The Semi-True Adventures of Lar

Bruno ist maschterpeizen du satiren! (Translated from German: Bruno is a masterpiece of satire!)

2009-07-13T11:07:00.015-04:00

Saw Bruno this weekend. Loved it for many reasons. Primarily because it was outrageous. I also like the blend of scripted scenes and absurd interviews. You can never quite tell what's real and what's staged. Like Fox News.

I recently went on a liberal-leaning website (The Huffington Post) and found myself laughing at all the comments complaining about how they feel Bruno reinforces gay stereotypes. They were in fact, reinforcing the stereotype that liberals are a bunch of humorless analysts who can't cease promoting their agenda for even one second, even to laugh at an obvious over-the-top parody from someone clearly on their side.

The fact is that Bruno is a masterpiece of satire. All topics are fair game, but more than homophobia, the movie hits the phenomenon of celebrity: its insincerity, the self-destructive (and destructive to others) lust for it, its obliviousness to hypocrisy.

Cohen's satire smokes The Onion's groin-kick obviousness or The Simpson's spoon-feeding subversion. Why? Because Bruno shows by example. Witness Paula Abdul live as she talks about human dignity while sitting on the back of a Mexican. Note the consultants advising Bruno on the hottest charity to get into so as to become famous-er. Feel your jaw drop as you watch show-biz parents willing to pimp their children out at any cost.

This behind-the-scenes look at the Fame Industry is eye-opening enough to be almost documentary-worthy.

With every work of satire comes complaints that boiled to their essence are concerns that people are going to take the work seriously and incorporate it into their world-view. The role of knee-jerk is currently being played by GLAAD, who despite their admirable agenda, are pushing the complaint that Bruno reinforces gay stereotypes.

So surely GLAAD must be violently opposed to the Bravo network, where every other show features gay people as fashion-designers, interior-designers or hair-designers. No such luck. A quick (and admittedly lazy) search on their site finds an essay titled Where We Are on TV: 2007 - 2008 that calls Bravo "The gold standard of LGBT representation on reality shows." (Link.)

But I'm not here to pick an internet brawl with an organization I mostly admire. I'm here to say that Bruno is a great film, funny and clever and ridiculous all at once. It even takes a few shots at homophobia, as Bruno visits gay-converters, taunts the cruel "God Hates Fags" people, and pulls the ultimate prank on a proudly straight crowd expecting a cage fight.

The real target of Bruno was fame and those who reach for it.

Now for some humility. The Huffington Post's Guide to Blogging instructs bloggers to "write on top of the news." That is, in order to get more site hits, you should hitch your blog to a rising news story, which I just did. So, despite my critiques, I suppose I'm not immune from fame-lust either. Bruno was right!

Ach mein suchen butockenkopf! (Translated from the German: I'm such a butt head!)

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? The world's first CarbonFree(R) novel according to Carbonfund.org. The book is available on Amazon.com as a paperback and Kindle eBook. It is also available for other eBook readers. For more info, visit LarryNocella.com.

How many times do you have to have gay sex before you're officially gay? (or, Change isn't always good, but that's no reason to be a judgmental jerk)

2009-07-06T14:53:00.027-04:00

There are just way too many clichés designed to discourage experimentation with your life, your identity and your habits.

When you're young, whatever you feel like doing is not really what you feel like doing. It's described by others as just a phase. When you're older, anytime you try something new, it's a trend. Then you're going through teenage rebellion. Then you're finding yourself. When you're older still, you're not trying to enjoy life's infinite variety, you're going through a mid-life crisis.

Can't someone just do something new because they feel like it and not have it categorized like a mental illness? Isn't it okay if something is a passing phase, why are the above clichés packed with such scornful judgment?

I mean really, can't a dude wear a dress once in a while just to try it? Does that make him a transvestite? Surely there must be a limit on how many times you can have gay sex and still not be officially gay. Please say it's more than ten times so I don't have to change my Facebook profile… to Republican.

Where is the line between a passing phase and your identity? Isn't any experimentation a part of your identity anyway?

I've never understood the mocking of our past selves for harmless preferences or even noble goals. How many times have you experienced some variant of this conversation: Oh my gosh, did we really used to X? (Where X equals any previous activity now discarded: wear legwarmers, listen to [a band fallen from fame], use gallons of hairspray, aspire to be vegan, try to live off the land, etc.)

Why is a phase sometimes viewed with such reverent awe (see Piccasso's Blue Period) and other times viewed with such mocking disdain (see glam metal)?

One of the rare clichés I know of that supports change is the dogmatic, and therefore wrong statement, "All change is good." That one is best debunked visually, as seen below.

[Cartoon first published in QECE #3 page 3.]

This rant got started because I wanted to kick off my new website logo and blog name with an explanation, but there's not much to say except that I want to have more fun. I didn't like the old stuffy design, and I wanted a more snazzy title. I wanted the posts to be shorter and to gravitate away from gravitas and drift toward more fun.

Then I ditched the idea of posting about the rebranding (as it's called in the dot biz) because the last thing the world needs is a blog entry talking about the blog itself. Whoops.

So, is calling my blog The Semi-True Adventures of Lar just a passing phase? Almost certainly. Is it part of who I am? Almost definitely.

Clichés usually annoy me, because they're levers pulled by the reflexive and lazy mind, but there are some I can live with, like this: Variety is the spice of life, suckas.

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? The world's first CarbonFree(R) novel according to Carbonfund.org. The book is available on Amazon.com as a paperback and Kindle eBook. It is also available for other eBook readers. For more info, visit LarryNocella.com.

Rare Find! A Funny Michael Jackson joke!

2009-07-03T07:23:00.005-04:00

I don't like to make jokes when people die, I mean, death is serious and sad. Frankly, it sucks. Except maybe when it comes to Hitler. Anyway, I couldn't help but trying to come up with a joke about MJ's passing.

Imagine my surprise when, upon sharing this joke with friends, a joke I wrote, the response was not the usual why-am-I-your-friend-again? look, they actually laughed! You like me! You really like me! Or at least tolerate me!

In fact, most friends were so impressed they insisted that I put this joke on my blog as a way of stamping my authorship on it, so when you hear it on Bill Maher, The Daily Show, or Late Nite with Comedian X, you'll know I'm not lying when I say I wrote it. I'm copyrightin' this bad-boy, gonna be rich soon.

Okay. Okay. So you made up a funny joke. Shut up and tell it.

Sorry, voice in my head. Here goes. Enjoy.

Michael Jackson and Farrah Fawcett both arrived at the pearly gates at the same time.

St. Peter said to Farrah: "So what did you do in your time on earth?"

Farrah said, "On TV, I played an angel."

St. Peter said, "You may enter. We always welcome those who portray the kingdom of heaven."

St. Peter turned to Michael Jackson and said, "So what did you do in your time on earth?"

Michael Jackson said, "Well, I slept with a lot of children."

St. Peter said, "You may enter. We always welcome Catholic priests."

===
Larry Nocella writes The Semi-True Adventures of Lar blog at LarryNocella.com. He's the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? The world's first CarbonFree(R) novel according to Carbonfund.org. The book is available on Amazon.com as a paperback and Kindle eBook. It is also available for other eBook readers.

Glad to see democracy in Iran, is it authentic? American ambivalence. btw, What does it mean to lose moral authority?

2009-06-21T20:12:00.021-04:00

So there's some trouble after the Iranian election. Silly democratic amateurs! They should learn from us Americans. We've been rocking democracy for 200-plus years, so we know how to do it right.

Psst! Bush v. Gore? Oops. Psst! The Franken-Coleman race? Double oops.

Okay! Okay! So maybe we Americans aren't that great at democracy, but at least we like to think we are, and it's the thought that counts, right? Damn, don't we get any credit just for believing?

We get so proud when we see democracy flourish in other countries, voters smiling for the cameras and showing their stained fingers! Hey wait a minute… why are they staining the middle finger? We love to see foreign democracies, until we realize the guy voted in hates us as much as the guy voted out.

Call me cynical, call me paranoid... and you'd be right, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong when I have a sinking feeling that I've already read the spoilers for made-for-TV Iran election drama.

It just strikes me as extremely convenient that a country the USA and most Western nations officially dislike, a nation they simply cannot stop from pursuing nuclear power (and nuclear weapons) is plunged into chaos during an election.

What reason do I have to doubt the official version? It's plausible enough. Maybe most Iranians are embarrassed that their face to the world, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is portraying them like ignorant, war-hungry morons. I'm sure there was someone like that as our president once.

Or maybe, just maybe, the current strife in Iran is just another example in a long line of clandestine US and CIA manipulation. (Reference Chile, Iran 1953, Cuba, Grenada, and on...)

A recent pundit cliché these days is, America has lost its moral authority. I don't know if they know what they mean by that, I suspect they've been infected by the meme, and it seems weighty and profound. I'll try to be more articulate. What it means when America loses its moral authority is that it's hard to believe that America inspires democracy instead of just inspiring its appearance, while actually subverting it.

The USA wanted regime change in Iran. Then after an election in Iran, the incumbent claims victory and opposition candidates cry foul. Wow! That sure was a lucky break for the USA!

Cynics everywhere are placing bets on which alternate ending we're going to watch: will the US pull a "Bay of Pigs" and not be there for the puppet? Or will they execute (pun?) a "Pinochet in Chile" and be there for the victor even if he proves to be a war criminal? Opposition candidates in Iran must know (or were told) they will be treated as heroes if they remove the thorn from the West's collective toe.

The CIA can't lose here. Installing a puppet isn't even essential. Chaos is a sufficient end. If you can whip up enough protest, whether founded (as when Bush "won" Florida by the Supreme Court ending a recount) or unfounded (Obama's non-existent birth certificate that actually does exist) you can attempt to deprive the official winner of legitimacy, and fill their term with late night monologue jokes, talk radio rants and extremely un-witty spam about how they didn't really win.

On the Iran situation, President Obama has even tried some philosophical flanking by stating that his response to the crisis is muted because he doesn't want anyone to think the USA is meddling. Now why would we think that?

So what's a concerned American to do? Twitter your ideas for subversion furiously or hope the anti-USA guy wins if that's what Iranians want? Wait a sec, if the Iranian leader is pro-America isn't that good for me since I'm an American? Should I care about genuine elections in Iran, or just care about what's good for me? Are we witnessing democracy in action? Or more stoking by the CIA?

Is it real? Is it fake? I don't know. I allow myself the luxury of no commitment to any belief. Ahhhh… very nice.

Here's what I'm sure of: the photos and news coming from Iran are very disturbing, what appears to be police attacking peaceful demonstrations. If they don't knock that off, I'm going to be putting aside my skepticism for some good down-home righteousness. I hope you find peace Iran, inside and with the Western governments.

