Boisterous Rants

I am Now Publishing on AddsYou.com

2008-11-28T18:29:00.000-05:00

http://www.addsyou.com
username=MjAwOC0xMS0yOCAxODoyODo0NQ==

Life is like.....

2008-11-22T17:53:00.002-05:00

Life.... is not like a roller coaster. Much to the cliche's dismay, roller coasters actually work quite the opposite of how I believe life works. You see, passengers on a roller coaster get rather bored as you go up, but become extremely excited as the decent begins. In my experience, I enjoy the "highs" of life much more than the trips down.

So, because this old cliche is actually incorrect, we've came up with a list of new similar cliches:

Life is like a carousel horse...
On a carousel horse, riders enjoy being higher than other riders. When you're up, you're happy; when you're down, you want to be back up again.

Life is like a Ferris wheel...
Very similar to a carousel horse. It is much more enjoyable to be going up. The ride down is depressing for two reasons. 1) You're going down and you can't stop it. 2) Eventually when you get to the bottom, its all over.

Life is like the teacups ride...
As long as you're moving at a speed where you can see what's going on, you're happy. The second your world starts spinning, you get dizzy. Next, the headaches come. Then, you puke.

Life is like the scrambled eggs ride...
The same as the teacups ride, only more people are going through the same thing you are. And, you might get another rider's puke on your shoes.

Life is like the pirate ship ride...
You want to go up; higher and higher. But, when it gets too high, you are going to regret it because going down doesn't feel good. And if it does a full flip, you'll be sick to your stomach. Then you puke.

Okay, that's all I can come up with for now....

Barak Obama WINS

2008-11-05T00:02:00.002-05:00

I'm so happy that I'm in tears!

Barak Obama has been elected as the 44th president of the United States of America. I participated in the historical event of electing the first African-American President of the US!

YES WE CAN!
YES WE DID!

Where would I go?

2008-10-10T13:32:00.002-05:00

I was filling out an application for a potential internship in NYC and I had this question posed to me:

If you could take THREE industry-related field trips, anywhere in the world, where would you go? What and/or whom would you visit and why?

I had to think about my answer for a couple of minutes... New York? Los Angeles? CNN is here in Atlanta? Where would I go? After a while of thinking, I made my decision:

Tokyo, Japan, Beijing, China, and Mumbai, India. The particular portion of the communications industry that I want to go into relies heavily on technology. Those three places I feel are going to be the places with the next major equipment changes in the field. I would visit the Research and Development divisions of the leading audio/visual manufacturing companies to learn about what is coming up next and how I can implement it in the future.

The Red Cross Called

2008-10-10T13:27:00.002-05:00

I got this email today....

from: ((my dad))
to: ((me))
date: Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 2:13 PM
subject: Red Cross called

Mary at Red Cross said it was time for you to donate again and that they are in desperate need.

My response:

Of course they are.... the major stock market players are all having heart attacks....and their ulcers are causing internal bleeding....

Blue Tooth Jerks finally LOOSE

2008-09-19T02:12:00.002-05:00

So, I just read this on CNN.com: http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/conditions/09/18/cellphone.sperm/index.html?iref=topnews and basically, a clinic in Cleveland, Ohio has research that shows that the quality of sperm goes down when phones are used in the talk mode and are 2.5cm or less away from the testes.

What that means, (if the research is true) is that all of those obnoxious bluetooth headset talking people....the ones who I cannot determine if they're on the phone or talking to me..... could be decreasing the quality of their sperm (the men anyways) by keeping their phone in their pockets whilst talking on their headset.

If this is all true, then I want to formally change my opinion on people who use those silly things... keep using them...they're awesome....*cough-hopefully-they-wont-be-able-to-procreate-cough*

What's so wrong with monkeys?

2008-09-08T23:23:00.002-05:00

I've been doing a lot of reading about evolution lately and I've learned a ton about it in many of my classes including Philosophy and Media, Society and Technology classes. The other day, I was talking to a family member of mine (on a distant 'redneck' branch) about evolution, and their response was simply: "I did not "evolve" from a d*mn monkey."

What is so wrong with monkeys? I mean really? The current science that I've seen recently says that we probably evolved from something similar to Apes or Orangutans. I took Sandi to Zoo Atlanta two weekends ago, and to be honest, they seemed pretty dang awesome to me. They could communicate, and knew what they could and could not eat. They took care of their young, and different groups weren't attacking each other over oil for their over-priced, over-sized and over-everything SUVS.... way more than I can say for us humans....

