On July 15, 2010, Congressman Charles Rangel (D-New York) introduced HR 5741 which would require all citizens and permanent residents of the United States between the ages of 18-40 to perform two years of what is being called “national service.” This would include community service, services promoting the national defense, and perhaps most troubling of all, conscription into the U.S. military during times of war, with the numbers of soldiers and means of their selection left entirely in the hands of the President. This is at least the fifth time Congressman Rangel has introduced this, or similar, legislation (2003, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2010).
In defense of this detestable (and seemingly unconstitutional, see amendment 13) piece of legislation, Mr. Rangel said the following: “The 3.3 million military households, representing only one percent of American families, have become a virtual military class who are unfairly carrying the burden of war.” He went on to say, “We make decisions about war without worry over who fights them. Those who do the fighting have no choice; when the flag goes up, they salute and follow orders. The test for Congress, particularly for those members who support the war, is to require all who enjoy the benefits of our democracy to contribute to the defense of the country. All of America's children should share the risk of being placed in harm's way.”
It would seem that, under the guise of fairness, Mr. Rangel wishes to rob every member of America's youth of two entire years of their life. He claims those who do the fighting “have no choice” but he could not be more mistaken in this assertion. Be it for patriotic reasons, financial reasons, or merely a desire to test their own limits, members of the United States military have, of their own free will, made a conscious decision to enlist. In reality, those who would have no choice in the matter would be those whom Congressman Rangel's bill would affect. They are the individuals to which no option would be given. Young men and women would find themselves forced at the point of a gun to surrender two years of their life to the direct control of the federal government and whatever fancy may strike the political party in power at any given time.
As far as I am concerned, there is only one moral course of action in the dreadful event Mr. Rangel's abominable bill were to actually pass, and that is open defiance. Let them throw us all behind bars and remove any pretense that we would still be living in a free society that had any respect for individual rights in the process. It would be far better to spend a lifetime in prison than to willingly validate with even one minute of compliance, the despicable philosophy lurking behind this bill. The obscene belief that we are not each sovereign individuals, free to make of our own lives what we choose, but rather that we are, as Jeffery Small of Go-Galt.org so aptly put it, “Nothing more than a resource to be manipulated as our masters see fit, in service of any purpose that they may choose.”
Don't mistake my opposition to this bill as merely the ramblings of an unpatriotic coward seeking to justify his own unwillingness to fight for his country. If a foreign force were to invade the United States I would, without hesitation, take up arms in defense of my family, my property, and the ideals upon which this nation was founded. I would gladly lay down my life in their defense. Unfortunately with each passing day it seems far more likely that instead of banding together to repel a foreign adversary bent on our destruction, free men and women may one day have need to take up arms against our own government — the very institution we have entrusted with the protection of our liberty — to ensure that our freedoms are upheld.
The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Mr. Rangel, your bill infringes upon all three of those rights which we Americans hold so dear. The Revolutionary War was fought over less grievous injustices than those contained within the atrocity you wish to inflict upon the American people. Mr. Rangel, my life is not yours to administrate as you see fit, nor is it subject to the passing whims of any senator, president, king, or god. Despite what you and your colleagues may think, Mr. Rangel, my life is my own, not the government's to own.
For more: http://go-galt.org/Galt_Pledge/JG_Blog.html#138
Congressman Rangel's official site: http://rangel.house.gov/2010/07/rangeldraft0716.html
Friday, July 23, 2010
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
R.I.P. Big Butter Jesus, 2004 - 2010
It is a sad day here in southern Ohio. Thanks to last night's thunderstorms, our very own Big Butter Jesus is no more. No longer will the gleam from his immense, white visage greet weary travelers who happen through his little stretch of I-75 between Cincinnati and Dayton. Oh sure, he will probably be rebuilt, but his “second-coming,” so to speak, likely won't be able to capture the same awe-inspiring grandeur and majesty of the original.
62 feet tall, creamy white, and reportedly coming in at a cool $250,000 (That's a quarter of a million dollars, kids) Big Butter was truly a sight to behold. I imagine he had to come as quite a shock to those visitors who were passing through town, not expecting to stumble upon a Godzilla-sized likeness of the Christian savior fashioned out of foam and fiberglass. As startling as he could be to the unsuspecting out-of-towner, he had to be an even bigger shock to those passing by last night.