I'd like for my country to get along with Iran, and I'd like their leader to be someone Iranians want elected. Lastly, I'd like a snack that has the great taste of a potato chip with the same nutritional value as broccoli.

5ewbud3t4m

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? The world's first CarbonFree(R) novel according to Carbonfund.org. The book is available on Amazon.com as a paperback and Kindle eBook. It is also available for other eBook readers. For more info, visit LarryNocella.com.

The Emergence That Didn't Emerge when Atlas Shrugged (or, If Atlas Shrugged, his job would get outsourced.)

2009-06-08T10:33:00.014-04:00

Since people tend to think in labels, most of them are surprised that I, being labeled a liberal (meaning I put caring about others at a high priority) have read and enjoyed books by Ayn Rand, herself being labeled conservative (meaning she puts caring about oneself at a high priority.) This fact often makes my fellow labeled-liberals gag.

Yes, I've read and enjoyed Ms. Rand's books, including Anthem, Atlas Shrugged, and The Fountainhead. I think I may have even tried her book The Virtue of Selfishness, but I bailed before completion. Call me virtuous.

For those who don't know squat about Ayn Rand, she's the patron saint of free market, zero taxes, individualist philosophy. When I say she's the patron saint, I mean that in its fullest sense. She's just as extreme and just as wrong in many of her assessments of the world as the people that worship her.

There is some intelligence in her endless warnings against too much forced behavior on behalf of society. I know giving her one sliver of credit will make some of my fellow liberals have a stroke, but I've always felt it best to extract wisdom wherever you can.

As an example, her book The Fountainhead is moving to any struggling artist. It's about an architect who is visionary and uncompromising. As a result, he is blacklisted, having to fight his way into the profession with heroic determination. Leaving aside Rand's inaccurate formula that "the masses" are always wrong and the individual always right, I enjoyed this book as simply an underdog story. It's inspiring for an author in search of an agent with the vision to release the genius of his blockbuster novel. That author would be me, by the way, in case that analogy blew past ya.

So that's my analysis of Ayn Rand: as an artistic philosophy, somewhat inspiring. As a social-political-economic philosophy, I'm unmoved.

The Ayn Rand novel I want to talk about most is Atlas Shrugged because I think its misguided views are backing a lot of modern opinion. In the book, the richest, most powerful men in the world have had enough of being taxed so they shut down their companies and thereby shut down the world. The whole planet plunges into chaos until the titans return.

This explains the title. It's a spin on the myth. Atlas gets sick of carrying around the world, of people freeloading off his effort. So he dumps the planet and everyone suffers.

The plot is laughable. Why? Because what would happen today if a worker walked off the job and said "I'm not working for you anymore?" The instant this earth-bound Atlas mentioned he might "shrug," he'd be notified that his services were no longer required and he was being replaced (for one-tenth the price) by a desperate immigrant escaping some war-torn country.

Of course, if the exiting person was a CEO he would probably reap a huge bonus on his way out, but ultimately the world wouldn't stop, it wouldn't even blink.

In short, if Atlas shrugged, his job would get outsourced. He'd be lucky if he could find even an asteroid to carry around afterwards.

Well what if an Atlas-like CEO actually owned the company and decided to take it elsewhere? Sure that would damage a lot of people's financial lives, but that illustrates that the existence of all-powerful individuals makes the world unsafe for other individuals. Ultimately, people have no choice but to band together (via society, or unions, or taxes) to prevent simply living at the whim of the wealthy (reference the at-will employee.)

I never really gave much thought to the magnitude of Ms. Rand's wrongness until I was working at a place that desperately needed a union, which I voted for, and which was enacted. We could all have been the fiercest individuals in the world, but the very existence of those who control everything would have stopped us from pursuing our own individual goals. An individual cannot possibly make a reasonable request against a company that is treating them unfairly.

I'm tempted to call Ms. Rand naïve, but I will refrain because she does not have the benefit (as we do) of several decades of watching her ideas being applied.

The root of the error in Ms. Rand's worldview and its modern descendants is that they rely on a miracle of emergence. The core belief is that by encouraging everyone to grab everything they can with no regard for anyone else, somehow the world will become the best possible place for everyone. It's like the dying (dead?) idea of "trickle-down" economics: give to the rich as much as you possibly can and then somehow, this will result in more money for the poor.

The real tragedy of Ayn Rand is that she doesn't seem to notice that by pursuing a world where the rich are in full control and don't owe the society that enabled them to prosper a darn thing, an individual's rights end up stifled. By advocating boundless individualism, she denies opportunity to other individuals who may be born to poorer families.

So there is an emergent result from her philosophy, just not the kind she wanted.

Okay, this is all getting complex and grey, and that's where Ayn Rand's extreme philosophy (where any extreme philosophy) breaks down: when it leaves the realm of contrived fiction and enters the real world.

===
Larry Nocella's novel Where Did This Come From? is available on Amazon.com as a paperback and Kindle eBook. It is also available for other eBook readers. For more info, visit LarryNocella.com.

Rock beats Scissors beats Paper beats Rock Update: Screen beats Paper beats Screen.

2009-05-26T07:15:00.010-04:00

Paper has been getting it's ass kicked lately. The conventional wisdom is that video screens are the death of paper. If you have an electronic device, you just download the info and you're done, there's (supposedly) no need to harm any trees.

As usual here in the offices of LarryNocella.com, I'd like to take a step back and review the "conventional wisdom" from an unusual angle. I find the screen vs. paper debate comparable to the Christmas tree debate.

I'm not referring to the perennial news stories about people spazzing because a Christmas tree isn't allowed on public property, causing them to lament the intolerant, especially at this time of year, since everyone is a Christian. I'm also not referring to the laughably manufactured War On Christmas™.

The Christmas tree debate that I think will shed some funky disco lights on the paper vs. screens discussion is about what kind of Christmas tree is better: a real one or a fake one made of plastic and metal.

Where I live, following Christmastime, you can count on finding defrocked Christmas trees tossed on the side of the road. It's annoying. What a waste to cut down a perfectly healthy tree for a short amount of time and then just chuck on the street where it withers away. Why didn't the person dispose of it properly, or even toss it into the woods?

This led me to be fully in favor of the fake (plastic and metal) Christmas tree. You can reuse it and you don't need to cut down any trees.

My view was changed after reading a letter to the editor in a newspaper. Was paper calling to me? The letter (I can't remember the newspaper or I would note it) rocked my world. It made this point: "Real trees are better than fake ones. Eventually the fake one is going to a landfill. Real trees can be used for firewood or composted."

Now I know why Rush Limpballs is so angry all the time! It hurts to be wrong.

Real trees are better, environmentally-speaking. A real tree can be returned to the earth. Ultimately some amount or all of a fake tree goes to a landfill. With minimal effort, a real tree can return to the earth to feed more trees.

Now let's look at paper vs. screens.

At first glance, cell phones and eBook readers like the Amazon Kindle seem like environment-savers: you never have to cut down a single tree to make paper for books, magazines or newspapers ever again. What a blessing! Well, it would be if a combination of plastic, metal and assorted hazardous materials simply appeared out of the air and vanished once obsolete.

In theory you buy one electronic gadget and you're done for life. But that never happens. Microsoft or some other jerk organization that claims they don't have a monopoly but really does makes some upgrades and soon your device is so obsolete it simply won't work. You need to buy a new one. The old one may take a circuitous route through eBay, but ultimately it's landfill stuffing.

The takeaway: don't write paper off just yet. When assessing how good something is for the environment, we have to consider not only what it takes from the earth but how easily it can return. Real trees beat fake trees, paper beats screens easily, super-convenient cell phones are upset by their whipping boys, the phonebook.

So now that I've presented a case for paper, we can all acknowledge there is a lot of paper waste going on. It has been noted that electronic spam isn't just a nuisance, it's wasteful of energy that could go to powering millions of homes. I have to think paper spam is even more destructive. Every week I get a packet of flyers from the same old stores I don't go to.

Spam (paper or electronic) needs to be outlawed, but it will likely never be, because that would put people out of work. Maybe screens and paper should stop fighting and acknowledge they both can be part of the solution. Waste needs to stop all around.

The whole media delivery and receipt world needs to be re-thought. The idea of an electronic device is cool, but not if (as seems to happen) the device goes obsolete every five seconds. The cost of something should figure in how it's going to get back into the earth. You should be able to completely opt-out of spam paper mail, too.

Like that annoying true proverb, it sounds like a lot of challenges, but it's a lot of opportunity to treat our home right.

===
Larry Nocella's novel Where Did This Come From? is available on Amazon.com as a paperback and Kindle eBook. It is also available for other eBook readers. For more info, visit LarryNocella.com.

Blah-Vroom-Blah! versus Sympathy For the Teabaggers (or, Finding the Best Servants)

2009-05-13T10:51:00.012-04:00

Lately I've been making more of an effort to understand those I disagree with. I'm desperately seeking opinions different than mine instead of digesting the same old media that reinforces my thoughts. I already know what I think and while insecure in some ways, I don't need to constantly be told I'm right (just that I'm beautiful.)

I think of my opinions like a champion boxer who cannot retire. He stays on top only as long as he defeats all contenders, and he must face every challenger.

Results of my quest have been mixed.

I've tried to engage people on the internet, and by "engage" I mean call them morons and get called worse. Strangely, this has not led to the thoughtful exchange I had hoped for.

Fortunately, shortly after embarking on this venture, an opportunity arose. I refer to the recent Tea Bag Parties held on Tax Day.

Having taken part in demonstrations before (mostly on behalf of animal rights) I felt kinship with the teabaggers. I knew what they were up against, even though they had Astroturf backing. If you've never taken to the streets, let me review the weird obstacles that arise when partaking in a protest.

It's not as easy as it sounds. Sure, you stand there with a sign and/or march, but it's often boring (that's one challenge) the weather isn't always friendly, and you even might get nervous, as from stage fright or public speaking.

Then there's the taunting. Knuckleheads driving by are quick to execute what I call the blah-vroom-blah. They disagree with you (judging by their hand gestures) and they scream their discontent without ever slowing down as they whip past. What they yell is invariably lost to the wind, their vehicle's engine and the Doppler effect. Apparently, to some, an exchange of ideas is best handled like fast food: quick and lousy. Thanks to the net, protest taunting options are multiplied. Now you can mock the protestors in lots of new creative ways before, during, and forever after, in multimedia. (True confession: I did some mocking on Twitter.)

Of course, the biggest challenge following a demo is getting your message(s) into the mainstream media (MSM). Sadly, most analyses from the MSM were echoes of the same crap I heard following my animal rights adventures. Some cliches: What is the message? The message just isn't clear. They need a leader. They need a single voice. What are they protesting? What are they doing out there?

I've always felt that you need to be careful not to assess the value of a message based on the skill of the messenger at presenting it. Imagine a genius with a speech impediment. His presentation is incomprehensible, but his ideas are awesome.

