The Grinch who stole the Holidays: PCness in December

It’s that time of the year: the time from Thanksgiving until new year’s. You know, the Holidays. Oh, uh, (tugs at collar, wipes brow with cocktail napkin) I mean the Christmas season…right.

Is anyone as sick of this as I am? I mean crap people, if we are going to argue about something, can’t it be something of substance? A cure for cancer? A way to end world hunger? Our favorite kind of chewing gum?

Doesn’t this come up again and again every year? And don’t we always move further away from reaching a common consensus? No matter what you call this part of the year, I am sure you agree that you do not want it overshadowed by the bickering of people who are inflexible and absolute that it always be called by one name and never by another.

Both Christmas wishers and Holidarians (to coin an awkward and ridiculous term) are wrong to launch a full-blown media war over this controversy. Petitions, lawsuits, and boycotts should be enacted on things that matter, not petty battles over what Wal-Mart calls their merchandise. Civic action is a finite resource, and it is disheartening to see it wasted on something so incredibly silly.

Whether you call it the Holiday spirit or the Christmas spirit, all this bad blood ruins it. This really does not have to be as complicated and divisive as we have made it to be.

My mom works as a bank teller. She has conversations with hundreds of people every day, and thoroughly loves developing relationships with her customers. Every December, she wishes people a Merry Christmas, and a lot of people wish her this in return. If they wish her Happy Holidays, she reciprocates, and says Happy Holidays to them. If they say Happy Chanukah, she says Happy Chanukah. Seasons Greetings—Seasons Greetings, Happy Kwanza—Happy Kwanza, Ramadan Wishes—Ramadan Wishes.

If someone came into Ipswich Co-op Bank and wished my mother a “good buy-one get- one free Lysol window spray day,” she would, without a doubt, wish one back to them too, and with all the sincerity in the world.

When someone wishes you a merry Christmas, whether you are a Christian makes no difference. In fact, a Muslim customer recently wished my mom a Merry Christmas as a gesture of personal respect and kindness. My mom was very touched. When someone wishes something unto you, they are opening up their heart, not trying to impose their religion.

That’s all “Merry Christmas” and any other greeting means. It doesn’t mean, “accept Jesus as your savior” or “all other religions are bunk.” Wishing someone a Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays, Happy Chanukah, or any other thing is an expression of love and goodwill. It works as a more personal and heartfelt “have a good one.” It is not an attempted conversion, not a display of power, not an evangelistic statement.

Ben Stein, a Jewish man, wrote a great editorial on this subject last December, and said “it does not bother me even a little bit when people call those beautiful lit up, bejeweled trees Christmas trees. I don't feel threatened. I don’t feel discriminated against. That's what they are: Christmas trees. It doesn't bother me a bit when people say, ‘Merry Christmas’ to me. I don't think they are slighting me or getting ready to put me in a ghetto. In fact, I kind of like it. It shows that we are all brothers and sisters celebrating this happy time of year.”

Over 95% of the United States population celebrates Christmas, and in our culture, Christmas is not a primarily religious holiday (only 80% of Americans are Christians; the math does not add up). When people think of Christmas, they primarily think of presents, friends and family, and Santa, not Jesus. As a Christian, I find this troubling, but I am not dismayed by it. I can still observe my religion when people wish me happy holidays, but I do not want to be told I do not have the option of giving people my blessing how I choose. Later in his editorial, Stein said “I have no idea where the concept came from that America is an explicitly atheist country. I can't find it in the Constitution, and I don't like it being shoved down my throat.”

All I want is to be able to wish people well and to mark observance of one of the most important days of my year. Is that too much to ask? So when you see me over the next few weeks, let me know what what you celebrate—Christmas, Holidays, Hanukah…or whatever else. I will be glad to wish it to you, provided that you let me do the same.

Read the entirety of Ben Stein’s editorial here: snopes.com/politics/soapbox/benstein2.asp

Read Lou Dobbs’ recent commentary on this subject here:
cnn.com/2006/US/12/12/Dobbs.Dec13/index.html

Soda Silliloquy (-that isn't misspelled. I want it that way.)

I like soda, but I don’t do caffeine and I only drink diet, so, my choices are usually very limited. I’ve found that Fresca is my favorite—especially after sweating profusely—but it isn’t hearty enough for the winter months. When it’s cold outside, I want some girth in my calorieless beverage, thank you very much. Diet A & W and Diet Barq’s Root Beer are very good, and are perfect to warm you up on a frigid winter day. Don’t ask me how, but it just works. I think the best diet soda I’ve had is Coca-Cola Zero. Damn son, they must put cocaine in that shit! Unfortunately, it has caffeine in it, and when I found that out, I had to stop drinking it. I mean, I walk when the sign says “don’t walk” and order steaks medium-rare, but caffeine in my soda? There’s just too much risk. Sprite Zero is good too, and that’s decaf. That one seems to have an extra propensity for producing burpage though, so only drink it if you’re going to be alone or with your wife (ay-oh!).

Diet Sunkist has a surprisingly natural taste, but you have to look pretty hard to find it. It’s usually in the bottom of the soda cooler wall next to the open carton of half-and-half the employees use for their coffee (that open carton is always there, but you chose to ignore it, like you do with all the other problems in your life. Good job, loser.). The thing is, hoboes like to drink Diet Sunkist, too. So if you give a hobo change, they’re probably going to use it to buy the last Diet Sunkist, mix it with Vodka, and then ramble on the street for hours on end about the conspiracy for Lithuanian paraplegics to take over the continent of Europe, “just like Hitler did.” For this specific reason, always think twice before giving away your money to street people. The bums probably deserve it anyways.

I don’t know what happened with diet ginger ale, but ever since I had it at my diabetic grandparents’ house when I was eight, it has been completely repulsive. How can they sell that stuff? It would be sort of like putting cat shit in a box of Chinese take-out and calling it spring rolls (actually, it’s exactly like that). I mean, how can my grandparents buy it? I mean, I know their taste buds are worn away and useless, but balls, this takes it to a whole new level. The fake ginger flavoring in combination with the artificial sweetener makes the drink doubly bitter and unpalatable. Ew guys, just, like—ew. The aftertaste is like blood mixed with Colgate toothpaste mixed with placenta. And yes, I know what that tastes like, so piss off. I don’t know why the FDA is messing around with all these prescription drugs and silicone breast implants and crap. Diet ginger ale is the real threat to the well-being of the American people.

Caffeine Free Diet Coke and Pepsi both taste like Moxie with an infusion of bath water (I’m actually making this one up, I haven’t tasted it, but I imagine that’s one of the uckiest (yes, uckiest, I didn’t want to use “yuckiest,” I think it would have been trite. And I am indeed using a parenthetical inside of a parenthetical. I digressed from my digression, what can I say? I do what I want. You just don’t mess with genius. Watch and learn ladies!)-tasting concoctions I could imagine). Nonetheless, I often end up drinking one of them, as they are carbonated, wet, and widely available.

So why did Chris go off on this wild tangent about soda? Well, Chris wanted to write about Double Big Gulps at 7/11, but he tends to take a while to get the hell around to his point. So anyways, Chris walked into 7/11 the other day, and was feeling rather parched.

Realizing that there were no good 20oz. sodas in the coolers (12oz. is a waste of money, dude, that was so not an option. Paying $1 for something that’s gonna cut his lip and give him a cold sore is like getting raped up the anus. No thanks.), he decided to wander on over to the soda fountain unit. Chris thought, “whoa, what are these paint buckets doing by the soda foun—oh, they’re Big Gulps!” Chris, deciding that the Big Gulp (22oz.) was insufficient, and that the Super Big Gulp (36oz.) was for pussies and the queers, wisely selected the Double Big Gulp (44oz. Hell yes). I mean, the Mega Gulp (64oz.) is just insane, who the hell could drink that much beverage?!? It was 9:12 at night, and Chris didn’t want to be up the whole night, so he wisely (Chris is quite wise) chose Caffeine Free Diet Coke. Upon filling the container and fitting it with the appropriate cover and straw, Chris proceeded to the checkout, whereupon he paid $1.25 for his prize.

