Or rather, how your political affiliation, at least for guys, is rather like the kind of underwear you choose. Actually, the similarities are many. There are myriad designs, patterns, and makers of underwear, but the choice is ultimately boxers or briefs, as it has been since before time began (there are cave paintings concerning the boxer/brief controversy--trust me).
Choosing a big government is like choosing briefs. Both will give you added security and take away some of the risks associated with government/underwear. Unless it goes wrong. Which, in underwear looks like the briefs riding up (not fun) and which in government looks like totalitarianism (you always knew it was a pain in the butt). Both briefs and big government keep you nice and close, indeed restricting your freedom a little bit, though you're willing trade that for the benefits.
Small government, on the other hand, is like boxers. Boxers don't restrict you nearly as much, though your risk of accidents or embarrassment is admittedly greater. I suppose the risks associated with a small government is anarchy, or in the case of boxers, the loss of your underwear entirely (which usually doesn't happen if you're wearing pants...could pants represent human decency? Maybe this metaphor is going too far). Briefs and small government allow greater freedom, acknowledging that you are responsible for the risks.
I can't tell you definitively the answer to the boxer/brief controversy or the big/small government controversy. The choice is up to you.
Except that briefs decrease your sperm count.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Iron Man 2
Yes, I did go see the second installment in the Iron Man series. I have to say, after seeing both Iron Man movies as well as Holmes, I think whoever got Robert Downey Jr. clean should get a medal. The man is a fantastic actor. As for the movie itself, the story was decent, the action was excellent, the characters and dialog were fantastic. I must admit, my single favorite moment was probably Rhody in the weaponized iron man suit sawing a drone in half with a minigun. That pretty much made my day. I would recommend this film to anyone, especially because there's no sex shot like in the first, so even younger kids could probably see it without asking awkward questions. (I hate awkward questions; one time my aunt asked me if I thought I would marry my girlfriend (now ex-girlfriend)) Anyway, see Iron Man 2. Now I just need to see How To Tame Your Dragon.
Looking forward to talking with my Periwinkle Ninja tomorrow morning :)
Looking forward to talking with my Periwinkle Ninja tomorrow morning :)
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
NFS
I play the game Need For Speed 2 a fair amount, primarily to drive the Lambos, but that's another story. Anyway, playing the campaign, near end I began to notice a pattern in the other cars. Namely, the th car that would be out in front would be identical to my own. If I was driving a yellow Murcielago, the best AI driver also had a yellow Murcielago. If I was driving a green Aston Martin Vanquish, so was the leader. At first this trend irritated me, since I knew the person I was competing with had a car with stats identical to my own. But then I realized: they had given me an evil clone!
And that was just all kinds of cool. I mean, sure it's fun to beat the other drivers and get gold and all that, but if you beat your own evil clone then it just becomes epic. So, instead of being mad at NFS, I was appreciative. Very few game designers would be so considerate as to give me an evil clone to whomp, so thanks NFS2, I appreciate it.
The only problem arises when the clone wipes the track with me...
And that was just all kinds of cool. I mean, sure it's fun to beat the other drivers and get gold and all that, but if you beat your own evil clone then it just becomes epic. So, instead of being mad at NFS, I was appreciative. Very few game designers would be so considerate as to give me an evil clone to whomp, so thanks NFS2, I appreciate it.
The only problem arises when the clone wipes the track with me...
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Tough Issues
I rarely let people know that I am, in fact, opposed to homosexuality, usually because they promptly give me look like I'm a dog-kicking child slayer directly after I do so. It's not at all popular to disapprove of homosexuality these days (especially in academia), and it's easy to see why. After all, homosexuals are people just like us, and don't deserve to be treated any differently, right? I wouldn't discriminate against a black person, so why would I then discriminate against a gay person? At this point in the conversation I have to interject, usually, that I disapprove of homosexuality in the same way I disapprove of stealing, lying, or cheating. It's a bad thing to do, but the person is no less deserving of my love and God's than I am. Lord knows I've stolen, lied, and cheated before (not in a big way, but God doesn't discriminate between sins), and I'll be the first to tell you I'm in desperate need of forgiveness.