Another thing, why do my family members have to be so intolerant. I'm not gay, but I support gay marriage. GLBT relationships to me are no different than heterosexual relationships. Why then do some people always have to point out when someone is "playing for the other team"? GLBT people are not diseased or anything, and they're usually pretty cool. Why do you have to point them out as if I should cross the street to not be near them... I guess some people just don't understand that true love transcends all... age, race, religion, social status, GENDER....

Lewinski wasn’t the only person who Clinton screwed

2008-09-08T23:19:00.001-05:00

If you are a college student with a political science major, he may have screwed you, too

The media had a field day with their coverage of the Monica Lewinski sexual relationship with former President Bill Clinton. Anyone of college age should know the 42nd president’s relations with his intern. What happened behind closed doors may never fully be known, but the one thing that should be known is what former President Clinton and many other politicians are doing to college students across the nation. They’re making the already-tough-to-break-into politics job market even harder to get into for college graduates.

I would bet money on deals that happened between Lewinski and certain political parties so that she will have no financial worries in the future. What I’m worried about is the students who are looking for internships in the political arena to get some “real-world-experience” before they graduate. These students are only trying to boost their resumes in hopes of getting at minimum a decent job. Unfortunately, who is going to hire a White House intern from when Clinton was president. What potential employer isn’t going to think “well, I wonder if this one had ‘relations’ with the president, too” when he or she sees that on someone’s resume?

To the media, Clinton’s affair was just personal. Many left-wing media outlets followed up every story about Monica with one about how well the economy was doing because of the president. Because it was thought to be only personal, it was cast aside in the judgment of many people because it just didn’t affect many people.

In some dark corner of my heart, I feel genuinely bad for Lewinski for going through that. I feel worse for any other intern or page whom went through similar situations. Up until this point, who has even thought about all of the other interns who are back at square-one all because they were trying to get ahead. As it turns out, these “personal affairs” may actually be hurting college graduates.

Most of the people who were interns during the last presidency have already made it through the system and are now either successful despite set-backs or flipping burgers at the local fast food joint. The problem now is the current ring of politicians who just cannot keep their hands to themselves.

In 2006, former senator Mark Foley resigned from congress after being caught sending explicit text messages to former pages. In 2001 “congressman” Gary Condit was found to have had an affair with intern Chandra Levy. This illustrates just two of the more well-known affairs. If one wanted to see the full impact, one would have to include nearly every politician who has had a sexual affair with anyone. What employer would take a job candidate seriously if they knew the candidate had worked under Eliot Spitzer as an intern?

Fourth Meal

2007-10-14T13:59:00.000-05:00

Our current younger generations, which have been dubbed Generation X and Generation Y, have some new tendencies when it comes to eating habits. What used to be a light midnight snack has now turned into a full meal into the late night hours. Taco Bell calls it Fourth Meal: the late night meal between dinner and breakfast.

Now, don’t think that Taco Bell came up with this idea, they just realized that people our age like to eat again after dinner. Taco Bell just trade-marked an idea that was already formed. It is only recently that businesses have noticed this trend.

It really is no surprise that our age group eats this late meal, since we stay up all hours of the night. “I’m up late at night anyways, so I just eat again,” says Clayton Bennet, a freshman.

This late night meal has not just been noticed by Taco Bell. In fact, most every fast food restaurant in the US is open until at least midnight. Many McDonalds, including the one in Cornelia, are open 24 hours. At other restaurants, if the main dining room is not open, at least the drive-thru is open until midnight or later. Even Piedmont’s new grill is open until midnight so that anyone who has a late night food craving can get some good food for a decent price.

But it is not necessarily a 4th meal. Many people, especially college students, do not often eat breakfast, or eat a very light one. Sophomore Tomas Montilla says “I don’t get a chance to eat breakfast everyday. So some nights, I go eat a third meal at like ten or eleven.”

For those of us who usually eat breakfast, we are not really eating any extra food. Actually we eat about the same amount, just evenly distributed over four meals instead of three. And it turns out that doing this might actually be healthier, as long as you do not eat too close to when you go to bed. In fact, based on a 2001 study conducted by a group of doctors at Emory, people should eat four to six smaller meals each day. The study goes on to report that eating smaller meals will help to raise body metabolism.