$1.25 for this glorious tankard of liquid refreshment? Chris felt pretty sure he was the smartest, most innovative person in the history of the world. Da Vinci, Einstein, and Hawking ain’t got nutin on Chris, son. If he could get value like this out of every business transaction, no one could stand in his way. Not even Donald Trump and his laughable excuse for a hairpiece and a get-rich-quick book. Screw Donald Trump. Chris thinks Donald Trump is probably a retard, but he respects him because he can make good real estate deals. As far as Chris is concerned, that’s all that really matters—real estate deals.

So anyways, Chris was walking around Downtown Crossing, talking to his Mother on the celly, sporting his Double Big Gulp, and feeling quite at ease. Chris has it down: talk, sip, talk talk, sip, talk talk talk sip, talk, sip, talk talk, sip, ect. Surely no one could out-cool Chris “the cool” at this very moment. After a relatively brief interval, Chris finished the drink, and was unfazed by the fact that he had just ingested 44oz. of liquid and that the human stomach is only 32oz. big. Screw science. Chris never lets Science get in his way. Science blows. What has Science ever done for Chris, anyways? Chris called Science, and Science was all like, “oh, I tried to call you back, but I was in a bad cell, my phone dropped the call. Let’s do lunch or something!” Bullshit, Science. Bullshit. Chris knows better, you whore.

So about an hour later, Chris was pretty sure he was going into labor. Wow, I mean, Caffeine Free Diet Coke does some weird black magic crap when it gets all up inside you and stuff. Chris thought, “Whoa man, I’m pretty sure that this weird crap I feel like right now means that that skinny Japanese dude eating all those hot dogs is a real sport. Not like a sport like NASCAR, but like a sport like baseball. Wait, no, it’s like Rugby. Ruggggggggby.”

Chris peed blood every 20 minutes for the next three days and died in a pool of his own vomit. He was 19 years old. 7/11 used Chris’ $1.25 to buy three Diet Sunkists at wholesale price from Cadbury-Schweppes Inc. Damn you, 7/11. Damn you to Big Gulp hell.

Carville's First Corallary

I was lucky enough to have the following piece run in the opinion section of Emerson's school newspaper, The Berkeley Beacon. I hope to write for them something like every three weeks or so. I'll post my pieces here, but they may need a little contexualization. The following piece may not hold true at other institutions of higher learning, but I think that that the criticism is fair. In general, young people do not understand the economy, and make no effort to understand it. A few years ago I was having a survey discussion of all things poltics. Abortion, the war, same-sex marriage, and capital punishment all got their due, but when we came to the economy, this is what one person said: "I'm for the economy, I support it. A good economy is good." And that was it, we moved on to censorship. The entire economy summed up in one, meaningless sentance. Damn we were idiots. The following is my draft, not the edited version that appeared in the Beacon. This one is about 150 words longer. I'm really not that good at that whole brevity thing.

Since I arrived on campus this fall, I have heard the same words being used to describe Emerson College students. “Creative,” “Diverse,” and “Eccentric?” Yes, yes, and yes, I agree completely. “Politically active and aware?” Actually, not really. Although we Emersonians are passionate, the scope of our political knowledge is narrow, and when politics is discussed, we usually harp on the same, tired subjects.

Being politically aware does not mean knowing about and holding strong opinions on two, three, or four issues. It means having a handle on all aspects of current affairs, and being able to apply and discuss the government’s desired role (or desired absence) in every facet of your life.

Our student body tends to be concerned with social issues, especially abortion and same-sex marriage. As Emerson students may soon find out, putting “Legalize Same-Sex Marriage” on the campaign issues of their Facebooks does not count as political awareness.

There is another elephant in the room, and no one is talking about it: the economy. The state of our economy is the most direct determinant of the well-being and mood of the people of our country. Nothing is more crucial in the day-to-day lives of working Americans. Whether or not you have a timecard to punch and money in your pocket reigns supreme all other political issues. Three months worth of unpaid rent and an empty refrigerator sort of makes the debate over gay marriage seem petty.

This is not to say that political activism on the issue of same-sex marriage or other non-economic subjects is not admirable or not a public service. It certainly is. But there are a myriad of other issues that need to be addressed that are vitally important to our entire population, not just a small stratification of it.
Advocates for same-sex marriage argue that because the issue only directly effects same-sex couples, the rest of the population should lay down their arms and let the people whose lives it will impact have what they desperately want. It is frequently said that it is irresponsible and unfair for Congress to put so much time and energy towards efforts to abolish gay marriage. If this is true (and it is), then it is also irresponsible and unfair for intellectually gifted college students to expend the majority of their political energy on this issue and a few others.

To be completely transparent, I am personally opposed to same-sex marriage (but support legal partnership rights). Yet whether one fights for or against these social issues is irrelevant. Both sides of this debate are polarizing, and poison our political climate. We need to put things into perspective. We need to reprioritize. As a country, we have not reached the point where we can endlessly quibble at each other over these relatively inconsequential issues. We have too much left to solve, and too many problems that need solutions.

While they are important to many people in our country, the debates over gay marriage and abortion have grown into all-consuming monsters, and dominate the nation’s political discourse. After debating the issue of same-sex marriage, people are in no mood to talk about anything else. As a result of this, nothing gets done, and the maintenance of our economy has been halted in its tracks.

Anyone want to talk about our trade gap? Outsourcing? Big Oil? The estate tax? The national debt? Social security? The housing gap? CEO pay? Eminent domain? Our porous borders and hapless immigration system? I hope so. These are the exact kind of issues we need to be talking about when we are forming our generation’s vision for the future of America.

There is an economy going on, and we all need to understand it, because within the next four years, we are going to be a part of it, looking for a job. My Dad has always told me (more often in my more liberal days) that “when you grow up, you’ll understand money and you’ll understand politics.” I do not know if Emerson College students truly understand either of these, but understanding of the first leads to understanding of the other.

Emerson is an extremely liberal campus, and that is fine, as long as we look at issues all across the political spectrum, not just the “hot button” issues of the day. As James Carville once said: “It’s the economy, stupid!” I do not wish to insult the intelligence or intentions of Emerson students. It is because of our conviction and our enthusiasm that I know we can do better. So next time when you are complaining about Bush, be comprehensive: bash last year’s overtime law or CAFTA or something. Now if only we can find a way to form a Facebook group to protest corporate corruption, we may be on to something.

Democratic Majority...stop laughing, it happened.

This election was, as Jack Cafferty put it, about “Americans choosing what kind of bad government they want to have: one-party rule that will rubber stamp President Bush’s agenda, or a Congress with Democrats in charge, and nothing but gridlock and frustration for the next two years.”

Well, Americans chose door number two, and it won’t be long before we see if we have won a new car or a croquet set. We must realize that Democrats won back Congress last week in the same way the Tortoise beat the Hare: statistically, but not in their own right. Most of the Democrats’ campaign strategy comprised of shrinking quietly into the corner while Republicans floundered about in a perfect storm of political scandals and corruption. This election was very much like the elections of the Palestinian Authority last January: Fatah was corrupt and ineffective, and Hamas happened to be the only other option, so by default, they won.

I am not thrilled about the idea of a Democratic Congress, it just isn’t very inspiring. As this campaign was mostly a reflection of the implosion of Bush and the Republicans, Democrats did not have to present a cohesive set of policies. That may be a good thing for them, because if asked, they probably couldn’t have done it.

