Excuses, excuses.

Wow, I've been terrible at updating. But trust me, I have multiple good excuses. 

One: I have tons of work. Even more than usual.

Two: I do make time for myself, but it comes in different forms. First off, I've been writing a fantasy novel. Can you believe it? I certainly can't, but I have almost 11 pages in word now! This is where most of my free time goes.

Okay, so there were just two excuses, but technically, two is more than one, and therefore qualifies as "multiple" excuses.

Last week, I saw The Capitol Steps live. They were awesome. If you don't know who they are, look them up. They're a political satire troupe, and are astounding. They write songs mocking politicians to the tune of popular classic songs. For instance, I saw them perform "How Do You Solve a Problem Like Korea?" (to the tune of "How Do You Solve A Problem Like Maria, from The Sound of Music as well as "The Lie of the Tiger," and many others.

For this post, rather than giving you a haiku as usual, I have decided to share with you a song in their tradition that I have written.

First, you must know what it's based on. So get Old Time Rock and Roll stuck in your head before listening to this.

Now, imagine someone impersonating Glen Beck as the singer.

Just take your phone, get ready to call

I’ve got solutions for problems big and small

Buy whatever coinage you are told

I like that Gold Line collector’s gold.

If you want your problems to grow gray and old

Just call the number you see on the screen

You’ll have gold fit for a queen

I like that Gold Line collector’s gold

Still like that Gold Line collector’s gold

The kind of riches that sooth the soul

Antique coins are a sight to behold

With that Gold Line collector’s gold.

Don’t let the government take yours away

With FDR’s mandate they very well may

If you don’t want to lose all you’re sold

Start buying Gold Line Collector’s gold

Don’t you dare get those bullion, no!

Numismatic are the way to go

They’re mostly worthless, but you don’t know

So buy that Gold Line collector’s gold

Th-th-that's all folks! Until next time.

Liberal Linguistics

If my mom had yesterday asked me "what did you learn in school today?" I would have had a very simple answer: Liberals' linguistics are lame.

That's what I learned in linguistics class. Either the democrats are too proud to not take the "linguistic high road," or they just don't realize what a huge difference linguistics make in politics. Seriously, the conservatives have their Frank Luntz, a marvelous linguist, and as a result have made some remarkable headway. For instance, take the "death tax." It used to be called the "estate tax." Essentially what it did was tax people who inherited estates worth a certain amount or more. Obviously, rich conservatives wanted it repealed, so Luntz renamed it the "death tax," so that people would be all like "oh no, I don't want to be taxed when I die!" and he left out the part about how it pretty much only affected the top 2% of the populace. Here's the moral of the story:

If democrats took
The linguistic low road, they'd
Be much better off

Another instance of linguistic engineering (or semantic engineering, as it's called), is that Rush Limbaugh calls liberals "libs." You'd think it wouldn't be too hard for someone in the democratic party (here's looking at you, Keith) to start calling conservatives "cons." Seems like the logical thing to do. You'd think that words don't matter that much- but in all honesty words make a world of difference. Even the word "liberal" is a perfect example of this engineering. In the 50s, being liberal was something that all politicians aspired to be. However, because of smart campaigning, the word has undergone significant pejoration (decline of the connotation words give) and has become almost an insult of sorts.

If you want to learn more about this, Geoffrey Nunberg has an interesting book called Talking Right: How Conservatives Turned Liberalism into a Tax-Raising, Latte-Drinking, Sushi-Eating, Volvo-Driving, New York Times-Reading, Body-Piercing, Hollywood-Loving, Left-Wing Freak Show.

Who names a place "Guam" anyways?

Last night we had Luis Foruño, the governor of Puerto Rico, speak here at Cornell. He spoke about how, in his opinion, Puerto Rico should become a state. If you didn't know, every year we offer Puerto Rico statehood, and they take a vote to become a state, stay as a commonwealth, or become an independent nation, and every year the commonwealth wins. Also if you didn't know, a commonwealth is a territory of ours, which mainly means that they don't have a federal income tax, but can't vote.

