Hello. My name is John Banzhaf. I'm so damn gluttonous and irresponsible that when I open my mouth, feces literally spills out. This is not my fault, it is everyone else's, because I don't have control over my actions. You see, I'm a victim, and I want everyone else to realize that they are nothing but mindless, helpless victims too. For some reason, people don't just laugh in my face when I spout feces from my mouth, they take me seriously. I am the face of a growing threat to our society. This threat is called "complete lack of common sense and responsibility syndrome" or CLCSRS. I like making money off of being ridiculous, and bending the truth to fit what I think should be correct in the world, even when that means the disintegration of everything that is meaningful and good in the world. Please find me and shoot me in the knees with a shotgun, or cut my tongue and fingers off so I cannot talk or write. I am a waste of the air I breathe and all the tons of fatty food that I consume.

What you must realize is that it is YOUR fault that I am gluttonous. It is YOUR fault that I am stupid looking, and it is YOUR fault that I don't know anything about the world other than how to manipulate stupid, stupid, worthless people (judges) into giving me money for every vice I have. The meek will not inherit the earth, the obese child-beating alcoholic junkies will, but only as long as they learn to blame it all on someone else. I am a lawyer, and that makes me right. All the time. Let's just start giving people $100 for every time they stub their toe - that way we can avoid the inevitable hassle of having to sue door makers, shoe makers, and everyone else who had a hand in creating any form of dastardly, evil, toe-level death trap. Here is a link about how fat people are better than everyone else, except that they have fallen victim to the evil plot of shady corporations wanting to put too much food in them so they will die.

Boo hoo, I am too stupid and irresponsible to do anything about being a complete waste of life.

Just let me add this at the end, so that I am not taken to be too inconsiderate...
I understand that some people have eating disorders, or are predisposed to being more hefty. This is fine. I have nothing fundamentally against heavier people. I just don't like it when people play the victim-game and blame everyone else and make everyone else's life hell because they have problems. If you want to be chubby, more power to you, but if you screw with me because of it, I will shoot you in the chubby kneecaps.

Aaah, that felt good...so much stupidity in the world...
In case you are wondering what set off this rant, check THIS SITE out.
Also, if you subscribe to the Wall Street Journal, there is an editorial on the opinion page regarding the fat-tastic degenerate who calls himself John Banzhaf.


Hey hey hey! I'm fat and it's your fault. Gimme all your money!

Until next time...don't be stupid like everyone else.

And don't be sad...
Whenever I'm feeling down...I think about Gary Coleman.

I realized today that this blog has become a little too dry, and possibly overly angry at times (yeah right) so I decided to embrace my softer side today, and share with you some of my favorite poetry. Don't worry, it will be pretty short and completely painless. Enjoy, and be ready for more anger tomorrow...we'll start out with one of my very favorite poems:

Had I the heavens’ embroidered cloths,
Enwrought with golden and silver light,
The blue and the dim and the dark cloths
Of night and light and the half light,
I would spread the cloths under your feet:
But I, being poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.

-W.B. Yeats (1865–1939)


I must create a system or be enslaved by another
man's;
I will not reason and compare: my business is to
create.

-William Blake


To see a world in a grain of sand
And a heaven in a wild flower,
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand
And eternity in an hour.

-William Blake


"If the doors of perception were to be cleansed everything would appear to man as it is, infinite."

-William Blake

Sorry George, looks like your time is up. When India says you're a liar and with no credibility, it's time to throw in the towel.

If an Indian person says it, it has to be true.

On a related note, earlier today President Bush spent four hours at mapquest.com attempting to find out how long it would take to "transport roughly four tons of an undisclosed substance" from Camp David to Baghdad, Iraq. He then issued a press release stating that WMD's would be found in Iraq "within 48 hours, 50 hours with rest stops."

The insanity never ends...

Ladies and Gentlemen, the future of the human race rests in the hands of one man.

This is that man.

Hey Gandhi, you wanna go overthrow the government? Come on, I'm bored...


Lenin, I've told you a thousand times not to interrupt me when I'm nonviolently making clothes! Find something different to do for a change. All you ever do is whine. Destroy the bourgeois...the state is evil...blah blah blah, constantly!


Gandhi, I swear you're the most boring revolutionary ever.


You know what Lenin? Fricking bite me.

Here's an interesting article I found online, which is a good explanation of how principles of nonviolence can work with....umm...violent revolution. Who'd have thought it? It turns out that Lenin and Gandhi are good complements to each other. Gandhi represents the spiritual principle of ahimsa, whereas Lenin represents Kshatriya ahimsa, or the ahimsa of the warrior. I will preface this interesting article with some appropriate quotes, of course. Don't ask me why I am about the quotes so much these days...it just happens sometimes.

"Destroy all that which is evil,
so that which is good may flourish."
- The MacManus Brothers

"While the State exists, there can be no freedom. When there is freedom there will be no State."
Lenin

"The only tyrant I accept in this world is the still voice within."
Mohandas Gandhi

Now onto the meat o' the blog:

The Path of the Warrior

The Bhagavad-Gita, which teaches about the spiritual aspect of yoga in great detail, was taught on the battlefield, during a civil war. While some will say that this outer battlefield is a metaphor for an inner struggle, which is true, that an outer battle was involved is clear from many historical records from ancient India. Krishna, the great yoga teacher, encouraged his disciple Arjuna, who was a great warrior, to fight, though Arjuna was reluctant and wanted to follow a way of non-violence instead. Why did Krishna encourage Arjuna to fight?


