The Top Gun Program

I know that government class is over or what ever but I felt this was important. I was offered to go to a program called 'Top Gun' by my JCC instructor in 8th grade. He told me it was a boot camp but there wasn't anything that could prepare me for the bull sh*t that would ensue. But now, 5 years later, I can't find that it even existed except for a smart comment here and there from the people I went to it with. I don't recall how much I paid for my 'education', but I'm pretty sure it was significant; and out of that they gave me a shirt and a hat.
anyway
I arrive the first day a few minutes early feeling this was the punctual thing to do. The second I march up to their militarized section of the highschool (Which I wouldn't have been surprised to run into an all singing all dancing choir of Goblins with David Bowie at the head in the process for how easy it was to navigate O.D. Wyatt) some guy in a blue shirt and cap starts screaming at me for how late I was; I was later to learn that Comrade drill sergeant started when ever Comrade Drill sergeant started.. The rest of that week of left right left right "drop and don't stop untill I allow it" has blurred into a nightmare of angry ego tripping highschool students preparing 14 year olds for war.. or something. It was to the point that I would be so scared of these people that in an unorganized scuttle race to a water fountain somewhere, I fell over and tore open my knee, but refused to announce to Comrade drill sergeant "I need to go take care of this bloody mess" and leave formation.
Upon reflection I'm not sorry it happened. But I need to know that it did happen.

In fact.. don't say anything.

My comrade and peer, Advent Crises, posted an article addressing the voices of those who are arguing for the “Don’t ask don’t tell” law to be repealed. Comrade Advent Crises’ article is largely asking a moral question and is sure to make the readers aware of what side we should take. Asserting that “we shouldn’t let our personal opinion get in the way of our judgment”, this seems contradictory, however, as the following sentence states “Gays and lesbians are just like anyone else therefore we shouldn’t treat them any different”. This statement is strikingly similar to what a judgment is that’s based on personal opinion. Advent Crisis supports this personal judgment with authorities that would seem, at first, to have a say in the matter; the retired General and Admirals. Yes, the guys who would have had impact on the matter but got too old. While before it’s likely these warlords of the United States wrote the book on “Don’t ask don’t tell”. Though it’s likely these men and women who were forced to be silent about them selves served well in the armed forces, they should relies they’re looking for rights in the least likely place to find them; the United States Armed Forces. All in all, when status and prestige hinge on your personal opinions, no authority will become an authority – especially in the United States Military – by arguing for change, or promoting tolerance.

Apocolypse Please.

You preach your intentions you praise your fake saviors.
The people who sell you as though they were slavers.
All the make up and hairdos are there in the mirror.
Look closer though you may see the creature.
Ugly and vicious it screams for your money.
"Buy more plastic and I'll give something funny"
"F* the children who die for your sins
What will you pay for that extra wide grin?"
Just drown it all out with the songs on your iPod.
Just Forget the fact that your voting in a fraud.
His lies are so happy and his smile so white.
He must be the right guy to sell me some fright.
But in the end what will it matter?
Your soul is sold and they're getting fatter.
Close your eyes and plug your ears.
That's a winners way to cheer.
So pay up the man, he's hungry for dinner.
But it's okay he'll purge to get thinner.
The mirror's still there and you won't get closer.
You see just fine that you're "so not a poser!".
And you're sinking deeper.

The ignored price for an ally.

My Comrade Our Price for Freedom (OPfF), has based an argument, I've concluded, to be in favor of heavy government regulation on immigration into the United States. OPfF states that printing official documents in Spanish is promoting the issue of illegal immigration, supporting this claim with "If someone is trying to become a citizen from Russia the test in not given in Russian, Spanish and English only." This raises the question if OPfF relies that Russia is not a neighboring nation to the United States. Or if OPfF relies that Russia's neighboring nations, such as The Ukraine, do have documents printed in Russian, Ukrainian and Polish.
OPfF also concludes that in fact tighter government regulations in concert with taking action against those who are in the United States illegally by "Rounding them up" is the ideal solution for the problem in question.
I wholly believe my comrade has every intention that these methods will have vast benifets to not only the citizens and tax payers of the United States, but also the international relations of those looking to the United States as a role model of developing nations; even one such as Mexico.
But I can't help but assume that my comrade, OPfF, hasn't entertained the idea of making the conditions in Mexico such that the citizens of Mexico will want to stay in Mexico. That the hundreds of billions of dollars being regurgitated onto the fiasco that is the (not)war in Iraq could be spent as aid to a country that could benifit one hundred fold more than what the Bush administration hopes to achieve over seas.
It doesn't even seem to occure to individuals with immigrations philosophies similar to the comrade I am now addressing that if Mexico were to be aided into a position with a powerful economy and strong national relations with the United States that not only would immigration be regulated such as OPfF would dream by the United States and Mexico. But also the United States would have the perfect political puppet* when it would come to the other issues the United States now faces.

