what i deserve

Ah, the moment of truth. I've never been much of a liar or a bullshitter. If I didn't do something, I'll admit to it. If I'm not going to finish something in time, I'll keep doing it at the same slow, carefully thought-out pace until I run out of time. A bullshitter, I am not.

I would deserve a D, and apparently the highest grade I'm going to get is a D, so at least I'm honest with myself. I deserve a D because I am a procrastinator and if I know there is time left to complete an assignment, I will utilize it. This isn't an excuse, it's just the truth.

I can accept responsibility and take a C home. That may mean repeating this course again, depending on the new guidelines being thrown about, but I actually liked the class, so that wouldn't be so bad. I don't know who'll be teaching it though or how they'll tackle the course, so that's a little scary. But I have no choice. I'm holding myself accountable.

I would like to clarify, however, that I am not lazy. I used to think I was, but I always start out the first month strong. I keep my agenda filled out and detailed, and I actually take the time to do my homework on time. I always strive to earn my B. I told myself this semester that I would write one blog every Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. Four blogs a week, as required by this course and Online Journalism. I did that for two weeks. I held my own. But then I became aware of the deadline and realized I had time now that I could use, and I would have time later to finish everything else. Obviously that was a flawed idea.

I am not lazy. I just put things on hold. I put other classes before this. And that was a regrettable choice, as it is for some course every semester. This isn't an appeal to you, Professor Carr. This isn't an apology. I deserve that A. I deserve that A for my hit-or-miss blog and my forced wit and my love of all things popular and all things weird.

I am accountable for my A. Or D. Or C. You're deciding. But I still have HOPE, so...you know. Stick it to Southern and pass me.

[/tasteless]

lost - the candidate

As always with LOST, I begin the episode wondering how my mind will be fucked today. There was a break between this week's episode and last week's, so I knew something major was going to happen. The last episode left our Losties in such peril that, following the nature of the show, something even worse was bound to happen. I'll admit that I was frightened.

The episode began in the alternative reality, which still felt like an entirely independent show worthy of its own forty-four minutes. If only. Jack attempted to pressure Locke into being what I presume to be a guinea pig; he was certain that a new procedure could give Locke back the use of his legs. Locke wasn't having it. Jack, being the overbearing maniac that he is, goes to Locke's dentist to get information on how Locke came to be in a wheelchair. Inquiring minds also wanted to know. Luckily, Bernard Nadler just happened to be Locke's dentist. What are the chances? They both realize that they were on the same plane together, as was Locke. This is reason enough for Bernard to break protocol and give Jack the name of a man who should know what happened to Locke - Anthony Cooper.

Anthony Cooper is Locke's father. In the original reality, he shoved Locke through a high-rise window and watched him fall to his presumed death. He survived, but he was paralyzed. In this reality, Locke tells Jack that he survived a plane crash, which put him in a wheelchair and put his father in a state of nonbeing. As always, Terry O'Quinn and Matthew Fox played incredibly well off of one another. This duo always seems like they know an Emmy is on the line when the camera starts rolling.

The original storyline was awesomely fast-paced. The captured Losties were thrown into the Hydra polar bear cages that first appeared in season three. Across the island, Locke and Sayid saved Jack from Widmore's attack and brought him to Hydra Island so that he would convince his fellow castaways to leave the island. Jack refused to leave the island and only agreed to help Locke after he gave Jack this chilly query: If he wanted them all dead, he would have killed them already, so why is he helping them?

This could be seen as noble, but this is LOST, and this man isn't John Locke. He's...the smoke monster. He doesn't even have a name. He places four bricks of C4 in a bookbag and gives it to Jack after the Losties are all reunited. It is unknown whether Locke was going to actually board the submarine with the survivors because, before he could even garner a superior response, Jack shoved him off the pier and into the ocean. A shootout breaks out. Kate is shot in the chest. Everyone heads for the sub and Sawyer closes the door, once again leaving Claire behind. It's a far cry from the end of the fourth season, when he rescued her from a smoldering house. The sub dives. It isn't until our Losties are well enough under the sea that Jack opens up his bookbag and finds the ticking bomb, counting down slowly.

Sayid tells them how to disarm the bomb but before he can rally off the risks, Sawyer performs the task and the countdown speeds up, surprisingly. Sawyer looks stupid at this point.

And then everyone about this episode went from awesome and amazing to utterly depressing. Sayid tells Jack where to find Desmond and tells him that he is the candidate, and in a span of perhaps five seconds he is gone, taking the bomb as far away as he can. It detonates in the center of the sub, killing Sayid instantly. Frank is hit by a door and left for dead. Water begins to blast in. Hurley takes an unconscious Kate and exits the sub. Jack and Sawyer attempt to help Jin free Sun but she is trapped. Sawyer bumps his head, knocks himself out, and Jack is left to take him to the ocean surface, demanded to so by Jin.

If I could cry, I imagine I would be in tears now. Alas, I cannot. Sun begs Jin to leave her behind, but he promises to never leave her again, and the two drown holding hands.

THEY JUST FOUND EACH OTHER AGAIN! How ridiculous.