What changes will the Democrats make—what exactly do they stand for? CNN’s election exit polls tells us that the issues on voters’ minds were corruption, terrorism, the economy, and Iraq (in that order), yet the campaign yielded little in the way of Democrats’ solutions to these issues.

Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi has laid out a laundry list of to-dos for the first 100 hours of the next Congress, calling it the “New Direction for America.” It is sort of like a new “Contract for America”, except made by Democrats, and heard of by no one.

Pelosi’s “New Direction”, according to HouseDemocrats.gov, includes an overhaul of ethics rules, which would, miraculously, “make this the most honest and open Congress in history.” Also on the list are raising the federal minimum wage, adopting the recommendations of the 9/11 commission, passing a stem-cell bill, cutting interest rates for college loans in half, giving the government power to negotiate for lower drug prices, eliminating tax loopholes that outsource jobs, rescinding subsidies for Big Oil, putting money towards alternative energy sources, and adopting rules for a “pay-as-you-go”

Got all that?

If anybody happened to be wondering, 100 hours ago (if today is Thursday) was Sunday. Apparently, Nancy Pelosi is going to drink seven cups of expresso on Monday morning, lock the doors of the House chamber and not let anyone leave the floor until all this stuff gets done. If she can pull this off in one workweek, we can only imagine how much she will be able to accomplish in two years.

Now, I realize this is mostly political grandstanding. Pelosi is trying to shoot the moon, and if she falls short, so what, she has the rest of her term to work with. In my mind, if she can get two or three of these things accomplished in her first week, it would be a success. But is how she expects things to work? That she can throw some pixie dust in the air and effortlessly pass a bill? I sincerely hope that Pelosi is not as naïve as this list of 100 hours’ work suggests.

Mrs. Pelosi, take note—it’s not as easy as Schoolhouse Rock. Republicans had majorities in the House and Senate and Bush in the White House this past term and got nothing done. The Democrats’ majorities are smaller, and they will have to get through President Bush to pass anything, as they certainly will not be able to override his veto. The Republicans—still a very formidable minority, will make every effort to block the Democrats’ agenda, just as Democrats did to Republicans for the past two years.

It will be interesting to see if the Democrats can garner enough support to apply their agenda, however ambiguous it may be. For six years their job has been to stand in the way to slow down the charge of Bush and Company. Have their offensive muscles atrophied, or can Democrats present a political philosophy that connects with the concerns of the American people?

One thing that troubles me about the New Direction is that there is nothing regarding terrorism or Iraq. No assault rifle ban? No port-security measures? No discussion on what we can do go get out of the snake pit that is Iraq? Republican pundits may be right: the Democrats can take America in whatever direction they want, but if they ignore these key issues, a Democratic Congress might be the best thing for Republicans to run on in 2008.

How are The Sopranos and Jews connected? You'll never guess...

If you're reading a blog, I'm sure you've seen Loose Change.
It is a video that is part of the 9/11 Press for Truth organization, a loose collection of bloggers, forums, public speakers and videos that don't have any stated goals except to "expose the truth." Loose Change's creator and narrator, Dylan Avery, spliced together footage taken mainly from CNN and FOX News, along with additional footage from the Naudet Brothers (who made the documentary 9/11). Loose Change has grown in popularity since its creation, mainly spread by word of mouth and over conspiracy theory websites. In 2006 alone it had over 10 million viewers.

Immensely popular, Loose Change or its creators have made appearances in Vanity Fair, TIME Magazine, Empire Magazine and assorted smaller magazines. It has been aired on television in Pakistan, Portugal and Australia.

Dylan Avery was not a very successful man before Loose Change. He'd grown up in Oneota, New York, and by the age of 19 had applied twice to Purchase College's Film School and been rejected both times. He still holds only a high school diploma. It was his dream to be a famous director.

In May, 2002, Dylan was working construction when he ran into James Gandolfini at an opening party. That's right, the actor who plays Tony in The Sopranos. Dylan Avery apperantly cornered James Gandolfini and talked to him about his troubled film career (Dylan's, not James. James film career is going great, I hear he's getting a million an episode for Sopranos). Dylan paraphrases Gandolfini as saying, "if you want to be a successful director, you have to have something to say to the world." That month Dylan started working on Loose Change.

Originally Loose Change started as a fictional story about a group of friends that discover that their own government was behind the attacks of 9/11. Dylan himself has admitted this in an interview with "Movie Minutiae: Loose Change" :

"It was supposed to be making a fictional story about me and my friends discovering that 9/11 was an inside job, and doing something about it, and basically that happened in real life."

That fictional story was called Loose Change, and while Dylan changed the genre from fiction to fact, the name stayed. That right there is every college kid's dream, becoming famous, making a difference and living in a James Bond-type world all rolled into one. Except that it never happens.

But Dylan Avery was becoming more convinced the more old footage he surveyed. The first edition of Loose Change cost 2,000 dollars to make and is basically an hour and a half long Powerpoint. The first edition was not as well cut as the edition that followed, and Dylan was distributing it on cds that he was selling. When it was put on the internet it was originally funded and set up by one Phil Jayhan. Phil Jayhan runs letsroll911.org, a website that features Loose Change prominently. It also features a conspiracy theory that George Bush and Dick Cheney entertain male hookers (not kidding).

Loose Change is available on Google video, and held the top ranking position of most watched video until mid 2006. A Scripps Howard and Ohio University poll in July 2006, in the height of Loose Change frenzy, came up with these numbers. 16% of the respondents said "it's very likely" or "somewhat likely"..... "that the collapse of the twin towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the two buildings." And 12% said that they "suspect the Pentagon was struck by a military cruise missile in 2001 rather than an airliner captured by terrorists."

How just is it to promote such theories? The families of those aboard Flight 93 have been regarding their dead loved ones as heroes for years, and now there is a new view, on the most watched online video, that their loved one is alive somewhere, kept in an unused NASA station (this is actually asserted in the video). Is this an appropriate message to be sending to the public? To decide this I took a look at the 9/11 Truth Movement and its intentions.

Phil Jayhan, another member of the 9/11 Truth Movement, runs the website letsroll911.org. There he promotes Loose Change and other conspiracies. He is also known for suggesting that the September 11th attacks were caused by Jews. That's right, letsroll911.org suggests that a cabal of Jewish bankers control the world and orchestrate events like this to steal money and manipulate nations. He is also intensely anti-Israeli, and on his site you will find links to anti-Zionism sites that portray 9/11 as an attempt by Israel to gain more leverage in the Middle East. The words "Zionism" and "Zionist" pop up a lot on sites like letsroll911.org. And that site is considered a prominent member of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

And Loose Change is heavily connected to the 9/11 Truth Movement. In Loose Change there is a part where it states who the film is "Featuring Research" from. One of the four researchers is a blogger whose forum name is Killtown. The following is a quote by Killtown, posted on a holocaust forum.

"I've always had a problem with the claimed number of Jews that allegedly died there [Auschwitz]. I keep hearing "6 million" or "1.5 million" that alone is a HUGE discrepancy. Some say the number was as low as 280,000.
Suspecting what the Israeli/Palestine conflict is really about, the strong evidence Israel was involved with 9/11, and seeing how 9/11 was faked in general, it makes me wonder how much of the Holocaust was true or not."

All through Loose Change the screen zooms in and circles or focuses on one article of text. But almost all of those articles are articles that appeared in The American Free Press. The American Free Press is a political magazine that many have declared to be neo-Nazi, and takes a very strong anti-Israeli stance. It also features articles about a Jewish takeover of the world.

If one looks deep enough into the 9/11 Truth Movement, if one clicks on the links on the side of the many sites, there is usually a shadowy underground of anti-Semitic views, bigotry, and sometimes utter insanity.