At this point, people will usually interject to say that my dislike of homosexuality is based on outdated Judeo-Christian principles, which have no place in our government (or, if they're harsh, no place in our society). At this point, my real argument begins. Why don't we let people copulate in the streets? Why don't we approve of people cheating on their spouses? Both this law and this commonly held social belief have no logical basis outside of the Bible. Nothing beyond a modicum of stability is gained by our thinking that men should stay with their wives and vice versa. Nothing is gained by our not allowing people to copulate in the streets. We dislike both of these things why, then? They don't hurt us. They don't inconvenience us personally (well, the copulating couple might be a little difficult to walk around if they're in the street, but so's a mime). Why, then, do we dislike cheating on one's spouse or having sex in public?
The only answer that makes sense is the Bible. Most Americans, even if they don't really believe in God anymore, still hold on to the basic views of right and wrong in the Bible. Adultery is wrong. Sex is private. Alas, if you want to accept these, you must also accept the other, more commonly advertised tenet of the Bible: that marriage is between a man and a woman, and that anything else is a perversion of what God made us for.
Lastly, people often argue about a "gay gene" in the populace, that many people are homosexual simply because they don't have a choice. Now, the definition of "disease" in the Oxford English Dictionary reads thus: "A condition of the body, or of some part or organ of the body, in which its functions are disturbed or deranged." If a gene in the body prevents someone from using their genitalia for procreation, which is undoubtedly their function, then the gene is acting like a disease, and ought to thus be classified as a genetic disease, oughtn't it? If, on the other hand, the homosexual is not compelled by any genetic influence to be the way he or she is, then homosexuality is a choice, and thus falls much more easily into the realm of a moral question, rather than a scientific or political one.
Now, of the very few people who read this post, chances are they will probably be offended. Most Americans are when they see such blatant "homophobia" (I'm not afraid of homosexuals, I think what they do is wrong). I'm sorry if I hurt anyone's feelings or offended anyone's sensibilities. I'm simply giving you my opinion, and offering what logic I have to back it up. Hmmm...I suddenly feel like I'm more likely in these modern times to be burned at the stake for opposing homosexuality, rather than being homosexual. Ah well, hate me if you wish. If you have a logical answer to anything I've said, leave a comment, please.
At this point, people will usually interject to say that my dislike of homosexuality is based on outdated Judeo-Christian principles, which have no place in our government (or, if they're harsh, no place in our society). At this point, my real argument begins. Why don't we let people copulate in the streets? Why don't we approve of people cheating on their spouses? Both this law and this commonly held social belief have no logical basis outside of the Bible. Nothing beyond a modicum of stability is gained by our thinking that men should stay with their wives and vice versa. Nothing is gained by our not allowing people to copulate in the streets. We dislike both of these things why, then? They don't hurt us. They don't inconvenience us personally (well, the copulating couple might be a little difficult to walk around if they're in the street, but so's a mime). Why, then, do we dislike cheating on one's spouse or having sex in public?
The only answer that makes sense is the Bible. Most Americans, even if they don't really believe in God anymore, still hold on to the basic views of right and wrong in the Bible. Adultery is wrong. Sex is private. Alas, if you want to accept these, you must also accept the other, more commonly advertised tenet of the Bible: that marriage is between a man and a woman, and that anything else is a perversion of what God made us for.
Lastly, people often argue about a "gay gene" in the populace, that many people are homosexual simply because they don't have a choice. Now, the definition of "disease" in the Oxford English Dictionary reads thus: "A condition of the body, or of some part or organ of the body, in which its functions are disturbed or deranged." If a gene in the body prevents someone from using their genitalia for procreation, which is undoubtedly their function, then the gene is acting like a disease, and ought to thus be classified as a genetic disease, oughtn't it? If, on the other hand, the homosexual is not compelled by any genetic influence to be the way he or she is, then homosexuality is a choice, and thus falls much more easily into the realm of a moral question, rather than a scientific or political one.
