Saturday, December 31, 2005

Auld Lang Syne

Translates to "the times gone past; the good old days."

So here we are wishing a fond farewell to good old days gone by and I, for one, look back with contentment and cheer on this past year. 2005 brought us such amazing endeavors as

--Skateboards
--Daego's Sober Semester
--Happy 22nd B-Day
--Tracie
--The Death of the Daego and the subsequent
--Birth of The Cobra
--The Taming of the Shrew
--Welcoming back lost family
--Poetry, which I know you all love...

Hopefully, 2006 will be as exciting. New Year's resolutions include:

--Getting in the gym ("BEEFCAAAAKE!!")
--Turning habit into recreation
--Being a better lover (I recommend this to all of you)

Happy New Year everybody!! And don't go too crazy on the Willie-Waught!!

"And here's a hand my trusty friend,
And put your hand in mine.
We'll take a right good willie-waught [Drink],
For old lang syne.

And surely you'll lift up your glass,
For surely I'll lift mine,
And we'll drink a cup of kindness yet,
For old lang syne."

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

Lines

The one that separates you from me.
The one between bondage and free.
The one between love and loss.
The one between price and cost.

The fine truth of perception.
The selectively deceptive.
The moment between is and was.
Beginning to loathe that which you love.

What is compromise if not surrender?
A heart of stone if not too tender?
Sunlight if not blinding white?
Hope if not out of sight?

Sittin' pretty atop my Tower


Where are you?

Insanity...

When will the corporate super-powers that dictate life and ligislature in the West uphold their humanitarian duty by empowering the people of Africa instead of perpertuating a culture of exploitation?

When will our compatriots cease to believe the strobe they place at the center of their homes and families, open their eyes to the lies they've been fed, spew them into the lap of their leaders, and demand truth?

When will the Earth, created on the second day, be held in higher regard than the profits one can reap by raping her?

Where do we draw the line between justified social unrest and terrorism?

When do the convictions of the noble become the ideologies of the insane?

Monday, November 28, 2005

Whispers on the Wind

The ground's too wet to sit,
So I, instead, will stand.
From behind the pulpit,
I sing the song of Man.

It echoes through the rain,
Reverberating from
My own office of pain --
My own prison of scum.

Solemn dirges of yore
Feather across your face.
The joy you knew before,
Vanished without a trace.

I've stolen it from you.
Unintentionally.
Song so true -- deepest blue --
Your soul belongs to me.

Sunday, November 20, 2005

"Situations" Jack Johnson

Situation number one,
it's the one that's just begun,
but evidently it's too late.

Situation number two,
it's the only chance for you,
it's controlled by denizens of hate.

Situation number three,
it's the one that no one sees,
it's all too often dismissed as fate.

Situation number four,
the one that left you wanted more,
it tantalized you with its bait.


Monday, November 14, 2005

I Don't Do This Often...

Capitalist ideology,
Money-market psychology --
Mockable as phrenology
In next-gen chronology.

Supply in the can --
The market demands
A change in the way
Man understands.

Primevil comprehension,
Intellectual detention --
Who own's the ressurrection?
Beaurocracy's confection?

Frightened of life --
Necessary stryfe!
Moan and gripe...
Spoon-fed rights...

Question conformity.
Browbeat authority.
Conglomerate beauty
Epitomizes duty.

Monday, October 03, 2005

The Church of Intelligent Design

There's alot of talk over this idea of Intelligent Design being taught in public schools as a counter-theory to Evolution. A big argument I've been hearing in support of it is that it doesn't have to be taught in Science class, oppossing evolution, but why not in a philosophy class?

I think it's simple. If philosophy was required in public school (and it isn't) would they teach religion? Would they teach Christianity and Jesus, Muslim and Mohammed, Confucism and Cunfucious? Or would they teach Nietzsche, Khant, Locke, Hobbes, Aristotle, DeCartes, and Hughes?

And then if Religion doesn't belong in a philsophy class, would you expect public schools to require a religion class? Would you expect the class to teach any Truth, or would they simply teach oppossing historical myths that attempt to explain the unexplainable without concrete evidence, but instead relying on the rawest, purest form of blind belief known as Faith?

I think we all can agree that Intelligent Design is a good idea. But it is no science. And in the public school institution there is no place where it can be taught. It isn't a well enough established, adhered, or even legitimately published scientific theory. Show me a science article, .PDF, periodical, anything, that provides a foundation for the development and discovery of concrete scientific evidence proving that some Being created everything.

