My Response to Montgomery's Raid on Education Funds

My response to HB159 and HB160 (two attempts by Montgomery to legally raid the Education Trust Fund and use the future of Alabama's children as corporate leverage):

 Raiding the education fund is not only a slap in the face to students and teachers alike, but it also sends a clear message that Montgomery wants to dumb down their future voters as much as possible, so they get away with more stuff like this. It also proves the Republican agenda is not one that advocates a better life for its people, but one that wants to give kickbacks to the rich, while trodding on the backs of innocent children and hardworking educators. Shame on Montgomery.

HERE is a petition to stop this travesty. Be a human and sign. It may not stop it -- this is a red state -- but it shows you're one of many who thinks this is bullshit. And that alone is worth taking the minute out of your day it takes to sign this.

And it's funny -- big government is bad only when it's federal, right? That's what's so ironic.

My post to my Congressman in regards to the piracy bill

And here it is:

As an American it is my legal right to freedom of speech, and expression. This law takes away from my fundamental rights as well as those of any other American, including yourself. I would personally never endorse a member of Congress who would even consider backing this bill. I don't know anyone else who would either. It is wrong; it is unjust.  

Instead of diminishing our rights as citizens of this fine nation, please work with your colleagues protect us and our domestic freedoms. We depend on you to do the right thing.  

The second the Internet is censored is the second we become a nation with conditional freedoms. That is not what the founders of our nation would've wanted, and that's not what any of your constituents would want either. Please think of us, we who depend upon your representation of our interests, in regards to this matter. 

And then it was signed, and yada, yada, yada. There are petitions and other things. This is how I sent my little letter. And it also gives better info than what I just did.

Facebook "rape pages": beyond tasteless jokes

One current event issue that hasn't been getting a lot of press in America, even though it involves Americans, is the Facebook "rape" pages. What do I mean by Facebook "rape" pages?

Personally, I would like to link you -- just so you can see with your own eyes -- but Blogger actually has a TOS thing about even linking to hate pages. And that's exactly what the "rape" pages on Facebook are. So, instead of linking you, if you haven't seen them, I want you to Google the phrase. You owe it to your sisters, girlfriends, wives, and mothers -- and most especially YOURSELF, if you are a woman -- to know what this page is, because only then you will see that it's not just a joke.

Because that's the thing. When I first read about this issue, it was a link someone posted on Twitter through a feminist website. So, I didn't take it seriously. I'm not what you would call a "feminist". I shave, bathe, and I like it when men open the door for me. Because the thing is: I'm a Carrieist. I think I'm better than everyone else. And as for other women -- I don't think they're equal to men: I think they're better than men. I mean, we birth them, change their diapers, cook for them, do their laundry and -- all the while -- most of us work full time jobs just like they do (only for less pay). So, not only can we do whatever men do, we can do more. And when we do what they do, we usually do it better.

So yeah. While women are better than men, I am better than all humans. Obey me. And obey me when I say men would be nothing without women and should worship the ground women walk on.

But the people from the Facebook page: "You know shes playing hard to get when your chasing her down an alleyway" don't think so. In fact, they think women deserve less respect than inanimate objects. I mean, after all, they don't rape people's cars or chairs, do they? But it's okay to rape women, according to them.

But who is "them"? According to this article from The Telegraph, the author of the rape page is, apparently, a British schoolboy with ties to British, Australian, and American hackers. People offering support to this page and pages like it are called in this article and others "cyber anarchists". But that's wrong. See, calling them "cyber anarchists" implies that they are exercising an anti-government philosophy and using these hateful pages to demonstrate that in a free society, they can say anything -- even this.

But no. No, no, no, no, no. Any true anarchist knows that anarchy means you don't want other people to rule you; the implication is that you, yourself, as a human being, have the innate moral compass to move about in society by doing no harm to others. That's what actual anarchists believe. All these "I'm gonna do whatever I want because I'm an anarchist" shitheads aren't getting it. They corrupt a non-violent philosophy and use it as a platform to do whatever they want -- and doing what they want isn't a good thing, judging by the rape content on these pages.

Another thing: the page I mentioned is rife with grammatical errors and if there's one thing I know, it's that the only thing that has worse grammar than a 13-year-old American schoolboy is a 13-year-old British boy. And that's what's scary. This screwed up little kid claims he's just joking. But the fact that he thinks this is a joke -- which I rather doubt -- is in itself not okay. And what's also not okay is the fact that this page is attracting real sexual predators. It's a fact. Real predators are visiting this page and it's become a meet up for them.

And what happens if you let people on the page know you disagree? Well, read the article by The Telegraph. Though, I find it very pathetic that while I blog and Tweet using my real name, this kid -- and many of his cohorts -- don't even do that. They are cowards. They have to hide behind the internet to say these things, because they're scared of what would happen to them, scared that people would hate them, if people knew who to blame. If you can't say something and put your name on it, you don't have a right to say it at all.

