with a cigarette boat and a bow that shoots harpoons… get those reef trolling d-bags shaking…
TTC News: Two Thousand Coconuts is about to reboot itself. Right now I’m developing something that should look pretty decent (in theory…), so until then this site is probably going to turn into some kind of development blog, then some kind of beta test, then a final site with an emphasis on production. If you want it to go faster you can give me money or up the page hits, make me feel guilty for not working faster.
1http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38632799/ns/us_news-environment
2http://www.aolnews.com/surge-desk/article/inuit-martial-arts-polar-bear-attack-thwarted-by-punch-to-the-n/19593452
~The Vagrant
|
Fauxbook |
|
This whole Facebook thing is completely ridiculous and I’m tired of hearing about it. Every day I wake up and thank the lord that I don’t have to find a white book with baffling density or an address book that isn’t convenient enough to carry with you all the time. And even though I wrote that confusing sentence, I’m not all that bright. When I took a look at the privacy settings, I came to what I thought was a pretty logical conclusion: I’m too lazy to even begin to want to understand this tremendous task that has been placed before me, now it’s time for some pirate's booty. I had no idea I could transform my confusion into enough zealous indignation to complain for weeks. Unless they just want us to think they’re mad about privacy… almost like… they were just looking for an excuse… Can you honestly look me square in the Internets and tell me that you won’t make a new profile in six months in a moment of boredom? Or maybe this was all some plot to purge the unworthy from your friend lists with a justifiable excuse? Just don’t think you’re getting away with anything…
But there’s something more frustrating at play here. It’s like making a public announcement that only really good looking people are getting mugged much more often than everyone else. The next day people would get worked up about the increased crime, not realizing that most of them were too uggo to be at risk. And even though that’s a weak metaphor, I still say COME ON.
I mean sure, the guy who keeps his bank accounts on his profile and scans of his passport in his photos might be in trouble, but I don’t understand how everyone turns into James Bond after a privacy risk. I’m really sorry Interneteers, it must feel awful having your profile page violated by beer company market research divisions… even though most of you probably have invisible, illegal data mining software hidden somewhere in your computer that’s constantly collecting a greater amount of more accurate information about your life. I’m pretty sure if big brother wants to be evil, his first stop isn’t the Facebook sales office…
But congratulations on the victory, I must say I didn’t think it would happen so quickly. It sounds like they’re cutting the options from hundreds to dozens, so I still may not even begin to want to learn how to care about the privacy issues beyond publicly decrying the people who care about them publicly. Tell you what FB, you cut the options down to five or less, and I’ll give you... …. ………uhh………six bucks and a fully stamped coffee card. And I won’t even start a hate group about you.
(And you’re not gonna find a better deal than that)
I hope I’m not the only person that’s a little uncomfortable about all this complaining about a free service. If you really feel that screwed, delete your account (almost every web article about the Facebook privacy issues is concluded with an advertisement for that very option), meet some new rural friends, start hand writing your letters, and stop being bitter about the fact that people can easily steal your ones and zeros. Think of it as a small price to pay for making memorization a thing of the past.
Thanks wikipedia!
~The Vagrant
|
tOil |
|
Let’s build a better politician. Sure it’ll be a bit tougher than not doing it, but I’m sick of twiddling my thumbs while the great American populous is faced with a choice between begging with pouty eyes and an angry, vein-busing rant. It’s no comparison! Anyone will tell you that people will never take sides with hippies when there are a bunch of rich people running around, spewing short sided comments at people whether they’re listening or not. There’s a hypnotic rhythm to the way a conservative person states their beliefs while belittling your own… their every platitude pitched just so at the end as to signify the dropping of a figurative bomb… the steady 10 decibel volume increase every two minutes for the duration of the argument… from my smile/noddings I’ve gathered that most of the beliefs involve protecting the moneys, which I’m all for, but they lose points for being ice cold and because no one wants to hang out with them at parties.
Now you actually want to do right by Gaia (the Spirit of Earth), and guilt has lead you to believe that nature isn’t humanity’s toilet, so you have to bleed your pu— ahem… uhh, your heart out and become a liberal. I mean that agonizing pace… like every word is profound, then the shock of realizing that your adversary wasn’t quite convinced… again. It must be frustrating to live like that. I mean maybe it’s harsh to call liberal rhetoric weak, but I can only put up with so many memorized and regurgitated facts before I tune out and start thinking about what really matters (Bacon). At least with conservatives it comes down to a God or family values or the right to shoot things, ask a Demo what to do about a problem and you’ll lose half a week.
