Monday, November 29, 2004

Deflation (Said very much like Cajun Man from SNL)

Typically I do not do a lot of that "reflective-journal" posting--you know, that "today I ate yams, then I washed my face and trimmed the hair on my feet" crap that chronicles my life and existence as it is known throughout my tiny corner of the universe--today is different though. For you see, today I experienced one of those truly life changing events... The deflation of a 'child-hood' (or teenaged) idol... Ok, so it's not really life changing but still--so here we go...

First, some background information. All the way up until the end of my junior year there was only one person who could walk into the room and completely blow the lid off of the 'cool-meter' and that was Ross Williams. To me, Ross was just "cool" in human form. Everything about him--his hair, the way he dressed, the way he acted, the fact that he was so smart and funny, his liberal views--oh, sorry--almost everything about him was cool, forgot about that liberal part haha... I always sort of idolized Ross hoping that one day I could be a fraction as cool as him.

I always knew that he had that one little short-coming--what with being a liberal and all--but I never really let it bother me. Lately, though, I'd been hearing that he's been quite the lippy-leftist on his little blog so I hit up a friend for the address and off I went browsing...sure enough...liberal CITY. I mean anti-Bush, anti-Styrofoam, anti-Meat...Classic lefty. As I read on I was almost shocked to stumble upon a post about...Little ole me? Yes, yes, it seems that I have become a big enough threat the the Hampshire County Liberals that my "lunatic right-wing views" must be discussed in the County newspaper AND in Mr. Williams' blog. I read through and it was truly fascinating just how WRONG these people are. Ross, the very definition of cool, is now the enemy. Ignorant, mouthy, intolerable--WRONG. Here's the blah from his blog:

yo folks: hope everyone made it home safely for a relaxing week of nothingness... well, nothingness until about Thursday when I need to study for my Italian oral exam and final, and all my other finals. Shit. Now I feel annoyed, so I’ll talk about what annoys me, and then finish on my lighter notes: so I was reading through the old Hampshire reviews today, and while I won't get into absolutely everything about that, I will offer up my kudos to Hasty and Arnold and Strother for keepin' it real, and I will question the evidence, motives, and general... well... I hate to say it, intelligence of Jeff k's letters... I know Jeff is a smart guy, and I've always liked him, and I guess you can do both of these and still disagree -- strongly -- with his political views, and the claimed "wisdom" contained in his letter. I'm sorry, Jeff, but I cannot "sit back. relax." and "enjoy 4 more years of dead terrorists and lower taxes" simply because there are dead terrorists and lower taxes; here are my reasons: the "dead terrorists" we're killing now in Iraq weren't there when we originally invaded this sovereign nation; we have created this group of people who are upset that we came into their country and leveled it so we could tally the numbers of their (and our) dead in the very numeric system that their society invented. I could go on forever about the thousands of dead Americans who have given their lives for a lie, and for the HUNDREDS of thousands of dead CIVILIANS (how's that for moral, you right-wing lunatics?) but I’ll cut short and go on to taxes. Bush's tax cuts are extremely ineffectual; sure, you get a little check in the mail from your refund, and that's great and all, especially if you're a working student, but what they don't tell you about that is that your financial aid, as well as other monies paid to your institution and all the schools below, k-12, is going down the tubes. Sure, bush granted more Pell Grants this year; what you don't hear is that the actual value of a Pell has decreased to the point of there being a serious gap between the actual money given now and the actual money given under previous administrations; oh yes, we'll all be enjoying our tax cuts all right; oh boy! No education! I guess I can just spend this cash I have sitting around on a pizza and halo 2...

In the "spirit-of-Jeff" I felt duty-bound to reply in order to set the record straight and defend myself. Here it is:

