(In response to “Xavier’s”comment: Just becuase you’re not collecting money doesn’t mean your not getting paid or being rewarded.  The fact that you live off your old savings and OTHER peoples work still qualifies you to be categorized as above …. actually no, unless your emulating the rat CEO’s that everyone dislikes vs an honest CEO that people rarely hear about…then i’d say…good work! It seems we have a solipsism here peoples! I wonder what will happen when France becomes such a poor nation that people will no longer have the funds to be taxed into egalitarianism.  Wait, those doing the taxing – are they equals? Or are they the power structure? Crap, ah let’s just jump a band wagon – bad capitalists! *laughs*)

How grand! He teaches people how to lay down in streets, dress up like clowns and run into nuclear sub pens, dress up like a zombie, wave signs around, and be a general nuisance.  Fantastic and he is profiting off this too? He is a professional toddler? Wonderful.  Basically he mooches of a rich nations resources and workers and calls it ‘Revolution’. Yet, people embrace his mentality – the mentality that often looks just like an excuse for laziness.

Who am I to judge? Let me tell you.

I was a member of the Order of Capuchin Franciscans.  I worked with the poor and i worked with the dying and you know what? They would much rather not be poor and not be dying.  Poverty is not a goal it’s not a way of life – it is a problem. It is a state of being that causes a lot of stress to people (in any political/economic system).  It has horrific health consequences, social consequences, and psychological strain that is often supplanted with the reaching out for help (like religions) in one hand and crime (the desire to free oneself) in the other hand.  It leads often to resentment, frustration, and all forms of coping mechanisms.  When governments control the masses it uses poverty as a weapon (disarming of citizens, control over their finances, the leaving citizens no alternative to which they can turn for help).   All religions have an element in them that asks you to take care of the down trodden and the poor.  Why? Becuase poverity is so awesome? No, becuase poverty is a problem.  A problem that ‘the church’ attempts to address in it’s hackeneyed ways.

So why do these people assault capitalism? They don’t – they assault wealth.  They believe that there is a class struggle going on that the weathly are attempting to keep down the poor in order to live off the sweat of these people and profit, unduly, from their labor.  They are looked at as slave owners and slave creators.  It is quite romanitc especially when one comes from a middle class background or a bankers family.  Romantic to look at yourself as the poor mans hero.  But, often enough what comes out is not heorism but stupidty.

There is one point that these protesters have – that there are people who ARE taking advantage of others unduly.  That is not capitalism and capitalism does not condone that.  That is called MONOPOLY that is called TYRANNY that is called COMMUNISM.  The system they think will save them is the one that scans the horizon and pounds down anyone who rises above the masses – it assaults the entrepreneur, the artist, the philosopher, the poet, the general, the leader.  But who does the pounding? THE LEADERS! THE GOVERNMENTAL INSTITUTIONS.  This communism that people so badly want or this socialism they view as heroic is anti-capitalist not because it’s better but because it is the very EVIL the capitalism hates: MONOPOLY OF POWER.  Yes, business people can desire to be a monopoly and some HAVE succeeded but that is the roll of government to break up monopolies and encourage competition.  Competition and freedom of markets is at the heart of Capitalism.  The argument that I hear so often is that Communism and Socialism haven’t had a fair chance.  Yeah? EITHER HAS CAPITALISM? You think we, in the US, live in a freely Capitalist society? Then explain the taxation a million times over, explain the absurd regulation, explain cap and trade, explain progressive taxation, explain death tax, explain Sarbanes-Oxley, explain the regulation that actually help companies monopolize industry rather than create competition? Explain Governments influencing the private sector to do that which, in the long run, is destructive.  Explain the enormous push for larger and ever pervasive government.  You want true capitalism? Then I’m not sure where to look.  You want to see Capitalism being strained and boxed in – look right here.  But, there is the amazing part – even with all the weight being put on capitalism – the US is an economic powerhouse (despite the medias objections and the objections of George Soros).  The US built its power in a short time on the back of those who put their wealth and health on the line to find what is called ‘The American Dream”.  The ability to free oneself of debt, slavery, poverty, and oppressive dictators.  The ability to own a piece of land work hard AND be rewarded for the work.  Give it time, and this will vanish into what much of the world is: Overly taxed and overly subsidized and overly reliant on ‘governmental’ power.

If people own the money then people own the charity. If governments own the money then THEY own the charity and if they own the charity you know who they give it to – not those in need – but those who support them.  Welcome to hell people.