The remaining Losties (Jack, Kate, Sawyer, Hurley) all make it back to the beach, and when Jack breaks the news that Jin and Sun are gone, they all let their emotions seep. Sad day. The episode ends as Locke senses thatt he sub sank and that everyone isn't dead. He leaves Claire on the dock.

NEXT WEEK: Epic, timeless, awesome episode that I shouldn't know anything about but I do and I can't wait. Allison Janney. Jacob. Man In Black. For one hour.

passion: nice..ness

I have this idea that, if I uphold my end of the moral bargain, eventually those that I interact with will return the favor. If I treat others nicely all the time, eventually they will be compelled to be nice to me and to others. I have this annoying fear of being disliked, so I’m always consciously making sure that doesn’t happen. I like the satisfaction of being seen as a nice guy, in my personal “now” and I would like to be seen that way in my professional future as well. More importantly, though, my parents instilled in me the idea that being moral and ethical is not only pleasing for society, but that it is simply the right way to be.

I notice that I can completely fabricate a story on impulse. I told someone that my dad used to force me to pee in public restrooms when I was younger because I’m slightly pee-shy, which is a half-truth. He does get annoyed when I say I have to go to the restroom and I don’t follow through, but he’s never forced me to pee. It seems like he would if he could, but he hasn’t. I also told a friend that her hair looked just fine when she put it into pigtails. I waited twenty minutes to tell her that she looked ridiculous.

I have a habit of slightly embellishing stories to make them funnier. I like to be liked and I don’t mind embellishing to do so. I don’t think it makes me any less truthful. I also don’t mind lying to my friends about their hair or clothing or general appearance if it will avoid an awkward conversation or spare their feelings. I tell everyone that I will lie to their faces though, so I feel that they can sense when I’m trying to nice. Again, I don’t think it makes me any less truthful.

I do tell the truth when I think it counts. I won’t tell someone what they want to hear if it means putting down someone else. If my friend is mad at her boyfriend for something and the situation is actually her fault, I will tell her so. She would want me to simply agree with her, but I can’t do things like that. I feel that when you defend someone when you don’t have to, it’s good karma. And it’s simply the right thing to do.

If that didn't seem coherent, that's because it was one fluid thought. And those never sound right.

art: coldplay's a rush of blood to the head

Art. According to Dictionary.com, art is the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance. What is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance to me?


Coldplay's sophomore album A Rush Of Blood To The Head was released in 2002 to critical acclaim, winning three Grammy Awards, a Q Award, and a BRIT Award. It is ranked as the 473th greatest album of all time by Rolling Stone, and as the 65th most definitive album of all time by the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

None of this mattered to me. Before 2008, I thought of Coldplay as a depressing emoband. That's what I was always told, anyway; Their only accomplishment was that complex piano song they had a few years prior, but that was all they really did. When I was a freshman in college, in 2008, I downloaded a huge file of music; it was easily accessible and I didn't want to risk not finding it all later. In that huge file, buried deep were three albums that I loaded into iTunes and completely disregarded: Parachutes, A Rush Of Blood To The Head, and X&Y. All Coldplay LP's. A few months later, a song called Daylight came onto my shuffle; the warbling guitar riff peaked my interest but the quirky bass line sold me instantly. I haven't questioned their artistry since.

A Rush opens with a swell of ambiance, followed by a pounding repetition of drums delivered by drummer Will Champion. The majority of albums begin with a song that should prepare the rest of the album, and in that vein, Politik prepared me for greatness. The slow-down of the bridge followed by the blast of energetic sound makes for an epic opener. The album slows down with the first single In My Place, a mid-tempo plea for a lover. The simple guitar melody carries the song amidst strings and cymbals. God Put A Smile Upon Your Face follows with a catchy guitar melody and a pulsating chorus that leaves you so high that that the next track, the easily-recognizable The Scientist, seems to be pulsating as well. The Scientist is depressingly beautiful, a track that I would have anticipated from Coldplay before I knew of them. Singer Chris Martin's vocals are often praised for this ballad. The next track is the track of the album. This track, along with 2008's Viva la Vida, is one of the band's signature songs.



The epic, awesome, award-winning Clocks pretty much floats through you. I don't think there is a way to listen to this song and not smile or tap your feet or hum a little. There honestly isn't a proper way to capture its "-ness" in words, in my opinion. The strings and keys are just...full of "-ness." This is a song that must be sung to the rafters. The aforementioned Daylight follows Clocks with the same sense of urgency. Daylight features a warbling electric guitar by guitarist Jonny Buckland that carries on throughout the song. Bassist Guy Berryman plays a diddly, almost sensual bass part throughout the song that is highlighted during the bridge. The following song, Green Eyes, is a nice guitar piece that slows the album down for a few minutes. I personally skip this song once I stop replaying Daylight in my head. The following song is one that Martin himself has said he wishes the band never recorded.



Warning Sign is my favorite Coldplay record, perhaps because it isn't an obvious tune of theirs. Perhaps that is why the band seldom plays the song live? Warning Sign is a pop/rock song at best, with the basic arsenal of drums, guitars, a piano, and introspective lyrics. It doesn't ask for too much deciphering and it doesn't have a dazzling piano melody or a synthy bass line. It's just a song. But it's basic pop/rock done by Coldplay; it has this quality of being so much more than a filler track. The up-down guitar that plays right after the chorus is so alternative and Martin's droning vocals push the song out of the mainstream and into the world of sappy-indie-kill-me music that just makes me smile. I wish Martin and the band would think twice about the value of this song. They recorded it for a reason.

