Tony and I just did something incredibly geeky, and we enjoyed it! After a long (calm) debate about political ideologies - specifically which one fit me best - and what would happen if a third party took such a chunk out of America that the two-party system we currently have would seriously be in Jeopardy. Tony made the brilliant claim, which I initially refuted, that ("theoretically") a candidate could take 80% of the popular vote, and the other candidate (assuming there is only one) could still be elected de jure President.
     So, refuting his claim, I had this brilliant idea: we should calculate just what that maximum percentage of the popular vote is that a candidate could get while still losing an election legitimately! So, based on 2000 census data (Excel Spreadsheet), we found that a candidate could be unanimously selected by the voters of the ten most populous states and the twelfth most populous state (skipping the eleventh because it had two too many electoral votes) and receive only 269 electoral votes. We then gave him exactly 50% minus one vote in each of the remaining states, or 281,421,906 - (80,162,175 + 40), bringing his total votes in the popular election to 220,873,108 total votes. Dividing that by the total population in the country, our losing presidential candidate would receive 78.48% of the country's votes.
     This number is obviously not accurate, for we used the countries entire population, completely ignoring the tens of millions of nonvoters. Still, as a "theoretical" estimate, Tony's original guess of 80% is not far off and is quite reasonably accurate, while my original, skeptically refuting claim of around 70% proves a bit low (assuming that adults in certain states aren't drastically... blah, whatever!).
     All the same, a candidate can win the eleven most populous states for 271 electoral votes and the Presidency. The eleven states of California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, New Jersey, Georgia, and North Carolina could be won with a 50% plus one majority for a total of 80,162,186 votes, which is 28.4% of the country without even bothering with the other thirty-nine states or the capital.
     Moral of the story? If you're going to go for the big guns of the country, you better get them all! If you narrowly miss, you're going to lose the election with a majority of people in your favor, which will probably make for an unpleasant four years, or at least an unpleasant few months in the beginning. (This was plainly exhibited this year when Bush received .3% fewer votes than Gore, and the country complained and complained... Shut the hell up already! He was elected legally! And he's doing a decent job! The only badness experienced as a result of his presidency is the hypocrites running Congress trying to run the country. It's not their job.)

     I don't know Charlton Heston well enough to judge his character or his actions, but I can admire one of his more powerful statements. In early 2000, the chairman of the National Rifle Association said, "Political correctness is tyranny with manners, and cultural cancer is eating away at our society". I am no gun advocate, and in no way am I a "supporter" of someone whom I do not understand nor do I know, but I do support every intricate part of that statement.
     Political correctness is a selective form of censorship invented by the liberal media in an attempt to provide a buffer between the American people and "offensive" things - it just happens that the most "offensive" things in today's world are Republicans (to them) and reality (in reality). It is selective censorship. Those in charge of the printing presses, which are mostly liberals - or Democrats - all but control journalism and the media today, and so the news being spewed forth across this continent is heavily biased. Of course there are your conservative-biased publications, but they are far fewer in number, and you rarely hear them crying about life not being fair, and I have never seen any instance of a conservative complaining about something not being "poltically correct".
     Any argument in politics always comes down to one ideology against another, and it is usually made quite clear that neither side understands the other, and because of man's natural fear of the unknown, we have a tendency to shun the other side - we accuse that which we do not understand of being "bad". We do not know the other side of the story, nor do we intend to find out about it - we simply refute its claims and look the other way. This is not an effective way of operating a political system. But what can we do? Well, for starters, we could be a bit more open to the other side of the story. No one says we have to bend or to break, but listening is always a good start. Listening leads to understanding; understanding leads to compromise; compromise leads to a greater satisfaction.
     Ignore the idealism of this post. Stop thinking that such a change is impossible, because it is that very mode of thought that makes it implausible. If you know that you can be more open, then why not anyone else? If only a tiny number is willing to make such a change - to be considerate of others beliefs despite being ideological oppposites, to be willing to listen to their reasoning - isn't that a start? If such a "movement" were to begin, isn't it feasible that it would be able to spread? Not that it will, but that it could?
     I am no idealist, but I am no pessimist - I know that change is possible, but I know that change is not my responsibility, nor is it within my power. I also know that all changes require a catalyst.

Hotkeys that I like to use when browsing the web in Internet Explorer:

    F5 - Refresh/reloads the page.
    F6 - Selects address in location bar.
    F11 - Toggles fullscreen.
    Alt ← - Go back one page.
    Alt → - Go forward one page.

I'm certain that most of those work with Netscape, but who the hell cares?

Reader-suggested titles for Bill Clinton's $10-million book.
The Simpsons versus Religion, plus mention of my new book!

     According to women's advocates, Andrea Yates is a woman suffering from post-partum depression, and therefore she does not deserve the death penalty for killing five children. Bullshit! As Larry Elder said, Nikolay Soltys is in a similar situation, having killed his wife, child, and four other family members, but you don't hear anyone screaming that he doesn't deserve the death penalty. This is nothing but "selective outrage and double standard", he says. I had heard the name Larry Elder before, but now that I have seen and heard him in action, I have such a greater respect for him.

     I'm blue! Comment.

     An insensitive ad supporting the right to own a gun (and rightfully so, in my opinion). (1) It should never, ever, ever come to the point that such a right should be absolutely refused. (2) If this ad offends you, why? Is it because the rapist is in the act? Or is it because the girl can not properly defend herself because of stupid laws preventing her from doing so? (3) America is full of gun-owning citizens. It is unfortunate that the pointlessly deadly machines ever came to exist, but the simple fact is that they are here and they are everywhere. If you take the guns out of the hands of the law-abiding citizens of America, that leaves guns in the hands of law enforcement officials and criminals. Criminals aren't just going to offer up their guns, and if they know the public is defenseless, then they have little to nothing to lose! The only possible way to solve the problem then, should such a problem ever arise, would be to turn America into a state similar to the Orwellian state of Oceania in his novel 1984.
     If you are a logical, or even sane, person, you do not want that. So what will it be? The simple right to own a gun? Or the simple denial of that right, meaning your only firearm protection is in the hands of officials several minutes away?

     Let's go back to yesterday's rant on idiots playing the lottery. Households with less than $10,000 annual income spend an average of about $600 per year on lottery tickets; households led by someone with less than a high school diploma spend an average of about $700 per year on lottery tickets. By rounding down, that's over $11 per week. Let's say someone put that $11 per week in a mutual fund or something with positive growth - say a 10% interest rate - for ten years: they've got $10,000. $11 per week at 5% interest for twenty years: $36,000. For forty years (high school to retirement): about $300,000. Keep in mind that those numbers are rounded down. Running the actual average of about $14 per week would give you almost $400,000 over forty years - and this is just a 10% interest rate! 13% would give you over a million - and most mutual funds' interest rates even higher than that!
     My point: playing the lottery is absolutely stupid. Your return on investment is about eleven cents on the dollar. Who's winning here? Remember, for any form of gambling, the rules are in favor of the house. How else would the house stay in business? The lottery is just another way for the government to get their hands on your hard-earned money. Hey, they spend it well sometimes, but are you sure you just want to give it away?

     Today was fun. A bit damp, but fun. I arrived at school as per normal at 9:30am, and instead of going to class I sat in the school lobby awaiting my teacher and other classmates to arrive. We took off a few minutes later for Atlanta, where we were to tour the High Museum of Art to view the Michelangelo exhibit(s). I thought that I had heard something about some performance at some point, which is why we could only schedule the trip for this particular Thursday, but apparently the performance is connected to something else, because all we viewed today was a load of drawings, paintings, sculptures, and such by and based on works by Michelangelo. (Some of you would think this is boring. Well, the tour was, because the speaker's bad/fake English accent and her "based on fact" explanations were less than entertaining. However, because Michelangelo was my single favorite artist back in the day, largely because I wrote a paper on him in fifth grade and so stuck with him any time I needed something to write on in the future, I knew enough about him to find the trip very entertaining. Not to mention a few good friends to walk with for most of the day.)
     Which brings me to another point. One member of our group trailed off at one point because he caught a glimpse of an attractive young lady. There is certainly nothing wrong with that, and I can certainly understand it. But the other guy with whom I was walking and I were a bit confused. We quickly pointed out to each other that we were walking with two very attractive young ladies, and so wondered what the fuss was about. Then again, we also justified it by the logic that we will likely never see anyone from this tour group again, as it is only by chance that we are all brought together at the High Museum of Art in the first place. And, well, none of this matters anyway. Then again, if you happen to be one of the party with whom I traveled today, and only one of them ever reads this page, then you might have mustered a little laugh just then. Or you might wish that I hadn't posted that.

