Monday, November 19, 2007

Favorite Characters from Fantasy Novels.

The following is an incomplete list of some of my favorite characters from fantasy literature. Be warned! Characters from George R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice & Fire series may be overrepresented.

Tyrion Lannister (from A Song of Ice & Fire series by George R.R. Martin) - A real-world dwarf (that is, he has dwarfism) in a fantasy setting, Tyrion is the ultimate underdog. Born into a family that is ruthless, powerful, and wealthy, Tyrion's only chance for survival in a world that is just as ruthless is to make sure his family--the Lannisters--stay in power. It's a sucky situation and his own family distrusts him, but every one else in the novels reviles him because he is a Lannister (even though Tyrion isn't like other Lannisters). Fortunately for Tyrion, he is very clever and usually is one step ahead of everyone who wants him dead--including some members of his own family.

Vladimir Taltos (from the Vlad Taltos novels by Steven Brust) - A sarcastic human is a world of snobby elves, Vlad seems to attract trouble. He has a knack for saying wrong things at very inappropriate times. Fortunately, he's an assassin and a witch. And a sorcerer. And he has four or five extremely powerful allies. Sometimes that's enough to get him out of trouble. Other times, it doesn't really help much.

Croaker (from the Black Company books by Glen Cook) - Croaker, a surgeon, belongs to the Black Company, an infamous mercenary organization. Croaker is jaded, weary, and has an unhealthy obssession with a evil goddess. Early on, the Company works for the goddess. But they eventually betray her. This, of course, leads to Croaker becoming the goddess' lover(?). Well, anyway, Croaker is an interesting character and his exploits are . . . complicated.

FitzChivalry Farseer (from the Farseer Trilogy by Robin Hobb) - Another assassin on my list. And the bastard son of a prince to boot! Fitz is recruited by his grandfather--King Shrewd--to become the king's assassin. Coupled with his natural magical skills, Fitz becomes one dangerous dude. But not as dangerous as his uncle Regal, the king's youngest and meanest son. Fitz may be a good assassin but he loses his head and becomes a brawler in physical combat. So his adopted father, Burrich, teaches Fitz to use the ax as his melee weapon. I dunno, I knda like how this breaks the stereotype of the sword-wielding, calm-and-cool-in-battle protagonist.

Samwise Gamgee (from The Lord of the Rings Trilogy by Tolkien) - The hero of the epic series is Sam. He does what he does not out of obligation or because it is his destiny or whatever. He does it simply because it is the right thing to do (and he is loyal to Frodo). That's my take, anyhow. One of the interesting things about Sam is that he is never--never--tempted to use the ring for his own pursuits. On occassion he uses it because he must. However, he not only doesn't think twice about using it for his own ends, the thought never enters his mind. That's pretty durn cool in a series where every other character--from elven queens to human kings to vile goblins to noble wizards is tempted. Not Sam.

Jon Snow (from A Song of Ice & Fire series by George R.R. Martin) - A bastard son of a pwerful lord, Jon has no place in his father's house so he joins the Nightswatch on his fifteenth birthday. The Nightswatch is a group of men that guards the Seven Kingdoms' northern border--the Wall--from wildmen, wights, and the ice demons known as the Others. They take an oath to do so for life. A good man, Jon still battles his temper and his cockiness. His adventures on both sides of the Wall (adventures political, social, and moral) both begin to define him as a man and define his legacy. His surprising successes and his demoralizing failures are fascinating to read.

There are more great characters I could list. These are but a few. But, hey, I don't have all night!

Tuesday, November 06, 2007

I'm a passionate centrist--no, really!

People who know me mistakenly think I'm far-right on the political scale. They think this because I rail against the left all the time. Let me clear up my politics for you folks (I'll try and use small words for those of you who are residents of Salt Lake City):

I'm basically a centrist with conservative leanings--center-right, if you prefer. The reason I come off as far-right is because I attack the American left at every opportunity. Why do I attack the left and not the far-right? Because the left is trying to destroy my country (they don't think they are destroying America but they are). The far-right--by any reasonable measure--is not a danger to this country.

One way to judge the left and right is to look at whom they embrace--not just associate, but embrace and praise and honor. The Democratic Party at their convention in 2004 gave the seat of honor--the seat next to former President Carter--to Michael Moore, for Heaven's sake. There is nothing even close to that on the right. The right along with the Republican Party distance themselves from the kooks. That nut who wrote that anti-Clinton book (the one that accused the Clintons of murder during their time in Arkansas) in the '90s was immediately cutoff from the right and the Republican Party. Michael Moore--who accuses President Bush of the same atrocities--gets to sit next to a former president at the Democratic National Convention.