There are two main types of ahimsa in the Yoga tradition. The first is ahimsa as a spiritual principle, that followed by monks, yogis and sadhus, which involves non-violence on all levels. The second is ahimsa as a political principle, the ahimsa of the warrior or the Kshatriya, that is followed by those who govern and protect society, which allows the use of violence to counter evil forces in the world, including to protect spiritual people, who often cannot defend themselves and become easy targets for worldly people. Krishna taught this Kshatriya ahimsa to Arjuna for the benefit of future generations. Sages before Krishna also taught this, like Vishvamitra who taught Rama and Lakshmana to destroy the evil forces that were persecuting spiritual people, so it is a very old tradition of India.


Yoga teaches us about the three great qualities of nature, the gunas of Prakriti, of sattva (harmony), rajas (action and aggression), and tamas (inertia, ignorance). There are several important laws of the interrelationship of these gunas. One important law is that sattva cannot defeat tamas. The quality of sattva being harmony, balance, meekness and surrender cannot break up the inertia of tamas, which is deep-seated anger rooted in ignorance, hatred and violence. For this the application of rajas or action to force change is required. Sattva or harmony cannot survive unless rajas is used to suppress tamas, which sees sattva as an unarmed enemy.


To put it more simply: Sattva means peace. Rajas means pain. Tamas means ignorance. Tamasic people being dull will only respond to pain. Only pain will bring about change for them. Otherwise they will continue, like a drug addict, in their destructive way of life.


The Kshatriya or warrior path is a common theme elsewhere in the Mahabharata, from which the Gita comes. The Mahabharata teaches that the masses of humanity are composed of mainly rajasic (egoistic) and tamasic (deluded) qualities, which makes them insensitive and unresponsive to sattvic (spiritual) methods. It states that if a ruler does not know how to properly apply the danda (rod), the symbol of punishment, that his subjects will end up "eating one another". Ahimsa as a spiritual principle should not violate common sense that requires a social order that has well-defined and fair laws and punishments to keep disintegrating influences in check.

Article By Dr. David Frawley, taken from http://www.americanhindu.net/Articles6.htm

I don't know if this is actually as funny as I thought it was, but I was about to suffocate from laughing...enjoy.

Stupid Headlines

More to come...

Ladies and Gentlemen...it's time for some quotes:

"While the State exists, there can be no freedom. When there is freedom there will be no State."
Lenin, "State and Revolution", 1919

"Be as radical as reality."
Lenin

"Only an armed people can be the real bulwark of popular liberty."
Lenin

"Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the capitalist system was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens...Lenin was certainly right."
John Maynard Keynes

"Fascism is capitalism in decay."
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

"It is impossible to predict the time and progress of revolution. It is governed by its own more or less mysterious laws."
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

"Reading furnishes the mind only with materials of knowledge; it is thinking that makes what we read ours."
John Locke (1632 - 1704)

"Earthly minds, like mud walls, resist the strongest batteries; and though, perhaps, somethimes the force of a clear argument may make some impression, yet they nevertheless stand firm, keep out the enemy, truth, that would captivate or disturbe them."
John Locke (1632 - 1704)

"Good and evil, reward and punishment, are the only motives to a rational creature: these are the spur and reins whereby all mankind are set on work, and guided."
John Locke

"Law, in its proper Notion, is the Direction of a free and intelligent Agent to his proper Interest."
John Locke (Government, ii. vi. 57.)

"The Legislative cannot transfer the Power of making Laws to any other hands."
John Locke (Government, ii. 141 xi. (1694) 276.)

"New opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed, without any other reason but because they are not already common."
John Locke

"To understand political power aright, and derive it from its original, we must consider what estate all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom."
John Locke

"Whenever the legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any farther obedience, and are left to the common refuge which God hath provided for all men against force and violence."
John Locke

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
The Declaration of Independence

Locke and Lenin make strange bedfellows, but they speak much the same regarding the nature of liberty and the necessity of the populace to take upon themselves responsibility for the preservation of true freedom. And just in case you didn't know who J.M. Keynes is...he's responsible for a great deal of the economic theory that our nation rests on. There's no doubt that with the state our nation is in these days, Locke is probably spinning fast enough in his grave to power an electric generator...wouldn't he be thrilled? There was your daily lesson in government, from my gurus Locke and Lenin. They sit on my shoulders and counsel me all the time. I wonder which one is the devil? ;)

As always, read read read until your head explodes:

Lenin

Even better Lenin

Locke is always the man...

Until next time...

Today I will touch on two topics, one that is related to yesterday's abortion issue, and another that is completely unrelated, but very interesting. First off, I discovered yesterday in my attempt to have a conversation with some pro-choicers that probably 50% of our population has mastered the art of being a pseudo-intellectual. What exactly does this mean? Well, here you have it, the ODHAVBLOG guide to Pseudo-Intellectualism.

1. Use big words incorrectly and hope no one notices.
2. Have extreme views that you are incapable of backing up with logic.
3. If anyone questions those views, become angry, defensive, assume a condescending tone, and proceed to denounce them as racist, anti-semitic, close-minded, or any other random non-PC thing, even if this accusation is completely unfounded and makes no sense.
4. If anyone uses the words why, how, or explain, accuse them of intolerance of your views, dodge the question completely, and state some unrelated fact, as if you were answering the question.
5. Spend more of your time whining or engaging in comfortable self-affirmation than actually thinking.
6. Pretend to read books, but secretly get all your opinions from the stupidest celebrity on Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher. If someone calls you on this, call them anti-semitic.
7. Keep a large collection of obscure early 20th century english literature that you've never read laying around, just in case it becomes necessary to impress someone with your ability to twist word meanings into cleverly meaningless phrases about the relativity of everything or the superiority of secular humanism over every other philosophy.
8. The bottom line is, be very militant about everything so that no one can engage in discussion with you without being screamed at and accused of myriads of ridiculous nonsensical crap.