Now, of the very few people who read this post, chances are they will probably be offended. Most Americans are when they see such blatant "homophobia" (I'm not afraid of homosexuals, I think what they do is wrong). I'm sorry if I hurt anyone's feelings or offended anyone's sensibilities. I'm simply giving you my opinion, and offering what logic I have to back it up. Hmmm...I suddenly feel like I'm more likely in these modern times to be burned at the stake for opposing homosexuality, rather than being homosexual. Ah well, hate me if you wish. If you have a logical answer to anything I've said, leave a comment, please.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Follow the Rules
I think there's a problem with the behavior of Christian Conservatives. I remember in my own fairly short life many times when we as a family prayed for our leaders, and for wisdom in the government, but that was only, as far as I can remember, when there was a conservative in office. Doesn't the Bible say pray for your enemies (even political ones)? Also, if you think that the opposite party has wrong ideas about governing, don't they need wisdom all the more? It seems to me that Christian Conservatives should pray for our leaders all the more when they are liberal. Let's not be sullen, and be like "Well, I don't like him, so I hope he fails, so I won't pray for him." That's rather immature, in my opinion.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Thought
Why do they put chlorine in pools, anyway? Polio isn't around anymore. Besides that, the only purpose it serves that I'm aware of is to burn my eyes and prevent me from swimming ungoggled.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
New Topper and Lawn Mowing
First off, for the two've humans and three aliens who read this blog, I'm sure you've noticed the new picture on top. That is, in fact, me, the only time I ever attempted to straighten my hair. But anyway....
While mowing the lawn today, I had a realization, namely that mowing the lawn is an awful lot like being an older brother. When being a lawn mower, as with being an older brother, you are confronted with a bunch of pipsqueaks who don't know their place and who grow rampantly and out of place. As a mower/brother, you have to cut them down to size periodically, but not too often so that you don't kill them. Also, you have to cut them all equally so that none of them complain about unfairness. Both jobs are long and tiring. However, only one has effects which are so immediate and satisfying to behold.
While mowing the lawn today, I had a realization, namely that mowing the lawn is an awful lot like being an older brother. When being a lawn mower, as with being an older brother, you are confronted with a bunch of pipsqueaks who don't know their place and who grow rampantly and out of place. As a mower/brother, you have to cut them down to size periodically, but not too often so that you don't kill them. Also, you have to cut them all equally so that none of them complain about unfairness. Both jobs are long and tiring. However, only one has effects which are so immediate and satisfying to behold.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Huzzah for Hebridean Mode!
One of my favorite Choir songs we've done all year. I might upload more at a later date, but enjoy this one for now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWzB56jJwA8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWzB56jJwA8
Friday, March 26, 2010
Long-Term Ramifications
Despite the actual economic and Constitutional viability of the Healthcare bill (which has been discussed in great detail in other places), the Democrats may have hurt themselves in the long run by deciding to use up a good deal of their political capital right before a census.
A census only happens once a decade, and usually ends up causing states to do something else: redistrict. Most states redistrict after a census, since that is when they have the best picture of their population makeup. Redistricting, due to the now common practice of gerrymandering (drawing political district lines to the advantage of one party or another), has political ramifications which will affect the next ten years of politics.
Obama, who has gotten some flak for the Healthcare thing, might get hurt not only in the House and Senate this coming November, but in the states as well. Now, who cares about state politics? Well, if the states draw their districts to advantage the Republicans, the next ten years of elections will be tipped, slightly, to the Republicans.
Perhaps Healthcare isn't actually that controversial, and perhaps Democrats will do just fine in the elections this November. All I'm saying is, whoever does well will have an advantage in American politics for the next decade, so if you're old enough to vote, show up for this one.
A census only happens once a decade, and usually ends up causing states to do something else: redistrict. Most states redistrict after a census, since that is when they have the best picture of their population makeup. Redistricting, due to the now common practice of gerrymandering (drawing political district lines to the advantage of one party or another), has political ramifications which will affect the next ten years of politics.
Obama, who has gotten some flak for the Healthcare thing, might get hurt not only in the House and Senate this coming November, but in the states as well. Now, who cares about state politics? Well, if the states draw their districts to advantage the Republicans, the next ten years of elections will be tipped, slightly, to the Republicans.
Perhaps Healthcare isn't actually that controversial, and perhaps Democrats will do just fine in the elections this November. All I'm saying is, whoever does well will have an advantage in American politics for the next decade, so if you're old enough to vote, show up for this one.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
The Truth of a Broken Heart
I met a young man walking
(His face was so downcast!).