Folks, I don't attack the extreme right because they aren't dangerous. They are isolated and cutoff from mainstream conservatism. However, the radical left--from the global warming crowd to the abortion-in-demand gang to the Bush lied, soldiers died idiots--are right in the middle of things not just on the mainstream left but in the heart of the Democratic Party.

The left in endangering my country. My passionate centrism demands that they be the focus of my attacks. Woof, woof.

Friday, November 02, 2007

Director Throwdown II

In my first director throwdown, Andrew Adamson (Shrek, Shrek II, and The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe) went up against Brad Bird (The Iron Giant, The Incredibles, and Ratatoulle). The consensus of those who responded to that blog entry is that Brad Bird is the better director. I didn't say where I came down in the original post, but I'll say now: I, too, prefer Brad Bird (though I love both).

So now we move on to Director Throwdown II: David Fincher vs Christopher Nolan!

Why this match-up? Because I feel both directors make movies with a similar feel: gritty, dark, and both seem to love directing movies about psychologically disturbed men. Also, each have five or six directorial credits and that helps when comparing.

David Fincher's major directorial debut was on Alien 3 in 1992. While many folks don't regard Alien 3 highly, don't be to harsh on Fincher for this one: he was thrust into the role of director at the last minute and he had to endure studio interference in the plot from the beginning. After Alien 3, Fincher directed Se7en, The Game, Fight Club, The Panic Room, and most recently Zodiac.

Christopher Nolan's movies are at least as eclectic as Fincher's: Beginning with 1998's The Following and continuing with Memento, Insomnia, Batman Begins, and The Prestige.

So it boils down to this:

Fincher's Alien 3 (in context), Se7en, The Game, Fight Club, The Panic Room, and Zodiac.

versus

Chistopher Nolan's The Following, Memento, Insomnia, Batman Begins, and The Prestige.

Get. It. On!

Friday, October 19, 2007

My wife is looking hot!

My wife has lost ninety pounds since she had her weight loss surgery four months ago. I've always found her attractive but now she's turned into a little hottie!

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Rant on Star Trek.

When are people gonna realize that Star Trek is just about as bad as sci-fi can get? Take off the blinders. I'm embarrased that I ever liked Trek. It's sci-fi for kindergarteners. I say this knowing that Star Trek XI will be directed by someone who actually has a brain. But I don't care anymore.

The test for science fiction is whether or not it explores new ideas, pushes the envelope, moves forward. The original Star Trek series was a bunch of standard stories set in space (the stories could have been set anywhere), Next Generation was politically correct nonsense (how many episodes ended with Picard lecturing the audience about how backwards modern America is?), Deep Space Nine was thinly disguised Israel-bashing (Cardassians = Israelis, Bajorans = "Palestinians"), while Voyager and Enterprise were just bad TV. How many people have to die in real world totalitarian nations before the socialist/communist utopian society depicted on Trek can be discredited?

I wish the franchise would die. How many people have wasted their lives devoted to the silly religion of Star Trek?

Star Trek should have died when TOS died in the late sixties.

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Rudy Giuliani's abortion stances.


  • Rudy Giuliani is against federal funding of abortions.
  • Giuliani opposes partial-birth abortion.
  • Rudy believes that states, not courts, should decide whether abortion should be legal or not.
  • Giuliani says he will nominate originalists in the same mold as justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito to the Supreme Court. Originalists, by definition, do not believe that abortion is constitutionally protected.
  • Former solicitor general Ted Olsen sits on Giuliani's judicial advisory comittee. Ted Olsen is someone even the most strident pro-lifers would love on the Supreme Court (when Rudy Giuliani becomes president, there's a good chance that Olsen will indeed be nominated if a vacancy appears).

I don't understand why pro-lifers are reluctant to vote for Giuliani if he becomes the Republican nominee. He is barely pro-choice whereas Hillary Clinton is stridently pro-abortion.

Friday, October 05, 2007

I'm supporting Rudy Giuliani for President.