Part II of Todays Blog:
A Biography of the American Presidency: The Clinton and George W. Bush years.

Disclaimer: I know I didn't number Clinton's bungles, that's because everyone knows he was incompetent. What really makes me mad about Bush is that somehow people still like him! Imagine that...guess I'll have to number his bungles.

THE CLINTON YEARS

President Clinton sits around being suave and doing nothing for 8 years, drawing some criticism for "launching multimillion dollar cruise missiles to hit a tent with a camel in it."
President Clinton actually achieves something in education, but then completely nullifies this achievement by disregarding the Constitution and the Posse Comitatis Acts in the Waco incident; here Janet Reno orders the killing of numerous unarmed women and children, and is never held accountable. Both should have been impeached and jailed for life, but the media finds Clinton's personal life more interesting, impeaches him for ridiculous reason - Clinton isn't phased.
Boring idiot Al Gore runs against exciting idiot George W. Bush. Gore wins popular election, Bush wins the election that counts, the world wonders if there's ever the possibility of a good candidate running. For now, looks like no.

THE BUSH YEARS
***President Bush's many spectacular bungles are numbered. A bungle is defined as a major failure in any important category, or a violation of Constitutional principles.

Exciting idiot George W. Bush stays out of everyone's way, like a good President should, until 9-11.
After 9-11, President Bush is transformed into Napoleon meets caveman meets Genghis Khan.
President Bush goes into Afghanistan to get rid of al-Qaeda and get bin Laden, does neither. (BUNGLE #1)
Soon, the American people decide that their freedoms really aren't that great, and get rid of them; the USA Patriot Act is passed, violating no fewer than 4 fundamental constitutional principles. (BUNGLE #2)
Through the modern miracle of irresponsible journalism and the wonders of plain old ignorance, the American people think that pre-emptive war against defenseless 3rd world countries is necessary to ensure our national security; Iraq is attacked. (BUNGLE #3)
It is officially announced that President Bush has perfected President Clinton's methods, simultaneously launching hundreds of multi-million dollar cruise missiles at hundreds of camels in hundreds of tents. Saddam Hussein escapes (BUNGLE #4), WMD's are not found (BUNGLE #5), and American and British soldiers continue to be slaughtered in scattered guerilla warfare. (BUNGLE #6)
British PM Blair is almost lynched by the English people for decieving them into an unjust war, while President Bush breathes easy knowing that the American political and judicial systems do not hold the President accountable for his actions.
Two American citizens jailed during the war in Afghanistan are held indefinitely and without charge in military prisons, after being labeled as "enemy combatants" by President Bush. In doing this, President Bush suspends the constitutional right to due process of law. (BUNGLE #7)
True to his Republican roots, President Bush proposes a budget 22% higher than spend-crazy Clinton. Well, it was still Republican because it all went to blowing stuff up, not feeding people. (BUNGLE #8)
President Bush gives birth; it's a record $304 billion deficit! You know Bush, tax cuts usually work better when you cut spending too...not just spend more and more on the military. Whatever, it's your country...I guess... (BUNGLE #9)

Coming soon....the collapse of America as a free nation!
also known as
Fascism is good. I love Big Brother Bush.

In the land of the free....
....and the home of the brave.

Question: What do you get when you put together a discussion group full of incredibly stupid and whiny pseudo-intellectual abortionists, a direct question, an attempt to use logic, and the truth?

Answer: A trainwreck! And a very entertaining one at that. Below I give you the hilarious transcript of an online discussion board conversation I had with some pro-choice loonies when I tried to be civil and logical. Of course in true pro-choice form, they answered every question clearly and logically, they were very friendly and helpful, and then monkeys flew out of my butt and attacked some flying pigs that were passing by just as satan asked for a blanket because he was freezing, as we all listened to George Bush as he spoke eloquently about how war was bad. My favorite was the ranting about the Talmud. The Talmud? What does that have to do with fricking abortion, or the legality of killing babies??? Hmmm...it was a classic abortion-stylee sidestep, although not a very smooth one.

If I ever hear a pro-choicer answer a question directly or logically, I swear to God I will shoot myself in the head. (Don't worry, never going to happen.)

Wow, it's kind of long, but it's quick reading and really hilarious:

***Comments will follow asterisks
CAPITALS ARE WHO IS SPEAKING

***It all begins simply enough. I act very polite and questioning, and I am very careful not to take sides:

ODHAV:

I have a question for those of you (presumably almost all those here)
who are pro-choice. I find the pro-abortion arguments regarding a
woman's right to control her own body very obvious and I agree with
them. What I do not understand, due primarily to the fact that I have
never heard anyone explain it, is the logic behind why a fetus is not
considered to be sufficiently 'alive' to have its legal right to life.
It is undeniable that our constitution protects the individual's
right to life and liberty, so I assume that the belief is that the
fetus is not 'alive' in a legal sense. Please be kind enough to
elaborate, and comment on the reasons why a fully developed fetus in
the womb is different from a fully developed fetus that was just born
or delivered prematurely.
I understand the "pro-life" or "anti-choice" or whatever position,
which is simply that a fetus becomes a living being at the moment of
conception, or very early in the pregnancy, and I understand the
reasons for this belief. (that fetuses resemble newborns, the belief
that a newborn and a fetus are the same developing organism, etc.)
What I do not understand thus far is how a developing fetus (in most
cases soon to become a newborn child) is fundamentally different
during pregnancy from after birth, aside from the obvious fact that it
is outside of the woman. Is it simply a question of location, or what
exactly is the determining factor?

