Obama's Civil Rights Plan - or as I like to call it, "Mismatching of Agendas 101"

Since John McCain pulled the genius move of selecting Palin as his running mate, Barack Obama will likely be the next President of the United States. Because of this, I felt obligated to go actually find our what this guy's ideas for the country really are, since all I have heard so far is that he is for "change" and "progress." Really?

Personally, I am against both "change" and "progress." If it were left up to me, high school students would still use an abacus in the classroom, and we would teach Creation (and not this "Evolution" monkey-mutant nonsense) in schools. I don't believe that the book of Genesis could possibly be interpreted as anything other than the King James raw facts, least of all some sort of "Metaphor." In fact, the covers of Biology books would look like this:

(pictured above): Creationism's depiction of what the world may have looked like before Jesus killed the dinosaurs, some 10,000 years ago. . .

Haha, sorry to any Creation Scientists who may read this, I had to put this on here. I'm just kidding, I'm not actually sorry. . .

Anyway, so I decided to go ahead and check out Barack Obama's website, http://www.barackobama.com/ and look to some of Senator Obama's stances on Civil Rights issues. To my amazement, the stances portrayed little more than a crude mix-and-match (I believe the military would refer to this as a "clusterf*ck") - censored for political correctness.

Here is part of the list of Obama's goals regarding Civil Rights: Combat Employment Discrimination; End Racial Profiling; and Expand Hate Crimes Stautes. However, there is a slight problem with these three policy goals: there are two irreconcileably conflicting agendas at play. The basic underlying assumptions behind the goals listed are completely mismatched. While the first two, combatting employment discrimination and ending racial profiling, are principled upon the basic assumption people should be treated equally. The third, expanding hate crimes statutes, is principled upon the basic assumption that certain designated groups should be set aside and treated differently.

I know what some of you are thinking here, "U_D, these goals are simply meant to end the arbitrary discrimination that has plagued this country for hundreds of years." No, hate crimes laws operate on the same arbitrary, dumbass assumptions that (I believe) most people wanted to be rid of to begin with. (Get' a ladder Paw, he's climbin' on his soapbox). Honestly, I find hate crimes laws to be one of the most offensive things in our society. This is literally a part of our Criminal Justice System making a ridiculous distinction between "hate" crimes and plain 'ole fashioned crime. For some reason, it is completely different when one person wants to kill another person because of his/her race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, etc. . . How? Does it make the bullet more terrible? Is one person worth more than another, or is it just worse when you kill someone who is different from yourself?

Last time I checked, when a someone decides to murder another person, he has pretty much given up on the whole "equality among men" thing anyway (unless he is just trying to kill everyone equally, including himself - in which case lets hope he starts with the latter). My point here is, pretty much every crime is a "hate" crime. (Crimes of passion sure seem a lot like hatred. Heck, even assassins are working for someone who "hates" the victim.) That said, why distinguish based on these ridiculous assumptions when our goal is equality?

Also of note, the "civil rights" portion of "issues" mentions nothing of Amendments 1 & 2 of the United States Constitution, or even the subject matter of those amendments, which have been hotly debated and litigated recently. I can somewhat understand Amendment 1, I am not sure Obama really gets much heat on this one, but Amendment 2 is still hot contention (and in my opinion an asset he isn't playing up enough) For example, this summer, the Supreme Court struck down a District of Columbia handgun ban as in violation of the 2nd amendment, stating that Americans had a general right to keep and bear arms for defensive purposes. This, by the way, is the first time in history that the Supreme Court has said this, and a lot of questions remain with respect to how this may affect future weapons legislation. But is this mentioned as a "civil rights" issue?

Nope. Wouldn't want to alienate the pompous, gun-fearing contingency. . .

How about other issues?

• Implement an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050.

How long is this guy planning on staying in office again? Hell by that time I'll be damn near ready to start drawing my social security check. (haha just kidding, there won't be any social security when I'm old)

• Make the U.S. a Leader on Climate Change.