It cannot go into a philosophy class because religion and philosophy are as polar opossites as religion and science. Philosophy uses the tools of reason, logic, and argumentation (that's for you Chucky-Poo) to discover Truth about human behavior while religion uses the occurrence of miracles, the existence of prophets, divine intervention, and a belief in that which cannot be seen or -- by very definition -- proven to explain the enigmas of this world.

Intelliegent Design by its very nature is a religion. It requires one to accept the existence of some greater intellectual being as responsible for everything's existence, a corner-stone of all religions.

Sunday, September 25, 2005

Question Everything

What is it that compells you? Is it fear? Is it love? Is it some innate desire to succeed where other's have failed or is it an empassioned yearning to overcome the maze of adversity laid out before you? Are you motivated by the shortcomings of your parents? Their failures at raising a “good, upstanding, law-abiding, contributing member of society?” Or maybe you just want to know who your parents are and why they felt compelled to expell you from their extremely important lives.


What is it that you want to accomplish? Are you a radical in search of global change or do you think it starts at home? When you watch television does your stomach churn with every passing channel? When you hear political pundits voice their views, their ideals, their “truths” across the great waves that stretch across nations and force themselves into your ears and eyes and minds do you smile abjectly as a peaceful serenity of reticent acceptance floods your soul?


If you died tonight what would they say about you tomorrow? Where you one of strong convictions? Did you follow your passion? Did you lay down in the midst of life's great highway and dare the oncoming traffic of stryfe – sports cars and mack trucks – to proceed unyieldingly, unswervingly? Did you rise up above the busy streets, the constraints we invent – time, success, money – the songs of yesterday and the movies of tomorrow? Did you fit into there little round holes? Did you break the mold? Did you shatter existence beneath your feet when you chose to bow before the powers of feeling, righteousness, enligtenment? Did you blaze a path worry to be followed?


What is truth? Where are the answers? Where is the treasure promised by the maps of generations passed? Where is the new wine? Who will toil in the fields when the peasants have left their plowshares to rust? When Old and Evil rise up to the highest ranks of the hierarchy we have allowed them to create who will be the voice of dissent?


What will you do to change everything?

Sunday, September 18, 2005

Hear Ye! Hear Ye!

Ladies and Gentlemen! Scholars and Knaves!

Lend me your ears!

Burning Coal Theatre Company

Proudly Presents:

William Shakespeare's The Taming of the Shrew

Starring:

Lucas Custer as quick witted, underappreciated Grumio, one of Shakespeare's earliest recipes for his imfamous "Fools."

Stephen LeTrent as the slightly perverse boy next door and suitor of the Lovely Bianca.

Ryan Nazionale as the dashingly handsome Lucentio, rival suitor to Bianca.


A dastardly trio of Campbell Alumns

Show Times...

Wednesday September 22 through Sunday, October 2.
Sunday perfomances at 2:00 PM, all others at 7:30.

Ticket Prices:

Wednesday $10,
Thursday through Sunday:
General Admission $16, Everyone Else $14
Call: 919-834-4001

Saturday, September 03, 2005

A Call to Fast

So many of us have seen the images on the television. We have heard of the destruction and the chaos. We have watched the humanity and the pain and the anger. We have asked ourselvesm, "what can we do? We are so far away..." Yet we feel that a part of ourselves is their in the wake of the destruction. Or at least I have...and I do...for Biloxi is my town of birth.

I want to call all those who read this to Fast. Be it food, drink, AIM, swearing, sex, TV -- be it all of the day, an hour a day, a week, a month a year. If you have ever participated in a fast, for lent, or for yourself, or for some other cause then you know the power it has. The Lord sees your sacrifice and will work through it. I myself am giving up one day's food for each of the next four weeks. During meal times, I will pray. When I am hungry, I will pray. I will consume only water; no soda, no tea, no juice, no bread, no substance -- only water.

Everyone, certainly, will pray for help. For swift recovery and preservation. For strength and perseverance. For protection from continued backlash. But I want to call you to pray for a problem whihc some of us as less aware of.

There are those around us that say, "they should've left when they had the chance." They say, "I can't eel bad when they so stubbornly chose to remain in their homes during a massive natural disaster."

In response I say that the people who left had a place to go and a means to get there. Many of those left behind had neither.

In your fast, if you fast, please pray for the hard hearts of those who do not care. Ask whatever God you pray to to soften those hearts.

Thank you...