Just so I can hopefully cut off any quick defensive judgements, this
is not a criticizing question, nor am I attempting to undermine
anyone's opinions...I am quite honestly undecided on the abortion
issue for this very reason, and I'd like to get the pro-choice side of
this part of the argument, so I can make an informed decision. Think
of this as your chance to win someone over to the truth. ;)

Thanks in advance for you help.

***And the first reply:

DEBRA:

No, I never claimed a fetus is less alive than you or I. It's just not a person and is not deserving of the rights of one, legally and in my case by religious doctrine.

***Well it didn't answer the question at all, and it's kind of defensive, but maybe we can clear this up...

ODHAV:

Yes that's my question...why is it not regarded as enough of a
'person' to have these rights...I just don't understand the logic,
please elaborate. Is it just because it is still inside the woman?
What change takes place at birth that causes the fetus to become a
'person'? Thanks for discussing.

DEBRA:

No! A fetus isn't even a person. Legally or according to the Talmud.

***That didn't make any sense. And in response to my asking to explain the logic:

Since this is a legal question ask a lawyer!

***That didn't make any sense at all either...hmmm...do you even know why you're pro-choice?

IN RESPONSE TO DEBRA SAYING:
> A fetus isn't even a person.

ODHAV:

That's exactly the question I'm asking, and you haven't yet explained
why that is a true statement. Why do you not view a fetus as a
person? Is there a logical reason for this? Is it because of its
dependence on the woman? If so, why is a newborn considered a person
once outside the woman even if the umbilical cord is still intact,
which is what connects the woman to the child? Thanks for clearing
this up.

SCOTT PIPES IN:

I don't see what you don't get. If it's inside a woman it is a fetus. When it is born it is a human. I think most of the rest of the world understand this, so I don't know why it's so hard for you.

***That was nice and condescending...but you're an idiot and you didn't answer the question, you restated it in the form of an answer. You sure do think you're smart, though, and that has to be worth something....nope.

ODHAV:

You see, it's not that I don't get it, it's that you haven't said why.
You just keep restating that "it's not a human until it's born." An
argument cannot just have a what, it has to have a why. I don't base
my opinions on faith in what people say, it has to be logical. No one
here today has given a reason why it is not human. For example,
pro-lifers would say that it IS human because it grows and develops
and is one day to become a full grown human, thus it is the same
organism and therefore it is human. Now what would be the actual
REASON that a fetus is not 'human'? (Please remember that saying that
it is not born yet is not a WHY, it is merely repeating the WHAT)

IN RESPONSE TO ODHAV SAYING:
That's exactly the question I'm asking.

DEBRA:
Ask a lawyer. It's the law.

IN RESPONSE TO ODHAV SAYING:
haven't yet explained why that is a true statement. Why do you not view a fetus as a person?

DEBRA:
Because the law and the Talmud says it isn't. Sorry if you don't like it, but this is a PC board remember. So if you don't like these answers, you shouldn't be here.

IN RESPONSE TO ODHAV SAYING:
Is there a logical reason for this? Is it because of its dependence on the woman?

DEBRA:
OK, I'll make this as easy as possible, IT HASN'T BEEN BORN YET. Do you get it now? NO? I do. And that's why I'm PC. Why don't you start showing respect for life if you want to stay on this board.

***Wow Debra, you are definitely a short bus master...you managed to restate your assertion about five million times as if you were answering the question. And you got angry for no reason...let's give her a hand, and bullet in the kneecap.

ODHAV:

There was no need for you to get so incredibly hostile towards me, and
I am aware that this is a PC board...that why I'm here to hear your
side of it. Also something being the law does not mean that it is
logical, nor does it mean that it is right. "The law" also says that
people cannot drive over the speed limit, and that
the FBI can tap your phone...I do not agree with the law in many
respects, so that appeal to authority is not proof. I'm asking if
there is some higher medical definition of human life, or something
not based on BELIEF, but on logic, upon which you base your opinions.
As far as what the Talmud says, that has no bearing on my views of
the world whatsoever, although I respect its importance for you. I am
also aware that the child has not been born yet, but it seems that you
are the one who does not get it, as you have not answered my question.
Please do not respond to this with more anger or defensiveness; that
is not helpful and has no place in civil discussion. I forward this
question to anyone who might better understand the question and be
able to answer more completely.

SCOTT-TARD IS BACK:

I spent a good part of today in front of a women's clinic today and had to listen to people making silly statements to me, insult me and harass women. I saw a 50 year old weirdo (male, of course) ask a woman coming out of the clinic why she was there. She said "for my yearly exam" and then he went off on her for having that exam at a place that does abortions (he called "the place where they kill little babies"). When she came back with "I don't have insurance and this is the only place I can afford", Fred's response was "oh, so it all comes down to money". As she walked away eh called her a murderer and a few other things. Just so you know, these tactics do not help your side and in fact helped me recruit 3 people for our cause. Why am I telling you this? Because you anti-choice people need to realize that being on this site is not helping your cause. It only strengthens our views. And, with all the talk here in America of Supreme Court appointees, listening to your drivel just reminds me that I need to fight for the right of Choice. So, slag off.