You want to destroy capitalism in favor of some other absurdity? Then go on your way and help governments create monopolies, levy huge taxes against the population and encourage your governments to print money freely.  Like it has been said, “The Printing Press is the machine gun in the back of Capitalism”.  The printing press referred to is that which prints money. Who holds that machine gun? Governments.

Bravo Xavier – keep on keeping on. When you’re done being mad at daddy for being successful then please join the rest of humanity and live your life – not your cause.

So, the Group of 20 summit is nearing and the media is feverishly covering the ‘anti-capitalist’ and ‘anti-globalization’ crowd raising an uproar.  In these recent weeks a popular slogan has been the noting of ‘Populist Anger’.  Hmmm, populist anger.

Let’s see what the definition of Populist is: (M-W.com)

2. a believer in the rights, virtues, and wisdom of the common people.  (note: I use the second definition in order to avoid the specific concept of populism pertaining to the 1800s rights movement)

Ok, so we are left with one ambiguous word ‘common’ or one ambiguous phrase ‘common people’.  Let’s use the same dictionary and see what the generally accepted definition is:

In the 4b definition of Common we have this: “characterized by a lack of privilege or special status <common people>.”  I think this will suffice.

If we are to use these terms and the general implication of ‘populist anger’ we come up with the concept that those who are characterized by a lack of privilege or special status are angry then we come to the question of what is this special status? Well, in the current economic situation the status would be that of the rich and more specific the ‘banker’.

What I find frustrating about this whole debacle is the grandiose ambiguity in the application of terms.  Populist Anger is applied to anger over AIG bonuses or to anger over banker’s salaries or applied ‘the general population’ of people who might be frustrated and an encompassing term like ‘Economy’.   It seems that the media is conveniently applying ‘Populist Anger’ to any opposition party.  This isn’t the only phrase they use – they use ‘anti-capitalist’ quite a bit to.  AS I was reading the Financial Times I asked myself who are these ‘anti-capitalists’ and luckily enough came across and article that briefly listed who it believed comprises this group:

In the World News section of the FT dating Mar, 28 2009 “London and Strasbourg brace for protests” {kindle version} we have a group of protestors:

“Meanwhile about 40,000 members of left-wing political parties, trade unions, and campaign groups are expected to take to the streets of Berlin and Frankfurt this weekend in one of the biggest shows of organized discontent in Germany since the recession began.” (Please note that this is not a definition of Anti-capitalist this is a cross section of a group of people who are protesting in an article that speaks of ‘anti-capitalists’ ‘anti-globalization’ ‘environmentalists’ and ‘anarchists’ and note that none of this titles necessarily apply toward the protesting group)

If we are to assume these people are considered anti-capitalist we have to ask ourselves – why?

Hmmm, let’s take a quick look-see.  Left-wing political parties – now that is a shock. Are you telling me those who are generally associated with socialists, communists, and other giant government organizations would be opposed to a group of people who are pro-free market and pro-private wealth? This is no big surprise.  Trade unions: of course trade unions would be there they are the epitome of anti-capitalist in the sense they that attempt to regulate the working environment on behalf of the worker (theoretically speaking) rather than the owner.  Campaign groups – I am not sure who this is as a result anything I say about it is simply speculation. Anarchists: Whoa they are opposed to EVERYTHING except their own jurisdiction and rule – so they should be considered why? Environmentalists: ok ok enough.  I think you all get the picture.

The point slowly being created here is: these groups and the angry peoples considered the ‘common person’? How many people would ascribe to being an anarchist other than the run of the mill angst filled teen? Trade Unions are such a large political group – here in America at least – that they are considered the common person? I guess one could say that ‘common people’ work in unions but I would find that rather offensive.

So, who are these Populists? I haven’t a clue – but I sure do find it funny that the media has latched on to this notion.
For example – it seems to be selective in its use: You have people having Tea-Parties and are these considered the ‘common person’ and do they fall under the slogan ‘Populist Anger’? I’d like to see that. But, if one does a quick search it seems that these Tea Parties protesting taxation are not Populist – they are angry – but they are generally considered to be conservative/libertarian.

In my opinion it seems populist anger is a very specific concept pointing to a very specific group – Wall Street.  It’s another camouflage for the ‘main street vs. wall street’ battle that is being arranged by the media.  Problem is it seems that main street is sick of the government to (look at the tea party protests and where these people come from).  The very real presence of another administration that is ready to spend out the kazoo (albeit through the levy of taxes) is not going to do the ‘common people’ any good.  IF we are to say the Obama inherited a huge deficit through the zealous spending of a military budget then who is going to inherit the even larger deficit through overzealous taxation and government control? No one is going to win this.  There is no talk of fiscal responsibility only of spending spending and bailing out.  Spend money to start this program and that program or for this military equipment or that or the raising of taxes for this purpose or on these people and for giving credits to those people and not these people.  The government is doing what any good sophist does:

Jump from one lily pad to the other and back again.