A constant criticism of Loose Change has been that it cherry picked facts and photographs. I see little difference (in terms of moral intent) in cherry picking facts and photographs to promote a conspiracy theory or to promote a way in Iraq. This is called a documentary and thus degrades all documentaries. Loose Change makes it so when real independent investigative journalism comes along, the American public is likely to dismiss it.

Dylan Avery now appears constantly on talk shows and in news articles, and is becoming a recognizable face. on the 5th anniversary of 9/11 he was portrayed as a leader of the crowd of people standing outside Ground Zero. But he still has a facebook account. Reading an excerpt from that, it is easy to see the teenager with a high school diploma behind this phenomena.

Wednesday, November 01, 2006.
"its my birthday. again.

yeehaw i'm 23. i can.... be a year older. when i turn 25 i can rent a car, so there's something to look forward to.

thanks for all the well wishes, guys. i read almost every single one. don't be concerned, btw, just because we're driving around los angeles and meeting with charlie sheen doesn't mean we're letting fame get to our heads. it means we're making the necessary moves to get the truth into theaters next fall. that's all.

i'll always be a hippie from upstate new york. :D"

Dylan Avery was a hippie from upstate New York. While working construction because he had been rejected twice by a film school he got advice to shock the American public from Tony of the Sopranos, then he spliced together a fictional film about a group of friends finding out that 9/11 was an inside job, then he became convinced that his fictional film was real and started marketing it online to people like Phil Jayhan, who runs an anti-Semitic website, then he used sources from an anti-Semitic newspaper in his once-fiction-now-fact documentary, and research from a Holocaust-denier, and then it became one of the most watched videos on the web, and four years after he started in May 2002, he is riding around Los Angeles meeting Charlie Sheen.

Dylan Avery is certainly living his dream as a great director, with his own studio company and his own star power. But is it really clear that he's doing this to expose the truth? Or is he just living out a fantasy? And if he is just living out a fantasy, is it right to take the American public along for the ride?

Great Wal of...Kentucky, or something.

I, as many of you know, proudly own and display a collection of eccentric (maybe plain weird is more accurate) t-shirts. The purpose of these shirts ranges from fishing for a laugh to referring to an inside joke to stating my beliefs. This August, lightning struck again.

Upon Googling “Walmart sucks boycott anti tshirt,” I found this: http://www.fatamerican.tv/shirtpage/sweat-shop.htm

While some people will giggle at my shirt, I take it very seriously. Anyone who knows me, even at a superficial level, finds out I do not shop at Wal-Mart, and more than casually protest when other people do.

I do not object to the American consumer buying goods at bargain prices. As Stephen Colbert puts it, he wants to “be able to pay just $1.95 for a twelve pack of tube socks.” Just as water seeks the lowest level, and electricity seeks that ground, consumers seek the lowest prices. And why wouldn’t they?

According to Wal-Mart spokewoman Sarah Clark, a working family could save $2,300 by shopping at Wal-Mart. I’m all for that. That’s great.

But, as Senator Byron Dorgan points out in his well-researched book Take this Job and Ship it, $2,300 “doesn’t go very far if Wal-Mart costs you your job, health benefits, and/or forces your local taxes higher.”

Dorgan is right. Yes, Wal-Mart has the cheapest prices around, but to say that the price of your two-gallon tub of reduced fat mayonnaise is the only factor that should influence your shopping is simplistic and unwise. Commercial purchases are complex, going far beyond the price tag into the ethical and macroeconomic spheres as well. Although Wal-Mart is good for shoppers, it is bad for American workers, and even worse for our country.

In 2005, Wal-Mart tallied $258 billion in sales (or $40 of purchases from every person on the planet). Wal-Mart is the biggest private employer in the USA, providing 1.2 million jobs (1.5 million globally). Americans has 3,000 American stores, and plans to open 1,000 more in the next five years.

This sheer corporate girth has never been seen as a good thing. Standard Oil and the railroad barons of the late 19th century were enemies of the public and the government, despite originally being deemed “convenient,” “money-saving,” and “signs of progress.” History proved that all three of these claims to be false, and it will do so again with Wal-Mart.

Is Wal-Mart a trust? A cornerer of the market? A monopoly in the making? Just about. Forget K-Mart and Target, Wal-Mart’s economic might is greater than 161 countries. Also, Wal-Mart is China’s eighth largest trading partner, just ahead of Russia, Canada, and Australia (the first largest, second largest, and sixth largest countries in the world, respectively). By 2007, it is predicted that Wal-Mart will control 35% of both the grocery and pharmacy industries.

Wal-Mart’s current power is nothing short of hazardous to our economy and the American way of life. How powerful is Wal-Mart? Well, when a store in Québec voted to join a union, instead of negotiating or bargaining with employees, Wal-Mart acted with absolution.

They closed the store.

Maybe the reason that Wal-Mart gives you smiley-face stickers when you go to their store is so you’ll ignore the frowns of entrapment and despair on the faces of their workers.

Some workers even got to have sleep-overs at Wal-Mart! In 2003, in a raid of 60 stores across 21 states, 245 illegal immigrants were found to be working for the company. Many of these workers slept in the backs of their stores (maybe that’s why your Wal-Mart sheets and pillow seemed already broken-in).

According to a UC-Berkeley study, Wal-Mart associates (euphemism for employees, it’s classier this way) earn 31% less than surrounding employers. These surrounding employers however, can do little to resist the retail giant.

For every Wal-Mart Supercenter that opens (1,400 nationwide), statistics show, two grocery stores close. Huffy Bicycles, an all-American brand, moved a factory of 900 workers to China to keep prices below Wal-Mart’s acceptable threshold. Etch-A-Sketch, who was ordered to keep prices under $10, had to move their Ohio factory of 200 to China. These two toys are now Chinese-made, and their employees were left without jobs. But they could skip on down to Wal-Mart and don that sharp blue smock, so all is well.

In total, 70% of Wal-Mart’s products are made in China. American companies cannot compete with sweatshop prices and American workers cannot compete with sweatshop wages. But, as Colbert points out, “If we have a permanent underclass working for sub-poverty wages, we won’t have to send our jobs away to the third world countries to stay competitive, we’ll have a third world country right here.”

The Democratic Staff of the committee on education and the workforce estimates that
a Wal-Mart of 200 employees costs federal taxpayers $420,750 a year in social welfare expenses. This is about $2,103 an employee (remember that number about saving $2,300?). Extrapolate this out over the 3,000 stores and 1.2 million dollar employees, and before you know it…there’s an extra, hidden tax on your tube socks, Stephen.

An internal Wal-Mart memo from 2005 stated that “46% of Associates children are either on Medicare or uninsured.” Wal-Mart’s health care plan requires a 35% employee contribution (more than double most major corporations) and thus, less than half of employees can afford the company plan. So we pay for it. Is this a sign of progress? Convenient? Money-saving? Or is this the same type of crap that we tried to stamp in the 1890s?

You know how I feel. Now suck it up and pay the extra dollar for those tube socks. Do the right thing.

Moderate Schmoderate

I go to Hampshire College. Yeah, that one with the Saturday Night Live skit about people getting high. Yeah, I’m shaggy from Scooby Doo. It’s not that bad of course, although I would say we have a disproportionate amount of people who smoke pot and cigarettes. But the reason I came here was because everything I read and heard pointed to this place as nonconformist and free-thinking. And here I’ve found a good amount of people who really do think analytically about subjects and who do consider all points of view. However, I’ve also found something else surprising about a place so liberal.

Apparently it is just as easy to be an ignorant liberal as it is to be an ignorant conservative. At my high school, it just so happened that all stupid people (don’t pretend they don’t exist) happened to be conservative, and all smart people (except for a few that we labeled as ‘bad apples’) were liberals. But here, something incredible has happened. The positions have reversed themselves.

