Aboriginal Contour

Feminism and The Burden of the Approach

2011-07-18T20:42:00.003-04:00

Imagine a world where men and women were truly equal. Not just equal on an economic level, but on a societal level as well. This is what the feminists fought so long for, is it not? Think about dating. In order for any relationships, marriages, and procreation to occur, there must be an initial approach. Someone must break the ice. Someone must have the courage to walk up to a total stranger and say "hi" and subsequently spark interest and attraction through conversation.

That someone is a male, 90-95% of the time.

This does not sound like equality. Does it sound like equality to you? Why is it OK for feminists to be hypocrites on this particular issue? Women claim to be seen as equal to men in every way, but somehow this outdated social norm stayed in place. No, women do not want equality. Women still want men to approach and break the ice with them, ask for their number, set up dates in which the man pays, and later initiate a kiss or sex. She still expects him to get on one knee and ask for her hand in marriage. And still in most cases, she expects the man to be the breadwinner of the household.

Now what part of that says equality? We know that women are well within their means to meet men halfway on all of those things. So why don't they? All women benefit from the fruits of feminism whether they claim to be one or not.

Let's delve deeper into the burden of the approach. Let's examine the risks a man takes when he approaches a woman:

1. Rejection- This one is obvious. As men we expect to be rejected often and we are never given a reason for it. A woman will rarely tell you the real reason that she is rejecting you. She will make up an excuse, but you will never know what you did wrong or what is particularly wrong with you. This is especially troubling since it means that there is no way to improve because the man has gained no knowledge for the rejection. It could have be for anything. Only her, God and her girlfriends know

2. Embarrassment- Now I've been in many clubs and bars. I've had some success and some failures. Embarrassment is really an interesting occurrence. It can only happen when there is a power balance in a given dialogue. It happens when one party has the upper hand and the other party has the lower. The party with the upper hand is almost always the woman. Since the man approached her first, he is lowering himself and putting himself at a disadvantage. Now he is in many ways at her mercy. She can toy with him if she wants. She can lead him on. She could be nice and reject him, or be mean and reject him. She could even accept him and decide she doesn't like him later. The point is, there is an infinite amount of ways a woman could handle a man that has approached her. I'll give a recent example that happened to me in a bar. I came up to a pretty woman and started a conversation. Her and her friends were taking pictures so I jumped in on one. I was being spontaneous and having fun. She seemed to as well. After a few minutes, I asked her for a dance. She replied, "I'm not dancing with any guys tonight". Right there I knew she did not want anything to do with me, at least romantically. I took it in stride. Because it was a crowded bar, I really didn't have many places to walk to. So I stood around for a while. After a minute or so, she got up out of her seat and started dancing with random guys, right in front of me. Now you may ask yourself, "why would she do such a cold, rude thing?" Well I don't know and I never will. But what I do know is that there are many women out there just like this and because men are at such a blatant disadvantage and are always at a low position, they are at risk of this kind of thing happening to them all the time at social gatherings.

3. Physical Violence- That's right. There is a tendancy for women to say in their heads, "you and him fight". Women like drama. They thrive on it. One of the things they love is when two men fight over them. So whenever you see a bar fight, it usually involves a woman. It usually occurs because some woman felt like seeing her man beat up another man. Such is the cold hearted nature of most Western Women. I'll even give an example from my experience in a club: I approached a girl and out of nowhere some guy came up and tried to start a fight with me. I thought it was clear that she was single, but you never know I guess. She didn't do anything to provoke this exchange, but as you can imagine I put myself at great risk just by trying to talk to a girl. So to the women that say "just be yourself and approach a girl we don't bite! We'll be flattered that you came up to us!", you're full of it.

This is what men are reduced to. This is what men face everyday. Rejection, embarrassing, and physical violence. These are things that women never have to face in the dating scene. They just sit there like the conceited cunts they are and accept or deny advances. That is all a woman has to do: accept or deny advances.

This brings me to a recent controversy involving a feminist, Rebecca Watson. Everything started with a awkward moment in an elevator. She got on and there was one other man. The man complimented her by saying she was interesting. He then proceeded to ask her if she wanted to have coffee in his room. She of course made this video later complaining about how he was sexually objectifying her and other bullshit.

Does she realize that men will die virgins if they do not risk such awkward moments? Does she have any appreciation for his compliment? It seems as though Rebecca Watson and other feminists like her do everything in their power to shun, ridicule, and suppress male sexuality.

In her perfect world, half of the male population would be imprisoned for improperly approach women.

My Two Favorite Pornstars

2011-07-07T19:35:00.003-04:00

Now I know what you're thinking: this blog is taking a lowbrow turn. But we as men sometimes must sit back and admire female beauty. It is why God put them on earth. I've watched an adequate amount of porn over the years as most guys do. I've been amazed at how hot some of these girls are, but these two in particular take the cake for me.

Jynx Maze

Brooke Lee Adams

Rape Culture and Its True Culprits

2011-06-11T12:55:00.005-04:00

I was lying back while drinking beer and watching television. On the side of me is a female friend who is doing the exact same thing. A conversation ensues between the two of us about what a man must do in order to get a date with a woman. The context was of a mutual friend of ours who has trouble in this department. I told her the story of how he was recently rejected by a female coworker of his. She went on with her advice as to why he was failing with women. But somewhere along the line she said something that disturbed me and gave me a keen understanding as to why so many women get raped. What she said was not at all original or revolutionary in its essence, but when the words

“Sometimes a girl likes to be chased. She wants to feel wanted”

I instantly knew the root cause of the so called “rape culture” in the U.S.

Women are notorious for always warning men that “no means no”. For us men who have dealt with enough women, we know this to be pure malarkey. If “no” always meant “no”, many men would die virgins. There would also be fewer rapes as a result, because for once women would mean what they said instead of talking in indirect code language.

Women, many times, bring rape upon themselves. They purposely reject men, even ones they are interested in, in order to get him to chase her. Since women love to be the prize and the center of attention, leading a man on a wild goose chase through all sorts of hoops and mind games is all too common in today’s society. What this does is blur the line between what is acceptable for a man to do to a woman and what is not…because once we can all agree that women want to be chased, we can understand what a predicament it puts men into. Since “no” does not always mean “no”, there is no real way for a man to know when to stop his advances upon a woman.

My theory as to why women give such pieces of advice goes back to dark triad genes or the lack thereof. You see, when a woman tells a man that he should just be himself, or to respect women, or to give them compliments, or that “no means no”, what she is actually doing is bullshitting the male. This is a weeding out mechanism that women use in order to ensure that men who don’t get it never will. You see, women do not want nice guys to propagate their genes. They do not wish for them to be successful with women. This is why advice coming from women is never good; it has been sabotaged from the get-go.

Women have the power and control in the dating scene. This is important to note because it means that any and every problem with society in the context of female-male relations falls on the shoulders of women themselves. If women decide to start dating men who are genuine, nice, and honest, then that is what most men will become. Since women, however, are only attracted to males with dark triad genes, that is what most men strive to be. The ones that do not either are alone or being used. Moreover, since women have decided to make men chase and act in an overly-aggressive fashion in order to get sex, the rape culture pervades society. Make no mistake about it, women invariably cause most rapes.

Now, this is not to say that specific individuals who are victims of raped caused it or even desired it. The point is that women overall have created an environment in which only sexually aggressive, narcissistic, abrasive men are seen as sexually attractive (these traits are what women interpret as being “confident”). They have created an environment in which “no” doesn’t mean “no”, it actually means “try harder, keep going, I want to be chased, I want to feel wanted even though you’ve already made it clear that you want me. I want to play games and toy with you until I’m satisfied.” Men are constantly placed in awkward, unsure situations because what women want is always esoteric. Should he approach? If she rejects him, should he continue his advances because that’s what she may want deep down? Who knows? For many men, leaving things to chance is not an option. They will continue to press the issue in order to find out the woman’s true intentions.

Thus is the nature of women: enablers of the very thing they claim to despise the most

And....

2011-06-02T21:18:00.003-04:00

He's back. As you can see, the new computer is in. There will be much more to come ladies and gents

About My Recent Absence

2011-03-08T19:58:00.002-05:00

My computer went down a few weeks ago. This is the main reason for me not making any new posts. Its a cheap Dell Laptop that only lasted 3 years. It has a virus that somehow uninstalled all my drivers for keyboard, internet, wireless, etc. I'm close to fixing it but when I do I will probably just sell it on Ebay.

Once I get a better computer, I will turn this blog more personal. It will be an honest journal of my experiences in life that have led me to who I am today. These will be full of complete honesty. I will also, of course, continue to make the usual posts along with it.

Until then, cheers folks.

"Dark Triad" Genes

2011-01-20T09:47:00.000-05:00

The bad-boy question has been answered by science.

Nice guy genes do exist, and many unfortunate men have them. Women want these genes severed from the gene pool and thus existence:

Why women really do love self-obsessed psychopaths

"Peter Jonason, of New Mexico University in Las Cruces, believes that these traits may have an innate, genetic component that explains why some men seem unable to stop themselves behaving badly."

- Steve Connor, "Why women really do love self-obsessed psychopaths",

The traits that he refers to are "Dark Triads". These are traits such as narcissism, thrill-seeking, psychopathy, etc. Basically, quintessential bad-boy behavior. This study proves that it is what women really want, while they lie about wanting a humble honest respectful guy. What a fucking surprise, right?

However, let's use our intellect to take this a step further. Let's go beyond what the study says using deduction and logic. If there are "dark triad" genes, or in other words bad boy genes, then conversely there must exist nice-guy genes. These are the genes many lonely men possess, and it explains why they are alone and suffering.

Like I've said many times before, for the most part women want to weed the nice-guy genes out of existence. That's why they reject so many men and also inform their social circles not to date us after the rejection takes place. They don't want to be treated well. Women want psychopathic narcissists and they are lying if they say otherwise. I'm tired of every girl claiming they want one thing then turning around and blowing some guy with a neck-tattoo and a criminal record.

The looks faction is close, but they fail to make the quantum leap and recognize it comes down to genetics. The confidence mafia (those that believe the key is confidence) are way off.

"Looks" and "Confidence" are simply byproducts of good genes. Its all genes. And women are quasi-eugenicists.