Whatever. It's my weblog and I'll post what I want! :)

     Oh, and Warner Robins-native band Rehab and the young Michelle Branch are performing tonight at RockaBillys, the local dance club that I grace now and again. Thursday night is "College Night" at RockaBillys, meaning no cover charge with a college ID. So my sister, who is no longer in college, is excited to have won tickets from a local radio station. I am excited to be in college. Then again, as much as I would love to go, I really hate that place when it is crowded, and my sinuses/fever are kicking my ass today. So maybe next time.
     Someone get a good picture for me.

     Despite the fact that I really really really hate the colors nickd is using for his refreshed site design, I like it. Somehow, I like it. It actually looks decent. Maybe that will fade when he gets rid of the picture of Silent Bob and the lookalike. Speaking of Silent Bob, Nick, did you know that he really doesn't have long hair? Oh no... The pony tail is part of the hat that Silent Bob is *always* wearing. Character image. Isn't life grand? I hope I didn't ruin anyone's lovely view of reality just then.
     My quote comes straight from Neal, as does lots of good reporting. (Some bad reporting gets away from him too.) Neal has also received an inside tip on the next Democratic Party slogan.
     Another interesting tidbit from Neal's site that I should share: "The rich keep getting richer because they keep doing the things that make them rich. Ditto for the poor." His source? A scientific study by a group from Duke University has discovered that households headed by someone with less than a high school diploma spend about $700 per year on lottery tickets; households with less than $10,000 annual income spend about $597 per year on lottery tickets (over 6% of annual income!). On the other hand, households headed by someone with a college degree spend about $178 per year on lottery tickets; households with more than $100,000 annual income spend about $289 per year on lottery tickets. What does this suggest? This essentially tells us that those with ten times more money spend less than half as much on lottery tickets. This also suggests, as the quote above plainly states, that much of the poor population have themselves to blame for their misfortune. Yet they continue to ask for help from you, me, and your government. And most of us, despite this, want to help them! I know I want to help them, but how? How do you help someone with such horrible habits? Do you just feed them more money to waste? Or do you try to teach them the differences between the rights and wrongs of their actions? I'd go with the latter, if there were an easy way of going about it.
     Oh, and in the great state of Georgia, these buffoons are footing much of the education bill. They are helping to keep the government schools up and running in full swing, making it very difficult for parents to refuse them. Oh, what a world...

It's fun doing this from school. A little difficult, but fun.

This is very short, so you damn well better read it. Humor me! Just read one paragraph!

According to an Associated Press article at Fox News:
     Simply put, Bush's budget does not take effect until the fiscal year ends. What does this mean? This means that taking money from Social Security has absolutely nothing to do with Bush's plan and everything to do with Clinton! We are still running Clinton's budget - Clinton's economy! Then there's that other lie, you know, the one when they say that money is coming out of Social Security. Not true. To start, there is no money in Social Security. Social Security is only an idea that is carried out year after year. There is no big Social Security bank account to add to or to subtract from. It is allocated year after year, and the number will not be affected in the aforementioned manner by anything Bush has done.
     I'm sorry. I try to be objective, and I try to listen to all sides and consider them equally, but Democrats in this country are such whores. Ugh. I'm sure I could write more, and I'm sure Tony could write better, but I have a headache and homework to do, and politics isn't exactly what my body is craving right now.

     For whatever bizarre reason, despite the fact that I uploaded the files twice last night at about 8:30pm and 12:15am, the latest update you saw the entire time was from about 3:45pm. I think my server is a little scewy, perhaps. Either way, the last two entries about server problems, school, and Silent Bob should now be readily available to you. If not, please consider the impossible task of notifying me of your problems. And now for some...

     Investigators have been able to confirm that scientists at a yet-to-be-named major research institute have discovered the heaviest element known to science. This startling new discovery has been tentatively named Administratium (Ad).
     This new element has no protons or electrons, thus having an atomic number of 0 (zero). It does, however, have one neutron, 125 assistant neutrons, 75 vice neutrons, and 111 assistant vice neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312. These 312 particles are held together by a force called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. Because it has no electrons, Administratium is inert. However, it can be detected as it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. According to the discoverers, a minute amount of Administratium causes one reaction to take more than four days to complete when it would normally have taken less that one second.
     Administratium has a normal half-life of approximately three years. It does not decay but, instead, undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons, vice neutrons, and assistant vice neutrons exchange places or are destroyed and replaced altogether. In fact, an Administratium sample's mass will increase over time because, with each reorganization, some of the morons inevitably become neutrons, forming new isotopes. This characteristic of moron promotion leads some scientists to speculate that Administratium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as "the critical morass".
     You'll know it when you see it.

     My grandfather would have turned ninety today. I have taken a few moments to remember him. He was a great man.

     Silent Bob is a genius. I guess everyone would know why Silent Bob is a genius if they knew that Silent Bob was the character that Kevin Smith played in movies that Kevin Smith rights. Yeah, that explains it. But who cares? His character is hilarious.

In Clerks:
In Mallrats:
In Chasing Amy:
In Dogma:
Go watch Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back to hear his new words of wisdom. I don't know why I just posted this. I do know why I ordered this. Good night, world.

     As Matt has stated on two occasions, my site was down last Wednesday and Friday at quite random (but consecutive) hours. It was down for at least twelve hours Wednesday, and quite a few again on Friday; it was down for so long that I gave up and ignored the site for much of the weekend. As I am actually mooching off of Matt's account for free web space for which he pays, I really have no pretension to advise the server administrator. Matt was gracious enough to donate space on his account which he does not use, and I am thrilled that I have had a solid and stable location on the internet for almost a full year - that's a first for me. So Matt, Eric, and anyone else, thanks for the service. Anyone that wishes to pretend that they actually wanted to read my site and couldn't, thanks for making me feel like what I write is worth something. :)
     And now I will read about what it is like for a Systems Analyst to be a Systems Analyst. Afterward I will draw up some pretty pointless flowcharts to demonstrate to my Visual Basic professor that I understand some of the more basic concepts of programming, like planning and troubleshooting. I wonder, if I showed him some of the really tiny programs that I have written in the past, if he would let me skip a little bit of the "basics". Then again, I'm paying for the class to learn stuff, so hopefully the good stuff will start tomorrow!
     Wish me luck in Political Science. Professor Tate is ultra-liberal, and he accused me of being an "ardent Republican", which I immediately refuted. I do my best to keep my personal politics out of school, but I realize that that may be a bit difficult in a Political Science class. My objectivist ways serve me well, though; hearing Dr. Tate's point of view is really quite interesting. Pure political thought from the left side of the political spectrum is quite interesting to hear, especially considering that I would line up slightly to the right.
     Homework and reading time! Woohoo! I hope I'm done by 10:00...

     Wow, it's been three days. I got to thinking today, why is it that we grammar nuts slash baseball fans ignore completely the fact that grammar does not apply to baseball? Some of us try so hard to encourage a few friends to speak the language just a bit better. This attempted encouragement is often annoying and may seem condescending, and basically, well, I try not to do it too much.
     Then I heard a baseball announcer say "he has flied out once and struck out twice", and I had to ponder for a moment. Why, if they go the distance to botch the past tense forms of fly, do they even bother with the correct forms of strike? Wouldn't it be just as easy, after saying flied so many times per game, to go ahead with striked as well? It makes perfect sense to me. Or why, if they get it right with strike, do they not bother with fly? It would also be just as easy to say flew or flown out, not to mention being the correct way of saying it, but instead they choose to disregard a couple of rules of the language for one word and no others.
     I guess what I am really trying to say is that I hate double standards.