People take positions on things that are extraordinarily complicated (let’s say abortion) without even thinking about it, and with the utter conviction that they are right. The conviction is what scares me. It is unrelenting and it is tireless in its protests. Not only do they consider themselves right, they consider everyone else wrong. They are so convinced that the majority of America has no idea what they’re doing, and that if only everyone else could see things their way, everything would be all right. They don’t seem to consider that maybe their economic policies would collapse the nation, or that utter-gun control could endanger our freedom, or that hugging the Middle East won’t actually make it all better.

It is what I’ve deemed (and I didn’t think it could exist!) Fundamentalist Liberalism. And before you all run to your dictionaries, Fundamentalism can actually apply to movements that aren’t religious, it’s just a very broad term. Now, there are two problems that I see with this movement.

One is the same problem that I have with religious fundamentalists, which is that in placing all belief in one thing, you immediately close yourself off from all other arguments. Although the aims are totally different, and I would argue that although Fundamentalist Liberalism is relatively harmless (simply because it has a much smaller base than any other fundamentalist movement), the results seem to be same as Conservative Fundamentalism. It’s kind of interesting how Conservative Fundamentalists want something, like more US involvement in the Middle East (which would, let’s admit, lead to nuclear war with Iran), and Liberal Fundamentalists want absolutely no involvement in the Middle East (which would eventually lead to nuclear war with someone like Iran), and both positions end up in the same way. Because of the fact that the US isn’t alone in the world, either complete view on a far end of spectrum ends up leaving us vulnerable to the other nations that choose the opposite way. Thus moderate (with good progressive intentions) seems to be the best way to go.

The other issue is a general lack of motivation on the Liberal side of the Fundamentalist gap. Because they believe that the rest of the nation is utterly moronic most have given up hope in terms of doing anything constructive. But Religious Fundamentalists have a strong motivation to move forward (converting the public), so it’s now a political force to be reckoned with. This lack of motivation stems from several beliefs: the two strongest are that fact that they think everyone else is stupid, and that the majority are strong atheists. Oh yeah, another similarity. In talking to someone, lets say a Christian, there is no argument that I can make that will make them cease to believe in God. In talking to an Atheist there is no argument I can make that will cause them to believe in God. (I’m agnostic by the way). It’s just interesting (and also quite terrifying) that in swinging to either end of the political spectrum you wind up in the same place, a Dr. Suess wonderland where logic no longer applies, a place that quickly crumbles under the weight of the real world’s demands.

-Erik

Election Night Fever, feat. John Travolta

So. Deval Patrick it is.

Eh.

I was only casually interested in this campaign from the start, not because I thought it would be boring or unimportant, but because I thought its end was fated. In fact, this has been one of the most exciting races in the state’s political history, and one of the more crucial as well.

The Romney governorship has literally starved the state’s towns and schools of money that is rightfully theirs, brandishing a token surplus and ambiguous jobs figures as “economic growth.”

As a centrist, I would usually find it desirable to have a Republican as Governor. But there is a huge difference between a northeast Republican—Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania—and a Utah one—frickin Mitt Romney—as governor. Our legislature is one of the most liberal in the country, and the counterweight of a moderate Republican governor can act to temper the near-socialist policies of the state house and senate.

Bill Weld, Paul Cellucci, and even the baby-toting, helicopter-commuting Jane Swift have acted in this capacity, and have checked and balanced the state’s ultra-liberal leanings. Republican governors have sat in the corner office for 16 years, but after Romney, enough is enough. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts is not about to elect yet another Republican, especially with the severe case of Romney burn we’re nursing. Furthermore, in these polarized times, this population of liberal Bush-haters is not going to elect Keary Healy for governor.

So again, Deval it is. Rally behind “together we can.”

And there’s good news—he’s running on the platform of hope, whatever the hell that is.

I’m not crazy – just talk to me

Let me be up front with this. I’m coming out.

I’m a Christian.

I go to church. I believe in literal interpretation of The Bible. I am anti-abortion, anti-same-sex marriage, and lament the moral and cultural disintegration of our society.

But I’m not crazy.

I don’t own, have never owned, and will never own an exorcism kit or a piece of toast with the Virgin Mary on it. I do not run around beating people with my Bible. I do not try to “convert you.” I will not say you’re going to hell. I do not go to anti-gay demonstrations holding a “God hates fags” poster (by the way, He doesn’t). I am against banning or blocking access to birth control. I believe that in its implementation, abstinence-only sex education has been primarily ineffective. I will never stand outside of a Planned Parenthood and abuse doctors and patients with destructive words. I do not champion against stem cells (I’m for them) while preaching a “culture of life.” I support stem-cell research and acknowledge the importance and veracity of science and the existence of eons further back than 4,000 years old (and along with them, dinosaurs). I think that both Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson are an embarrassment, and are destructive to our nation and both the Christian and non-Christian agendas of our country.

Am I rare? Is this fusion of Evangelical (yes, I am) Christianity and un-insane, near-normal logic achievable? And furthermore, how many “moderate Evangelicals” exist? Is this an aberration in the thinking of a singular collegian male, or is this the biggest rising movement in Christianity today?

Well, I don’t need to tell you. I don’t feel I have the right. Ask around. Ask the Christians that you know, talk to them. Don’t let the conversation end if they say they’re against gay marriage, probe them on it. Ask what they think about the legal status of same-sex couples and about gay people coming to church. I have a feeling you’ll be very surprised.

Most Christians are not bigoted. Our beliefs are not derived from hate and exclusiveness, but from compassion and love. We cannot have our opinions summed up in one-sentence blurbs. We are not sheep. We can and do disagree with our ministers/pastors/priests. It is not the Middle Ages anymore, and we do not fear the presence of an inquisition to punish heretics for unorthodox views. Religion is a very personal thing, and people put as much different personal variability into their beliefs as they do with other parts of their lives, like music, hobbies, and wardrobe. And for goodness’ sake, Falwell and Robertson (and all like personalities) are not Christians’ Bin Laden:

“Asked to rate certain personalities on a 0-100 scale of favorability, Baptist television personality Jerry Falwell scored only a 44 percent rating among white evangelicals. Christian Coalition thunder and broadcaster Pat Robertson fared slightly better, at 54 percent.” (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_9_121/ai_n6173720).

Saying that Jerry Falwell and his 44 percent favorability rating speaks for Christians is like saying that President Bush and his similar approval rating speaks for Americans. The reason you never see moderates on CNN is because people would never say, “Hey, guys! Com’ere and check out this crazy Jesus freak on TV!” It’s the same as talk radio. It’s bad for ratings. If you are a moderate; you aren’t provocative enough to make waves.

Christianity calls for meekness, humility, and loving all of your brothers, Christian or non, gay and straight. I hope that as young Christians and young people of other faiths or of agnosticism and atheism interact, we will be brought together by our many likenesses, not separated and segregated by our less frequent differences. I just hope that one day, when the time comes, us moderates of the middle will arise and take back their religion from the power-mongers who hijacked it.

Chris

1984 was a good year. It is also a prophetic book.