I happened upon your little blog here by chance. I always knew that our views didn't exactly mesh, and I had heard that you were using your blog as a political forum, so I wasn't really surprised to read the liberal blah that is the leftest agenda, I was, though, a bit shocked (two years ago I'd have said honored and excited) to see you talking about ME. I mean, I assume it's me--what other "Jeff K" attacks the twits like Strother, Hasty and Arnold?
I don't mind you 'discussing' my political views. I can't even say that I mind you not seeing eye-to-eye with all of them. What I cannot accept, though, is you distorting the facts. What I cannot stand is you questioning my intelligence because I view things differently then you. Allow me to set the ticket straight:
First of all, there is slightly over A thousand dead American soldiers. There are not THOUSANDS, there is ONE thousand--a small price to pay for a safer America and a free Iraq. Secondly, the terrorists that we are killing in Iraq WERE in Iraq pre-Iraq War--even the 9/11 Commission says that. Zarqawi (sp?) and his little gang of hoodlums were in Iraq seeking refuge and medical treatment in the immediate days before we moved in to free the people of Iraq. Thirdly, you say "hundreds of thousands of dead civilians..." Perhaps you should learn to use the number system you go on and on about because the estimated numbers are between 8,000 and 100,000. Even if we are pessimists and say 100,000, that is not HUNDREDS of thousands of dead Iraqis. Lets compromise and say 50,000---this number doesn't come close to the amount of Kurds Saddam slaughtered--along with the Iranians in the Iraq/Iran war--how about the mass graves of Kuwaitis and Iraqi's who dared question Saddam's leadership? The numbers do not even compare. Do you realize that the amount of soldiers killed in Iraq during the invasion--the FOUR MONTHS of invasion--was less than the amount of murders that happened in Detroit? Think about that before you complain my friend.
And about Bush's tax cuts--they extend much further than the refund check my friend. My father, a small business owner, has directly experienced the benefit of Bush's tax cuts and, if he had followed his accountants advice, could be reaping even greater benefits than he is now. Obviously Bush's tax cuts--which do NOT take away from money that the federal government is spending on education, instead it takes away from the Pork barreling that the Almighty Senator from West Virginia is famous for--are doing some good as the unemployment rates when Bush was re-elected were even BETTER than those of Clinton in '96--and Clinton wasn't in the midst of two wars, nor had he experienced the first large-scale act of terrorism on American soil like Bush has. You know, even mentioning the Pell grants in the same breath as the tax cuts make me sick. You are an educated person, Ross, you should know better. I think it's great that now instead of Jonnie Twitface--who will probably drop out 10 days after getting his $1,000 Pell grant--getting one big check, Jonnie and Judy can both enjoy a little financial assistance. Besides that, why are you complaining? Do you really need a Pell grant? Probably not. No President has done as much for Education as Bush has--and if you follow the lead of the "ALL KNOWING CONSTITUTIONAL GURU BOB BYRD, Education isn't even in Bush's job description. Quit complaining.
Even with all that aside, you questioned my intelligence because I believe what I believe. I thought you said that I could still be a "smart guy who you've always liked" even though I disagree with you, then you say you must question my motives, evidence and intelligence. Viewing the facts in a logical manner, then deciding that I'd rather have dead terrorists and lower taxes than gay marriage, partial birth abortion and human cloning does not make me stupid--and if it does, then by God, print me out a t-shirt that says "STUPID AND PROUD!"
Take care,

Today's Moral: Never idolize crazy liberals freaks who rant about Styrofoam, dead terrorists or taxes because it will only come back to bite you square on the ass!

Monday, November 15, 2004

Survival of the Fittest

Though I cannot claim to be an expert, or even close to an expert, on the subject, evolution is always a topic which brings much yapping from, well, me.

I guess it's because of my personal views which leave no room for support of Darwin's theory of evolution that drives me to want to know both sides. As a creationist who has struggled with just how to deal with the theory of evolution, I believe it both healthy and needed to have a good exposure to both Creationism and the Evolution Theory while studying biology. However, ridiculous Supreme Court cases have often called it 'unconstitutional' to even mention Creationism in the classroom.

A new theory, known as 'intelligence design' now appears to be opening up a little room for the exposure of theories concerning the orginis of life by means of creation by a higher power. This new theory, though attacked by its enemies as "creationism is secular tersm" is catching hold in Pennsylvannia, and could be coming to a town near us.