It seemed he had a broken heart,
I stopped him as he passed.
I asked him, “Son, who broke your heart?
Your hurt, please tell me of.”
A wan smile flicked across his face,
“Sir, I’m ta’en by too much love.
“When I was young, my parents loved
me dear, and I loved them.
But as I grew, more folk I knew,
From thence my problems stem.
“Each person that I loved loved me
With all that they could give.
But I, alas, have but one heart,
Whose breaking I forgive.
“I would to each give my whole heart,
But, see, I’ve only one,
And so I broke it all apart,
A piece for everyone.
“So now I walk, as sad as rain,
But blessed beyond all thought.
For I was loved so much by all…
I gladly broke my heart.”
(His face was so downcast!).
It seemed he had a broken heart,
I stopped him as he passed.
I asked him, “Son, who broke your heart?
Your hurt, please tell me of.”
A wan smile flicked across his face,
“Sir, I’m ta’en by too much love.
“When I was young, my parents loved
me dear, and I loved them.
But as I grew, more folk I knew,
From thence my problems stem.
“Each person that I loved loved me
With all that they could give.
But I, alas, have but one heart,
Whose breaking I forgive.
“I would to each give my whole heart,
But, see, I’ve only one,
And so I broke it all apart,
A piece for everyone.
“So now I walk, as sad as rain,
But blessed beyond all thought.
For I was loved so much by all…
I gladly broke my heart.”
Friday, March 5, 2010
Why You Should Not Leave 6-Page Research Papers for the Night Before
All I can say is, thank goodness it's just a draft. However brilliant and eloquent the paper might have seemed at 3:40am last night, it's probably not even legible. Still, it was pretty epic. At about 1:00 am I hiked down to the laundry room to retrieve a can of Coke, with a distinct "this is it" expression on my face. The Coke did its work well, for which I am grateful. I just hope I don't literally collapse in class or (God help me) Chicago rehearsal tonight. Yikes...
Monday, February 1, 2010
Ohmygosh...
it's a GIRL! (you have to say 'girl' with an extreme Redneck twang to achieve the desired effect) Since I'm quite sure that nobody reads this blog, I feel perfectly secure in informing absolutely no one that I have discovered a human of the female persuasion, to whom I am quite attracted and who seems (*crossed fingers*) to like me as well. She's smart (better grades than my own), sweet (she keeps cats, I kick cats...(not really...)), and marvelously pretty. Of course, I say this at least in part because I'm pretty sure she's the only person who reads this blog. (*waves Hi*)
Also, I'm still trying to get a good video for Youtube. Hopefully, if the video gets a few viewers and I mention my blog in the video, people will actually visit the darn thing, bringing my total audience up to something greater than 2.
One final thing: I need an evil-empire mantra. Every aspiring evil-genius-who-takes-over-the-world has one. Whether it be simply "Catzrule!" or "Big Brother is Watching" or "Come to the Dark Side." Something catchy and ominous, easy to remember, that I can paste on every building and on the forehead of anybody who dreams of overthrowing me. Thoughts?
Also, I'm still trying to get a good video for Youtube. Hopefully, if the video gets a few viewers and I mention my blog in the video, people will actually visit the darn thing, bringing my total audience up to something greater than 2.
One final thing: I need an evil-empire mantra. Every aspiring evil-genius-who-takes-over-the-world has one. Whether it be simply "Catzrule!" or "Big Brother is Watching" or "Come to the Dark Side." Something catchy and ominous, easy to remember, that I can paste on every building and on the forehead of anybody who dreams of overthrowing me. Thoughts?
Friday, January 29, 2010
What Every Big Brother Needs to Know About Pacifying His Peons...er, Siblings
I have many brothers. They are very enthusiastic and spirited people, and it is my unsworn duty to prevent them from running wild and destroying a small nation. Since they cannot be coerced by threats of death, torture, disembowelment, or loss of candy, and cannot be bribed with money, fame, power, or computer games, I must of necessity resort to Aggressive Pacification in order to maintain peace in our time.