     Which brings me to another point: Why is it okay for anyone to argue any point freely (freedom of speech), but then when it goes the other (wrong) way, it is not okay? Why is it that, when a system is built on decisions based on pluralities and majorities, those in the minorities seem to have more power? Our American government is built over a very strong foundation, and for that reason alone I have much faith in our country and our people to keep it alive. However, part of that foundation was the ability to make decisions collectively - as one nation - knowing that some decisions would go against a significant portion of the country quite often.
     The point of plurality- and majority-rule is to ensure that the greatest possible number of people can have it their way. That is the point. When something is decided by a majority, less than half opposes. When something is decided by a plurality, usually more than half opposes. So what! The system was designed so that the greatest possible number would make the decision, and the smallest possible number would be disappointed in the decision.
     Then there is always the question of whether or not the majority/plurality is actually right, but who is one person to be the judge of that? Right and wrong are nothing but ideas, as are truth and untruth. Without speech there can be no truth (or untruth). One individual may only know what is best, right, or true for himself - he can not make decisions for everyone. Sure, it may make sense to that individual that what he thinks is the best possible solution, but if that is not the best possible solution in the minds of the people making the majority, then it is not the best overall solution.
     My point? People should try to respect their peers a bit more, even if they are doing everything in their power (unbeknownst to them) to destroy others' ideals. Because, no matter how disappointed one person may be with the way things go, a majority (or plurality) or representation for that majority (or plurality) is happy with the way things progress, which is exactly how the system is intended to operate.
     Then comes the question of whether or not the representation is truly representative of what it supposedly represents, which is an argument for some future time.

     In the meantime, I could review Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back and American Pie 2 while I'm at it. As anyone would know that has seen any of the other Kevin Smith films (Clerks, Mallrats, Drawing Flies, Chasing Amy, and Dogma), Jay And Silent Bob is the epitome of great toilet humor. Raunchy jokes, great (and familiar) casts, and a plot always including drugs, sex, and weird allusions and parodies make any Kevin Smith movie a great movie, and Jay And Silent Bob is probably the funniest one I've seen yet. I don't know though ... I still think Mallrats and Dogma were pretty darn funny. Word to the wise for those that haven't seen the new flick yet: Make sure you have seen the other four (Drawing Flies was only released in Canada; I haven't seen it.), and make sure you sit through all the end credits.
     As for American Pie 2, it's everything you would expect and much, much more. If you've seen the previews, then you'll know the basic plot of the movie, and you will laugh throughout! The trend of damaging stereotypes continues from the first and comes out to shine once more. However, unlike the first film, American Pie 2 breaks from the original with a few unrealistic yet highly anticipated events. If you liked the original, you'll love the sequel.
     And, if you're like me and you see Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back at 7:20 and then walk down the hall when it ends at about 9:10 to catch the 9:15 showing of American Pie 2, you'll get a great back-to-back of toilet humor at its best! It is also best to watch Jay And Silent Bob first, I think, because Eugene Levy (Jim's Dad), Jason Biggs (Jim), Shannon Elizabeth (Nadia), and Seann William Scott (Stifler) all make appearances in the latest Kevin Smith flick.
     Go. Watch. Laugh.

This took forty-five minutes to type.

     I hate to bother you with more politics, but PrenHall added three more simulations to their PoliSim section that goes with my political science textbook. "The Impact of Foreign Aid" was an interesting lesson on how to manage foreign policy, and I have not bothered with "Balancing the Nation's Checkbook" yet. However, I thoroughly enjoyed "Election in Action", which simulates the 2004 election in which Al Gore (yeah, right) takes on George W. Bush for a second time. Depending on your difficulty (low, moderate, high), there will either be no third party, a weak third party, or a strong third party candidate. In order to win your election, you must remain true to your platform, and you must also earn financial support from key (money) states and use that to campaign in key (electoral) states. I carried George W. Bush to the White House several times!
     If things continue at this rate, I will have a blast at PrenHall's site throughout the semester. If there is no way of finding out what's to come, then I'll just stay tuned and keep you informed - as if you care about it.

     Last year at Macon State College, the student body was asked to attend a lecture on "diversity", and the Matrix (school paper) staff was treated to a special lecture in which they were informed on how to include all parts of the campus equally. The key ingredient to each of the lectures was equality, and Chris, one of the Matrix's senior editors, raised a very good point in the last issue of the Matrix.
     Macon State College is fairly well known in this area as a commuter college, a good and tough school, and an excellent transfer school. It is also very well known for its Information Technology program, which is among the best in the state. Why then, Chris asked, are there no Macintosh computers to be found in any of the classrooms across the campus? The only Macs are in the Matrix office, and that is not nearly adequate. For a school that touts its four-year Information Technology program(s), which includes multimedia and design, the absence of Macintosh computers is simply wrong.
     This thought had crossed my mind, but I had never thought to write about it for the school paper. I guess I should start focusing on the little things that I never thought were worth arguing about - because they didn't pertain to me - and attempt to write some meaty articles that concern something people around here might actually care about. My current objective, I think, is to interview the head of the IT department on campus and discuss the expansion of the IT program. We have discussed it briefly several times, but now that I want to write for the paper, I see no reason why I shouldn't try to go a little bit further with it. I'll see what he says...

     I just took a political test offered by the makers of my political science textbook: PrenHall. Feel free to visit, try to register, and give it a shot if you like. Fair warning, the test itself takes about fifteen minutes, but you will find out exactly how you line up with five of the country's most prominent political parties. For your information, it's called "The Political Horizon" and is the fourth of four links in the "PoliSim" section of the site.
     Here are my results from Part I. Just as I suspected, I didn't fit the bill - any of them! - and I am quite proud of that. I guess I most closely line up with the Republican Party, but I do not even support a majority of their stances on the nine issues in question. By the way, those issues are education, media, trade, government reform, employer/employee rights, crime, families, health care, and environment. And the results:
     As I suspected, I line up most closely with the Republican Party, but I also believe somewhat in a significant chunk of the Democratic Party platform. However, that I line up with each party's position on at least one of the nine major issues in question suggests that my political opinions are quite diverse, as they say, which is about what I have been trying to tell the world recently. Also, to explain the 1.5 in the Democratic Party and Constitution Party, I took the test twice and scored 2 and 1 for each either time. You know what I mean.

     Politically inclined or not, you should be O'Reilly inclined. Tonight on the O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly will interview a big fan of his show - Marilyn Manson. You can bet that the investigative reporter in Bill's gut will get some goods out of Manson, and I can bet that Manson will seem ever more reasonable than so many Americans think. And if you're concerned about who may or may not be running for President in 2004, perhaps you should stick around the Fox News Channel for the interview with the Reverend Al Sharpton, also on the Factor tonight. O'Reilly's taking on two reasonably popular guests tonight, and I'm guessing he'll garner a significant portion of tonight's Prime Time television-watchers. That's 8:00pm (Eastern Time Zone) on the Fox News Channel.

Geez, I feel like a bad commercial.

     School - Day One: Complete. Two hours of information technology and one hour of political science. Mondays and Wednesdays should be fun! Friday is about the same with one class missing, meaning I get the afternoons off. Yay! Tuesdays and Thursdays involve one hour of Humanities and another hour of information technology. Whee! So this semester is set to be pretty interesting, if not actually fun.
     On an interesting note, I messed up my political science professor's plan for a pop quiz on Wednesday. He had been repeatedly telling us to "look it up" when we came to a word he felt we might not know. As I was rapidly looking them up on my laptop while trying to avoid letting that be known, I finally got tired of that, and so I said, "just did". He looked over and thanked me for ruining his plans for the pop quiz, told me he would remember that, and thanked me not to look up any more of his words.
     And, as all political science or history teachers are in Macon, Georgia, he is a Democrat, meaning his bias will control what we learn and how we learn it throughout the semester. He came out with it, and I accepted it as fact. I had actually accepted this long ago. I have no problem taking any politically inclined class with a liberal influence. I can recognize opinions that I disagree with, and he has a history of being very fair with is grading. My only worry is that certain other staunch Republicans in the class may not feel the same way, and may flaunt their "conservatism" a bit too much.
     Or maybe not. But one interesting thing the professor said today dealt with the words "liberal" and "conservative". He claimed that he didn't really know what either meant, and was quite convinced that no one else did either, and he especially pointed out that no conservative could define "conservatism". I am no conservative, so perhaps that is true. But I could certainly have told him the definition of "conservatism" from what I have gathered over the years. Conservatism is a political ideology/philosophy that asserts more traditional government institutions and generally opposes sudden changes to the system. I do not know what Dr. Tate was trying to say with those comments, but if he is an HONORS politican science instructor and he can not definte "conservatism" in a political sense, then perhaps he should study his field a bit more.
     Don't tell him I said that.


