"Where now is our last best hope on Earth?"

... in their bunkers!! via Hitchen's is wrong, though when he says: ... They also know the US is just as segregated as it was before Martin Luther King – in schools, streets, neighbourhoods, holidays, even in its TV-watching habits and its choice of fast-food joint. The difference is that it is now done by unspoken agreement rather than by law. ... There's still a great deal of mistrust and distrust between races and languages all over the globe. We're still trying to understand each other. Just look at how well Canadian multi-culturalism has worked, thanks mostly to Trudeaumania. Instead of fluent "Canadian" citizens, we've managed to segregrate all immigrants into little "piazza pockets". [It's a Canadian thing ... you never know what you're going to get when you bite into it.]

Welcome wagon ....

Plus... igloos!!!!

I just got back from Canadian Tire ....

I bought a chainsaw. ... for the alternative energy. PSA: Never mess with a woman who owns power tools.

Unfair and Imbalanced: I retort, you decide

I just wrote a huge post about CNN and their "Black in America" coverage trying to elaborate on the fact that the media is fixated on racism. In the middle of it, I realized it doesn't matter what I say on the subject because I'm white. I'm assumed to be racist. So, fuck it. Here's some unvarnished truth: people have hated people forever for arbitrary reasons and you do it, too. Life sucks because people choose to be self interested. You want a better world, then find God and work on your own house. From my personal experience there is plenty of work there to keep people occupied. Eventually, you'll find that being self critical will make you a little nicer to everyone else. And if everyone did that, then racism wouldn't be an issue. Outside of that, I have no patience for this race baiting, divisional bullshit.

I still fear for y'all ...

.... because, despite all evidence to the contrary, Hillary and Obama still feign a convincing argument for HOPE! Just get in line. [I watched the "unity" gathering today and almost, almost felt Hillary's pain. She looked like a bobble-head doll in the rear window of the bus.] I'll look for video later. ... Back in the 1960s, Castonguay chaired a Canadian government committee studying health reform and recommended that his home province of Quebec — then the largest and most affluent in the country — adopt government-administered health care, covering all citizens through tax levies. The government followed his advice, leading to his modern-day moniker: "the father of Quebec medicare." Even this title seems modest; Castonguay's work triggered a domino effect across the country, until eventually his ideas were implemented from coast to coast. Four decades later, as the chairman of a government committee reviewing Quebec health care this year, Castonguay concluded that the system is in "crisis." "We thought we could resolve the system's problems by rationing services or injecting massive amounts of new money into it," says Castonguay. But now he prescribes a radical overhaul: "We are proposing to give a greater role to the private sector so that people can exercise freedom of choice." ... Freedom of choice, eh? What a concept. h/t Carin

Happy Birthday FIU!

It totally slipped my mind yesterday but the 4th was our 4th anniversary of Fileitunder.com So... yay! I'd do something more fitting for the occasion but family illness is about to take me out of pocket for a few days. So feel free to throw a party at the house while the parents are away... figuratively speaking.

And the hits just keep on coming ...

Long, long ago, I actually met Hood via the website Terrorexchange.com. It was a website where you traded futures of fake money on the probability of political, natural catastrophic and terrorism related events. If I remember correctly, it was a site that was spawned off of a similar idea that DARPA had and based off of the concept that by tapping a large enough base of thought on a subject you would have a pretty good idea of where an event might be headed. Via the forums attached to that site, I met Hood and our long lost blog brothers Tom and Darius. Later, after being introduced to the ease of blogging by Hood, I was asked to join here. Since that time, the amount of posts has gone up, as well as the average typo per post ratio. We've had a Malkin-lanche and a Black Five-lanche and even won a Weblog award. All in all it's been a pretty good run. Over that time there have been very few rules for posting here. The givens were that you don't out anyone that is anonymous, you never lead a post with curse word in the title and that you don't talk about fight club. With rules that simple even I was able to only break two out of three. (I've lead a post with a curse, I outed my own virtual identity but I never talked about... damn it.) One of the things that enabled this was that my current job, whom I have never outed and never will, has a "feast or famine" work load. It seems that I am either totally buried or bored. In those times that I was bored, I was free to post or Photoshop and my current employer didn't mind. The way they saw it, it was a "taking care of business attitude" in our office. Anything they needed, they knew, was my instant priority and that I'd get it done. By nature, I enjoy being a clutch performer. Just like in hockey, I wanted the puck on my stick in the last seconds of the game. Since I had performed minor miracles for them several times, they never second guessed it. Well, those times have changed. Yesterday, I accepted a new job. Just like the first one, I can't say who with because corporations prefer that their message is the only one presented to the public on their behalf. Likewise, just like I have never discussed the prospects or deals that we work on, I won't be doing so here. I know that the friends that I have made blogging understand because this blog, no matter how small, is just one Google search away at any given time, for anyone. What I can tell my friends is this, I'm leaving my current employer for a world class opportunity. I can honestly say that I am more excited about the work that I will be doing and the people that I will be doing it with than the fact that this position has a personal growth potential that outclasses anything I could have ever even hoped for. The company has a robust outlook, a position that is almost tailor made for me and is encouraging me to continue my work towards my geology degree. In the meanwhile, I will gain business experience and leadership under some incredibly gifted business leaders. In my meat space world, this job will require more time daily and end my "feast or famine" work cycle. This is fine with me because I don't "do" boredom very well and I enjoy challenges. It will also provide better things for my family which is always on the forefront of my mind. In the virtual world, things are less certain. I'm not sure of my future employers stance on blogging. As in all business, information is power and they might consider it a risk. For that reason, if they ask me to stop I'll need to do that. Either way, due to the change in position, I'm fairly sure that the amount of postings I've been able to fire off in the past is going to drop because anything I do will have to be on "Rob time." As we know, "Rob time" gets shared with the family and school. So, as with all changes, there is some uncertainty ahead on what real and virtual life changes will be made to adjust to this new position but I am extremely excited and ready to get in there and "mix it up."