A Whisper picks the album back up to a pounding number that eases from gentle edgy guitars to a resonating chorus with piano and drums. I find it forgettable like Green Eyes, but it doesn't disappoint. The final two close the album out with themes of sadness, regret, and foreboding. The album is named after track ten, A Rush Of Blood To The Head, which could be described as a tale of blind faith. The track never surpasses its soft level of assurance that what is being said isn't necessarily right. The chorus raises the volume to the point of acknowledgment, but not past that to pressuring the listener. Amsterdam, the final track, seems to be about a love that has ended on one side, and that one side is pushing the other to move on. The first two verses and chorus are strictly accompanied by Martin and the piano. The last verse builds up with the addition of the band and concludes again with the piano. The album ends with Martin's seldom-valued lower register.

If anything in the world is art, A Rush Of Blood To The Head certainly is. To me, music is the best kind of art. It can leap so many bounds to reach people. Coldplay and A Rush Of Blood To The Head shattered my perception of what is good music and has forced me to start anew, and I couldn't be happier to do so.

america™ - trends, sex, desperation

What television show/website/musical performer best reflects American culture?

Initially, I was going to discuss how Bob Dylan has shaped American culture. There were too many television shows to choose from (and too many that I wouldn't bother to watch, no matter how culturally relevant they are), far too many films to choose from, and far too many artists to choose from. Everything that came from this country is essentially reflective of the culture at some point or another. The band Nirvana set out to make music, and in popularizing a genre, also created a fashion craze with plaid and torn jeans. Britney Spears made people feel comfortable enough to bare their stomachs. Bob Dylan not only inspired so many singer-songwriters, but he was socially aware and strove to make changes, two aspects of his fame that have been widespread. I thought him to be the perfect candidate. That was, however, until I saw this:


Christina Aguilera has an amazing voice. She is a great talent. I'm not particularly a fan; I leaned more towards Britney myself. But there is no denying her talent. That's not what I'm going to discuss, though. Let's discuss, instead, how insanely desperate and reused this entire video seems to be.

Aguilera has said numerous times that she is a sexual person and that she doesn't shy away from expressing her sexuality. Cool beans. That would explain her raunchy 2002 video for single "Dirrty." If anything, that video defined Aguilera as the risktaker among her pop star colleagues. But while she is all about the sex, she also has integrity and talent. It makes one wonder why the hell she would make a video that is so quick and bright and glaringly a rehash of several other videos. The white backdrop that the video uses is oddly reminiscent of Lady Gaga's recent epic video for "Bad Romance." As is the fire and the hair and the red lingerie and the sunglasses. Several scenes from Aquilera's video seem to be pulled straight from Madonna's 1989 video for "Express Yourself." Considering that I was born in 1989, I didn't catch the older inspirations, but the more recent ones stuck out like sore thumbs. It was almost comical, considering how Aguilera has publicly denounced the comparisons between her and Lady Gaga.

In addition to the video feeling like a mashup of so many sexually-charged ones before it, it just seemed SO sexually-charged. The making out on the bed was uncomfortable. The product placement was awkward. The ball-and-gag number was, albeit pretty cool, so very forced. Everything about this video seemed forced. Frame 1 was "Look, it's me,"; frame 2 was "Look, it's me again, but sexier"; frame 3 was "Wow, can you believe how incredibly sexual I am?" So many controversial scenes were forced into three minutes and nine seconds and it showed.

How does this relate back to American culture, you ask? You don't need to ask, you probably already know. Our culture is made up of recycling trend thieves, sex-obsessed teenagers and desperate attention-havers. Everyone says fashion trends come back every other decade or so. What they mean to say is that one kid will look at his dad's old pictures and start dressing like he did so that he can set himself apart from everyone else. Someone would see him and copy and it would spiral out of control. The clothes worn today are a blend of the styles from the 70s and the 80s. But it has become its own trend. Christina wears shiny leather unitards and odd-patterned leotards, made popular (once again) by Beyoncé. The song itself is an electropop banger, a take on the genre that has consumed the radio for the past two or three years. The sex appeal is an attempt at attracting controversy and attention, which worked. Much like with "Dirrty" in 2002, Christina has been thrown back onto the mat because she knows how to work the system. She usually does so with sex though, not with capitalizing on the popular trends of the moment, that being electropop, leotards, and abstract imagery.

The example above shows just how many images "Not Myself Tonight" has borrowed, and those are just from two of Madonna's videos. This entry doesn't intend to diminish Christina Aguilera's talent or image. I happen to like the video for what it is. It's a pop video. I don't think we'll be talking about it in ten years like we will be with Lady Gaga's "Bad Romance" or Beyoncé's "Single Ladies." It is, however, timely enough to serve as a representation of American culture as I know it - a recycling wheel. Sort of.

don't ask, don't tell

At times, America baffles me. This country often boasts about its reputation as the "land of the free," but it also rationalizes its blatant discrimination with the idea that the nation has a one-dimensional morality.