Whether or not it is truly healthy is debatable, but whether or not it will be a new meal that is here to stay is not a question.

In the next couple of years, these young generations who are used to eating a late meal, will be finally getting good salaried jobs where they can afford to eat at more expensive fancier restaurants. I believe that when these generations get to this point, you will see these four- and five- star restaurants open for another meal between 10pm and midnight.

My Atlanta

2007-10-14T13:56:00.001-05:00

Someone was telling me the other day that when you enter metro Atlanta, that you are no longer in the south. This made me think. Atlanta is south of the Mason-Dixon line. Atlanta is where General Sherman marched through en route to the sea. But at the same time, most things that define something as being southern just are not found in Atlanta. Really, Atlanta is not part of the south.

I was born and raised all thoughout metro Atlanta and I have not lived anywhere else until I came to Piedmont. Therefore, when I realized that my hometown is not really part of the south like I thought it was, I wanted to figure out what the identity of Atlanta is.

According to the 2000 census, Metro Atlanta is one of the fastest growing metropolitan areas in the nation. In fact, between 2000 and 2006, Atlanta grew 20.5%, faster than any other metropolitan area in the US. Atlanta is a big city, but when you think about it, every other big city has a special identity that is all its own.

Washington DC is the headquarters for the government. Los Angeles is the headquarters for television. Hollywood is where most of the film industry is located. Seattle has coffee and the leftovers from the tech burst of Silicone Valley. Las Vegas has gambling as does Reno. Orlando, Miami, and the rest of Florida are resort cities. Honolulu has beaches and beautiful girls. New York City is basically the communications capital of the world, not to mention there are certain styles of pizza, steaks, and hotdogs that are native to the city. Chicago has these same limits on certain foods. Detroit is the car manufacturing headquarters of the US. Philadelphia has amazing cheese steaks and is the city of brotherly love. Boston at least has its own accent. Nashville has country music. Dallas and Houston have the whole cowboy stereotype. Huntsville, Alabama, a city that is only a fraction the size of Atlanta even has the space center.

What does Atlanta have? Nothing really. Atlanta is basically a mixture of a whole lot of other cities. The only thing that Atlanta can even remotely call its own is the Center for Disease Control, or as it is more commonly known: the CDC. But even still, that is not really an identity.

The name of the city is not even special. It was named Atlanta as a shortened version of Altantica-Pacifica because of its location with the railroad. The only nicknames for my hometown that are listed on Wikipedia are “Hotlanta and the A-T-L.” At least Atlanta has a few tourist attractions, like the Georgia Aquarium, the World of Coke, the CNN center and many others, but because of all of the outside influence, I believe that Atlanta never will have its own identity.

Freedom to be Searched

2007-10-14T13:53:00.000-05:00

Recently a high school in Colorado has been put under investigation because the principal would search through students’ cellphone text messages. The American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU, says that this is an invasion of privacy. My question is: how has the school invaded these students’ privacy?

I believe the school has every right to search cellphones and even PDAs and computers. Let’s say a couple of upper classmen are planning to pull a prank on a couple of freshmen that could be potentially harmful. If theses students were sending text messages about it, and a principal were to see these text messages, the school administration would be able to put a stop to it.

Or, just take a look at any of the recent school shootings. Just think had someone looked at a couple of the emails that were written by the gunman at Virginia Tech, don’t you think that someone would have been able to prevent this tragedy from happening. And certainly the two gunmen at Columbine High School communicated somehow beforehand about their plans. If the principal had seen a text message or something, wouldn’t that principal have done something about it?

From my perspective, if a student does not want something to be searched, then that student shouldn’t bring that to school with them. Basically, if you know that a principal will take up your phone or laptop and then read your text messages, just don’t bring your phone or laptop to school. I mean, certainly this principal had a reason to have the student’s phone in the first place.

I'm For Socialized Medicine

2007-09-23T17:03:00.000-05:00

Socialized medicine in America? Why not! The only bad part about the government paying for all of your medical bills is that taxes will go up to cover the additional expenses. Taxes are going to do that anyways, no matter which party controls the government.
Changing America’s health care to socialized medicine will even go as far as helping to solve a few of the problems that we are currently facing in the US. The American people would no longer be worried about Medicare or Medicaid. Elderly people will not have to be concerned about who is going to take care of them when they become unable. The government would take care of them. Socialized medicine will help to get sick people to the right types of doctors who can correctly treat the patient.
Sure, people who work in the medical insurance industry might have to make a career choice, but until people stop dying, there will always be life, car and homeowners insurance.