When we focus on a complaint they jump to another issue and when we focus on that issue they jump back.  All the while passing legislation in OUR AMERICAN name even if we AMERICAN people don’t benefit from it or support it.  Now, we ARE NOT a direct democracy and in fact we are a Republic who elects representatives.  As a result if we don’t start pressuring the right people (OUR LOCAL REPRESENTATIVES) we are not going to have any support in the House or the Senate.  We focus too much on the president when the president (for now) needs the support of the Congress – shouldn’t we have people in there the support OUR ideals? Until executive decisions become the Kingly Law of the land and until the Judicial branch completely fails at safeguarding our constitutionals RIGHTS we must elect the right local officials in order to get the pressure sent down the right channels and finally UP to the president.  We need to be much more involved in politics as a citizenry and not allow our only concepts of politics to be voiced at a TV or on the day of elections.  We need to be vigilant and we need to write, phone, and complain to our local politicians.  Or not elect them ever again.

Good Luck America.

Well the biggest drop that seems unable to place blame is what we in the US call our ‘gubmint’.  Ironically the demotivator about Government is quite apt these days.

Why on earth would I be blaming the Government for these current economic troubles that are CLEARLY to be blamed on Capitalism (that’s sarcasm for the un-initiated).

First, let’s ask ourselves the essential questions that seems to elude people: How on earth did we get here? We could give the common answer and babble ‘Capitalism!! Capitalism – it’s inheriently flawed” As we wear nike, abercrombie, chow down on doritos, and slurp a coke.  Yes, walking contradictions we are – I know.  Well, that’s a great answer when you are trying to actually avoid any culpability, as most organizations are; as we of the world try to place blame rather than focusing on what is important – salvaging of the financial institutions and correcting policy run amok.

Let’s start with Community Reinvestment Act (CRA)

“

According to a 2000 United States Department of the Treasury study of lending trends in 305 U.S. cities between 1993 and 1998, $467 billion in mortgage credit flowed from CRA-covered lenders to low- and medium-income borrowers and areas. In that period, the total number of loans to poorer Americans by CRA-eligible institutions rose by 39% while loans to wealthier individuals by CRA-covered institutions rose by 17%. The share of total US lending to low and medium income borrowers rose from 25% in 1993 to 28% in 1998 as a consequence. ^[28]

In October 1997, First Union Capital Markets and Bear, Stearns & Co launched the first publicly available securitization of Community Reinvestment Act loans, issuing $384.6 million of such securities. The securities were guaranteed by Freddie Mac and had an implied “AAA” rating.^[29][22] The public offering was several times oversubscribed, predominantly by money managers and insurance companies who were not buying them for CRA credit.^{[30] (I added bold for emphasis).}

AND

Although not part of the CRA, in order to achieve similar aims the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 required Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two government sponsored enterprises that purchase and securitize mortgages, to devote a percentage of their lending to support affordable housing. Often times felt to be the beginnings of the mortgage lending crisis ^{[9] (once again bold is my emphasis)}

“

Often when mentioned I receive one of two responses – 1) Oh, Blame it on Clinton! 2) So what.

Answer 1): The implication is that I am a conservative.  Wrong – I don’t care who it is but it started in 1977 with changes instituted under Clinton and Bush Jr.

Answer 2): It’s for your own edification and to help you avoid looking like an idiotic mouthpiece.

Moving on:

The intent of this act is quite noble and in fact quite understandable.  It was a government designed effort to help lower income citizens to participate in the free flow of lending capital in order to invest in housing and other assets which help people move from lower income to higher income.  A cause that is in fact – noble.  The nobility of this act is not in question, it’s the application.  When we LEND money to people they are incurring debt.  Debt that grows if nothing is paid toward the principle or interest.  Now, people who are not major wage earners are given loans not only do they have to deal with say – the day to day – they now have to deal with bank originated debt (goodbye credit score).  Does money make people move from lower income classes to middle income to higher income? Of COURES!!! However, debt forces everyone down a notch and not up.  So, what is the problem here? The problem is that money is not growing off tree’s its being taken out of someone’s pockets and put in another person’s pockets with a string attached this string is called “THIS ISNT YOURS YOU WILL HAVE TO PAY THIS PLUS THE PREMIUM ON IT (interest) FOR ME LEDNING IT TO YOU” in other words debt.  It was not earned money but debt that was given.  So now people have easy access to debt, they take their debt and the go buy a house.  Sounds reasonable right?  So, many times, people move up a notch on the socio-economic scale NOT by an increase in income but by….you said it…..an increase in debt.  Sure, this is a wonderful recipe for disaster, but since the thoughts were noble all will work out.  Ever heard “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”? I guess not.