I can just imagine. Driving home from work you happen to glance over at Monroe's monstrous messiah just as a bolt of lightning flashes out of the black night sky. Like something out of the Bible itself, flames immediately shoot out of Jesus' outstretched hand, and quickly proceed to consume the entire statue. In a matter of minutes everyone's favorite fig-bucking Jesus statue is reduced to little more than a smoldering steel skeleton and a pile of ash.
I only assume that God finally happened to turn His gaze towards our beloved religious eyesore and decided to get all Old Testament on our collective asses. Full of divine rage, He reached down from the heavens above and smote the abominable J-man in a righteous blaze of fire and for all to see. Doesn't take a Biblical scholar to get that message loud and clear: God no likey ginormous Jesus statue!
Of course there is always the more reasoned, scientific approach to explain Big Butter Jesus' unfortunate destruction. With his giant steel frame, it is somewhat hard to believe this didn't happen sooner. But honestly, who could have possibly known that making an enormous, 60ft tall, steel-framed statue of Jesus out of paper-mache, Styrofoam, duct tape, thermite, and napalm was such a bad idea?
Make no mistake, there is a part of me that absolutely delights in the absurd irony of this glaring example of religion's ridiculous nature being violently wiped from the Earth in a fiery “act of God,” but deep down I am actually gonna miss the silly old thing. Sure, it may have been a profoundly garish and embarrassing eyesore, but dammit it was our profoundly garish and embarrassing eyesore! Here's hoping they rebuild it, bigger, better, and uh...Jesus-ier! Perhaps the nearby Islamic Center should erect a Big Butter Mohammed statue in its stead. You're right, that probably wouldn't be kosher...
Gone, but not forgotten. I look for his return in three days...
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Sunday, May 2, 2010
President Alan Smithee
I'd be willing to bet the name Alan Smithee doesn't mean much to most of you. I feel confident in that assumption simply because anonymity was exactly what Alan Smithee wanted. A few of you who are familiar with the history of Hollywood may already be aware of Mr. Smithee, but if you do not count yourself among those people, allow me to bring you up to speed.
Director Alan Smithee enjoyed a long and varied career in Hollywood, directing such diverse films as Death of a Gunfighter; The O.J. Simpson Story; and Hellraiser: Bloodline. From 1968 to 2000 he was credited for dozens of films and despite officially retiring a decade ago, his name still appears now and again if one looks hard enough. Despite this impressive resume, he remains largely unknown to this day.
You may be wondering what exactly is so special about this particular director that he should now warrant your attention. After all, aren't there countless numbers of directors whose careers have eventually been all but forgotten by the general public? Well yes that is true, and in that respect there really is nothing terribly out of the ordinary about Alan Smithee. What sets Mr. Smithee apart from the myriad of other forgotten directors is the fact that Alan Smithee never existed.
For over thirty years Alan Smithee was the official pseudonym used by members of the Director's Guild of America who felt that they had lost, or never had, control over the final outcome of their film. The aggrieved director would petition the DGA for an “Alan Smithee” credit and if the guild agreed that the director's vision had been compromised by forces outside of his control, his request would be granted. This practice prevented a director from having his name attached to a film he wasn't particularly proud of while simultaneously allowing the film to be released without the black mark of having had its director publicly disown it. After many years of use this face-saving tactic became somewhat of an open secret within Hollywood and was eventually discontinued.
While Alan Smithee may no longer be working in the film industry, it seems that he is primed to make a comeback of sorts on the political scene thanks to President Obama.
A year and a half after assuming office, President Obama still continues to point the finger of blame towards his predecessor at every opportunity. The prolonged economic downturn? He inherited that from President Bush. Skyrocketing unemployment? Again, Bush. The projected 20-trillion dollar debt by 2015? You guessed it. All President Bush's fault.
Why according to President Obama, even his own party's stunning loss in Massachusetts at the hands of Republican Scott Brown was the direct result of President Bush.
“People are angry and they’re frustrated. Not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years, but what’s happened over the last eight years.”
So the election of a Republican in Ted Kennedy's former seat had more to do with the residual anger the citizens of Massachusetts felt towards President Bush, a Republican, than it did with the actions and policies of the current Democrat majority under the leadership of President Obama? If we are to believe President Obama, yes.
