University Suckers

Thursday, October 26, 2006

Light Blogging

-I'm trying to finish an article for an online magazine, so blogging will be light these next couple of days.

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

dePlume Daily Is Good

-Over at dePlume Daily, Victoria Bekiempis has outdone herself. One of her latest posts, As promised - the step by step logical refutation of Islam is a very good read. Thankfully her progress doesn't end there...

-Every morning I pickup an Oracle at 9:30 A.M. and like every other morning my expectations on the content have decreased because of the day before; it's an ongoing pattern. Anywho, today was completely different. Today I read an article in the Oracle dedicated to exposing what ruthless scum Ché Guevara was. This article can be found both here and here. Needless to say, the column was very refreshing. Aside from Ché, it's good to know that there are other objectivists within my age range out there; meeting her, as well as being reintroduced to the rest of the USF Objectivist Club, was simply a confirmation for me.

-Until just recently she was trying to blog off of her alias, Victoria dePlume, until she actually exposed herself on accident. Because she stated this herself I assumed it was alright for me to mention her real name in this post. Victoria, if you feel otherwise, just let me know.

-I would highly recommend this blog to anyone who appreciates freedom and individual rights with the occasional twist of humor wrapped up in there somewhere (i.e. "It seems that orgiastic Ché veneration has become a criterion for admittance to the in-crowd amongst the intellectual hoi polloi - you know, those shoeless barnacles that indiscriminately cluster along the Social Science building.") That's what I'm talking about! Absolutely classic. Go check it out.

I'll Take 5:1 On Uncle Sam!

-Yet another governmental restriction. Via Cox and Forkum, I have learned about this new "law". Dr. Yaron Brook of ARI wrote an article on it as well. I must say that I feel out of the loop. Regardless, it disgusts me. Anyone who has ever taken an economics course knows that not only controls breed more controls, but that governmental restrictions open up outside markets (i.e. ticket scalping). Outside markets in this case result in average citizens being considered criminals because they are doing what they want with their own money and not infringing on anyone's individual rights. It also appears as if internet gambling is not going to stop either:

"It has put a terrible scare into people," said I. Nelson Rose, who teaches gambling law at Whittier Law School. "But it won't by any means wipe out Internet gambling."

-Which confirms my statement above; more (unnecessary) laws make more (unnecessary) criminals. The government's stranglehold on individual freedom gets stronger with every day that passes.

Dr. Yaron Brook goes on the state that:

"Why do supporters of the law deny individuals the freedom to spend their hard-earned money on gambling? Because, they say, people will bet and lose more than they can afford. In other words, individuals are inherently incapable of making rational decisions, and thus it is the government's job to protect us from ourselves. This vicious, paternalistic idea has no place in a free society."

-They may say that's the case. I seriously doubt it. What's going on behind the curtain of the "common good" is the government's inability to tax and have it's nose in all of those offshore accounts. Usually, as a rule of thumb, I always ask myself if the idea of either obtaining or not being able to obtain taxes could be the reason behind some governmental restriction or intervention; I haven't met a case where it couldn't be logically considered. If the government is unable to gain control over everything and anything it passes some law in order to "justify" its case. Look at my quote of the week; just because the government passes a certain law doesn't mean that specific law is moral. It's merely illegal. In a decision between the illegal and the immoral I'll gladly accept the label of criminal. Every American that loves freedom should be getting sick of this type of malarkey by now. Unless, of course, you look like this and if do, we all know that you don't love freedom at all.

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

But Squared Circles Can't Exist! Exactly.

-If you're a regular reader of Dawson Bethrick's blog, Incinerating Presuppositionalism, you may be interested in knowing that he also has a website. He has also recently posted a very interesting and devastating - I may add - debate onto it. Check it out.

Screw Ageism

-It's not called "age discrimination" and/or "ageism"; it's called safety when people like this are tested for their driving skill. But that's not the case. Instead, people like George Russel Weller are negligently running people over. As much as I hate government intervention in our daily lives, something has to be done with people like George Weller.

Sunday, October 22, 2006

Ann Coulter Is An Idiot

Controversial conservative pundit elicits praise and protest Thursday. - News


-Having such circus acts as Cornel West, John Zerzan, and soon to be Aaron McGruder coming to campus I was a little excited, in the beginning anyway, to hear Ann Coulter as a sort of balance from all of the past liberal silliness. I was extremely disappointed with her case against liberals. She went on to criticize all of the issues that truly matter in the deterioration of America's fabric: abortion and gay marriage. She didn't talk about welfare, affirmative action, or any other govermental policy that truly matters. I am almost ashamed to say that I was on the side of the liberals who chose to attend, the only difference was that I chose to wear shoes (I'm being dead serious). The most offensive part had to be when Ann Coulter went on to call the Constitution a "religious document". How dare her! She continued to say that sodomy should be illegal without giving any justification. She also said that the government should enforce the ban of sodomy with a very weak argument that resembles* this:

"Yeah, the government shouldn't be able look in your house for what you do in your free time. Just like they shouldn't care when you're sawing off the end of shotguns and creating meth labs."

-That was her was beyond pathetic.

-Coulter also went on to say that the reason South Korea is doing so well now is because of the Christian missionaries that went there after World War II. I'm going to forget about how horrible the Dark Ages were for a second and look at the numbers: a whopping 31.67% of the population are Christian, while 35.02% are NON-Religious. We've all been through elementary school, so is 35.02% (The non-religious) > 31.67% (The Christians)? Of course it is. South Korea's success can only be attributed to the freedom it has; Ann Coulter should be ashamed of herself for trying to give the credit of South Korea's prosperity to Christianity rather than freedom. Once again, take a look at the Dark Ages; everyone was religious, everyone suffered. On a side note, I did notice that there was a lot of hubbub about this speech being made before she actually came to campus. It's completely different when Cornel and Zerzan come though.

-At the end of the night I was just as startled to find myself agreeing with the liberals on these topics as anyone else.

*That is not a direct quote from Ann Coulter, but a variation of what she said. I didn't write down the exact analogy, so it is impossible for me to quote her verbatim, even though those are the examples she used and the point remains unchanged.