The Arizona Shootings: Who's To Blame?

2011-01-13T00:39:00.006-05:00

Yet another mass shooting has occurred recently, ironically right around the time I posted about the one that happened back in 2009 (see below post). Is this nothing new? Has this not happened before and for a similar reason? Or was he a lone nut? The answer, as it usually does, lies somewhere in the middle. Like with Sodini, this shooting (and the reasons it happened) is not cut-and-dry. There is more to this guy than meets the eye, and it surpasses the nerd-loner stereotype in my opinion.

All politics aside, this man, Jared Lee Loughner, was deeply troubled.

Most leave it at that.

"He was disturbed"
"He was mentally ill"
"This guy had a few screws loose"

What sickens me about society is the cowardice and disturbing inability to display empathy for those deemed unstable. Loughner may have been irrational, but why does no one ask what made him that way? My answer to that is one that I will always have in these situations: society has trouble pointing the finger at themselves. No one wants to admit that perhaps, just maybe, there were other factors that contributed to Loughner's shooting rampage.

And what of Lougner's politics? There is no doubt that his conspiracies about the government led to hatred of certain politicians. Some of his theories had slight merit; for instance, language does indeed control thought. However there is not substantial evidence that the government is forcing or subtly encouraging its population to speak a certain way. There is such a thing as political correctness, but those who wish to exercise free speech are still welcome to do so.

When I first heard of this story, I immediately knew that his failures with women had something to do with it. I just had the feeling, deep down. And, sure enough, the Wall Street Journal proved me to be correct recently when the following article was published:

"Postings of a Troubled Mind"

Whenever something like this occurs, miserable interactions with women are a culprit, if not the biggest one. What cannot be stressed enough is the importance of consistence sex and companionship that a man needs to keep his sanity. Its no joke. Its life and death. We are seeing examples of it over and over again. Men need sex, men need women that truly care about them as a person. One might jump to say, "But all people want that, including women!" Well, women are not the ones that experience loneliness the way men do.

Here's a question everyone must ask themselves: If Loughner had a girlfriend that loved and cared about him, would this tragedy have happened? No one can say for sure. It is a question for critical thought.

Women and Eugenics

2011-01-03T17:07:00.002-05:00

Scenario: After being rejected by a woman, you discover that she also informed her friends of the debacle. Now not only has she rejected your advances, but she also ruined your chances with several other women. What is this inclination that women have and where does it come from? I am here with an answer: Eugenics

The image that you see to the left includes tools that have further enabled most women to be quasi-eugenicists. They can now line up all their prospects conveniently on a screen and carefully select what genes they want to allow to propagate. Its almost like shopping in the cereal isle for women. The over-abundance of options that even average plain-janes posses is remarkable, and in combination with social media, they can all use their sexual prowess to their advantage like never before. Make no mistake about it, social media has benefited women exclusively and has almost done as much harm to men that feminism has.

The Theory of Modern Female Quasi-Eugenicists

I am not saying that women are walking around reading your genetic code as a scientist would. That's not what I mean by quasi-eugenics. Your genes are expressed through your physical traits. Gene expression. Also known as phenotypes. Its eugenics on a small-scale; women control who gets laid and how, therefore they control propagation. If they reject you, they are rejecting your genes. When they go back to their social cliques and inform other females of how you were rejected and humiliated, she is sub-communicating that your genes are undesirable, and all the women should reject your genes from passing on as well. Now, she has successfully ended the possibility of your genes propagating with several more women in addition to herself.

Hence my term, quasi-eugenics.

In the following video, Mystery explains how being a victim of quasi-eugenics in tribal times directly relates to fearing the approach of women today:

But there is something else....something, elusive. The "IT" factor that was discussed in a previous thread. I think that women have some sort of intuition or animal-like quality that turns them on to the "IT" factor.

This is why many men can't understand why they are single and it seems to defy logic. Isn't it curious how the dating game has always been sort of an inside joke? In other words, dating has always been a sort of "if you have to ask, you aren't getting any" type deals. Those who have it have it, and they can't even successfully explain it to someone who does not. Kind of like how women always seem to give bad dating advice, as if they want you to fail.

The "IT" factor is something that has yet to be discovered that some lack, and women know it. Most guys have it, but some don't. Maybe its facial symmetry. Most likely, it is the gene that women can sense.

I mean, there are certainly things that can transcend all else, such as wealth and riches. Especially in America. I'm not stupid enough to suggest that even being rich wouldn't help lonely men. It would. My theory by and large has to do with normal people who exist outside of the top 2% of American society. Other guys try to compensate in other ways, such as getting super-jacked, getting nice tats, etc.

Let me give you an example of why none of this stuff even matters anyway: George Sodini

* He was worth $250,000. That is financial security
* He had a nice house, car, and stable job.
* He was built. He worked out at LA Fitness Gym.
* He went to PUA conventions

As you can see, he did everything that most people would jump to suggest for you to do if you complain about not getting women. People will say,

"you need to make at least decent money"
"you need a career and goals"
"you need to workout and become healthy and attractive"
"you need to learn how to talk to women. "

George Sodini did all of this and some. He went right down the checklist of requirements that women have. Yet, it was all in vein. Why?

Quasi-eugenics. His genes simply were not desirable, for no discernible reason. Women severed his genes off from society; forced him into celibacy and loneliness. The female eugenicists destroyed Sodini, so he in turn took the lives of 3 of them. I'm not condoning anything, but you see my point.

The difference between this and regular sexual selection

The abundance of selection that these women have, specifically in Western countries.

Women may be this way partly by nature. But guess what: in the 50's, they could most certainly NOT exhibit quasi-eugenic behavior, because society put barriers in place that controlled their sexuality. Now, those barriers don't exist and women have all the free reign in sexual selection that they want. Also not all women can have the power the be quasi-eugenicists, but most do. As long as she is a 6, she is a god among insects and will enjoy endless options until she hits age 53. 5's as well. Women below this still have options but its not as much and not guaranteed

Michael Savage talked about this. He said that shame is a good thing. When you do bad in school, you should feel ashamed. When women act promiscuous, they SHOULD be shamed by society and scorned. Unfortunately that does not exist in the West anymore. To many weak-minded men allowed this to happen.

I must point out however that I think most women in the dating game fall within the 6-10 range. Beauty seems to be common; Mystery (a famous pick-up artist) said this himself. I can vouch. On my college campus I can honestly say that ugly undesirable women are rare; I find myself attracted to the majority of them. All it takes is the right outfit and makeup, and women can all look above average and be selective breeders. So therefore, the vast majority of women are quasi-eugenicists and have the power to do it to men.

Another example is the Middle East...the men there do not allow their women to be eugenicists and control what genes get passed on. The nice guys in the middle east get their genes propagated, as well as most men there in general, good-looking or bad. Why, social barriers (i.e public shame, beatings. harsh but its necessary)

In China however, the government has become the eugenicist. The gender imbalance there was deliberately done by the communist regime. Men there are screwed to hell and they report very low sexual partners on average...sad.

All women are quasi-eugenicists by nature and as long as they have complete sexual freedom with no barriers, nice guy genes will continue to be weeded out of existence. This is why you see more and more psychopaths and douchebags in bars and clubs hording all of the women. Women chose the fathers of these men for that very reason, make no mistake about it.

Possible Solution: Get the Hell Out of This Country

2010-11-24T23:17:00.000-05:00

So, I've been pondering about my location lately. I pretty much am fed up with America. Where should I go? Better yet, where can I go? Is it even feasible, given my particular situation, to move out of the country for good?

I sure as hell hope so.

The first thing on the list of things to remember would be the language barrier. I could encounter difficulties if I do not understand what anyone or anything says; moreover, I certainly would not be able to assimilate into the culture. That is what I ultimately want to do, move somewhere else, and completely convert to their way of life. This includes learning their language. English-speaking countries will be my first choice, but I will not rule out learning another language if the situation is nice enough

Here are a few places I've given serious thought to:

New Zealand

I've heard great things about this place. Perhaps...

Canada (Alberta)

I don't know. Saskatchewan, Quebec, Nova Scotia? I like the idea of Canada because I've been there and I have family that are citizens there. From what I hear, people are much friendlier in Canada. Everything I hear about the place is good.

However, people seem to dislike Toronto, so I'll stay away from there. The things I hear about Toronto are that it is even more expensive than New York, the women are notorious for being stuck-up, flaky, and unfriendly, and people are in general submersed in their own lives and not willing to make friends.

That's a huge factor for me. I have to be able to have a successful life amongst others, and Toronto's qualities seems similar to the Seattle Freeze in many ways.

For instance, check out the city-data forum for Toronto:
Toronto Forum on Difficulties in the Social Scene

Nonetheless, I will strongly consider everywhere else Canada.

Germany

The women are some of the most beautiful in the world. Seems like a cool place. I'd have to learn German, but I think I could do it. Who knows?

The Philippines

The demographics of men to women favors me here. They are all bilingual, so I wouldn't need to learn Philippine. I also hear this place is very friendly. Am I scared of 3rd world countries? Nope. I live in a terrible city as it is.

The U.K.

I once read somewhere that there is no paradise. Every place has its ups and downs, its share of problems. I recognize this reality and fully accept it. However, I am 90% positive that the U.S is not the place for me. One day, I hope to get away to one of the above mentioned places. I hope to thrive somewhere else, and just be happy.

What hinders me? Well, lets see. I'm not done with school, I will have a ton of loans to pay off when I graduate, and then I would have to find a job in the new place that could A) pay the loans and B) still leave me with enough to live off of.

Other than that, there's nothing stopping me. We'll see what happens. I need to get skills that I can market anywhere.

Strange, Startling Dream

2010-11-16T18:00:00.004-05:00

Have you ever dreamed of a family member coming close to death? That's what I just had. It took me by complete surprise.

Today, I did what I usually do: School, then lunch, then home. I was depressed as I have been for months now. I was thinking about the past and how I wish I could change it, and about my current problems. I do this everyday. Then when I got home, I was mad at myself for missing opportunities to further connect with people on campus. I really should have stayed on campus instead of commuting.

So anyway, I get home, play some Xbox, then take a nap. 9/10 I don't get or remember my dreams. But this time, I dreamed about a certain family member coming close to death. The reason why this struck such a nerve and startled me so much, is because I have yet to have had to deal with the passing of someone close to me. All the deaths in my family have not been devastating, as I was not that close to those people.