With the economy showing little signs of recovery, the national debt exploding to absurd levels, and support for his redistributive policies continuing to dwindle (along with his approval ratings), I can foresee only one logical response for President Obama. Since, as he has made abundantly clear, his presidency has never been and apparently never will be fully under his control due to the actions of the previous officeholder, he certainly shouldn't be held responsible for his administration's numerous failures. It seems the only viable option for Mr. Obama is to dust off that old Hollywood tradition and begin petitioning historians and school boards around the world as soon as possible. If he acts now he can guarantee that long after he leaves office the history books will tell the tale of the disastrous presidency of Alan Hussein Smithee.
A terrible shame that the first black president should have to suffer such an ignoble fate, but as we all know, that will be President Bush's fault, too.
Director Alan Smithee enjoyed a long and varied career in Hollywood, directing such diverse films as Death of a Gunfighter; The O.J. Simpson Story; and Hellraiser: Bloodline. From 1968 to 2000 he was credited for dozens of films and despite officially retiring a decade ago, his name still appears now and again if one looks hard enough. Despite this impressive resume, he remains largely unknown to this day.
You may be wondering what exactly is so special about this particular director that he should now warrant your attention. After all, aren't there countless numbers of directors whose careers have eventually been all but forgotten by the general public? Well yes that is true, and in that respect there really is nothing terribly out of the ordinary about Alan Smithee. What sets Mr. Smithee apart from the myriad of other forgotten directors is the fact that Alan Smithee never existed.
For over thirty years Alan Smithee was the official pseudonym used by members of the Director's Guild of America who felt that they had lost, or never had, control over the final outcome of their film. The aggrieved director would petition the DGA for an “Alan Smithee” credit and if the guild agreed that the director's vision had been compromised by forces outside of his control, his request would be granted. This practice prevented a director from having his name attached to a film he wasn't particularly proud of while simultaneously allowing the film to be released without the black mark of having had its director publicly disown it. After many years of use this face-saving tactic became somewhat of an open secret within Hollywood and was eventually discontinued.
While Alan Smithee may no longer be working in the film industry, it seems that he is primed to make a comeback of sorts on the political scene thanks to President Obama.
A year and a half after assuming office, President Obama still continues to point the finger of blame towards his predecessor at every opportunity. The prolonged economic downturn? He inherited that from President Bush. Skyrocketing unemployment? Again, Bush. The projected 20-trillion dollar debt by 2015? You guessed it. All President Bush's fault.
Why according to President Obama, even his own party's stunning loss in Massachusetts at the hands of Republican Scott Brown was the direct result of President Bush.
“People are angry and they’re frustrated. Not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years, but what’s happened over the last eight years.”
-President Obama, on the election of Scott Brown
So the election of a Republican in Ted Kennedy's former seat had more to do with the residual anger the citizens of Massachusetts felt towards President Bush, a Republican, than it did with the actions and policies of the current Democrat majority under the leadership of President Obama? If we are to believe President Obama, yes.
With the economy showing little signs of recovery, the national debt exploding to absurd levels, and support for his redistributive policies continuing to dwindle (along with his approval ratings), I can foresee only one logical response for President Obama. Since, as he has made abundantly clear, his presidency has never been and apparently never will be fully under his control due to the actions of the previous officeholder, he certainly shouldn't be held responsible for his administration's numerous failures. It seems the only viable option for Mr. Obama is to dust off that old Hollywood tradition and begin petitioning historians and school boards around the world as soon as possible. If he acts now he can guarantee that long after he leaves office the history books will tell the tale of the disastrous presidency of Alan Hussein Smithee.
A terrible shame that the first black president should have to suffer such an ignoble fate, but as we all know, that will be President Bush's fault, too.
,Thursday, April 22, 2010
South Park Solidarity
Over the past week the creators of South Park, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, have received numerous death threats—most notably from the radical New York-based organization, Revolution Muslim—in response to a recent episode of their show in which the Muslim prophet Mohammed appeared.
Regardless of your opinion of this particular episode, South Park, or its creators; this cowardly attack on free speech is completely unacceptable in a free society and must be fought. It is vitally important to demonstrate to those who wish to silence others by means of intimidation and violence that free people will not cower in fear because of the irrational demands of violent extremists.
In response to these terroristic threats, I am hereby announcing Attack of the Individual's unwavering support of Mr. Parker and Mr. Stone as a show of open defiance against those who have issued these threats. While I admit this may not be much, I feel obligated to show my support to the creators of my favorite, little foul-mouthed fourth graders. It is my hope that other bloggers and webmasters will join me in this show of solidarity against radical Islam's latest “Jihad against free speech.”
Please feel free to use the banner below if you wish to show your support:
For more on this story, click here and here.