Yet that poor genius would be mocked by the MSM because of the snotty way pundits of all stripes assess demonstrations. If the demo isn't executed in an easy-to-report fashion, with a ready-made single message and choreographed dance numbers, they whine. As if it's even possible to gather hundreds of people in one location and have them all sing the same tune with one voice.

The MSM has not learned or perhaps simply can't cover this important facet of America. News is made for single simple messages that fit into defined areas, but with America speaking so diversely, reporting usually falls short. Though it may be true that the protest is disorganized, we need to note that inadequate reporting methods may be a bigger part of the problem.

So let's listen to the teabaggers. They are angry about taxes, angry about bank bailouts, worried about how all Obama's spending will affect future generations. These are all legit concerns. I applaud them taking it to the streets. I like to think a big demo frightens would-be dictators.

Sadly, though, they don't, and that's where I part ways with the teabaggers. I understand they are concerned, but when the Bush-Cheney Criminal Cartel was selling out America for generations in ways financial, legal and moral, teabaggers did nothing. It was only when Fox News whipped them up about Obama that they mobilized. This is disappointing.

Obama's team has repeated endlessly that anyone making less than a quarter-mil per year will see a tax decrease. Yes, Obama is spending, but he has explained his method to pay for it: tax the rich, which the general teabagger seems to also oppose.

How odd! These rugged individualist types practically have a waking wet dream while talking about making their final hopeless stand against a much larger, much more well-armed foe (always the government or some arm thereof.) Yet the same people are always willing to live at the whim of the rich. I say tax the greedy bastards!

That's the teabagger paradox: they fight against their own interests, for free, on behalf of the rich who would steal their life savings and screw them and their families in a second. The best servant is a willing one.

So even with the impossibility of adequate media coverage, can a protest accomplish anything? Well sure, it shows that people are angry enough to get out in public. For that, I commend the teabaggers. As for their no-taxes-for-the-rich stance, I'm afraid when it comes to that, I'm just going to have to say they can suck my balls.

===
Larry Nocella's novel Where Did This Come From? is available on Amazon.com as a paperback and Kindle eBook. It is also available for other eBook readers. For more info, visit LarryNocella.com.

Liberals Coming to the Defense of Fox News?! (Reluctantly Admitting Maybe We're Not All Evil)

2009-05-04T09:41:00.008-04:00

I miss a good argument, where my core beliefs are challenged. The current Republican Party has no new ideas with which to move the country forward and that's extremely dangerous. To get good ideas, you need lots of them to compete for the top and borrow from each other. It's another example of the GOP paying lip-service to the concept of a free market. If the market's not rigged, they can't compete, not even in the marketplace of ideas.

Funny that the people always complaining that others are unpatriotic commit a kind of treason. By being short on any decent ideas, they are making the USA vulnerable. We'll end up with only one world instead of the best of both.

As a writer, I'm a big First Amendment fan, I love the clash of thoughts provided by free speech and I like Voltaire's quote: I disagree with what you say, but I defend to the death your right to say it.

So it gives me a strange feeling as I am compelled to defend Fox News. The feeling is like finding a woman attractive, only to find out she's a male transvestite. Is this where I note that's the voice of experience or should I just leave that out?

As you likely know (or can easily guess) I think Fox News is a total joke. I honestly can't see any good coming from spending every second of airtime feeding on people's fears, but Fox certainly has the right to do so for fun and profit. I suppose I should also entertain the remote possibility that their reporters are sincere in their perpetual rage over superficial things and not just because there's always a market for anger reinforcement.

That said, I have to take issue with a criticism has been leveled against them by Media Matters, a group I respect as much as I disrespect Fox News. Media Matters always includes their sources with links and audio and video clips. They perform their own research projects and assemble data-heavy reports. They are top-notch journalists and analysts, and save me the time of logging every B.S. thing said by the Fox News team.

As much as I love Media Matters and their commentator, Eric Boehlert, I couldn't help but twinge when I read his article, Glenn Beck and the Rise of Fox News' militia media. (Link.) The column cites many situations in which Fox stokes the militia mentality, that anti-social behavior that presents itself as severely pro-freedom but always ends in a child-molesting micro-mini dictatorship. Boehlert notes that a man named Jim Adkisson shot and killed people in a church. Boehlert then writes this:

When investigators went to Adkisson's home in search of a motive, as well as evidence for the pending trial, they found copies of Savage's Liberalism is a Mental Disorder, Let Freedom Ring by Sean Hannity, and The O'Reilly Factor, by Fox News' Bill O'Reilly. They also came across what was supposed to have been Adkisson's suicide note: a handwritten, four-page manifesto explaining his murderous actions. The one-word answer for his deed? Hate. The three-word answer? He hated liberals.

That's the part that set off my liberalism, because it sounded exactly like agenda-driven accusations I've heard my whole life. Whenever someone goes crazy and kills people, the police search their home and find a number of things. Depending on what mailing lists you are on, you will find the cause of the murder. If a group is worried about music, they focus on the CDs with gothic lyrics (almost always Marilyn Manson.) If the group is active in alerting parents to videogame content, they will focus on the videogames found (almost always Grand Theft Auto.) In this case, Media Matters was focused on Fox News, so that was the source.

Now you could say the case of Adkisson is a bit different because in addition to finding Fox News reading material, there's the suicide note manifesto echoing that material's sentiments.

But the media focuses on action, not inaction. Meaning, we have to remember that there are millions of people who watch Fox but haven't shot people. (Gag. Millions?)

Sadly, yes. Millions of Fox News fans, despite being told that Liberals are evil, have enough human decency not to harm others. Millions of people, despite listening to vicious goth lyrics, have not gone on a shooting spree. Millions of video gaming kids (and pseudo-adults like myself) despite having access to Grand Theft Auto IV, have enough human decency not to run over several hookers, throw a grenade at a hot dog stand and then fly a helicopter into a river.

I think it says something. Despite all the hysteria about media, it might actually be much less potent than anyone believes. Millions and millions of people watch heinously violent stuff all the time. They - I should say we - We enjoy it. Yet the huge massive majority of us have never killed anyone in real life. Most of us are downright kind-hearted.

The common denominator between killers is not their media diet. The common denominator is closer to being access to guns, but even more common than that, to paraphrase Chris Rock: "Whatever happened to just being crazy?"

I believe Fox News is bad for America and humanity, because they keep people ignorant and prey on people's fears of a world always changing beyond their control. I cannot stress enough how I think Fox News is a negative influence, but I don't think it is correct to imply that they were a cause of this or any shooting. They were as much a part of Adkisson killing people as anything else in the rancid soup of his brain.

Fox News doesn't make people shoot people. Music doesn't make people shoot people. Videogames don't make people shoot people. Even guns don't make people shoot people. People shoot people because they're crazy and cruel and deranged.

In summary: Is Fox News responsible for the deaths of those people? No, but it does not immediately follow that Fox is in any way superior to a steaming pile of llama poop.

===
Larry Nocella's novel Where Did This Come From? is available on Amazon.com as a paperback and Kindle eBook. It is also available for other eBook readers. For more info, visit LarryNocella.com.

Thinking in keywords. Is the net making us horny people, as easy to spark as dry kindle in the Amazon under a kiln owned by Harry the potter?

2009-04-13T10:43:00.022-04:00

Recently, I was researching the effectiveness of ads for my novel, Where Did This Come From? on Google and Yahoo! I was looking into what phrases (known as keywords) were being used on those search engines that ultimately led people to this site.

That's when I came across the fact that the keyword used most often to find my site, by a large margin, was "horny people." Wow! The internet really does invade privacy. All this time I thought I was keeping that to myself! How do I clear my browser's history again?

Seriously, after I got done laughing, I had to find out what was going on. I'm not paying Google and Yahoo! to show my ads when people enter "horny people." Why would I? My novel is about the environment and consumerism, not boinking. So I went to Google, typed in "horny people" (for the first time, I swear) and clicked "Google Search." No, I did not click "I'm Feeling Lucky," Doctor Funnybone.

Bang! There was my site. (Image.) Talk about SEO (and by that, I mean a Search Engine Orgasm!) I was among in the organic listings, not the paid ads, about the fourth one down (it has since moved). It was the Holy Grail of placements! This was a location on the search results that paid ads cannot go. I was there for free, completely by accident. Awesome! Now if only horny people happened to be interested in purchasing an environmental-themed novel also available in eBook format including for the new Amazon Kindle!

What was going on? Apparently, Google had picked up my essay, "Apocalust now! Why are people so horny for Armageddon?" (Link.) and was leading the sexually frustrated to my blog. (You being the sole exception, of course.) As for capturing web traffic, this was good fortune. As for capturing people interested in purchasing my novel, not so lucky, but it was free, so ha ha funny funny, no harm done.

Right? Well sort of.

Let's put on our serious hats for moment (no, not Jimmy-hats, serious hats, thank you! Damn horny people!) This whole thing made me think about all the people trying to tell us the internet is bad, but never successfully articulating how. (See boring reading like the book Snark by David Denby and the article Is Google Making Us Stupid? The Atlantic, July-August 2008)

I'm here to pick up their slack. Unlike those weak critiques, I don't consider the danger I see as inevitable. It's not a doom we are powerless to stop. The net will only harm our thinking if people try to consciously write to achieve what happened to me by accident. Meaning, if people write (and editors edit) for keywords.

Mark Twain said the difference between the almost right word and the right word is really a large matter, it's the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning.

If your motivation is not to communicate, but to score web traffic, you won't be looking for the right word based on what makes the most impact on the heart of the reader, but what the most popular keywords are.

Just as word processors (is that not the coldest term possible for writing software?) can check grammar and spelling and suggest synonyms, it will only be a matter of time (if it isn't here now in some form) before you can select your text and request your words be changed to synonyms that are more likely to be keywords. The meaning of your article wouldn't change, but the words would, so your site is more likely to fall into the organic listings.

For example, say you wrote a blog entry that contained the sentence: The chicken was burnt. Afterwards, you would run it through an Search Engine Optimizer (or this process would be Orwellianly automatic) and it changes your sentence to: The cock was hot.

Since porn is big on the net, the latter is much more likely to be listed organically, grabbing all the "hot cock" searches which are most certainly more numerous than "burnt chicken" searches. Sure, your communication is eviscerated, but who cares when you can get free advertising?

This situation reminds me of filmmakers raging against the process of colorizing. I think it was Woody Allen who noted that all the effort that went into making the movie appear correct in black and white was obliterated by the colorization process. Sure, the movie was now in color, but the loving devotion to make it beautiful was gone.

It could be the same if we let search engines dictate what words we choose. All the effort that went into unleashing the lighting would be reduced to the silent blink of the lightning bug. As Orwell pointed out in 1984, where words go, our thoughts follow.