Hello, all. If you missed it, a couple weeks ago my family went on holiday (I’ve always wanted to know what it feels like to write “on holiday”) to Washington DC. If you haven’t been, go. It was really a great trip, and there is plenty to do for those of all interests.
It was a more than eight hour drive, so I had to find a way to pass the time. I took my iPod, my laptop, a Time, a Newsweek, Emerson’s summer reading (The Motorcycle Diaries, by the Ernesto “Che” Guevara), and my old, beat-up copy of Orwell’s (no first name needed) 1984. The rest of my reading things went unused, and I dived into a rereading of the old classic.
I first read 1984 during Sophomore year, and therein discovered my love for dystopian literature. I happened across my copy of the book at Triton when I found it on the floor near a trash-can after the last week of school. It sat next to an old, well loved textbook and a destroyed Shakespeare, and I intervened to save it from certain internment in a landfill. It was obvious that this book could not be issued for student reading anymore, even in the face of Triton’s budget woes. Its paperback cover had long ago fallen away, but it still proudly proclaimed “84, George Orwell” on its now front cover. I’m guessing the numbers “19” were on the page to the left of it, but I have no way of knowing. As it could be said (only those who have read the book will understand), the book is coverless, it was always coverless, and it will always be coverless.
1984 was on my list of books to reread, but I felt that it would be worth it to buy new, so I could lend it to friends, peers, and one day, to my children (yes, I thought that far ahead, I hold this book in very high regard). But I felt obligated to claim this mutilated copy, especially considering the themes on which the book is based.
1984, along with Farenheight 451 and Brave New World, are favorites of mine, and were all written within ten years of each other. Despite being written to satirize and delegitimize Soviet-style totalitarianism, this trio of books has only gained relevance and potency over the decades, after the Cold War and Soviet totalitarianism have largely subsided. Now, in the midst of the information age, we are no more out of the woods on the issues of freedom of information and freedom of being than we were fifty years ago. Omniscient “thought police” intelligence agencies, limitless surveillance techniques, alterations of the past, corruption and graft at society’s top, and forbiddance of books and sections of the internet abound in much today’s world.
Many of you may anticipate where I’m going, and I’ll beat you to it. The United States is not “Orwellian.” America of 2006 is eons apart from 1984’s Oceania. But visiting the nation’s capital while reading the book made me think about the way the Bush Administration likes to do business, and made me notice some un-over-lookable parallels between Ingsoc and Bush methodology. These quoted passages are long—feel free to skim, it’s quicker and you’ll get the main idea.

First, contradiction in name of agency or law as a means of justification.
Oceania:
Even the names of the four Ministries by which we are governed exhibit a sort of impudence in their deliberate reversal of the facts. The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental, nor do they result from ordinary hypocrisy; they are deliberate exercises in doublethink. (Chapter 9)

Bush Administration:
The Bush administration developed a plan called the Clear Skies initiative and submitted it to Congress in February 2003 as a proposal to amend the Clean Air Act, which is the primary federal law governing air quality. But "Clear Skies" is a clear misnomer, because if Congress passes the Clear Skies bill, the result will be to weaken and delay health protections already required under the law. The Clear Skies legislation sets new targets for emissions of sulfur dioxide, mercury, and nitrogen oxides from U.S. power plants. But these targets are weaker than those that would be put in place if the Bush administration simply implemented and enforced the existing law! Compared to current law, the Clear Skies plan would allow three times more toxic mercury emissions, 50 percent more sulfur emissions, and hundreds of thousands more tons of smog-forming nitrogen oxides. It would also delay cleaning up this pollution by up to a decade compared to current law and force residents of heavily-polluted areas to wait years longer for clean air compared to the existing Clean Air Act. (http://www.nrdc.org/air/pollution/qbushplan.asp#clearskies)
The Healthy Forest Restoration Act was sold as a pro-environment bill that would reduce the risk of large forest fires. However, most environmental groups argued that the title “healthy forests” was a dangerous misnomer and that the bill would actually cause harm to our forests not protect them. The Union of Concerned Scientists noted in their newsletter earthwise (Winter 2003-2004 edition) that commercial timber companies “would be contracted to thin forests in exchange for the trees they cut down, so there is a financial incentive to cut down larger, more valuable trees that actually help keep fires from spreading. There were also no restrictions placed on where thinning could occur; so, rather than protecting communities at risk, timber companies could harvest in remote areas where fires pose no immediate threat to people or property.”
(http://peaceworks.missouri.org/monitor/2005/fall/1.html)

Second, alteration/denial of the past.
Oceania:
On the sixth day of Hate Week, after the processions, the speeches, the shouting, the singing, the banners, the posters, the films, the waxworks, the rolling of drums and squealing of trumpets, the tramp of marching feet, the grinding of the caterpillars of tanks, the roar of massed planes, the booming of guns -- after six days of this, when the great orgasm was quivering to its climax and the general hatred of Eurasia had boiled up into such delirium that if the crowd could have got their hands on the 2,000 Eurasian war-criminals who were to be publicly hanged on the last day of the proceedings, they would unquestionably have torn them to pieces -- at just this moment it had been announced that Oceania was not after all at war with Eurasia. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Eurasia was an ally. There was, of course, no admission that any change had taken place. Merely it became known, with extreme suddenness and everywhere at once, that Eastasia and not Eurasia was the enemy…One minute more, and the feral roars of rage were again bursting from the crowd. The Hate continued exactly as before, except that the target had been changed. (Chapter 9)

President Bush:
(6/18/02) Reporter: “Do you believe that there is a link between Saddam Hussein, a direct link, and the men who attacked on September the 11th?”
Bush: “I can't make that claim.”
(6/17/04) “The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda: because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda. There's numerous contacts between the two.”

(New York Times, 7/13/04) Mr. Bush was asked in June 2004 whether he would fire anyone who leaked Ms. Wilson's name. Without hesitation, he said "yes."
(7/18/05) "If somebody committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration."

Third, “War is Peace.”
Oceania:
“The war is waged by each ruling group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make or prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society intact. The very word 'war', therefore, has become misleading…The effect would be much the same if the three super-states, instead of fighting one another, should agree to live in perpetual peace, each inviolate within its own boundaries. For in that case each would still be a self-contained universe, freed for ever from the sobering influence of external danger. A peace that was truly permanent would be the same as a permanent war. This -- although the vast majority of Party members understand it only in a shallower sense -- is the inner meaning of the Party slogan: War is Peace.” (Chapter 9)

President Bush:
“I want to thank the choir for coming, the youngsters for being here. I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace. We want people to live in peace all around the world. I mean, our vision for peace extends beyond America. We believe in peace in South Asia. We believe in peace in the Middle East. We're going to be steadfast toward a vision that rejects terror and killing, and honors peace and hope. I also want the young to know that this country, we don't conquer people, we liberate people -- because we hold true to our values of life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The security of our homeland, the need to make sure that America is safe and secure while we chase peace is my number one priority for the country.” (http://www.studentsfororwell.org/yarr/warispeace)


