Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Beacon Editorializing: 31 Jan.

I've decided to start a new thing where, every now and then when the Beacon opinion page is particularly interesting, I'm gonna write a review/opinion/response/whatver to the things appearing that day. As I've been on the recieving end of both praise and criticism for my works with the Beacon for two years now, I've decided to dish some out for once. But of course, if I criticize a fellow columnist's argument, my comments do not bear any ill-will toward the writers themselves and are merely meant to spark debate.

"Nation should seek unity" -by Sarah Pevey
This was an interesting read. It kinda pulls a 180 halfway through. I totally disagreed with the first half, but agreed with the second half for the most part.

Starting off, it seems like she's arguing that America's political divisons are threating to tear this country apart, then she likens the current political debate to the atmosphere preempting the Civil War. Now believe me, if there were a revolution coming, I'd be on the front lines, but Pevey clearly sees political divisons running much more deep than even I do.

But the real thing I didn't agree with was her apologism for the flaws and failures of our government officials. She seems to imply that we shouldn't be highlighting their failures and corruptions; that we should just "ride it out" and eveything will work out in the end. This is exactly why American democracy doesn't work! Like I, er, that really smart guy, said in his piece today, not demanding acocuntability breeds corruption.

What I did like about this piece was her call for moderation and the examination of your opponents ideas. SImply ignoring everything that the other side has to say will get us nowhere. You must understand how the other side thinks. Like I said last week, you may learn how to better oppose them by understanding them, and there's always the off-chance they'll actually be right.

Like Pevey points out, there is no "us" versus "them" out there, and it's kinda creepy that many Americans feel the opposite. One of the tenants necessary for fundamentalist Christianity, for example, is that they must feel persecuted. The martyrdom complex and the idea of "striving against evil" is necessary for it to flourish, or it would fail outright, as has been shown time and time again through history. I mean look at Bill O'Reilley or Pat Robertson.

But we're all Americans. Sometimes, it seems like its hard for some people to remember that.

Next...

"US society far from being just" -by Jon Fish
Man, I dunno who this guy is, but he's smart. Damn good looking, too. If I were a woman I'd totally have sex with him.

Editorial Cartoon: Eric Moore

Yesterday and today's ed toons have been great. Eric Moore is witty and a great artist. I, too, remember the lugubrious, drunken serenade "lkjhaflhjkagklj!" lol.

That's it for this week. Catch ya later, all.

~Peace

Monday, January 30, 2006

No Surprise Here

Study Ties Political Leanings to Hidden Biases - Washington Post

Correlation between voting Republican and racial prejudice? Naaa, couldn't be.

Monday, January 23, 2006

Why American Democracy doesn't work anymore.

Thursday, January 19, 2006

Beacon Editorializing: 19 January

I've decided to start a new thing where, every now and then when the Beacon opinion page is particularly interesting, I'm gonna write a review/opinion/response/whatver to the things appearing that day. As I've been on the recieving end of both praise and criticism for my works with the Beacon for two years now, I've decided to dish some out for once. But of course, if I criticize a fellow columnist's argument, my comments do not bear any ill-will toward the writers themselves and are merely meant to spark debate.

Hrm, it seems like I only do this when Crystal's runnin'. Fact is I just have a big 'ol break on Thursdays with nothing better to do. Anyway,

"Alito makes for interesting TV" -Crystal Humphrey

Now this was a funny column. In fact, it reminded me of a slightly more crass piece which an incredibly handsome and intelligent columnist wrote last semester, and to which she also contributed.

And the point was there: pay attention, it's important. Despite how boring it might be.


Next...

"Abortion not for court to decide" -Chris Hedgepeth

Okay, I'm gonna sum up every Hedgepeth column I've ever read:

Democrats are stupid, moronic, depressed, godless sex addicts who hate America and need a healthy dose of Paxil. Joseph McCarthy and Richard Nixon rule!

There, now I don't gotta review them ever again, cause they'll all be the same.


So that's all for today, but I wold like to briefly comment on some of the other columns that have run since last time that I really enjoyed. Michael Lumley's piece from last week and look forward to more "quasi-conservative" bashing of Bush. Apparently I'm not the only one that thinks jacking up spending 40%+ is very fiscally responsible. Also, Scott hendrix had another good piece yesterday regarding fundamentalism. Check 'em out.

~Peace out, yo

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

BeaconBrief: 17 January

I'm just gonna be brief here. I dunno who that good-lookin' guy is on the left today, but he's a damn good writer.

Okay, enough with that. I will say that the piece came out lookin' a little weird, though. One paragraph was moved to an entirely out of context location and there were just some very, very strange grammar and style editing choices on both our pieces today.

I think someone at the copy desk was asleep at the wheel. Or maybe drunk.

Meh, it happens. No worries. Whenever I find the time to update my website, you can see the piece as it was intended. Til then,

~Peace

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Beacon Editorializing: 11 January

I've decided to start a new thing where, every now and then when the Beacon opinion page is particularly interesting, I'm gonna write a review/opinion/response/whatver to the things appearing that day. As I've been on the recieving end of both praise and criticism for my works with the Beacon for two years now, I've decided to dish some out for once.

Bear in mind, though, that even if I disagree with or derride a columnist's argument, it's being done in in civil discussion and not meant to be in any way malicious. In fact, chances are good that I'm friends with most of these people. Anyway...

Now, I'd love to link the columns I'm about to comment on today, but the website hasn't been updated yet. When that happens, I'll update with the links. Til then, pick up a copy of the Beacon, jeez!