Hurricane Katrina: The Aftermath, The Rescue, and The Mentality.

I have been talking about this for several days now with friends and co-workers and have a great many things to say.

First let me begin by stating that FEMA has a list of the top ten worst things that could happen in this country. Amongst the top 5 are a level 10 earthquake hitting Southern California. Another is a major hurricane hitting New Orleans. While FEMA recognizes that this is a serious issue and has contigency plans on the books, as with any disaster/emergency, there are hordes of variables and elements that no equation, however well constructed and calculated, can take into account.

As far as the response effort goes, let me say that it is important to consider that Bush was on vacation (granted, he takes alot of those) and that Congress was out on its annual recess that they always take this time of year. So, before anything could be done on the Federal level, everyone had to come back from all over the world and reach quarom, but once they did, BOOM, $10B.

I'm not raising defense for the relief organizations' poor response. I'm not placing blame either. I think that now is not the time to point the finger and say it's your fault, you should've done this or that faster or better. I think that now is the time to continue to be forward-looking. To continue to try our damndest to fix the bigger problem. A few months down the line when things have stabalized a bit, then we should look back, with perfect 20/20 hindsight and say "where did we go wrong, what could we have done differently."

As far as the looting, the people are operating on the most primitive parts of the human psyche. The needs, wants, desires, and functions of the ID have pushed their way to the front of their mind and consumed their consciousness. I think anyone who says that it is wrong for these people to go into destroyed Wal-Marts, gas stations, grocery stores etc. to take food, water or clothing doesn't understand this basic principle. I think that when talking ethics, and people's lives are at stake, then we have to put that fact into the context of the ethical/moral questions we are facing. If the people down there want to to steal a television, let them. They can't plug it in, and it will never leave the city. All these items have been written off as a loss by every company, corporation, or small business. They're lost. Everyone knows they're lost. Everyone has accepted the loss.

The people are majorly poor black people who lived in the inner-city of N.O. Their lives have been governed by a cognitive process of why us? Why are we poor while white men run our governments. Alot of them have lived their lives making victims of themselves, and I'm not saying this mentality is right, but this mentality is not in question right now. It is important to understand this mentality when we see them on the news demanding help. They believe that White America is leaving them there to die because they are Black and poor. They believe that White America is continuing to do what they have always done. Regardless of the validity of these thought processes, I believe it explains a great deal.

The fact that these people shoot at their would be rescuers and benefactors, I believe, is a disgrace to Humanity. Shows a lack of respect. Understandably, it shows a great deal of fear. However, it's martial law down there. That means there are no civil rights. While that sways many people to believe they have a right to shoot and kill and rape and rob, it doesn't. What it does mean, is that military personnel have a right to put a round in anyone's head they feel like. And while I don't support violence, and am not big on militarty supremacy, if I was in a helicopter homing in on a rescue landing, and taking fire, or if I saw a gun in a civilians hand AT ALL for that matter, I would pick up a megaphone "Citizen! Drop your Weapon! 3..2...1..." BANG! In the Head. You are dead. Call me cold-hearted, cruel, ignorant or immoral I care not. Some people want to be rescued and wait and watch desperately as their rescuers come in, and ANY one stnding in between the rescuers and the stranded should be removed from their place betwixt the victims and the heros.

I would like to end with a bit of hope. Lt. Gen. Russel Honore is in charge now. The leadership problem at "Ground Zero" has been solved, in my opinion. He's pointing, and yellin, and cussin, and gettin' shit done. I like him. People listen to him. He's not afraid to be responsible for 20,000 lives, or if he is, he sure as hell don't show it. He's a tough sum' bitch willing to get the job done.

Wednesday, August 31, 2005

On Niggers

written as a response to the Tempe, Arizona controversy over Mark Twain's classic novel The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

Niggers are not black. Niggers are not Moors. Niggers are not African. Niggers are ignorance. Niggers perpetuate an ideology of ignorance. Niggers blame classical literature for spawning an ideology of hatred and bigotry. Niggers question what authority White Man has to deem literature "classic" while failing to question what authority White Man had when he assembled the works of The Bible. Niggers place blame on books, on paper, on words, instead of placing accountability upon individuals. Niggers exempt themselves from intelligent discussion and debate that seeks to find the heart and purpose of controversy. Niggers shut their minds to the views and opinions of others. Niggers take their footballs and go home to read Charles Dickens -- believing that it is somehow comparable to Twain. Niggers wrap themselves in self-righteous arrogance. Niggers believe if we euphemize a tool of hatred and evil down to something as menial as "the N-Word" it will somehow alleviate the hurt, when in actuality they only succeed in strengthening the power of "nigger" and proliferating the evil and pain that it has grown to connote and cause. Niggers ban book.