ODHAV:

That's all very interesting, but completely irrelevant. I have not
said anything at all in this discussion that was anti-choice at
all...I've merely asked questions. Apparently these questions are too
difficult to be answered directly, because I all I have been met with
has been "leave if you don't like it" and "our side vs. your side"
crap that has nothing to do with anything I've said. I have not said
anything from either side, and to draw a parallel between my logical
and straightforward inquiries and some lunatic calling people
murderers is asinine, and demonstrates to me only that if "your side"
as you put it is represented by you, then "your side" doesn't know
what they're talking about and doesn't know how to answer a question.
But, I will assume that everyone else knows what they're talking
about more than you, and give one last chance for someone to answer my
question without insults or defensiveness or question dodging. And
finally, so you know, telling someone to "slag off" is not the proper
way to conduct a discussion, and does not make you seem like a very
intelligent or informed person. Please refrain from using childish
insults from now on.

ODHAV:

I'm getting very tired of explaining to people that asking completely
neutral questions in order to understand someone's opinion is NOT
'anti-choice'. It's very simple. If someone was to come in here and
call someone a babykiller, that would be 'anti-choice'. Asking
questions and trying to become informed on an issue is not
anti-choice, it's not anti-anything. It's called trying to form a
logical conclusion based on gathered information. What is causing
conflict here is the fact that no one is answering questions, and
everyone is just becoming very defensive and insulting. For example,
Scott enjoys dodging questions and then being patronizing by stating
things like "everyone else understands it, I don't know why it's so
hard for you." And Debra finds insulting people to be very conducive
to understanding and discussion. The problem is not the people who
are asking the questions, the problem is the people who are taking
them the wrong way, dodging them, or just being childish.

IN RESPONSE TO ODHAV SAYING:

That's all very interesting, but completely irrelevant. I have not said anything at all in this discussion that was anti-choice at all...

DEBRA:

Really? Then what do you call asking us when a fetus becomes a baby and about an abortion procedure that doesn't even exist. I've been here long enough to what you were trying to do? And it'll never work I'll always fight for your rights even if you think you don't deserve them.

***Apparently asking someone about their opinions and asking them for a logical explanation is attacking them...wow Debra I'm glad you're pro-abortion, because then maybe you'll never pass you're idiot genes on to future generations of lunatics like yourself.

ODHAV:

Actually I never said anything about specific abortion procedures this
whole time, that was someone else. And when I asked if a fetus
becomes a baby, that is a logical question, not a trap of some sort.
A question I hoped you would know the answer to, but apparently you
don't know the answer, or you're just not going to tell me because
you're too busy fighting against me in this imaginary war you have in
your head...I am sorry but you are wrong. I have not said anything
anti-choice the whole time I have been here. You have been
confrontational and insulting and very immature, so I do not think I
feel like continuing this endless babbling loop of nonsense with you.

******************************END

So we have learned the argument for abortion. Abortion is right because fetuses don't have rights, because fetuses aren't human, because they haven't been born yet. Wait a second...why? OH YEAH...there is no fricking why!! These people are stupid and can't answer a question. I haven't turned 80 yet, does that mean that I'm not human? I doubt they'd answer that one either. Hope you enjoyed.

If you recall articles 10 (Things that make me want to buy a gun and use it regularly for the good of humanity) and 12 (People I hate) of my posting regarding possible future topics, you will find that this posting is a very close derivation of that line of thinking.