Anyway, lower income people move to middle income places or into middle income size houses usually without the added benefit if middle income size paychecks and what happens? Well, if the spending habits increase so does the debt.  Are costs of a large house smaller than a small house? Definitely not on average.

Well, here we go, mortgages started to default and the rest is history.  Except there is more to the story than that.

So, let’s get some basics down.

Bank – an establishment for the custody, loan, exchange, or issue of money, for the extension of credit, and for facilitating the transfer of funds. (Thank you M-W.com)

Ok, so the bank is 1)  given or acquires money or other assets.  Yaaay here we are a little bank with assets.  2) We give people money contractually and they promise to give it back plus interest lest we are forced to take their property and sell it as collateral.  3) Exchange! DUH! 4) Extension of credit – basically – we have determined you are good for X amount of money and will pay it back on time – if not we monetarily penalize you. 5) Transfers! DUH!

Simply thinking here, what advantage does a bank have to lend all sorts of loans (including micro loans or subprime loans) to people – including people who were considered financially unreliable.  On face value, banks make a profit when the loan transaction is successfully completed.  Does it profit a bank to have huge sums of money loaned out to all sorts of people for all sorts of reason? Not really.  But in the mean time if that’s the way it is going to be let’s start including fees everywhere.  But, that’s a different story.  Ok – here is what I am driving at.  Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack (FMFM) are GRE (GOVERNMENT RUN ENTERPRISES) that specialized in the purchasing of mortgages!! Why? So that banking institutions could have consistently available funds! Yaay! Not only can they LOAN it out – they don’t have to worry about it ever leaving!  Great idea! Sure, the intent was probably increase liquidity and credit but this couldn’t have been an idea that was just slipped right under peoples financial radars could it?  SO what did FMFM do? Well they took those nifty mortgages which they bought up and bundled them all sweetly into derivative investments and said these wonderful things are backed up by Mortgages!!! They are backed up by…..debt.  No no, I’m sorry Mortgages are not considered debt THEMSELVES but they sure as hell are evidence a debt has been made.  Yeah – the going idea was that, if trouble hit, we could rip those properties out of the earth and sell em like some commodity to cover the defaults that could happen that could cover the drop in share price of FMFM that could happen IF the real estate market faltered.  It can falter? No no no it’s only a local phenomenon.  HA!

Anyway, the brilliant gubmint basically paved the way for banks to, i unno, loan loan loan, without their reserves taking a major hit.  Then there was pressure from the government to increase loans to more higher-risk families and – wait the government does something stupidly? Well the whole history is easily available on the internet.  The point here is this:

To blame this on capitalism is like blaming an air crash on the mountain.  Hmmm, sure if the mountain wasn’t there the plane wouldn’t have crashed.  Well, what happens with crony capitalism is that the gov’t pressures (i.e steers) industries (due to whatever demand is on the political plate) to adopt ideas or strategies that they normally wouldn’t adopt – usually with the implicit guarantee that the gov’t won’t let them fail. Much like what is happening today.  As a result – what is allowed is either a monopoly or a company who has no concept or need for risk aversion because no matter what happens – the tax payers will bail them out – cuz the gubmint said so.

We DONT have capitalism freely here people!!!!! IF it were it would probably look like a government who intervenes and regulates only to maintain competition, levy taxes (debatable), raise militaries, and enforce, create, and revise the law. In a perfect world what would the government do? Well it wouldn’t get involved in the first place unless competition was being destroyed, discrimination was evident, and the playing field was being over weighted by monstrous corporations.  Basically it ensures businesses can grow and die with dignity.  Thus, these businesses that are TOO LARGE TO FAIL – become a fabrication.  But, that is only my opinion.  What do i know.

Don’t worry I know it generally takes two to tango or one with the other tied to them – thus my critique of those people who are often the faces of capitalism are on its way – on one of my next two blogs.

Don’t be the escape goat for our elected officials screw ups. Be angry at the right people America!

Yes, but these are not my words. If they were, they would have Oreo crumbs and chocolate spittle, but since they don’t, they aren’t mine. They are the words and definitely a sentiment I have heard before and now am hearing with fanatical fervor.