You're probably waiting to hear my opinion, so here it is:

Puerto Rico should
Be a state, but only if
They don't spread ideas


Really, I'm fine with it being a state, in fact, I think it's not a bad idea at all (though we'd have to adjust the flag, which is sad since it's just so pretty right now). However, they need to not inspire others to do the same. I'm fine with Puerto Rico being a state. However, Guam is an entirely different story. It's name is just too darn ugly. Maybe if they get rid of Kentucky, but until then- we don't have any more room for ugly sounding states.

Someone at the speech asked the governor how American citizens could benefit from Puerto Rico's statehood (apparently he's been watching a lot of West Side Story). He gave a decent answer, but I could think of better, so I shall share it. "How could we benefit from Puerto Rico's statehood? You may as well be asking how could we benefit from abolition of slavery? How could we benefit from women's suffrage? How could we benefit from the fact that "all men are created equal"? It's not just about Puerto Rico. It's about what we stand for. It's about liberty and equality. It's about America. Excluding Guam, of course."

Isn't it Interesting?

Oh boy, have I an article for you. I don't actually know what to say about it yet, I just know that I should have something to say about it.

But first, it's Sunday! I had pancakes for breakfast. Last night I had some banana bread for desert. But not just any banana bread- it was Reese's Pieces Banana Bread. If you don't happen to know, I love both Reese's and banana bread- so this combination was pure genius.

Now, on to less pressing issues. In a recent poll, Fox news was found to be the most trusted news network among Americans. Now, I know what you're thinking- that this is ridiculous. But don't worry- Comedy Central wasn't part of the poll, so it's not really the case (considering that both of them are meant for laughs). And if you think about it, it kind of makes sense. About 50% of people trust Fox (and by people, I mean of the 1151 voters that were chosen at random, which likely excluded most of the various demographic groups considering the underwhelmingly small number) according to the study, which is not the least bit surprising considering that they do the best job of brainwashing people. I think the results of this survey are really actually a good thing.

The results we see
Show that everyone doesn't
Believe everything


By this, I mean that people actually question what they hear instead of mindlessly listening to everything they hear on TV. If only 39% of people believe CNN, it really gives me hope for our country yet. So please, don't get mad over the results of this survey. This is disorganized. I'm tired.

In other news, Glenn Beck was declared to be the second favorite TV personality in another poll. This, again, is not surprising when you consider how entertaining that guy can be. Nowhere else can you see someone dodge slander by adding a question mark to the end of sentences. ("Isn't it interesting how Obama likes chocolate and Hitler liked chocolate? I'm not insinuating anything though, I'm just asking and ending my sentences a little higher like a teenage girl so that they sound like questions so I won't be sued and shut down for what could otherwise be considered slander?" (that was my Glenn Beck impersonation by the way)). Well I have my own question about Glenn Beck. Isn't it interesting that Glenn Beck is white and criticized Obama and the KKK does the same thing? I'm not saying anything, I'm just pointing out what would seem to be a coincidence.


Sources:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/27/fox-news-most-popular
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=9659056

Sore Losers

As you should hopefully know (unless you're a Twitter user in the USA, according to Twitter's trending topics location), the State of the Union was last. Obama gave a strong speech, standing in front of Congress and the Supreme Court and other people who I would presume to be important. He spoke of such things that to republicans must have sounded like fairy tales (or ghost stories) their parents would tell them at night ("And then people other than us were able to afford health care!" *insert screams of horror). In any case, he received much support from his fellow Democrats. And behind him the whole time sat Biden and Pelosi, looking like those theatrical tragedy/comedy masks (although occasionally Biden would smile and look remarkably similar to a panda bear). The democrats seemed to clap at every single word and, had I been there, I probably would have just stayed standing- it would have been easier on my leg muscles.

The republicans on the other hand seemed unable to move their hands together. My guess is my haiku:

It would seem that the
Concept of "sore losers" was
Not taught in their schools

I mean, really. You lost, get over it. That's all there is to it. I know that in my rich, predominantly-white school we learned about being sore losers, and were taught not to be. Just because you lost does not mean that you can't laugh when the president says something funny. Just because you lose does not mean that you can't applaud when the president actually says something you agree with. And just because your mommy and daddy bought you stuff in place of love does not mean that you can't try to be respectful.