Explicit Language

2007-09-23T17:02:00.000-05:00

Everyday we hear members of parent’s council or another entity complaining about how something is too explicit for their children. Everyday the Federal Communications Commission, FCC, puts another restriction on what can be said on the air. The American government is increasing the limitations of what the media can say.
At the same time the Americanized dialects of the English language are becoming more and more loose; words that used be considered vulgar, are now generally accepted by much of the American population.
Although I cannot speak for the entirety of my generation, I will point out that there are not many words that you will not hear coming out of our mouths. These words that I cannot mention in this article, because they are “bad words,” are so socially accepted that no one even turns when they hear them spoken.
As journalists we are told that we have to not use these words and other “vulgar” comedy because it is “for the greater good of society.” We cannot expose children to these words because it would be very bad if they heard it from a reputable source versus from their friends.
I don’t understand why I can say whatever I want to at the grocery store and no one can stop me, but if I am in front of a microphone, I cannot say *bleep.* If I am in front of my computer working on a newspaper article, I cannot type $&#@.
Since the phrases freedom of speech and freedom of the press have been thrown around so much, they have lost most of their meaning. These two important amendments to the American government no long stand for what they used to.
It has gotten to be so bad these days that if you slip up and accidentally say one of those “bad words” you will be heavily fined by the FCC. And that does not even include all of the suits that will be filed by those fanatic parent groups.
I feel it is sad that I cannot *bleeping* say what I *bleeping* want to.

Allow Trade

2007-09-09T15:12:00.000-05:00

These days you see advertisements everywhere that are flaunting the selling point of being American-made. Chevrolet, a division of General Motors, even went as far as changing their slogan to: “An American Revolution” a few years ago. One of Wal-Mart’s slogans is “We buy American.” What exactly are these companies selling? What is so good about American made products and services?
Sure, the money stays where you want it to, but is that really the best thing? Should you deny money for food to a farmer in some third-world country because you want your bananas from America? Just because your money is here in America, does not mean it is going to stay there. You are probably paying an American who is then paying someone else who is not American for other goods and services.
There really is no good argument for not having imported goods. For some reason, the American Government thinks that it has the right to place laws and therefore tariffs on imported goods. Obviously, I do not think that the government should have that right.
If I want a Chinese-made American flag, then I should dang well get my Chinese-made American flag. If I want my coffee beans from a small field in Columbia, then I should get them.
Americans should stop being so selfish. Everything is not all about them. What about the human population as a whole? Shouldn’t everyone else have jobs that are supported by imports? I realize that people are worried about the American economy, but what about the global economy?
There are slogans like “as American as apple pie” but where are the slogans like “as cool as anything global?”

Eco-Friendly is GOOD

2007-08-21T15:49:00.000-05:00

You can save every penny you want, but if the planet is not here for you to enjoy it, what is the point? While eco-friendly products may not yet be cost-efficient, they are extremely necessary to the survival of the planet. Why anyone would not want to save the planet is beyond me.
Across the market, nearly any product that you can think of has an eco-friendly alternative. For instance, Seventh Generation laundry products, which cost only a couple of dollars more, are very environmentally friendly. According to the Seventh Generation website, “if every household in America replaced just one box of 48oz petroleum-based powder laundry detergent, we could save 96,000 barrels of oil each year, enough to heat and cool 5500 homes in the U.S. each year.”
Changing laundry detergents is only one part of the battle. Why not change to a more fuel-efficient vehicle, or even a hybrid for you more adventurous folks? Or you could change to environmentally friendlier mouth care products. The Tom’s of Maine company boasts more than 10 toothpastes that contain only natural products that works just like regular toothpastes.
Money should not be an issue when the planet that you call home is in jeopardy of survival. At the very least, we as humans, owe the planet a little consideration when living out our lives here.

Why Smoke?