What do I say? “Hands off my cookies! Damn it.”

So, the other day there I was sitting on B&N minding my own business, reading random books and essay and dreaming of the sweet creamy filling that inhabits the paradise between two cookie layers and this is what happened:

“Mmmmmm Oreo cookies….. Jesus is a socialist!”

What? What? What? Whose thoughts were those? So, I snap back to ‘reality’ and I find myself confronted with a neighboring table with people blabbing away about politics.

Person 1 “It’s not exactly redistribution of wealth that bothers me it is the lack of control of where my money goes.” {Cookie commentary: And you control where it goes with the current tax system – the usual cop out answer of someone who doesn’t want to get involved}

Person 2: “So what? The rich are sitting all high and might on their thrones they can do no good with all that cash! Give it to those in need.” {Cookie commentary: Fallacious to paint with a broad-stroke all the rich as if they do no good with their money. Rich is an ambiguous word. Fallacious to believe putting cash in other pockets will lead to a healthier state of being. While food and shelter are necessary for those without, handing out money without education is a pandering recipe for disaster….ask Rome.}

Person 3: “What? Can you really say that? I mean this is not about taxation this is about ideology. Those proponents of socialism want power. They want power by destroying land rights, inheritance rights; they believe it’s a struggle against old money. If they, the gov’t officials, are in power then they are the new ‘rich’. You think it will be better to be socialist and have the ‘high’ pounded down at the expense of lifting others?”
{Cookie commentary: Hmmmmm. Rather logical argument. The issue at hand then usually becomes a battle of another question: Should we help those ‘lower’ than us and do the ‘high’ deserve it??”

Person 2: “Look. Jesus was a socialist. He wants us to share our property with those in need. Look at the book of acts, the eye of a needle quote, and such…” {Cookie commentary: HO HO HO! Wow, I have a lot to say about this which will undoubtedly tick so many Oreo lovers and haters alike. SO, I shall hold it for now.}

Person 1 looks shocked and uncomfortable.

Person 3: “What? What does this have to do with Jesus?”

Person 1: “I am just saying. There is a good example of socialism.”
{Cookie commentary: Cannot give an example that appeals to an authority without describing why the authority might have such views. Cannot retro-fit ideas into a subject matter that would not have coined nor understood the full implications of the term.}

So, this is the point where my mind went reeling from the bliss of books, coffee, cookies, and solitude to the utter intrusion of a bazillion differing opinions and ideas about life.

Ok, so now that I have held myself until this point let’s examine two quotes that I have been hearing a lot of lately and look at them from two different perspectives:

Act4:32: “And the congregation of those who believed were of one heart and soul; and not one of them claimed that anything belonging to him was his own, but all things were common property to them.”

Interpretation 1: If I were to take this passage literally and out of context of the entire book of Acts I would have to say that this sounds like a completely justifying line for promoting socialism.  Sure, these apostles are sharing all that they have so that a centralized organization can then ‘redistribute’ the apostles wealth for the benefit of the poor they come in contact with and for the benefit of each other’s longevity.

What if you are not an apostle? A Christian? Or any type of believer? Well, then you didn’t give them your property did you? No.  Does this mean that if you are to become a Christian you would have to give up your possessions to avoid damnation? Some would agree with that.

Others wouldn’t.

Interpretation 2: Then there is the camp that believes in a historical perspective and a metaphorical belief of what is said or done in much of the scriptures.  So, those people tend to say a few different things.

1) That the book of acts is a story about the Apostles ‘AFTER’ Jesus and although usually attributed to Paul might be either written by Paul or by his followers in the years between 55-90AD.  They continue to say that Paul also never met Jesus.  Paul calls himself an apostle but only ‘met’ Jesus in a vision while being knocked off a horse as he was traveling to Damascus.

2) Scholars also say that at the time of these acts there was a great need for a centralized command structure in order to preserve the faithful and their teachings.  If you have followers scattered all around with differing beliefs and no command then the faith can be mopped up by an opposition or hijacked by swindlers.  Therefore, some of the desire to collect land was to form a pool from which the cost of operations was taken from and to make sure there would be recourses for the followers.  Not to mention an attempt at keeping the faithful in groups to better avoid misrepresentation and persecution.

3) The line quoted above is a metaphorical reference.  The point being that you cannot be a follower if your heart is not completely in it.  God knows all things and will know if you are faithful to him or to possessions.  Not to mention the line appears to reference earlier events and sayings i.e. ‘Serving God vs. Mammon”

4) It was a story that was to highlight the gifted and blessed nature of Jesus’ apostles.