     For those of you still convinced that I am a conservative, I would like to point out that I am not against any sudden changes to the system, and I am not necessarily in favor of traditional government institutions. I lean in all directions, really. I decide what I think about a given issue when the information is presented to me. I do not consistently lean one way or the other, but I do find myself consistently leaning against liberals, which usually call themselves Democrats.
     Wondering why I am so often against liberals, I looked up "liberalism", another of those words our professor claimed had no meaning. According to American Heritage Dictionary, liberalism is "a political theory founded on the natural goodness of human beings and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority".
     My qualms, then, are not with liberalism. My qualms are with those that are calling themselves liberals, those that are completely destroying the meaning of what liberalism truly is. Liberalism, as defined, does not sound bad at all. Liberalism, as practiced, is nothing like the definition I just copied and pasted.
     I will go no further, because I really have no idea where I am going with this, and it is beginning to appear to me that I am cluttering my site with too much politics and not enough philosophy. Anyone with any good or new links dealing with philosophy in general, especially the meaning of life, questions about God, how or why we exist, and so on ... please send me something!

     It's about that time again - about that time that I got off of my ass and spent about twenty weeks devoting my self and my time toward my future ... in school. I somehow managed about nine hours of sleep last night, and I even woke early this morning. So I feel quite refreshed, to say the least. Any Macon State College or Mercer students that may actually know me and may actually stop by to read this web page before noon may feel free to join my mom and me for lunch at the Applebees by the mall, unless, like most college students, Applebees is too expensive, which is why I love eating with my mom any chance I get. (1) Family relations are kept up. Very important to us. (2) Free food. No college kid can refuse! (3) I love you, Mom!
     On another note, which I will touch upon briefly, I like the new Florida "Voter Responsibilities". It's a list of ten responsibilities that the Florida state legislature thought would be good to have posted around the state to inform its voters what they need to know to vote properly. And the ACLU - surprise, surprise - is trying to refuse to allow these responsibilities to be posted. Do you want to see the list? Tell me you want to see the list! Okay, you twisted my arm, here's the list!
     This is horribly unfair, right? I mean, this is a "throwback to the days of literacy tests, and may disproportionately impact race and language minorities in exercising the right to vote", right? No? It isn't? That's too bad? What? Well that's what the ACLU has claimed in the lawsuit they just filed.
     I agree, it will disproportionately impact race and language minorities in exercising their right to vote. And that's just too damn bad - or should I say good? - for them! The only way it could possibly steer them away from voting is if they have no idea what is going on in the election and only listen to someone telling them who to vote for, or something worse. I can nearly guarantee you that all of the "affected" voters will vote in largely the same way they always have, but they will be forced to learn just a little bit of information about who they are voting for and the repercussions for it, not to mention how to use a ballot.
     In this case, Neal Boortz is right. In this case, Florida is right. In this case, the ACLU is wrong. I recall a rant on the ACLU in the past (March 26 and March 27), in which I basically pointed out a few flaws of the ACLU. Not that I disliked everything that the ACLU had done, but that they needed to get their priorities straight. It seems they haven't complied yet.

     This is a bit of news that I sniffed up on my own, and I don't feel like crediting any sources ... mostly because I was a bit careless and didn't write any down. The news deals with animals being treated as though they are more important than human's lives. Now, I would never say that humans are more important than fish in the sea, but if we are going to run a civilization that is supposed to be civilized and is supposed to support the endurance of that very civilization, then shouldn't we put a bit more focus on protecting the hard-working members of society instead of a bunch of fish?
     I assume you have heard of the many shark attacks that keep occurring along the Florida coast. Do you ever wonder why there are so many more sharks off the coast of Florida than there ever were before? Would you believe that your lovely federal government shortened the shark-fishing season when they learned that one species of shark that normally swam those waters was endangered? They altered the rules and shortened the season to protect the sharks, and so many shark fishermen either fish less, don't fish at all, or have stopped fishing that area completely in order to make their money.
     In other words, there are hundreds - if not thousands - more sharks in the waters off the coast of Florida because your government wanted to protect the flesh-eating monsters for a few years to keep one species from going instinct. So what we have is a vastly increased population of sharks and the same amount of snack food they have always had, so they're spreading out and chomping the next best thing that moves - hopefully that isn't a limb of yours.
     The American government has essentially dethroned God or evolution, whichever is in power, and has taken control of which species should and should not become extinct. Your government doesn't just want to govern you - your government wants to govern life itself. I guess that wouldn't be such a bad thing if their goals were a bit less selfish and a bit more altruistic...

     My job has expired. As an Orientation Guide, I was provided no job security at all. From the moment I signed on, I knew that my job would expire two days before the school year started. It was the fact that about forty potential employers in the middle-Georgia area did not hire me (not to mention the countless others that never heard from me) that led me to that position. Either way, I enjoyed the few hours that I worked, and I like the people I worked for and with, and I'll look forward to pestering them about helping me to find another job that is actually good for me...

Or just pestering them in general. You know, with rubber bands and such.

Oh, did I mention that school starts tomorrow? See you bright and early!

     I know you probably don't care about my dealings with any video game, but because it is probably the best game I have played in my entire life, and because I let you know of my progress through the game, I may as well explain to you how much I was not looking forward to a race called the Roadster Endurance. You see, Gran Turismo 3 is the closest thing to a real driving simulator a video game system has ever seen (and the franchise is only getting better). What does that mean? That means that, while you don't actually feel like you are driving in a Mazda Miata or Nissan Skyline or Toyota Celica when you are driving its counterpart in the game, the contrasts between the ways in which each vehicle functions are extremely accurate. In other words, you pilot cars around on a screen based on their real-life counterparts' abilities without actually feeling like you're behind the wheel of a real car. So it simulates their capabilities, not the feeling of driving, which is why I refuse to use the official Gran Turismo slogan, which is "The Real Driving Simulator" (something which it is not).
     But anyway, the Roadster Endurance. Progressing through the game, I have acquired better and better cars. I started slow, won races, made money, suped up cars, and won and bought better cars. This is how the game progresses. Once you have beaten the entire game, the only thing left to do is to win all of the remaining prize cars, most of which are racing cars or exotic road cars - all which move at speeds upwards of 150mph.
     And then you have the Roadster Endurance - an event in which you must race a normal Mazda Miata 40 laps around a track. Sounds simple enough, right? Do you know how long it takes to race an un-tuned Miata about 100 miles at speeds ranging from 40 to 110 miles per hour, usually about 80? About 70 minutes! Okay, sure, that doesn't sound too bad, but when you are used to racing at 200 miles per hour in nearly any car you use, with brakes, suspension, and tires all equipped for racing, an ordinary street car named Miata doesn't exactly tickle your driving instincts, know what I mean?
     My only real complaint about this race is that it is too deep into the game. By the time most players have the license that allows them to race in this event, they should be reasonably deep into the game, past all of the initial slow races that would bore them to tears after getting used to driving the blazingly fast races ... blah. It should be available to race after acquiring an A License. Simple as that.

GT3 Progress: 80.1%.

     Work is great, if you can get over the chronic exhaustion bit. I worked from 7:30am to 9:30pm on Wednesday, and the same hours again on Thursday with a three-hour break from 1:30 to 4:30 (and an hour-early departure). So mark me down for twenty-four hours of work in two days, and twenty-four hours of sleep for the next two days. After work last night, the crew decided to hit up Rockabillies for about four hours of, well, what it is that college kids do on college night at Rockabillies. I enjoyed myself. And Claire looked amazing.
     Um, that's about all of which I can think to say about that. Aside from my ears and feet taking turns sending sharp-pain signals to my brain, life is pretty good right now. I get to work another five hours or so tomorrow morning before one last day off on Sunday before school starts on Monday. I just spent $303 and some change on books, leaving $303 and some change in my financial aid account. Neat how that worked out...
     Two final words. One: it's neat how several cups of coffee and several sodas will keep one wired to the point that fourteen hours of work is actually fun. (On that note, it is also neat how I timed it so that the caffeine wore off just in time for sleepy time, at which point my body basically died for seven hours before getting up and doing it all again.) Two: Watch the O'Reilly Factor on the Fox News Channel Monday night at 8:00pm (ET) - Bill O'Reilly interviews Marilyn Manson, an "interview you don't want to miss!"

GT3 Progress: 79.1% (haven't touched it in two days!).