Fortunately, we can control whether this dystopia arrives. To avoid it, we just need to keep writing from the heart, the horny people demographic be damned.

Allow me to give the last word to Rush (the band, not the blowhard) from their song, The Spirit of Radio. When commenting about the changes in the music world, the lyrics note new technology isn't good or bad. "It's really just a question of your honesty."

===
Larry Nocella's novel Where Did This Come From? is available on Amazon.com as a paperback and Kindle eBook. It is also available for other eBook readers. For more info, visit LarryNocella.com.

Where Did This Come From? versus Where Is This Going?

2009-04-02T11:45:00.012-04:00

I’ve often thought of writing a sequel to Where Did This Come From? titled Where Is This Going? because it's hard to ask one without wondering the other. Both questions can be as spiritual or as concrete as you like. Spirituality being an individual thing, I'm going to talk about the concrete aspect, which will be a nice parallel to the theme of Where Did This Come From? That is, I will ask it primarily in reference to the things we buy.

When you first ask, "Where did this come from?" you learn that you really don't know. Every object around you has undergone several different processes before it arrived in your sphere. Then you start to wonder, well, I not only don't know where it came from but I don't really know where it's going once I throw it out, or after I'm gone. Will it pollute the world for the future? How do I get it back into the earth so future generations have something to use?

"Where is this going?" is a question partially answered, then abandoned by a few TV commercials a while ago. I refer to the ad that connected buying drugs to terrorism. The idea was that the money you spend on drugs ultimately funds terrorism, so don't buy drugs. Following that was a commercial linking buying a gas-guzzling car to terrorism. The idea there was that the money you spend on gas ultimately funds terrorism, so don't buy gas-guzzling cars.

Most people chose one side or the other, often claiming one link was correct and the other was wrong. Or more often, attacking the one without giving the other merit.

The interesting thing about the debate was that everybody was correct at the same time, just not to the degree that they thought they were. Yes, buying drugs leads to terrorism, yes buying gas leads to terrorism, but neither stop there. Buying a hoagie can lead to terrorism, buying shoes can lead to terrorism. Buying shoes and hoagies can also end up financing the Ulaanbaatar Society for Confused Ninjas as well.

It all comes down to free-flowing money. The instant cash leaves your hands, it's completely out of your control. You buy a sandwich at the local sandwich shop. Then the shop owner buys a car from the local lot, whose owner happens to be an as-yet-uncaught pedophile. Does this mean your money supports child molesters? Yes. Is it any fault of yours? No.

So what's the solution? Is there one? Should we just give up on boycotts? Should we bother to ask Where Is This Going?

We don't need to be paralyzed by our ignorance. Really, since when did being ignorant ever stop anyone?

You just need to consider what you're trying to accomplish and determine how direct the link is. For example, buying illegal drugs supports illegal activity only because drugs are illegal. It doesn't necessarily go to terrorism. Buying gas supports terrorism only in the case where the oil came from a company (Shell) or nation that sorta kinda sponsors terrorism but pretends not to (Saudi Arabia.) It's up to you determine how direct or indirect the linkage is. In cases of drugs and oil, it's there, but as stated, it's also there for hoagies and shoes.

In contrast, if you want to stop cruelty to animals, it's a sure bet that boycotting ham will lead to your goal.

Ultimately both ads were right, and ultimately both were wrong. Even if everyone stopped buying illegal drugs, even if everyone stopped buying oil, those who wanted to kill people for some agenda would find the money and they would find a way.

Leaving aside privacy concerns, it would be interesting if money could be tagged electronically and then you could see where it went. Sort of like WheresGeorge.com but on a much more detailed scale.

Just like with Where Did This Come From? we can't really know Where Is This Going? but we can still do our best to act responsibly.

Maybe it's best we don't know. You think you're mad now about the bottomless money pit that large banks have become? Imagine how angry you'd be if you actually knew where it all went!

===
Larry Nocella's novel Where Did This Come From? is available on Amazon.com as a paperback and Kindle eBook. It is also available for other eBook readers. For more info, visit LarryNocella.com.

Want to Save the Economy? Send the Marines Shopping! (or, Debt is the Lube of the Working Class Hamster Wheel.)

2009-03-16T15:20:00.009-04:00

I'm so confused. I thought we were doing well.

After 9/11, those of us who were not in the military got our marching orders. We were told to go forth and shop, shop, shop, spend, spend, spend.(Link.) Keep going to Disney World, keep flying the airlines. Whatever you do, don't let this shocking, horrific and historic event cause you to change anything you do, just keep spending.

It was easy to be a hero back then. Patriotism was as simple as dropping a dime. All you had to do was finance an SUV with no money down, grab an extra case of Coors Light, or tip a little extra at the strip club. You would do those things, if you cared at all about freedom. If you didn't give Sindee that extra five-spot in her thong, well then, the terrorists win!

Such was the rallying cry. The little guy could help, too. It seemed incredible that we working class folk had a part to play in trickle down economics, but we did, and still do! We're supposed to keep going into debt so the rich folk have a desperate workforce always at the ready. Debt is the lube of the working class hamster wheel. Without debt, we working people would stop working. I know it's true because I read it on a bumper sticker: I owe, I owe, it's off to work I go.

So we pitched in, we spent until it hurt, just like we were told. We hated those terrorists so bad, we even spent money we didn't have until finally someone somewhere noticed a lot of bills were overdue, so they came calling, then people went bankrupt, then banks went bankrupt, and trickle down economics reversed itself. Instead of wealth trickling down, debt rained up.

Now everything is a mess. In the past, those with big shiny things were admired. It was common to say wow, look at the size of that person's house (or car, or trophy wife's breasts) they must be rich! Now we know that person isn't rich, they're in a lot of debt.

How did this happen? How could debt be our redemption immediately after 9/11 but our downfall a few years later?

Suddenly spending is a bad idea. Now President Obama is offering to hand out money so everyone can go into more debt and the spittle-producing media is screaming "socialist" with all the fury they can muster before the next infomercial about erectile dysfunction.

Of course it's a well-known fact that people who use the word "socialist" as an insult are the same people who have no idea what a socialist is.

For their benefit, I will explain. A socialist is someone who pools the wealth of society and distributes it to some other purpose. Hey, sounds a lot like the USA, regardless who is president! After all, we pay taxes, and that money gets pooled and then used for a lot of things like a road system, a mail system, an internet, fire fighters, police, and a military.

What? Our military is socialist?! I'm afraid so. Well then we should do away with our military as well as all those other things. After all, military equals socialist and socialist equals evil. So dump 'em, the friggen welfare queens.

Unless!

Think about it. As history shows, the problem wasn't spending, it was how much and who did it. We need professional spenders, an elite force of shopaholics, a bunch of trained individuals who follow orders and- That's it! We need to re-tool the military into the finest shopping force the world has ever seen!

Everyone wins! The military, being socialist, and therefore evil, is disbanded and rebranded as The Shopping Service. Armed with credit cards backed by taxpayer funds, they will deploy into local malls and spend precisely what is needed, when it is needed, as they are commanded, with a discipline we civvies could never muster.

We in the working class will be able to horde our money for our survival without being told we're unpatriotic. The former members of the U.S. military will no longer struggle with the impossible task of peacemaker in counties ravaged by civil war. Most importantly, the rich will get their profits! Bailouts will be a thing of the past. Socialism will no longer infect our government. Who will pay the credit card bills, you ask? Nobody! And by nobody I mean the U.S. working class taxpayer. Got a problem with that, you terrorist socialist?

You want to save the economy? Send the Marines shopping! Oorah!

As someone else once said about his own flawless plan, there is no doubt they will be greeted as liberators.

===
Larry Nocella's novel Where Did This Come From? is available on Amazon.com as a paperback and Kindle eBook. It is also available for other eBook readers. For more info, visit LarryNocella.com.

Poser Propheteering

2009-03-13T12:37:00.002-04:00

I was thinking of predictions recently, and everyone's tendency after making them to trumpet the ones they get right, and say a quiet whoops about the ones they get wrong. Apparently, the desire to be a prophet is strong in human nature. One thing that is definitely predictable is that people announce only their correct predictions.

So this being a blog, obviously I'm coming to you with evidence that I called something long before the rest of the world.

Note this story from the March 12, 2009 New York Times: Forget Britney; Media Outrage Hits Big Spenders By Brian Stelter. (Link.) It's an interesting article about how the paparazzi are not only chasing celebrities, but lately they've taken to chasing rich criminals with no connection to showbiz.

I knew it, dear reader. I knew it! The Prophecy of Lar has come true. For yea, I have foreseen and even advocated this trend.

Huh?

As you no doubt recall, since you've been a faithful reader since long before it was cool (okay, that would still be now, but let's assume you've been reading this blog for a while) I advocated the papa-z chasing the truly powerful over two years ago in February 2007. I refer to the timeless classic: Watching Hollywood like a hawk. Watching Washington like a blind duck. Preventing Vietnam War Part 3: Iran with Secret Weapon Paparazzi. (Link.)

So, what other predictions has Lar the Prophet made that came true?

Uh. Um. Ah. Well. Hm.

Bother me not, fool! For I must go now to meditate on my next vision!

Wow, a self-proclaimed prophet who, when pushed for more predictions, belches out some pomposity and runs for cover. Who could have foreseen that?

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? available on Amazon. For more info, visit his website at www.LarryNocella.com.

Holding Every Book You Have Never Read in One Hand (or, The Kindle is Book Buying's Monolith Moment)

2009-03-03T11:51:00.009-05:00

Despite my natural tendency to question everything, some days I just want to believe the hype. Skepticism gets tiring in the land of relentless advertising, but enhances the thrill of discovery when something I think is going to suck ends up winning me over.

So I come to you preaching with the zeal of the newly converted: the recently released Amazon Kindle 2 is really cool.

If you don't know, the Kindle is an eBook reader, but much more importantly, it's a travelling book store, and that's where it scores book-buying's 2001 Monolith Moment, evolving the process a significant step. While not every book in the world is eBook-compatible yet, someday they will be. When that day comes, if you want, you can clear off your shelves, recycle every paper book you own, and keep just your book-reading device.

Obviously, being a semi-pro writer (heavier on the semi than on the pro) I'm very interested in how books are purchased, and how writing is marketed. However, unlike most of my writing colleagues, I'm not resistant to technology, believing it will be the end of good writing. I think mediums will always change, but they will always need writers to fill them. On the surface, eBooks sound bad. It sounds like books are going away, but they're not. Only their format is changing.

That's good news, because change is something the publishing world needs desperately. Before the internet, before print-on-demand self-publishing, books had to be filtered through the self-anointed priesthood of New York City literati and their hugely wasteful forecast-and-recycle model (they guess how many they are going to sell, or purposefully overestimate to build hype, and then recycle what doesn't sell.) That method is about as inefficient as you can get.