Less than sixty years ago, there was a legitimate law called the Racial Integrity Act that, among so much more, outlawed interracial marriage. Could you imagine living in a time when you couldn't marry someone if you were white and they were any other race? Could you imagine that being the norm? Could you imagine not being able to go to school with your best friend because you were white and they were any other race?

Today, to a hopeful majority of people, that kind of discrimination would be blasphemous. Yet, it is still happening. What once used to plague American people who weren't white is now plaguing American people who aren't straight. Non-heterosexuals (which encompasses homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, transgendered) are not equal citizens in this country. There are several classifications that can chock you down in terms of equal rights in this country - you can murder someone. Murderers aren't allowed to just roam the streets once they have been deemed guilty; even after they serve their time, they aren't allowed full freedom. People who break the law are not given their access to the endless possibilities that life has to offer. But they have done something to be less than an average citizen. They have literally done something. What has a bisexual done, other than come to terms with themselves and their sexuality? What has a homosexual done? What have these groups of people done to be denied the same rights as every other law-abiding citizen of the country?

This round of questions obviously applies to the military. It's the freaking military. It's voluntary. If someone wakes up one day and decides they want to serve and protect the country, they shouldn't have to think twice whether or not their sexuality will be an issue. Blacks weren't allowed to serve in the military not insanely long ago. The rationale was that the white soldiers might not all be comfortable serving with people of color. It might be a distraction during battle. Lyndon B. Johnson bravely put an end to that bullshit with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, against heavy resistance from the south. But he did it. And it stuck. Today the rationale for non-heterosexuals soldiers to serve in the closet is that...the heterosexual soldiers might be uncomfortable serving with gay men. It might be a distraction during battle. Men and women serving the country shouldn't have to hide a portion of their identity, especially a portion that isn't harmful or offensive to anyone.

Slavery and racism are black notes on America's lengthy report card. When will the nation look at the past and realize that Don't Ask, Don't Tell and civil unions are black notes as well? Separate but equal is a heinous way to live.

lost - the last recruit

LOST has this magical habit of surpassing itself with each episode. The final season was destined to be memorable and I certainly haven't forgotten a single frame. This episode in particular had a revelation, two reunions, one meeting, and a whole lotta awesomeness.

Let's begin with the revelation. Locke revealed that he had been taking the form of Christian, Jack and Claire's father, for some time now. He said he only did it to show the survivors where water was back in season one...um, hows about no? Christian has appeared multiple times since then, and he even used Christian's memory to turn Claire into a squirrel monkey. Locke is obviously a bad buy up to no good, but his rationalizations for his actions make me wonder if he actually has a point or if he is legitimate crazy, as in evil and in need of a white jacket or a blow to the skull. Who knows?

One of the reunions take place between Jack and Claire, who were finally given an opportunity to talk. Claire seemed overjoyed at the prospect of having a big brother, especially one who was on her side. Jack, likewise, seemed to be excited to see her. Lord knows Jack just loves saving people. That's a big brother trait through and through, so hopefully he does that. Hopefully you wind up saving her once this season, Jack. Because you kind of left her behind three years ago and you blatantly left her behind at the end of this episode. Even I was hurt by that. Jackhole.

While Jack and Claire were reuniting, bonding, and losing faith in the original timeline, the alternative timeline had their first meet. Claire was going to a lawyer when Desmond, fresh off the "I-know-what's-going-on" boat steered her to an stranger's office. This stranger happened to be the dearly-smithereened Ilana who died just last week. Everybody is alive and well in this alternative universe. Claire unexpectedly gets pulled into the reading of her father's will, a father she never even knew. Jack shows up with this son David and the pair are stunned to learn of Claire's paternity. So stunned that they have to leave after maybe two minutes. They left, coincidentally, to go save Locke. What a small city.

I'm trying something here. I was going to simply comment on the flash sideways as if they were an independent series, but I love the actual LOST universe too much to do that. For now. I didn't decide to do it today because Sun and Jin FINALLY reunited after 29 episodes apart. That's three years. A season and a half. They are the couple that needs to stand the test of time for this show to really be about life and love. Jin has to meet his daughter and they have to all reunite as a family.

So hopeful, however. The writers will kill anybody.

NEXT WEEK: Repeat! Yay, what happened to no repeats? In two weeks, there are explosions and decisions are made. It is a must-see. I'm nervous. I'm nervous and scared.



Aside: Terry O'Quinn can make the angriest face . He just pulls it and I'm forced to look over my shoulder to see if he's watching me.

the sea shepherd conservation society

The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (SSCS) is a marine conservation organization that uses "direct action" to protect sealife.That direct action includes intentionally damaging ships that partake in mass fishing, whaling, and netting, among other sealife infractions. The organization was founded by Paul Watson, a former Greenpeace board member who disagreed with the organization's nonviolent approach. His desire to attack resulted in his separation from Greenpeace and his creation of the SSCS.