I'm at work. Don't ask, don't tell. :)

     Reading through Dave's site today, I was reminded how much I miss mIRC. I wrote a script for mIRC many moons ago, and I have not been able to touch it sense networking my computers, because I can't figure out how this damn LinkSys router blocks the ports or - more importantly - how to unblock them. I tinkered and toyed with settings for a good week or two before giving up. I will be in a new home with only one computer by winter, and I figure that I can use a year away from IRC. Maybe people will remember missing me when I return. Right...

     And so I leave for Macon. I will be back in a little over two days, or maybe almost three. I am working two long days at Macon State College tomorrow and Thursday (did I tell you? I'm an Orientation Guide! Not the greatest job in the world, but I enjoy it and it pays, and the people are great!). So I'll be staying in Macon to avoid an extra hour of driving each day. Don't miss me too much. And go watch American Pie 2 for me! (Pssst! If you buy the special edition American Pie DVD, you should get a free pass to see American Pie 2!)

GT3 Progress: 79.1%.

     <sarcasm>Great... Lovely. Just terrific!</sarcasm> Does anyone else realize that we are paying to support our nation's leaders attempts to buy their votes. Of course many of us know that, and some of us are even incomprehensibly in support of such. I do not pay taxes so that they may use that money to take trips to Colorado, build trails, sponsor this, talk about that, and so on and so forth. I pay taxes so that they may effectively run our country and do what is right for our country. What are they doing instead? Instead of doing everything in their power to ensure that we live in the best possible country we could live in, they are doing everything in their power to (1) ensure that they keep their jobs, which directly opposes the purpose of those jobs, and (2) ensure that like-minded people replace those in similar jobs in order to ensure control.
     Political parties should die. They should die, and then they should be trampelled on so horribly that no one would ever dare even to consider reviving them. Political parties are the means to work together to achieve common goals for few, rather than the common goals for all. Political parties are the means by which thousands of politicians are paid to believe certain things, or to appear that they believe them. You see, as long as the image is preserved, no matter how fake it may be, the parties are successful.
     Well, reasonably successful. As someone recently pointed out to me in a completely separate conversation, success usually means "the achievement of something desired, planned, or attempted". Well, by today's desires, plans, and attempts, parties are certainly successful. By the original desires, plans, and attempts of our nation's original fathers, or even those that spawned the origins of the current dominant political parties, they certainly are not successful. I guess this says a lot for priorities ... and how easy it is to be spoiled by the temptations of wealth and fame.
     Another famous (paraphrased) thought: "Those that would make the best politicians avoid politics."

To the guys: Sorry I couldn't make it tonight.

An advertisement that I would not be proud of: "You can't spell ignorant slut without IGN."

Uhh, yeah.

     Many drivers are familiar with the terms torque and horsepower, and they know a little about what each means, but do they really know how each affects their vehicles' performance as the torque or power increases or decreases? Now I will try to show you that the popular opinions of torque and horsepower aren't exactly right. Hopefully I can do this without confusing the hell out of the both of us...
     Torque provides acceleration. We can prove this with a rule of physics, where force equals mass times times acceleration (F=ma) equals torque divided by length (F=t/l). By substitution, therefore, a=t/mL and t=maL. As you should be able to see, higher torque provides better acceleration, as does a less-massive vehicle. Got it so far?
     Good, that was the easy part. You see, force and torque are intuitive - we can feel them. Power, on the other hand, is not, because power is a measurement of the time rate at which work is done. Work represents the transfer of energy from one system to another; in the case of cars accelerating, work equals force times displacement (W=Fd). As velocity is the time rate by which displacement is measured, replacing "displacement" with "velocity" effectually equates to "power": P=Fv.
     At this point, one could reason that greater power results in a greater top speed, but that misses two points. (1) To reach a greater speed, the car must accelerate, requiring torque. (2) The velocity used to compute engine horsepower is engine RPM, not vehicle speed. Keep in mind that power is a measure of how fast work is being done, so horsepower is a measure of how fast the engine can perform its work.
     So it is understood that torque applies acceleration and that power affects how fast the engine works, meaning that power (measured in horsepower, or foot-pounds per second) is simply the rate at which torque (measured in foot-pounds) works. Therefore, high torque will get the car moving, but higher power will allow the torque to accelerate the car more quickly. At the same time, high power will provide a high top speed, but high torque allows the engine to accelerate to that top speed more quickly, thus enabling a greater top speed.
     Does this make sense? So you know, I embarked on a mission to learn the difference between the two and how they work independently and dependently to affect a car's acceleration and speed. Mission accomplished!

mp3otd: Alien Ant Farm - 13 - Universe.mp3
GT3 Progress: 78.0% and fully licensed!

     I actually sent a message to the nickd mailing list in which I used the words "Campbell's Stroup". I should be caught and shot. But not for quite some time... The point is that everyone should Stroup, or just wonder around which way up is down and left. What? Beats me... The little green man in my pocket typed that.
     While I'm confusing the hell out of you, might I recommend that you click that link back there? Dave seems to think somewhat freely, which is what I like to see in people. Also check out his "writing" page, where you will find rants (if I may call them such) on topics like flag desecration, Marbury v. Madison, Lincoln and Douglas debates... I quite enjoyed the read. People like Tony might as well. Maybe.
     Oh, and baaaaahahahahaha. Let Eric convey an emotion for you. Beware of those of violent nature - heh.

     The apocalypse is now. Our country is very near the point at which the majority of wage-earners will pay no income taxes at all. The Democrats are inches from an age-old dream of a ballot-proof majority in Congress.

     Is Tom Daschle a socialist? Tom Daschle, if you didn't know, is your Senate Majority Leader for the Democratic [Socialist] Party. But the linking of Daschle to socialism is reaching more desktops than those reached by my web page. In a Cybercast News article, Daschle is quoted as saying, "Unequal outcomes are not equal protection" (for the people). The writer of the article is apparently just as socialist as Mr. Daschle, as he supported Daschle's words (as a monkey would support bananas), reinforcing that Daschle urged, in the writer's words, "equal economic outcomes for all Americans". Meanwhile, Senator Daschle is raking in more cash than about 80% of Americans (very rough estimate on my part).
     I'm making no mistake. Your Democratic Party has turned pink. They're socialists. They're trying to take what isn't there and give it to you. And you're simply gobbling it up. You live the idea of a free cookie any time you can get one. You don't have any care for the consequences - the temptation is simply too great to pass up. What is it that the Bible teaches about temptation again?

     Finally, an urgent message to the anti-leftists in America. I have urged for quite some time that belittling and disparaging comments usually do not convince anyone of anything. When one argues, one most effectively gets his point across by arguing his point home. One's argument loses its power, especially in the eyes of whomever it is one is trying to persuade, when one attempts to reduce their side of the argument. The answer, albeit a difficult task to adjust, would be to stop with the name-calling and such. Especially you, Neal. Neal Boortz has the potential to be one of the more influential voices of our time - the potential to go down in history as a man who helped to change things for the better - if his arguments would show no signs of the anger and hatred and simply offer his side of the story.
     This is just my opinion. I've always thought that belittling one or one's arguments automatically forfeits the argument...

     Is this evidence that George W. Bush, a Republican, may actually be pro-choice? And if not, then just a little more than his anti-choice, "like-minded" Republican friends? You be the judge with this extraction from his Thursday-night, stem-cell research speech:
     The "potential for life" - spoken like a true pro-choice-man. You see, when one has an abortion when the human-to-be is only a few cells, or maybe a couple of tissues, but in no way resembling the human form, it is merely a potential for life, not a life in itself. A living organism is defined as "an individual form of life; a body made up of organs, organelles, or other parts that work together to carry on the various processes of life". One is not defined as "an individual form of potential life that carries the potential to be made up of organs, organelles, or other parts that may potentially work together to carry on the various processes of life. Until that potential life reaches the stage where its functions are carried out by its own body, rather than the mother's body simply building and shaping it, it is not a life.
     Controversial? Oh yeah. Built on opinion? Unfortunately. Does this mean I am absolutely right? In my mind, of course. In the minds of the general population, well, that's another story.