*I do not condone such behavior.

Foundation trouble.

The definition of the United States government in terms of what the founders designed it to be is: a device for the people to protect the people from influences foreign and domestic. To serve the people, what is carved into the badges of police across the country? “To serve and protect.” This is a common concept that strictly defines the United States government in the minds of most. That it is god sent to protect their rights for the pursuit of happiness; the best, most powerful thing in the world. That is could do no wrong.

This is a largely unhealthy philosophy that even Benjamin Franklin commented “The most patriotic thing you can do for your country is to question it”. Don’t mind if I do.

How many Native Americans (If it were blatantly obvious to know who is native American) could you count walking down 6^th street on Halloween. History books record (The one I’m referencing is ‘Culture Composition 2, 7^th edition, chapter 3, page 233), that ninety-two (92) percent (%) of the Native American population vanished between the years 1770 and 1910, albeit mostly by disease. This statistic is vastly ignored, or simply not known by the vast majority of Americans living in the United States. How could the best, most powerful thing in the world come from the largest genocide ever recorded? Preposterous!

Certainly the origin of the United States is something behind us. Certainly that is the only zit on the pristine face of United States politics. Certainly it has never toppled foreign governments to meet its own end. Certainly the dictatorships in the Congo, Zaire, Argentina, Iran and Syria made there way to power by the high praise and the loving admiration of the people they now tyrannically rule over.

No, the United States Government is legitimate. Perfectly benevolent and just to all creatures. That’s what it was designed to do after all; to serve and protect, to be the best, most powerful thing in the world.

Progression Static.

An article, “A ban on Mom and Dad” written on Free Republic addresses a California law that passed recently banning discrimination amongst sexual orientation in the educational system. The article explains that children as young as kindergarten will be sexually indoctrinated, that there is nothing in the law protecting children with traditionally conservative life styles.

This article is hard not to disregard as paranoid assumptions. Where the government intervenes to protect the rights and identities of minorities, the author of the article sees an attempt to turn children into social perverts, “Sending children as young as five to homosexual-transsexual indoctrination centers”. Though it should be safe to assume that if one were to ask the author what a liberal is the difference would be naught. Throughout the article the author makes it hard to sympathize with his point, professing that not only will difference be protected, but traditionalists will be turned into the antagonists of society, calling the bill a ban on Mom and Dad.

Oddly enough this article looks similar to articles from 1957, the year that desegregation was forced at the tip of a bayonet. When the parents of the author of the article I’m addressing now knew it in their bones, knew it in their bibles, knew it without any thought of being wrong, that segregation would corrupt their children and produce only anarchy. Odd it is that this author knows it in his bones, in his bible, that a law promoting tolerance and protecting minorities will corrupt his children, produce only anarchy.

A Human Problem.

FROM THE HALLS OF MALIBU TO THE SHORES OF KENNEDY

Comrades, I bring your attention currently to an article by a one Ann Coulter. Famous for her aggressive style arguments; she relents nothing here. The article goes on about the hypocrisies and the inaccurate prediction from democrats and political analysts. Quoting Mark Bowden, Frank Rich, and Nicholas Kristof, she exploits these individuals and attempts to reveal the evil creature a democrat is, for the commonly accepted idea from democrats that the war in Iraq was a bad idea and has in fact failed. It bothers me that so much attention is invested in Iraq, as the cause for its instability is an imported commodity. When terrorists are being trained and armed in Syria and Iran it is hard to ask why Iraq was the Bush administration’s first attempt at spreading “freedom” in the Middle East; The citizens of the above countries live just to fear their governments. Scared of the modern day 1984 they live in. These are just the more localized (To Iraq) international sad stories. Looking just around the corner of the earth’s curvature we find genocide, disease, warped governments, some of which were installed by the United States and more fear. What we don’t find is oil. I apologies if this commentary seems misdirected and not following along a single point. But I’m really upset with the Human race; Ann Coulter amongst many for fueling division and miscommunications. The ignorant b*. When people are killing people killing people killing people over pieces of the ground, growing thumbs just to make a club to beat their brother down; fighting over something that is by no means going to last, fighting over ideas, words and writing. All anyone has to say, the only solution found in Ann Coulter’s article is that we should blame the democrats and that they are dumb. Articles like these are why loss of human life on any level is “Oh shucks” news now. She boasts about the extermination of individual targets as though it should satisfy the world, that America is doing its job. If such is the case God Bless America.