The morning after ...

So, a few hours removed from the speech, I realized that I forgot something. If you can, tivo the speech or at least get a transcript. Why? Because that's how you play the State of the Union drinking game. Duh. If you are a raving moonbat, or just stuck for a really good evil plot on which to base your conspiracy theory on, you can also go here. It's a random evil overlord plot generator. I consider this my bipartisan effort for the day, everything else will be jacked up neo-con thuggery.

Private Oil and Gas Investing

(For the FIU regulars that come here, let me take an uncommon side step out of my typical persona to post on a topic I've had a few people ask me about.) With the current oil prices near, and tapping $100, I've had a few friends contact me because they have been approached about investing in oil and gas projects. Since they know that I am involved in the industry, they've asked me to look at the various packages they have had submitted to them. However, the question that I always get asked is this: "Do you think I should do it?" typically followed by "Would you do it?" These two questions are the big ones that every investor has to face in asking for advice but understanding the answer in oil and gas investing is a little different. As a result, I will give you my answer to those questions and how I have come to reach them so that you have an idea of how I believe that a successful investor needs to understand that even before you analyse a deal you need an analysis of yourself. To the answer to whether I would invest in a oil and gas deal is always the same ,"No." Now this isn't because the deal is bad or the company is bad or the prospect is bad. They may very well be all top notch. The reason that I can always answer "No" is that at this point in my life I do not have the money to spend on speculative investments. I can't make this point strongly enough but all, I repeat ALL, oil and gas deals are speculative. Period. I don't care if it's shallow, in field drilling. There is a risk every time of complete and total loss of all money raised for drilling, every time. I can't afford, at this point, to put the amount of money needed to partner in a well, into something that has a reasonable chance of netting me $0 return on investment. Understand, before I make people panic and say "I'll never invest in O&G" that the stock market and the like are just as volatile. The difference is that instead of basing your investments potential off of the perceived value of a company as based by accounting statements and economist your basing the potential for hydrocarbon recover off the work of geologist and engineers. There really isn't a drop in professionalism on either side but the simple fact is it cost more to play on our side. As a result, it is cheaper for me to diversify on the stock side of the market. As a result, the key in O&G investing is diversification, both in your over all investments and in your well partnership investments. It's the same as the logic that points out that if you walk in and bet all of your money on one hand of poker you will boom or bust quickly. However, if you only play with money that you can afford to lose and you play several hands you have a better chance for success. So my advice to oil and gas investors, who already know the have the money that they need and can afford to be speculative, is to spread your exposure over the best quality programs that you can find. Don't do one big project, do smaller positions in several projects of various scopes with multiple companies. This allows you to better gauge the programs that you are involved with. Also, be patient. Things in O&G move in spurts of activity. It's a lot of hurry up and wait. This is an additional reason to spread your programs because sometimes a rig timeline gets skewed and drilling gets put off but if you money is working in different places you have a better chance of seeing continued activity and not suffering the emotional roller coaster of waiting on operations. As far as selection of a company to invest with, there are loads to pick from. My company even does private placements, but there are strict restrictions on advertising and I can tell you firsthand that some of the wells we drill don't suit every investor. So let me give you what I would consider the important things to look at in considering a deal or vetting a company. A lot of people want to tout their record and a lot of people will tell you to ask for lists of the company's production or return to the investors. I have to say that I put less confidence in this. I've seen big companies hit a bad streak and hit only 1 out of 10 wells. Sound horrible, right? What if those wells all cost the same and that well they hit nets 20 times it's cost? I've also know of companies who can hit 10 wells in a roll and all produce just enough money that keep them on line but no one makes money. It's too easy to skew the data off of well results besides each project is different for the simple fact it's a different well being drilled. The two biggest things I'd stress checking is the company's standing and the projects strength. If a company is selling interests and it's not through a brokerage that is FINRA then skip it. If they won't submit themselves to the over site of the securities laws in their sales then you might as well move on. The second one is harder to judge but the amount of information you get is a clue. If the company doesn't provide you with logs, maps and production to look over you need to be skeptical. If they do, spend a little money and check the area on sites like Drilling info to see if the production and activity in the area the are representing is indicative of what's really going on. If the investment is sizable enough, hire someone with a background in evaluation to do this for you. (You know, I like my job but if you'll pay significantly I consider quitting to evaluate for you.) While this all seems like a lot of work and worry over an investment, it is. The good thing is that my best argument for why it is worth it goes like this: I know of a well In Lavaca Co, Texas that cost $2.4 million to drill in 2000. It came on at 242 barrels of oil per day and 4.4 million cubic feet of gas per day. As of this month it has produced 235,077 barrels of oil and 5.471 billion cubic feet of gas. Even if the oil and gas prices stayed locked at year 2000 levels that's a total of $5,876,925 in oil and $17,780,750 in natural gas. Of course, oil prices rose from $25 to $94 , today, and from $3.25 per mcf to $8.12, but I think I made my point. There is quite a bit of money to be made if you can afford to invest in it wisely. So, in summary, it's not for everyone. You have to be realistic in what level of exposure and risk you are comfortable with. This is really the strongest factor in answering the question of "should I do this deal?" And once you know that, proper planning on your side can help you minimize loss through an investing strategy and diversification.

AN Exclusive FIU Parenting PSA

Parenting 101: Baths In this exclusive video, see my cute baby boy have fun and learn about bathtub safety in a meaningful way. (Also, this is FIU's first all nude video. I'm just saying.)

Documenting the Adjustments

So I'm still in transition, sort of, going from the single life to married. I do plan on scraping some honeymoon pictures together from St. Lucia but for now I thought I'd update you all on my personal progress. % of master bedroom closet space retained: 35% % of all other closet space retained: negligible % of bathroom(s) defended: 67% (she uses one for hair makeup prep, leaving a half-bath downstairs and the master bath available to myself at my leisure) % of bed defended: 45% % of refrigerator space available for beer: 8% (in my defense, I consume much more wine) % of living room seating available: 100% (I have my own leather recliner and the couch is large and seats/lays two comfortably) % of laundry done by me: 0% (hey, it was her request - evidently you can't do her laundry in two loads like you could mine. Apparently lingerie, bras, et al require special settings... whatevs...) That's it for now. Did I leave out anything?