I remember the dream in bits and pieces...I drove to some sort of amusement center. A Dave and Busters type place. (This reminds me of that movie Inception. DeCaprio explains in the movie that we do not remember the beginning of dreams usually, just the middle. He explained some other stuff that I can't recall that was related to this)

My close(debatable if this is true anymore) family member was there. As I was walking around, I saw this family member in line for something. Let's call the family member X. X had a pale skin tone. At first, I started to wonder why my skin wasn't pale, or if it was going to be pale, or if it now was.

Then, I had the horrible epiphany that X was about to die soon. Rather it was cancer or just old age, their time was coming to an end. X started talking to me in a way that was profoundly sad.

Then, at home, I broke down in tears while sitting next to X. I was about to tell X how sorry I was for everything I had done, and I was about to tell X the reasons why I was this way. Then I realized that I was only doing this because X was about to die...and I was ashamed. Just as I was about to tell X how sorry I was, I woke up from the dream. My heart was racing.

2 minutes later, X came into my room and asked if I could drive them to pick up their car. I said OK and was ready to go in 30 seconds. I dress fast. I'm not like other family member that takes 20 minutes to get ready to go anywhere. So, on the drive to the car shop, I asked X what they thought about my "check engine" light being on. X said it could be many things. Then, X said to keep checking the engine and it's many parts. X said that its like a person; I knew it's heartbeat more than anyone else, because it was my car. X said that just like observing a person, I should be able to tell if it was having trouble starting, trouble getting going, if it was near the end.

I know this is all coincidence. Nothing in my life has given me ample reason to believe in anything beyond the harsh realities of the world.

Game Changers

2010-11-05T21:30:00.000-04:00

Game Changer That Will Favor Men

What we have in the United States is a full blown matriarchy. In the courtship process, women have all of the power and control. The male must do all of the work, from initiating to being the breadwinner. I've outlined this thoroughly in previous posts. See here

What can a guy do? Women are on such a high pedestal that even average to ugly ones have a multitude of options by default, while it is very easy for an average guy to have nothing at all. The simplest way of putting it is like this: a guy who is a 7 and a woman who is a 7 are not equal in their sexual-market value. The woman will certainly have more options than the guy. There will be flirtatious posts on her facebook wall everyday by random guys just waiting for their chance. She, of course, soaks in all the attention and will certainly continue to chase the alpha male (think "the situation" from Jersey Shore) that already HAS women chasing him. Illogical. She will be approached when she goes to the store, campus, clubs with her friends, bars, wherever. This is an advantage that cannot be stressed enough. The male is expected to have the burden of making the first move, while the woman can sit back and be picky, picky, picky, picky. If the guy says one wrong thing he's out the door. If he calls to early, he's a creep. If he calls to late, well, she's already forgotten him because she has so many options that his value is nothing. This is the plight of men.

Part of it is feminism, but an even larger part is obesity (see here ) and demographics; there are many more single men than there are single women in the age categories that are relevant.

1). The first is legislative: Fully Legalized Prostitution. I'm talking Keynesianism for safety/health (STD checks, etc), advertisements on television, and online ordering of hookers. Private businesses could thrive in this new (legal) market.

This will immediately remove all men from the dating pool that are only looking for sex. This in and of itself will decrease the sexual power of women everywhere 10 fold. All of a sudden, you will see less bitchiness less demanding, less superficiality, and less slutiness. American women will no longer be able to get away with these things because they would no longer hold the ultimate trump card over men: vagina. If a guy could buy it at a decent rate, without fear of a sting operation or disease, why go out and try to game/spend money on some undeserved woman?

The only way this can be achieved is politically of course. The Mens Movement needs electable public figures that will fight tooth and nail to get prostitution decriminalized in their respective locales. The entire movement would have to come together...all the PUA's, TFL, DJ's, Nice-guy's, Spearheads, even Incels. If they all were to band together and find leaders to put in public office, then that would be a start.

2) Sex Robots -

CNET Sex Robot Article

As you can read from the article above, sex-bots are becoming a reality.

Once Japan creates and refines a life-like robot that has realistic female body parts and can possibly cook/clean the house, feminism will begin to crumble. It doesn't take much thought to understand why having a sex robot could literally replace women. These robots, however, would certainly have to be made affordable. When the first wave of them hits the market, they will surely have extremely high price tags. Fortunately, as demand grows and technology continues to advance, the sex machines will slowly become affordable and pretty soon, these bots will be in almost every household. Wives will be forced to either give her man more pleasure or accept him getting it from his new robotic girlfriend. Of course, at first, there will be a bit of a stigma against owning one of these machines. This shaming language, which will undoubtedly include "loser", "virgin", "creep", etc, will come mostly from women that know that their sexual power over men is coming to an end.

Just check out the comments from that article. Here are a few:

"And, yes, I believe real people (male and female) are to blame for the dolls. Everyone just cares about themselves these days and this product caters to that. Imagine having your needs met anytime you want without having to consider someone else's?"

-celticbrewer

This is simply judgmental. So guys are only allowed the options of either catering to self-entitled princesses or just becoming hermits? Who is this guy to be against such a thing that will not effect his life?

"This is just wrong and creepy on many levels."

-gameking23

Shaming language. Judgments, judgments, judgments. I suppose everyone is perfect except this guy, right?

"It's depressing that people have sunk to this level. What kind of person would let a robot replace a person?"

-NerdusMaximus

I'm beginning to detect a pattern here... Everyone seems to have an idea in their heads of how others should act, and if you dare deviate from what societies deems as normal, you shall be shamed and insulted. That's how it works, folks.

3) Male Birth Control - This won't have as much of an effect as the previous 2 game changers, but it will certainly work in men's favor. The ability to screw raw-dog without fear of impregnating the sperm recipient will revolutionize sexual control for men, while lowering the risk of paying her for 18+ years. Women, for whatever reason, seem to have trouble taking their birth control on schedule. They tend to "forget", or swear that it didn't work once they get pregnant. We know these are lies and that girls know they can financially entrap a man by getting pregnant, hence the reason they purposefully do away with their pills from time to time.

What You Should Listen To...Because I Do!

2010-10-28T20:31:00.012-04:00

Music taste, for me, has changed drastically over the years. When I was younger, I would listen to nothing but repulsive rap music while playing video games...ah, those were the days. You could find me with my Dell Pocket DJ in my ears playing Star Wars: Jedi Outcast 2, Star Wars: Jedi Academy, NBA Live games, Madden NFL, and of course, Halo 2. I probably played Halo 2 more than any one guy should :) When I went through my World of Warcraft phase, I listened to standup comedy. Mostly George Carlin on youtube.

Now I listen to an entirely different array of music. Below is what is in my Zune (the speakers in my Jeep are screwed up, plus the CD player does not work anymore) everyday while I drive to college campus, work, or to get black coffee from Dunkin Donuts.

Below each Band are suggested songs. You can't go wrong with them.

Radiohead

I listen to these guys the most. Thom Yorke has produced some amazing stuff. Here's what I recommend starting out:

"Street Spirit [Fade Out]"
"Creep"
"Pyramid Song"
"High and Dry"
"Karma Police"

Boards of Canada

Ambient/electronic music is now my new favorite genre, mainly because it is so relaxing. Stress and depression can creep up easily these days, and there's nothing that can calm the soul than BOC. Here are tracks that I recommend from this group:

"Dayvan Cowboy"
"Music is Math"

The Notwist

My favorite band, period. These guys produce the ultimate music in my opinion. They are a German Indie Rock band. Here are some must listens:

"Pick Up The Phone"
"Consequence"
"One With The Freaks"
"Pilot"
"Gloomy Planets"
"On Planet Off"

The Seatbelts

I discovered the Seatbelts through my favorite anime, Cowboy Bebop. They produce futuristic jazz. Its great to listen to and works well within the episodes of the show. They have a ton of CD's out. Here are a few good songs:

"Piano Black"
"Memory"
"Is it Real"
"Adieu"
"7 Minutes"
"Clutch"
"Rain"

Nujabes

The guy who produced these tracks has passed away, unfortunately. He was in a car crash in China a few years ago. Here are some great tracks for listening:

"Horizon"
"Kunomi"
"Arubian Dance"
"World's End Raphsody"
"Beyond"
"Transcendence"

The Veils

Just discovered these guys while surfing Expat blogs. An expat is basically someone who leaves their native country in search of a better life elsewhere. Anyway, the blog was authored by some woman living in New Zealand. She posted a video that she thought was funny that wasa an edited movie trailer that used clips from Seinfeld. Yea, its hard to explain. Here's what I'm talking about:

That first song is what hooked me. Here are some tracks for listening for The Veils

"Talk Down The Girl"
"Leavers Dance"
"Vicious Traditions"

MCR

Yea, I like them. And I'm way late.

"You Know What They Do TO Guys Like Us In Prison"
"Ghost of You"
"Cemetery Drive"
"The Jetset Life Is Gonna Kill You"

Linkin Park

Now these guys are PERFECT for listening to while working out. The following are guaranteed motivators:

"Crawling"
"New Divide"
"Somewhere I Belong"
"In The End"

Local H

"Hand To Mouth"
"Bound To The Floor"

Here are honorable mentions that I also like (just songs):

Eminem- "Superman"
Lil Wayne- "Shoot Me Down"
Korn- "Make it Go Away"
NERD- "Breakout"
Muse- "Time Is Running Out"

So, more or less, that is my music taste.

Youtube Personalities That I Watch

2010-09-16T19:14:00.009-04:00

I've floated around on Youtube for years, and I must say, the vast majority of it has become commercialized, basic, pretentious fluff. The videos that I watch the most are ones that are either A) extremely funny to me or B) Has a certain genuine, intelligent purpose and presentation. Here's who I follow and pay attention to on Youtube. These people have a legitimate point of view and have a certain charisma that is not coated with vain, disingenuous aspirations. Do I agree with everything they say? Of course not. There are many people I admire that I don't necessarily agree with on every point. I do, however, always appreciate fascinating, impassioned gumption.