Ok, whatever camp you are from you have a choice but either way if you are a staunch proponent of either camp you have to be wary of the most common error: Generalizing your views and making it the ONLY view.

Ok onto the next quote:

“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

If we took this literally it would be the most absurd of tasks…….the impossibility implying that it is a pre-requisite for heavenly existence: poverty or detachment………If you tried and realized you couldn’t fit a camel through the eye of a sewing needle and concluded that is the point of this statement: that it is impossible for a rich man to get into heaven….well then that is your desired belief.  Ironic though that prior to this wealth was a sign of Godly favor.  So, what could the real message be? God’s acceptance of all vs. prioritization based on disposition? Well, let’s leave that debate to the scholars, shall we?

Also, some scholars believe that the eye of the needle was a passage way near Jerusalem that was very difficult for an unencumbered camel to pass through let alone one what is weighed down with baggage. As a result the interpretation would then mean that one has to be ‘free’ or ‘unencumbered’ in order to enter into heaven.

Then again there is the interpretation, one that is much more difficult to defend, that Jesus’ response to the rich man in the ‘eye of the needle’ passage was not about wealth but about keeping the commandments.  The persistence of the young rich man in continuing a line of questioned can be interpreted as ‘showing off’ and as a result Jesus was making an example of the young man to show that ‘insolence’ will not be tolerated. Or that we all have things we are not willing to give up and if given the opportunity none of us will be ‘naked’ entering into the kingdom of God: i.e. none of us are perfect.
What is the point of all this God forsaken seriousness?

THAT IT DOESN’T MATTER WHO SAID WHAT AND WHEN IN TIME IT HAS BEEN SAID!

We humans have a great knack for bickering all day long about this or that other thing.  We can argue until the Cows, Jesus, or any other being comes home and it won’t make a lick of difference.
Therefore the best thing to do is eat your Oreos and share with your friends.  Children are taught this yet we adults think it’s childish? Do you actually think that the need for socialism or class struggle would be necessary if we shared FREELY (That is the most important part, the word freely).  Does it mean that there would be a Utopia? No. Does it mean that there would not be the poor? No, but there would most likely be less poor. Does it mean that we would live happily ever after? No.  Does it mean that there would not be wars? No, but maybe less wars….maybe.  Does it mean that our friends and we would enjoy each other more? I think so.  Does it mean it would end greed? No, but it might lessen it.  Does it mean that we would have all that we ever wished for? Nope, but we might have more of what we wished for.

People want to be free. Free to choose and free to reign over their little lives. Freedom and its exercise tend to be in greater supply in a free society/market.  Does that mean we should run freely over all that makes sense? Heck no! Does that mean we need SMART regulations and honest looks into minimizing the abuse of the greedy or cutthroat? Yes.  But, let me tell you, as soon as you give up your freedom of choice in order to be safer and/or wealthier then you have just freely chosen to become less than human.  I might not agree with Socialists or the super-free market capitalists, but I would share my Oreos with them and entertain a real discussion with them any day.

But, the gods help anyone who comes in and grabs my whole bag of Oreos! There will be hell to pay; the hills will run brown with chocolate milk!!!!!

Good luck tomorrow, America.

He hates the headset.

Yes! Gawk and flee in terror! A headset hater among us. An Anti-head-ite! A REAL LIVE ANIT-HEAD-ITE!

I am so ashamed. So, positively and completely horrified at how medieval his views have become. In fact I think he is behind these draconian cell phone laws…….I know it seems like his support of those laws would increase headset use….but it’s only phase one of his entire get us to talk-to-each-other-plan. So, here how this logic goes: Follow along slowly and read carefully…..

1) He creates these draconian laws and everyone is forced to go hands-free. Yes…….it seems like a victory for the headset crowd…but wait.

2) Everyone one their little baby sister goes and buys a headset to talk about their updated MySpace profile. So, those legitimate Head-ites among are then swallowed into a sea of stupidity by those blabbing…. (Read first post about fat man-boobied jerk).

3) Now, forced to contend with the idiocy of 12 year olds sporting $100 ear pieces we, the legitimate ones, are lumped together in the seething hell of mediocrity.

4) My cousin then nonchalantly points out how the bulk of the world is wearing these stupid idiotic, cybernetic, pieces of trash while talking to walls at restaurants.

5) Then he becomes president and enforces a ban on head-sets while not lifting the ban on hands-free use.

6) This law creates chaos and the amount of tickets that are busted down from using a cell phone while operating a motor vehicle to parking on pavement become enormous.

