A far better thing that I do...

So, I'm going to go more sappy here and less cynical for a moment.  This post will also not be about politics or clothing or anything like that.  Rather, I'm going to wax poetic for a bit.


So, the other day I was having a good conversation with my good friend Jesse Luciani (Great guy, ladies.  Careful, though, he's taken.) about what it truly means to love.  Now, I've been a perpetrator of the sappy, idealistic, puppy love rampant in teenagers and only slightly less common in adults.  I've gone on and on about love and how "painful and haunting" it can be.  Yeah, I've been that guy.  But here we were talking about real love for someone.  The kind of love that would cause you to forfeit your happiness, or your life, for the happiness of another.  In our selfish world, this idea seems so foreign that it doesn't bare thought at all.  Now, I do not pretend to be a scholar or an expert on movements of the heart, but I do know a few things about what love is not.  Love is not obsession or ownership.  Many seem to think that love is a claim you have on a person, that you own them and they owe something to you.  Such is not the case.  Love is given fully and without compensation.  When you give a person your love, they owe you nothing.  No, not even their love in return.  They may give it, but don't be under the illusion that because you love someone, they MUST love you back.  No, they don't.  Love is the unconditional caring for another person above and beyond yourself, not the possession of that person.  So, Jesse and I were talking about this philosophy, and we came to two of our favorite stories on the subject.  Or, rather, two embodiments of this idea: Sydney Carton and Rick Blaine.  In Casablanca, Rick Blaine is suddenly and unsuspectingly reunited with the woman he considers the love of his life, only to find she is married.  Of course, a love triangle ensues as Ilsa is still torn between Rick and her husband, Victor, a resistance leader and fugitive from the Nazis.  But Rick, despite his love, not only lets Ilsa go, but MAKES her go with her husband, knowing that he can never be happy with her and that Victor needs her to keep up his fight.  He gives her up for her own happiness and for the greater good of humanity.  In A Tale of Two Cities, Sydney Carton goes even further.  He loves a married woman, one who does not love him back or even know of his love.  So, when her husband is about to be killed, what does he do?  Carton replaces him in prison, giving his life for the husband of his love.  He gives his life, gladly, for the happiness of the woman he loves, even if that happiness is without him.  


Now, I'm not entirely sure what I'm trying to say here, and I'm certainly not advocating giving your life for just anyone because you think you may love them.  That's not at all what I'm saying, but maybe this will give some perspective to someone out there, and maybe give some food for thought.

For spacious skies

In the past several years, I have had to come to grips with the fact that the country I live in is no longer the greatest country to have ever been.  I can only really say that we are the greatest country in the world for lack of competition, but the America that exists today is not one I can be proud of.  We started as the greatest underdog story.  Our founders rose up against injustice to form a new country absent of the tyranny prevalent in the rest of the world.  Against all odds, they fought against the strongest military power of their day and won.  In this country, we built industry, innovated and invented, we took to the roads and to the skies, we built higher and stronger than anyone else, we brought light into the dark and connected everyone with the telephone.  We survived a civil war which, through dividing us, made us stronger.  We went on to win two world wars and fight against tyranny again, bringing freedom to the world.  Yes, our country's history is far from perfect.  A country of people can not be exempt from their follies.  But despite the many blemishes and imperfections, we have a whole lot to be proud of.  We achieved more in less than 250 years than can be adequately accounted for in any one place.  So what happened?  This was a country where prosperity and success were rewarded, where shooting for the stars was only the beginning and the possibilities were endless.  We built things to last and, if unsatisfied, we made better.  Now where are we?  Now, we are a country of stagnation, where mediocrity is the norm.  We buy products to be replaced after a year.  We produce nearly nothing and export even less.  Our innovations are almost all consumer based and are obsolete within months.  We eat carbon-copy food full of additives and chemicals barely deemed edible and do nothing about it.  We sue to avoid responsibility for our own actions.  We take pills and get surgery instead of exercising or eating right.  We call customer service with the expectation that we will be treated poorly.  We do all this and we sit in our living rooms and bitch endlessly while doing nothing about it.  We are told that we have two candidates to choose from, two candidates whom the majority can not, in good conscious, choose.  But, we are told that choosing any other is a "waste of your vote."  Our founders gave us a choice.  Our founders put the power in the hands of the people, but we have given that power away; to the government and the media.  We are uninformed and indifferent, under the false notion that ignorance is bliss. Our education system is failing, but we penalize instead of nurture it.  Our healthcare system is flawed, but we are trying to replace it with something that is already failing abroad.  Prosperity is now a dirty word and success is a sin.  We punish the rich for being rich, regardless of how they got there, and we reward those who give up on employment and use our safety nets as a hammock.  This was the greatest country to have ever existed, and we still have the potential to be.  Americans, stand up and demand what you deserve.  Demand an end to standardized mediocrity and demand better.  Make better, do better, be better.  We are an exceptional people, now lets act it.  Let us be known not for what was, but for what is and what will be.