Environmentally speaking, forecast-and-recycle has been improved with the print-on-demand model, where printing technology allows a single book to be printed at a time, so only as many books as are wanted are printed.

The Kindle moves book-making even further: no books are printed at all. This is where the short-sighted residents of Status Quo go into full-blown panic mode. "The barbarians are crashing the gate!" They cry. As usual, that warning is code for, "Our elite little club is no longer elite! Anyone can get in!" As for me, I say rock on, democracy.

People in the supposed know have been bitching about how internet technology is making people dumber and meaner. One recent example of this hysteria is the perplexingly popular yet uninsightful article Is Google Making Us Stupid? from the The Atlantic. (Answer: No, but that article sure is.) Another is the book Snark, by David Denby, a book whining about superficial and anonymous commentary on websites. Denby's entire thesis is blown apart by the simple technique of moderated comments. Looks like someone didn't need Google to make him stupid. As for Google dumbing people down, I never heard of something so off base. Search engines help conquer ignorance of all and any kind. That's ALL they do. Ignorance that remains is the fault of the person housing it, not Google.

My point is, The Kindle is going to be good for book publishing and good for writing. When you can buy a book instantly wherever you are, that's good news for writers. With website and printing technology as is, anyone can publish anything. It's full-throttle democracy.

Now onto my specific Kindle experience. Just for kicks, I picked it up and purposefully did not read the manual, to see how easy it was to use. I poked around with the buttons and figured it out. In under five minutes I had successfully ordered a book I've had my eye on for a while: The Black Swan by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. I had the entire book in what felt like a minute.

The Black Swan was a serendipitous choice for a first Kindle read. The book starts with a philosophical approach to one's own library, that your shelves should not be filled with books you have read, but with books you haven't. This way, you can easily reference what you don't know. Books you have read are used up, you've already soaked up what they have to offer. I laughed as I read this introduction, perfectly appropriate to me holding a tiny device that contained (in theory) every single book I have never read.

I've shared my praise and I've scoffed at the hysteria, but there are some solid disadvantages to the Kindle. While it's great for anti-clutter freaks like me, nothing beats the feeling of walking into a library or bookstore and just staring in awe at the physical manifestation of all the knowledge and stories unknown to me. That's gone with The Kindle. Also, if I love a paperback, I can hand it to someone and say "You've got to read this!" but I can't do the same with the Kindle, though I've been informed that some people are trading Kindles. That's too risky for me, but this seems like an easy fix. Likely all that's needed is to finesse the digital-rights management (DRM) of the book files.

Another Kindle disadvantage is long-term: if every book is digital, it would seem more susceptible to censorship by an oppressive government or their functional equal, jerk hackers. The Kindle also loses to print in the tactile world. Touch and smell are part of the experience of books and the printed page, but not so much that I can't live without it.

That sounds like a lot of negatives but ultimately, I knew the Kindle 2 was a winner when it passed the most important test of reading. Can it be read while, ahem, multi-tasking on the toilet?

Let me simply say yes it can, and leave it at that. Ebook reading has arrived.

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? available on Amazon in print and Kindle eBook format. For more info, visit his website at http://www.larrynocella.com/.

The Myth of the Modern Day Minuteman (or, Gunophiles let us all down, are they serious about a well-armed militia or are they just LARPing?)

2009-02-17T08:59:00.009-05:00

I recently came across an internet post where gun lovers were seriously complaining that President Obama is a threat to American freedom because he wants to take away people's guns. Without even considering whether this accusation is true or not, I have a bigger question for gunophiles: Where the hell were you guys over the last eight years?

Gunophiles always claim they are the thin voluntary line between tyranny and freedom, the noble defenders of life, liberty and property. Yet the Bush Crime Family stole their (and all of our) savings right out from under us and never once did the modern-day Minutemen rise up. The "well-organized militia" that the Second Amendment promises failed to self-organize in a miraculous display of social emergence.

Where were the gunophiles when Bush was allowing his goons to plunder the country? I'd sure like to know, because as things are, we're all (and for you breeders, your children and grandchildren are also) going to be working well past retirement to pay off Bush's debt.

As for defending our nation, the Second Amendment turned out to be as useful as Web 2.0, little more than a buzzword. The gunophiles themselves were as helpful as LARPers playing resistance fighters. If Obama does want to take away their guns, it seems he has good reason: dereliction of duty.

Picture this scene: a family is starving, they have no jobs, the water is polluted, they can’t buy food, they're about to be kicked out of their home. That's a scary and growing segment of America today, but gun-lovers feel everything is all right for now. After all, they still have their guns and therefore, we're still free. Free to eat as much bullet-stew as we like. Yum yum, freedom is delicious and just loaded with iron!

Now I often find myself in a disturbingly small minority when I express concern over arguments bolstered by scenes from fictional movies, but then again, this is Hollywood, excuse me, this is America, and fiction can do the job and frame history's lessons more concisely than recalling any event. That's part of the reason I write it.

So let me try my memory at one of my favorite scenes in the movie The Grapes of Wrath. It goes something like this: A bulldozer is about a run down a farm family's house. The farm owner stands before his home and prepares to shoot the bulldozer driver. Displaying unnatural calm, the driver explains: you can shoot me, but then the man from the local bank will just send someone else. Then I'll go shoot him, the farm-owner counters. Well then, the driver says, the guy who owns the national bank will replace him. Then I'll shoot him, too! The farm-owner insists. The driver is chill: but then the corporation that owns the banks will hire someone else. Finally the farm-owner yells in frustration as his house is destroyed, "Damn it, who do I shoot?"

Exactly.

The observation made plain in the scene, supported by gunophile inaction during Bush's criminal reign is: guns are not a guarantee of freedom at all. Guns may work for solving problems of immediate physical safety in extremely rare circumstances, but not problems of finance.

See, I mock our gun-loving fellow citizens because, well, like any wanna-be comedian I’m a bit of a jerk. In addition, gunophiles are an irresistible target because they often take themselves too seriously. However, I do agree with them on two points. If someone breaks into your home with an axe, intending to do you harm, it sure would be nice to have a pistol. No question.

If you are in the extreme minority that needs to hunt for subsistence, it would help to have a rifle, but that’s where I get off the gunophile shortbus, long before the final stop deep in the heart of Crazyville.

As the saying says, give someone a hammer and every problem looks like a nail. Give someone a gun and every problem looks like a five-year-old who didn't think it was loaded.

Where were the guns? Where were the gunophiles? Where was Revolution 2.0? Nowhere, and it's just as well. Guns would not have solved the problem. They don't solve systemic problems and are no guarantee of freedom. So, please gunophiles, if you really want to defend freedom, work on stopping corruption in the financial world. As the situation is now, we'll be wage slaves the rest of our lives even if we are free to own guns.

===
Larry Nocella's novel Where Did This Come From? is available on Amazon in paperback and for the Amazon Kindle. For more info, visit LarryNocella.com.

ApocaLust Now! or, Why Are So Many People Horny for Armageddon? or, Do Bugs in a Rug Going Up a Vacuum Cleaner Believe The Rapture(TM) is at Hand?

2009-02-02T15:13:00.014-05:00

Why are so many people horny for Armageddon?

It doesn't matter how crazy your rationale is. If you claim that the world is going to end, people will believe it. If you're feeling especially randy, you can even name some specific and very near moment that humanity's doom will be sealed. Don’t worry when the time comes and goes and the end doesn’t arrive. Just revise your prophecy and the followers will be back, hungry for more of your apocalyptic visions.

All of that would be laughable except for the fact that people who are delusional are often short on humor. The other trait that always seems bundled with a willingness to believe in The End is a desire to make sure it happens. Human nature, ya gotta love it: people would rather go to oblivion rather than be proven wrong. I find it all a little scary. When someone is delusional and suicidal, that’s when we sane people get hurt.

It's a state I call ApocaLust. It's not just the belief that The End is coming, but also a desire to make sure it does, or at the very least, a joyful hope that the afflicted person witnesses it.

Chances are you brushed up against someone stricken with ApocaLust when it was at a fever pitch as the year 2000 loomed. Never mind that other human calendars (Jewish and Chinese) passed 2000 long ago. The obnoxious faithful knew all those zeros on the Gregorian calendar were going to snuff us out! So what happened? Squat.

Well, just because Y2K came to nothing doesn't mean you missed your chance! New Armageddons are always on their way! Recent chart-toppers are The Rapture(TM) and The Year 2012.

What’s up with 2012? Well, apparently that's as far as the Mayan calendar goes, and since an ancient, extinct human culture knows much more than we do, well, there simply can’t be a 2013. Imagine our misfortune! If only Staples stores had been invented then, the Mayans could have just ordered a 2013 calendar. Instead, now we’re all gonna die.

Another modern example of ApocaLust is The Rapture(TM). Our religious friends just can't wait for that day, when the chosen are called to heaven and the rest of us can finally get down to some real partying. The Rapture(TM) is big business. Someone even wrote some books about it. They're called the "Left Behind" books, which always make me think they have something to do the port side of a person's ass. But enough about Republicans, whenever I hear about The Rapture(TM) I’m tempted to put a trademark symbol after it because it just seems like a product. It's the same old religion but New! and Improved!

Another Rapture(TM) product is the commonly-seen bumper sticker: "In case of Rapture this car will be unmanned." It's not only arrogant, but also stupid. Arrogant for assuming they will be chosen by God and stupid because every car I see it on is a hard-top. Shouldn't they be driving convertibles? They're going to look like helium-filled inflatable sex dolls pinned against the inside roof of their car as it careens off the road and sits in a ditch for all eternity.

As with everything that involves us human animals, I'm convinced there is some sexual component to Armageddon. How else to explain why people keep going after it without consulting logic or reason? I believe the band Bad Religion concurs. Notice the lyrics to their ripping song, New Dark Ages: "Our kin will be immaculate ejaculate in space." Well said, BR.

That's got to be it. The End makes people horny. Armageddon is some kind of primal Spiritus Mundi archetype in our subconscious, a cosmic-sized male orgasm wherein the chosen spurt into the sky during The Big Finish. As with many things religious, the female perspective is neglected, because, well, it's confusing. And girls are icky.

I have a secret desire that The Rapture(TM) is some kind of pre-programmed harvest by people-eating aliens. They planted us here a while ago, and they’re going to zip on by (in the year 2012 for sure) and suck up all the people. The faithful will cheerfully go along, realizing only too late they are not in heaven, but they’re the main course. It makes me wonder, do bugs in a rug going up a vacuum cleaner believe The Rapture(TM) is at hand?

I can hear some of you out there now: Oh yeah? Why are you attacking religion, you damn liberal? What about all this concern for Global Warming? Isn't that an example of damn liberal ApocaLust?