Sooooo...

Getting married today... I'll be gone for a bit. Honeymoon and such. But I will return with pictures. Of the honeymoon locale, people, etc... not of that, you gutterminders. At least not for free. p.s. Today's forecast: Isn't it ironic? p.p.s. There's nothing ironic about rain on your wedding day. That's Global Warming's fault.

I Survived

Though with some bruising to my torso that would rival that of a really bad boxer. Paint balls travel faster than I do. I'll try and add a photo soon. Update: Photos...

Letting the air out of the tires

I'm a self admitted paradox. Some people get this, some don't. Still, I'm in a consistent struggle between who I want to be and who I try not to be. Left to my own devices, I'm a horrible person. I know that I have in me both the capacity and desire to be as bad, if not worse, than anyone else. The seven deadly sins would be my playground and to hell with the rest of you. That part of me is always there in my head. Always wanting to be in control and trying to influence my path. This is where the paradox often gets misunderstood because the path is not one that is expected. A lot of people are waiting for me to talk about the part of me that wants to be good. Right? I mean that's the natural inclination in logic. You'd expect there to be a "bad part" and a "good part." By definition, the "bad" part exists to contrast what is by definition "good." I used to think that as well. The problem is, left to my own devices there is only the bad part, or rather the "blind part." No, the other part is the "loved part." People misunderstand this, sadly a lot of the "loved people" included, and as a result the world has a totally wrong picture of a lot of things. I'm still a little sketchy on this explaination, but see if you can follow where I'm going with this. People are hard wired to respond to love. Either love from outside or self love. We seek that in many ways. We do a lot of things to seek love from others. I doubt that I have to elaborate the length and breadth of that to you guys. We've all seen people jump through those hoops, both good and bad. Likewise, America is almost a study in "self-love." The problem with this isn't that we seek love, because I would say that we are designed to do so. The problem is that we too quick to accept the weak and watered down substitute. If love is a balanced, healthy 7 course meal, full of textures, smells and sights that leave you full and satisfied, then I'm pretty sure that many people have settled for the packaged, flat, over salted, low presentation alternative: pork rinds, or as I would call it "bliss." Sure, it has a flavor and it's fast and we can even kind of like it, but it's bad for you and it leaves you wanting and as soon as you swallow it you want more because it's gone and it's not enough. We do that in life. We want to feel bliss. We want that high or that buzz or that orgasm or that drink or that cigarette or that cookie or that honor or that accolade or that nap or that vacation or that raise or that bonus or that release or that anger or whatever it is. We want it and, when we get it, for that one shiny second we're happy! Yea! Bliss! ...And then, just that fast, in that little second, it fades just a bit and we want it again but this time better. Just like a pork rind, it's never enough. Our pursuit of that is stupid. Still, we all do it. We all see other people do it and know it's stupid. Hell, sometimes in the dark, alone times we even admit to ourselves that it's stupid. But we still want it because it's in us to look for love. That bliss is as close as we can get alone and we fight for that. One more smokehouse almond, one more shot of Quervo and one more blow job; that's all I need... but we know it's not and it pisses us off. So let's look at the alternative, being loved. We want it. We're all for it. Right? But one problem, we want it our way. We want "one order of love, with a super sized no commitment, some curly, seasoned no obligations and a side order of I don't want to be vulnerable. Hold the damn mayo." Yeah, it doesn't work like that. You know why? Not because love can't be unconditional. Love is, by nature, unconditional. The reason it won't work is because if we get it our way, we'll get it wrong because we're too greedy. Here's one you've probably never heard. Love as explained by math. Bear with me. What is the value of 1/1? To remind you, 1/1=1. It's reciprocal is, therefore, 1. Understanding this, the value of love is giving everything up for someone else/giving everything up for someone else? However, it equals getting everything. Not getting more. No, we get the full sum of everything. This is why, as a person who has fought to understand that bliss is a hollow lie I can't grasp the understanding on why people reject Christ. He's already filled the equation for you to just have to love him back and people 2000 years later still love to hate him so that they can hold onto lifestyles that allow them to chase bliss, knowing that the bliss will never fill them up. I've said this 1,000,000 times and I bet that I say it 1,000,000 times more but people seem to think that because I am a Christian that I think I'm better than you. WRONG. I know for a fact that I'm a great deal worse than most people I know. You read what I write here. I'm an abrasive jerk. If anything you have to know that I'm not selling you on Jesus because of his ability of making me pious. I'm not. I'm selling you on Christ for one simple reason: He loves you and all he wants is for you to let him love you so that you can love him back. All the crap about sins is not his priority. For havens sake, he already died to cover for the sins! It's not like he's really concerned about it now! He's concerned about you chasing bliss and being empty when what you really need is love. He's already given everything for you and paid for what you couldn't give to him, so why are people so against it? I know that the world would have you think that the advertisers on Madison avenue have it all mapped out for you. Consume the right things, drink the right beer, buy the right clothes, work out at the right place and screw the right way with Viagra! After all, that stuff is going to last you until the end of your days and you'll go out #1. On your tombstone they'll write "Here lies a total bad ass that had everything." The problem is that's bullshit and we all know it. I hate to let the air out of everyone's tires but you weren't built to seek being the best. Everyone else expects you to do that. You were built to seek love and there is only one true love and until you give yourself fully to him, you're just popping pork rinds mindlessly looking for that nanosecond thrill that won't last.