People to Watch on Youtube: (No particular order)

Red Letter Media

http://www.youtube.com/user/RedLetterMedia

This guy produces, by far, the most entertaining, engaging, and funny movie reviews I've ever witnessed. If you are a fan of Star Wars, you must see what he has to say about the prequels. He reviews mostly sci-fi classics as well as a few other movies. His voice is very distinctive and comedic, which adds to the video's entertainment value. Certainly one of the premier Youtube personalities out there.

Saturninefilms (Cody Weber)

http://www.youtube.com/user/Saturninefilms

george4title

http://www.youtube.com/user/george4title

Basically what this guy does is provide a realistic view of the effects of the economic downturn in America, specifically California, which happens to be one of the states that is struggling the most. I don't know what his true intentions are. At some moments, he seems genuine, but in others he seems deceptive. Nevertheless, I think he puts out great, informative, and engaging videos.

SupraDarky

http://www.youtube.com/user/SupraDarky

Here's a guy that I like because he posts video game music. I have always been an avid gamer and this channel provides ample nastalgia.

Steve Hoca

http://www.youtube.com/user/SteveHoca

Here is a controversial, frustrated middle aged man that brings up many great points about America, it's dating scene, and capitalism. I honestly think he believes in what he says, and I agree with some of what he says. It's taboo what he says. It's taboo to agree with him. It's taboo to be associated with him. But I'm done bowing to social pressures, and obviously so is he. He was a member of the "TFL" movement (True Forced Loneliness). This movement is disorganized and ineffective in my opinion. Actually, I've yet to see one decent Men's Rights group emerge. I don't think it can happen in such a feminized country.

The Logic Junkie

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheLogicJunkie

His name says it all-if you are someone that enjoys high level conversation, check him out.

What's Wrong With a Mosque at Ground Zero?

2010-08-16T00:44:00.003-04:00

Nothing. Islam is the largest religion in the world. The extremists fit into a small minority. Therefore, it would be irrational to suggest in any way that a mosque is a symbol of terrorism or a threat to the USA.

Fox news recently did an interview the Republican Senator of Texas, John Cornyn. When asked about this topic, Cornyn said, "Whether you're connected with people, whether you're listening or whether you're lecturing to them, I think this is sort of the dichotomy that people sense, that they're being lectured to, not listened to, and I think that's the reason why a lot of people are very upset with Washington," Cornyn said.

As you can see, he is playing the "Americans are being condescended to by the elite Ivy League liberal grads" card. This is a recurring theme and tasteless strategy used by Republicans whose constituencies consists of back-woods hicks and low IQ hillbillies. That's who buys the rhetoric of repubs such Cornyn, unlike us educated elitist northern folk. Now I understand that as a libertarian, I agree more with republicans than I do democrats. However, many of the tactics I see used by republicans in their arguments just seem phony and calculated. The "common sense" approach to everything in politics is getting tiring to say the least.

One of the common arguments against the building of the mosque near ground zero is that it insensitive to those who died on 9-11. I do not understand this one bit. By doing research, one can easily find out that Muslims too perished in the 9-11 attacks, along with Christians and many other religious people. Whether or not building the mosque is in "bad taste" is completely subjective. What is objective is the law and the constitution, which both fall on the side of those who wish to build the mosque.

These arguments for government intervention in a religious freedom issue mainly plays on the emotions of Americans who are sensitive to what happened in the atttacks on the Twin Towers. For those of who are mature and intelligent, labeling any mosque as a terrorist base/breeding ground is illogical upon any fair analysis. But not for many flag-waving lunatics, apparently.

Ironically, it seems that the Americans who are the most patriotic are the ones that you are most embarrassed to share the same nationality with.

A Shift in Thoughts of Sweat

2010-08-05T13:46:00.009-04:00

So fitness is something that I've just recently taken up. The whole idea off braking a sweat was something that I dreaded until I turned 20. One day I just happened to notice that I had quite a gut on me. Not one that showed through most clothes, but one that you may see if the shirt was tight enough. At 5'11, I weighed in at 193 lbs. This came as quite a shock to me. I finally realized that I had to do something about it.

As I sat in my car in the hot sun because of a massive car event a few weeks later, I began to wonder if joining this gym would be worth it. I mean, I wasn't actually fat, was I? No one could tell that I was a bit overweight, so why even bother? Good tasting food is one of the many joys in life. Well, needless to say I still decided to go through with it. I actually passed the gym because of it's strange location, but I was sure to head back out a few days later. This was my first ever gym and I was not at all surprised by what I saw. Unfortunately, the gym was not co-ed. This did not help me get girls, but hey, the idea was to get in shape right? The only girls that were present were the trainers and desk clerks, who were as condescending as I've ever experienced. No surprises there, however.

At first, nothing. I did mostly cardio, just running on the treadmill for about 20 minutes. This did absolutely nothing for me in terms of weight loss. I was beginning to lose motivation. One day, however, it all changed. I decided to experiment with my diet. Unfortunately, until then, I had never thought to change up my diet in order to get results. I finally tried, and lo and behold, I was at 189 lbs. I felt great. Nothing had been going right for me at that time, but this came through. I started to count calories. Less than 2000 a day. One other trick I learned was to eat nothing after 6pm.

Losing Weight While Still Eating Fast Food

Now that's where it got difficult. It is extremely hard to go without dinner every night. But you know what? It worked like a charm. When I woke up, I checked the scale and I was losing at least 1-2 per day. I flew through the 180's very quickly. Then it hit me: weight loss is more about DIET than it is FITNESS. Exercise, in my opinion, is nothing more than icing on the cake in terms of strictly weight loss. I was dropping lbs faster than I ever thought possible. I actually became quit obsessed with it, checking the scale 2-3 times a day, looking at websites that had information about BMI, etc.

Taco Bell, Checkers, McDonald's, Burger King. All places that I ate. The key is not to order fries or sodas. Get a burger, perhaps with no cheese. Drink the tea or just get a water. That's the way to go. The chicken wraps are also very good and light on calories.

So here we are today. I'm at 157 lbs. Everything worked out for me. I am heading in the direction of being cut and having a 6-pack, and to what do I owe this accomplishment to? Myself, of course. Only I could do this. Not a doctor, not a diet plan, not a pep talk. It was all self-motivation. I had to have the self-control and willpower to be able to go a few days without food. I had to have the determination to head to the gym at odd hours and put in a good workout.

Sweat and physical pain are now things I strive for, because I know the results will be worth it.

Here is how I lost over 30 lbs. I still ate fast food, by the way. Follow these tips and your golden. It's all about willpower.

1. Count calories. Eat 1500 or less per day. Take in most of them in the morning.
2. No soda, period. No fries, period. You order water or unsweetened tea. And for coffee drinkers such as myself, go all black. No cream, sugar, or anything.
3. No food past 7pm. This includes snacks. Nothing but water and tea at night.

Do these 3 steps and the results will come in almost immediately, guaranteed

Lost: Finally Over, Final Thoughts

2010-07-21T16:34:00.000-04:00

One of my favorite shows was LOST. From season 1 on, I was hooked. The mystery, suspense, and drama always held me in and left just enough to my imagination to get me to watch the following episode. I still can't believe it's over after 6 seasons.

To me, the reason LOST has gotten progressively worse ever since the first season is simple. Academic touched on it: the answers the mysteries were not satisfactory in the least.

They spent so much time and energy into building the suspense and drama of the mysteries of the island. They built up the hype to it for so many episodes to the point where we as viewers were literally begging to know what the answer was. The problem with this is in the buildup itself that the writers should have been smart enough to figure out: there is no feasible way to satisfy such a teased mystery. Your better off omitting it from the show or not answering it at all, which would still lose you fans.

The biggest mystery and disappointment in this entire series, without question, is Walt. They dedicated so much time in season 1 and 2 to taunting the viewer about how "special" he was. Well, its season 6 and now all we know is he killed a bird. This is the prime example of building so much hype and anticipation with there being no possible satisfactory explanation for it. You could just tell they were on to something and kept trying to feed into it; with the others taking Walt and keeping him in a special dungeon (or whatever that place was).

Kind of like a few episodes ago when it was revealed what the voices were in the jungle. A dead Michael stands there and confirms to Hurley that the voices are just dead spirits who are stuck on the island.....Thats it?

You see, they teased the "voices" in the jungle for 5 and a half straight seasons and there simply wasn't going to be an explanation that felt good enough. They should have revealed what the voices were long before that.

Ironically, the mystery element is what made this series great and a later disappointment at the same time. Its like taking a loan out and not being able to pay it back later. They just kept borrowing our suspense and anticipation over and over and when it came time to pull back the curtain it was too late. The only reason any of us kept watching was for the suspense and anticipation for what was to come. The writers tried too hard to bait us and didn't put the same amount of effort into actually explaining what the answers were.

The problem with the ending was that it was anti-climactic and too safe. It gave me the feeling that all of it could have been in Jack's head. The main draw of the show was the mythology...not the characters. What was so interesting was not the love triangle between Kate, Sawyer, and Jack. It wasn't about the struggles of the characters. These were very interesting plot developments, but the main hook of the show was the mystery of the island, time travel, and all things supernatural.

The ending of LOST simply ignored all of these things and did not even make an attempt to explain them. What exactly was the smoke monster? Was it an ancient God? Was it simply a "security system"? Both of these explanations were eluded to in the show, but the answer was never given. This is a common theme with LOST.

Overall, however, this was still one of my all time favorite shows. My favorite characters would have to be Locke and Desmond. LOST had it's shortcomings, but the characters and their back stories helped to keep the show interesting while still teasing the viewers with mysteries.

The Rating System: Girls from 1-10

2010-07-11T16:29:00.013-04:00

One of the interesting ways that men created in order to identify a woman's value, is the ratings system. A woman's worth is largely defined by how good she looks. What I will do for everyone who reads this is give a standard for what is valuable as well as invaluable in women today. Make no mistake, any woman can be rated.

First, allow me to define the rankings.

1: Untouchable. Repulsive. Disgusting. Pitiful. This woman has 0 value and 100% of the time, it is her fault. This is reserved for women who have lost all self control.

2: Barely better than a 1. Still untouchable. The difference here is perhaps the woman was born deformed. Since her looks are out of her control, I will spare her the 1 ranking.