A decent point. While liberals are just as susceptible to ApocaLust as anyone else, anyone who chooses to FIGHT global warming obviously isn't wishing for the end of the world. I've never heard of someone who WANTS global warming to arrive, believes it will, and sees it as something to be coaxed and rejoiced over when it arrives (note unavoidable male orgasm references). Most see it as something to be avoided, but there surely could be some misanthropes out there for whom this description fits. Like any mental illness, ApocaLust doesn't discriminate.

So what is it about people that makes them crave The End? Is it too much destination, not enough journey? Well don't stop believin' kids, the end of the world will be here someday.

That's why in my novel, Where Did This Come From? The native chief's wife, Yuala, notes that the world as we know it is a living thing, and all living things are born and die. Someday, even if we somehow muscle past the idiots who deny global warming, and survive those who want to bring about The End, the earth will die despite all our best efforts, should we ever bring them to bear. That doesn't mean we should ignore caring for our planet, it means we should be aware that she's fragile and temporary.

Or we can just keep jerking off, literally and metaphysically.

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? available on Amazon. For more info, visit his website at http://www.larrynocella.com/.

Obama Should Immediately Appoint an Ambassador to Moronia (The Ten Billionth Entry in the "Obama Should" Category)

2009-01-21T10:46:00.005-05:00

This week is when 99% of everything written on the internet starts with some variant of "Obama should..." and I'm such a conformist, I don't want to be any different. So here's my contribution: What Obama should do ASAP is appoint an Ambassador to Moronia.

Where is Moronia? You won't find it on any map, in the same way you won't find Funkytown, The Nation of Islam, or The State of Confusion in any atlas. Though it sounds like a physical place, Moronia isn't defined by a landmass covered with invisible lines that tempt humans to kill those living on the opposite side of those lines.

As you probably have figured out (if you haven't, you may be a citizen!) Moronia is The Nation of Morons. They can live anyplace on the geographical globe (though they apparently tend to coagulate in Midland, Texas.) In the space defined by mind, they are all in one place: jammed up their own asses.

Moronians (aka morons) are people who, just a few days ago, comprised the 22% who felt G. W. Bush had done a good job as president. (Source.)

They are the people who recently at a Bush fund-raiser in Midland, Texas, chanted "Four More Years!" To quote my main man Keith Olbermann: "Maybe they didn't want him back." (Source.)

I know, I know, we're supposed to be healing now. We're supposed to come together and, how would President Obama say it? Put aside partisan rancor. I love that kind of talk. I'm a hippie at heart. I love the idea of people who dislike each other coming together for a greater good. I almost cried when a dying Darth Vader chucked the Emperor down the tube in a final act of redemption. What nerd didn't?

Sadly, over the years, skeptical me has trumped the nerd and hippie within. I've come to learn that reaching one's hand out has a slim chance of working, because some people are cruel, petty, selfish, spiteful. In short, they are just fuckin' morons!

That should explain my call for an Ambassador to Moronia. We need someone to figure out exactly what morons are thinking when they claim Bush did a great job, when they chant "Four More Years!" when eight years was nine too many. What makes the people of Moronia tick? What criteria are they using to arrive at their assessments? Do they think a dive-bombing Dow Jones is good? Do they think losing 30-plus percent of their 401k is groovy? That a large national debt will just vanish? That our fellow humans dying in Iraq is worth cheering for?

Then again, do we really need The Nation of Morons? If they are a small enough minority, maybe we can just over-power them. That's preferably the case, but I've never been able to settle in my mind whether the majority of people are morons or not. Some days it seems like a pitched battle, with morons vs. non-morons switching their proportions 49-51% back and forth with the frequency of a strobe light.

Morons are people, too. I'd like to reach out to them, but how do you reach out to someone who is okay with war? Who is okay with people being poor? Who can accept elderly people without healthcare? Who can live next door to someone dying of poverty and shrug? Who want to rewrite the U.S. Constitution just to prevent private activities behind closed doors between consenting adults?

The long-haired hippie freak side of me is thnking, "Hey hep-cat, your verbal tones are harshing my aura." Well, fuck your aura! Take a shower and tell me what Morons are thinking! I want to hold hands with everyone too, but it's kind of hard when they're clinging to their guns, claiming that's their guarantee of freedom (meanwhile their retirement account is looted. Morons!)

Until we reach out to the Citizens of Moronia, getting logical, intelligent, compassionate things done will be an uphill battle. For those of you against immigration (despite what's written on The Statue Of Liberty) I might have to reluctantly agree: let's close our borders to morons!

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? available on Amazon. For more info, visit his website at http://www.larrynocella.com/.

Should George W. Bush and Dick Cheney Hang Until Dead? Or, Would a Second 9/11 Have Been Preferable to an eight-year Bush-Cheney regime?

2009-01-06T16:37:00.009-05:00

I'm not a crazy Fox News pundit. I'm not a right-wing whack job performance artist trying to sell books and using the tired old strategy of saying something so violently outrageous that I score some blips on a slow news day.

I have a functioning conscience, heart and brain. Unlike a Fox News pundit, I don't embody all the character flaws from The Wizard of Oz rolled into one. As a result, I don't sling around death wishes against people just because I disagree with them or just because I don't like them. If I did that then you would be reading about how anyone who likes that show The Hills should be boiled alive in acid.

My point is, it isn't every day and for the slightest infraction that I seriously request someone die or be executed. I'm giving you all this background so you know that it's a rare and exceptional event when I suggest that someone should go on trial for crimes where the penalty, if found guilty, include a death sentence.

Despite my hesitation to play armchair executioner, I find myself unable to escape the wish that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney be tried for crimes against humanity and if found guilty, they should hang just like Saddam Hussein. What crimes am I referring to? I guess with those two it would help to be more specific. I'm referring to the fact that Bush and Cheney deliberately deceived Congress and the American people in order to start a war with Iraq. There are a lot of other crimes those could be held to account for, but in my mind, starting a war is big enough to warrant a trial all on its own. All the other stuff? Supporting torture, ignoring the constitution, those can be additional charges.

The one thing the few remaining morons who still support Bush-Cheney fall back on is, "Well, have we been attacked lately? Has there been another 9/11?" No. There hasn't. I guess to a Bush-Cheney supporter, presidents get a one-massive-terror-attack mulligan, but no mulligans for lying about blowjobs.

No, there hasn't been a second 9/11, but given the choice between that and Bush-Cheney in power, a second 9/11 would have been much more preferable.

Let's compare. From 9/11, around 3,000 people died. Multiply by two, that's 6,000. That is far fewer people than have died in Iraq as of now: 4,221 Americans plus over 90,000 Iraqis (SOURCE: Iraq Body Count.)

The cost of 9/11 to the U.S. economy was, oh, let's overestimate it at $200 billion, though sources (Wikipedia, Naval Center for Contemporary Conflict) say it was less. Even doubled, that's still well below the debt we've been rammed into thanks to Bush and his policies: at least $700 billion.

Regarding lost jobs: a recent CNNMoney headline says, Jobless claims highest since Sept. 11 attacks, but that just refers to the number of new jobless claims over one week (the week of the article and the week following 9/11). When you add up how many total over the Bush-Cheney years, it's no surprise the article also states the number of unemployed in America is the highest since 1983.

I could go on and on and on, but I've seen enough. If you can't agree that a second 9/11 would have been preferable to eight years of Bush-Cheney, I understand. It sounds radical, but the facts support it. I don't mean to belittle the terror of 9/11 by wishing to live through it again, even though I only "lived through it" by seeing it on TV. I simply want to put it in perspective. It was one day, it was one horrible impact, but it is dwarfed by the sustained campaign of dismantling by malicious insiders over the course of eight years. The horror and fear brought about by Bush-Cheney will echo down the years and decades, and both you and I and every single other American are living through it, not just watching it on television.

Imagine the number that will die due to them being unable to afford medical care, or needing to work multiple jobs, or due to a failing infrastructure. Osama bin Laden put us all in direct, immediate harm, then vanished. Bush and Cheney have damaged our livelihood far worse for years to come. I'd like to see them held to account in some more meaningful way other than being mocked on The Daily Show.

This all leads to my request for their trial. See? I'm so unlike a Fox News pundit, I still can't just out and out call for their heads, as much as they deserve that. Let them go to trial. I'm confident they would be found guilty. Imagining it might happen, if they both hung, I wouldn't celebrate, but I'd understand it was necessary, for what they purposefully did to you, to me, to humanity, to our nation, and the generations to come.

To sacrifice two lives for the thousands of lives lost? That is not an act of revenge, but an act of justice.

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? available on Amazon. For more info, visit his website at http://www.larrynocella.com/.

The Opposite of Awesome (A Connection between the Bush Administration and Domino's Pizza)

2008-12-18T14:09:00.005-05:00

I want to take a break from heavy stuff. President Dubya is nearing the end of his ruinous term that has damaged the USA beyond bin Laden's wildest wet dreams, and there's little more to say than, Mission Accomplished, jackass!

For the moment, I feel the need to blog about something other than solely reflecting upon the thousands of obvious ways that Dubya is an asshole. It will be hard to resist the temptation. Like cheese puffs, once you start, it's hard to stop. Something about each one being easy and fun.

So I'll try to talk about something else, but I'm sure I'll take a shot or two at Dubya along the way. Besides, something has been on my mind for a while, and I just don't know the right forum for it, so why not now?

What's been on my mind? Well, I had this awe-inspiring experience and I'm struggling to express to you just how impressive it was. How do you convey to another person the idea that something is astounding? Reflexively I reach for adjectives, superlatives, capitals, bold, italic, larger fonts or repetition of the word "very," but in true cases of awe those efforts are inadequate.

I'm talking about that rare type of awe that leaves you dumbstruck, impressed to the point of being stunned, so shocked by an experience or a sight that you temporarily can't speak or move. It can be positive or negative. Sometimes it's when you're caught by a delightful surprise, sometimes it's when someone is so rude you fail to respond.

These moments of awe are rare, but I will try to convey to you a recent event where I felt (and still feel) tremendous awe. It involves pizza.

Via the New York vs. Los Angeles media, I've heard tell that we East Coast Americans are snobs about our pizza. Well, whatever. Maybe I am a snob, but I assure you, it was no snobbery that contributed to the awe with which I witnessed Domino's Pizza's extremely proficient craposity.

Let me set the scene. It was late at night and the room was filled with a cloud of green smoke, if you know what I mean and I know you do. Being a responsible adult, I don't ever drive intoxicated, but I was suddenly stricken with a vicious case of the munchies. All other delivery options were closed except for Domino's. My judgment impaired, I ordered from a place I swore to avoid long ago, not only because of their inferior product, but because of their founder's dealings in right-wing lunacy.