     I just got an email concerning my web site from Ray that I will share with you. It's nice and short, and by reading it you will understand why I am sharing it. Also attached to his email was a quote from one of our greatest former Presidents, perhaps the last great Democrat. - - - - - - - - - -
     Ray, thank you for your words, and it's good to find that I'm not the only person thinking as I do, and that someone else finds value in what I write. It's somewhat of a secondary dream of mine to become a writer one day, and this is my only outlet right now. Thanks for reading, and feel free to comment on more in the future!

     Ugh. Nick has informed me that the above quote is a 311 quote, not a Nick quote. Sue me. (Or, actually, I'll ask that you not sue me. Simple mistake, and it's been corrected!)

     Nickd's fusion is the best and funniest fusion I have ever seen/read in my life, which only includes the last few months, as I cared nothing for fusions until recently. For those of you that don't know, fusions are somewhat like comic strips. They seem to normally consist of ten panels, each of which is usually produced by a different individual. In this case, I laughed harder than I ever have laughed at any fusion. All of the participants did excellent work. Just wanted to say that. :)

     Phil raises one of the more philosophically significant questions of our time: Why do urinals exists? It's not like men can't use toilets, he says. Toilets are arguably the most functional of bathroom water-based devices, equally useful for people of either gender. Why do men need a special device? Phil argues that a man can use a toilet equally as well as a urinal, although aiming comes into play a bit.
     This is my whole point in entering the discussion - the aiming. Being one of the taller members of society, I have the problem of towering over many urinals. It comes down to either standing back to hit it squarely, or standing to close to aim rather uncomfortably. Then again, I hate the splashing sound of the ultra-versatile toilets. For the sake of physical comfort, I usually prefer the toilet, but this does not answer the question asked. Why do urinals exist?
     Phil concludes that, logically, the only reason to have urinals in this nation's men's restrooms is to satisfy the government's plan to subconsciously influence the minds of the young. We all know how effective the words "Don't Do Drugs" are when inscribed on a urinal cake holder, Phil says.
     I think I'll stick with the idea that men need something special to feed their egos.

     Test driving Nickelback's second album now. I could tell before the first five seconds had been played that I will buy this album. Must have. Nickelback sounds amazing. I thought their first album was awesome, and it seems, about a minute into the first track, that the second album will be much better! I'll come back around after a few more minutes of wasting time and let you know about the rest of the album, including their first single, which is the next track...
     (in the interim) Nickelback has one of the loudest - yet one of the cleanest - sounds in hard rock. The lead vocalist's voice is just amazing; perhaps that's why I like the band so much. Excellent guitar work, heavy bass, and heavy drums - all are key ingredients that you'll find in most of my favorite rock bands ... Creed, Deftones, Stabbing Westward, Metallica, Linkin Park, Tool... So that makes two CDs that I absolutely will have to buy this fall/winter: Nickelback's Silver Side Up on September 11 and Creed's Weathered on November 20.
     With all the talk of new video game systems - both the Microsoft Xbox and Nintendo GameCube will be released in early November, I'm surprised that music is my main focus on the entertainment side of things for this fall and winter. I think that's a good thing though. There are fewer and fewer games that I feel are worth the time to play, and so I have become much more selective about playing games and buying systems. Gran Turismo 3 was an exception that had to be made, however, for Gran Turismo 3 just rules. It's the best game I've ever played.

GT3 Progress: 75.0%.

     Halfway through the album now, I've decided that my first five-second impression is justified. Nickelback's Silver Side Up will be mine. Maybe not exactly on September 11, but it will be mine. Maybe if I don't buy it myself, I can work something out with my mom. She buys a CD for me once every few months... :) I'll be in line to buy my own Creed CD. Don't worry about that... Creed's new CD will definitely be mine.
     One a sidenote, I have an interesting question. All of this banning Napster crap has done a variety of things. It's made mp3s harder to find. Therefore, it's made new music harder to find. Therefore, it's driven CD sales down. Way to go RIAA. Don't you love being your own worst enemy? On a similar note, if I have just "illegally" downloaded an entire album in MP3, but I also have every intention of buying that album as soon as it is available, isn't that defeating the purpose of the act of downloading being illegal in the first place? Isn't the whole idea that downloading music is supposed to discourage people from buying the music? Just wondering.
     So Silver Side Up is amazing. And I'll add that finding it was a fluke. I ran a random search, and I came up with a track from the album. I ran a search on the supposed album name, and I was shocked to find a collection of Nickelback songs I had never heard of! I ran the search in a more common search engine and, lo and behold, a new Nickelback album scheduled for release on September 11! Of course, I didn't know about the new album part until after I had downloaded about 80% of it. I just wanted to know when the music came from...
     If anything amazing should happen with the music in the next twenty minutes, I'll come back and let you know. Otherwise, I'll stop discussing Nickelback now.

     Heh. I almost like it when a bunch of young kids speak their anti-Bush words. You see, despite the fact that they're actually tilting many other kids in the wrong direction (so I say, right?), it's amazing how stupid they sound with the little to no evidence or reasoning behind their claims, so it's all like the arguments of an eight-year-old that doesn't know what he's talking about. Don't you remember, moms and dads, when little Billy (or Tommy, or Susie, or whatever your kids name might not be) would lie to you straight-faced and swear that he didn't do it, or that he know why this happened, or that it was his fault? This is exactly what the Democratic Party has its legions of ignorance doing today! Everyone blame Bush and the Republicans! It doesn't matter if you look stupid, because the stupid people like you will believe you!
     Disclaimer: I know that it is possible, although I can't fathom it, that some very smart people can find sound reasoning to oppose Bush and/or the Republican Party. Hell, I don't like the Republican Party, but they're ten times better than the Democrats. Either way, I do not mean to offend any friends of mine. Think of this as my way of spreading my message. Oh, and if you are offended, it's your fault for taking defense to it. :)

     One thing I like about this altered format that I'm using now is that I am re-acquainting myself with the twenty-four hour clock, or military clock (I guess). Just working out these few extra numbers is bringing me back to my math-loving roots, and I'm finding myself messing around with baseball stats and other math-related things. Gran Turismo 3 also has me working my spatial skills, not to mention teaching me a lot about cars. In that regard, would it be out of the question to classify Gran Turismo 3 under "Educational"?

GT3 Progress: 73.2%, plus half of the Professional League GT All-Stars series.

     The President made a good decision tonight. George Bush decided to allow federal funds for limited embryotic stem cell research. The limitations appease the pro-life, anti-anything-new crowd, and allowing the research at all pleases most of the rest of us. The limitations also act as somewhat of a trial period; if we are not satisfied with what the limited research turns up after a certain amount of time, we can either continue to research or cancel the funds. If we are pleased, and if it proves highly advantageous to proceed further with the research, then the door will open a bit wider to less limited stem cell research. Excellent move by our president to keep all sides reasonably happy.
     I think I was most surprised to hear that Tom Daschle supported the decision. I always thought it was his plan to come up with reasons to oppose our Republican president on everything. Maybe he actually believes in some of the crap he allegedly believes in. :)

GT3 Progress: 72.7%

     The Seattle Mariners are easily the best team in baseball right now. They have one fifteen more games than the nearest opponent, winning nearly 73% of their games when no other team in baseball has even won 60%. They are on a pace to win 118 games - the current record for most wins in a season by any team is 116. They are third in the majors in batting average, but they have scored more runs than anyone. They are also third in earned run average (surprise, surprise! the Braves are number one!), and they have the best fielding percentage. Being among the best in hitting, pitching, and fielding can only mean one thing - the Mariners are absolutely the best in baseball. What's the point in sharing all this? I'm just prepping you for a good quote!
     There now. Wasn't that exciting? I was certainly surprised when I read that the Braves were leading the majors with the best earned run average. Last I had checked (All-Star Break), the Braves were in sixth. They've dropped thirty-four points to 3.60! Go Braves, and stuff.