3: This is the girl in high school that you'd get made fun of for dating. This is the last option. This is for the poor man that simply cannot afford anything better. Women like this usually compensate for their atrocious looks by being overtly funny or "good" to her man.

4: Still butt-ugly. No self-respecting man should ever stoop this low, however, the sexual marketplace favors women and therefore even below average ogres can get a man.

5. As average as it gets. Certainly not marriage or dating material. This girl is your last option in the bar when you've been rejected by everyone else. If your drunk enough, you just might take her back to your place. (But prepare to be horrified in the morning when you sober up)

6: These are the girls that usually look just decent enough to be in a relationship with (if your desperate), but not good looking enough to be a bitch. A 6 will cook, clean, and be appreciative of her man because she lacks the value to do anything less for him.

7: On her best day, when her hair is done, the nails are nice, wearing a cute outfit, she looks cute. On most days you could easily overlook her. 7's are common in offices. They shine at the christmas parties and other events when they can dress up, but other than that, you could do without them. Most times, however, this girl remains in a perpetual state of cute/averageness. (I made that word up) Also, she may be average facially but have a banging body.

8. She's cute and has a descent body. As I mentioned above, the sexual marketplace's current state is very beneficial to these women; you are very lucky to get one to stay with you. Nothing to be ashamed of here, however, you and I both know that you could do better.

9. Great body, excellent face. The real way to test if she is a 9 is to see how she looks without makeup and with her hair not done. A 9 is beautiful, even on a bad day. If you can bed a 9 then you've done well, and you deserve a drink :) What is she missing? Its hard to say, but guys know there is something left to be desired.

10. The pinnacle of beauty. Only a few exist on earth. This girl is perfect in every way. You hardly see them in real life, because they are either supermodels or off somewhere in a private country club which an uber-rich man paid for. You will most likely never bed or even talk to a 10. They are rare and unavailable.

Now that the ratings have been defined, allow me to give the standard for what is what. Below are examples of women, 1-10.

1.

Notice the short hair. Very few women can pull this of and still look decent. Long hair is feminine and very important for a woman to at least have some semblance of being a female. Her fatness was brought on by herself; she is also equally ugly.

2.

3:

4.

Not fat, just plain ugly

5.

Ah, your average American woman. A few extra pounds

6:

7:

8:

9:

10:

Let's be honest here: Asian women are superior in beauty. They truly are the best. This one here is the most beautiful on the planet. No questions asked

Feminism and Chivalry: Hypocrisy

2010-06-02T21:20:00.006-04:00

Parenting is one of the most important jobs that one can have. That's where it all begins. Sure, genetics play a role in what a child grows up to become; however, for the most part, it's up to parents to raise their children the right way and instill in them proper beliefs and customs that benefit society as well as themselves.

Generally speaking, what is the average young boy taught growing up in regards to women? To respect women. To hold open doors for women. To be polite around women. To take care of women. To watch his language around women. To pull out chairs for women. When there is something heavy to be lifted, the boy learns quickly that he should volunteer to carry it for the girl. Not long after this, the average young boy discovers chivalry at its most horrific stage: dating. Whether its a romantic comedy or a television show, the young boy will find out that it is a social standard that on a date, he must (standard date)

a) Chauffeur the girl around in his car, on his dime.
b) Pay for the movie tickets and any snacks that she desires
c) Pay for dinner
d) A kiss is expected at the end. This requires courage, as he is risking rejection as well a a blow to his self-esteem.

We know what young boys are taught growing up. Basically, its to appease and serve women. It continues through adulthood; men don't care for large homes and fancy cars. Not in the abstract they don't. They work slavishly to get these material possessions because society has taught them that its the best way to get an attractive female; if a male could live in a comfortable apartment with a decent car his whole life and not have it work against him when it comes to getting a mate, he would do it. So serving women never stops.

With that being said, I have an important question to ask: are young girls instructed by their parents and society to respect and revere men as much as boys are told to respect them? Of course not, and everyone knows it. Young girls are pampered and told they are princesses. This is a fundamental difference in the way men and women are raised. If feminism is truly about equality, then why exactly have feminists turned a blind eye to the issue of chivalry and the way boys are taught to worship girls?

Chivalry in and of itself is sexist. Yet I see nothing but hypocrisy from feminists and most women for that matter. The feminist movement has turned out to be yet another special interest group that claims to be for equality but in reality desires more and more advantages, entitlements, and attention.

If you are a true egalitarian, you would not identify with any ideology at all. That is the fact that feminists hide. Inequality is a double edged sword. Not being equal has disadvantages as well as advantages. For instance, a disadvantage for women in the early 1900's was that they were restricted to the kitchen and raising children. However, an advantage was not having to work or take on any stressful responsibility. Another advantage was having the luxury of choosing a mate. Women were (and still are) in the position to judge males and choose who they saw fit. Chivalry was also an advantage.

Now, after feminism has pervaded society, we see that these disadvantages are gone. However, the advantages that inequality brought women remain; they conveniently held on to the luxurious social custom of having a man put his self-esteem on the line to approach a woman who he doesn't know, and go through all of the steps that I outlined above on a date. Chivalry was left out of the "equality" movement.

This seems to me to be pure hypocrisy and nothing more than a power grab for the gender that is a 53% majority in the USA. Feminism has turned the average woman today into a party-seeker. A feminist will fight for the right of women to get drunk and pass out in front of groups of red-blooded males. This is subtle encouragement. Today's American woman is as irrational as yesterday's American women; the difference is that today's has been given the green light to act on her illogical, irrational, and emotional choices.

Rand Paul: Libertarian Messiah or Fraud?

2010-06-02T14:40:00.005-04:00

Rand Paul, the "Tea Party" candidate has won the republican nomination for U.S Senate in Kentucky. Like his father, Ron Paul, he is a libertarian that used the republican ticket to help him get elected-this country is still in the dark when it comes to voting for anyone other than a republican or democrat. When I heard of this news, I personally was excited. Finally a senator that I can get behind. I mean, he's a libertarian so I should back him 100%, right? Well not after I saw this video of him getting grilled by Rachel Maddow:

Now don't get me wrong: his stance on private ownership is a true libertarian one. And I would support his view even though no one in this country wants to go back to the 1950's where we had signs outside businesses that banished certain groups from entering. The problem with Rand Paul is that he selectively chose this issue to have an extreme view on. After reading an article by David Saltonstall (link to the article below, I discovered where Paul stands on the issue of medical marijuana: he support's its legalization. Upon first glance this may seem to be a good thing. However, the true libertarian stance is against the nanny state. All drugs should be legalized. It isn't in the government's place to tell its citizens what they may or may not put into their own body. The problem with Rand Paul is that he is extreme when it comes to allowing businesses to discriminate, but not extreme where it counts perhaps even more: on the war on drugs.

Anyone who understands the war on drugs and how it is a complete failure knows that it is an issue of utmost importance. This isn't about letting stoners and hippies have their day; its about ending statism, violence, and helping to grow our economy. Paul, unlike his father, doesn't seem to understand this. He should be at the forefront of the argument speaking out against the phony war on drugs. Instead, he takes a weak, watered down stance on the issue and promotes the legalization of medical marijuana. That is simply not enough.

Either you are for freedom or for the state, take your pick Rand. So far you have damaged the Tea Party movement beyond repair. The big knock, if you recall, on the Tea Party Movement was that it was filled with racist, middle-aged, crazed blue collar people who are fed up with so much government. You are only validating the liberals when you take unpopular stances on a civil rights bill that is in the past and will never be changed. What was the point of speaking out against it? I don't understand this extremist point of view in light of the fact that you aren't willing to take extreme libertarian views on other issues.

Philosophy can be a great basis for political positions. However, one must discover that there is a difference between theory and reality. In theory, what Rand Paul wants should hold up. But in reality, all business owners and corporations are not filled with responsible, good natured people. There is incompetence in both government as well as private business. I understand that private ownership is better to bet on than government, but one must not defend private ownership at the expense of the civil liberties of American citizens. Let's suppose a private business were to bar all Jews from entering their Cafe. Does this not infringe upon Jewish American's freedom of movement? What about the American citizens?

These and many other issues are ones that Rand Paul must think clearly about. The arguments that he brings forth are at the college level- they have no place in the United States Senate. He needs to clean his act up and start coming up with constructive, practical ideas rather than loony ones that no one but him will vote in favor of.

Barry Goldwater: The Aboriginal Conservative Libertarian

2010-02-14T00:40:00.005-05:00

The description that I give myself politically is as spot on as I could put it: I am a conservative libertarian, along the lines of a Ron Paul. The Texas senator is a staunch constitutionlist and understands the importance of freedom. Liberty is my main concern whenever approaching the political realm.

Who was an even greater pioneer for personal rights, freedoms, and liberty? Why none other than Barry Goldwater. Outside of his misguided notions about minorities, Goldwater's vision was on the correct tract for both his time and ours. This Arizona Senator was a true patriot and is certainly a great influential figure in history for any true libertarian. He was known as "Mr. Conservative"

Not only was his policies and ideas in the right place, but he also commanded a stellar resume. Prior to his political career, he was a Major General in the U.S Air Force Reserve. Military experience is paramount to determining the intestinal and mental foritude of a presidential candidate in my opinion. What Goldwater accomplished was no easy feat; combining true conservatism with the libertarian movement.

Here are a few classic and influential quotes by Goldwater that truly represent freedom:

"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue"

“A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away"

"I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in "A," "B," "C" and "D." Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?"

-Barry Goldwater

Women Aren't Funny

2010-02-04T22:17:00.004-05:00

Sitting in my college course today, I got to thinking about comedians again. After a string of thoughts, I somehow got to the point where I was desperately trying to name a decent female comedian. I couldn't do it. Sarah Silvercunt is NOT funny. She stands there behind a mic and says things in a monotone voice that are meant to be so shocking that they are hilarious (but they aren't). Silvercunt stands there and says "look at me I'm a Jew" and expects to get laughs...her looks are the one and only thing that keeps her popular.

The same can be said for Margaret Cho, whose greates accomplishment was her "eat me out" song. Kathy Griffen is even worse; I'm sure she gets booed out of every bar she ever goes to perform standup. Here's Cho's only decent bit :

But its not just female profession comedians; its women in general. Women simply aren't funny. They just aren't. They just rely on men for entertainment such as comedy, amongst basically everything else (protection, security, finances, etc.)