The SSCS's tactics are extreme, to say the least. Their mission is to "end the destruction of habitat and slaughter of wildlife in the world's oceans in order to conserve and protect ecosystems and species" by using "innovative direct-action tactics to investigate, document, and take action when necessary to expose and confront illegal activities on the high seas." So...they will literally attack your ship to the point of it becoming inoperable. One one hand, their tactics is admirable. They are tenacious in the same vein as the better-known PETA. They have slight credibility over PETA because they aren't harming individuals, but rather individuals' means of harming wildlife; PETA will just throw a bucket of blood on you. It's actually ironic (and it really is ironic, not just a coincidence) that their official title is People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, when they harass and assault individuals. Pot, meet kettle.

This calls into question the ethics of direct action. Direct action is not always unlawful. Some forms of general activity are completely legal and ethically sound. There is nothing improper or wrong about the idea of a protest or a strike. The execution is relative. The SSCS, in my opinion, is not ethically sound in terms of their direct action tactics. It is unethical to harm someone and their property, for any reason. It isn't frowned upon to do so all the time, but I would still say it is unethical. It must certainly be unethical, then, to ram a ship into another ship in salute to the whales and the fishes. I said before that their actions are admirable; it is incredible that people would go through such lengths, albeit dangerous, because of something they believe in. The idea is admirable. The actual execution of said idea is a tad bit unhinged. This...



...is ridiculous. I understand the desire to provoke change, but there should be a line. I'm pretty sure there is a line, and I think the SSCS crosses it.

banking in the usa!

bank2 [bangk]
–noun

1. an institution for receiving, lending, exchanging, and safeguarding money and, in some cases, issuing notes and transacting other financial business.

A bank is a financial intermediary used by the majority of Americans, and the world, to hold and protect their money. Banking in the United States is generally synonymous with retail banking, which refers to institutions that deal with customers directly. Examples of retail banks are Chase, Bank of America, and Wachovia.

Most retail banking institutions offer the same generic services:

• Personal checking and savings accounts
• Business checking accounts
  
• Credit cards
• Certificates of deposit (CDs) - Accounts that accrue interest over an allotted period of time; can be liquid, meaning accessible and able to be withdrawn, or can be fixed, meaning the only way to withdraw is to pay a penalty charge
• Loans (personal, auto, mortgage, home equity, business, student, boat)
• Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs)

Online banking is a feature that most banks have adopted in the new millennium.

The Banking Act of 1933, also known as the Glass-Steagall Act, established a staple of the banking industry that is still prevalent today - the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The FDIC insures the safety of deposits made to banks that are members of the corporation. Since 1980, the FDIC had insured $100,000 per depositor per institution, which encompasses checking and savings accounts. In 2008, the insurance limit was raised to $250,000 per depositor to ease the public's fear of the banking industry crumbling around them.

Banks are incapable of going bankrupt in America; they would be taken over by the government and would eventually be sold to a stronger banking institution. The only downside of bank failure is the incapability of choosing where your account will be held next. Many people hold accounts at different banks to maximize on the insurance capabilities; each depositor is insured for up to $250,000 at each individual bank, meaning you can easily have a million dollars federally insured if spread across four different banks. Every banking institution is not FDIC-insured, though.

review: MASH (1970)

I sat down with with my grilled cheese sandwich and my Rockstar energy drink to finally watch MASH. I was already intrigued before it even began because the subsequent television show is so prestigious and well-renowned. I was fully prepared to laugh hysterically.

I think I laughed maybe three or four times. I laughed when Hawkeye (Donald Sutherland) and Duke (Tom Skerritt) arrived at 4077th surgical hospital. The overlapping introductions were amusing. I laughed when Major Houlihan was arriving and her welcome wagon was facing the opposite direction. I laughed when Trapper (Elliott Gould) punched Burns (Robert Duvall) in the face, mainly because I knew that I recognized Trapper but I couldn't place him for the life of me. When he punched Burns he let out a yelp and started talking and his high voice clashed with his appearance and it was hysterical. Burns and Houlihan having their sex broadcast throughout the hospital was so awful and so great. The long take after they realized what was happening was great cinematography.

The entire "Suicide is painless" scenario was my favorite part of the movie. Painless Pole's (John Schuck) dry plea for ideas on how to kill himself was perfect. The staff's vibrant ideas made it all the more enjoyable. And then the serenade combined with his suicide attempt was entertaining, mainly because of how long it lasted. The fact that you got to see how far their joke carried on make it funny.

Other than those few instances though, I didn't follow MASH that well. I can appreciate that it is a comedy. I can appreciate the cultural relevance of it all. I didn't laugh as much as I thought I would have but I think that if I watched it again, I would be able to pick up on the more subtle bits of humor.

So, MASH: B+. Will watch again.

history of association football...or soccer

Association football is known by a few different names: football and soccer. Perhaps there are just two names for it. Association football is the world's most popular sport; as of 2000, over 240 million people play association football across over 200 countries.

The origins of football, in terms of kicking a ball around a field, span back as far as 3000 years ago. The Ancient Greeks and the Romans used football for military training. The Chinese, Japanese, Italians, Persians and Vikings also engaged in leisure reminiscent of modern day football.