Things and People I Hate
or
The Abundant Stupidity of Mankind

1. Alanis Morissette - "Isn't it ironic" that someone could launch a singing career with the repeated misuse of a word?
In case you have questions about this...I direct you here and here. And finally for the really slow among us: Here ...if you still don't understand why Alanis should hop on the first short bus back to Canada or Oregon or wherever she learned that strange and disturbing form of incoherent english.
Basically she's an idiot, and doesn't deserve the money she made from that song.
2. Rosie O'Donnell - Not that this needs and explanation, but she's ridiculously annoying, stupid, obnoxiously chubby (like 2/3 of our degeneratingly great country), not funny at all, and she has (or had, I don't know if it's still on the air) a boring boring daytime talk show that at one point involved nerf guns ....enough said.
3. Reality Shows - Anyone who watches and enjoys reality shows leads an obscenely sad and misguided life. If you enjoy watching people eat scorpions, cheat on each other, cry, hug incessantly, and generally display their stupidity to the world through various disturbing stunts and manipulations, I suggest you buy a gun with one bullet, and use it for the good of humanity - or just pull your head out of your ass and do something with your life. I mean, even watching sitcoms is better than reality TV; when you're watching something that is sub-sitcom, you've really hit rock bottom.
4. American Idol - I know it's a reality TV show, but it deserves a special rant. Let's see...pop music isn't manufactured and artificial enough, so let's have a show where we harass and belittle people for their efforts, make them cry, crush their dreams, and then ultimately end up with some random abercrombie wearing pretty-boy or mindless sex symbol 18 year-old girl to sing songs that they didn't write, which we can then market to make money, even though people know that the singer is completely manufactured and has no creative ability. Congratulations for having a good voice, why don't you do something with it besides feed the beastly music labels who have destroyed art and replaced it with canned sugar-pop BS capitalism? And as for the judges, I think they are without question the most worthless human beings in history...a man must be very clever and talented to make teenagers cry all day and act like he knows what music is. Please, someone hand me a gun, now!
5. I don't even think it's out yet, but "American Juniors," the sequel to American Idol, will feature children between the ages of 8 and 13, or something like that. Great. Now the sick sick greedy evil record labels get to pervert and destroy childrens' lives, as if it wasn't bad enough when they were over 13. Let's destroy hundreds of children's ambitions, and then we can manipulate and exploit the one that wins, and turn him/her into a famous-for-no-reason one hit wonder soon to be has-been that will propagate our sick version of "music," do what we say, and eventually sink deep into depression and start doing heroin at the age of 15.
6. People between the ages of 12 and 19 (with a few exceptions) - Any demographic that is characterized by its ability to imbibe unbelieveable amounts of consumer garbage, wear the clothes they're told to, eat what they're told to, buy what they're told to, and conform to every single tiny detail of what they see on TV, and still think they're "rebellious" should be immediately destroyed. Let's take my mom's hand-me-down front wheel drive Honda Civic, put a coffee can on the exhaust, a wing on the trunk that weighs more than the car, some euro lights, and a massive sticker with the name of the car on the windshield, and we'll be more rebellious than anyone else. Seriously, driving crappy cars fast is new and cool. Or even worse, let's just ask our parents for a huge truck that we can cover with massive spotlights and metal tubing, drive around almost killing everyone, and feel good about ourselves because we're spoiled and our parents give us whatever we want because they feel guilty about being incompetent and worthless.
7. MTV - aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhh!!! "Music" television? Where's the music? All I see are dating games featuring stupid abercrombie boys and bimbos trying to impress each other, and then insulting each other, after having given up on trying to sleep together. Which is stronger, my ego or my animal sex drive? I don't know....umm..... I'll get back to you. Don't forget our heroes the "VJ's" they're not DJ's, they're Video Jockeys. Let's just call them walking stereotypical fad-boards. I mean after all, they're put there not only to do the easiest thing in the world and get paid for it, but also to show all the non-thinking trend-zombies out there exactly how to look and talk and act. "Be cool." Be like Carson. Or was that "be a tool?" MTV should be promptly firebombed, then urinated on so that innocent bystanders aren't harmed.
8. The rest of TV except for "The Daily Show" - this is more of an inclusion by omission. There's just nothing to like about the rest of TV, so it's included in the hate list. There's nothing new or different or of value...simple enough. This should be destroyed as well...then maybe people would do something worth-while. In fact, if we destroyed TV, there would be no reality shows, no Rosie O'Donnell...I'm getting a little too excited here.
Until next time. Same blog time, same blog website.

Today I would like to introduce some very thought provoking and interesting ideas to you, although they are not written by me, they still have some educational merit. ;) Most of these articles concentrate mostly on the thinkings of Jean Baudrillard, a social theorist and generally cool guy. Enjoy:

Cultural Warfare

Basic Baudrillard

"Baudrillard describes the history of disappearance from Plato onward in _Simulacra and Simulation_. First the image reflects reality. Then it masks it. Then it hides the absence of it. Finally, it has no relation to any reality at all, which has disappeared. Relating this to the panopticon, there is the observer-observed, the reversal, and the disappearance of the distinction. In both cases, we end up in a world of the third order." - Joan Richmond

"Baudrillard starts defining "precession of simulacra" with a contrast drawn from a Borges fable. In the fable, cartographers draw a map in such detail that it ends up exactly covering the real territory of the empire. The map frays as the empire declines. The reality and the abstraction (map) decline together. By contrast, today that pairing has disappeared. Abstractions are no longer "the map, the double, the mirror, or the concept." [1] No longer is there simulation of a "territory, a referential being, or a substance." [1] Instead, B. sees a "real without origin or reality" being generated "by models." [1] This is the hyperreal. In the hyperreal, (referring again to the Borges fable), the map "precedes the territory." [1] And this precessive map, or simulacrum, then "engenders the territory," such as it is."

More Baudrillard

Simulacra and Simulation

And finally, some clear thinking and/or interesting musings on our situation and our culture:

http://www.transparencynow.com

http://www.digressmagazine.com

And finally, as kind of a tangent, who do we have to thank for this deception? Well, in part it's our friends in the media.
Is the media evil? Why yes, of course, my dear. What a silly question. Is the sky blue?

The Media and Truth


"Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery; None but ourselves can free our minds." - Bob Marley
"Free your mind." - Morpheus

I thought of a very interesting topic I could blog on...enjoy enjoy enjoy.

In Defense of the Necessity of Revolution by Force

Our country is one founded on revolution. This is undeniable historical fact, and it is also what makes our country what it is. The men we now call the founding fathers set their minds to finding basic principles of truth, and then built a great nation on those principles. What, then, is the correct course of action for a citizen of this country, founded on disobedience of injustice, reason, and freedom, when freedom is challenged, when obedience is demanded, and complacency is the norm? Quite simply, it is the citizen's duty to go against the system wholly insofar as it betrays these basic social and governmental principles. To do anything less would be to betray that which our country -- indeed our western society -- was built on. When accordance with any part of the law violates any higher right of man, accordance with that law becomes itself unlawful, unjust, and irresponsible.
There is, however, a great fundamental difference between now and the time of our founding fathers' revolution -- this being the widespread complacency and obedience which are so ingrained in the psyche of the people. So the democratic masses now willingly violate their own rights and the rights of others in exchange for pleasure, money, comfort, and the thoughtless propagation of their own toxic complacency.
The question now arises which is higher: the will of the people, or the fundamental and inalienable rights of man. If the will of the people is allowed to encroach on the inalienable rights of man, a free society could very easily become one bound by the chains of despotism. The only requisite is a general attitude among the populace that selfish, individual well-being stands above the principle of liberty. And this is what has happened in our country, where now the rights of man are cast aside at the whim of the masses.
There is only one responsible way to react to this decay of the guiding principle of a good and just society. This is to always act according to the higher principles of freedom and reason and justice, no matter what the consequences. Then, if a government or a society as a whole was to slip into irreconcilable, regular violation of these fundamental principles, the course of action necessary for the protection of human life, liberty, and happiness may extend so far as to require direct removal of authority by force. To neglect to take such action would be to accept the slow and agonizing decay of freedom and justice, as we are witnessing today in our country. Let us not sit idly by and watch our world crumble for our complacency in nothingness.