May the comments be biting, stinging, and accusatory, but, please, let them be intelligent...

Tuesday, August 30, 2005

Heights of Macchu Picchu: XII by Pablo Neruda

After scouring the internet for not only the poem, but the perfect translation of it, to no avail, I have decided to simply post the poem myself. This translation comes from The Essential Neruda: Selected Poems written by Pablo Neruda, Edited by Mark Eisner check it out at Amazon.

Heights of Macchu Picchu: XII
Rise up and be born with me


Rise up and be born with me, my brother.
From the deepest reaches of your
Disseminated sorrow, give me your hand.
You will not return from the depths of rock.
You will not return from the subterranean time
It will not return, your hardened voice.
They will not return, your drilled-out eyes.
Look at me from the depths of the earth,
plowman, weaver, silent shepherd:
tender of the guardian guanacos:
mason of the impossible scaffold:
water-bearer of Andean tears:
goldsmith of crushed fingers:
farmer trembling on the seed:
potter poured out into your clay:
bring all your old buried sorrows
to the cup of this new life.
Show me your blood and your furrow,
say to me: here I was punished
because the gem didn't shine or the earth
didn't deliver the stone or the grain on time:
point out to me the rock on which you fell
and the wood on which they curcified you,
burn the ancient flints bright for me,
the ancient lamps, the lashing whips
stuck for centuries to your wounds
and the axes brilliant with bloodstain.
I come to speak through your dead mouth.
Through all the earth unite all
the silent and split lips
and from the depths speak to me all night long
as if we were anchored together
tell me everything, chain by chain
link by link and step by step,
sharpen the knives you kept,
place them in my chest and in my hand,
like a river of yellow lightning,
like a river of buried jaguars,
and let me weep, hours, days, years,
blind ages, stellar centuries

Give me silence, water, hope.

Give me struggle, iron, volcanoes

Fasten your bodies to mine like magnets.

Come to my veins and my mouth

Speak through my words and my blood.




'tis beauty spilled forth on paper...read more poetry...

Monday, August 29, 2005

"Look Where We Worship"

(title borrowed from The American Night by Jim Morrison)

The fables of our youth are Ninja Turtles and Care Bears. They are Rainbow Bright and Fragglerock. The great puppet master was literally Jim Henson and figuratively the old and evil. The moral teachings of Aesop were schooled by our grandparent's that they might mold the ideals of a generation. And as that generation grew older and became the Chieftains of the Tribes of Corporate America, their skewed visions of life -- what is and what should be -- spawned a new wave of self-righteous education. The mind-numbing experience of prime-time news and saturday morning cartoons became the chalkboards with which they taught their pupils who lay idly supine in the cold-comfort of their living rooms -- content to learn life's truths through a stretched, flipped, and distorted image exuded from a tube.

The villian always escapes. The hero is worshipped for his failure. The evil the community so desperately attempts to fight, capture, and destroy maintains a two step lead over that individual whom the weak and feeble have deemed powerful enough to stand in his way. Do the People truly put their faith in him? Or, do they simply content themselves in knowing that someone else faces the battles they themselves will not due to their inherent sloth and greed for comfort and routine?

Herein lies the irony: the Chiefs of the Tribes of Corporate America have formed a treaty with the Chiefs of the Tribes of Democracy. In any treaty, their is compromise. While we sacrifice that inalienable stuff promised us by Smith, Jefferson, and Washington -- the deceased, white-wigged Chiefs of the Free-Masons -- they sacrifice so much more, their good name. Speak to me of compromise.

The Chief addresses the tribe surrounded by his chosen counsel while the Shaman interprets his words through vision and dance. The people gather and instead of hearing the words of their leader they are hypnotized by the Witch-Doctor whose song is his medicine and whose dance is his syringe. The hyperbolic rhetoric is accented with flashes of color blinding the ears to the vague promises of protection against a nameless, faceless villian. Each time the Warriors' of the Chief, the Elite Soldiers, the Praetorian Gaurds of Freedom and Democracy near their prey, close in on the evil they have pursued, he slips between the cracks like sand between the crevices of the hand. Yet, we still worship. We still adore. We still prostrate ourselves before our great hero and interpret his words for ourselves instead of demanding clear meaning an understanding. Those whose interpretations juxtapose our own are chastised, ridiculed, punished, shunned as hypocrites and heretics.