The game was also played in England, in the British Isles,. Public schools across the country allowed their students to engage in different forms of play; some schools favored a no-hands approach, which would later become association football; other schools allowed their players to run with the ball and even tackle other players, which would be known as rugby football.Both forms of play were referred to as football though, as no officials rules were in place. In 1848, the schools began attempts to reach a consensus on what the official rules of the game would be. In 1863, the two were officially distinguished when the Football Association was formed. The Football Association adopted rules from Cambridge University.

The first timed match of 90 minutes was played in 1866 between London and Sheffield.

The first international match was held in 1872 between England and Scotland. Great Britain began holding matches regularly, even before the appeal of association football could reach the rest of Europe.

Two Scottish players, John Love and Fergus Suter, are believed to have been the first footballers to receive some kind of fiscal recognition for their talent. This occurred sometime around 1885.



source, source, source,

editorial cartoons

Mike Keefe, The Denver Post

Keefe shows what some consider to be the only two outcomes to joining a gang. And it is interesting that the van is going full speed towards either death or prison - he's implying that these kinds of people know exactly what they are getting into and that they can see the end of the road coming up fast. They just don't care. Yay for social commentary.

Walt Handelsman, Newsday

This cartoon is referencing the recent scandal involving (I think, because I didn't really follow the story) Republican officials using party funds to hire strippers or prostitutes. I think that was the story that broke a week or two ago. I honestly don't want to look because I'll be distracted for at least an hour. This cartoon tackles two social issues, though. Some politicians do things that completely counteract their political agenda. As well, the media can take harmless statements and twist them out of context. And then an innocent elephant loses his job. Tough break.

Jeff Stahler, The Columbus Dispatch

This cartoon is self-explanatory. Times are so hard that financial advisers are taking jobs away from teenagers. I have a friend who got a job as an Easter bunny at the mall. She didn't need to, but she did anyway; she also has a college degree. If you happen to read this, said friend, I love you.

Ed Stein, Rocky Mountain News

Well, duh. Of course marriage equality would ruin every other marriage in the nation. Gay men and women getting married is practically like a man being forced to divorce his wife and marry another man. And we can't let that happen, America. We can't. That, and that alone, is what will damage the sanctity of marriage. For shame.

I'd like to commend Ed Stein for drawing this.

Ted Rall, The Los Angeles Times

This comic is poking fun at the parents who have "extreme" ideas on how to protect their children. Like the comic about the touchy republican, this comic shows how people can easily manipulate a situation. The kids in the school district got the book banned, not the parents, but this is something that parents have been known to do in our society. The policy probably passed because a good portion of parents would be horrified to learn that their children could pop open a dictionary and learn what 'oral sex' meant. I wonder what they would do when they realized that 'shit' and 'bitch' are in the dictionary too.

Joe Heller, The Green Bay Press-Gazette

Here's the necessary economy cartoon. It's sad, really; so many people are involuntarily having to give things up everyday. Hopefully someone saw this and laughed about their misfortune.

stereotypes of political parties

When it comes to political parties in America, the two largest parties are most often discussed: the republican party and the democratic party. Both parties have thousands of accomplishments and hundreds of downfalls, but with these accolades comes a negative aspect - stereotypes. The republican party and the democratic party can easily be summed up by a list of stereotypes used to describe the kinds of people that flock to each party. Of course, any stereotype is a subjective opinion, but this post isn't aimed at throwing random stamps on the individual parties. Rather, I just gathered a few stereotypes that everyday people attribute to the parties. Leave a comment and add on any that may be left out.

- Old and white
- Wealthy
- Conservative
- Close-minded
- Southern
- Adherent to family values
- Money-hungry
- Selfishly greedy
- Gun-toting
- Young and misinformed
- Poor and uneducated
- Pro-abortion
- In favor of handouts
- Liberal
- Northern
- Tree huggers



Food for thought: How much of perception is reality?

tyranny

Main Entry: tyr·an·ny
Pronunciation: \ˈtir-ə-nē\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English tyrannie, from Middle French, from Medieval Latin tyrannia, from Latin tyrannus tyrant
Date: 14th century

1 : oppressive power ; especially : oppressive power exerted by government
2 a : a government in which absolute power is vested in a single ruler; especially : one characteristic of an ancient Greek city-state b : the office, authority, and administration of a tyrant

A tyrant is a leader who exercises their power against public interest. A tyrant may take control of a city or state by his or her own means, or a tyrant may cater to a specific oligarchy to gain control. From a factual standpoint, tyranny is absolute power for a single individual. From an opinion standpoint, tyranny is an unethical abuse of absolute power. According to writer Jona Lendering, economies usually benefited under rule of a tyranny, which would vindicate a ruler's absolute power.


World's 10 Most Notorious Tyrants
10. Caligula: Roman Emperor (37-41)
9. Genghis Khan: Ruler of the Mongol Empire (1206-1227)
8. Henry VIII: King of England (1509-1547)
7. Ivan IV: Czar of Russia from (1533-1584)
6. Maximilien Robespierre: Ruler of France (1793-1794)
5. Joseph Stalin: Leader of the Soviet Union (1922-1953)
4. Adolf Hitler: Führer of Germany (1933-1945)
3. Augusto Pinochet: President of Chile (1973-1990)
2. Pol Pot: Ruler of Cambodia (1975-1979)
1. Kim Jong-il: Supreme Leader of North Korea (1991-Present)
source

source, source, source

geography of tourism

Tourism geography is the study of travel and tourism, as an industry and as a social and cultural activity.