Think clearly for a moment: back in high school, do you recall any female class-clowns? I CAN'T. I just recently realized that every single class clown or witty/funny personality in school was a guy 100% of the time (including me), with girls giggling in the background.

The outspoken atheist Christopher Hitchens happens to agree with my theory in the video below:

Top 10 Stand Up Comedians All Time

2009-12-08T15:08:00.010-05:00

I actually prefer stand-up routines to most comedy shows on television...the routines are much easier to follow. I discovered stand up a while back on Youtube. I would minimize it and continue my MMO hypnosis( you can guess which one I played)

After searching you tube for the best of the best and after much deliberation in my head, here are my top ten comedians of all time:

10. Lewis Black

The angriest comedian of them all-this guy is hilarious with almost anything that comes out of his mouth. I particularly enjoy his rant on there being too many Starbucks out there.

9. Dave Chappelle

Much of his stand up has to do with racial/gender issues. He may be yet another black comedian playing on race for half his show, but he is still one of the best at his craft.

8. Jerry Seinfeld

I personally don't believe you have to be edgy in order to be extremely funny, and for the best vanilla jokes you'll ever hear in your life, check out some of his shows. His dry sense of humor is along the line of Larry David. (I suppose this is a Jewish style humor)

7. Chris Rock

Yes, I like him better than Richard Pryor. His standup has always made me laugh harder than anyone else who has that type of humor that is so common in this day and age. He doesn't push the limit very much, but his ethnic jokes coupled with his distaste for married life gets a laugh out of me every time.

6. Zack Galifianakis

The most unique talent out there today in comedy. I don't ever recall seeing someone play a piano as part of their act in stand-up...but this guy does it to perfection. His DVD, "Live At The Purple Onion" is hysterical and definitely worth the buy. It has all his best jokes along with bonuses that are well worth the money. And out of everyone that has had to deal with pesky hecklers, this guy did it the best. Search You tube for "Zack Galifianakis berates audience member" and you will see what I mean.

5. Mitch Hedberg

Listening to his comed albums always shocks me at how someone who is high on stage can be so funny. Out of everyone on this list, Mitch has the simplest jokes. And they work like a charm. You would never think of the stuff this guy says in his routines...you just have to listen. "Strategic Grill Location" is my favorite of all his albums, but honestly you can't go wrong with any of them. Its sad that he died so young, but I guess thats what happens when drugs consume your life.

R.I.P

4. Larry David

Another funny Jew. His show on HBO, "Curb Your Enthusiasm" is probably the best on television at the moment. However, I feel that his standup routine is even funnier. This video below says it all. Hitler didn't like magicians, you learn something everyday.

3. Doug Stanhope

A perfect fusion of #1 and #2. Quite possibly the best living comedian to date. This may just be my taste, but i prefer the dark, twisted humor of this guy. By far the edgiest of any comedian out there, nothing is off limits for Doug. I'm talking murder, rape, even child pornography.

I actually just uploaded part 1 of his new album, "From Across The Street". Check out my youtube homepage at http://www.youtube.com/user/bj07bran7

Below is one of my favorite routines of his. If you don't laugh at this bit then you have no soul

2. Bill Hicks

He's as dark as they come, especially for his time. Very funny and very insightful.

Another dead druggie. R.I.P.

1. George Carlin

There isn't much to say here...this guy is a legend and a wizard with language.

Review: Akira (1988)

2009-11-22T13:43:00.003-05:00

Classic movies do not come about too often. Classic movies are the ones that belong in your DVD collection. Katsuhiro Otomo's Akira is certainly one of them. Now, the year is currently 2009. This astounding masterpiece was made in 1988. This is perhaps one of the most advanced movies for its time. This gem has it all; action, thrills, a great story, great music, and a deep meaning throughout.

This is set many years after Tokyo had been destroyed by an unknown force that consequently began WWIII. Tokyo has been rebuilt and is now refuge to cults, bike gangs, etc. Shotaro is the leader of the bike gang that is prevalent throughout the movie.

Without giving too much away, it is a classic story about an older friend and a younger friend who begin to have issues with each other as they get older. The younger friend, Tetsuo, is sick and tired of his older friend, Shotaro, saving him when he is in trouble. He wants to be able to take care of himself without any help at all. Later on, he develops powers and is somehow connected with Akira, a powerful being that has been locked away by scientists many years ago. The music is fantastic and as I mentioned before, the visuals are spectacular for 1988 and still hold up pretty well in 2009.

The manga version of Akira had much more information that could be shown in the movie. The movie was forced to jam everything together early in order to support the plot. This was my main issue with it, but overall its still a very enjoyable movie. This contains some nudity. It’s a definite watch in my opinion, one of few classic anime movies to ever come out. 10/10

Review: Spirited Away (2001)

2009-11-15T23:35:00.005-05:00

One of my many interests is anime. I've watched them since the days of Pokemon and Dragon Ball Z. However now days I prefer a more serious form of anime, along the lines of Elfen Lied. Serious, cerebral, and contreversial anime draws me in like a misquito to a bug light.

Recently, I watched a few anime movies. (Don't ask where I got them) Here's what I thought on the first:

Spirited Away
Directed by Hayao Miyazak

This movie is about a little girl who goes on a journey of self-discovery. It begins with her in the backseat of her parent's car. They are apparently moving to a new community. Her father is driving, and goes up to a mysterious tunnel. The little girl, Chihiro, is apprehensive as to what dangers might be in this tunnel. In a strange sequence of events, they all discover an old abandoned theme park. The two parents find a stand that has hot food and begin to eat viscously. Once again, Chihiro is apprehensive and does not eat with her parents.

From there, the story goes into an 'Alice in Wonderland' type journey. I won't give away anymore of the plot, but what I will say is that this was an excellent film, especially for the light-hearted humor and subliminal messages throughout.

The biggest problem with this anime is the same with Alice in Wonderland; it's hard to follow at certain points. It can be very frustrating to not be able understand what is going on, especially when you invest time to watch the movie. One other issue that I had was the music. The tunes in Spirited Away are sub-par at best. Perhaps I'm just use to masterpieces from anime's like Cowboy Bebop, but I digress.

This movie's strength is obviously the creative imagination of Hayao Miyazak. Some of the scenes were absolutely breathtaking in their beauty and originality. I only wish he could have figured out a way to meld this creativity into a more concise, understandable plot. Nonetheless, the movie is very interesting and easy on the eyes as far as picture goes.

Overall, this movie is about a 9/10. Those with open, imaginative minds will want to see this for sure. For children, I recommend 100%. If you are neither of those, give it a try anyway. You may be surprised.

*Up next, the review of the anime thriller "Akira".

Feminism’s Effect on Dating, Marriage

2009-11-04T16:56:00.002-05:00

*Note*: Of course feminism is not responsible for EVERYTHING wrong with marriage and society today. I am writing under the assumption that people who read this are fair minded individuals that respect opinions even if they disagree with them. This is how I see it. If you have a different opinion, thats fine with me, I have no problem with it.

If you talk to any sociologist, they will all agree that feminism is responsible for breaking up the traditional, stable family. Whether or not this was for the benefit of women is up for debate. I would argue that destroying families is worse than the grievances of women at the time.

Back then, there were virtually no divorces. Today, divorces are the norm. Statistically, women are the ones who initiate the divorce most of the time.

Back then, there was less of a chance that a woman would cheat. Women were faithful and gave themselves to their husbands. They actually could cook, unlike now days. I've never met a girl who could cook. So back then it made sense because women would actually stay with them.

Many feminists claim that they do allow men to pay for them on dates. Well, while most women who identify as feminist benefit from the equality and specific laws protecting women, they have not given up the custom that men should pay for them. So they keep the benefits of feminism, but don’t give up what is necessary for them to become truly equal.

There is less of a reason for a man to do all these things for women. Think about the dating process:

1. The man must approach the woman who he has never met. This takes courage and confidence. He must be completely over himself and willing to lower his value and self-esteem. Right off the bat, he is in the L column.

2. He must say the right things, and be interesting enough for her to give him the number. She could just use him for free drinks, who knows. If he is good enough to her pleasing, he may get the number.

(So far, she has contributed absolutely nothing. Standing there looking pretty does not count. And he must do the most in terms of contributing to the conversation, such as figuring out topics to talk about and what-not. She certainly is not going to do anything that would make her seem too interested. She will only help the conversation along, so she can further judge the man.)

3. He must call at the perfect time. If he calls to early, she'll think he's a stalker and tell all her friends that he is a "creepy" stalker weirdo.

(So far, she still has contributed nothing)

4. The date. He drives her around in his car, on his dime. He pays for movie tickets. He pays for dinner. All the while, he must be on his A game and say the right things. He can't be too boring and can't be too aggressive.

(She has contributed nothing. A stuck up, selfish woman might say something like "Well just my presence alone is enough." This is how some women think, I have heard them say it myself)

5. Sex, or a kiss. After all he did, he is still expected to initiate the kiss or sex. Of course, he must do this at the right time for HER and to HER liking. Its all about HER pleasure. If its sex, he is expected to have protection with him.

(This is where she finally contributes something. She sleeps with him. But does this mean she has actually matched what he sacrificed? No. In fact, this doesn't even count, because sex benefits both men and women. So she still hasn't done any independent thing on her part to contribute to this relationship. He has done over and above anything she did. At this point, the best she possibly did was help the conversation along or maybe help keep the talk interesting, throughout the date. That is still little in comparison to what he has done.)
What has the woman done through all of this? Look nice? That’s it. She may contribute to the conversation, but he is expected to lead the talk and do everything else.

So the whole dating system is rigged top to bottom and the advantage is almost all women, from the very start.

This is why feminists should shut up. This is why they are radicals. If you are a feminist in America today, you are selfish and ungrateful.

I try all the time to rationalize this. I try to figure out where men get their share of the pie. I try to see where women actually contribute something meaningful to the relationship. But the more I analyze it, the more I come to the same conclusion: the entire mating scene is rigged. Perhaps, as I've said above, back then it was worth it. Women didn't cheat or leave their husbands. Women cooked and cleaned and actually raised the children. But today, I have yet to meet a woman my age that could cook. Feminists have demonized housework. So basically, women have kept all the benefits of the sacrifices men had to make in order to be with them, and thrown away all of the contributions that they once had to do.