On Wednesday, November 3 2004, the day after our country reelected President Bush, our own Erik sat at a Triton Library computer, uttering, “We’re screwed,” under his breath.
Are we? Far from it. But we have to pay closer attention, and improve our sophisication of how we gain our understanding of the news and the government. The media has turned our newscasts and newspapers into propaganda. The 30-minute newscast (22 minus commercials) devotes about 90 seconds to its top story, and only superficially reports the news, while adding the spin of its given network. The consolidation of media companies into a few megacorporations (see chart: http://www.mediachannel.org/ownership/chart.shtml) has resulted in selective purges and censorship of the news. The front page filling “gotcha” photos on major newspapers (see The Boston Herald or New York Post) look more like picture books than the deliverers of the day’s news. The sound bite-ization of our public officials’ speeches allow President Bush and political spin masters to disguise their words as truth.
And even if the Rove-driven political machine did want to turn the United States into an absolutist police state, they have proven too incompetent. Their errs would block whatever progress they could make. What could, however, allow America to fall victim to this scenario is our nationwide case of ADD. I’m a huge fan of CNN. It’s quick and easy. It wraps up the world into a handy half-hour long package. I watch for 30 minutes, and BAM! I’m on my way, armed with the day's news. Believe it or not, the goings-on of the world cannot be compressed into a half-hour bloc of Paula Zahn. It just does not work that way, and because we think it does, terrible tradgedies happen.
What happened to the Darfur Sudan crisis when ABC's World News Tonight ran out of room to report it? It wasn’t solved. It didn’t go away. But we forgot and stopped talking about it because news anchors no longer brought the subject to the forefront of our minds.
Hurricane Katrina? By December, it was off the news, but its refugees were not off the streets. It only returned to newscasts to be in time for the anniversary specials, where much of the Gulf Coast is still trapped in September of 05.
Stem cell research? Not enough room! It was a hot topic in July-August of 2005 and June of this year, but not since. And besides, cancer can cure itself.
AIDS in Africa? That story is tired. And it makes Americans feel guilty and uncomfortable.
Our nation’s immigration policies? The ones that have failed our citizens, our businesses, and the immigrants themselves? Congress did nothing, but the story is gone from the news.
1.1 billion of the world’s people not having clean drinking water? Nope. That one was never on the news, it isn’t sexy enough, viewers might have clicked over to another newscast, and we don’t want that!
Michael Jackson, Natalee Holloway, JonBenet Ramsey, Jessica Lunsford, Martha Stewart, Katie Couric, Barry Bonds, Ann Coulter. Yah! There’s some real news! They can have as much of the newscasts as they want, that’s what the public wants to hear about!
I guess what I’m trying to say is, AMERICA: WAKE THE HELL UP. If we don’t inform and teach ourselves, no one is going to do it for you. Seek out “whole grain” news, instead of “white bread” options. Watch and listen to public broadcasting, PBS’ on television and NPR on the radio. Read blogs and news services that aren’t affiliated with corporations (by the way, I’m not claiming that we should be you news source, then we really would be screwed). Find BBC World Service on the newsdial. If you’re a Liberal, listen to Conservative talk radio to develop counterpoints. If you’re a Conservative, listen to Air America, or visit any forum on the internet (they’re all left anyways). And if you do have to fall back on Fox News or CBS or The Boston Herald, DON’T TAKE THEIR WORD FOR IT! Review what is reported and look for signs of bias or omission in the article/report. Trust me, they are there. Please, do not overlook what is happening around us. It is not just a governmental phenomenon, but a media and cultural one too.
Thank you for trudging all the way through this entry. It is long and it’s content heavy, but I believe it is vitally important. Good luck, members of the Brotherhood.
We will meet in the place where there is no darkness…


I did cite from where on the internet i took the quotes, but the research was compiled by Students for an Orwellian Society (studentsfororwell.org). Visit the site and see if you noticed all of the loops we've been thrown by the media/Bush Administration, I know I didn't.

Chris

"Wheat Thins" contest wrapup

In a stroke of genius, Kevin graced us with the name "angry beaver". Folks, if you are wondering what it takes to get into MIT, look no further-euphamisms for the female reproductive cycle. Well done, Kevin, and congratulations. You win absolutely nothing.

Now, we'd like to get another contest going, you know, as a guise that we care about what you say but really just as a meter find out how many hits we're getting. We can be real dicks sometimes.

Anyways, your challenge is to come up with an ideal imaginary ice cream flavor. Easy enough, no? Well, the caveat is that the name also has to be fitting for a Mexican food restaurant and a pet name for a boyfriend/girlfriend. Do your worst...

As starters: Hot Choco Taco, Sweet Carne' Ammaretto Crunch.

A New Direction

I was recently listening to NPR and heard a man who had contributed a lot to charity because of his great success on the stock market answer some questions. One that struck me was something like this.

Interviewer: “Do you ever feel that to make money on the stock market one has to sacrifice morals? For example, if you know that a stock is going to make a lot of money, but you disagree with its business practices, do you ever worry that you are hurting the same causes you are trying to help by investing in it?”

Interviewee: “Well, if you actually think about the stock market, and how complex it is, you have to realize that if I didn’t buy this stock, someone else would. Because the game is so huge and complex, which stock I invest in doesn’t matter, because someone else would be investing in it anyways. That way I can be cut-throat in my trading without worrying about the consequences.”

Unfortunately I can’t remember the name of the guy and I couldn’t find the interview on the NPR website, but it got me thinking. Is it possible for people to play a role in something as huge, impersonal and complex as the stock market? If something like the stock market is mathematically reduced to Chaos Theory, does what you invest in matter? Or is everything very very related? Another thing I’ve been lightly keeping my eye on is the housing market, which is quickly cooling, and perhaps even bursting. Are these bubbles simply mathematical constructs that happen when a system like our economy is so very large, or are they profoundly influenced by personal choices?

The first recorded boom and bust cycle that resembles anything our markets go through now happened in the years of 1635-36, in the Dutch Netherlands. And the product was not gold, spices, silk, or any other strict commodity. It was Tulips.
That’s right. The Tulip has a long and interesting history as a flower. The first Tulips were in the steppes of Tibet, and were idolized by the warriors and tribes there as a flower of the Gods. Because the steppes are notorious for being lackluster in color, it is easy to see how the people there would have been in awe of this brightly colored flower that stood up straight from the rocks. The blood-red hue of the original Tulips made them perfect to be worn into battle.
The English word for Tulip comes because Arabs generally worn them in their turbans. The Mongol Horde brought the Tulip with them to the Middle East, where is stayed and became cultivated. It was there that the Tulip truly came into its own in terms of prestige, probably because the Arabic word for Tulip is lale which is made up of the same characters as Allah. It became the holiest of flowers.
From there it made its slow journey to the Netherlands. At the height of the Tulip frenzy, a single tulip bulb would be the most valuable object in all of Amsterdam. The most famous bulb was recorded for selling at 6,000 Florins, with the average Dutch worker making around 150 Florins annually. Today the average US salary is 35,000 a year, so that Tulip sold today (yeah yeah its hard to compare two economies but whatever) would be around 1,400,000. In 1637 the market crashed because of over-speculation and people realizing that prices could not climb any higher. The Dutch economy was shattered and thousands ended up with bulbs that they paid hundreds of times market value for. The Netherlands then quickly came down the bubonic plague right after that (not relevant but man their luck sucked).

So who was to blame for the first market bubble bursting? Chaos theory or human error? I would say that human error has everything to do with it, and that even a system as complex as the stock market is made up only by a series of choices. It’s funny that a system made up of human choices ends up being described as chaotic (in a mathematical sense).
Traffic follows the same rules. When you apply models to traffic the closest mathematical models that fit are fluid dynamics. But really each ounce of pressure to the break and gas are human choices. Is it a coincidence that human choices end up looking like we follow nature’s laws in our decisions, that from a distance we model like falling leaves or spilling water? Is it possible to simply leave morals out of it because from a distance we have no control over what everyone else does?

But just where do you draw the line on that? If there is an average amount of murders in the US, and if no life is substantially better than another, would it be fine to just kill someone now, because there is an average and thus your decision seems to indicate that another person would be saved from murder because of averages. When looked at it this way the remark that we have no control over the complex systems we create is both ridiculous and defeatist.


Just felt like posting this, cause I thought it was relatively interesting and no one had posted in a week. PLEASE feel free to comment on any mistakes or flaws in logic that you see in either the history or the economic stuff, I welcome any input.

Born to be Oscar Wilde

Hey. I'm going on vacaation to Washington DC this week, so I felt it appropriate to do this bona fide politcal column/analysis. Have a good week all, good luck with move in if I don't get back to see you.

And so people who don't care about politics, I challenge you to read and get as much out of this as you can. And to reward you, I'll put a picture link of jello being nailed to a wall at the bottom.

Peace,
Chris


Hilary? McCain? Ha ha. No.
From where will our nominees come?

Understandably, when looking for a Presidential nominee, we start in the Senate. It has long been thought that the Senate it comprised of the most honorable, experienced, wise, and skillful politicians in our public service construct. Many politicos believe that the Senate is a veritable farm of political leadership, and that there is no place better to find a candidate suited to win in a national election.