When the delivery dude arrived and I opened the front door, he stepped back. I guess a puff of smoke billowed out the open door, Cheech-n-Chong-style. Anyway, I paid for the pie and took a bite. I forced my way through one piece like a reality-show contestant who forces themselves to eat slugs and I almost vomited. It was the absolute worst tasting pizza ever. I was in awe. This awe lasted beyond my then-altered state to my current sobriety.

Think about it. A person under the influence of some prime grass is craving snack food. This person orders the most fun, most delicious food ever invented, in the region of America that rules the pizza world (fuck off, Chicago!) and near a city that houses more Italians than any city outside of Italy. (Or at least it seems that way.) I daresay Philadelphia is the pizza capital of the USA if not the world.

Yet this delivery chain, Domino's, could not deliver a pizza a starving man could stomach. You don't just work at making a pizza that bad. You don't just have a talent. You don't transcend craft and raise it to the level of art. You are a god. You have a divine power to make a shitty pizza. Your supernatural ability leaves us mortals in awe.

Kneel before the awesome might it requires to make a pizza so heinously bad that a sometime stoner, in the throes of the munchies, will actually turn away from it! Witness the power! Tremble before it!

Thus, awe.

With that, I leave you my summation of the Bush Administration: as bad as a pizza from Domino's.

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? available on Amazon. For more info, visit his website at http://www.larrynocella.com/.

Exactly how vigilant is eternally vigilant again? (or, Yet another partially educated opinion on the passage of Prop 8)

2008-11-25T08:50:00.006-05:00

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, Thomas Jefferson once said. Live long enough and you can't help but agree with the statement. The problem is, agreeing with it and fully understanding its implications are separate. Being eternally vigilant sounds like a lot work without a day off. Exactly how vigilant are we talking here?

I'm afraid Jefferson's wise observation means we have to occasionally attend boring political meetings or carry a sign in the street. It means we have to read the news, or worse watch it, or make tedious calls from a campaign office. It means no matter how much fun we're having, sometimes we have to stop, and volunteer for a second job that doesn't pay, so we can take part in a movement to fight some wankers who are trying to outlaw gay marriage, or videogames, or books, or whatever.

Some might think that within that "whatever" I include guns. I suppose it could, but I find it a never-ending source of irony that the people most vocally terrified their freedoms are going to be taken are the ones who run out and stock up on guns, at the same time voting for Republicans who rob them blind and lock them in the cage of poverty. Analogies to describe the situation are equally surreal. It's like pointing all your weapons at the front door, while leaving your money stash outside on the back porch with the door wide open. Gun Nuts have admirable drive but a poor sense of direction.

Pay attention, Gun Nuts! What is the primary obstacle when you seek to go from point A to point B? What most often blocks your freedom to pursue life, liberty and happiness? Is it someone you need to shoot? No. It's money. So should you shoot money? Cease fire, soldier! You can't blast your way out of the poor house, and as for bullets, you can sweat 'em but you can't eat 'em.

But enough of all this sky-high abstract talk. Let's get specific. Let's talk about eternal vigilance as it refers to Prop 8 which just passed in California, attempting to deny gays the right to marry.

If all of those who worked hard for the No on Prop 8 (pro-gay) movement would forgive a marginally educated opinion (since there is such a shortage of those!) let me say that the success of Prop 8 seems to be in part due to a lack of vigilance on all of us freedom lovers.

It's easy to say that from 3,000 miles away (as I live on the opposite North American coast) but I don't count myself blameless. Here's the score: 1.) Despite the zillions of liberal organizations that send me email asking for money every day, I barely heard of Prop 8 until the election was right on top of us. 2.) When I finally did hear of Prop 8, I heard that the Mormon church from Utah was donating a lot to the anti-gay effort. As a supporter of the other side from out of state, I was never contacted to lend financial support. 3.) I set aside the issue in favor of working for Obama because I found it hard to believe an anti-gay measure would pass in the state that holds two gay capitals: Hollywood and San Francisco.

That makes me part of the problem. Of course maybe it was simply a devious strategy by anti-gay wankers, in that they timed Prop 8 at the same time they knew all the liberal energy would be working pro-Obama.

Psychotic extremists have an advantage over us cool people who want to live and let live. Extremists don't care if their Friday night is spent sealing envelopes, or preparing bombs, or something equally uncool. Extremists are eternally vigilant... for opportunities to be assholes. We need to be just as relentless in stopping them, even if that means doing the boring stuff mentioned earlier.

So, for this past election, as great as we all did, we have to do better. There's still work to do to achieve equality for our fellow human. Let's get to it. Obama's elected, because that campaign and its supporters took nothing for granted.

Despite my critique, let's not waste too much time on blame. Maybe Prop 8 just got beat in a close race. I just want to make sure we remember that if we take something for granted, we'll soon have nothing left to take for granted. Not as poetic as Jefferson's quote, but just as true.

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? available on Amazon. For more info, visit his website at http://www.larrynocella.com/.

Modern Cube Jockeys and Nineteenth Century Prostitutes

2008-11-18T15:10:00.008-05:00

I just finished reading the massive graphic novel From Hell. It was also made into a movie starring Johnny Depp. It's based on a theory of who Jack the Ripper was and why he killed. We Americans have our JFK theories, our British pals have their JTR theories.

The story is good, but it's a huge downer. It's not the sort of thing one should be reading in these dark months, but for those who could use an extra helping of seasonal depression, From Hell is just the ticket.

The story bummed me out because the victims were completely helpless. They were poor nineteenth-century prostitutes, essentially street people, scratching out a living day to day by letting any guy give them some coins for a few minutes against a wall. Then on top of it all they were being hunted by a psychotic killer. They simply had nowhere to run, and little to live for. Death and mutilation closed in, inevitable as the sunset.

As if autumn's dark and From Hell together weren't enough to knock me into a funk, layoffs hit the day job. Fortunately, I was lucky and spared the ordeal of having to look for employment. Luck was all it came down to. Those that were released across all levels of the organization were powerless to resist and I was powerless to help them.

It's the powerlessness that's upsetting. Tie that in with the brutal impact of the event, make it random and you've got everything that composes terror.

To ponder the subject of layoffs and poverty sends me on a rant-path that always ends with this question: Why are we working, anyway? Why are we relying on the random forces of the market (meaning, the will of the rich)? There is enough wealth and food for everyone to have plenty. If we could just all distribute the work evenly, we could probably work one day a week and spend the remaining six days doing little more than drinking and eating and goofing off. Who's the ass that came up with the concept of work? Why couldn't Jack the Ripper take out that fool?

Now I'm not saying that your modern cube jockey is as unfortunate as your average nineteenth-century prostitute from the slums of London...

Or am I?

I don't think I am. Despite similarities, they're not identical. I'd argue now, people are better off. There is money to be collected from unemployment. If you want to, you could survive using a credit card for a while, even though you'd go into debt for a long time.

According to the theory, the Jack the Ripper killings were not random, there was an agenda behind them (but no spoilers here!) Maybe that's inaccurate. Maybe they were random. The human mind just can't tolerate a lack of reason. We see patterns even when we don't want to. Images emerge from clouds. Shapes form in TV static.

Randomness annoys our brains. Death terrifies. Together that's a primal-level scared-shitless cocktail.

Sure, there may be a reason behind something, some kind of pattern, but if we're not aware of it, it might as well be random. If we're powerless to stop it, does a pattern make it anymore comforting? Or does that make it worse, convincing us that the architect behind the forces that control our lives is malevolent just like Jack the Ripper and just like a system that makes layoffs so crushing?

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? available on Amazon. For more info, visit his website at http://www.larrynocella.com/.

Breaking Up with Obama (It's not you, it's me.)

2008-11-11T15:15:00.012-05:00

Last week on U.S.A. Election Night 2008, we dodged a huge-ass bullet!

We had to stop the McCain-Palin insanity. We simply could not allow their armchair bloodlust anywhere near nuclear weapons. McCain would have pushed for war over an adjective (honor, integrity, dignity, freedom, etc. take your pick) and Palin would have pushed for war because she wanted The Rapture(TM) to happen ASAP.

McPalin was clueless, arrogant, prone to self-deception, oblivious to the costs of war, and crazily religious. Those are not ideal traits for stewards of a nuclear arsenal. If they had successfully stolen the election, we would all have had a decent chance of perishing in a nuclear holocaust.

Humanity dodged a bullet? Humanity dodged a fuckin' ICBM.

Now the election is over and I can breathe a tentative sigh of relief. Sadly, though, Obama and I are breaking up.

The lawn sign has been taken down. (By me, not by angry McCainers who think that supporting freedom means they must deny me my first amendment rights.) The bumper stickers are coming off when I get around to it. I've supported Obama strongly. I wanted to, but even if I didn't, I had to. The alternative was offering up all of us to become crispy, radioactive Human McNuggets(TM).

I've never been blind or purposefully dishonest when supporting Obama. Biased? Definitely, but never dishonest. Now, however, I intend to be a much more harsh critic.

You hold the highest office in the land, Obama, and your predecessor was a complete idiot. There's no time for soft words. I love you, bro, but there's no room for mushiness here. We've got to fix this country ASAP, so I'm going to be coldly objective. As much as I admire you, I still can't help but remind myself you are a politician and therefore worthy of my skepticism. We can still be friends, but the honeymoon is over. The good news is I think you're going to do well.

On a separate note, I know a couple who a while ago left the USA. They just didn't like the way the country was heading, so they took off. Buried in the hopeless Bush years, I can certainly relate, so I don't judge a decision like that.

As for me, I'm never leaving the USA. This is my country and I will stand and fight for it. I won't let a single stolen election (or even two) deter me. So to those refugees running from Hurricane Dork (the Bush years) I say, please come back. We need good people like you. To anyone who entertains the idea of leaving, please don't.

We need as many good people here as we can get. Because if the wrong group grabs power in the most madly military nation in the world, no place on Earth is going to save you.

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? available on Amazon. For more info, visit his website at http://www.larrynocella.com/.

Game. Set. Match. Election. History! (or, The cynics were as wrong as a Fox News pundit.)

2008-11-05T19:24:00.002-05:00

Several years ago I worked at a place where the management was either incompetent, uncaring, unsupported or untrained by their managers. For the record, I think the latter was mostly the problem: upper management didn't care and left the front line managers to fend for themselves.

Whatever the reasons, it was a good place to work but it needed structure and consistency. We were generating a lot of income for the parent Corporation but getting little back in pay. Every so often a high level exec would stroll through, tell us what a great job we were doing, how much money we were generating, but never promise us any additional opportunities.

In short, the place needed a union. It was obvious. So when a union did come around for the card check ritual, I was cynical. I thought people were stupid, they were often cowardly and they regularly voted against their own interests. There was no way my co-workers would see the logic of a union, the vote was going to fail and all of us who voted yes were going to be fired afterwards.

I was as wrong as a Fox News pundit. The union won in a landslide. Lesson learned! Sometimes the people aren't stupid, sometimes the majority is right. All those quotes about the unwashed masses being dumb are exposed for what they are: knee-jerk snobbery.