To be continued...

So the episode always ends. Perpetuating the pattern that has evolved into routine and which will become Truth. We are left on the sidewalk gaping slack-jawed and dumb-struck at a great parade thrown in honor of a lying failure of a man we call a hero whose promise lacked definition so that its fulfillment might come with ease. For to promise the specific requires accountability and responsibility. And a noble tribe despises an ignoble chieftain, and no treatise matters when the Passions of the People Call for an Uprise.

"look where we worship"--Jim Morrison
Read: "Rise up and be born again with me, my brother" by Pablo Neruda

Think...

Friday, April 15, 2005

And one More thing

I got something else to say. Let's go ahead and play that blame game. Let's point the finger right at the new wave of media sweeping the nation. A wave consisting of cross-fire, Bill O'Reilly, and Michael Jackson. The media has turned its back on its solemn purpose and given way to the appealing temptation of entertainment. The media, whose sole purpose is to provide the public with a clear, unbiased view of the TRUTH. Instead we get split screens with two extremists who bicker and argue over menial points of one issue or another that may or may not have any real importance concerning the state of the nation. The biggest news in the country is which celebvrity is in trouble this week. Every channel has some story about Michael Jackson every day. Is this what freedom of the press is all about?

What has happened in America is that the centrist has lost his appeal. The news stations, desperate for ratings, are appealing to the whims of the entertainment industry. If people won't fight on camera, we won't watch. Reality television has infiltrated the six o'clock news and the people that are hurt by it the most is Joe Citizen. Sitting there with his popcorn and beer on his sofa laughing at one moron and chastising another, all the while believing that he is watching intelligent debate.

Why does it have to be one extreme against another? Why does the Republican party force members to agree and uphold every single one of their platform issues? Where is the middle ground? I firmly believe that had the people not viewed George Bush as this extreme right-winger that John Kerry wouldn't have won that primary election. The democrats of the nation felt as though they HAD to get someone as extreme as Bush in order to for people to act against Bush. When in reality, what the American people as a whole were demanding was a man more middle of the road.

There is a heritage within the centrist movement. JFK, Roosevelt, Thurman. These men held certain doctrines on both sides of the fence and attempted to bring them together for the benefit of everyone. Instead what we see is the news media spoon-feeding the public this idea that everyone is either as far left as they can be or as far right. That any attempt to sit in the middle and be reasonable and listen to legitimate arguments from the other side with the intention of understanding their point-of-view is a cop out. That centrists are too afraid to take a hard stance on an issue. That centrist want to please all of the people all of the time, when in fact none of these are true.

The reason so much of the things that I tiraded about concerning the third world are allowed to take place is because it gets swept under the rug by the media. We can't be that controversial. We cant' tell the people the real truth about the atrocities taking place in the world. The people don't want to hear that. My question to them is when did what the people wanted to hear determine what went on your news brief?

I call out to the people who peruse this site to not accept the new media. Not to bow down to extremist points of view. Do not let them control your perception of the world. There are slews of alternative media out there waiting to be read. UTNE, The Atlantic, hell even Reuters does good at giving broad coverage across the world. Turn off the Miochael Jackson trial. Avoid the Savage Radio Show, and Cross-Fire, and Bill O'Reilly's "fair and balanced OPINION(!!!)."

This is further proof of the American Citizens inability to hold persons accountable. Politicians and news stations must be held up to the fire when they fail to deliver that which we have a right to know. We must not stand by the way-side and allow extremist ideology to run the way we think, the way we vote, and the way we live.


Holla @cha Daego.

Gettin' Bitter with it

Hey everybody. Long time no speaky speaky. Life's busy, what can I say. I'm just gonna tirade for a bit, throw some opinions about, step on some toes, hope you like it.

1) Has anyone ever listened to the savage radio show? If you have I hope you realize that as intelligent as this man may attempt to sound, he's just as bad as the people and policies he attempts to speak out against. His entire argument on the show is "can't believe this moron" "he talks so slow cuz he thinks he smart" and "listen to this crap." All the while he fails to support any of his statment with hard fact in between cut audio files. I recently heard him trying to defend Mr. John Bolton on his recent nomination for UN ambassador. He was totally jacking Bolton off. This is a man that said the UN doesn't exist. When questioned as to whether, with perfect 20/20 hindsight, would he have done anything different in Rwanda, he said no becvause there was no logistical evidence supporting the fact that anything different could have been done. WHAT?! With perfect 20/20 hindsight you wouldn't have stopped a genocide?! There is a right answer to this question and it is YES! I would have attempted to alleviate the atrocious crimes of humanity felt by the people of Rwanda. YES! I would've put troops on the ground and given them the power to shoot. NO! I would not have ignored the blatant evidence that showed that mass insurrection and potential crimes against humanity were on the horizon and fast approaching.