2007-08-21T15:48:00.001-05:00

There are over 400,00 deaths in the United Stated every year from smoking related illnesses. Then why in the world would anyone want to do it? 400,000 is nearly .14 percent of the population of the U.S., and while that does not sound like much, it’s a lot considering it’s a conscience choice to smoke.
I would have written this article with a million statistics and facts about smoking like that according to the American Heart Association, each cigarette that you smoke takes and average of 8 minutes off of your life span, but instead I’ve decided to just give you my opinion.
Smoking is dumb, period. I fully support the many local governments that have begun to enact smoke-free ordinances. In the end, it is a personal choice for whether or not one wants to smoke, but when you look at it, what is good about smoking? You look cool to your peers? Smoking is so not cool.
What is worse is that when you smoke, if you smoke around people, you are breathing out secondhand smoke for other people to inhale. Secondhand smoke is just as bad as puffing on a cigarette.
Why would you want to shorten your life as well as other people’s lives to do something stupid?

Definition of Terrorism

2007-08-21T15:46:00.000-05:00

Osama bin Laden is generally accepted as a terrorist by people in the United States. But, to much of the al-Qaida organization, he is considered to be a hero. According to many of their beliefs, bin Laden did the world a favor when he organized terrorist bombings across America, and therefore from al-Qaida he is praised for his heroism. To them, Americans are considered the devil. To us they are considered the devil. But wait, this brings up a new question.
Is George Bush a terrorist? Political views aside, certainly by the logic that we have established, members of al-Qaida, more importantly their families, must believe that President Bush is no better than we think bin Laden is. But wait a second, the leader of the apple-pie-loving, bald-eagle-protecting, flag-waving, in-God-we-trust United States of America cannot be a terrorist…
Now stop right there. I am not saying that George W. is a terrorist; I am just trying to show you how confused many Americans are about the definition of the word terrorist.
According to Webster’s dictionary, a terrorist is a person who terrorizes or frightens others. By that definition, my own loving dad is a terrorist: I was definitely frightened from ages four to six just because of the stories that he told me about the boogey monster. I think we can safely agree that this definition may be just a little too broad.
If you break it down, the word terrorist has two parts, ‘terror’ and ‘ist’. Traditionally we add the suffix ‘ist’ to adjectives that we want to turn into a type of person. Whether or not that is the accepted way of creating words is another debate entirely; we can use slang however we want. The word terror means an intense fear, according to the American Heritage Dictionary. That is still very broad, but maybe it is not wrong. Maybe terror, like most adjectives, is in the eye of the beholder.
Maybe calling someone a terrorist is saying that in your opinion, that person frightens you. When Fox News calls someone a terrorist, it means that the producer or the writer is afraid of this person. When President Bush calls Saddam Hussein a terrorist it is because he is frightened by the thoughts that his father instilled in him about Hussein.
Maybe as Americans, we should be better people and not throw the title terrorist around so loosely.

Are the states at fault for lousy drivers?

2007-06-02T15:54:00.000-05:00

Across the United States, teenagers are becoming licensed drivers. They practice for months with parents, they take the written test, and then they take the driving test. In some states they are required to also take a driving course. But is this enough? Why are the requirements to become a licensed driver different from state to state? Why are some more lenient on requirements than others? Are these differences the cause for so many deaths among teen drivers?

According to the Center of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 36 percent of deaths among teens is due to motor vehicle accidents. In 2004, 4,767 teens. aged 16 to19, died of injuries from vehicle accidents. I think the reason all of these accidents and deaths happen is because teens are not taking hard enough driving tests. In some states the requirements to get a drivers license is harder than in others. For example, in the state of Georgia the minimum score a driver can get is a 70 and in Washington they have to get an 80. According to Stateline, the restrictions that are placed on states cut the fatalities of drivers by 19 percent.

After going to the different DMV websites for different states I realized just how different the requirements were. In Washington, the teen must be 15 1/2 to get their learners permit. The driver must be in the car with someone 21 or older and must have 50 hours of supervised driving, including 10 night hours. They are required to take a driving course before they can take any of the exams. When the teen goes to get their drivers license they must take a written exam and make an 80 percent and a driving exam and also take a drivers exam which also requires them to make an 80 percent.

In Georgia, teens must be 15 years old to get a permit. They must have 4o hours of supervised driving and 6 hours of night driving. When the teen goes to get their license they must take a written exam and a driving exam, that only requires them to get an 70. Although these Georgia regulations are not as tough as the Washington regulations, the licensed driver has a lot more rules to follow. These rules include passenger restrictions, time restrictions, and time of day restrictions.