Too late! We are already a world leader in building a warmer, greener earth. Heck, once we can get rid of some of that polar ice-cap nonsense, we can turn Waco into beachfront property. I mean, what did the polar ice-cap ever do for you?

Barack Obama and Joe Biden recognize that we must forge a broad coalition if we are to address the great conservation challenges we face. America's hunters and anglers are a key constituency that must take an active role and have a powerful voice in this coalition.

I am confused on this one. Great conservation challenges? Translation: "We are making an obscure and cryptic reference to 'hunters' and 'anglers' *which we aren't* and these people must take an active role in our 'coalition', to what end we are not really sure, as our Dr. Martin - wearing affiliates will likely start leaning on us pretty soon to make all of you start eating Boca Burgers."

Respect the Second Amendment: Millions of hunters and shooters own and use guns each year. Barack Obama believes the Second Amendment creates an individual right, and he respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms. He will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns.

Aside from the fact that I found this is the "Miscellaneous Issues" section under "Sportsmen" (and certainly not anywhere near "civil rights," even though our founding fathers somehow saw fit to place it second in the Bill of Rights, in explicit terminology), I actually have to give credit to Obama for saying it creates an individual right (therefore agreeing with the Supreme Court majority).

Improve Rural Quality Of Life: Combat Methamphetamine

I don't know about this one, not only are you destroying an important part of the Arkansas economy, you are denying these people a valuable education in Chemistry.

Come on, Mr. Obama, think of the children, and the education we are throwing away. . .

Oh well, so the guy steps to the beat of his party's drum (or drums, come to think of it, with the scattershot of the Democratic Party's various interests, he's practically river-dancing). He is a presidential candidate after all, and if he decided not to go along with his party, he'd end up in the same candidate box as Jesse "the body" Ventura. All in all, I think this candidate is a worthwhile one.

(Just kidding, I am writing myself in!)

U_D outsmarts SPAM robot with his infinitely clever logic.

This all started because I accidentally left my messenger service on. (yes, I have a messenger service so I can keep track of some of my friends who either went into the military, or for some other reason aren’t generally reachable by phone) I was minding my own damn business, looking at random stuff on the internet and wasting time, and suddenly I was informed that I had been added by this “person” named “Sharlene” (which I assume is the result of an Indonesian scam artist trying spell “Charlene”). Afterward, I begin receiving messages from “Sharlene” and the “conversation” is posted below.

As a note, I would like to mention that at no time during this conversation did I actually believe that a “girl” named “Sharlene” was really contacting me over the internet to establish some sort of personal relationship. Even if this had been a real person, I still wouldn’t be interested. I am perfectly satisfied with my current relationship and have absolutely no interest in acquiring a cyber-dwelling cam-skank on the side.



Sharlene says:
Hi

[Unfettered_Discretion] says:
who is this?

Sharlene says:
hey, A/S/L?

[Unfettered_Discretion] says:
ASL???

[Unfettered_Discretion] says:
what does that mean?

Sharlene says:
hey whats up babe, U got a webcam? finally someone adds me, I am soo fuckin horny today for some reason lol

[Unfettered_Discretion] says:
? I recommend watching Oprah

Sharlene says:
listen hun, I am just about to start my webcam show with jen, come chat me there in my chat room? We can cyber, I will get naked if u do..lol!

[Unfettered_Discretion] says:
lol why not, of course it's kind of a one-way street if I don't own a webcam

Sharlene says:
I can show u how to watch if u promise not to tell anyone else how to do it???PLEASE

[Unfettered_Discretion] says:
your answer calculator sucks donkey dick

[Unfettered_Discretion] says:
but at least it does emotions

(Some of the messages from “Sharlene” included little smiley faces and the like.)