However, I cannot simply lay them out with one good 'ol haymaker, because then I look like a bully and my parents use...ah..."moral suasion" to cause me to desist. Thusly, we get
"WEEEEEE!!! I'm going to shoot a BB gun at pressurized cans next to a candle!"
*POW*
"Cut it out peon...er, sibling! That's dangerous!"
"WAAAAHH! MOOOOOOOM! Tyson hit me!"
"Tyson! Don't be a bully! You're more mature than that!"
*Kachink-BOOM!"
"What was that, Tyson?"
"I dunno. Definitely not a pressurized can getting hit by a BB then exploding into a raging fragmentation firebomb."
Unacceptable.
So for all you older brothers and sisters out there, here's a tip: learn a few pressure points. Neck, ear, underside of the arm, instep, inguinal region, whatever, learn a few places that really hurt when poked or squeezed. That way it's less obvious that you are...ah...pacifying your dear little brothers and sisters
"WEEEEE! I'm going to light matches around the gas line!"
*poke*
"YEEEEAARRGH!"
"Don't light matches around the gas line peon! It's dangerous!"
"MOOOOM!!! Tyson poked me!"
"Tyson! Don't be a bully. You're more mature than that!"
*KABOOM!*
...
...
...
anyway...
However, I cannot simply lay them out with one good 'ol haymaker, because then I look like a bully and my parents use...ah..."moral suasion" to cause me to desist. Thusly, we get
"WEEEEEE!!! I'm going to shoot a BB gun at pressurized cans next to a candle!"
*POW*
"Cut it out peon...er, sibling! That's dangerous!"
"WAAAAHH! MOOOOOOOM! Tyson hit me!"
"Tyson! Don't be a bully! You're more mature than that!"
*Kachink-BOOM!"
"What was that, Tyson?"
"I dunno. Definitely not a pressurized can getting hit by a BB then exploding into a raging fragmentation firebomb."
Unacceptable.
So for all you older brothers and sisters out there, here's a tip: learn a few pressure points. Neck, ear, underside of the arm, instep, inguinal region, whatever, learn a few places that really hurt when poked or squeezed. That way it's less obvious that you are...ah...pacifying your dear little brothers and sisters
"WEEEEE! I'm going to light matches around the gas line!"
*poke*
"YEEEEAARRGH!"
"Don't light matches around the gas line peon! It's dangerous!"
"MOOOOM!!! Tyson poked me!"
"Tyson! Don't be a bully. You're more mature than that!"
*KABOOM!*
...
...
...
anyway...
Monday, January 25, 2010
10 Pounds Off
After a grueling (well, pretty grueling) workout this morning, I was informed by the Magical All-Powerful Scale of Truth that I weigh 213 pounds. This is ten less than I started with back in October, twenty more than where I want to be, and exactly where I was before Thanksgiving and Christmas. Sheesh.
Friday, January 22, 2010
Governmentium
NOTE: THIS IS NOT ORIGINAL TO ME. This was forwarded to me via email, but it was funny enough that I thought it worth sharing.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratories has discovered the heaviest element yet known to science.
The new element, Governmentium (symbol=Gv), has one neutron, 25 assistant
neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it
an atomic mass of 312.
These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are
surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. Since Governmentium has no electrons, it is inert.
However, it can be detected, because it impedes every reaction with which it
comes into contact.
A tiny amount of Governmentium can cause a reaction that would normally take
less than a second, to take from 4 days to 4 years to complete.
Governmentium has a normal half-life of 2 to 6 years. It does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant
neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places.
In fact, Governmentium's mass will actually increase over time, since each
reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes.
This characteristic of moron promotion leads some scientists to believe that
Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration.
This hypothetical quantity is referred to as critical morass. When catalyzed with money,Governmentium becomes Administratium (symbol=Ad), an element that radiates just as much energy as Governmentium, since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratories has discovered the heaviest element yet known to science.
The new element, Governmentium (symbol=Gv), has one neutron, 25 assistant
neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it
an atomic mass of 312.
These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are
surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. Since Governmentium has no electrons, it is inert.
However, it can be detected, because it impedes every reaction with which it
comes into contact.
A tiny amount of Governmentium can cause a reaction that would normally take
less than a second, to take from 4 days to 4 years to complete.