A child of the 80's

I know that it's a pretty unoriginal theme to do the ol "I remember when" thing but this is one of those times that I just have to. I was in class the other day and our teacher opened up for debate the question of whether to have our first test in class or in the testing center. Personally, I could care less between those two options. In class you have less time but teachers normally compensate by giving less questions and easier questions but they are normally more points per question. In the testing center, you have unlimited time because you're there in non-class hours but they are more free to make the test longer and more difficult. Still more questions allows for more mistakes having less effect on the grade. I don't see any really clear advantage to either way because, in the end, either you know the stuff or you don't. The class voted to have the test in class. No sooner had that happened then the girl that sits to the right of me wigged out. In her own words, "Well, I'm going to have to pull the disability card on this because I can't take a test in here with a time limit. I have ADHD and it's really hard for me to concentrate in a timed environment." Wait a sec. Back the truck up. This is one of those times where I need to clarify one of the things that is adding to the pussification of our country. Disability is not the same thing as being unable. She wasn't unable to do the test during a time limit, it was just more difficult. While I understand wanting every advantage possible in taking a test, the absolute anger and entitlement for the school to adjust to your limitations is something I can't endorse. I mean, if your blind, then test them in braille. If you're in a wheel chair, common sense dictates we need a ramp. regardless of those things, the blind or the wheelchair bound are still taking the same test in the same time. Learning disabilities are no different in that even though you have them you still need to make it your job to learn. To make this personal, I have dyslexia. If you've been on here long enough you've seen me misspell things or make little dyslexic mistakes. That's because I don't spend a lot of time proofing the stuff I do on here. Normally, I hammer something out real fast and then get back to real life stuff. However, when I choose to spend the time on it, I can write fairly well and type fairly typo free and put out a very respectable product. I'm able to do that because in the 70's - 80's, when they discovered that I had dyslexia, the idea was "well, let's put him in the 'special' class and move on." In response, my mother went to the school, kicked ass and took names and said "no, he's not stupid. If you can't read what he wrote, ask him. He'll give you the right answer. And, we'll correct the rest." And we did. Having dyslexia didn't mean that I was going to have an easier standard. It meant that I better roll up my sleeves and bust ass because I was expected to do it as well, if not better, than a kid that didn't have it. I had a hero in that, Bruce Jenner. Bruce Jenner had severe dyslexia and he worked at it continually just like he worked at kicking ass in the Olympics and kick ass he did. I'm not saying that ADHD is the same and I'm not saying that disabilities aren't a real burden. What I am saying is that a society that allows people with a disability to sit there and say "Well, I guess the world is just going to have to accommodate me" isn't doing anyone any favors. Sure, you can mandate disabilities hiring standards and you can mandate educational equivalencies but in the real world you have to achieve. If you don't cut it at work, a hiring standard make them keep you a job but it won't move you ahead. A easier grade of work might help you to keep a job but it won't earn you respect. The reason for that is simple: If you challenge the problem and fail people respect that. Challenge it and succeed and they'll respect you. If you take the easy path and use your disability as a crutch to do less challenging things they don't. Is that fair? Probably not, but that's how it is. The 80's had a lot of ass backwards things in it, but they still forced you to try to keep up. I'd agree that we need to give people more help than what I had back then but at the end of the day, if you have a learning disability, you have to make sure that you developing. You have to do the work. We don't need more victims to the cruelties of life. We need to help more people be champions that overcome them. That's what the world expects and that's what we need to give them if we want to exceed being more than learning disabled.

We're not lost: A woman's guide to "What? I know where I'm going!"

Sadly, due to the proliferation of women that believe that they are somehow equal or better than men, there is in our culture a narrative that must be addressed. This of course is the common female story shared in between the stories of stretch marks vs bikini exposure ratio and pictures of the kids at the beach. It is the inevitable story about how a woman's husband got lost and refused to ask for directions. This urban legend has persisted for ages despite many clenched teeth issued reassurances that we men know exactly where we are. In this post we will, for the first time, explore this myth and explain the science that proves once and for all that men know exactly where they are. Men and women, as most people could tell you, have distinct physiological differences. These differences allow for a certain degree of tasking prowess to be innately possessed by one sex or the other. While breasts give women the natural advantage in feeding children, getting free drinks at bars and winning wet t-shirt contest they pose a distinct disadvantage in other areas. Science has shown that the natural resistivity to electricity in water is low. As a result, women, due to their "fun pillows" and their increased water retention, do not have the same ability of their male counterparts to experience the natural load stone effect of the iron in human blood allowing for a physiological compass generated by the earths magnetic poles. This goes doubly for women with big ol giant saline transplants. This is also the reason that every woman that describes herself as once being "a tomboy" is twice as deluded about her hooters making her a bad navigator. Once the boob fairy came along and waved his magic wand, her sense of direction faded as the bazookas budded. A secondary reason that men and women find differences in navigational awareness is the difference between verbal and visual acuity. Women are typically verbal communicators. They, as a result, navigate by places that they have either conversed at or have conversed about. However, nowhere in there conversations is the spatial element taken for consideration. Instead their recollection is of "who said what to whom and what they really meant about that and does this make me look fat?" This information is unlikely to yield successful navigation. Men are a different breed in that we navigate by distance and landmarks and spatial relationships that are easily accessible to all men. For example, how far a distance to a store is to a woman includes the type of sale that they are having and the fact that she had a runner in her hose and that your mother never liked her. To a man the distance is regarded as the length "I ran in that State game back in high school" multiplied by "the distance I could shoot a rifle and take the head off of a lion, if I wanted to." See, there is nothing subjective in male calculations because they distances increase with each recollections at the same speed of the expansion of all matter in the universe. Our lies to ourselves therefore bind us to reality. The third reason that men an women argue whether or not they are lost has to do with math. While women are incredibly quick in the areas of math that has to do with figures like the actual cost of a sale item, "the amount of money I can hide from my husband" and "how much would I pull down if I just poison him and run off with the pool boy" they suffer in other areas. This is not an extension of algebra but of geometry and engineering. In female geometry, the shortest distance between two points is directly effected by hormones, hot flashes, what she's wearing that day, the distance to a Starbucks, what she saw on the lifetime channel and in direct proportion of the book sales of Oprah's latest endorsement. For men, the closest distance between two points is in relation to two things only: The time of the next sporting event and the distance furthest away from his mother in law. In terms of engineering the problem is one of conversion. Men know that a standard "foot" is 12 inches. However, women have constantly been told that a foot is 12 inches while typically only be exposed to about 6 inches. This false conversion, while nice for the male ego, distorts actual distance traveled in vehicles by a large margin. In looking at these factors we can see that men and women will more than likely never agree on whether or not the man is lost because of the huge difference in methodology of measurement and navigational reference. Due to the physiological, navigational, spatial, mathematical, geometric and engineering differences it is unlikely that this gap will ever be bridged in this life time. However, hopefully this will shed some light on the issue and raise awareness that the answer for women, who mistakenly believe that their husbands are lost, can adapt for practical purposes: We know where we are. We have no idea why you think we missed the exit. Your mother was closer if we turned that way, we could feel it and we're taking your fun pillows away from that as fast as we can. No, that dress does not make you look fat. It accentuates your natural curves. Can we get some road head? By adopting these point, I believe that we can put this myth to rest or at least maybe get a little more road head, which is a good second place in our book.