Sharlene says:
well since its the law that u gotta be 18 (nudity involved), u have to sign up with a credit card for age verification! BUT.. Once you are inside, just clikc on "Webcams" let me know what name you use to sign in with so I know it is you babe! http://www.lovelocalgirls.com/janefun fill out the bottom of the page then fill out the next page as well and u can see me live!

[Unfettered_Discretion] says:
really? then since you magically just shat some legal requirements, I would like to know your source. Exactly what is the "law" at play here, is it state law for whatever state you (and by you I mean the person who set up the spam robot) are in? If it is federal law, I am afraid I am going to require some citation. I'm not sure if I want to tell you my age just to see some low-rent cam whores

Sharlene says:
Please dont mention anything about that in the chatroom once u get in ok?

[Unfettered_Discretion] says:
Oh, I was just assuming that you were going to come over to my house dressed up like a french maid and start firing budweiser bottles out your snatch. . . Can we just do that?

[Unfettered_Discretion] says:
Better yet, can my girlfriend get involved? I'm pretty sure she would like some budweiser too

Sharlene says:
OH SHIT.. k I am late to start my show, I gotta get off msn...I will see ya inside my chatroom babe.. remember not to mention that I am upgrading u... You can use your msn name to sign in so i know it is you..

[Unfettered_Discretion] says:
I am glad to be upgraded! for further contact information, dial 1-900-94Jenny

Sharlene says:
AUTO-RESPONSE: hey just in the middle of my webcam show if you want to watch click the link http://www.lovelocalgirls.com/janefun

[Unfettered_Discretion] says:
Awww, now that you've left I feel all lonely inside! Oh well back to briefing cases. Toodles!


Ha! Eat it spammer! You are no match for a combination of high-speed internet and endless boredom.

Few people can actually fathom how cool I really am. . .

"A Vice Presidential Hopeful's Teenage Daughter with Child!!!" - and other things I don't care about during election 2008

So I'm watching the news about hurricane Gustav "tearing" through the New Orleans area, and I see a headline about John McCain's running mate having a pregnant teenage child. All I can do is anticipate what the amazing point of this story could possibly be. Is the fetus mutated? Is it the product of some sort of imbreeding? (Hey, it is Alaska) And, to my suprise, what is the point of this story? Nothing, there is absolutely no damn point. The entire purpose of this story is to point out to the American public, a group of people currently experiencing around a 50% divorce rate and an increasingly large number of teenage pregnancies, that someone who may possibly be called upon to represent them might have some family issues. My God, what has society come to? (insert eye-roll here)

While this is going on, I got to thinking, "I really don't give two shits about 99.9% of news stories." Not that this is really all that big of an epiphany, I am occasionally just taken back by the in-your-face useless that tv news really is.

Take the New Orleans Hurricane, for example. I realize that hurricanes are dangerous, and that a couple of years ago the city was ravaged by a hurricane. However, does this mean we have to go apeshit just because a category 2 storm (which would probably be little more than an 8-hour party favor in Florida) strikes a city that has been given 3 years of post-Katrina over-funding to get its collective shit together?

And this leads me to another problem: I am tired of hearing about how bad New Orleans is "after Katrina." I usually hear this from people who hadn't visited the city BEFORE the hurricane. (and occasionally from people from nearby towns whose cities were not as fortunate to receive the same un-Godly amount of funding).

Before the Hurricane: New Orleans was one of the most crime-ridden cities in America, with almost unprecedented levels of not only drug activity, but Police and Governmental corruption. The city's main claim to fame, the French Quarter, smelled like sour ass and was generally just a great place to meet drunken tourists, catch HPV, and lose your wallet.

After the Hurricane: New Orleans is one of the most crime-ridden cities in America, with high levels of drug activity and continuing allegations of local corruption. The French Quarter still smells like sour ass, and is still a great place to meet drunken tourists, catch HPV, and lose your wallet.