After a brief pause in the action here at ODHAVBLOG, I return to you with a thought experiment that came to me out of the blue the other day. I was wondering which of the great figures of history I would take with me to a deserted island, if I was charged with building a new society. Just so you readers can get an idea as to the influences that form the root of my psychosis... Here's the list, and brief explanations for some of the lesser known ones:

I give you the (Real) League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

Mohandas K. Gandhi - The most spiritually inspiring man in modern history.
V.I. Lenin - One of the strongest minds of history - a true revolutionary and man of principle.
Pytor Ilyich Tchaikovsky
Benedict de Spinoza - the best philosopher in history (in my humble opinion)
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
Hermann Hesse - German writer and literary genius extraordinaire.
Martin Luther King Jr. - yet another true freedom fighter and revolutionary
John Locke - my political guru, along with Lenin (oh, the irony)
Albert Einstein - for obvious reasons
Friedrich Nietzsche
Tenzin Gyatso (the 14th and current Dalai Lama) - top notch self-denying spiritual inspiration
Pope John Paul II - to duke it out with the D.L.
Jack Kerouac - great author from when America was great
Erwin Schroedinger - physicist and quantum mechanical genius

Well that's a start...we'll see what else I can come up with to add on, but I think my society would be far better than anything else anyone else can come up with, because I'm the best! Ever! Actually, I do suggest that you try out this experiment, because of the clarity it brings about your influences and how they have formed your view of the world. One final note: please notice that very few of these extraordinary figures are from very recently or the present. This is not a coincidence. This is because the vast majority of those in our society today are half-wits and lazy corpses; they aim for nothing and achieve just that. Thus the need for Lenin, for King Jr. - we are in need of drastic change - we are in need of a revolution - to bring our society from wallowing in its filth. If only everyone would aspire to be one of the above figures, our world would be great indeed. Not perfect, but at least everyone would have purpose and motivation...we sure as hell wouldn't have American Idol or Temptation Island...I need to stop before I become sick. And in case you hadn't made the obvious deduction, everyone on the island would be superi-- I mean Indian. OF COURSE.
Until next time, remember: If you're not angry at our world, you're not paying attention.
Oh yes...I almost forgot...


--I am Morpheus--

Well I recently took this interesting test, and I think everyone else who is obsessed with the Matrix should take it too...I was pleasantly surprised to find that I lived up to my naming of Morpheus. Check it out...


You are Morpheus, from "The Matrix." You
have strong faith in yourself and those around
you. A true leader, you are relentless in your
pursuit.


What Matrix Persona Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla

Aaaaah, the Matrix stuff...indeed, indeed.


In addition to that, I found some interesting things for those of you with questions regarding the oh-so-entertaining sequel to the Matrix...Here you go:

Transcript of the Architect/Neo Scene

And finally, for those of you who do not have the game "Enter the Matrix" - there is a special bonus in it, which explains the ending of Reloaded a little more completely:

Enter the Matrix Bonus Transcript

Well that's it for today, kids...maybe I'll give you guys the gift of another endless rant tomorrow, if I have the energy. Until then....