The Talk of the Town (And no, it's not Tiger Woods)

Well, I am officially finished with my first semester of college. Today, I shall be on route to home, once again. My dad is taking the time out of his Monday and Tuesday to drive the 6 hours here to pick me up. So again, I have a fun car ride in store for me.

In the news, the healthcare reform bill is still the talk of the town. And by talk of the town, I mean the filler between Tiger Woods stories.

The most recent update, from what I have heard, is that Public Option and Medicare Buy-In are no longer in the bill. This action was taken in an attempt to allow the bill's passing (Which seemed otherwise impossible), by gaining support from such skeptics as Joe Lieberman and Olympia Snowe. If you have been living in a hole (result of not watching CSPAN or browsing news websites for the non-celebrity or ukulele kid stories), public option is a federally supported option for health insurance. Many people opposed it, and so in order to have any chance of passing, this change was made.

However, I still have little hope. Why?

Joe Lieberman will
Always find some way to prove
His douchebaggery


Seriously, he's a democrat, he's an independent, he's a democrat- he needs to make up his damn mind. He's hated by democrats, and loved by republicans. He was even encouraged to join the republican party but chose not to (even though he lost the Democratic primary for a senate seat in '06). He ran with Gore in 2000, but went on to support McCain in 2008. He was in that group of people who supported the war, and then was too old and stubborn to admit that he was wrong (much like McCain). His reason for not wanting public option is that it would allow people as young as 55 to get Medicare. I think that the phrase he used was "get off my lawn you young wippersnappers!" Except Lieberman, believe it or not, is rather progressive. He supports gay rights, abortion rights, and other such issues. So why exactly does he insist on trying his best to go against the democratic party? I blame douchebaggery.

I have a more concrete theory though. If I were to guess, bribing... I mean lobbying might somehow be involved. Healthcare lobbyists spend millions of dollars to try to save themselves from any sort of government regulation. According to one article I read, they averaged 1.4 million dollars in spending per day earlier this year. Now, I'm no econ major (though I'm probably better at math than many of the athletes- I mean econ majors here), but that seems like an awful lot of money. Maybe if some of that money went to health care instead of lobbying, we might not need reform?


If you're interested in more, here's a good read about Joe Lieberman from a like-minded, and more educated-on-the-issue individual.

"Gold Man-Sacks"

Well, I had my first final exam yesterday! It went well, I think. I finished first, which isn't necessarily a good thing, but I'm relatively confident with it. If you take a look at my Twitter feed (lower right hand corner of the page), you can see some of my Tweets regarding it. Pretty much I owned the quote identification part, but was not expecting a definition portion. Needless to say, I used my extensive background in Latin to make up definitions (to clarify, the only Latin I know is from random sayings (illegitimi non carborundum anyone?) and from Harry Potter spells). My made-up definitions ranged from "a Greek delicacy" to "newer than Old English, but older than New English." I also identified some random guy I didn't know as "presumably a medieval scholar or author, who is important enough to be on this exam- which is quite the honor."

Now, to move onto more pressing issues. In the news, Goldman Sachs announced that they would be altering their bonus policy because they have gotten enough hate from the public (or to "quell uproar" as they might have you think). What do I have to say to this?

Finally, we know
The cause of the recession
Won't be too pampered


Am I right in thinking that? They're altering bonuses to be less ridiculous? Maybe?

Well, let's see what the article says:

"With a resurgent Goldman set to award billions of dollars in bonuses... the bank said that its 30 most-senior executives would be paid in the form of a special stock, rather than in cash. Goldman said that it would also let its shareholders vote on its executives’ pay, although the decision would be nonbinding." Source

Okay, great. Instead of money, they get "special stock." I suppose that's a reasonable substitute. Now what do they mean be "special"? Is it "special" like my mommy says I am or "special" like the special effects in movies? I personally would not mind the latter, if it entails explosives.