Arkansas has one of the most lenient driving requirements that I have seen. Teens there can be 14 to get a learners permit. I don't know why they would want to, but that is their policy. There is no amount of supervised driving time, no supervised driver restrictions, and no passenger rules. The leniency of these rules has given Arkansas second place to having the most teens deaths in 2001, according to state master. I don't know if Arkansas is still in bad standings, but if their driving requirements are still the same, I doubt it.

These are just a few of the state requirements in the United States. Could these requirements be the cause of the 36 percent of teen deaths from motor vehicle accidents? I think so.

Why ban books when you can set them on fire?

2007-05-29T18:33:00.000-05:00

All across America parents are fighting local and even state legal cases about whether certain books should be banned from school or public libraries. These parents say that they are attempting to get these books banned because they contain foul language, suggestive themes, against religion, or whatever reason suits them for the time being. These parents will go to every expense to get these books removed from the shelves. Why? What is the big deal if their kid becomes a little educated to the real world? Hell, they do not even get to experience it until they get out of college. Do these parents plan to hold their kids hand until the day the these kids get their diplomas? How in the world are they going to survive the real world?

These parents claim to be sheltering their kids from the pains that run rampant through the world. In Georgia this week, for instance, a mother from Atlanta is trying to get the Harry Potter series pulled from the shelves. Why? Because they are against God. This mother thinks that she is protecting her children from Atheism. But from a different perspective, maybe these parents are just trying to control their kids and run their lives. How are these people any better than dictators across history? Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler, and Hussein all removed books that did not agree with their agendas and/or doctrines. But at least they were smart about it: Why just pull the books off the shelves when you can BURN THEM?! In Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, life without books really was not to bad, was it? Other than the fact that everyone's life was controlled by the sole sources of information.

My thoughts to kids: Read Everything! There is no limit to the knowledge that you can gain from reading.

My thoughts to parents: No one is making your kid read these books. Your children need to learn on their own what the real world is like. Choose your battles, let the kids have their books, but you can still go battle what kind of music is available or what video games they can play.

For the most part...Tipping is needed.

2007-05-24T14:33:00.000-05:00

The very first job that I got in high school was one where all I worked for was tips. I was considered a "volunteer" and I did not have to pay any type of taxes. Today in many jobs it seems mandatory that a customer tip the employee, even though it is not. Some of these jobs include waiting tables, being a pizza delivery person, or working at a casino or hotel.

According to Business Today, tips should only be rewarded for good or superb service a customer receives. According to the American Society of Travel Agents in a Business Today article, 15 to 20 percent gratuity from the bill price is normal for restaurants. In big parties, 15 percent gratuity is already added for you. According to the same article, most waitresses think that 15 percent is a decent amount for waiting a table. According to Restaurant Gage.com, tips are the main income of the waiter or waitress. For some restaurant waiters and waitresses, the hourly wage is somewhere between $2-4. For anyone this is not enough, which is why tipping is such an important part of the job. Without tips, people probably would not have enough to pay for anything.

On the Pizza Driver Homepage, it states that the minimum tip for a pizza delivery driver is $2. Although the common gratuity is 15%, if it is less than $2 than the minimum should be $2. It also states that a great service person should receive 20% while a poor service person should receive only 10%.

From personal experience, many things determine the amount of gratuity a person is going to receive. The friendliness of the person, the amount of time the person takes to do the service asked, the amount of the bill itself, and the sometimes the quality of the food or items bought. Yes, I always try to pay 15%, but sometimes people do not deserve it. Because I know how it feels to do someone a service and receive a quarter, I know how a person should act to receive a good tip. From personal experience, some of the servers I have had do not deserve the 15% gratuity they want. But on the other hand, I understand that most people who get tipped don't make much money in the first place and need the tips. But I still believe that if they want more money, they need to do more work to get it.

what does not matter for you may matter for someone else

2007-05-24T14:32:00.000-05:00

In most news media, they are supposed to call people by what they want to be called. In some cases that is easily defined, but for some individuals this is not so easy. Transvestites, bisexuals, gays, and lesbians may have a different name for themselves than that of which they are. To find out what the person wants to be called, the reporter needs to ask. If a person is called something they do not want to be called, it could cause problems for the person but also for the news organization. Most news media uses this same policy. The ethics behind this policy is that if the reporter does not ask and puts what they want in the story, they are discriminating toward that person. That particular person may not be what the reporter says and it could very much ruin their reputation. I am not sure, but I think libel can come in to play here.