Governmentium has a normal half-life of 2 to 6 years. It does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant
neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places.
In fact, Governmentium's mass will actually increase over time, since each
reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes.
This characteristic of moron promotion leads some scientists to believe that
Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration.
This hypothetical quantity is referred to as critical morass. When catalyzed with money,Governmentium becomes Administratium (symbol=Ad), an element that radiates just as much energy as Governmentium, since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
The Fifth Holocaust
I hate to preach. Life would be wonderful if everyone could agree on those things which mattered. Many posts on this blog so far have been fairly lighthearted. For someone looking for a lighthearted diversion into my limited wit, I apologize. This is not one.
Babies have been on my heart of late. My little brother, now 6 years old and beautiful, is no longer a baby, but I remember him, as well as every other one of my younger brothers, when they were no more than a few days old. They're soft, and so incredibly clumsy when they try to grab your finger or look around their strange new home. They don't have much in the way of hair, just sort of a five o'clock shadow on their otherwise bald little pates. Once a little older, they do have remarkable flexibility. Combine this with their mostly-cartilage skeletons, and you'll understand my oft-repeated maxim that "He'll be fine. Babies are made of rubber."
That's not true. We all know this. Babies are made of cells, just like I am, and my brothers are. They are possibly one of the most vulnerable things in this world. In this country, approximately 3000 of them die every day. That's about two per minute, give or take.
To my friends, family, and anyone else who might read this blog, I would like you to consider watching this video, with preamble and closing by Spanish actor Eduardo Verastegui. If you support the rights of the unborn, this video will hopefully both motivate you and provide you with an invaluable resource in your conversations. If you support a woman's right to choose whether she gives birth or not, perhaps you might be caused to at least stop a moment, and examine whether your ideals can compete with the horrid, brutal reality that is abortion. Whichever you are, you do need a strong stomach or a nearby bathroom. For viewers under 18, I strongly advise waiting until you're a little older to watch this. To viewers over 18, I cannot encourage you enough to watch this. If you start it, I recommend that you watch the whole thing. We can't live in denial anymore.
http://www.massmediamail.com/durarealidad/
Babies have been on my heart of late. My little brother, now 6 years old and beautiful, is no longer a baby, but I remember him, as well as every other one of my younger brothers, when they were no more than a few days old. They're soft, and so incredibly clumsy when they try to grab your finger or look around their strange new home. They don't have much in the way of hair, just sort of a five o'clock shadow on their otherwise bald little pates. Once a little older, they do have remarkable flexibility. Combine this with their mostly-cartilage skeletons, and you'll understand my oft-repeated maxim that "He'll be fine. Babies are made of rubber."
That's not true. We all know this. Babies are made of cells, just like I am, and my brothers are. They are possibly one of the most vulnerable things in this world. In this country, approximately 3000 of them die every day. That's about two per minute, give or take.
To my friends, family, and anyone else who might read this blog, I would like you to consider watching this video, with preamble and closing by Spanish actor Eduardo Verastegui. If you support the rights of the unborn, this video will hopefully both motivate you and provide you with an invaluable resource in your conversations. If you support a woman's right to choose whether she gives birth or not, perhaps you might be caused to at least stop a moment, and examine whether your ideals can compete with the horrid, brutal reality that is abortion. Whichever you are, you do need a strong stomach or a nearby bathroom. For viewers under 18, I strongly advise waiting until you're a little older to watch this. To viewers over 18, I cannot encourage you enough to watch this. If you start it, I recommend that you watch the whole thing. We can't live in denial anymore.
http://www.massmediamail.com/durarealidad/
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Welfare State
My Art History teacher mentioned something in passing in class today which gave me pause. Talking about ancient Rome, he noted that one of the first "cracks" in what would eventually be its downfall was that it effectively became a "welfare city" supporting a giant populace with high unemployment using government funds and excessive taxes on the provinces. Where have I heard that before?