Yesterday, Obama won a solid victory and cynicism lost again!

I visited Amsterdam in 2005, about a year after George W(ar criminal) Bush got re-elected. Here was a man who was a wealthy oil baron, whose daddy was president just a few years ago, a man who lied the USA into a war with Iraq. He wasn't a good example of America. He was a good example of the knuckleheads that are often found in royal families. I was so embarrassed.

No longer. Now I can visit Europe (assuming I could afford the weak U.S. dollar vs. Euro exchange!) and hold my head high again. Last night, not only did the smarter guy, the best guy, the right guy, win, but look how far our society has come. Around 150 years ago, Barack Obama would have been a slave, but now he's our deserving leader.

A word about those who supported McCain: I don't mean to imply that by not voting for Obama they are racists or cowards or anything negative. I can't imagine a worse candidate for right now than McCain, but I'm sure those people had their reasons, and as long as they were based on reason, I don't fault you.

What I am excited about, and what all Americans should be excited about as well, is that our country provided Obama the opportunity. That's what it's all about: equal opportunity.

I'm also hoping this election provides irrefutable evidence to my darker-toned fellow humans that millions of us paler folk are willing to judge people by their words and actions, and not prejudge based on skin color. Maybe that fact will spell the end of some cynicism, too.

For now, the first hurdle is passed. Obama won. Obama won! My country rocks!

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? available on Amazon. For more info, visit his website at http://www.larrynocella.com/.

To all those damaged and dead from the Iraq Oil Wars: This vote's for you.

2008-11-04T16:18:00.011-05:00

Well, I voted early this morning, my opinion a tiny drop that dissolves into the tidal wave of Obama supporters that's going to sink the dinghy George W. McPalin in Pennsylvania. It's a delight to deny Whacky Mac and Taliban Palin the state they wanted so bad, the state they thought was key to their victory, the state they never stood a chance in, that they gave up on Michigan for. It's extra funny since McCain was lecturing Obama in debates about how much he knew about strategy and tactics.

Ah, what a pleasure to say no to McPalin, to fearlessly push a button (does that count as brave?) and defy those who would try to base their leadership on fear.

I'd like to dedicate that vote to every person who suffered under war criminal George W. Bush's Iraq War lie and this era of oil wars. I mean the thousands of dead Americans, the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, the millions displaced, the countless damaged. I see that vote I cast, tiny as it may be, as a step toward moving our country to a more responsible place, a place where prejudice has no part, a place where being smart is admired and not scorned, a nation not run by oil interests.

Hell, if being smart matters again, there is no telling what might happen. Maybe we can even get lots of people to see the logic behind becoming a nation where helping someone out is understood as the right thing to do, and anyone who tries to paste it with a supposedly scary label (like socialist) is pointed out as an idiot and challenged to define the label (which they always are unable to do.)

For all of you who died in the oil industry investment more commonly known as the Iraq War, I can't bring you back to life, but I can throw my tiny influence behind reversing the addiction that ended your life.

As a side note, it's bittersweet that Obama's grandmother passed away the day before her grandson won the election. Still, I can't help but think her death has a mystical air of confidence about it. She was so certain her grandson had the race won she knew it was okay to bow out.

Rest in peace, Ms. Dunham. We'll finish what you started.

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? available on Amazon. For more info, visit his website at http://www.larrynocella.com/.

A Real Halloween Scare: A McCain-Palin Presidency!

2008-10-31T11:34:00.008-04:00

Okay, so today is Halloween. It's tradition to fantasize about things that scare the crap out of us. So let me use this time to live one of my many nightmares. The following is rated R for intense situations.

It's November 4, 2008 Election Day. Due to widespread electronic voting machine breakdowns in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, the election results from those states remains unclear. Neither candidate has enough electoral votes to win. Rioting breaks out and the Army brigade stationed in the U.S. reveals its true purpose: to discipline Americans. In the chaos, several hundreds are killed.

Under the guise of restoring order, the Supreme Court rejects calls to have another voting day in the three contested states and declares John McCain the winner, citing some obscure fine print in the U.S. Constitution never before enacted.

Due to all the excitement, John McCain drops dead before Inauguration Day and Vice President Sarah Palin becomes the first woman President. She claims God has ordained her rise to power and commanded her to annihilate the planet so that Judgment Day may arrive.

She gives orders to launch a nuclear first strike against Russia. Fallout sweeps over China and India, killing millions more. The world turns against the USA, its president showing the extent of her rogue maverickness. A coordinated nuclear counter-strike is launched against the USA, destroying a once-great nation and poisoning the earth, leaving the rest of humanity to die out slowly and painfully.

NOOOOOOOOO!!!

Whew. The scariest horror stories are the ones that could happen. Let's try to avoid this one, shall we?

===
Larry Nocella is the author of the novel Where Did This Come From? available on Amazon. For more info, visit his website at http://www.larrynocella.com/.

A Maverick is Never Very Far From a Horse's Ass

2008-10-19T11:59:00.024-04:00

Yawn. Is the campaign over yet? A train wreck is fun to watch for only so long, but then it gets dull. Behold The derailed Insane McCain Campaign Train. Its usefulness now is simply as the perfect place to conduct a field study of the behavior and habits of the North American Moron.

I refer to the hordes of idiots who are showing up at Palin-McCain gatherings and displaying unprecedented levels of ignorance. Videos of the hate rallies and the ugly, nasty, vocal, unashamed racist fools who attend are sprouting up like things that sprout up a lot. (Wittier analogy unavailable at the time of this writing.)

While studying the North American Moron, I'm struck by the superficiality of the attacks on Obama. He is right about McCain, and doubly right about McCain supporters. They will do anything to prevent the campaign from being about issues that matter (specifically, the economy, U.S. infrastructure and wars.)

Let's review the most popular of the Insane McCain Supporter's memes:

* * *

Wordplay B.S.
Transposing the B to an S in Obama's name cleverly converts his last name to the first name of a known terrorist. This reminds me of the time I altered a McDonald's sign with removable letters. "Now hiring all shifts!" became "Now hiring all shits!" Both examples of childish wordplay have the same impact on the future of America. That is to say, none.

CAPITALS!
Repeated capitalization of Obama's middle name: Barack HUSSEIN Obama. By virtue of emphasizing a man's middle name, we deduce with horror that he, um, he has a middle name! McCain's moron squad brings emphasis to Obama's middle name as if calling someone Hussein is sufficient enough to be an insult. Then they claim the Middle East hates them for their freedom. No, the Middle East hates you because you're stupid. I, however, think you're hilarious. Hilariously stupid, that is. As for me, I'd love to have a guy named Hussein in the white house. Imagine Osama bin Laden, hiding in his Bush-sponsored villa in the wilds of Pakistan as he lectures future Al-Qaeda warriors: "The USA hates everything about Islam, Muslims and Arabic culture!" "But, um, Mr. bin Laden, why then does their president have the middle name of Hussein?" "D'oh!"

Arabs Among Us
Another classic: Obama is an Arab. He's not, but if he were, so? What exactly is an Arab, anyway? Is it a race? I can understand "Arabic" as defined to mean "From the vicinity of Saudi Arabia." If he's an Arab, what am I? Americanish? In what category does Arab fall, anyway? The impact of someone's heritage on their capability? It's the same as the North American Moron's I.Q: Zero.

Remember when being a terrorist meant you had actually killed someone?
Obama is a terrorist (or close enough) because he crossed paths with William Ayers, a guy who did some bombings. Did Obama take part in any violent acts? No. Did Obama endorse any violent acts? No. Did Obama assist in any way with violent acts? No. Is Obama repeatedly seen consulting with the man behind the violent (yet-non-injury-producing) acts? No. Did Obama condemn the violent acts? Yes. So from all this, we deduce Obama knows and interacts with other human beings. I suspect we are all guilty of this as well.

Socialist! It's bad because, um, well, it just is.
McCain says Obama (and his policies) are socialist. You're supposed to already be programmed to know that socialist equals very very bad. So Obama's plan to tax and assist in governmental infrastructure is somehow more socialist (meaning bad) then McCain's plan to tax and fund wars. The US government is such a large and complex machine, it has elements of socialism, communism, fascism, dictatorships, etc. depending on where you look.

A Maverick Is Never Far From A Horse's Ass
Every bit of evidence of disorganization, self-contradiction, and obvious buffoonery by Palin-McCain is spun as a thing to celebrate. The justification is: What else should you expect when you get two "mavericks" together? But is it a good thing to be a maverick? Does that mean if Maverick A says we should go left, Maverick B will say let's go right, just to prove his or her maverickness? Would a maverick even call itself a maverick? I think Margaret Thatcher already addressed this when she said: "Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you're not."

POW. POW. POW. POW. POW. POW.
Recently the Philadelphia Inquirer endorsed Obama, sort of. Hoping not to offend a single reader by presenting a clear opinion, they also published a minority report editorial that endorsed McCain on the same webpage. Since I support Obama I would not be challenged by the pro-Obama article, so I headed over to read the pro-McCain article. I have to be truthful and admit I didn't read the whole thing. My eye immediately caught two references to POW and I didn't bother. I never again want to hear what McCain was doing 30 years ago. Heroic or exaggerated, that has absolutely zero impact on how he is conducting himself today. He is out of touch, often angry, 90% Bush, and selected Sarah Palin, a clueless dolt, for a VP. The implication of mentioning McCain's POW experience is that he learned something from it. I challenge that conclusion. McCain was smeared by robocalls before and now he is doing the same to Obama. The facts therefore indicate that McCain does not always draw lessons from his experience.

* * *

Make it stop! Ugh. If I wanted to, there's many more examples, but I don't have the endurance. I just can't catalog the dumbness as fast as McPalin and Co. churn it out.

Now Palin is talking about Pro-American parts of America, and where the Real America is. Is one of the candidates for one of the most powerful positions in the world, really talking about things like this? Is she really unaware that people everywhere can be likable or hate-worthy, and almost always they are both? Apparently, she is. An organization (ACORN) is being scorned because they worked on the (apparently evil) goal of registering people to vote. I can't even bring myself to scoff in detail at the imaginary characters in the Palin-McCain campaign: meaning, Joe Six-Pack and Joe the Plumber. (Are they they same person?)

As the cherry on top of this crap sundae, Republican Congressdope Michelle Bachmann is now calling for a committee to investigate Obama's supposedly anti-American beliefs. I guess because the House Committee on Un-American Activities and McCarthyism have been so vindicated by history.

Is the campaign over yet?

===
Larry Nocella is the award-winning author of the novel Where Did This Come From? available at Amazon and Xlibris and other fine online book stores. Where Did This Come From? is also available as an eBook. For more info, visit Larry Nocella's website at http://www.larrynocella.com/.