Well, the actual answer is that a "special stock" is one that cannot be sold for five years, and can be taken away if the executive is in need of a time-out. This is much better than a real stock, because it means that they can't instantly sell it (like they would normally). Instead, they need to invest it, something that they probably never do with their money. The horror. I suppose it's all just, though, right?

The second part is that the shareholders can decide the salaries. I think that may profit the company, in the end, what with all of the negative salaries the shareholders would demand. Oh, except the decisions are non-binding. In other words, it's like saying "we'll let you vote on the ice cream for our ice cream party, and we'll definitely take into consideration. However, in the end we are more than likely going to choose our favorite type of ice cream, even though we never, ever do things with our own profit in mind" I mean, come on- with a history like Goldman Sachs's you can't exactly trust them to listen to votes that might not satisfy them.

Well, that's enough rambling for now. Too-da-loo.


Credit for the title goes to Jon Stewart, who had that phrase on an episode of The Daily Show

Would You Like Some Cheese With Your Whine?

Well, it's another Sunday. And Thanksgiving break is just a couple of days away. I must say, I'm probably a bit more excited for the break than for Thanksgiving- I've become used to stuffing myself.

But there will be plenty of time to post about Thanksgiving when it comes 'round.

I was just on CNN.com, and I saw an interesting video.

It's short, but it's more-or-less Mitch McConnell, the GOP Senate Leader (aka minority leader) calling Democrats arrogant for wanting to pass health care reform bill while "ignoring the wishes of the American people." I find this a rather funny statement. Why?

The minority
Is rebuking democrats
About listening


McConnell is telling us to listen to the American people and what they want. However, something tells me that perhaps the majority would be a better representation of what the American people want, considering that they are the ones who elect the Senators. To listen to "the wishes of the American people" is simply to listen to the loudest voices. However, even the loudest voice has the same vote as the mute. And I think that if the actual wish of the American people was to not have a reform such as this pass, McCain would be president, and there would be a republican house and senate majority.

"How To Make Millions And Become Famous" For Dummies

You're probably wondering why I have yet to post about Sarah Palin's Going Rogue (not her going rogue, her book). Well, it is mainly because I have not had the chance to read it. I've changed that now, and will be making this post almost completely uninformed about the book.

Get rich quick: Run for
VP, get hated by all,
And then write a book.


That's right, it's a perfect scheme. First, you become governor of a state with 2 occupants, and either bribe them with moose pelts (if they're in to that) or threaten them with a rifle (don't shoot them though: you can't do that until you actually are VP). If you want some advice, run as a republican, and make your platform saying that you are an "average Joe" (not necessarily a plumber though... and not necessarily with a six-pack of beer). The rest is simple, and will fit on a notecard. Here are some actual notes from Sarah Palin:

Issues:
Abortion: Bad
Gay people: Bad
Democrats: Evil. Elitist. 
Religion: Good
Environment: Bad, but iffy. Save the moose (mooses? meese?) so you can shoot them.
Drilling: God's gift to man

So now, all you need is connections. Or to sleep with the right people. Or both, potentially. Just make sure you don't mix those two too much, else it could end up awkward.

Next, make sure that when you're elected governor, those people stay in line. Then, use your connections to end up on the presidential candidate's desk (or break in and place them there, replacing all of the other potential candidates with pets and Sesame Street characters... just make sure to botch their resumes, or else they may be chosen).

Something else worth noting is to have a sitcom-worthy family. And naming a kid after a part of a gun may help please the NRA. I would recommend Magazine (Mag for short), Muzzle, Hammer (they could also be a superhero), or Bullet. Trig has been taken.

Once you're chosen (presuming you have carried out these previous items successfully), become revered by conservatives and written off as idiotic by liberals (these two usually go hand-in-hand).

Then, when you lose: Write a book about it. Everyone will know your name, and democrats and republicans alike will buy it. Pictures help.

On the off-chance that you win: Get involved in a scandal of some sort as quickly as you can (try to be original. Some untouched territories: polygamy, bestiality, necrophilia, or sell yourself as a prostitute. Everything else has been done). Issue a public apology, resign, and then write a book about it.