Being an Anti-Federalist is difficult, since you tend to seem like a villain whenever you advocate spending less on welfare: "How could even SAY that?!? Do you want these people to STARVE? What kind of monster are you!?!?" I just fear one of two things happening. The first being that China, Saudi Arabia, and the rest of these countries that own our debt suddenly realize that our debt is worthless and that they don't want to buy anymore of it until we pay some back. The other is that the bankrupt government begins to lose the ability to pay for roads, police, and military, suddenly leaving the poor, impoverished people in a much worse state than they were in before.
Don't think that I oppose supporting the destitute. I do. PRIVATELY. It's not the government's job. As John Smith said to the first colonists of this country: "If you don't work, you don't eat." People can't leech off of the government, which is held up primarily at this point by tradition, a large military, and a whole truckload of as-yet-unfulfilled promises. The problem is, welfare programs attempt to create equality of society. That is known as socialism. The Constitution does not encourage, in fact discourages this sort of thing. It guarantees us our right to property, the sanctity of contracts, and equality of OPPORTUNITY. Not equality in fact, equality in opportunity. Because, believe it or not, people are different, and to the government, which is only concerned with our physical well-being, not all people are equal.
Now, to believers in a charitable religion such as Christianity, Islam, or Buddhism, all have equal worth in God's eyes, and thus are worth saving, protecting, and lifting up. But this is the job of private institutions like the church, not the government. People have to be able to choose generosity. The government should not be taking money out of one person's hands and giving it to another. The Constitution protects my right to be a greedy uncharitable bastard, should I choose to do so (though I hope I don't and am not).
The British sailors, according to the song, said "SINK THE BISMARCK!"
Modified for a more relevant purpose,
"SHRINK THE GOVERNMENT!"
Being an Anti-Federalist is difficult, since you tend to seem like a villain whenever you advocate spending less on welfare: "How could even SAY that?!? Do you want these people to STARVE? What kind of monster are you!?!?" I just fear one of two things happening. The first being that China, Saudi Arabia, and the rest of these countries that own our debt suddenly realize that our debt is worthless and that they don't want to buy anymore of it until we pay some back. The other is that the bankrupt government begins to lose the ability to pay for roads, police, and military, suddenly leaving the poor, impoverished people in a much worse state than they were in before.
Don't think that I oppose supporting the destitute. I do. PRIVATELY. It's not the government's job. As John Smith said to the first colonists of this country: "If you don't work, you don't eat." People can't leech off of the government, which is held up primarily at this point by tradition, a large military, and a whole truckload of as-yet-unfulfilled promises. The problem is, welfare programs attempt to create equality of society. That is known as socialism. The Constitution does not encourage, in fact discourages this sort of thing. It guarantees us our right to property, the sanctity of contracts, and equality of OPPORTUNITY. Not equality in fact, equality in opportunity. Because, believe it or not, people are different, and to the government, which is only concerned with our physical well-being, not all people are equal.
Now, to believers in a charitable religion such as Christianity, Islam, or Buddhism, all have equal worth in God's eyes, and thus are worth saving, protecting, and lifting up. But this is the job of private institutions like the church, not the government. People have to be able to choose generosity. The government should not be taking money out of one person's hands and giving it to another. The Constitution protects my right to be a greedy uncharitable bastard, should I choose to do so (though I hope I don't and am not).
The British sailors, according to the song, said "SINK THE BISMARCK!"
Modified for a more relevant purpose,
"SHRINK THE GOVERNMENT!"
Monday, January 4, 2010
Creating Words
Wouldn't it be cool if one of the privileges of graduating with an English degree was that you could create your own word? Miriam-Webster would update their dictionaries, and you would be the author of whatever world you desire, be it spadlush, flithup, or snippid. Personally, I think that sortakindamaybe ought to be a word.
In other news, I saw The Blind Side a day or two ago. It was excellent! Sandra Bullock was perfect for the part, as was the rest of the cast. The story was sweet without being cliched (well, not too cliched, anyway) and the fact that it's based on a true story just increases the awesomeness (I'm pretty sure that is a word. If not, I hereby decree it to be so).
In other news, I saw The Blind Side a day or two ago. It was excellent! Sandra Bullock was perfect for the part, as was the rest of the cast. The story was sweet without being cliched (well, not too cliched, anyway) and the fact that it's based on a true story just increases the awesomeness (I'm pretty sure that is a word. If not, I hereby decree it to be so).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)