So, why does this page even exist? Simply put: Facebook loves getting the ad revenue off of it. It gets a lot of hits. That's why, even though this and pics of breastfeeding both violate their TOS, the pictures of breastfeeding gets taken off -- not because a partially exposed boob is more offensive and not because it's okay to publish hate stuff about women. Really, it's because Facebook is so freaking greedy that they will allow a page to violate their own TOS provided it brings in a shit ton of revenue. Because that's the thing folks: no one but a close circle of family and friends cares to see your breastfeeding pics, but people love to see something that's horrible whether they agree with how bad it is or not.

So, instead of saying "Facebook allows this because they hate women" we should be saying "Facebook allows pages that promote hate and violence to women as long as it makes them money". And that, my friends, is the real issue here.

And still, we all use Facebook because we can't be assed to go back to MySpace.

They're OUR Bitches: My View on Politics and Why it Should Be Yours Too

Democracy as defined by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

1.a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority
b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

Could it be any clearer? Let me break it down into modern terms.

We hire politicians via voting. We pay them (far too much) via taxes. We are their bosses; they are our employees. But it's more than that. We hire them to represent our interests on a national level, because all of us doing it at once, in person, would be far too confusing. And since they are specifically hired to do our bidding, they are, in effect, our bitches.

But everyone seems to have forgotten that. Instead, when they vote somebody in, they think they're voting for an autocrat that rules them and makes their decisions for them. If you think a democratic government rules you, then you need to read the definition (several times if need be). Instead, the real point of a democracy is that we, the people, create an administrative body to represent us on a national scale. They do our grunt work to keep society flowing smoothly. Laws should be for the protection of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Any law that tells you what you can read, who you can talk to, or where you can go, what you can wear -- that's a dictatorial law of an autocratic fascist and you really shouldn't even listen to it, because it came into being by your bitch (aka politician) usurping the job you gave them for their own agenda.

Now, I don't mean to tell you what political party to believe in. That's not why I'm here. The reason I'm here is to educate you on how a democratic society works and to tell you -- whatever your political affiliation -- that in a free country, you are the boss.

It's time for us, as Americans, to take our country back. From this moment on, I challenge any and all politicians to go to work for me, for their people, and not themselves. And I challenge the American people to remember their place, to remember that you rule this country.

We live in the best country in the world. But it often doesn't seem that way. The reason is this: We forget why we're here, what our ancestors fought and died for. We forget that this was supposed to be better, we forget that we're supposed to be the best. Anyone not willing to stand up with me and adopt this philosophy is already beaten and you might as well just go ahead and lay in that hole in the ground, waiting for them to pile the dirt on you.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think my little blog post can effect overnight change. But I hope that this idea takes hold, that you share it with your friends, that they share it with theirs, and eventually Americans, on a massive scale, are reminded why we are here and of the power they posses.

So, be a human and pass this on. If you don't pass this on, I assume you like being the bitch of your bitch and I'll remember to buy you a blindfold, gag, and some fuzzy handcuffs for Christmas, because you're apparently going to need it.

Hey you! Be a human: the compassion post

As I was eating my breakfast yesterday morning, I stared at the battered, lifeless corpse of former Lybian dictator Muammar Gaddafi, and had an epiphany: people really don't recognize the moment that they become hypocrites.

I firmly believe the rebels had a right to be pissed. And they had a right to oust Gaddafi. All people deserve to be free and live in dignity, served by (not ruled by) a government of their choosing. But when I saw Gaddafi all battered and dead, I realized something even more harrowing: the rebels had become Gaddafi. And isn't that the way it goes? We turn into the thing we hate, because instead of rising above it, we think to give it a taste of its own medicine.

I was talking to a friend on Twitter yesterday. And, in the midst of my disappointment and shock, I actually said something wise and mature: "The only right way to fight oppression is to fight smarter and better and righter -- not violenter." Violenter is not a word, but the rest are, and I think I made a good point: our evolved brains are supposed to give us the ability to rise above of oppressors mentally, physically, and -- most importantly -- emotionally.

As people opposing Gaddafi's ridiculous autocracy and ethnic cleansing, the rebels' main job was to get him out of power (and hopefully not tear the country to ribbons while doing it). That was their original goal. But then, how do you explain Gaddafi's battered body yesterday? Easily: it was hate. It was anger over him and everything about him and the fact that he was the enemy. Why is it that hate is the most human trait there is, yet it's the one we're supposed to rise above? But that's the thing: every human, no matter what their beliefs or culture knows that hate is wrong. They know what it does. They know that hate festers until it's all there is. Fear is the mind-killer, but hate is the soul-killer. We all know it, but we still let it get the best of us.