The problem with Rwanda is a problem that America and the UN consistently argue to be against. Look to Cambodia. Look to Bosnia, Serbia, even the "rape-room" argument set forth for the recent movement into Iraq. If America and the United Nations are going to attempt to establish the precedent that we will NOT stand by while genocide occurs. That we WILL intervene and help those that cannot help themselves. That this type of behavior among nations will NOT be tolerated than how can one honestly say that with perfect 20/20 hindsight we should not have done anything differently. 1 million people, 30 days. Unfathomable.

Again we see this precendent shat upon with the recent developments in Haiti. What developments you ask? You may not know becuase America and the UN let it happen. Haiti, home to the world's worst slum (Amnesty International and the Red Cross will attest to this) which has over a million and a half people within 4 square miles located in the backyard of Aristaide's palace. Haiti, powerful men consistently put there by American and UN officials. Haiti, whose every election is controlled by murder of the oppossition. Haiti, where the people had enough and attmepted to rise up against the tyranical regime, only to be ignored by western culture. Do you research, get schooled.

We get so caught up in whether or not a person has a right to die. How much money we have to spend to drive our SUV's. We bitch and moan about Social Security and demand a governmental baby-sitter as we grow old becuase we as a nation are to irresponsible to prepare for our own financial well-being while Third world AFrica continues to deteriorate. Men continue to be placed in power based on how well they will conform to America's Idea of nation building. The World Bank looms over the head's of politicians saying do this with the loan money, pay this much back, stay in poverty, we don't care, you are of no strategic economic value to the West. And we wonder why they hate us. Our ignorance and arrogance brings our own judgement upon us. We have people like Wolfe in charge of the world bank who would rather piss on the third world than forgive debt. Bolton, a man who would rather actively disbelieve in an organization that should be (not necesarilly doing) benefiting the globe as a whole, speaking for us at the UN.

When will we change,
When will we learn,
Just in time to,
See it all come down...--Incubus

--Holla @cha Daego

Wednesday, March 30, 2005

Booty-luctable

I have recently become aware of a serious problem facing our society today. Hip-hop culture has been generous enough to grace us with a term that we can use to describe women of large posterior: ghetto booty. Now the problem I spoke of isn't the use of this term...so much as the over-use. For years I have stood by the wayside and heard people describe a "big ol' butt" as "ghetto," and that, frankly, is incorrect. So, once and for all, I have decided to clear up this matter.

Several years ago, me and my bro came up with what we called the "booty-line." In essence, it's a scale with which all booties fall into. Most people have simple, three-step scale: lack of an ass, ass, and ghetto booty. Incorrect. There are actually 7 different classifications of booty.

Nosatol - This isn't so much a booty as it is a serious affliction. Hundreds of thousands of women a year suffer from Nosatol (alt. pronunciation "No Ass at All"). These women don't have any ass at all. Instead, they just have a very long back. Serious cases of Nosatol can actually result in ones booty becoming concave.

Lil' Booty - The lil' booty is most commonly found on tiny asian women. Tiny asian women with lil' booties are some of the most beautifully shapen women on the planet. This booty has shape and symmetry, but isn't obtuse. Scrawny women aren't the only ones who sport this booty, but they do sport it best.

Booty - This is the booty that fits the majority of women. Ample, supple, but not disproportionate. Women packin' booty typically have hourglass figures, not pear shapes. When you see a woman and say "hey, she's gotta nice ass," it's generally a booty. Think: Katie Holmes.

Ghetto Booty - This is the section I know you've been waiting for. Now, this is my personal booty of preference. Plump, supple, firm, more than two decent handfuls. These booties are perfect for all sorts of activities ranging from long stays in bleachers at sporting events, to lengthy boat outings. Consider cutting a basketball in half and shovin' it down the back of some chicks jeans -- now, you got a ghetto booty. You've seen these women in all sorts of rap videos. Many latino women carry a ghetto booty, however, I don't want this to get confused with the next classification of booty...