It focuses on the connection of the "inner" tourist experience to the "outer" geographic destination. Tourism geography also focuses on the poignant natural and cultural elements that make up the geographic destination.

In simpler terms, tourism geography is the study of...travel and tourism, and how the places that people go are determined by the features of that place, whether they be artificial or natural. The experience of visiting a foreign location as a tourist is a sociological aspect of tourism geography. The way that tourism impacts these places is the geographical aspect. More hotels may have to be built, resulting in a disruption of the land, but it would bring in more jobs, which would boost an economy. The travel industry as a whole is a boost for any country.

Here, a random diagram that probably doesn't belong, but it looked really cool.

And here, a video that sort of explains the concept of tourism geography, albeit it with terminology that I don't understand:



source one, source two, source three

lost - lighthouse

In the season four episode "Something Nice Back Home," the survivors lost track of one of their most innocent members. Claire Littleton got up in the middle of the night and disappeared. She left her two-month old Aaron behind and was only seen again by Locke in Jacob's cabin, which he kept to himself. This threw me for a loop. The episode prior to that, Claire's cabin at the Barracks was blown apart by a missile, and she survived. I was thoroughly convinced that, even though she walked around for two more days and carried her son and held conversations, she was somehow dead, if not dying.

Alas, Claire Littleton returned to LOST two weeks ago when she saved Jin from two edgy Others. She shot one in cold blood and took the other hostage. Claire is obviously a changed woman. Her hair is a ratty mess and her eyes aren't all there. She tells Jin, while dressing his wounds (another thing Claire doesn't do) that she has been on the island for three years. She's been there since they left. However, she has a friend. Someone has been telling Claire that Aaron is still on the island, and that the Others have been holding him for three years. She was shot once trying to get him back, and she was tortured like Sayid.

Claire lifelessly kills her captured Other when he refused to tell her where her son is. She kills him even after Jin confesses that Kate took him off the island and raised him as her own. When she presses Jin for more information, he tells her that he lied, upon which Claire says that she would kill Kate if she actually took Aaron and raised him. Well...yeah. After this awkward exchange of lies and unwanted truths, Claire's friend finally arrives - it's Locke. Jin is confused, just as Locke is slightly confused to see him there, but Claire is happy that he has joined them. This was indeed a collective "what-the-hell" moment.

In the alternative reality, another "what-the-hell" moment ensues when Jack goes to school in his opening scene to pick up his son- the son he never really had. This is the first glaring difference in these other realities. If Jack had a son before, it certainly was never revealed. Jack's son, David, has an iffy relationship with his father, much like Jack did with Christian. It is revealed that, whoever David's mother is, she and Jack are divorced and he lives with her primarily. She is out of town, so Jack has him for a while. Jack's mother asks him to go through his father's thing with her, so he leaves David alone with the promise to return with food and pizza.

At his mother's house, Margo inquires about a Claire Littleton that Christian has included in his will. Both she and Jack have no idea who the girl could be. Jack returns home to find that David has gone and is nowhere to be found. After a typical "too-involved" Jack investigation, he discovers that David has an audition for a performing arts school. He goes and watches his audition, unbeknonwst by David. They have a heart to heart afterwards and Jack attempts to preemptively combat the problems his father made with him.

Honestly, if this were another show, it would be just as amazing. A show about a group of people who were on the same plane and keep running into each other for unknown reasons. I approve. I also approve of next week's promo. Fire and creepy cuts and a new Sayid. Tempted!

defense of marriage act

Public Law 104-199
104th Congress

An Act

To define and protect the institution of marriage.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Defense of Marriage Act''.

SEC. 2. POWERS RESERVED TO THE STATES.

(a) In General.--Chapter 115 of title 28, United States Code, is
amended by adding after section 1738B the following:

``Sec. 1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect
thereof

``No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian
tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or
judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe
respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is
treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory,
possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such
relationship.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of
chapter 115 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by inserting
after the item relating to section 1738B the following new item:

``1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect
thereof.''.

SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE.

(a) In General.--Chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 7. Definition of `marriage' and `spouse'

``In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any
ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative
bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word `marriage' means
only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife,
and the word `spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is
a husband or a wife.''.

(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of
chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is amended by inserting after
the item relating to section 6 the following new item:

``7. Definition of `marriage' and `spouse'.''.

Approved September 21, 1996.

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 104-664 (Comm. on the Judiciary).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 142 (1996):
July 11, 12, considered and passed House.
Sept. 10, considered and passed Senate.

source

critical writing

Some elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools utlize a writing technique designed to make writing essays easier. This technique is called the Two-Chunk Paragraph. The Two-Chunk Paragraph consists of color-coded sentences that make it easier for developing students to back up their opinions with facts, and to clearly identify what their thesis is.

Two-chunk paragraphs actually have four paragraphs - the first an introductory paragraph, the following two containing an answer or opinion with supporting fact, and the last a concluding paragraph.