He's the best candidate and I think the Republican field is strong (except for the nuts Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul). But I want to dig into the silly reasons why some conservatives say they won't vote for Rudy:

  • "He's pro-abortion." No, he's not. As he has repeatedly stated, he is personally against abortion but doesn't think it should be up to him. Giuliani doesn't support an amendment to the constitution banning abortion but, and this is key, he does support the Supreme Court in overthrowing Roe vs. Wade and giving the decision back to individual states. It should be noted that there is little presidents can do about abortion, pro or con. The ball is in the Supreme Court's, er, court. Yes, the president can appoint Supreme Court justices. But that is not a guarantee. Pro-life presidents have failed miserably in the past. Reagan gave us O'Connor and Kennedy. And while George H.W. Bush gave us the brilliant Clarence Thomas, he also gave us David Souter. So what kind of justices would Giuliani nominate? I listened to the Dennis Prager Show on Wednesday and Sean Hannity's radio program on Thursday. Guiliani was interviewed on both programs. He stated on both shows that the justices he would nominate would be in the same mold as Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, John Roberts, and Sam Alito. He was quite clear about it. Rudy likes justices who simply interpret the constitution based on what the founders meant, not what they could've/should've meant.
  • "Yeah but how can we trust a guy who has been married three times and has a ton of personal baggage to be a good president?" I wish it weren't so, but a politician's personal life tells us very little about how trustworthy he is as a public figure. Besides, in Rudy's case we already know how he will be if elected president. He will do what he says he will do. In his twenty-five years as a public figure, first as a U.S. attorney and then as Mayor of New York City, Giuliani has gained the reputation of a man who says what he means and follows through on it. Giuliani has a public record. We know who were getting as president.
  • "Okay, but I still cannot vote for a man who supports gay marriage." Giuliani doesn't support gay marriage. He does support civil unions, but he is against gay marriage.
  • "The abortion thing is still holding me up. I can't vote for a guy who is pro-choice." Fine. Don't vote for a guy who cut taxes seventeen times as Mayor of New York, got rid of the sex shops and smut vendors throughout the city, and reduced crime dramatically. Don't support Giuliani neverminding that you do agree with him 95% of the time. I know you won't vote for Hillary but instead will stay home on election day, or even more ridiculously support a third-party candidate like some Christian leaders have suggested (how childish and stupid can you get?). Either way, Hillary Clinton wins.
I suggest you vote for the candidate who is personally pro-life and will appoint more Thomases and Scalias to the nations highest court resulting in the eventual overturn of Roe vs. Wade. There will likely be at least two high court vacancies in the next presidential term. Do you want another Souter and Ginsburg on the court? 'Cause you darn well know that Hillary will appoint those type of justices.

I support Rudy Giuliani for president.

Monday, September 17, 2007

More of my favorite films.

I previously posted a list of some of my favorite movies a month or so ago (check it out here). The list was incomplete so here are some more of my favorite films:

The Incredibles - This movie is pretty much perfect. As a fan of comic books and superheros, The Incredibles, with it's clever take on the genre, really made me smile. I grinned through the whole movie! Great flick! I'd give my entire comic book collection to see a sequel (as long as it's directed by Brad Bird).

Falling Down - Michael Douglas portrays a disaffected former defense worker who has a breakdown during a traffic jam. Robert Duvall (my favorite actor) plays a disaffected cop nearing retirement. One man breaks, the other heals. Duvall hunts down the broken Douglas and proves to himself he is still a good cop. An amazing film. Douglas's best role.

GalaxyQuest - A brilliant comedy that somehow pays tribute to Star Trek while lampooning it at the same time. Tim Allen, Alan Rickman, and Sigourney Weaver are wonderful and along the way we get a film that is both touching and irreverent.

Aliens - Best sequel ever. Sigourney Weaver returns to the Alien franchise and the past she thought she left behind. The fight between Sigourney's Ripley and the alien queen is one of the most memorable throwdowns in movie history.

Signs - A powerful film about faith. I think most people missed the point of this film thinking it was supposed to be something it was never intended to be. It wasn't a sci-fi film or a supernatural thriller. It was simply a story about a man, who in the midst of a disaster finds his faith tested.

Beauty and the Beast - The last great Disney traditionally animated film? This film had a great story, charming characters (even the untraditional villain was charming), breathtaking animation and truly great songs.

There. Several more movies that I think are great. Discuss.

Sunday, September 02, 2007

Director Throwdown: Andrew Adamson vs Brad Bird

For the fun of it, let us pit two hot directors against one another in Director Throwdown: Andrew Adamson vs Brad Bird.