7) The tax revenue generated from this stroke of Ivy League genius pisses one person off….

8) Me. His cousin.

His poor defenseless little cute adorable fluffy sweet and cute again little cousin. His cousin is stripped by the angry hands of the police as I flee in terror while trying to talk on my Bluetooth Headset. Then, as my cousin ascends to the Master of the Universe title, he then throws the magic switch and all the Bluetooth headsets melt.

Thus, we are left with the most horrifying prospect ever!

HAVING TO LIE TO ONE ANOTHER’S FACE! Can you believe trying to get out of a dinner date while looking at someone vs. talking through your nifty headset? Imagine that. Well, I am a proponent of cybernetic organisms….

and I shall not let this evil win. This evil anti-cybernetic-anti-head-ite person destroy my electromagnetic bubble of probably cancer causing magnetism destroy my do-what-I-want-when-I-want-life.

Yes, I know this sounds selfish….but think of it this way….

No headsets = no Oreo cookies = no love.
It is as simple as that.

Don’t mistake the anti-head-ite crowd for lovers….no no………only the headset wearing Oreo munching people of my lost, lost, lonely generation…..

Only we…….love…..truly love….

This is not about headsets…this is about love!

LOVE!!!!!!!!

DONT LET THEM TAKE IT AWAY!!!

So, is this blog going to be about how in Heaven there will be a tree that perpetually grows Oreo cookies? No.

This blog is about the travesty that a famous restaurant called TGIFriday’s has bastardized the greatest cookie in the world by removing it from its menu!!!! Yes, TGIFriday’s had the great desert in the world. The Oreo Sunday. Mmmmmm two big Oreo wafers with oreo-esq ice cream in the middle covered in caramel and chocolate fudge! Well, for years I reveled in that desert until one day, it was gone. Just like that it was gone! Oh the humanity!

Well, this couldn’t be possible. “Oh, we have the brownie Sunday still,” one server said.

Oh no! THAT WILL NOT DO! THERE ARE NO OREOS!!!! NO DAMN OREOS! I QUIT THIS PLACE! I QUIT IT!!!!
Then, suddenly, as if all the restaurant chains were owned by Warren Buffet, they all, simultaneously, started offering these deserts in a shot glass. A SHOT GLASS! IT’s like giving a man dying from oxygen deprivation a coke bottle! WHAT GOOD IS THE AIR IN THERE?! WHAT GOOD IS THE DESERT IN A SHOT GLASS?! What is this France? I mean, come on people! Don’t try to fleece me of my moderately-hard earned cash in order to give my portion control! GIVE ME OREOS GIVE ME OREOS!

PROTEST PROTEST PROTEST!!!

NO OREOS! NO FRIDAYS! WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

In a frenzied roar I leaped from my table! CAUSING AN INSURRECTION! Me and my posse then raided the local grocery store and attacked the Oreo Isle! Yes, in my grocery stores there are ISLES FILLED WITH OREOS AND SODA FOUNTAINS SPEWING THE SWEETEST MILK! We set up camp there, under the cover of Oreo bliss and we held out! We held out for 10 minutes until wives and girlfriends, and babies began to cry! I was then abandoned by my comrades……my soul brothers, and left to defend the ISLE OF OREO single handedly! But, my Navy SEAL skills (I play video games too, people) could not hold out the onslaught of bad publicity and poor business decisions of TGIFriday’s parent company. In the end, I lost. Bitterly lost the battle for the Oreo Sunday. *tears*

If only…..there was….some….way to bring…..it back………

If only………….there was a god.

Ah, so, this post is for my cousin who has a viral dislike of anything Bluetooth headset related.

NOW! After our looong and drawn out discussions of this modern invention I have to take the side of that rare group of bluetoothers. Therefore, there are three groups of bluetoothers I give my apostolic blessing to: Car users, home users, and business types.

Now, lemme tell you, I was not always a Bluetoother, I am a recent convert. For a long time I was driving in the car without one, even though the law now mandates “Go hands free or get a ticket!”. This, of course, seems completely absurd that it must be legislated, but that is a whole different post. So, there I was driving along when a call would come in, “Can you get some milk?” or “Where are you?” or “What are you doing?” or “Wanna hang out?” or any of these things that we pick up the phone for and realize that maybe we shoulda just kept on driving. Now, with the advent of these touch-phones, sliding your finger or finding the right part of the screen takes a little more attention off the road. So, when I was driving home once in a storm and the phone went ding-aling, and being the weak willed person I am, I picked it up; only to almost make a close friendship with the car ahead of me, who decided that stopping for a person who decided stopping for a deer would be the best thing possible on a four lane highway in a frigging tornado!!! Can’t you humanitarians just crash and leave the rest of us drivers alone! No, that was a joke, today I am not that cold hearted.