Chick-Fil-A?

Well, this issue has been going around lately so I figured I'd tackle it.  For those who don't know, the controversy here surrounds a comment made by Dan Cathy that implied that he is anti gay-marriage (his actual words were that he supported "the biblical definition of the family unit.")  Now, obviously this caused some backlash against the company.  Many have boycotted Chick-Fil-A and the Jim Henson Company (an open proponent of marriage equality) even pulled their Muppets toys from the restaurant's kids' meals.  I applaud both of these efforts as I think it is important to stick to your guns.  However, some have gone way too far.


Let me start by saying I've not been to Chick-Fil-A.  I also happen to support gay marriage.  In my opinion, if two adults with the capacity to make a decision for themselves want to get married, then why shouldn't they?  However, I am also a staunch defender of the Constitution.  So, when I heard that folks everywhere were calling for the removal of Chick-Fil-A restaurants and that some cities were actually considering banning or restricting the establishment, I was disgusted.  Let me say again: I DISAGREE WITH THE OPINIONS THAT DAN CATHY, CEO OF CHICK-FIL-A, VOICED IN REGARDS TO GAY MARRIAGE.  But I DO respect his RIGHT to HAVE and VOICE those opinions, regardless of their controversial nature or unpopularity.  You see, in this country we have freedom of speech.  The first amendment to our constitution states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, or to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."  So, basically, what they're saying here is you can't try to silence this guy's opinion, no matter how much you dislike it.  So, as long as Chick-Fil-A is not discriminating against gay employees or customers, which I have found no evidence to support as of yet (do correct me if I'm wrong), then he can spout all of the anti-gay rhetoric he wants.  There are also those who condemn the company's donations to anti-gay foundations.  Guess what, they have the right to do that too.  It's their money.  YOU also have the right to not eat there.  You DO NOT have the right to demand they no longer do business.  In fact, the same law that protects their rights to say what they want about homosexual marriage is the same one that protects YOUR rights to complain about them.  If we could silence every opinion we disagreed with, everyone would be silenced.  Again, feel free to boycott Chick-Fil-A.  I probably will as well.  If you own a company that somehow supports or has ties to Chick-Fil-A, feel free to pull that support or sever those ties.  But the government needs to stay out of it and allow this company to do business how it wants, regardless of the opinions of its CEO.  Obviously, if the company is actually taking discriminatory action ie. not hiring or serving homosexuals, then go ahead and take government action.  But until then, use those first amendment rights to avoid or protest the establishment, but do not use your rights to try and infringe on someone else's.

The Grapevine (somewhat NSFW due to language)

So, recently I've been thrust into several situations dealing with rumors, backstabbing, and whispering behind people's backs.  Now, I always have the same thing to say to these people: either tell them this to their face or keep your fucking mouth shut.  Listen, I'm a person who tend to tell it like it is.  I don't spread rumors, even if I know they happen to be true; this is mostly because I can't be bothered with anyone else's bullshit.  And if you CAN find the time to be bothered with other people's dirty laundry, then you need to find a hobby and get a fucking life.  Furthermore, I'm tired of people complaining about each other behind closed doors and smiling to their face.  If you have a problem with someone, either tell them and try to fix it or keep your God damn mouth shut.  If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.  A caveat here though; this is not the same as having a problem with someone that is not worth confronting them over and keeping it to yourself.  Obviously, you have to pick your battles.  But when you smile to someone's face, then go bitch to everyone about something they do then I have not patience for you.  Either try and fix it, or shut up.  It's that simple.  And if you happen to be reading this and thinking "Christ, what a prick," then do me a favor and comment on this or message me on Facebook to let me know, or kindly cease reading my blog and unfriend me if applicable.  I've got no time for people who won't speak their mind.  The name calling, rumor-slinging, and passive-aggressive behavior I have witnessed in the past few weeks is enough to make me sick to my stomach, and I have stuck to my guns and told all involved as much to their face.  You've got a gripe with me, tell me.  Don't sneak around acting like what a dick I am, tell ME, not everyone else, me.  I can't change how I treat you if I don't know what the problem is, especially if that problem is non-existent and you're just mud-slinging.  This street goes both ways, by the way.  If someone is saying shit about you, either confront them or let it go.  And decide what's worth confronting someone for Christ's sake, don't fight every battle not worth your time.  My male peers will probably read this assuming it's targeted at women.  Not true, men and women are both guilty of this, so quit your shit.  