Adamson, who was a visual effects supervisor for Batman Forever and Batman & Robin, has three directorial credits to his name: Shrek, Shrek 2, & The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witvh, & the Wardrobe (he will be directing the second Narnia installment, Prince Caspian, as well). A very impressive trio of movies but does it stack up against Brad Bird's movies?

Bird has worked on The Fox & the Hound for Disney and he helped develop the Simpsons from shorts on the Tracy Ullman Show into a half-hour comedy. An executive consultant on the Simpsons for several years, Bird worked on other animated television series including The Critic and King of the Hill. Bird has directed three movies: The Iron Giant, The Incredibles and Ratatouille. Talk about a triple threat!

So it boils down to this: Adamson's Shrek, Shrek 2, & The Lion, the Witch, & the Wardrobe vs Bird's Iron Giant, The Incredibles, & Ratatouille.

Who do you think is the better director?

Friday, August 31, 2007

Hypocrisy and the media.

The leftist media are at it again.

By now you've all heard about Senator Larry Craig's arrest for playing footsie in a public restroom (some say soliciting another man for sex). The media are now trying to destroy Larry Craig's life by public humiliation. This is bad enough but the real evil is that thy--the media--are humiliating Craig's wife and family and they are innocent of any footsie wrongdoing. Many will argue--both from the left and the right--that Craig deserves what he is getting and we have a right to know because what he did wrong and and because he's a US senator and so on and so on. Fine, I suppose, if you think Craig's personal problems are your business and he deserves humiliation. But his wife and family do not deserve this! The punishment the media are doling out far exceeds the crime! But, of course, the leftist media does not care, especially because Craig is a Republican (the media can accuse the right and not the left of violating standards because the left doesn't have standards).

So, of course, this whole incident makes Craig a hypocrite, right? I mean, after all, he is against special right for gays and he's against same-sex marriage and the gay agenda. So the guy, because he was apparently seeking sex from men, is a hypocrite! Nonsense. First, just because one is a sinner does not invalidate their positions on any given issue. And two, many homosexuals--many homosexuals--are against same-sex marriage. Hypocrisy is when someone says everyone should be doing this but I don't have to. Let me explain better: Al Gore is a hypocrite because he says everyone should save energy and make their homes green and environmentally friendly as possible yet he makes no effort to make his own home green. That's hypocrisy. If we say Craig is a hypocrite then no one can advocate anything because we all sin, we all make mistakes.

The media and the left have put gays (and other minorities) into a funny position. If you are gay and don't agree with the gay agenda you are a hypocrite. But no one says that heterosexuals whom support the gay agenda are hypocrites. Heterosexuals, apparently, are allowed more freedom to think than homosexuals are. This rule applies to blacks, too. We all know how bad it is for blacks who are conservative. They are publicly ridiculed and accused of not being black simply because they like lower taxes, a strong military and less government. What stupidity. The left do not think rationally. It's simply emotion. And Larry Craig and his family are destroyed because of this.

One little mistake . . .

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

The Left Destroys.

Have you heard about this one?

Dr. J. Michael Bailey, a psychologist at Northwestern University, has been under attack since his book, "The Man Who Would Be Queen" came out (ahem) in 2003. In his book, Dr. Bailey theorizes that some men who want to become women do so because of an erotic fascination with themselves as women. Even though the book was nominated for an award by the Lambda Literary Foundation, an organization that promotes gay, bisexual and transgender literature, many transgender women took offense to the book's premise. The militant transgender community believes that those who want to become women do so because they are trapped inside of a man's body; it's biology, not psychology, they claim.

Just a few days after the book came out, Lynn Corbay, a computer scientist at the University of Michigan, sent out an e-mail comparing Dr. Bailey's book to Nazi propaganda. A transgender advocate and consultant from L.A., Andrea James, even went so far as to post pictures of Dr. Bailey's children on her website with explicit captions. Attacks on Dr. Bailey are numerous (I believe they are listed at Corbays site--she must be very proud).

I have no idea if Dr. Bailey is right. For all I know, the transgendered women who have taken offense to Dr. Bailey's theory are right. The point is academic freedom has taken another punch in the mouth. And, as always, it is the left trying to stop those with whom they disagree with. The right in America never tries to silence those they disagree with (I challenge you to give me an example). It simply does not happen. But the left, true to their totalitarian tendencies, attempts to shut-up and destroy those they disagree with all the time. The right doesn't set out to destroy the lives' of those they disagree with. You won't find any example of such a thing in America. But for the left, it's what they do.