"Reexamine views in 2006" (can you tell we don't get to write our own headlines?)-Crystal Humphrey

Sigh...I love the girl, but we clearly need to have a talk. Now before I go on, I'll just tell ya that Crystal likes to call herself a centrist. Don't let her get away with it! Lol, na I'm givin' her a hard time, but you will notice she took the moderated conservative view on every issue she mentioned, even going so far as to espouse support of the pseudo-notion of extensive media bias. This is just like the idea of "judicial activism" in that the facts simply go against conservative ideology far more often than not, so instead its easier to slander them (the media and the judiciary, respectively). I've always argued that if the media looks biased, it tends to be because the right is being caught trying to screw America way more than the left. That's not to say the left doesn't do it's fair share of trying to screw us; their attempts usually just pale in comparison.

I did like what Crystal had to say about some of the events though. In talking about Katrina, she couldn't have been more right when she said "For every display of heroism and compassion, there were images of rage and opposition." I remember hoping for a meteor to strike Nancy Pelosi, Kanye West, and Michael Chertoff every time they got on TV in the weeks afterward.

And I absolutely loved the part about Terri Schivo. Bill Frist (R-TN, Medical Doctor, Senate Majority Leader, and complete tool) turned that woman into a martyr for principle, and I remember wishing that someone would martyr Bill Frist for being such a colossal, for lack of a better word, douchebag.

Then there's the Tookie thing. People keep trying to drag me into Tookie debates (damn you Pevey), but I just can't get worked up about it. I don't care about the death penalty. You can't make me care about the death penalty. It doesn't matter!

However, when cornered and forced to take a stance on the issue, I take a purely pragmatic one: what good did it do to execute him? The short answer is, well, none. In fact, we may have done him a favor. I mean if he'd had his sentence commuted, life in prison is no picnic (in fact, it's probably a lot worse if you have faith and know something better lies around the corner). Plus, there was some potential good he could have done. Since his imprisonment, it appeared that Tookie had realized the atrocities he'd committed, and had become a harsh and vitriolic critic of gang violence and the gang lifestyle. Hell, I just tend to think that if his words could have stopped one person from joining a gang, it'd have been worth it.

Then there's the standard conservative rhetoric about all the good we're doing in Iraq. My argumet to that one is well documented: does that really make up for all the bad? The thousands of dead Americans? Tens of thousands of dead Iraqis?

And what about the reason we went there in the first place? We were told that Iraq had WMDs (the republican's favorite buzzword) and that Saddam consorted with terrorists. These two reasons are very compelling reasons to go to war, because if you're a terrorist, who's on top of your hit list right now? That's right: us. We're #1! We're #1! USA! USA! It's too bad that both of these reasons, the only ones we heard til about a year after the war had begun, turned out to be patently wrong if not outright fabrications. Let's get to the heart of the matter, this war is about two things: oil and revenge; and that's why so many have died.

Unacceptable. Irreproachable. Unforgiveable.


Wow I've rambled. Moving on...

"Political labels signify little" -Scott Hendrix

I really liked this column. I fall into this category of not fitting into the standard label system. Now I won't deny my affiliation. I'm a hardcore liberal, and proud of it, but did you also know that I am a certified National Rifle Association Instructor in Rifle, Shotgun, Handgun, and Muzzleloading Rifle and Shotgun? Or that I am an Eagle Scout and still quite active in Scouting? Or that I fully endorse the expansion of nuclear power? Do those sound like liberal traits to you?
And I'm glad Im not the only one concerned about the new "tax and spend conservative" doctrine. Bill Clinton actually cut government spending by over 1%, whereas George W. Bush has increased spending by over 44% in the last 5 years. That's fiscal responsibility, let me tell you.

I'm also glad he got on the new scandals recently breaking out. Well they're not that new. I mean, this is why Nixon was ousted, after all. I've got my own piece to say about spying on Americans. Stay tuned.

Otherwise I don't have much else to say except kudos, Scott. Great piece. Well, save for the "no handguns" thing. I despise the NRA as much as the next liberal (yes, I'm aware I'm certified as an instructor by them, but they're the only ones that do it), but a handgun has legitimate defensive tool. Now if ya wanna talk assault weapons, I'm right there with ya.


Political Cartoon - Josh Schendel

Very funny. Pat Robertson is a dick and a half.


Alright, that's all for this edition I suppose. As an aside I wanna say goodbye to LaRue Cook. The former Entertainment Editor of the Beacon won an internship with Scripps Howard and had to resign to persue this opportunity. Unfortunately, now I have no one to shoot the bull with when I'm down at the Beacon. Everyone else actually does work! Sigh...ah well, good luck man!

~Peace

Saturday, January 07, 2006

Stick a fork in him, he's done.

Tom DeLay to officially step down as majority leader

Even his own party is turning their back on him now.

With the upcoming testimony of lobbyist Jack Abramhoff, who recently plead guilty to a myriad of fraud and conspiracy charges, and having agreed to cooperate in exposing 20 or more congressional Republicans in his schemes, DeLay included, House leaders have demanded new leadership in the hopes of saving face, being an election year and all.

DeLay still plans on running for re-election. I hope he can execute his official duties form behind bars.

Gay Marriage Is Wrong

Via PVP

10 reasons Gay Marriage is wrong:
1. Being gay is not natural. And as you know Americans have always rejected unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because, as you know, a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
4. Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed. The sanctity of Britany Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
6. Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.
7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
8. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.
9. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.

9 out of 10 Baptist divorcees want gays to stop undermining the sanctity of marriage...

Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Abramhoff pleads guilty

20 Republican Members of Congress, Including Tom DeLay, face various corruption charges on Abramhoff's testimony.

Man, it's really starting to look like corruption is par for the course for Republican congressional leaders these days. Granted, Abramhoff isn't in congress, but as a lobbyist for some of the largest Republican organizations in the country, it's expected that he'll be take a couple dozen congressmen down with him, all of them with a little "R" beside the state they're from. I wonder if they put that little "R" on the mugshot photos, too.