Are you a leader?

My mom found this and suggested that I share it. It's a quiz testing leaderships skills. As with all good quizzes I took it. It seems that I am not really fit to lead in today's corporate structure. Some would follow that I am not fit to really follow either. While I could look at my score of 10 out of 100 possible points as a sign that possible improvement is needed I see it as a validation of the hard work I have put into forging my "wild ass, loose cannon, think inside of what box" persona. So either I'm a "Patton" in a world of "Bradleys" or a I'm the nail that's still sticking up. We all know what typically happens to that nail, right. It gets pulled out or beat down. So, take a minute and test yourself against the quiz, then post accordingly because after this Hood might be demoting me to the FIU mail room.

JR got Hood an engagement present

Racism as an extension of Stupid: A systemic crap ball of absolute idiocy

For those who currently surf CNN, one of today's stories has to do with racial discord, violence and charges in the town of Jena, Louisiana. The story is linked here and is truly a train wreck of stupidity on many levels. I'd suggest reading it because I won't mass post it but to sum up the relevant points: ~ A group of black kids decide to sit under a tree that the white kids normally hang out under. ~ The white kids hang nooses there which the black kids find there the next day. ~ The white kids responsible are suspended for 3 days ~ Racial tension in the school increases, fights both on and off campus happen ~ The school system has the DA address the school ~ The schools main academic building gets torched, as in 'arson' ~ Six students "reportedly" jump one kid and beat him until he is unconscious ~ The six are arrested and face charges ~ Parents of all the kids say their sons are being railroaded via Jim Crow Justice So where to start? The whole thing got touched off because, let's be honest, the kids hanging the nooses were trying to be dicks. Was that racial motivated? Hell yeah, it was as some level. Those kids may have deserved more or less time out of school based on your personal opinion but as an educational administration you know they have rules regarding race relations and common sense that those kids broke. They showed a major lack of judgment in thinking that idea was "cute" or "harmless" in today's social environment. So, I don't have any problem with those kids getting punished and would point out that if it were one of my sons, there would have been some punishment at home that would make a 3 day suspension seem like a vacation. What happened from that point was where the pure stupidity stepped up. Should those kids have been ostracized in school? That's a debatable social theory depending on whether your pro-enforcement or pro-rehabilitation. I can honestly say that they could expect to be fairly hated when they get off suspension. However, should their actions light off a powder keg with other students who weren't involved? No. And yet, it did. In my estimation it did for 2 reasons. The first is because black culture has not accepted that they are an easy mark when it comes to getting a reaction. The second is that schools and society's do an exceptionally poor job of handling teen boys and violence. Those two thing let 3 stupid kids melt down a whole school. Look racism is a problem in America. Period. And I know that some people can't accept it but it's not a one sided problem. I'm sorry, I've worked in predominately black environments and in predominately Hispanic environments. The result surprised me because you guys seem to dog each other and, even funnier, you just assumed that I agreed. The irony is that I don't. Sure, the races are different as genetics would tell you but I haven't seen that as any type of limiting factor in any type of human endeavor, much less a sign of superiority. However, that's something I had to learn from experience with individuals because culture sure doesn't teach it. White culture, for example, seems to say that I'm supposed to help every other culture out because it seems that every other culture needs help and I'm of the culture that's supposed to provide it. That was news to me considering that when my dad left, my mom was making 14k and I was having to hot glue gun the soles back on to my shoes. Still, it seems that "I'm responsible because I'm the man." I also found out that I'm responsible for slavery and I took Texas from the Mexicans who stole it from the Spanish who took it from the Indians. The fact that 1/16 of me is Indian doesn't supposedly void me of the white guilt for the Trail of Tears or Wounded Knee, either. While all of that is fun to learn as a heir apparent to "the man" franchise, I believe that I can correctly assume that several other boys have since learned that they are the heirs to being the "aggrieved black man" or the "downtrodden Latino" or whatever bullshit society is pedaling. As a result, black culture, from a white perspective, is so predictable that you could almost write a scientific law of universal response: Something like, "Any reference to the KKK, Jim Crow, Slavery or the use of the "N" word by anyone not Black is guaranteed a negative response at twice the energy level expressed and grows exponentially as the number of black recipients of said utterance is increased." Disagree? You think it was a accident that In Die Hard 3 that it was just accepted wisdom that Bruce Willis' character was going to get a serious ass beating, if not die, for wearing a lunch board saying "I hate Niggers?" Why is that? Furthermore, why is that acceptable wisdom? Have you ever stopped to consider the response if you drop a black character in the middle of white America with the counter sign of "I hate Crackers" or Whitey or Jews or whatever? Is that a guaranteed ass beating or death sentence under today's conventional wisdom? Not hardly. The point is that regardless of how you feel about it, and in today's PC world none the less, all it takes is saying "nigger" and people get wound up past all conventional wisdom and personal responsibility. As a result, they lose the power of initiative because their emotions dictate over their reason, more often than not. Who is the exception to that? The people who define themselves and others as individuals. Racism will continue to be a problem for one reason: People employ it to define who they are and who other people are because it's easier than being an individual or treating people as individuals. Society, and more specifically their parents, failed these kids in not enforcing that. The second issue is that society at large has a horrible grasp of what a man is, much less how to raise one, much less how to deal with a immature one. Violence is just one aspect where society fails miserably. Being a man is about understanding your value, your strengths, your weaknesses and how you allow those things to interact with those around you. Today's kids are barely taught to make sound decisions, typically isolated from risk, over protected from consequences and totally uncoached in understanding the power of their actions. There is a reason that martial arts can often market it's self for teaching responsibility and respect. The reason is that it is incredibly stupid to be disrespectful to a person who is able to break bricks with their head. The interesting factor is that it is typically the person who can break bricks with their head that is the most respectful to the people in the room that pose him no threat for a reason that most people don't get. A teacher is typically the most respectful of the power that he has learned, but he has also learned that the true power is in the choice to not put himself in the position to have to use it because of the damage that it can cause. He understands the consequence to action. Some kids today need to have their asses tossed around a dojo once or twice to realize that violence is just a tool. It can be effective but it can also run contrary to what you are trying to accomplish. In plain English, kids today see violence as the final step in a confrontation when it isn't. The aftermath of a confrontation still has to be dealt with and eventually the root cause of the confrontation before it is resolved. However, most boys are never taught that so they believe that "kicking ass" will fix the problem. Wrong. That might be a step, but normally there are other things that could be done before, or during, that confrontation that would be better than unchecked aggression. Society, and specifically these kid's parents, have failed to teach them, and possibly understand themselves, that when the only tool you have is a hammer every problem looks like a nail. When you place this all together the result is what you see. Kids that are in trouble, kids that are in pain, kids that are in discord, a community wrecked, fear mongers circling the wagons and everyone generally unimpressed with the whole thing because it could have been prevented. However, I want to take a second to say that for once in the news, the school system in this seems to have acted responsibly. They alone addressed the issues along each step. They alone took preventive action. In short, they are the only ones I see in the whole thing that tried to defuse things. Where all of this will go is beyond me but the point that we need to take away from it is this: fixing the problem of racism doesn't lie with the schools. They tried. It lies with society and parenting. We need to better coach our own kids on living in a equal society of individuals and educate them to the nature of their actions, including but not limited to violence.