Take this Gulf of Mexico oil spill for instance. Either you’re rooting for our economy because it totally feels like damaged goods right now (which is ludicrous because it’s a fantastic, voluptuous economy and there are plenty of other great markets out there) or you’ve been swayed by your completely justified urge to be outraged by wanton environmental destruction so close to home. So what are you gonna do… whine about the soulless creatures and pretty ocean that you’ll never see without great expense, or freaking ANGRY RANT ABOUT HARD DECISIONS IN TOUGH TIMES.
WOOOO.
If only there was an angry leviathan of a liberal who could swoop in with some angry ranting for the side of good instead of money. I mean it’d be tough to pull off, mostly because he/she would be a complex human individual (batman-esque), but once we put in the work, it’s a lock. Instead of whining because the defense budget is too high, maybe he/she would GET PISSED ABOUT THE FACT THAT TRILLIONS WERE SPENT ON A FAILED WAR-ON-DRUGS INSTEAD OF ELABORATE NATURAL/SYNTHETIC DISASTER RESPONSE/RELIEF SYSTEMS! And instead of sensationalizing a disaster for profit or pushing an agenda that requires military escorts for all heartbeats lacking opposable thumbs, he/she could say, “YOU WANT DRILLING IN OUR BEAUTIFUL MOTHER FREAKIN GULF, YOU AVARICIOUS BAFOONS, HOW ABOUT WE GO AHEAD AND GOVERNMENTALIZE A FEW DOZEN PERCENTS OF YOUR PROFITS TO INCREASE SAFETY STANDARDS OF AMERICAN OIL PUMPING EVERYWHERE! BWAHAHAHA.” Now I’d love to hit you with a third example, but I’m TIRED OF USING CAPS TO PROVE MY POINT, AND FRANKLY, IT’S VERY IMMATURE AND ANNOYING.
Or maybe I haven’t, I don’t really care, but the Gulf Oil situation doesn’t seem that complicated. We need black gold for our cars/houses more than we need shrimps for our cocktails or Shamus for our Sea World. I think it’s worth taking risks closer to home if it means putting some distance between America and the Middle East.
~The Vagrant
|
The Hate Virus |
|
Hate is like a disease. They may deny it, but I’ve never seen a hater that hasn’t spread their hate to someone else. If a hater manages to infiltrate your place of business, watch out, because soon everyone will catch the infection. Then all it takes is a jammed copy machine or an empty tin of coffee, and BAM…hatesplosion…you’ll be picking bits of that squirrely IT guy out of your mail cubby for weeks…
But what if a disease could hate? Ok, maybe not a disease, but a medical condition...a sinister medical condition. I learned the horrifying truth from a billboard in Eagle Rock: Stroke targets by color. That’s right…the rapid loss of brain function due to a disturbance in the supply of blood to the brain brought on by thrombosis, embolism, or hemorrhage has no respect for the health of African Americans and Latin Americans and maybe Middle Eastern Americans (it depends on your definition of Caucasian). Well I’ve got news for you strokes, your days denying my fellow Americans their right to have blood flow in their brains are numbered! We’re pissed and we’re bringing the fight to your door step! YOU HEAR ME?! NOTHING WILL STOP US FROM EATING A HEALTHY DIET AND, uh…maintaining a regular exercise routine while reducing alcohol and tobacco consumption…
Sounds fun…
Gotta say, I’m not impressed with whoever came up with the PSA featured below because my news script decided to glitch and deny me the ability to provide links. I’m not arguing with the facts, I just think it’s worth mentioning the evil required to O.K. an ad that subconsciously uses fear of discrimination to drive its point home. Not only is it bad form, but it’s technically terrorism.
It’s probably the public’s fault, which apparently can’t be motivated unless they’re threatened by a mysterious outside force. Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s a great idea to educate people about public health concerns. What I don’t appreciate are slogan jockeys that think they’re being clever when they’re really just hitting below the belt.
If you want to be clever, start a blog. Trust me, it's great, you don't even have to spel or write good. Why you gotta con people into going to a boring web site? That’s just mean, man.