In my opinion it does not really matter. If a person wants to be called something other than what they really are, I think they should be called that. To make my opinion about this issue, I had to kind of look in their perspective. They know they are not the same as everyone else, and they don't want to be called the same thing. If I were a lesbian, which I am not, I would want to be called a lesbian because that is what I would be. But others, like transvestites, may want to choose the gender he or she would like to be known as. For people of different gender than what they are makes it really hard on news media. If the person does not tell the reporter what they want to be called, it can cause issues. First of all most people don't want to ask. It may seem rude or impolite. I think if a person has a questionable gender and is going to talk to the media, they need to tell them what they want to be called.

Spying on Terrorists is always a good thing

2007-05-24T14:30:00.000-05:00

The Domestic Monitoring Program that President Bush put into place is a program that lets the National Security Agency put suspected terrorists under watch. Under this program, the NSA is authorized to eavesdrop on conversations that are leaving and entering the US. This program was designed after 9/11 to stop terrorists from attacking again. The controversy in this program is that most people think that a court approval is needed.

A lot of people that do not think the idea is a good idea is because they consider this to be spying on people. They are saying that they do not want to know when people are plotting against the United States. They want to wait and have another 9/11 happen. People who do not agree with the program also want a court approval before the monitoring takes place. I can already find a problem with that. So the people that want to wait for court approval want to wait for the court date. The court date can take place at any time and it can also take place a long time away. So while we are waiting on this court date to happen, people can be plotting and acting against the United States. I guess they just don't want people in America to be safe.

I think the monitoring program is a great idea. If people didn't have anything to hide, they would not mind having their phone taps. I think that people do not want this to happen because they have something to hide. If people are doing bad things in our country than they should be caught and stopped before another terrorist attack happens. If the NSA can catch terrorist before they attack, than terrorism will eventually become a lesser threat. Yes, it will take a while but I think it is worth the safety of our country. One reason why people should be happy because this is taking care of some of the danger in Iraq and Afghanistan. If we are catching the terrorists, this could later call for fewer troops. Well people complain about how there are too many troops over there, so this could bring down the amounts of troops there and eventually allow for all of them to come home.

In my History class, we learned about our natural rights, Life, Liberty, and they pursuit of happiness. I do not think this program is breaking any of these rights. If this monitoring program does not take place, then I think we are going to loose these rights. More people will die and grief will be a part of the lives of more people in the US. This program is there to keep everyone safe and to seek out the people who try to bring us harm. They are definitely not trying to spy on us.

Unborn children should not be aborted

2007-05-24T14:28:00.000-05:00

For the most part, I agree with the bill from 2006 completely. I have found out that in most cases, most women who get abortions did not even want to get pregnant. In the United States, 49% of the pregnancies in America are unintended and they are aborted. Out of all the women that obtain abortions, 52% of them are 25 or younger, 33% are 20-24 and 19% are teens. Here’s an example of how many abortions actually occur. In 1996 there were 1,221,585 abortions in the United States alone, so using the percentages above 232,101 were teens and 403,124 were between 20 and 24 years of age. Although these numbers have been going down slowly, this new act can help with the decrease of abortion drastically. So in other words, I think that the new abortion act is fine in most cases. If the women decide to have an abortion, seeing an ultrasound will let them have a change of heart. Ok...so it will cause guilt trips for women, but it is a guilt trip that will save another human beings life.

Although it will not get rid of abortion 100%, it will help in the decrease. If teens and adults decide to have unprotected sex I think that they should take responsibility for their actions. If the did not want to get pregnant, they should have been more careful and not had sex off the seat of their pants. If you are not ready to have kids, I think people should consider having safer sex. I think this should also go for married couples. If they decide to have unprotected sex and have an unintended pregnancy, they should also have the baby. If they couple thinks they are too old to have kids, maybe they should have thought of that before hand. If they to the actions to get pregnant, they should not take a life for the mistake that they made.