Missing from FIU for years: Favicon

About a month ago, Will installed a Favicon on his website. It adds a warm, fuzzy touch, no? Well now it's time for FIU to plunge into the 21st century and add its own Favicon. But this time, we'll take submissions from you, the general public. To the winner will go my favoritest prize to give, evah! A gift card to Amazon.com for $10. And really, folks - I'm not getting kickbacks from Amazon. I'm certain Instapundit is but he does stupid high traffic. We do about 100 reader hits a day - maybe. So, feel free to use your own sources or one from the web. Email your submission(s) to hoodlumman [at] gmail [dot] com. Deadline for entry: Wednesday, August 29th.

Why video games can be a parents best friend.

When I was born they had Pong. By the time I was a kid they had Atari. In my teen years it was Nintendo. By college we had Sega. By late college we had the PlayStation. I'm living right in the wheelhouse of the video game generation. I was a master of both Pac-man and Tekken Tournement. I wasted time with both Galaga and Grand Theft Auto. As I have grown, video gaming has been a constant influence in my life. Now, as a dad, I have to weigh that influence again from a different perspective. The cons of video games get a lot of popular press. It's not too hard to find a story linking video games to obesity, anti-social behavior or violence. Honestly, I am typically critical of these stories for the fact that most make rather loose leaps between the correlation and the causality of social ills. For example, if I had research that said that "By their 15th birthdays, close to 100 percent of males have masturbated to orgasm." and I have data that says "95 per cent of the teens surveyed said they had access to either a video game machine or home computer and a similar proportion (90 per cent) said they owned at least some video games." Does that mean that video games makes boys by age 15 masturbate? No, it's a correlation. However, the media rarely takes the time to explain the methodology of their comparative data or it's collection in the inferences that it makes when blaming social ills on video games. I can honestly admit that as a result of my childhood, I'm jaded about the validity of these results because I belonged to several "at risk" groups of my adolescent time. I was a single parented child. I also listened to heavy metal rock. I played D&D. I had dyslexia. We were, for most of my life, below the poverty line. My parents didn't have a college education. Somehow, through all of that statistically proclaimed "adversity" I managed not to become a drug fueled, Satanist who was kept down by socio-economic underpinnings of a corrupted upbringing. Who knew? The truth of it is, a lot of that so-called study done at the time was conducted to blame a social phenomenon that people didn't understand or like or correlated with an event that they would accept either happened for a different reason or no reason at all. Like the kid that killed himself while listening to Ozzy. His parents wigged out and blamed Ozzy, and heavy metal, for their sons death. In the process, they actually sued Ozzy for causing their sons death. The court killed the case but the standard of people blaming external events for an issue that would have more than likely been tied to the home was set. Additionally, I never forget that the media is generated not by experts in relevant fields but by people with journalism degrees. They can write about science but are rarely scientist themselves. On the other hand, the positive effects of video games are rarely ever discussed. In passing we are told that these games are horrible things that teach our children horrible things. Really? If they teach horrible things, then is it possible that they can teach good things too? For example, some video games teach children problem solving abilities dictated by logic and memory. Not only are children given objectives, but they are given limitations in multiple areas that govern the problem, that must all be managed, simultaneously, in order to solve the problem. All of this is done in an environment that rewards success, promotes learning, increases hand eye coordination, has consequences for failure and works within a construct of fair play. For example, the "Lego Starwars" video games are ones that my kids love. In them you have to solve puzzles, both short and long term. Achievement is rewarded. Mistakes have an immediate cost but the option to retry and learn from mistakes is available. It forces players to make logical problem solving steps while under character constraints, physical constraint and chronological constraints. Most importantly, it's fun. This is a game that my four year old can play at a totally different level than what my six year old does or for what I do. The complexity increases the reward of play while not governing the game play itself. The Shrek and Spiderman3 video games are similar but for older players, due to plot complexity. Most sports games fit under this mold, as well. In this, parents who are willing to take the time to research and pay attention to game play can find that some video games are great learning tools that create their own reward while giving the parent the open forum to show the real life benefit of the lessons learns in the virtual world. Even this morning, as my son sat, stuck in a part of the Ratatouille video game, he was frustrated with his ability to pass the level. I pointed out that sometimes multiple attempts have to be made to correctly time any event in order to pass the level. If that fails, back tracking and reevaluating the steps you made to get there and looking for a missed part of the level sometimes helps to show another path to progress. However, I stressed, there is always a way to get over any objective because the game is governed by it's design so that once you truly have all the options the answer will present itself. Sure enough, before I left he had passed it and in that exchange he was reminded of the same qualities that make real people succeed in the real world. Of course not all games are suitable for all kids and some games are just crap but the same can be said of books, TV or ,in some cases, parents. The point I am making is that video games, out of hand, are no worse than any other tool that a parent has for teaching, yet offer a somewhat unique way to allow for an interaction that mimics the real world in the tasking that one must acquire in order to solve real world issues.