Believe it no more. This the distinction belongs to our Governors.

Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, and Carter were all Governors when they campaigned for their party’s nomination. Going back further, we can note that Gerald Ford failed win a full term (he was a Congressman) and that Richard Nixon was VP before rising to the oval office. Lyndon Baines Johnson is the most recent former US Senator to have won a Presidential election, and LBJ was launched to the Presidency by an assassin’s bullet.

John F. Kennedy is the last US Senator to make the direct jump from the Senate to the Presidency. He did it in 1960, twelve national elections ago. Fact is, with the emphasis we (and our medias) put on national, as opposed to regional, politics, senators are damaged goods by the time they get to the end of the primary season.

We all saw what happened to John Kerry. Sure, he wasn’t exactly resolute in his politics, but he was not the flip-flopper the Republican machine made him out to be. It was asserted that he, on 350 occasions, voted to hike our taxes. In reality, most of those votes were cast to end debate, yea/nay an amendment, or get a bill out of committee and onto the floor.

The lesson: a Senator’s voting record is his/her’s opponent’s greatest weapon. It is the greatest, most abundant source of what an opposition can use to smear their opponent, and afterwards, defend as empirical truth. Governors (and incumbent Presidents) don’t have detailed voting records to be bandied about to contradict their stated views.

Do any of us really think that Hilary could survive this scrutinizing of her Senate votes? Imagine: “Clinton has voted 1000 times for the war and 2000 times against abortion.”

Hypothetically, could McCain stay face after the revealing of his telling voting record? After trying to rub elbows with the Christian right—W. Bush’s current base—Senator McCain’s socially near-liberal views on same-sex marriage and the relation between church and state would be revealed.

Governors are free of such baggage (and of this administration and Congress’ failures), and only sign/veto bills that make it to their desk.

Govs also can rise to legendary status for leading their states through major events or natural disasters. We have seen Jeb Bush’s (R-FL) stock rise after guiding Florida through the last two overly-active hurricane seasons. Mitt Romney scored points for expediting the Olympics in Salt Lake, although he wasn’t Governor then.

Senators are not really the leaders of anything. Sure, they are senior diplomats, but do they lead? Especially in this age where we turn to our President in times of crisis, we want someone who has already dealt with such crises. At this point, the only thing Senators have proved able to do is raising their own pay and sitting in debate about flag burning until their next vacation.

As promised: http://teachers.henrico.k12.va.us/freeman/zanetti_s/jello.jpg

To Wrap It Up: Ann Coulter Has Cojones

Man I wish reporters at the White House would grow some cojones.

"So President Bush, your concern for the Avian Flu is that it might evolve into a strain that is passable from human to human?"
"That's right."
"Mr. President, I thought you didn't believe in evolution."
"........."
"Sir?"
"Well... I believe in Intelligent Design."
"So God wants a plague to evolve?"
"....yes."

On a lighter note.

Anyone ever heard of Bible Dipping? Well, there’s a new fad these days called Coulter Dips. Go to your nearest bookstore and find Ann Coulter’s new hardcover book “Godless: The Church of Liberalism”, open it to a random page and read a random sentence. The results will astound you. Forget reading your horoscope, Ann Coulter Dips can provide you with valuable life lessons and advice.
The following are three real Ann Coulter Dips:


“Of course, only teachers get long summer vacations, ‘professional development’ days, snow days, and every conceivable federal holiday, it appears that the only people who get better compensation that teachers for nine month’s work are professional baseball players (157).”


“The Democrats will sell out blacks, blue-collar workers, Catholics, Hispanics, and the elderly (97).” I would dearly love to know the sentence above that one, but I can’t, it’s against the rules of the Ann Coulter Dip.


“At least the embryonic stem-cell researchers have a clear financial incentive to lie about adult stem-cell research. Liberals just want to kill humans (195).” Whoops read the next sentence!

I am SO gonna buy a gun if you worthless losers don't comment

Listen, you who call yourselves "Americans". Show your patriotism and comment in the frickin blog. The other night, you people were reeling off names for periods like a Cambodian 7-year-old does Nike sneakers. Now that the post is up, NOTHING.

Now i know that the blog just started and the ball isn't rolling, but this blog is as much about comments as it is abuot posts. Sufficient spew is not achieved in a post, it needs sufficient after-post comment spew to hold it up. And it's YOUR JOB AS AN AMERICAN! Don't ask me why, but if you don't cmoment, we'll all be wearing turbans in a month. Either that, or we'll all have to go on Fear Factor with Joe Rogan and take a bath in cow feces.

For a picture of cow feces, click here:
http://www.hobotraveler.com/162nepaltoamsterdam/fecesstirringmethanegasnepal.jpg

Couldn't resist, could you? Now go add your period names to the post. Here's another: burgandy blowout. Now go!

p.s. I was just sent - via house elf courier - this link: http://www.mum.org/armedyb4.htm about the current place of menstration in our modern public society. Check it out, but wear a pad, it's the only copy.

I've been told that Wheat Thins are a good cramps food.

We've all been around it, whether we realize it or not. girls all experience it, and like to talk about it, even when guys are around.

ESPECIALLY when guys are around.

If you're still in the dark, we're talking about periods. If you don't have a copy of "Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret" within reach, a girl's period is the week of every month when she really hates you and really loves chocolate. It also has a lot to do with the ability to concieve and the natural ovarian egg cycle, but we don't really care about that.

What we DO care about is what you call your period. We started this brainstorm session at Hannah's a few weeks back, so add to it in the comments section and we'll pick a favorite, who will be awarded absolutely nothing. I'll start this off with a few of my favorites so you see how it goes-

ketchup kerpunzle
ruby tuesday
bloody sunday
strawberry slammer

Ok, people. You can do much better, go crazy!

Ma!? The meatloaf! MAAAAAAAAA!?!?

Hey. I’m Chris and I’m the other Phoenix serial killer. No, the one that hasn’t been caught yet. Yah.

So I don’t think that senselessly (yet, efficiently, if I may add) killing people was contributing to society. So instead of committing my ninth and subsequent murders, I’m writing in this blog. It’s sort of like killing people, except less blood.

As you get used to me and my writing, you’ll notice that I like to be narrow in my entries, and that I am not afraid to extend an issue over three or four updates. I do this so that my points don’t get too diluted. Many columns bite off more than they can chew, like this one I saw the other day:

Iraq is an evil ploy for oil.

Bush is a stupid, dangerous man that will start WWIII.

Red peppers are much sweeter than green ones.

Barbara Streisand was never worth the hype.

Star Jones must have had lipo, and she deserved to be fired.


Seriously. Chicago Tribune, July 23, page C6, bottom fold on the right.

Another thing I won’t do is get personal. Writing “Bush is an a**hole” doesn’t mean, solve, or settle anything (even if he is).

Lastly, I won’t be arrogant in my arguments. Bill O’Reilly, Ann Coulter, and Michael Moore use the “because I’m right, dammit!” method of persuasion. I won’t. It’s retarded.

I challenge all to follow these guidelines, and we can really cover much more ground if we do.

If I break a rule, call me on it, I’ll listen, or read, or type, or rype, or byke, or dyke. Actually, I won’t dyke, but any of the others I’ll gladly do.

I plan to lighten things up, too. Back in middle school, Ben, Dan McGrath, Blaise and I founded the comedy magazine “The Daily Satire”. It came out bi-weekly and after four issues, we lost interest.

I like to satirize the news, à la (but not nearly as well as) The Daily Show or The Onion, so I’ll throw that in there. Or if I stumble across something really wicked sweet (like a blue and purple carrot) on the internet, I’ll post it. Why not?

Other than that, it’s up to you, we’ll see where this goes, where it gets taken.

Keep it real
(I still have no idea what that means),

Chris