I thought I would take this chance, whilst the unsuspecting remain vulnerable, to touch on my theory of the causes of the decay of western society. And of course, in true blogging style, this will not be well organized or necessarily coherent. I do guarantee, though, that it will be sufficiently persuasive. And off we go...
Western society peaked circa the year 1860. I won't explain why, because this is very self-evident. If you do not agree, you should learn to read, and then come back and tell me you agree. (teeheehee) I will, however, explain those factors that have worked to dismantle those central figures of our society that once made it great (it is no longer great, or even necessarily good). The first factor that contributed to the demise of all that is true and good in our world is the darker side of our friend democracy. Another is the darker side of our friend capitalism. And the third, and most virulent cause of our impending demise, is the fundamental and inescapable ineptitude of the average human being. Let's start with our friend democracy.
Democracy, while the most fair form of government, does sadly subject those intelligent and responsible members of society to the paranoia and stupidity of the masses. This is manifest in many different ways, but the basic end result is that laws are made for the lowest common denominator...and we all must play by rules made to keep the stupid and irresponsible in line. But this aspect is rather harmless; the dark side of democracy shows when the masses are unknowingly brainwashed, and made to view the world in a way that is well detached from reality. Then, the masses not only make their normal paranoid and stupid decisions, they also make decisions that are formed directly by that which the media and government wish to present as fact. Whether or not what is told, is fact, is of no concern. Information is a means to and end -- it is a cause to achieve the desired result out of the American population. So therefore in our world of paranoid, non-thinking, and lazy citizens, there is really no attachment between fact and democratic will. The will of the people is determined by whoever has the most money that they are willing to spend on advertisement and news and so on. So, democracy, the great invincible giant and champion of freedom, becomes yet another slave to the wealthy and to the powers that be (often the same thing).
Next up, capitalism! Capitalism, once the great bestower of gifts, and the most effective economic system in history, has now become for some an obsession, in a sense the very meaning of life, and for others, merely a giant distraction -- a huge Snoopy-shaped balloon at which our nation can stare in amazement, denying and ignoring that which truly matters. There is no need for the modern American to really know what they NEED, or even what they WANT. Advertisers will do that for you. Of course, none of us would ever admit to being guilty of being duped by advertising. Everything we have ever bought, we still use, and we are glad we purchased it. Riiiiiiiiight..... Actually, consumerism has become the perfect compliment to the abused bastard child we call democracy in our country. It provides the perfect agent with which the citizen's mind is formed into a unresisting gelatinous mass -- one not bothered by logic or reality, one eager to imbibe the untruths and fantasies of our culture. Simply put, capitalism has become, through rabid mindless consumerism, the drug that puts everyone's mind to sleep so that those few with power can mold popular sentiment, and thus democratic law, to their desires.
And finally and most simply, the ineptitude of the common man. It is not necessary for any sort of epiphany to occur in order for this fact to be readily evident. That which makes the bastardization of capitalism and democracy possible is very simple. It is the fact that most people are happy with being fat and having the creature comforts we have all grown too attached to. No one really cares for the truth...people care for that which makes them the most money that can be transformed into the multitudinous pleasures presented by our monstrosity of a capitalist system. Whatever feels best, whatever allows mankind to slip deeper into his barcalounger of mediocrity, is unquestionable truth. This is only human nature. To be lazy, to seek pleasure before truth -- these are the cardinal instincts of humanity. And so we have no one to blame but ourselves for this hole we are living in, like pigs, content in our own waste, content to bask in the cool comfort of societal defecation.
Don't worry, there is hope for the world, but that, my friends, is another blog....another blog entirely.

----Just a note for the lesser minds among us: If any of this seems far-fetched to you, I urge you to look honestly at your life, and at the lives of those around you, and ask yourself where reality intersects what your life is and what you wish for. I believe that if we all do this, we will find that the truth is very uncomfortable, but very powerful.
....And if you still don't agree with me, take it on blind faith, because I AM ODHAV AND THIS IS MY BLOG!!!!!!!!!!!!! muwhahahahahahaha!!
But seriously, think about it.

Welcome friends, family, and random cyber-stalkers. This is the 21st century, and everyone has a blogging site, and since I have so much more to say than everyone else put together, and since I know so much more than them about everything, I thought I should have a blogging site too. That's just how things work around here. My only question is if I have the constitution, the depth of faith (and the ego) needed to take this as far as it must go.
No doubt one must feel extremely self-important to dedicate any fair amount of time to ranting and whining in text, banking on the off chance that someone cares. Well here's some news for you...deal with it. Things are going to get mighty deep and mighty profound around here pretty soon, so you better hold on. This is the blog that will transcend all blogs. In my frantic, groping, lost search for meaning, you will accompany me through every dark corner. But first, I must put forth my reasons for giving birth to this monster of a blogging site that we call odhavblog.
Come August, I'm going off to college in the great city of New York, and I thought that my friends and family would enjoy hearing about my experiences. Not very likely, I know - but hey, it's a hobby. "Why not write e-mails to them?" you might ask. If you did ask that, you are stupid. E-mail is stupid. Do not ever suggest that again. Ever.
So, another faceless blog is born in a sea of blogs. Welcome to 2003. Blogs are the beanie babies of our day. And I am with it, I am hip, and so I have a blog.

blog (n.)
1. a pointless ranting by a self-important anonymous cyber-persona, usually resulting in the accelerated decay of countless brain cells belonging to the reader and blogger alike
2. the eighth deadly sin

Just to fill space, here's a list of 15 things that may or may not become recurring themes on ODHAVBLOG.

1. Short buses (if you don't already know, you don't want to know)
2. The Matrix
3. Physics
4. Philosophy
5. My love of elitist warmonger idiot George Bush and our bureaucratic monster of a ridiculous excuse for a government
6. E.P.R. Correlation and its repercussions in relation to the spacetime continuum
7. Other suffocatingly dry mathematical concepts that I find interesting due to my various social deficiencies
8. Living in New York City (starting in August)
9. Religion
10. Things that make me want to buy a gun and use it regularly for the good of humanity
11. The decay of western society (and its various causes)
12. People I hate
13. People I idolize
14. Benedict de Spinoza
15. Me, me, me (Matrix allusion for the slow ones in the crowd)
16. Almost forgot - India!

Enjoy and come back soon. There will be more, God willing.

I had a dream, and in this dream, people not only cared what I had to say, they would go out of their way to find out what I thought. This, obviously, was only a dream. Those few unfortunate souls who stumble across my blog will most likely not be interested by anything here, but that is what blogging is about. It is about the meaningless inner dialog that we all cherish coming to light. In short, it is about unveiling our insanity to the world. This is not even a blog per se, it is more of an introduction to a blog. Because a blog has a purpose or at least a theme, and a blog about blogs is arguably the most pointless thing a person could ever create. And so here it is. We begin with nothing: without meaning, without purpose, without direction. And now we must find truth, we must find purpose, and we must find direction, in this sea of meaninglessness. I give you ODHAV BLOG.