By Martha Raffaele
DOVER, Pa. -- When talk at the local high school turns to evolution, biology teachers must make time for Charles Darwin -- and his detractors.
This rural south-central Pennsylvania community is thought to be the first in the nation to mandate the teaching of "intelligent design," a theory that says the universe is so complex that it must have been created by an unspecified higher power.
Critics call the change in the ninth-grade biology curriculum a veiled attempt to require public school students to learn creationism, a Bible-based view that credits the origin of the world to God. The school will continue to teach evolution, the theory that Earth is billions of years old and that life forms developed over millions of years.
The state chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union is reviewing the Dover Area School District case. Meanwhile, its Georgia counterpart is fighting a suburban Atlanta district's decision to include a warning sticker in biology textbooks that says evolution is "a theory, not a fact."
"What Dover has done goes much further than what's happened in Georgia," said Witold Walczak, legal director of the Pittsburgh ACLU. "As far as we can tell, Dover is the first school district that has actually mandated intelligent design."
About 2,800 students are enrolled in the district, which encompasses the rural community of Dover borough, and a patchwork of farmland and newer suburban developments in several surrounding townships.
The revision was spearheaded by school board member William Buckingham, who leads the board's curriculum committee.
"I think it's a downright fraud to perpetrate on the students of this district, to portray one theory over and over," Mr. Buckingham said. "What we wanted was a balanced presentation."
Mr. Buckingham wanted the board to adopt an intelligence-design textbook, "Of Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins," as a supplement to the traditional biology book, but no vote was taken. A few weeks before the new science curriculum was approved, 50 copies were donated to the high school anonymously.
Although Mr. Buckingham describes himself as a born-again Christian and believes in creationism, he said, "This is not an attempt to impose my views on anyone else."
Two of the dissenting board members, Carol Brown and her husband, Jeff, were so upset that they resigned after the board voted 6-3 on Oct. 18 to mandate the teaching approach.
"We have a vocal group within the community who feel very strongly in an evangelical Christian way that there is no separation of church and state," Mrs. Brown said. "Our responsibility to is to represent the viewpoints of all members of the community."
Critics of intelligent design contend that it is creationism repackaged in more secular-sounding language. "Creationism in a cheap tuxedo," said Nicholas Matzke, project information specialist for the National Center for Science Education in Oakland, Calif., which advocates for the teaching of evolution.
Even the Seattle-based Discovery Institute, which supports scientists studying intelligent design, opposes mandating it in schools because it is a relatively new concept, said John West, associate director of the institute's Center for Science and Culture.
"We're completely against anyone who says you should downgrade or limit the teaching of evolution," Mr. West said.
Dover biology teacher Jennifer Miller said the curriculum changes have left her uncertain about how to approach her evolution lesson.
"If you put the words 'intelligent design' into my curriculum, then I have to teach it," said Miss Miller, a 12-year veteran. "I'm not sure what that means as to how in-depth we have to go. ... I'm looking for more direction from the school board."

The big argument of anti-'intelligence design' theorists really seems to be that they are afraid of "imposing somebody's else's views" on the children. But in all honesty, isn't that what the teaching of any theory is? The imposition of someone's view on some thing which cannot (or at least has not been) be proven true or false?

I believe that beneath the argument of 'preaching religion' lays the true fear of the intellectuals who appose this measure is that they're afraid of the law set forth by Darwin--the designer of their theory. I honestly believe that they are scared to death that this will be a pure example of survival of the fittest--and in the end, Faith is much more compforting than the thought of being spawned by some primortial ooze...

TODAY'S MORAL: Teaching Darwinism is 'creating a lab for free thought,' but teaching 'intelligence design' is preaching phony religion. It's ok to 'think outside the box' as long as your thinking remains inside the circle that the Intellectuals have place around the box--remember that.

Thursday, November 11, 2004

"They're all Intellectuals, we're stupid dumbasses"

As the animated John Kerry points out in JibJab's video, "This Land," Kerry's "as an Intellectual, you're (Bush) a stupid dumbass..."

This statement has bothered me for some time. The liberals of the world often refer to themselves as 'intellectuals' and it has often caused me to wonder just what sets them apart from the 'common man' (whom they claim to represent). I thought, perhaps it was schooling. That, though, can't be it--both Bush and Kerry attended a prestigious educational institution (Yale). I thought maybe they were more educated in the fine arts--but I wasn't entirely convinced about this either (Dr. V.J. Brown (yesterday's post topic) is no more informed on the arts than I am). I was finally to the point that I was about to call it quits and give up on my search and simply state that it is a FEELING of superiority. Today, I figured it out...

As I sat in Sociology today (my class with the WONDERFUL Dr. V.J. Brown, whom I eluded to earlier in this post and can be read about in full in an early post) listening, well partially listening, to the useless blah which is a Brown-Lecture it struck me...

You see, Brown was, as usual, going on and on about the evils of religion--this time blaming Christians for years of discrimination against women and blacks which is the BIGGEST 'humanitarian crisis' facing us today--and it just clicked.

Intellect, as the John Kerry's and V.J.Brown's of the world refer to it, has nothing to do with education or culture, nothing to do with knowledge or power, instead, an 'intellectual' is one who has been 'enlightened' to the fallacy of religious belief and tradition. Intellectuals are those who have risen above the common man which is too ignorant to sort through the mind numbing garble of religious values. This enlightenment is what sets the intellectuals apart from the 'rest.' It is for this reason that THEY are more suited to spend our tax money, establish moral law (i.e. gay marriage, abortion) protect us from ourselves in our quest to defend America (the intellectuals almost all argue against any type of war). Intellectuals are, simply, the most well balanced, logical group of individuals in the country today. That's all there is to it. Thank GOD for the Intellectuals (I guess we should thank Him since they are to knowledgeable and logical to believe in His existence).