Ghettoooww Booty - To pronounce, simply place the emphasis on the last syllable and drag it out a bit. This is a classification left solely to those women who think they sport a ghetto booty, but are actually way too phat in the ass.
These ghetto booties are too big to be pleasing to the eye. They are awkward, generally misshapen, and difficult to control which can often result in third party injury, typically, on the dance floor. But don't worry ladies, there is still hope for you. Simply invest in Jane Fonda's "Bun's of Steel" and work that ghettoooowwww booty down to a booty-luctable ghetto booty and you will be on your way to music video stardom.

Big Ol' Butt - Here is where we get to the classifications of booty that are simply much too much too large. Rosie O'Donnell has a big ol' butt. I mean, big, really big, but not the kind of big you want to reach out and grab. More like the kind of big that makes you want to dive out of the way. However, it does not make overt attacks on ones personal "bubble." Theirs' are more subtle.

DAMN! - Yes, that's right, the seventh and largest size booty is DAMN. When you see this booty, you will know it. You will look at it and say "DAMN!" These women have a hard time fitting on escalators. It seems almost as if these women walk with their asses. Their ass controls their every movement. Do not come within close proximity to these booties because they WILL knock you down and recent legislation has released them from liability.

Now you know, and knowing's half the booty.

Holla @cha Daego

Wednesday, March 23, 2005

Women are so Stupid

Whereas I could follow this awesome title up with a whole hodgepodge of legitimate arguments including, but not limited to, the fact that women make important decisions based on the whims of their ever unstable emotions, the words "logic" and "reason" lie not within their vocabulary, and, as a whole, women score lower than men do on standardized IQ tests (making them, inherently, less intelligent than men), I will instead defer to a reason not so obvious to the general public.

In 1920, women had just won a major victory over chauvinistic men like myself when they finally received the right to vote. Kudos, seriously, they deserve it. I consider "inalienable rights" to encompass all genders, be it male, female, or transgender. However, they were not content to stop there. Once again they allowed emotion to sweep over them without reason.

In the wake of such a phenomenal victory over the forces of oppression and hard-ons everywhere, women were intent on riding this wave all the way in to shore. Upon arrival, however, they would be left stranded as a beached whale upon the surf--scared, confused, and lonely. What was the next step that women wanted to take? Where would their efforts be focused next? I tell you now, women wanted to work!

Now, don't get me wrong, if women want to work, I think they should work. Get out of that kitchen woman! Put down that feather duster! Take off that apron and get down in the dirt with those men that have held you down for so long! Show them you can do it too! Just don't come bitchin' back to me when you find out it's not all it's cracked up to be.

The problem here lies within the customary responsibilities' of men and women and their juxtaposition during the 20th century. For the last, oh, several millenia or so, it has been the man's role to be the primary bread winner in the household. To go out, find work, and perform well enough to keep his family properly nourished, housed, and, hopefully, comfortable. Conversely, it has traditionally been the women's role to stay home, have/raise children, make the abode a comfortable and welcome one for their hubby.

Now, whereas the recipe to raising children and keeping men happy isn't printed in a Betty Crocker cookbook, women had it easy. The stresses of grocery shopping, carpooling, cooking and cleaning maybe great, but I would argue that they are dwarved in comparison to that of having to go out and ensure that your spouse will have the neccesarry means (by means I really mean funds) to perform these duties.

When the leading cause of marital turmoil is finances, one cannot honestly say that the role of women in the early part of the century required the level of responsibility nor the level stress that the man's role played.

Now let's fast forward to the last 15 years. The role of "stay-at-home Dad" has been steadily on the rise. A trend I do not predict to last. Why have men been more and more willing to stay home and raise children, cook, clean etc? I find the answer here to be rather simple. If my leading lady wanted me to stay home and perform these tasks instead of having to go out and face the job market while perpetually being haunted by the fact that my failure as an employee would lead to my failure as a husband/father/man, I would eagerly jump at the oppurtunity. Oh, what a weight to have lifted from one's shoulders! Never again would I have to don the monkey-suit, sit in front of some dried up old prune lying about my overwhelming desire to sit locked away in a high rise cubicle! Never again would I have to wake up at 5 AM to trudge out to some snobbish neighborhood to build some doctor's home! No, not me, I raise children. I have no job. I! PAINT! SUNSETS!

'Twould be glorious...

However, some may argue--but Ryan, there are those who feel women should still perform these duties. And,in response, I say those men are rednecks. And rednecks are stupid,too.