On the economic front, Miss California was fired by Donald Trump. Everyone who thinks she’s a stone cold fox says Carrie Prejean got fired because of her comments about gay marriage (“I, like, totally think dude love is gross,” or something along those lines). Everyone who’s read the contract she singed says Prejean failed to fulfill her obligations as Miss California, such as waving, smiling, being at places on time, and pretending not to care when every man and lesbian she talks to stares at her chest. This came as a complete shock to me. I had always assumed that good looking people were known for their stalwart work ethic and dedication to their jobs. I mean let’s face it; no one has to work harder than a blonde chick with huge knockers, legs a mile long, and a perfect face. It’s not like she can just sleep her way to the top, people, have a little compassion.
It sure would be nice if we could come up with a solution to this complex political issue. Too bad the media drools every time a pretty moron has an opinion. Quote Mrs. Prejean, “I mean of course I want to be Miss California USA. I earned it. I deserved it. I won. I beat out 90 other girls…This is something that I did and accomplished.”
For all of those keeping score at home, she used the word “I” seven times, or 20% of the time. Yikes.
Here it is!
~The Vagrant
|
Crud Junction Redux |
|
I have a brand freakin' new version of Crud Junction recorded by none other than Senor Rich Gaarde of Think No More.
Crud Junction (Ver. 2)
~The Vagrant
|
The Main Event |
|
IN THIS CORNER…WEARING THE RED, WHITE AND BLUE TRUNKS…SHE’LL PUT HER FOOT UP YOUR ASS, BUT NOT BEFORE PUTTING THE “ASS” IN ASSEMBLYWOMAN…THE RRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEDDEEMER OF RIGHTS…MISS…AUDRAAAAAAAA STRICKLAAAAAAAAAND!
AND IN THE BLUE CORNER...THE CHALLENGER…WEARING THE GOLD TRUNKS WITH THE WHITE COLLAR…WEIGHING IN AT A MEATY 84.5 POUNDS…THE EPISCOPAL AVENGER…THE MASTER OF MESSIANIC MAAAAAAYHEM…JAAAAaaaaaaaaAAAAAACK PHILLIPS!
Oh my…it seems...ladies and gentlemen, apparently the defending champ is unable to perform acts of intimidation because she’s a harmless hot chick…I gotta tell ya, the crowd does not like this one. Wait! We have someone ready to take Audra Strickland’s place…OH MY GOD, IT’S JOSE “JOEL” ANGELES! In all my years of officiating underwhelming physical altercations at political protests, I’ve never seen anything like this! This is gonna be the one you’re friends are talking about at the water cooler, folks!
There’s the bell…and the two fighters are circling each other, each trying to get a feel for the others weakness…OOOOHHHHH Angeles leads off with a vicious body slam!
Woap…fight’s over…
It’s really a shame when people think politics is worth getting pissed about. I mean let’s face it; ultimately it’s just the futile process of trying to reduce your personal beliefs to a neat set of pigeon holes with the intention of having a pretty, systematic method of dealing with new ethical questions. Our government keeps telling us that democracy is the best way to run the world, but the more I learn about democratic politics, the more hopelessly confused I become. As far as I can tell, the government doesn’t necessarily need us to continue running the country, it just needs to pretend like it’s listening so that the rest of the world believes that the United States is of the people, by the people, and for the people. And we all know what that means: Justified Wars!
But before the system makes good on it’s promise of turning our society into a utopia, we’re stuck tearing each other apart over every little issue. A fight took place in California over state senator Tony Strickland, but you aren’t going to get the real story from either side because both are blowing it way out of proportion. All you need to know is that a coward flew off the handle and bum rushed a 69 year old holy man. Way back during the November 4th elections, Audra Strickland’s husband, Tony Strickland, ran for state senate and beat Hanna-Beth Jackson by about a 0.2% margin. It was an intense political battle that everyone must have completely ignored until Jose Angeles decided to go Hulk Hogan on Father Phillips, who led a protest against Sen. Strickland for taking cash from tobacco companies during the election.
Of course, the only reason I heard about this little altercation was because Father Phillips decided to press charges. Never mind why he got body slammed, all that’s important is that the good Father squeezes as much money and retribution as he can from the Republican Party. Once the election ended, the father’s priorities naturally shifted towards gathering resources to battle his political enemies. Maybe he’ll spend the money on his hospital bills for the rotator cuff surgery. Maybe he’ll fund more smear campaigns against the Repos. Or maybe he’ll spend the money on what he was trying to do in the first place: Pointing out the negative influence of the Tobacco Lobby.
Naw…probably not that last one…
In the mean time, try not to piss off any Republicans. And next time, Father, just ask the Catholic Church if you can borrow the Holy Hand Grenade…problem solved.
GO WITH GOD, MY SON.
*boom*
~The Vagrant
Next >>>