Wow, the city is really in shambles. . . Or should I say back to normal? Either way, it's about as functional as the Jackson family. (footnote: I can't completely knock down New Orleans, having spent quite a few drunken evenings there myself. New Orleans endows its populace with the enviable ability to not only drink at bars all night long, but also walk from place to place while still carrying open alcohol containers.)

In the media's defense, they did roll out the red carpet for Hurrican Gustav expecting at least a category 3 or 4 storm. After all, with all of the reporters, news correspondents, camera crews, vehicles and other equipment already deployed, they might as well go ahead and flood my television with heart-stopping scenes of signs shaking and National Guardsmen swimming in floodwater.

What else is there to report on? It isn't like we are at war or anything. . . I mean why would anyone bother letting families and friends back home know what's going on in the Middle East when we can dress Geraldo Rivera in a rain poncho?

I'm done writing about this shit. I am finishing my glass of whiskey and going to sleep.


Afterthought: When does Palin's daughter turn 18? I have some friends that might be interested in the "my mom's the Vice President" type. I mean, we already know she puts out. . .

"Unintended Consequences of the Biofuel Industry" and other gripes that come from watching the news

So today I turn on my television and see the heading, "Unintended Consequences of the Biofuel Industry." Now what is going through my mind is some sort of dangerous pollution caused by running cars on ethanol, or maybe some hippie on a soapbox talking about how many animals are slaughtered by machinery used to harvest corn and grain.

But what is the unintended consequence? Higher prices for food crops caused by using those crops for fuel production.

Three words: HO - LY - SHIT!

For those of you who aren't mouthing your words as you read this, when the Damand for a product increases, and the Supply doesn't change, then Price goes up. Take using corn, soybeans, and occasionally wheat for fuel: when you slate a significant portion of these crops for fuel production instead of food, naturally, (since there is now less for food) the price will increase. Gee, do you imagine that this is why so many of this nation's farmers were for using the crops for fuel to begin with? (Not firing a shot acros farmers' bows, just pointing out why any farmer would be for this)

Now don't misunderstand me, I'm not charging everyone with an intimate knowledge of economics. I just think that there are some things that everyone, including legislators, heads of administrative agencies, career farmers, and Fox News correspondents, should know know as a matter of common sense. The fundamental principle of economics is one of those things.

Now I know that some people reading this will think, "But wait, not everyone is intelligent or successful enough in life to understand that." However, I really doubt that those individuals are the ones writing whiny news stories based on a "no shit" assessment of crop prices, but then again, I may be wrong.

This is almost as thoughtful as the standard "Most citizens of (pick today's Arab nation, usually Iraq or Afghanistan) dislike United States foreign policy." Really? Personally, I would love having my country bombed, seeing tanks rolling down my city's streets, and requiring an allied-supervised police force to secure my safety from suicidal nut-jobs with strap-on bombs. I'm not saying that this country didn't need to put a little beating-down on its enemies in the area, but should anyone be suprised that the civilians in those countries aren't really all that appreciative?

Maybe this entire post is cliche', but I still felt the need to get on my soapbox about journalism. I really am not asking for too much, just think about what you are going to report before you report it. For example, if the first thing that you think when you read the story is "no shit," then you should at least reconsider reporting the story.

Another request to mainstream media: is it possible to stop trying to undermine the legal profession by reporting on ridiculous cases and framing disputes in a sensationalist nature?(eg announcing that an umpire sues because he gets hit in his protective helmet by a baseball, which had previously bounced off a batter's helmet) Being a student of the law, I am really tired of, every time I turn on the news, hearing a ridiculously one-sided, underinformed, and ill-advised summary of a lawsuit. It isn't really that hard to report on a case objectively, I do it every time a law professor asks me to summarize a court opinion.