With either of these methods, you will end up being rich. I guarantee it. And then you can finally buy that ski resort you've always wanted, and never have to deal with politics again.

The Times, They Are a-Changed (about 8 months ago)

I used to be a religious watcher of both the Daily Show and the Colbert Report. It was my nightly tradition to tune into each one every single night at 8 o'clock. As I briefly touched upon in my post, "The truthiness will set you free!," I would get all of my news from Comedy Central. Sadly, I have not been watching them lately due to the fact that I have been remarkably busy and our floor's lounge is 24/7 home to studious students studying some studies of sorts. However, I still have found to check the NY Times each day, and to read our student-run paper "The Daily Sun" (not quite as good as The Daily Show, but not bad). And there has been one thing in the news (or should I say not in the news) I really have taken note of:

George W. Bush
Has not been in the news of
Late. I wonder why.


That's right, Bush is not president anymore (and so it has been for quite a long time, believe it or not). Since I have really not been seeing the news on TV, I don't receive as frequent reminders of who the president is (not that I forget, but it's just not beaten into me as much). Of course, the lack of reminders does not make me think Obama isn't doing a good job (Which he is). He's doing well, but our government would probably be much more efficient if Congress didn't exist. It's when I think about that (im)possibility that I remember Bush.

As hard as it is for me to admit, I actually miss Bush a little. He was a prime target for ridicule and Obama just isn't the same. Luckily, we still have such great targets as Joe Wilson and Kanye West (who admittedly is not a government figure, but is still great fun to make fun of).

Karl Marx: The Fourth Marx Brother

Seriously, have you read this guys works? He's hilarious! It's like Anne Coulter, but in the 19th century (and, admittedly, on the other side). For my Soc 101 class, we had to read some of his Communist Manifesto and I quickly discovered the humor of it. I mean, listen to this:

"It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilisation into their midst, i.e.e, to become bourgeois themselves. In one word, it creates a world after its own image."

I would tell you what I wrote in the margins next to that, but I want to leave you to think for yourself. It is hilarious though, believe me. I read the whole section we were assigned, and rather quickly derived the gist of the Manifesto from the part I read:

I never knew that
Capitalism skins and
Kills babies for fun


I bet you didn't know that either, did you? Well now you do. According to Marx, capitalism is effectively the incarnation of the devil, and in its free time it enjoys hunting down babies and eating them alive (don't leave your baby carriage unattended on Wall Street). Overall I found Karl to be quite the comedian, and would suggest that you pick up your own copy of the Communist Manifesto if you want to have a good laugh (just make sure that you have a pencil, or else you won't get the chance to write in the margins (that's the best part)).

"The truthiness will set you free!"

I'm a huge fan of politics. I know that's something most people would not say, and those people would probably give me strange glares when they learned of that (I can see you through your webcam). However, my love for politics manifests itself not in a want for a profession in politics (oh boy... congressman is exactly what I want to do in life), but rather a joy of seeing politics mocked to the nth degree. That being said, I would first like to share this:

I get my news from
Comedy Central and my
Comedy from Fox

Well by now you should know that I am a democrat (if you did not know by now), but fear not- for I will not alienate the quarter of my fan base that is republican (please don't leave, Matt), and will only occasionally touch upon politics. But yes, I thoroughly enjoy Fox News, and find Bill O'Reilly to be absolutely hilarious. But even more funny than O'Reilly is my favorite comedian:

I love Anne Coulter:
She's just like Stephen Colbert
But believes her bull-

Seriously, have you read the works of this woman? She is so entertaining. She is to the logical fallacy as Shakespeare is to the sexual innuendo (BAM! Successful analogy).

That is all.


That quote is from none other than the great Stephen Colbert.

Modern Politics

I've decided to make my first "real" post tonight instead of tomorrow because I feel like it. Don't like it? Well quite frankly, I am not especially concerned.

I thought about this last year in AP English, and only just decided to turn my thought into a haiku.


Dante’s inferno
Would be notably longer
If written today