Regardless of your opinion of this particular episode, South Park, or its creators; this cowardly attack on free speech is completely unacceptable in a free society and must be fought. It is vitally important to demonstrate to those who wish to silence others by means of intimidation and violence that free people will not cower in fear because of the irrational demands of violent extremists.
In response to these terroristic threats, I am hereby announcing Attack of the Individual's unwavering support of Mr. Parker and Mr. Stone as a show of open defiance against those who have issued these threats. While I admit this may not be much, I feel obligated to show my support to the creators of my favorite, little foul-mouthed fourth graders. It is my hope that other bloggers and webmasters will join me in this show of solidarity against radical Islam's latest “Jihad against free speech.”
Please feel free to use the banner below if you wish to show your support:
For more on this story, click here and here.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Chris Henry 1983-2009
What a waste.
That's all that keeps coming to mind when I think about Chris Henry's passing earlier today. What a waste. A young man who had been through so much adversity – most, by his own admission, a direct result of his own actions – finally seemed to have his life on track. After numerous and highly publicized legal issues, Henry distanced himself from people whom he considered to be negative influences, and managed to keep his nose clean ever since being re-signed by the Cincinnati Bengals in 2008. He had a beautiful fiancée, three beautiful children, and was being paid millions of dollars to play a game most American men would gladly play for free.
Chris Henry had all of the tools to be one of the elite wide receivers in the NFL. Unfortunately, his many bad decisions coupled with some equally bad luck kept him from ever reaching his on-field potential. Still, even after nearly five years of frustration with the oft-injured and troubled receiver, Bengals fans like myself couldn't help but be excited for the day when a healthy and mature Chris Henry suited up in tiger stripes on Sundays. Now, we'll never know just how good he would've been.
As disappointing as the loss of a talented young athlete is, a wasted football career is trivial when one considers the three children Henry leaves behind. His three small children are now forced to grow up without their father. They won't get to cheer as their dad scores touchdowns on Sundays. No, instead this Sunday they will be planning to bury their father, at 26 years old.
I don't currently know all of the details surrounding Mr. Henry's death, and for me to speculate here would be in very poor taste. Whatever transpired Wednesday afternoon, it appears his death was the unfortunate outcome of one last poor decision in a life which was regrettably fraught with them. A tragic, but not altogether unexpected end for a young man whose brief life was so frustratingly defined by what if.
In the end I think Mr. Henry's life can accurately be summed up by a single play. Back in a 2005 playoff game against the Pittsburgh Steelers, Henry caught a 66 yard pass on the Bengals first offensive snap – and seriously injured his knee on the very same play. That was Chris Henry in a nutshell; A brilliant flash of potential, followed by bitter misfortune and disappointment. Regardless of whatever is ultimately written upon Chris Henry's tombstone, I can think of no epitaph more fitting than “What might have been.”
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Former atheist becomes true believer. Exclaims, "Truly there is a God...and He hates the Cincinnati Bengals!"
"Ugh...Why hast thou forsaken me?"After a calm and collected Carson Palmer expertly led the Cincinnati Bengals offense on a 6 minute, 91 yard touchdown drive that eerily mirrored his USC Trojan's game-winning drive against the Ohio State Buckeyes the night before, things seemed pretty darn good in Bengal-land. Up 7-6 with only 38 seconds to play, the team seemed almost assured of a win. They had somehow found a way to overcome dumb penalties, wasted opportunities, and 55 minutes of inept offense to steal a victory and avoid a crushing opening day loss at home.
Then the all-too-predictable disaster struck. In a play that could really only happen to the Cincinnati Bengals, a desperate Kyle Orton lobbed a pass that was nowhere near his intended target and was subsequently tipped into the air by Bengals cornerback, Leon Hall. For any other team, the ball would have either been intercepted by one of Hall's teammates or merely fallen harmlessly to the ground. But because these are the Bengals, Denver wide receiver Brandon Stokley just happened to be in the perfect spot to catch the deflected ball and scamper 87 yards for a touchdown to give the Broncos (after a missed 2-point conversion) an unbelievable 12-7 win in Cincinnati.
I am left with only one explanation for this madness: There is a God, and He absolutely hates the Cincinnati Bengals with a passion. So God, on behalf of the downtrodden football fans of Cincinnati, I implore thee, please spare the UC Bearcats from your divine wrath. They are our only hope of salvation...oh, the Bearcats and your son of course. Heh, heh, heh...Please don't smite me!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)