Why wait? : My abrasive and caustic response to the post below this one

Since A. Whitney Brown was kind enough to share with the world, via Youtube, his disregard and dislike for the troops, I feel it's perfectly justifiable for me to retort via our blog. After all, when one does a Google search for his name the first result is his wikipedia link. You search for me and your first result is FIU. I had no memorable roles on SNL. He had no memorable roles on SNL. So we're on level pegging. A Whitney Brown made several statements designed to be funny. They weren't though. However, this is a common thing and happens to everyone. For comics, or in this case comic-wannabees, it can be embarrassing. Sadly, medical science had not discovered the humorist equivalent of erectile dysfunction/premature ejaculation medicine for the comic who can neither maintain, nor time his delivery. While embarrassing, you have to applaud the dysfunctional comic who is brave enough to go shoot his wad with the lack of effectiveness displayed here, thereby risking certain humiliation and disdain, in order to make a point. What was his point exactly? Let's examine that. After boiling through the atrophied layers of fat surrounding what should have been a 30 second quip that was agonizingly drawn out, we come down to these points: ~ People say that they support the troops all the time ~ Some might be insincere ~ Not all the troops are brave or patriotic ~ Some are just there for the free school and for gay sex ~ Brown pays for all the military training, food and equipment from his taxes ~ Brown doesn't like taxes ~ He wishes he had an Iraqi skull because he doesn't get anything to show for all those hundreds of dollars that he pays for in taxes ~ Brown thinks the troops are stupid. ~ Brown thinks the troops are morally retarded ~ Brown doesn’t like our troops ~ Brown doesn’t like what they’re doing ~ Brown doesn’t like their fat, whining families Now, I'm sure that he would say that several of these comments are hyperbole or taken out of context or that he was just riffing. That may very well be true. If I remember correctly, so was Micheal Richards when he had his N-word laden meltdown. As was Imus, when he made his Rutgers remarks. However in both cases those were decisions and words said on the fly that people like Al Sharpton has assured me are "signs of what's really beneath." Brown, on the other hand, did this as a premeditated, written, produced and then published material. Unless he ad libbed during the execution of his posting, he had plenty of time to rethink the conventional wisdom of his commentary. In response, let me retort. In this war, people have died. People have been killed or wounded. Several people have lost time from jobs, families and their plans. Several people have had to make hard decisions. People have had to weight consequences. Some people have committed incredible acts of bravery. Some have committed acts of extreme cowardice and utter depravity. However, all of these thing have happened without a single second wasted on what A. Whitney Brown thinks or feels or believes. The reason for this is dual fold. On the first hand, he has absolutely nothing to offer to any side of the pro-war or anti-war efforts. He is not smart enough to lead either side. Strategy escapes him. He is not famous enough to engender support because he lived in Denis Millers shadow, much like a Remora fish living off the scraps of Miller's work. He's not particularly creative. He's not physically useful other than a low tech land mine finder, but the cost of transportation to the front wouldn't be worth it. He is essentially useless as a participant at any level. The second reason is that what he believes is so devoid of value that it actually repels both sides. The claim that the troops are "moral idiots" might be useful if it was delivered from someone who was seen to be as "morally astute." Brown has no claim to this. His sole claim to an level of notoriety is being the "yuk monkey" that lived in Miller's wake. In third rate comedy dives that might be good enough to get you half price Bud Lite but for the rest of the world we regard that position to be as relevant as the 16 year old kid that loads my groceries and squeezes the bread. He's barely a mind annoyance and a far cry from any type of moral compass. Additionally, his reasoning is so devoid of continuity and context that it is the equivalent to trying to teach brine shrimp how to do calculus. He has no grasp of the subject, it's relevance in the world or his relation to either of the aforementioned relationships. In fact, the only reason his video is a topic of conversation is one thing: A Whitney Brown has finally said what so many in the entertainment industry think but don't have the balls to say. They know it will make them look like elitist assholes. They know it will separate them from the people who purchase their products. They know that is can ruin their careers. Brown, hell he never had a career, so what does he have to lose? Sadly, this derangement has allowed for him to no longer have the foresight to see the connection to the underlying consequences of what he has to lose by so rudely asking his question: his freedom, his lifestyle and quite possibly some teeth. See, in the history of mankind, I can find a lot of people who think they are smart. I can find a lot who think they are smarter than everyone else. I can even find people who have expressed, due to what they consider their ample intelligence, the same disregard for the lives of soldiers. What I can't find is even one case in history where comedians, much less one comedian, much less one "spare of a comedian" used jokes to dethrone a tyrant or protect his homeland or stop a war. I can't find a place where comedians set the moral compass of a society. I can't even find a place where a comedian, cracking jokes, saved lives. Raising money on a telethon is about as close as it gets and Mr Brown's didn't exactly even make that cut. So while Mr Brown may not like the troops, what they are doing or their families, I'd like to inform Mr. Brown that we don't really like you. This should be a noticeable feature in that unlike so many others who went on to have further camera driven comedic careers after SNL, he disappeared like a fart in a tornado. So congrats on at least having the nuts to be honest about hating our soldiers, I'm sure that will be a lot of comfort if some supporter of our troops, former military person or current enlistee decides to activate your dental plan. But hey, that might actually get you back on TV for 15 seconds. Outside of that, you are still an unremarkable ball of lackluster talent and a trivia answer to the question "Who was the SNL cast member whom Denis Miller had to carry almost weekly?"