Special Interests

Sorry that it's been a while folks, but I've really been wiped out lately and needed a break, but now I'm back at least for a little while.  So, I've had an ever rising hatred of so called "Special Interest Groups" lately.  Now, let me elaborate.  I have no problem with any group wanting equality to all other people.  In my opinion, all people, regardless of race, creed, sexual orientation, religion etc. should be equal.  The only exception I have to this are those who commit such acts (murder, rape etc.) as to, in my mind, forfeit their humanity, but that's a post for another day.  What I do take exception to, however, are groups that, under the guise of equality, attempt to gain preferential treatment or otherwise portray themselves as better than all other people.  For instance, I have recently come into conflict with so called "feminists."  I have no problem with the feminist movement.  I think that women have gotten a shitty deal in the past and deserve the same opportunities, wages, and respect as men.  What annoys me are people who call themselves feminists, but are really "man haters."  A woman who hates all men is no mightier than a man who hates women, and the next time a "feminist" yells at me for holding a door open for her (a courtesy I extend to all people, male or female) and goes on a tirade about how she is an independent woman who does not need a man to hold a door for her, I may just slam the door in her face to prove a point.  These high and mighty types will ruin any movement very quickly.  Another example is the current "civil rights movement" in this country.  During the 60s, Martin Luther King spread a message of equality for all.  He marched for a future where African Americans were given the same rights and privileges as whites.  He was seeking no reparations, he wanted no hand-outs or special treatment, he simply wanted to be treated as a full person.  This was a noble cause.  However, modern black leaders such as Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and others have not upheld this philosophy.  These men, and their followers, would like to see an America in which white people are punished for what their ancestors MAY or MAY NOT have done and in which black people are given more opportunities, wages, etc. than all others.  Not only is this hypocritical and hateful, it is, in and of itself, racist on many, many levels.  First, there is the obvious racism of basing anything at all on the color of one's skin.  However, there is another level of racism that many will not even notice: the idea that all white people are just white.  Today, whites have been stripped of their culture.  Many African Americans do not celebrate the cultures of their families have been in the U.S. for hundreds of years.  However, a large number, if not a majority of whites families in this country emigrated from Europe around the turn of the century.  In the Hispanic community, it is very offensive to lump Cubans, Puerto Ricans, Mexicans etc. as one type of people.  Why then is it not offensive for Polish Americans, Italian Americans, Irish Americans etc. to all be "white?"  Never mind the oppression and discrimination that these people endured when they came here.  People have forgotten the racial slurs of wop, dago, guinae, mick, patty, polock, fritz, kraut and other slurs used against people now considered "white."  But this is a racists dream, isn't it?  To have a whole group of people with an identical culture so you can easily pigeonhole all of them?  This also compounds the issue a bit.  How can you punish a person for something they (or their ancestors) did not commit?  Many whites can trace their ancestors to having come over AFTER the abolition of slavery.  Many of the countries they came from never practiced slavery to begin with.  So how can one justify punishing them for an act that neither they nor their ancestors took any part in?  And even for those who CAN trace their ancestors that far back in the U.S., how can you punish someone for something their ancestors MIGHT have done, or even did do?  We're talking over 100 years ago, here.  That's like me hating a black person because, since they're black they MUST be related to Kony and all of the people currently and recently committing Genocide in Africa.  This logic just doesn't stand up.  Toward the end of the 1960s, we were on our way to accepting that all people, regardless of skin color, are different in their own way and deserve to be treated equally and decently, but the folks who took over after Dr. King only served to divide blacks and whites further, painting blacks as the great victims and whites as "white devils."  Again, this is not a phenomenon unique to African Americans and the Civil Rights movement, but it is an easy, relate-able example.  This goes for any group, and these same corrupting powers can be found in evil, racist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Aryan Nation.  However, since these people often hide under the guise of "Special Interest," they are left alone to their own devices as no one wants to come off as racist, sexist, prejudiced etc. for speaking out against them.  Thankfully, I don't have that problem!  Again, I fully support all of these movements for their true purpose.  I believe that homosexuals should have equal rights and should be able to get married.  I believe all people should have equal rights regardless of who they are or what they identify as, but no one deserves to get treated specially because of who they are either.  Anyway, just needed to rant about this, thanks for listening.  Hopefully I'll be posting more often now.  See you next time!

Capital Punishment

So, I know I've been gone for quite a while, finals week and all that, but I'm back and looking to talk a bit about the death penalty.  I won't voice my own opinion on the matter, as that is neither here nor there, but I will offer up some fact about the use of corporal punishment in the United States.