Paragraph One:
Thesis statement
Transition statement
Lead

Paragraphs Two & Three:
Topic sentence
Concrete Detail
Commentary
Commentary
Concrete detail
Commentary
Commentary
Concluding sentence

Paragraph Four:
Restated thesis statement
Reparaphrasing of thesis statement
Concluding statement

One-chunk paragraphs are the same, with only one middle paragraph.

dr. horrible's sing-along blog

The well-publicized Writers' Strike of 2007 and 2008 was both a gift and a curse to the television and film industry.

Curse: Every scripted show halted production for four months, resulting in the subjective boost in reality programming.

Gift: Conan O'Brien delivered the most entertaining hours of late night ever. And he grew a beard.

Curse: Thousands of makeup artists and sound technicians and other odd job workers were forced into temporary unemployment.

Gift: Joss Whedon defied the strike and wrote a musical, and he made Neil Patrick Harris the lead.

Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog was born.

Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog is a short musical film starring Neil Patrick Harris and Nathan Fillion. Dr. Horrible, played by Harris, is an aspiring villian with a soft spot for laundry and his burgeoning love interest, Penny. His nemesis is the classic superhero Captain Hammer, played by Fillion.


For such an inexpensive and hasty production, Dr. Horrible is a gem. Joss Whedon has a knack for throwing a thick layer of realism and wit onto tragic sagas, as seen in the dearly-departed Buffy the Vampire Slayer and the gone-too-soon Dollhouse. He knows how to make you laugh. Dr. Horrible is no exception. The story was executed so naturally that it felt like the top-tier finale of a series. Everything came to a head and a major character was accidentally killed in the crossfire. As someone who watched Buffy from the beginning to the end, I found myself completely dumbfounded at Penny's death. It was right up Whedon's alley but I was so honed in that I didn't see it coming.

The music was catchy. I didn't expect anything more than that, so I was pleasantly pleased. Harris delivered when it came to vocals, though Penny, played by the underrated Felicia Day, seemed particularly flat throughout.

What impressed me the most about Dr. Horrible was its tenacity. It was rightfully campy and made no apologies. And it was original. The Writers' Strike gave the writers who didn't boycott the pen the chance to create whatever the hell they wanted with no corporate input or executive shadow. That was the Strike's biggest gift...the gift of freedom.

lost - what kate does

Kate episode's often get a bad rep. Her character in general usually gets a bad rep. She was the strongest female character on the show until Ana Lucia came along, but Ana Lucia was shot for being too strong. Juliet came along and she was a definite match for Kate. She competed with her leading men and took one of them for three years. And then she died. Ilana could be considered strong. She seems to have a staunch determination to get her job done, but she isn't her own leader. She's following someone. Sun has certainly shaped up into a strong, independent, hands-on woman ever since she left the island. Her character's turning point, in my opinion, came when she watched the freighter explode with Jin on the deck. Her screaming alone was worthy of an Emmy, nevermind her exceptional acting. I got goosebumps.

Despite that fluffery, I think Kate gets the bad rep because she is all about the boys - Jack and Sawyer. Kate started out as a screamer in the Pilot, calling for Jack's name when the Monster's iconic cranking was first heard. Who would have taken her to be a badass fugitive that killed her own father? Her character was on par with the men. It's hard enough writing a strong female lead when she's among men and it's even harder to keep her strong. Kate went from toting guns to fawning over Jack's obsessive need to reason with science and Sawyer's mantra to forgo reason. Her overarcing story was about the two of them for the first four seasons, and then she took Aaron from the island and began to raise him as her own. There was hope.

But she and Jack were engaged to be married and they were raising Aaron together. Girl just needs a man. That's why it is so tantalizing to watch the flashsideways and see season one Kate reborn, taking charge and stealing cars and kidnapping pregnant women. She and Claire form an immediate bond once more, something that I personally missed when Claire went missing in season four.

That's why I can't wait until next week to learn exactly why Claire hopped the bus to Crazy Ville. Her hair looks a mess.

fast food industry

This will be my shortest attempt at an editorial, because I don't have a relevant opinion on the fast food industry. I love Burger King. Love Wendy's. LOVE Checkers. Love Zaxby's. I used to like McDonald's until I saw Supersize Me, but I'll eat their french fries for the rest of my life. And according to this Yahoo! Health and Men's Health collaboration, I make a worthy conscious choice in fattening myself up with McDonald's french fries instead of Chili's Texas Cheese Fries...which I had last Thursday.

The problem with the fast food industry, if it can be called a problem, is that it is so accessible. There are options at every corner, even in the smallest of towns, and everything is so cheap. And tasty! America has grown used to this process. People are too busy to cook, so they eat out. Elementary schools' idea of a treat for kids is a large platter of chicken nuggets and barbeque sauce. Once they've had Chick-fil-A, they don't want a pita. And once they've been graced with the savory goodness of waffle fries and polynesian sauce, they will throw a tantrum when they sit down for dinner and see peas and broccoli. They are conditioned to go for the all-American grease bucket of Hardy's and the triple-quarter-angled pounder thing.

That is a problem.

But I'm still going to Zaxby's tonight.