This is why feminism is bad for our society. I do not hate women or wish them harm. But I'll be damned if I have to bow down to this matriarchal society that beats down the male and wants to feminize everything.

Rape, The Wage Gap, and Domestic Violence

2009-11-02T17:55:00.005-05:00

First of all, allow me to proclaim that I do not hate women. I will debunk all of the feminist's faulty arguments starting with rape.

My argument is that any modern feminist should be considered a radical. Feminism started off innocent enough, but at this point, women not only have equal rights but they have the advantage over men. Women are the majority in this country. Women go to college and graduate more than men. If women are being held back in any way, it is their fault.

Let's talk about rape. Of course more men rape women than vice-versa. This is for many reasons. One is, men are physically stronger than women. Men are also sexually attracted to women, so naturally their victims will be women. It is nearly impossible for a woman to rape a man. If women could, some women would. It has nothing to do with sexism, but rather our biology.

Next up, domestic violence. This also has nothing to do with sexism either. Again, men are stronger than women. Naturally they will beat them up if they lose their temper. And if you are one of those women who say men and women are equal, do me a favor and petition the government to get rid of domestic violence laws, which are there to protect women. If women could, they would beat the shit out of men as well. It has nothing to do with hatred of women. It is biology, which I have studied myself.

Another bullshit feminist argument is the "wage gap". This is a myth. There are no groups of men that sit around and figure out how to weed women out of jobs. According to www.ncpa.org/, women simply choose different lifestyles. Men are more productive. Men are more likely to respect deadlines. Men are more willing to take risks on jobs. According to the department of labor, over 90% of work-related deaths happen to men and men alone.

Women take more days off. Men work more hours for the same jobs. The point is that women simply do not work as hard as men and therefore do not get compensated for it. These are the reasons for a wage gap. It is not sexism or misogyny. Women are responsible for this mess, and if they want to clean it up, they will have to do it themselves.

Christian Hatred in America Today

2009-10-29T16:03:00.003-04:00

In this country, religion bashing has become the norm in the media and Hollywood. Whether it’s a biased news story or a jab by a lowly comedian such as Sarah Silvercunt, religion is constantly sneered at and looked down upon by elitist liberals.

However, what is meant by “religion bashing”? Are these people bashing random religions for humor? The answer is no. Religious bashing in America seems to only include Christianity. Jesus is the constant butt of every joke and Bible believing Christians are ostracized daily by the likes of Bill Maher, Larry David, and Sarah Silvercunt. (Sarah Silvercunt, the comedian that relies on her Jewish heritage to garner laughs. Sarah Silvercunt, the lanky woman with no body to speak of.)

What is this fascination with Christianity? Why not Islam? Why not bash Hindus? It is well known that this country was founded upon Judaea-Christian values. Christianity can be observed everywhere in the heart of America, from the homes of the citizens to the constitution.

The vast majority of this country identifies as Christian. Yet, when one turns on the television, all they see is Christians being depicted as dunces and fools. The atheists are apparently smarter than any believer. Anyone who is an atheist is accepted as smart and reasoned; anyone who has faith believes the earth is flat.

It is socially acceptable to attack Christians in this country. It is now part of our culture.

The latest example of this was in an episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm. Larry David, the main character of his own show, urinates on a portrait of Jesus. Even worse, the Christians, meant to look like chimps, are led to believe it’s a miracle because Jesus appeared to have a tear coming out of his eye.

I like Larry David. He is a funny comedian and his show is one of the best on television. But urinating on Jesus is over the top. It is highly offensive, yet he does not seem to care. HBO claims that the material was simply “playful” in a recent statement released by the company.

Or maybe one of the recent episodes of Real Time with Bill Maher, where the terrible female comedian bashes Catholics yet again. That video is below.

Abortion: Not A Woman's Issue

2009-10-18T23:10:00.003-04:00

Abortion is by no means a woman's issue. Liberals and the feminists have brainwashed America to believe that it is somehow wrong to tell a woman what she can't do with her body. It may be her body, but at the time of conception there is an actual living human.

Do parents own their children? Or are they simply responsible for them? The arrogance of women never ceases to amaze me. The unborn child inside of her has it's own dna, it's own genes. It is a individual.

In this video I made, I lay out the argument for outlawing abortion. I also point out the hypocrisy and arrogance of women who are pro-choice.

Origins: Why Do We Even Exist?

2009-10-12T15:46:00.015-04:00

If you watch tv and absorb information from the government-media complex daily, you may be led to believe that most people are secularist atheists that have no need for religion. Religion will be seen in a negative light, just an excuse for old men to molest children. Religion will be seen as a gateway to war and destruction. Religion will be seen as a leech on society, a belief system that is thousands of years old and is outdated.

While religion is responsible for death and crime, that does not validate atheism or discredit religion entirely. Religion is also reponsible for much good in the world that constantly goes over looked. Whether the essence of each religion is true is irrelevant to me.

Our universe is complex and diverse. Simply by looking up into the sky, we can all see it. The question is not, "Did God create the universe or did the universe create itself?" The proper question is, "What is the more probable scenario?"

Probability

Once you strip everything away, what is left? Once you accept the fact that we as humans know nothing, what is left? Humans can only understand those things which can be observed within time and space. Probability is all that remains.

Let's use a simple analogy in nature. There are two wild panthers in the jungle. One panther is a few years older than the other and has more experience in hunting and survival. The other panther is still of age to catch prey, however. Now let's say they both spot a racoon. Which panther will capture and eat the racoon first? Sure, it is within the realm of possibility that the younger less experienced panther could in fact get lucky. But the more likely explanation is that the older panther with capture the racoon first because of it's experience. No one can know for sure which would get to the racoon first, but any rational person would put their money on the older one.

Both atheism and theism are false (in the sense that neither can be empirically proven here and now). The existence of a god cannot be proven. The inexiestince of a god cannot be proven. Once you accept those two statements, what is left? The only truth in this world is that we know nothing for certain. Probability is all that remains and must become the primary system of thought and belief.

Here are my proofs that end the debate on whether or not it is rational to believe in God. #3 is the one that is most questionable by atheists. The reason it is there is simple: every cause has a causation. The only one that isn't explained is the origin of the universe. Therefore, it is more probable that the universe, to, had a cause. To say that the universe did not have a cause goes against this logic. Moreover, it is also worth noting that this causation would have to of been of a higher intelligence, given the complexity of our universe.

1. Neither theism or atheism can be proven.
2. It is possible that the universe either always existed or simply came into existence for no reason.
3. It is more probable that a deity or deities created the universe.
4. Therefore, theism is the most plausible, logical, rational and reasonable explanation for our existence.

Today's Western Woman

2009-09-22T01:28:00.001-04:00

This is the true traditional viewpoint of what feminism is responsible for, articulated as best as I could. It's my first video, and I must say there are more to come.

Why does the middle east hate America so much? Why are we spat upon around the world? Everything can be traced back to the rise of feminism during the sex revolution, when everything pertaining to our culture went south. The middle east hates us because we have destroyed the family. The secular left, headed by teh feminists, have given America an identity which is laughed at and sneered at all around the world. People need to realize that by moving away from the traditional values of our founding fathers, we have effectively set in motion the downfall of our civilization.

Study: Women Reveal Why They Have Sex

2009-09-20T00:51:00.000-04:00

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26039391-23272,00.html

According to this study, women aren't even attracted to men. Sex is almost a chore to them.

When it comes to sex, we guys always knew there are strange tendancies with women and sex. I've had girlfriends before. I have never used sex as a bargaining chip. I am sexual honest; I just want her badly. But for some reason women can control their sexuality to the point where they can decieve and plan in their head, such as getting you to buy them things or do chores for them in exchange for the sex.

If you honestly want to have sex, you'll go have it. There is no bargain. There are no dates, there is no chatter. There is no need for presents, theres no need for chores. Theres no need for getting to know each other deeper, you already know enough. There is just fucking. This is why the homosexual community is so permiscous; there is no woman around to say no. No woman to make them work for it. No woman to decieve and get them to buy them something first. No woman around to demand they wait longer so it can be more special.

This article pretty much exposes women sexually. I already knew this, but it's pretty clear that women can do without sex. Just think about it, if they really enjoyed sex then there would be no waiting and no need to butter her up first, or stroke her ego. There would be a period to get to know each other, then fucking all the time. Those would be healthier relationships. Those relationships would end in fewer divorces.

Everytime I analyze these type of issues I keep coming to the conclusion that it's the woman's fault. It's her fault he's angry because she never wants to cook or clean. It's her fault she gets beaten; she wanted the meathead that is twice her size and is a drunk. It's her fault the kids of the society are fucked up; she drove her husband away in divorce because he just wasnt good enough and because single mothers cant raise children for crap they grow up all screwed in the head. The majority of men in prison were raised by single mothers. And most of all, as it relates to this topic, women simply dont put out enough in relationships. Theres always strings attached.

It's pretty clear that women want men for things outside of who they actually are and how they look. It's completely a superficial attraction.

Let's Talk About Socialism

2009-08-25T01:01:00.002-04:00

A socialized medical system is one "in which all health personnel and health facilities, including doctors and hospitals, work for the government and draw salaries from the government," an example being the U.S. Veterans Administration, while U.S. Medicare is a single payer system which is not socialized medicine. This is according to medicinenet.com.

The term socialism has been thrown around alot lately. For months, conservative radio hosts have been labeling the president this term.Many of these talk show hosts may be good people. Many may be true conservatives. But when it comes to knowledge and research, they fail miserably.

Lets take Glenn Beck. This hemorrhoid with eyes has been harping, whining, crying, and complaining about socialized medicine for months. But this fool has no idea what socialized medicine is. I already defined socialized medicine. It's not what is in the health care bill.

Now take a look at this video. Here we have the hemorrhoid with eyes saying he would back Hillary Clinton if McCain got the Gop green light. What's interesting about this? Clinton has been a well-known proponent of a universal health care system (ie. socialized medicine) since the Clinton administration. It has been no secret. She even campaigned on it.

So this hemorrhoid is a complete fraud, and conservatives should distance themselves from him, just like his advertisers recently did.