Makes me wonder what the left is so afraid of. Disagreement, surely, but why?

Saturday, August 04, 2007

Nice Michael Medved Quote.

Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison recently compared President Bush to Adolph Hitler, suggesting Bush “exploited” 9/11, like Hitler used the Reichstag fire, to seize absolute power. It’s true that both frightening episodes produced pro-government propaganda, but there are glaring differences. Anyone who defied Nazi propaganda ended up in concentration camp; anyone who denounced Bush propaganda got a big book contract, an exclusive interview on “Sixty Minutes” and general adulation from the media establishment. Of all the paranoid charges against the Bush administration, the silliest involves the suppression of dissent: from the time of the disputed election with Al Gore, millions of Americans loudly dissented from Presidential policies and none of them – not one – has faced dire consequences. Even at the time of the President’s greatest popularity, leftists energetically attacked him – protesting even against the invasion of Afghanistan. None of these critics suffered for their opinions and dissent remains lively, even ubiquitous, in today’s America. -- radio talk show host and author Micheal Medved

I am so tired of President Bush being compared to Adolph Hitler. It's sick. It shows you that most on the left are not serious thinkers. Grown-ups can disagree with the president's policies and not resort to silly, childish attacks. While there are those on the right who are just as childish, they are few and are shunned by mainstream conservatives. Mainstream liberals embrace the radical left. As proof, look at the Democratic candidates running for president. Most are fairly mainstream liberals but they pander to the far left and are attending, this very weekend, the Daily Kos Convention. The Daily Kos is a vile, despicable site that engages in all sorts of profane attacks on the current administration. Yet they are embraced by presidential candidates. There is no extreme right organization that the Republican candidates, as a whole, embrace (I won't speak for Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo because they are the token nuts on the Republican side of the presidential candidates, who knows whom they embrace?).

Few think on the left. They mostly emote.

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

My famous movie kiss? What?




Your Famous Movie Kiss is from Spiderman



"I have always been standing in your doorway. Isn't it about time somebody saved your life?"

Some of my favorite movies.

While I'm sure I'm leaving out a few, here are some of my all-time favorite movies:

Star Wars - I was five when Star Wars came out in 1977. Star Wars fired up my imagination like nothing before or nothing since. Han Solo and Chewbacca immediately became my favorite characters and light sabres are the coolest weapons ever!

Raiders of the Lost Ark - I'm not a fan of Steven Spielberg as a director (I'm sure he would make a good next door neighbor, though). But Spielberg got it right with Raiders when he created one of the coolest characters ever to grace the big screen: Indiana Jones!

The Sixth Sense - I'll never forget the emotions I felt when the movie reached it's twist ending. It still gives me chills. Repeat viewings take little away from the finale.

Field of Dreams - I've never been into baseball much but every American knows that baseball is weaved into the very fabric of our society and our history. The movie plays on this and ties it into the disconnect many post-fifties men feel they have with their fathers (much thanks to the Age of Stupidity ushered in by the nineteen-sixties and 'seventies). I don't get weepy often but the final scene in Field of Dreams makes my sob like a baby.

Big Trouble in Little China - I remember my dad taking me to this flick when it originally came out back in 'eighty-six. I loved it then, I love it now. It crosses so many genres (fantasy, martial arts, comedy, action, adventure) that it confused audiences when first released. Since, it has become a cult classic. Kurt Russell is at his best.

Unbreakable - One of the most suspenseful films I've ever seen. I love Unbreakable's take on superheroes. Two by director M. Night Shyamalan on my list so far.

Tears of the Sun - Bruce Willis (in his third appearance on my list) plays a Navy SEAL squad leader ordered to rescue a Doctors Without Borders physician during a fictional civil war in Nigeria. The movie forces the SEAL's to choose between duty and morality as they decide whether or not to save villagers from the slaughter of militant rebel Nigerians.

Serenity - Based on the short-lived Firefly TV series, Serenity is the best science fiction movie ever made. It was released in 2005, the same year as the stupidly simplistic and shallow Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith. Serenity made twenty-five million in the US. Sith made, what, a half billion? Something ain't right with the world.

Once Upon a Time in the West - A so-called Spaghetti Western directed by Sergio Leone, this epic movie tells the tale of a murderous outlaw (played by Henry Fonda of all people), a mystery man nicknamed Harmonica (Charles Bronson), and a recently widowed beauty caught up in a corrupt railroad owner's schemes. The climax of the movie, as Harmonica faces Fonda's character in a showdown, is absolutely superb. Pay special attention to the clever opening credits sequence.