Questions from space

If I were an alien there are a few questions that I'd want answers to before I made first contact. So in a effort to be proactive, let me address a few of those, so as to speed things up. Q. What's the deal with Micheal Jackson's face? A. We don't know. We thought he was one of yours. Q. Are you guys going to try to carve me up? A. No. Well, maybe. I mean if you look prettty much like us you might have a few people want to carve you up but more than likely you'll just have people that want to have sex with you because we have a lot of alien freaks down here. Now if you look all wierd then they'll try to cut you. Q. Do you have advanced technology? A. Not really. I can say this because they still haven't made a machine that my grandparents can work to get email without confusing it with the TV. Also, we don't have jet packs, which sucks. Q. We are a species of parasitic aliens, how do we get you to let us bond with you and use you for hosts? A. As long as you advertise your self as natural penis enlargment devices you should be able to get a foot hold on our planet. Q. We want to abduct all your cattle for scientific experiments, is that ok? A. As long as you beam back down the steaks we might be able to reach a deal. Q. What's up with Trump's hair? A. I have no clue. and finally, the most asked question Q. Will you take us to your leaders? A. Only if your going to blast their asses into oblivion, otherwise, you're wasting your time.

New Haloscan feature

For those of you that like to participate in comment threads but don't have the time or patience to go back to the comment threads and check on them, Haloscan has added a little check box below where you enter comment text that will email you when a comment is added to a thread. Obviously for this to work you'll need to fill out the email field when commenting. This info isn't published anywhere, however, on occasion, I may submit emails to Scarlett Johansson fan site email listings... ... not really. But I could.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!

The comprehensive "piece of crap" (aka Immigration bill) has been wounded. Most likely mortally! All I can say is that Cornyn and Hutchison, both R-Texas, voted the right way. Some illuminating quotes on this one: "Congress really needs to prove to the American people that it can come together on hard issues," Bush said. They did, GW. They came together and said to themselves "Holy shit, the unwashed masses are really pissed about this and no matter how much special interest money I might get, or what great pork I can trade for, I better kill it or find another day job." "Everyone knows that our immigration laws are broken," Schumer said. "And a country loses some of its greatness when it can't fix a problem that everyone knows is broken. And that's what happened today." Let's explore that logic, Chucky. A government fails to enforce the laws that is passes. Should they: a. Quit fucking around and enforce the laws they have b. Quit fucking around and at least "try" to enforce the laws they have c. Fuck around, yet eventually enforce the laws they have d. Have a shit flinging monkey fest in which they solve nothing, call their own people racist, ignore the voters and generally fuck around, other than making a bunch of law breaking people legal and giving them free crap. It seems that in Washington logic, D is the congressman's answer. Or at least it would have been, until thousands to millions of people gave a collective "WTF" to their officials and told them that we'll let you play your stupid political games all day long but America, for the most part, expects you to not give our country away. I still expect that the next election will have a great deal of turn over just from this issue alone and well it should. So for all the congressional members consider this your notice, much like the one that the old media establishment received over "Rathergate" and the like: The Internet has leveled the field. You once thought that the people were stupid and easy to fool. Individually, that very well may be. But collectively, we are smarter than you, we have more time than you, we have a more vested interest than you and we are watching you. If you try to screw us, we will notice and we will return the favor, in spades.

My excuse

Sorry, I've been posting way below level but, well, that's just how it is. We have a "freaking huge-ass" project at work. So I'm still going to class, then coming to work, then adding about another 15 hours per week of overtime on the project, then studying for class but only if the kids and wife aren't awake, because I really want to make sure I do stuff with them. I know you guys understand and you've been pretty cool about cutting me slack, and all, so I felt I should give an explaination. In the mean time I've had a few good things happen (more money for me) and few bad things happen (water heater cracked so I had to replace it therefore, less money) and some indifferent things happened. Hopefully, I'll get a chance to catch up soon, as the project should play out late this week or early next week. Until then, here's some pics I took on the camera phone. Let's all just imagine that they are a visual representation of me passing by what once used to be a functioning Republican party that now has gotten on the wrong side of the immigration bill despite the flow of traffic, instead of getting with it. I think that's called a metaphor, or something.

Just a political side note....

Until the primaries resolve the issue, let me go on the record. I'm for Mike Huckabee. I truly hope we don't get Guliani or McCain because I just can't bring myself to vote for either of them unless the whole platform becomes "not Hillary" in the general election. However, I think that a pro-choice canidate will kill the Republican party and McCain is a douche. Fred will be popular and he's conservitive but Mike Huckabee tracks better with my beliefs and he's a true conservitive on the isues. I've now seen him in about 6 or 7 interviews, 2 debates and checked over his website and Govoners record. He's the best person and I'm supporting him. Whether he gets traction or not is irrelivent to me, I'm voting for the best Conservitive/Social Conservitive in the group because that's who I want to win. If I'm lucky, enough people will back him to the point that we get the canidate that we dont get the canidate that the liberal news tells us is going to win the Republican nomination but instead get the best Republican canidate. So, consider me in the I like Mike Camp.