The Degenerate Western Women

2009-08-21T18:54:00.004-04:00

Decades of radical feminism. Look what we have. A society that is up-side down. A society where the women view the thuggish deadbeat as the hero and the good-hearted male as the boring human wallet. When women chose to be sexually "free", they thereby chose to degrade and destroy our society. I am not only fiscally conservaitve, but socially conservaitve as well.

By conservative I mean a traditional thinker in regards to social interactions with members of the opposite sex. It wasn't too long ago when there were less divorces, unfaithful women, and abortions. The sex revolution and the rise of feminism were not simply a coincidence at the time when western civilization began too slowly decline. Putting women in power, giving women more sexual freedom, and demonizing the natural male have clearly degraded our culture as well as our shared-social reality.

Feminism started innocent and just enough; all they wanted was the right to vote and to get out of the kitchen. The ninetenneth and early twentieth centuries ganar no complaints from me as the first wave of feminism came about. Margaret Sanger, one of the earliest feminists, presented sound arguments and provoked rational thought about equality, suffarage, and reproductive freedom for women.

This however had a snowball effect into what you see when you walk into the mall: undisciplined, spoiled, deranged, dramatic, disrespectful, rude, elitist, controling, caniving, detached, dominearing women from the earliest stages of puberty to the bowels of menopause.

Our very social fabric has been getting thinner every year. The society has devolved into a social realm where women have the immediate and automatic advantage in almost every aspect of social interaction as we know it, as well as post-social interaction. Going down the list, almost every level of the relationship a man has with a woman is rigged from the beginning. Whether the woman is a feminist or a woman who has never heard of feminism is irrelevant; they all benefit and take advantage of the accolades of the feminist movement. The entitlements women demand is not an illusion; it is now and has been a reality, from free dinners to the vaginamony.

Obama The Pacifist

2009-08-12T15:21:00.005-04:00

Pacisfism is probably the most dangerous character trait a president can have. When you live in these times, you need strong leaders. Obama is not a strong leader. He may have charisma and powerful words, but he does not have stregnth and powerful actions. Obama has proven time and time again that he is not willing to do what is necessary to defend this country.

The current dilemma with North Korea is appaling. N Korea, at this point, have just been daring Obama to do anything. This communist country led by a physco who rules with an iron fist. Believe me when I say that Kim Jong Il, Hugo Chavez, and the Iranian Hitler all wanted Obama to get elected. We had McCain saying that he'd follow Bin Laden to the gates of hell. With Obama, we have the opposite.

How did this happen? Years ago a man would have a much tougher stance on national security. When we continuously make empty threats to N Korea and they keep calling our bluffs, what does it make us?

Obama's pacifism clearly has come from being raised by a single, fickle mother. This si a problem with single mothers in general. Many studies have shown that most of the men in prison had single mothers. Usually when a child is raised by a single mother, something horrible happens to the child when he grows up. Many become homosexuals, end up in jail, become metrosexuals, or just plain pacifists like Obama.

It will be interesting to see how much other countries test Obama. They already know what they can get away with and will continue to push the envolelope with this weak president.

Man On Wire: Review

2009-08-09T01:13:00.006-04:00

This is without doubt the best documentary of the year for 2008. This film follows a rising wire-walker that has an ambitious goal: wire-walk the tallest buildings in the world, the Twin Towers in New York.

The film goes through all the planning and debating between Phillip Petit and his friends on how to get to the top of the building, during construction, with all of their equipment. It was a truly miraculous movie, even though mostly everything was still-photos and re-enactments of what happened.

A truly amazing documentary. This get's a 10/10 from me.

Are The Dissenters of Public Health Care Legitimate?

2009-08-07T03:53:00.010-04:00

The leftists have clearly crossed the line at this point. I will concede the point that some angry protesters are completely deranged. Accusing Obama of being born in Kenya is embarrassing to the GOP.

But when fools like Nancy Pelosi casually discard hard working americans as fake protesters. These people are normal people. Normal americans. They are not plants. Their views are genuine and should be respected.

As for the conversation between these two, good points are made. Democrats are trying to diminish concerned citizens. When Bush was in office, the same thing was done but by the liberals.

I think that this is yet another example of arrogance on the part of the Obama administration and the democrats as a whole.

Green Tea Prevents......HIV??

2009-08-05T03:23:00.003-04:00

For the past month, I have been addicted to green tea. The taste is certainly superior to any cola out there. Better yet, it seems every time I log on to my computer, I find a new study showcasing the benefits of this tea.

Here's a bizarre conclusion to a recent study: green tea can hinder HIV transmission. According to physorg.com, the medical experts at the University of Heidelberg in Germany have discovered a chemical within green tea that "helps inhibit sexual transmission of the virus which causes AIDS." (Not that I have this disease myself).

Not only can green tea help with that epidemic, it has been found that it can help prevent cancer and heart disease. The benefits of this delicious drink seem endless. The brand shown, that I am drinking currently, contains theanine. Theanine apparently increases the overall level of the brain inhibitory transmitter GABA. GABA regulates muscle tone as well as excitability throughout the nervous system.

Who Has The Better Heath Care Plan?

2009-08-05T02:25:00.003-04:00

What is the major issue facing us at the moment? Healthcare. Allow me to explain why this debate is one-sided and has been for a long time.

We have the democrats, who have a clear plan for health care. Obama has stated it clearly for months now. Socialized medicine is not the correct termonology for this. It's more like socialized health insurance. Obama's plan for a government takeover of healthcare, which is 20% of our economy, may very well be in order for the future. But for the present, we are looking at something similar to the post office.

The dems have thrown around the number 50 million for the amount of people without healthcare in this country. We know that America is no where near the top of the rankings around the world when it comes to health care quality. We know that the average life span for americans is much less than other countries, more specifically, socialized countries. This all makes a very persuasive argument for health care reform.

What is wrong with this public option? Well, video has already been unearthed showing Obama claiming that he is for a single payer system, and how he wants to eventually make government run health care the only health care, essentially. The immediate problem with this public option is that most insurance companies will not be able to compete with it. Obama has continued to promise that if you like your current health insurance plan, nothing will change. This, however, is not entirely true. Here's why: employers have control over their worker's heath insurance. Whatever the employer chooses will be what is implemented for the people. It is simply more cost effective to choose the cheaper health plain rather than a more expensive one, lets say Blue Cross or Hap. So emplyees won't have control over their health care if they rely on their job for it, as many citizens do.

The other side of the argument, I am sad to say, is very weak. The republicans have failed to come up with a plan on their own. They have done nothing but stalled this plan. I can't understand why no one in the republican party has come out and articulated a plan for reform as well as Obama has.

This problem goes much deeper than lack of organization. The GOP still has no real leadership, and that is why they have no plans. They only have road blocks. I would say that Rush Limbaugh is the leader, but I haven't seen much leadership from him.

Who Was the Greatest President?

2009-08-04T02:27:00.001-04:00

William Howard Taft embodies everything a president should be. His actions should be the model for every future president: quiet, honest, effective politics. Let me explain what I mean by “quiet”. Quiet would be the opposite of what our current president is doing. America should not see their leader’s face every other day but rather the fruits of their leadership. One example of Taft’s dedication to running the country the right way was a brilliant comment he made in an interview with a reporter. Taft had been receiving increased pressure from Roosevelt to be more of a “celebrity” president. When the reporter remarked about Taft being “no Roosevelt”, Taft replied: “try to accomplish just as much without any noise". This shows he had the right idea on how to run a country.

An honest president is obviously a must. However, very few presidents are. There is something about Taft that came off as genuine. He became an outcast in the congress by having a quiet conservative way of ruling. Taft was meeker than any other president to date. Public service is the technical definition of a politician and therefore politicians should be humble. I don’t recall any of them being humble except for Taft. Most presidents are ego-maniacs that don’t revere the phrase: pride comes before the fall. Taft was a true servant of the people, and that is why he is better than any other president. Upon leaving office he made a comment that showed his transparency, something that Obama lied about having. “I felt like a fish out of water”. This quote alone proves what kind of president Taft was. It showcases his meekness, humility, and honesty.

As for effectiveness his work speaks for itself. Anytime congress and the previous president shun you, there is a good chance you are doing something right.

Our Current President

2009-07-31T22:53:00.001-04:00

So where should I begin? How about the current president, Barack Obama. Here is a man that is about as left as you can possibly go on the political spectrum, yet americans can somehow realte to him. Why? Is it because of his race? Is it his background? Or is he just a inteligent, charismatic, great speaker? It certainly is a combination of all of those, amongst others.

For the first part of his presidential campaign, Obama was trailing Senator John McCain in every poll. The turning point was when Sarah Palin was chosen for the vp candidacy. Once this ignorant, unintelligent mother of five was tapped by McCain, the race was all but over. McCain shot himself in the foot every step of the way in this campaign, and this was the nail in the coffin. Obama was steadfast throughout the campaign, paling it safe and smart the entire time. What was his biggest criticism before selecting a vp? Inexperience. So he chose Joe Biden, a well seasoned senator. There were few slip-ups in Obama's campaign, such as the "lipstick on a pig" comment about governer Palin. But this was not nearly enough to stop the Obama machine.

McCain was simply too much like Bush. When you are on tape bragging about voting with Bush's policies 90% of the time, it's hard to separate from that. Palin, McCain's age, Obama's charisma, and McCain's similarites to Bush was what lost him the election.

Now we have Obama in the whitehouse. While he tries his best to paint a picture of a transparent presidency that is straight-up with the american people, it does not fly. He is simply another politician, out for power. He is, as I stated previously, the most far left President we have ever seen. His expansion of government has not gone without notice. The situation he has been in is similar to FDR's position.

The economy is in shambles and his argument is that we cannot allow the failing banks to go under. So his solution is to expand govenment into the private sector in order to save them. Is he a marxist revolutionary? Was FDR a socialist? Or are these men simply doing what they think is best to save this economy? When this is all over, there will be those that call Obama a hero that saved the economy like FDR, and there will be those that call Obama a socialist just like FDR was.

The Start

2009-07-30T00:43:00.000-04:00

Greetings to all. This a blog that will consist of and be dedicated to politics, reviews, and sometimes random things of interest. My opinions are strong and cannot be swayed. Whether you agree or disagree you should find my views to be legitimate.