So, women, here's to ya. Congratulations on gettin' out of the kitchen and showing us all that "YOU CAN DO IT!" But I bet if you had it all to to do over, you might just cash out while you were ahead. I sure as hell would've

--Holla @cha Daego

Monday, March 21, 2005

Pigeon-Holing America

Since I intend for this blog to facilitate some form of intelligent discussion, I think I should start out by explaining a bit of my ideology. The foremost question, I anticipate, would be: liberal or conservative? My answer: neither.

I considered following that with Webster's or Dictionary.com's definition of the two terms, but you can do that for yourself. From those definitions I could easily determine which term more adequately describes my beliefs. However, I feel that using one of these two terms to describe someone (please pay careful attention here) hurts America. Yea, I said it, it hurts America.

Firstly, the definition for these two terms as layed out by America's leading definographers (sp?) is simple, comprehensible, and generally positive if one were to ascribe them to one's self. However, in our day and age when these two terms are thrown around like poo against a wall, there meanings become cloudy, and stinky. Society has moved to the point that wearing one of these titles will have you shunned by another wearing the opposite. You will be stigmatized (is that a word?) as either a bleeding heart liberal who has nothing better to do but smoke pot and hug trees, or a closed-minded conservative fearful of change and determined to kill as many innocent lives necessary to accomplish your goals.

There was once a time, many many moons ago, when being a conservative or a liberal meant something. Describing yourself as one or the other conveyed a clear and concise message as to, not only your political beliefs, but many of your social, economic, and, potentially, religious beliefs. At some point during the late-mid 1900's these definitions swapped, and since then, no one has been able to get a firm grasp on the exact meaning of either.

Secondly, what happens when we as individuals begin abusively throwing around these terms, we end up generalizing an entire group of people. We become bigoted. We have reached an era where it's unacceptable to be racist, or sexist, but it has become the norm to be an "ideologist," if you will.

Let's say Bob and Joe are friendly co-workers. One day, around the water cooler, Bob says to Joe, "Hey, Joe, can you believe that? Peggy in accounting is gonna have an abortion. Murdering wenchbag." In response, Joe says,"You conservatives are all the same, what if she was raped?" And Bob says, "You liberals just don't get it do you? Murder is murder." And both parties storm away in a huff. Now, both men have been labeled by the other and any conversation heretofore will result in one filtering the words of the other in light of their blatantly obvious political alignments.

However, before today, Bob and Joe have been very similar in many of their beliefs concerning social security, homosexual marriage, gun control, etc. Unfortunately, they have been irreconciably divided due to the fact that one is obviously a liberal and the other, obviously a conservative.

I'm not saying it's always this menial, nor am I saying this is always the case. But, more often than not, we, as a society, become divided over a solitary issue and your stance on it will immediately determine which end of the spectrum you sit.

Thirdly, we have gotten to a point where, as a whole nation, we have allowed the media to wash our ears with these terms without ever asking them to define either. For the last decade + we have heard on the television and read in the papers that this candidate is liberal, or this candidate is conservative, without ever knowing what their actual platforms are. We take this information and we make our decision about the people who will potentially govern our lives and our childrens' lives without ever fully knowing what they intend on doing once elected. Subconsciously we have made up our own definition, we have already predetermined that we don't like individuals of this ideology, or individuals for this issue or against that one. We fail to see the bigger picture, and instead, narrow our eyes down to one meaningless word and go from there.

I challenge you, go out and ask people (both people you consider liberal, and those you consider conservative) to define these terms. Ask them what they mean to them. Compare these answers. There is no uniformity. There is no clear understanding. There is no definition. The majority of the time there answer will be filled with animosity, ignorance, and cliches.

So I beg the question: who are you? Liberal? Conservative? Progressive? Communist? Or just another citizen with an eclectic set of values hoping to find the best of a bad bunch?

Stop pigeon-holing America...

Holla@ cha Daego

As if You Really Care

So, I finally broke down and did the "cool" thing -- got a blog site. I almost want to be ashamed of myself.

Let me begin by saying that I will not site references to anything I ever say, unless, of course, I do. In which case, I do not honestly expect anyone to check them.

Anything I say on this blog is simply my opinion, which is, to be brutally blunt, much better than yours. I welcome all readers to agree, but, preferably, to disagree because it's never any fun when we all just sit around in a circle jerk now is it?

On a final note: I reserve the ultimate right to not care one rat's turd about what you have to say but I whole-heartedly wish that you would say it anyway.

Holla@ cha Daego