Those are several of my favorite films. I'll add more at a later date.

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Boys charged with felonies for butt-slapping.

Two thirteen year-old boys in Oregon were put in jail for slapping girls' butts in the school hallway. The butt-slapping was common by both boys and girls as a way of greeting. The boys were interrogated by an assistant principal and the school's police officer. They were then placed in handcuffs, arrested, strip-searched, and put in jail for five days. If convicted, they could spend ten years in jail and become registered sex offenders. However, the charges, which were originally felonies, were reduced to misdemeanors. But the boys could still spend time in jail and still be registered as sex offenders. Jail-time is unlikely even if the boys are convicted but as part of a likely probation agreement, the boys would not be allowed around younger children unsupervised including younger siblings.

This is sickening. District Attorney Bradley Berry, who is prosecuting the two boys, is either evil or an idiot (I'll give him the benefit of doubt and say he's an idiot). But this is what liberalism and feminism has wrought. The feminization of our schools (and of society, for that matter) has put boys and masculinity on the defensive. Men are told time and time again that they must suppress their nature. And, of course, men should suppress the part of their nature that is sexually predatory and violent. But women are never told that they, too, must suppress the parts of their nature that is overly sensitive and too compassionate. The schools in this country have been taken over by radical feminism; grade school and college. As a result, are schools have become feelings based and not reason based. Reason tells us that what those two boys were doing, though inappropriate, was not a sex crime or even sexual harassment (whatever that means these days). But put emotions in the mix and reason goes out the window, i.e. I feel what the boys did was a crime, therefore it is a crime.

My heart weeps for the two innocent boys and their families. Hopefully, this Bradley Berry creep will have to face the scrutiny of his superiors and be removed as prosecutor of the district he serves. Meanwhile, there is no justice.

Here is a link to a video interview of the two boys. Beware, it'll break your heart.

Sunday, July 22, 2007

The Quotable Calvin Coolidge.

As many of you know, I think Calvin Coolidge is one of America's greatest presidents. Some quotes from him follow:

Don't expect to build up the weak by pulling down the strong.


Industry, thrift and self-control are not sought because they create wealth, but because they create character.

It is only when men begin to worship that they begin to grow.

Knowledge comes, but wisdom lingers. It may not be difficult to store up in the mind a vast quantity of face within a comparatively short time, but the ability to form judgments requires the severe discipline of hard work and the tempering heat of experience and maturity.


Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.

Good stuff. I encourage everyone who reads this blog to read about John Calvin Coolidge, 30th president of the United States. Radio talk show host Dennis Prager often says "Seldom are the famous great and the great famous." There are many US presidents who are more famous than Calvin Coolidge, who most Americans probably couldn't identify, but very few greater.

Saturday, July 21, 2007

Influencing the Outcome.

It occurs to me that television reporters (not commentators whom are supposed to give their opinion) are supposed to be neutral much like a referee. But as I listen to Keith Olbermann tell vicious lie after vicious lie on his MSDNC show Countdown with Keith Olbermann, I realize Olbermann and the vast majority of journalists in the mainstream media are like NFL referees who show up at a Oakland Raiders/Denver Broncos game in vehicles with bumperstickers that say "Go Broncos" and wearing orange and navy blue caps with "Denver" spelled out across the front. If you were a Raiders fan and you saw that occur, would you think the Raiders would be fairly treated during the game?

I don't think so.

Even though the previous paragraph accurately describes the mainstream media, it doesn't really bother me that the New York Times and MSDNC shows such as Hardball and Countdown lean left, it's that they don't admit it. They are not honest with their audience and push their propaganda on some who may accept their spin at face value.

But even commentators aren't supposed to lie.

That's why Keith Olbermann is so dangerous (at least he would be dangerous if people actually watched his show). Not only does he claim that his show is straight news, he is not just a commentator disguised as a newsman. He's a liar. Their are websites who use Olbermann's own words (taken in context which is something those on the left never do with comments made by those on the right) and compare his story with what really happened. Olbermann is a liar. Every day their are many lies told on his little show and they are presented as hard news. He's called on it but he never issues a retraction or correction. This is the height of arrogance. Even honest, fair news outlets make mistakes and print corrections from time to time. But not Olbermann. Not only does he claim his tiny show presents the news in a unbiased manner but he claims he makes no mistakes as well.