     Time to rant about Fox News again. This morning - barely twelve hours later - their highest headline reads, "19 Killed in Jerusalem Blast". This is worthy news. This is something that, while it may not concern all Americans, it is a concern for much of the world. However, the next five words in the headline, as part of the caption or subtitle or whatever you want to call it, read, "Six children among the dead".
     I hate to break it to you, but telling us how many children were caught in a suicide-bomber's mission from God (his God) or country don't change the fact that thirteen (13!) non-children died. By emphasizing that six children were victims, are you telling the world that they are more important than the thirteen others? That's certainly what it sounds like. Also, why do you emphasize the children? For statistical purposes? No, because then you would emphasize everyone's age, gender, religion, shape, color, etc... You do it simply to generate an emotional reaction, most likely anger or something similar, and everyone knows that an angry mob thinks like a three-year-old chimpanzee.
     George Lucas is a genius in many ways. His Star Wars character Yoda, as many may recall, once said, "fear leads to anger; anger leads to hate; hate leads to suffering". Scare America with the news, turn our citizens into an angry mob, and make them and the rest of us suffer for the actions and reactions they enforce or cause to be enforced. Or just start with the anger, ignoring the means by which it is reached. It is a well-known fact that an angry person can not think nearly as rationally as a calm person. Why, then, does our media so often concentrate on angering hundreds of millions of us all at once? To generate such responses as, "Let's just blow them both to bits!"? Yeah, that's a good way of going about it. Way to go, liberal journalism.

     Some people are just stupid. Some people just have sticks up their asses. Some people just think their way of life is better than others', and they stop at nothing to show it. What's worse? The Atlanta Brave received hundreds of complaints for allowing a gay group to purchase a block of more than 1700 tickets for Wednesday night's baseball game (ESPN article). This is an outrage. What the hell is wrong with America? We cry for freedom for two hundred years, but suddenly it is wrong to choose to be gay? I swear, people are so stupid... Ugh. If you don't like gay people, don't go out of your way to show it. More often than not, you will look like an idiot.
     On a related note, I am 38% gay according to thespark.com's gay test. Does that make me a better person? Maybe, maybe not. It makes me want to snuggle up a bit closer to Claire, though, just in case... Ah, gotta love TheSpark's tests!
     On another related note, my brother and all other Houston County school children are going back to their government-driven institutions of "learning" tomorrow - er, today. How gay is that?

     Do you want to know what's wrong with America? Well, there's certainly a lot more wrong than I have the time to tell you about, but I can easily discern a few things. For example, two of the twelve current headlines at Fox News deal with absolutely nothing significant or important in any way for our country. Perhaps more of the headlines could be argued against as well, but it just irks me that these two in particular are dominating the country's news: (1) Mariah Carey has checked out of the hospital, and (2) Sandra Bullock may have bought a beach house in Georgia. Hmm. Okay, that's nice. Who the hell cares? Unless you know Carey or Bullock personally, or unless you are in the general vicinity of where the stated occurrences took place, why does it matter so much? Hell, I'm in Georgia, and I don't care in the least that Sandra Bullock might have a new home on Tybee Island. And I certainly don't care about Mariah Carey's troubles. I certainly hope that she has no more problems in the future, but the point is that this is private information made readily available for the entire country, and the country is gobbling it up! People love to hear about it, and it means almost nothing to them!
     As you can see, many Americans have a serious problem prioritizing. Imagine ... if people just cared for things that actually mattered, like a crackdown on child pornography and the U.N.'s potential boycott of the U.S. and Israel. See, you're looking away and frowning, or you've already left the page, because you don't care or don't want to care. Why? Are you not concerned that your country is falling a part? Are you not concerned that this is partially your fault for not paying attention and therefore not keeping up your end of the bargain to keep this country together? Are you not concerned that, by not paying attention to such things, that you are just as great a problem in this country, when taken as a whole, as the bad news and bad deeds are themselves?
     I'm glad to be an American, because I know I have many opportunities in this country that I could never have elsewhere. I also know that many in other countries have many opportunities in their countries that I can never have here. And, all the same, I am really getting sick and tired of being surrounded by ignorant bigots that care nothing for anything that doesn't directly have an impact on their lives. Wake up, citizens of America, or get the hell out. Please. :)

     On an unrelated note, sorry for not getting the 10:30 update up until about 11:15. I connected to upload the new information several times for about forty-five minutes, only to find something else to do while I waited on the stupid server to connect. Sorry, it happens. Maybe if alphapython would take less than twelve seconds to connect...

"Violence is for those who can't handle diction!"

     Violence is also for those who can handle diction. While you or I may not see it as rational to be violent, there are those that have rationalized it in their own minds. I would say that this quote fits quite well for the average violent act, such as robbing a gas station in the boondocks. I would say that this quote holds no meaning whatsoever with other criminals, such as your average serial killer or assassin. I suppose it takes a weak mind and weaker morals to resort to violence for selfish ends, but in this day and age, it seems that the word "crime" holds less meaning than it used to. In a day and age in which it is a crime to speak freely if speaking freely involves the word "fuck" (for instance), perhaps diction should be for those who can't handle violence... you know, to avoid the unwarranted misdemeanor charge.
     Also, Hackers is almost nostalgic now. It's amazing how primitive everything in that movie seems. Let's see, I'm going to download a supercomputer's garbage file and save it all to a floppy disk! It's funny, actually. I was talking with the movie rental store manager about a few titles in the Action/Adventure section that I felt belonged in the Science Fiction section (Men In Black, Event Horizon, to name a couple), and she made the comment that, when Hackers was initially released, it could have fit under Science Fiction as well. I found that worth consideration.
     Oh, and The Saint is an excellent movie. I was really surprised. I thought it was just another sexy, violent, Val Kilmer thriller, but I found it to be far better than most of his other stuff. In fact, I would have to think long and hard to find a movie of his that I liked more, if one exists. I'll let you know.
     Now get out of my way before you become roadkill.

GT3 Progress: 69.6%.

     I have come to the conclusion that reading a variety of websites in a variety of colors bothers my eyes, while also perhaps being quite healthy for them, if not for the fact that my monitor is actually blinking at me almost one hundred times per second with a refreshed image - I wonder if that's good for the eyes. Either way, it bothers my eyes. Blue on black, red on white, white on black (the worst), or black on white... It seems the only colors that don't hurt my eyes are the dull gray on black, which happens to be the colors I've been using for over two years now. And yes, that is the reason why I've used them - they don't bother my eyes. As for the rest of the internet, you need to shape up and use gray on black soon, too.
     And, while I need to stop recycling news that I find on nickd.org, sometimes I just can't help it, especially when it involves singer Angeline Jolie. Next thing you know, there will be hundreds of action figures sporting her various roles, both real and fictitious.

GT3 Progress: 67.8% (must go faster!)

     Attack of the Clones? Why George? Why? I don't feel like commenting much more, but only because IGN has already written an editorial on Episode II's title. In short, I agree with about 95% of the article. (The only line I don't agree with? Chopper Chicks in Zombietown could easily be a children's title. Cartoon titles have been slipping further down the drain since their beginning, and I could easily picture some clan of cartoon girls in choppers trying to kill a bunch of zombies. In fact, this sounds a lot like what I used to watch on Saturday mornings, except I think the chopper chick was a villain in a Ninja Turtles cartoon...)
     Which brings up another point: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles rule!

     I guess my body decided yesterday that it wanted to be sick, and so it was. Maybe it was the Taco Bell snack, or maybe it was something else I ate or did, or maybe it was just time to be sick again, but none of that matters. What matters is that I had one of the more miserable days of my life yesterday. Well, most of it wasn't miserable. Most of the day was pretty good, but about the time the sun went down and my headache came on at full strength, well, the rest of the day was pretty miserable. I think I lay down at around 9:00pm, trying to sleep through the pain and see a new day in the morning. I think I actually fell asleep around midnight, after lying in agony and cussing every few conscious moments because my body wouldn't allow me to sleep. I'm sure my body temperature reached around 102° last night. It felt like much more, so I'm guessing 102.
     So that's my excuse for getting absolutely nothing productive done between then and now. Maybe now I can get back to the thrills of tweaking my site, playing my game, and seeing my girl.

GT3 Progress: 65.1% (must go faster!)