First off, there are a few different outlooks when it comes to the death penalty and its use.  First is that it is a punishment to those who have been convicted; that it is a revenge of sorts that provides closure to the families of victims and acts as a deterrent and warning to others. The other most prevalent is that it is used to get rid of people who have harmed others; to remove them from society completely and prevent them from harming anyone else ever again.  


The first argument is the one that is most criticized as it is A.) a vengeful, spiteful method that mirrors the killers' actions and B.) shown to be ineffective as a deterrent.  Many studies have shown that the threat of capital punishment does not contribute to a lower crime or homicide rate.  In fact, the South, which accounts for 80% of executions, has consistently had the highest murder rate in the country.  


The second argument is one that more people agree with as it seems a logical solution.  Most would agree that someone like Charles Manson has nothing to contribute to the world except for harm and that getting rid of him would be of no loss.  However, this argument is hard to defend as it has little to no data to confirm it.  The only way to defend it is monetary data.  Many have argued that killing a prisoner is cheaper than keeping him fed, clothed, bathed, and sheltered.  However, Texas spends about $2.3 million dollars on a death penalty case, enough money to imprison someone at high security for 40 years.


Currently, 33 states still allow the death penalty, as does the U.S. Government and the military.  17 states and the District of Columbia have abolished the death penalty.  Michigan is the only state with a constitutional prohibition of capital punishment.  Since 1976 there have been 1,294 executions in the U.S., 1,061 of which have been in the South.  Since 1973, there have been 130 exonerations.  Currently it is illegal to execute someone with "mental retardation" or for crimes committed as a juvenile. 


Contrary to popular belief and media claims, the majority of executions have been white prisoners, 56% in fact.  In addition, the black to white ratio of current death row inmates is about equal, with 43% white, 42% black, 12% latino, and 3% qualifying as "other."  However, race of the victim seems to be a large factor.  76% of victims whose death lead to an execution order were white.  There have been 254 executions where the victim was white and the killer was black, but only 18 where the killer was black and the victim white.  Caveat: Justice department data shows that the rate of black on white murder is 18 times that of white on black murder, so this data may have less to do with racial prejudice than it may seem.  Since 1976, there have been 12 women executed in the United States.  Currently, there are 62 women on death row.  This is less than 2% of the death row population.  Caveat: Statistically only 12% of homicides are committed by women.   

Currently, the primary mode of execution is Lethal Injection.  In the past, hanging, firing squad, electrocution, and gas chamber have all been common methods.  Hanging has since lost favor as it is fairly unreliable, as has electrocution as it can result in a failed execution.  Firing squad has also waned in popularity as it can cause severe emotional damage to the executioner(s).  Gas chamber lost popularity after the Second World War due to its use by the Nazis.  Since 1976 there have been 1120 lethal injections, 157 electrocutions, 11 deaths by gas chamber, 3 hangings, and 3 deaths by firing squad.  Most states allow only lethal injection, but some allow one or more alternate options by request or in the case where lethal injection is not possible/viable.


http://www.ourcivilisation.com/usa/racewar.htm
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/gender.cfm
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/FactSheet.pdf


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/09/opinion/09dow.html

50 Mission

So, been a while, I admit, but I'm back for a bit.  End of the semester tends to take a toll.  Not a whole lot to report, but a few pics from Spring Break here.  I was in Ann Arbor Michigan for a spell.  Nice town.


So, first thing to report is a trip to Cabela's.  Usually not terribly noteworthy, but the fellas at the gun library were kind enough to let me have a look at a long coveted specimen.

Okay, so it's the 1927, semi-auto version, and not the 1921 or 28, but still.  I was drooling a bit.  Had I the money, it would've been mine.


Next off, we headed to Hell.

Yup, Hell, Michigan.  A one horse town if ever I saw one.  Apparently the settler's couldn't pick a name, so the leader said something along the lines of "Name it Hell for all I care!"  So they did.  Go figure.


And lastly, our own personal hell, the 30 inch pizza at Bella Italia.

3 of us had to do it in 30 minutes...We failed terribly and the "after" pics are too depressing to post...anyway, that was spring break in a nutshell.  Luckily, when I got home, there was a present waiting for me.  I picked up a WWII Enlisted Man's crusher cap on Ebay.  I popped a repro Officer's cap badge on it (just 'cause I like the look better) and popped a few pics.

The framed picture in the last photo is me and my younger sister at my cousin's wedding a few years back.  Well, that's about all there is to report for now.  Hopefully I'll have some more for you later.  'Night for now!