Wow.

So most of the referees in the game are wearing one team's colors and then, confronted with the truth, deny it while still wearing their team's logo.

Thursday, July 19, 2007

The Totalitarian Tendencies of the Left.

The left in America has totalitarian tendencies. I'm not talking about your average liberal, I'm talking the left which make up most of our mainstream media journalists. What is even more astonishing is that those very same leftist journalists claim to be fair and straight with the audience. A good example of a leftist who claims to be a straight newscaster is Keith Olbermann.

Keith Olbermann presents his MSDNC (er, MSNBC) show as a newscast but it isn't. He often demonizes Bill O'Reilly for allegedly lying to his audience but, at the very least, O'Reilly has never claimed that the O'Reilly Factor is a newscast (O'Reilly doesn't lie, either, but facts never get in the way of Olbermann). O'Reilly has repeatedly stated--from day one--that the Factor is a news analysis show, i.e. the television equivalent of the editorial page in your local paper. As for Olbermann's attacks on O'Reilly, they are virtually all ad hominem attacks and are demonstrably untrue.

It takes balls for a guy who claims to be a newscaster to ask for the president's resignation or impeachment. Olbermann does this daily and still has the hubris to call his show straight news. Yet it is Fox News that receives so much negative attention from the press. Now admittedly, no one watches Olbermann's silly little show so perhaps this is why it garners so little attention from the media. Still I find it absolutely hilarious that Olbermann is so worried about the O'Reilly Factor when, in fact, the evening newscasts of the big three networks are watched by far more viewers than the O'Reilly Factor (even Katie Couric has triple the viewership on an average night).

It is some sort of pathology that propels the Fox News bashers (including Olbermann) to be so obsessed by the only news network/newscast that may lean right Even if Fox News does lean right, what the heck is the big deal? CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, PBS, all the major newspapers, and NPR lean left (at the very least). So Fox News (and commercial talk radio) lean right. Why is this so threatening to the left?

The answer is simple. The left doesn't want other opinions heard. The left simply wants to silence those they disagree with. For forty years the left has controlled college campuses (campi?) across the nation. College campuses have speech codes which proponents claim are used to go after hate speech but, in fact, are a tool to silence conservative voices. After all, any speech the left doesn't like is hate speech.

It's funny that the left claims President Bush is using stuff like the Patriot Act to silence those the administration disagrees with. Never mind that no one--no one--has had their speech rights--or any other rights--violated by this administration. Yet it is the left that endorses, enforces and approves speech codes at our universities. It is the left that is trying to reinstate the Fascist (er, Fairness) Doctrine. It is the left that uses terms like homophobe, racist and sexist to try and silence opponents. Show me where anyone on the right has tried to institute anything remotely akin to speech codes and fascist doctrines.

Contrary to the left, the right love open debate. I listen to conservative talk radio. While different hosts have different formats, those that do have guests on (which is a majority of nationally syndicated conservative talk shows) have guests they disagree with every day. Michael Medved goes out of his way to have guests with opposing views (those with whom Michael agrees with makeup a distinct minority of his guests). Dennis Prager has an extremely wide range of guests, many of whom are left of center. Even the shrill Laura Ingraham (I dislike her program immensely) has guests on who are at the other end of the political spectrum.

I'm not a fan of Bill O'Reilly's program (I used to be but he makes far to many emotionally appealing arguments when reason would better serve those same arguments) nor am I fan of most conservative talk radio hosts (too many are demagogues like Sean Hannity, Glen Beck, and, especially, that fraud Michael Savage). But, please, let us have commercial talk radio and Fox News. You guys on the left have everything else.

Thursday, July 12, 2007

More of those micro-heroes!

This is my ongoing posting of micro-heroes I've made. The following micro-heroes are all original works by your truly. They are members of the United Superheroes of America's Mountain West branch which protects the people of Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming and Montana. Enjoy!

ATOMIC-HAWK of NEW MEXICO
Field Leader, USA Mountain West Branch


Atomic-Hawk grew up on an Indian reservation with dreams of becoming a superhero like her comic book idols. But she never thought those dreams would become reality. But then she was exposed to the mysterious Radiation X, gaining nuclear-based powers--and bird-like wings to boot! With the ability to fly at extremely high speeds and the power to control and generate nuclear energy, she is one of the most powerful members of the USA.

Notes: New Mexico has a large Native American population and was the site of the first atomic bomb test. That was inspiration enough.