     Ooh! Ooh! I have another chance to disagree with Neal! The topic this time? Base closings! I'm surprised he even touched this one, let alone the way he chose to go about it. He claims that politicians are against base closings because they'll lose votes. *sigh*
     Neal, you're starting to lose your edge if you really believe that. Let's think about this a little more. Ten years ago there were five Air Force bases whose main tasks were defense, especially repairs. Obviously, we do not need these bases in peace time, so let's close the weaker two down. Now we're down to three. What these stupid politicians don't know is that the two weaker bases that were closed down only appeared weaker because the Air Force gave them the "weaker" programs to take care of. What does this mean? Now the Air Force has to divide the necessary workload of those two installations over the three remaining.
     Well, here comes round two (or is it three or four?). Time to shut down one of the three remaining bases. Why? Because we're spending too much money, says Neal, and we don't need to spend all this money on defense when there is no need for it! Okay, that's a wonderful idea. Let's bring our nation down to two of these bases. Two nukes and our country can't fix itself - we're through. I like the way you guys think... Looks like we may not have time to plan any escape route Neal, not if we think like you.
     Okay, I'll admit that I don't know what I'm talking about 100% here, but being raised next to one of these Air Force bases, and therefore knowing its most significant functions and purposes, I know enough to know that shutting down any more bases is the wrong decision. And Neal, you anti-anyone-that-doesn't-think-like-you, it is not about the votes! (I'm sure some idiots might care more for the votes than their own safety, but stop acting like elected officials are the only important thing in this country.)

     Victory! Fox News reports that California's top court has ruled that people kill people, not guns. Victims can not sue gunmakers when criminals use guns illegally. And it's about time! I hope this shuts up the anti-gun idiots. Hell, in an ideal world, we wouldn't have guns at all, but we're not living in an ideal world, and in the one we're in, guns are a part of life. Not necessary, but they're not exactly the problem either. I bet Neal Boortz reports on this story, if he hasn't already.

     Mad props to nickd for hanging with me throughout the night. I made about eight gazillion changes, and he sat there to advise me through each and every one. Does that make us geeks? Thanks, Nick! I owe you... a little. As for anyone that is not Nick, thank you for coming here of your own volition. And feel free to give Nick a few clicks. He's a funny guy. Definitely worth reading about his life. Especially because he probably lives 1437 miles from you.

     In case you haven't noticed, this place doesn't look exactly like it did yesterday. (Click permalink for direct comparison.) You like? You no like? Feel free to email any comments about the new look. In fact, I encourage you to do so. How else do I know that my skills are worth having?

So, um, what do you think? Be honest.

     Almost pointless update. I just wanted to point out a pretty neat quote that I just added to the top of the page, and I felt obligated to share my GT3 progress at day's end. Oh, and happy six months to Claire and me. A wonderful six months it has been. :)

Gran Turismo 3 progress: 61.8%.

     Ah, a response. This comes from my good friend Tony, who is probably quite a bit more "politically informed" than I:
     I have several points to rebut here. Hmm, where to begin... First of all, no one should ever get more than one vote. Period. Our tax system is screwed up as it is; bringing that into the mix would only screw up what good is left in our election system. Second, comparing voting to driving in that manner is ridiculous. Driving is a privilege - not a right - because it does not directly have any bearings on how our country is run. He went on to argue that driving is necessary to get people from points A to points B, C, D, and all the other points that are "necessary" to get things done. I argued that driving is not necessary, but only the accepted means of transit as a result of a few bad decisions leading to a few others to give us the system of transit we have today. Buses, walking, moving sidewalks... All would be much better if implemented properly, but in today's society would never take hold, because everyone just has to have a car - because it's "necessary"! We have simply built over a faulty foundation, which will make it much easier to fall and fall hard under the wrong pressure.
     Okay, let's analyze the whole income thing. He is basically saying here that those that make the money and run the country should be in charge of the place. But those earning the highest wages don't even make a fraction of this working class, meaning basically that the upper classes of society would be counted more than the bottom of society, or that they sould essentially have control over them. "They have obviously earned this status, and should therefore count more!" This resembles many ancient arguments that the upper classes of society should simply be in control, and the lower classes, despite being the largest part of society, should simply be controlled. Ever read the book 1984?
     Okay, the taking a test to vote part isn't bad. That test being money is absolutely the worst possible thing that it could be. "Money is the root of all evil." Everyone's heard the phrase; it can't really be applied to anything concrete. But I can tell you that basing a country and its election processes on money would be the very worst thing for that election system. If you want to make a test for voter eligibility, here's a suggestion: when every American votes, he takes a sort of quiz on current events and such to decide if he is politically aware enough to participate in the election. Obviously the questions would not be incredibly difficult, but just enough to see if the citizens are paying attention enough to make reasonable votes. If a person fails the test, he doesn't vote - get involved and come back next year! The point? Get rid of those that don't vote based on anything worth basing a vote on, and encourage our citizens to really be aware of what they are voting for.
     He and I argued for over an hour on several other points, on which he basically belittled my arguments while I attempted to reason them through to him - which is sort of like trying to reason with a brick wall. He asked why I wouldn't start up an Individualist Party for people that think like me. I argued that political parties are one of the worst things our system has, and that people don't need them. He is so convinced that there is no way around them that he can't fathom the possibility of someone being able to do anything for himself without the help of a money-grubbing organization looking for people to conform. Well, if you want to conform to their standards, be my guest.
     And, then, he called me naïve for thinking more rationally than he ever possibly could. And so I went to bed without saying good night. Good night. :)

     I have come to the conclusion that Neal Boortz is not a Libertarian and that he is a hypocrite. Oh, I agree with his opinion somewhat, but he's missing some other more fundamental issues. He claims that there are many "parasite" voters that should not have the right to vote - voting should not be a right, but a privilege earned. His arguments, to some degree, are reasonably sound. There are those that vote unreasonably selfishly, or otherwise stupidly, that simply should not be a part of the voting process. However, as a Libertarian - one who believes in the equal rights for all humans so long as they do not infringe upon the equal rights of others - Neal is forgetting that he can't think that way. You see, allowing these "parasite" voters to vote is not restricting others' rights, it is just a nuissance and is bad for the system. I agree that, in principle, these people should not vote. But as a Libertarian, or more accurately, an individualist, I believe that these people should be able to choose this on their own. Sure, this could cause more trouble than its worth for some of us. But is your happiness worth any less than theirs? Who decides whose votes should count more? What if people like Neal Boortz fit the "parasite" profile to those voters he is against? Everyone should be allowed to vote, plain and simple, with very few exceptions. (One of those exceptions is prison inmates.)
     Forbid election reporting until all polls are closed. Now that I agree with. In fact, that's the best idea I have ever heard. People will no longer relax and skip voting because their guy is in the lead, and people will no longer flood the polls when their guy is behind. Instead, they will feel the need to vote because their vote really could count, because they have no idea how it's going. Plainly put, we should know absolutely nothing about the progress of the election until Wednesday morning. Neal says that every precinct across the country should operate from 6:00am Tuesday to 6:00am Wednesday. I disagree. I believe that they should all operate over the exact same 24-hour period. Start it at 6:00am Tuesday and end it at 6:00am Wednesday in the Eastern Time Zone. For the Pacific Time Zone, this means that it would last from 3:00am Tuesday to 3:00am Wednesday. For Alaska and Hawaii, it would be offset by a couple more hours, the earliest possible opening and closing being at midnight on Tuesday and Wednesday, respectively. But what would that matter? Everyone in the country would have the exact same 24-hour period to place votes, meaning that everyone would have exactly 24 hours to vote at his or her convenience. The hours would be odd for some, especially those working the polls, but this would all but fix the problem of early reporting.
     As for any other discussions on politics, you'll have to excuse me... Gran Turismo 3 has a lot of my attention right now. Of course it takes a backseat to Claire, but I'm really trying to get this game finished before school starts. I don't want the temptation to finish the game with classes to deal with! So that's my story. Feel free to opine on the election issue. I'd love to put a little more than just my opinion on here all the time...

     Is it August already? I guess that means it's time to get used to early alarm clocks and an atmosphere of stress again. Hopefully, this does not include the same shit every day that I had to wake up to today. My sister and father screaming is not my ideal alarm clock, especially when it wakes me up before my necessary eight hours of sleep. Do you remember ever saying anything about leaving emotion out of arguments, as it only gets in the way? You can always tell who the more reasonable person is in an argument because that person will not yell nearly as much. The person yelling and screaming and complaining is usually not thinking so much as reacting, and is therefore not offering a very reasonable argument. I don't know that this is the case every time, but it's been my experience that the quiet, calm person of the argument (by contrast to the screaming, hysterical person) usually has reason on his side.
     And so, after all of this wonderful screaming and generally pissing me off, and stealing my CDs (that I can barely afford to begin with) for several years, my service has been requested. Paul's taxi service is in business! And not at my convenience - but now. "I have to go now." Not that I have any problem with it, but it often seems like... Oh nevermind. This isn't the place for it.
     I love my family very much, as much as anyone could love his family...