All these people have to do is wait until the court issues its informed opinion (provided ridiculous case reported on even makes it to trial), and then summarize the case. Damn, that sounds really hard. . . Although this won't necessarily result in the same sort of ratings as reporting sensationalist versions of the same case, it might actually convince me that I am watching the news and not hearing about it from my 80 year old grandmother. In the immortal words of WJC, "Give me the facts, the whole facts, and nothing but the facts so help you God."

From the Archives: Nazis at my College. . .

So the Nazis came to town. . .

The other day, a group of Nazis (National Socialist Party to be exact) came to my university to protest the apparant Leftward slant of the University. My first thought at the time was, "Holy shit, a state university with a large number of liberal professors and administrators, say it ain't so!" The amazing part is how clever of a message these people obviously thought they were disseminating. It would probably require someone with intelligence levels falling somewhere between simian and pig shit to figure this one out.

Aside from the "no shit" factor to this demonstration, there is also the "Nazi" issue. I mean, how exactly does one go about becoming a Nazi? Do you just walk down the street one day and think, "man, my life really sucks. I think it is a bunch of African Americans/Jews/pickaminoritys' fault."? Thats almost as cool as chewing on lead. . .

I always try to picture that first sit-down meal with the family where the kid first admits to the parents he has become a Nazi:

Dumbass Kid: Mom, Dad, Grandpa. . . I have to tell all of you something. . .

Mom: What's the matter sweety, is the pot roast too tough?

Dumbass Kid: No Mom, I have decided to join the National Socialist Party. . .

Dad: Dammit you little pile of disappointing shit. I knew you would join those pinko-commie bastards the moment I sent you to that Leftward leaning university!

Dumbass Kid: No dad, it's a fascist organization. I'm uh, I'm a Nazi.

Dad: Holy Shit! I can't believe this. I told your mother to get an abortion when she came in with that damn test!

Mom: Dammit son! Why can't you just be gay like the Johnson kid up the street?

Grandpa (climbing over table): You little bastard! I killed you sons-of-bitches in WW2 and I'll do it again!

Dumbass Kid: I hate all of you! You never understood me! I'm leaving here and going to a large university to protest the Leftward slant in front of the NAACP and a bunch of militant hippies! *runs away crying and carving "Afrikaaner Underground" style swastika into arm with a pocket knife*

By the way, the NAACP and some militant hippie group showed up to protest the Nazis. This was a clever way of sending the message, however unnecessary, that the Nazi message is wrong (as if WW2, the Holocost, and Kosovo didn't serve as a clear-enough message). I guess I should at least give props to the Hippies and NAACP for giving the obvious "Nazis are bad" message that some people may not know. For example, some peoples' moms drank during pregnancy.

Another interesting thing about the Nazis is that they were all from Minnesota. Are people from Minnesota crazy? I mean, aside from voluntarily living somewhere where they can't go outside for 10 months out of the year and electing Jesse "the body" Ventura for governor, what could possibly go wrong? Either way, I had to see this.

My plan for the day:
1. Sleep until at least 11:00. Nothing, not even a Nazi rally right next to campus, warrants my being awake before 11:00 on a Saturday.

2. Proceed to liquor store up the street, purchase 12 pack of beer.

3. grab lawn chair and take beer to set up camp to watch free entertainment, which today comes in the form of a trippy WW2 reenactment.

4. Get as drunk as possible on short notice at a public demonstration, and spend the rest of the day mercilessly ridiculing Nazis by pointing out that unless they are blond, 6' tall, blue-eyed, white guys then they are "unpure" and not fit for delivering the message, while simultaneously hitting on hippie girls.

Unfortunately, I wasn't able to accomplish anything after purchasing the beer because the Nazi rally was over by the time I got there (around noon). However, I did get to hear later about the Nazis getting into a street brawl with the militant Hippies. What I like to imgine is a 245 lb biker being ruthlessly beaten down by 5 or 6 man-orexic guys with signs reading "end the hatred," but hey, maybe it was chicks. I wish I would have seen that, although at least I still have militant hippies to make fun of.