Overwhelming anger and passion is the only way an average person could actually go through with killing someone. (Psychopaths and sociopaths obviously operate differently, but we shan't go into them now.) But when you're full of hate, you change. Killing becomes less of a big deal. It becomes less justice and more vengeance, and you've probably forgotten the real reason you were angry in the first place. That dudes who were parading Gaddafi's corpse were all like "Fuck yeah! We killed that sonbitch!"

Yeah, you killed him. Now what?

Because that's the thing: killing him during a raid is just vengeance. You showed everyone (especially Gaddafi) that you were pissed off. But you forgot why. If he was put on trial and had a sentence according to the local legal system, the whole world would've seen why the rebels were angry. They would've showed everyone that Gaddafi's a bad guy, he did bad things, and they refuse to be ruled by that. Execution under law is a political and social choice of a people. But Gaddafi was just killed out in the streets; what was done to him, he'd probably had done to others in the past, but that doesn't make it right.

And, when you kill someone: you just became a killer. You just became the thing you hated. The bullied became the bully; the beaten child beats his children. And that, my friends, is the worst kind of hypocrisy there is.

But with all that said, I sincerely hope the Libyan people find peace, because they deserve it. Everyone does.

The one where I say things to piss you off: My view on Steve Jobs' death

I wanted my first post to be something lighthearted and altogether more exemplary of what the majority of this blog will be like -- but that's not going to happen.

Unless you've been frozen in carbonite , you've probably heard the sad news that Steve Jobs passed away two days ago. And yes, it's very sad news. He was a genius, relatively young, and he died way too soon. My deepest sympathies go out to his loved ones, who no doubt miss him very much. (And I really do mean that.)

But, do you see what I did right there? I reacted normally to the death of a stranger whose work I respected; I reacted normally to the death of a fellow human being. But what's getting me is all the abnormal reactions other people are having. I'll elaborate.

I first heard about the news on Twitter. Like the rest of my generation, I find it much quicker to read a 140 character or less tweet about said event than to watch CNN anchors drone about it six hours before they actually get to the point. And, since I learned about this sad news on Twitter, I had the unique opportunity to instantly see the reactions of everyone who was commenting on Jobs' death. The first couple of condolences were normal, sober, and well-expressed. (i.e "I'm very sad to hear about the passing of Steve Jobs.") But as I continued reading, it became apparent that people who never even knew Steve Jobs were freaking the fuck out. "OMG. I can't believe he's dead!" -- which is, granted, rather normal.

And I get that. Everyone reacts differently to death. And the death of someone you look up to -- even if it's someone you've never met -- is very hard for a lot of people to wrap their heads around. You know, I can understand it. And with that said, I can move along to my point.

There is a line between being upset (including very upset) about the passing of someone iconic in their field and between turning that being upset into a yuppy trend, a bandwagon for others to hop on just so they can feel included in this tragedy. Further more, I saw a lot of celebrities who probably didn't care one wit about Steve Jobs tweeting vehemently about his death. And I mean, I can't say that with a categorical certainty -- that they didn't care -- but I can say that a lot of them seemed to be using it as a platform to get attention. That is Thing Number 1 I saw very wrong that day.

And then there is Thing Number 2, which I found even more disturbing. And it may seem like a small thing to a lot of people, but just humor me, follow along with my thought train for a moment, and THEN see what you think...

When I was reading through my Twitter feed, I saw a tweet done by Alyssa Milano:

This tweet came after a usual sort of sympathy tweet, where she spoke her sentiments from her heart. This tweet however, is merely a well-meaning gesture that's actually rather shallow. And what thought did this tweet provoke in me? I thought to myself: Why is she using her celebrity to get her followers to do a tribute to someone who's already died when she could instead be using it to raise awareness for the disease that killed him? 

I have lupus. Right now, I'm doing rather well and I'm grateful for that. But I've nearly died from it before. And if I ever did die from it and I was looking down from above, I would want a celebrity to use their power and influence to help save others from my fate via raising awareness, charity work, etc. My spiritual, spectral self would probably appreciate sincere comments, but empty gestures? Just no.

And I want to make it clear I don't think Alyssa Milano was doing this as a purposeful thing to gain attention for herself. I mean, she could've been -- I'm not her and don't know what she's thinking -- but whatever the motive, I wish she knew that a better, more meaningful tribute to Steve Jobs would've been something to raise awareness. After all, one of the greatest things Jobs is known for was his innovative spirit. He saw the world going forward. He saw new ways to look at the world, to make daily life easier, to make entertainment more entertaining. And since he had that way about him, I think a greater tribute than an empty gesture would be to carry on his message, you know? For instance, helping solve what caused him to die -- even in a tiny way -- is an innovation. And aside of the tribute aspect, I think, even in death, he'd want the rest of us to use every opportunity to just keep moving forward.