But on the other hand, I also think that some cases should be considered. Rape is an issue that stands in some abortions. When women are raped and get pregnant, I fully agree with having the baby aborted. Being raped is one the worst things that can happen to a girl or a woman and she should not have to be reminded of that every time they look at the child that they had been raped. In these cases, I think there should be an exception. Anyone who has gone through rape should not be forced to have his or her rape baby. Another exception to this rule should be women who are at risk for their lives. Usually when women give birth and their lives are at risk, the woman dies and so does the child. I think it is better to loose one life over two, especially when one life can be saved. These are the only exceptions that I think are important and should be taken into consideration.

Only 35 MPG?!

2007-05-22T14:31:00.000-05:00

The United States Government just passed a bill into law that states that all new motor vehicles produced after 2019 are required to have at least a 35 mile-per-gallon fuel consumption. While this law is good, in that car manufacturers will be required to make slightly more fuel efficient vehicles, it is horrible that it is only 35MPG. With China and Japan producing 100MPG cars now, and requiring vehicles be at least in the 70s, American car companies cannot even sell most of their cars over seas. Europe is the not as high as Asia, but most of their vehicles are at least in the 50 to 60 MPG range. While the bill was supported by many "tree-huggers" it is said to be the only compromise between the legislators and the car companies. COMPROMISE?! Why is our government compromising with businesses?! Our government should be looking out for the people, not the companies.

Mass Advertising or Mass Execution

2007-05-22T13:15:00.000-05:00

Have you ever noticed the billboards that line the highways? Sure you have; everyone has. They're annoying, boring, and worst of all, they are DISTRACTING! Sure, some of them are interesting, for instance the Chic-fil-a billboards with the three-dimensional cow statues never cease to amaze me. BUT, these billboards, especially the few interesting ones, are extremely distracting. What's the big deal? Aren't advertisements supposed to catch your attention? Yes, but my question is: ARE THEY SUPPOSED TO KILL YOU?

Over 40,000 people were killed in traffic accidents in 2005 alone, thats about one death in every 13 minutes. According to the US Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), nearly 25% of these deaths are attributed to drivers being distracted. That's over 10,000 people each year! The NHTSA released a statement that 30% of distracted drivers are distracted by cell phones. That still leaves 7,000 people who die each year from distractions. Now I'm not saying that all 7,000 deaths are because of billboards, and there are no statistics to prove either way, but just think about how many possible deaths each year could be caused from this accepted form of mass advertising. And billboards are only one form of advertising.

What about television? You can turn on the television and watch depressing news about murders, wars, rapists on the loose, and anything else that you may find depressing. You switch to other channels where you can watch reality television shows that showcase people doing extreme stunts where there is a rather high chance of death. With television being so depressing these days, it is no wonder that the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) says that out of the 30,000 suicides each year nearly 29,000 are of people who are suffering of depression. Having not even touched on television advertisements, one can almost see how television might actually have helped caused some of this depression. Everyday teenage girls across the world watch television commercials that tell them how imperfect they are. These commercials tell them that they aren't pretty, that they are overweight, that they aren't smart, or that they will never succeed in life because they aren't perfect like these television models. What does this do for the self-esteem of these teenage girls? It drops it dramatically, and low self-esteem is a major cause of depression. And depression is a major cause of suicide. Teenage boys are watching shows like Jackass where stupid people do stupid potentially fatal, or at least painful stunts. These boys who are watching these shows go out and attempt these stunts that often end up having fatal results. Although these shows do not air until later in the evening, the commercials for these shows do not even include the "Do not try this at home!" small print. Also the commercials for every cartoon seem to be exploding with violence. What does this say about violence and death to these boys?

The internet is another place to get bad advertising. With over a billion people online across the world, the internet is a great place for advertisers. But does anyone ever questions these annoying advertisements? No. Kids go online every day to sites all over the internet that include advertisements of people doing stupid stunts, or more advertisements telling people how imperfect that they are. Aside from that, what about all of the advertisements for all of the violent games that appear on the internet? What about the pop-up advertisements for the videos of people doing stupid things?

How many deaths can we attribute for the psychological effects of advertising? How many deaths can we attribute to the distractions from the reality? What is the media, with all of its power trying to accomplish? Is it mass advertising or mass execution?

UPDATE: Maybe I'm not crazy after all. And oddly enough, it seems like other people agree: http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1271015,00.html?f=rss