TODAY'S MORAL- Post election discussion has centered a lot on the "democrats being out of touch with 'red America'" This is why. People like this are the mouth pieces of the Democratic party. People who think that belief in God is illogical and irrational will never hold a seat as long as a majority of the American people hold strong to the values upon which this nation was built--faith! Like it or not, Faith is the cornerstone of America. Like it or not, the Christian belief structure is the corner stone of Faith.

Tuesday, November 09, 2004

We ARE the Establishment...

Is it not logical to believe that in the Post-Re-Election days, we conservatives would have an easier times on the ever liberal college campuses? Well, I thought it seemed logical, but apparently the one thing worse for college conservatives than campaigning for Bush is seeing Bush win.

For me, there has been an unbelievable increase in anti-conservative sentiments here at Shepherd.

For example, on the Wednesday after the Election, my political science teacher had a 25 minute rant on the evils of "Big-Oil" and anybody (IE George Bush) who is associated with Big-Oil. She continued to explain that we (drivers of SUV's, big cars, and trucks) are evil and need to see that oil consumption is bad and that having a President who supports big oil is just plain wrong. Whatever lady--I'll keep driving my Jeep until I can afford to buy something bigger....

I guess this doesn't bother me because I just see it as your 'run-of-the-mill' argument from somebody who can't think of anything better to attack the President on.

Today, though, I experienced that hatred of Conservatives that runs deeper than just Big-Oil. It's the hatred that really hurts me deeply--that hatred that makes us all out to be the Evil Bastard Empire that drives around in big fancy cars, living in big fancy homes, with waiters and butlers. We sit in our Ivory Tower and watch as the 'common man' struggles. We allow black women and children to live in the streets and starve or freeze to death. Meanwhile we step over the rotting corpses in our constant quest for the acquisition of wealth. Oh, and we give tax cuts to the rich, too.

Dr. Brown, or Jabba-the-Hutt as I call him, got on his soap box today about how conservatives would have people believe that people who live in poverty caused their own misfortune. He went on to describe his two children. Let me give you a description of them as closely and unslanted as I possibly can.

CHILD 1- Child 1 lives with her husband in Dr. Browns home. Child 1's husband, shall we call him Husband 1, works for a printing company making $10.50/hour. This is not enough to survive in the world, well at least not around here were apartment rent costs anywhere from $900-1500. Couple 1 has 4 children. They don't smoke or drink. Dr. Brown took it upon himself to keep them off the government tab.

CHILD 2- Child 2 lives wither her 'significant other' in Maryland where she is employed as a Certified Nursing Assistant making $11.50. She smokes. Her significant other drinks and smokes. She uses food stamps to subsidize her (low?) income. Couple 2 and their three children live in an apartment in Boonsboro.

Dr. Brown says that smoking and drinking are caused by poverty. He says that Conservatives would pull all their funding/government subsidies because we believe "they caused it themselves." This is true--I would pull their funding. Brown says that Couple 2 smoke, together, 3 packs a day. That's $9.00 a day, $63.00 a week, $3285 a year. That is money that this couple could use to buy a better house, a car, feed their children, or get further education to make more money which would lead to a better life. Does my belief in the idea that these people HAVE done this to themselves make me a bad person? I don't think it does.

He says that poverty is an institution created by society and that once you are in poverty there is no escaping. I have a problem with this. My father worked for very little money. We lived in a trailer which, when purchased, was not in great shape. Today, he drives a fairly new truck, has his own business, we have a house, mom has a car, I have a car, I'm in college. We all have our own computers. Granted, all the bills aren't always in on time. We can't just up and go on vacation or buy things we don't NEED without saving a little, but still. All of this was accomplish with NO government help. NO wealth redistribution. Nothing of the sort. Our system works. That's the bottom line--it works.

Brown also got on this soap-box about the 'tax-cuts for the rich.' Then, he went on to talk about how Husband 1 pays little income tax, because he has a wife and four children. He also said that most years, Husband 1 gets back MORE than he paid in...How does that work? I don't understand how anyone can call them "tax cuts for the rich" when Husband 1 is getting back MORE THAN HE PUT IN! It's a ridiculous claim. I'm tired of it. I am not an evil bastard who doesn't understand the "true needs" of society just because I am a conservative and believe that if I want something I need to work for it. This is just ridiculous.

On a side not, misuse of religion by George Bush also resulted in overwhelming support from mindless Christians which is the only reason he was reelected--remember that!

TODAY'S MORAL- If you're a Christian Conservative, you might as well face it--you are an evil person who would let small children rot in the streets because you care only about your own wealth and well being. Thanks for the insight, Dr. Brown...