The micro from which she was created is a micro I made of a Dawnstar (Legion of Super-Heroes)/Falcon (Avengers) DC/Marvel amalgam I did awhile back. I made only a few minor changes.



STRONGBOW of ARIZONA Deputy Field Leader, USA Mountain West Branch


Though part Native American, it is his grandfather, the British hero Longbow Jack, that taught Strongbow how to be a hero. A skilled archer, Strongbow does not have any powers but instead relies on his athletic abilities to beat up the bad guys. He is aided by infrared imaging in his helmet.

Notes: Arizona has a large population of Native Americans. But I didn't want to make that Strongbow's sole identity. So I made Strongbow a legacy hero with an unlikely connection to a WWII British hero.


MOUNTAIN MAN of IDAHO Senior Member,
USA Mountain West Branch


A mysterious loner, Mountain Man was accepted as a member of the USA under strange circumstances. No one knows his true identity (or even if he has one) or where he came from (though he does call the mountains of Idaho home).

Mountain Man is a nine-foot tall stone golem. He weighs at least one ton and is definitely the strongest member of the USA--Mr. President included! He is virtually indestructible and immune to mental attacks. His speed and quickness are rather ordinary and he does seem susceptible to magic-based attacks.

Notes: Obviously this character is influenced by trappers, scouts and mountain men of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.


BISON of WYOMING
Senior member,
USA Mountain West Branch


Bison was born with powers but they didn't fullymanifest until he was fourteen. He has the ability to generate a force field around himself that is virtually indestructible. A common use of his power is to bowl opponents over simply by running into them using his massive size. The force field does the rest. It should be noted that Bison does not have superhuman strength though he can sometimes manipulate his force field enough to lift objects by touching objects and extending the force field around them. This requires a lot of concentration so he doesn't do it often. Another aspect of his power is that the force field (which extends no more than a centimeter away from his body) is always on. He has to think to turn it off. His horns are artificial and can be detached from his skull.

Notes: Part of Wyoming is in the great plains where the American bison (some call it the American buffalo which is incorrect) used to roam in the millions.


BEELINE of UTAH
Junior Member, USA Mountain West Branch


Exposed to Radiation X while being the subject of an expererimental bee anti-venom, Beeline gained the proportionate strength of a bee. And while he doesn't produce any honey and can't gather pollen worth a darn, he is strong, quick and very agile. His scientist friend designed a pair of wristbands that can emit an electrical charge that can knock a normal man unconscious--his bee-sting. Beeline's costume is also outfitted with "beewings" that allow him to glide several hundred yards.

Notes: Utah is known as the Beehive State and has the motto "Industry". Beeline is one darn industrious bee (man)!


BIG SKYE of MONTANA
Junior Member, USA Mountain West Branch


Skye Madison was born with the ability to fly. As a teenager, she tried her hand at super-heroics. After initial success, she got in over her head when she tried to take on the criminal super-powered gang Power Danger Trio X. One of the members of the trio, a mutant who can project extremely toxic levels of radiation, blasted Skye, seriously injuring her. Left for dead, Skye was aided by bystanders and taken to a nearby hospital. But she wasn't going to survive. . . until some mysterious person injected her with Radiation X!

Skye quickly recovered and found that she was superhumanly strong, had gained nearly one-hundred pounds of muscle, had added an additional foot to her height, and was now impervious to physical harm. These new abilities, along with her ability to fly, made her tougher and more formidable than before. No longer a naive teenager, Skye donned a new costume and a new name and brought Power Danger Trio X to justice. Big Skye was born!

Notes: Montana is known as Big Sky conutry with big mountains and wide-open plains (on it's eastern side). I couldn't resist naming a superheroine Big Skye.


GOLDRUSH of COLORADO
Junior Member, USA Mountain West Branch


Goldrush is a speedster. She was born with the ability to move at extremely high speeds. Her metabolism is very high and she must consume a lot of food every day in order to function.

Notes: Like California and South Dakota, Colorado had a famous gold rush, too. The character was easy to come up with.

USA MOUNTAIN WEST TEAMSHOT!


More micros coming soon!

Last five songs.

The last five songs I just listened to on my iPod (shuffle setting of course!):

  • "Sing" - The Carpenters
  • "The Class of '57" - The Statler Brothers
  • "Dreams" - Van Halen
  • "What I'd Say" - Earl Thomas Conley
  • "Industrial Disease" - Dire Straits
The list is only for your enjoyment. Please, no betting.