So, after that little incident I decided it was time to go hands free. Well, as I was driving one day with my little headset attached to my ear I got a call. So, using my hand {irony} I clicked the button on my piece and started to talk. And talk. And you know after awhile I frigging liked this little thing. In fact, I was talking to my cousin…..yes the very same cousin who hates Bluetooth headsets.

Anyway, so I got to the store, got out of the car and I got myself a cart. Then I froze up with sheer terror. I almost committed a mortal sin! I almost went into a highly trafficked public area wearing my headset!!! Now, some of you might not care, but let me tell you. Walking around all day long with that piece of sh*t attached to your head and talking to yourself , having to point to your ear every time someone looks at you with that, “You are some pretentious a**hole, aren’t you?” look well……you’re a pretentious a**hole.

So, I told my cousin I will call him when I am back in the car.

Great, catastrophic incident avoided.

Where did I encounter such an a**hole? Well, let me tell you! Thanks for asking:

There I was strolling along and my tummy started to rumble. So, looking around I saw a TGIFridays. Yes, the very same TGIFridays that used to have the Oreo desert that was like paradise on earth (new blog topic) but now has those stupid little sh*t deserts in a shot glass! DAMN IT ALL! Anyway…..

So there I was sitting with a friend and some dude walks in the size of a truck. Hey! I can hear the objections, “Why does his size have to factor into this story.” To give you a better picture of the situation, calm down you politically correct anti-exaggeration people! So, there he was sitting at the table next to us and he was alone, no phone in hand- jabbering.

“Yeah, NO! I am at TGIFridays! No, TGIFRIDAY! YEAH FRIDAYS! HAHAHAHAHA”

Now imagine this in your best loud obnoxious drunk voice…..

“NAh! I don’t know what I am going to order. So yeah, did you meet her? Wasn’t she hot? Yeah I would have so screwed her! Oh yeah! HAhahaha, of course I would have to get her drunk, I am no brad pit.”

No sh*t Sherlock you are no Brad Pitt.

“So, oh hold up the waitress is here (he should have said wait staff to be politically correct), Yeah, hey how are you sweetie. I’ll have a bacon burger, fries, a coke, and nachos for an app. Thanks, babe.”

Omfg, now I am trying to eat without wanting to kick someone’s fat man-boobied chest in. So, I look over at him like he was a total jerk and this is what he does:
He shrugs his shoulders at me and says, “What?” while pointing to his ear piece.
After that experience everywhere I went there was someone on their Bluetooth blabbing away as loud as can be! The world……was suddenly invaded……no…..suddenly made more aware of…..all of its jerks!”

I vowed to never wear one in public. So, to my cousin I will concede that point.

BUT!!! AH-HA! Neither the car point nor the other two.

So, there I was at home and talking to my cousin again while trying to make dinner. Well, it’s not easy to cut up veggies and be on the phone so, amid great protestations by the other end of my phone; I put on my Bluetooth and continued cooking. Well, my cousin started groaning about Bluetooth being so stupid and yadda yadda yadda.

But, after a few hours of conversation and going about my daily duties, I realized Bluetooth is awesome, when it’s at home, in the car, or in business.
Ok, so on the to the business point—–

I think, ok, so when I imagine Bluetooth I usually imagine someone in a suit. A business suit. Some power broker who has to be connected 24/7. Therefore, I give my official pardon for the business types, but if you are not in a suit while blabbing away, know….just know….you are a jerk.

So, to all you bluetoothers out there be considerate.

Now, I leave the viewers with one last story:

Last night, I was talking to my cousin during a power outage. Well, I could have used my Bluetooth but it was left at the office. So, as we’re discussing things I hear a loud *CREEAAAK CREAAAAK CREAAAK* coming from the other end of the phone. Now, I ask, “What on earth is that?” He replied, “What this?” *Creaaaak creaaaak creeeaaak*
“YEAH THAT!”

“Oh, I’m just opening and shutting the door with my foot.”

“Why are you doing that?”

“Cuz I am laying here on the floor in the kitchen….”

“HA! See, if you weren’t attached to that damn phone by a cord and had Bluetooth……” I replied

Well, you get the picture. Bluetooth has its places.

Now, after this extremely scholarly and well rounded presentation of Bluetooth, I hope all you users become part of the holy trinity of users and not the legion of jerks!

-O