I was lucky enough to score a discounted ticket for the Colplay show at Darien Lake yesterday. A friend of a friend couldn't go so I got a lawn ticket for $20. Sweet! I have to say it was one of the better concerts I've attended. It is obvious that the lads love playing together and love their music. It wasn't like so many shows I've attended where the musicians tend to just go through the motions - like "oh my god do I really have to play this song again" - but Coldplay was spot-on and performed the living daylights out of their music. The lighting and effects were also top-notch, absolutely phenominal. I was very impressed with the quality of the show. I'm telling you guys if you ever get a chance to see Coldplay, take it!! You'll love it!!

Also right now at work I am listening to System of a Down's latest offering, Mezmerize. I've gotta say the album is excellent. I've seen them once live and they also put on a very energetic performance. I'm listening to the song "Question!" right now and man is it ever good. I really believe SOAD is one of the very best rock bands out there right now. They are so tight, and they also play in mixed meter very easily compared to other bands who seem to struggle through it. The guitar player is fucking amazing - he was the guy who got off a "FUUUCKK YOUUUU!" on Saturday Night Live. What a great band. RAAAAAAAAAAHH!HHH!H!!!!!!!!

Jason

There are a few things I want to touch on today. It looks like we are having some lively discussion here on (e:strip) and I'm ready to jump in.

(e:Joshua) says I am too diplomatic in what I said about Media Bias before. Well I really believe part of the problem in discussing it is that the word "liberal" is used in a much broader sense in conservative circles, while in liberal circles the word is used to describe those on the left wing only - there is a difference between Democrats and Liberals to them. Without a doubt the mainstream press is not championing the uber extremist left out there. They do not push the ideas of the Animal Liberation Front or other kooky organizations. I just don't see it, but if someone were to say that they generally tilt to the left I would agree. Does anyone else think this is a valid distinction to make?

About my post concerning ladies - HOLY POOP never did I expect so many responses. In a way I feel bad. It wasn't meant as a serious post at all - in fact I tried to make it as silly as possible. Are you guys telling me you've never had a girl hog all the sheets? Am I the only one? LOL. I really can't believe that everyone took it so seriously - but it is obviously my own lack of comical writing skills that caused such a commotion. I'm better at one-liners and normal jokes. Am I really so jaded when it comes to the ladies? I'll be the first to admit what happened with the last one damaged me badly, perhaps beyond repair. Ever since then I've sworn off girlfriends, and I carry myself and dress in such a way that it will ensure that they ignore me. However there are only a few types of ladies that really turn my stomach - the suburbanite princess, the digger, and those who think they are above most men. I also can't stand when those types ask "where have all the good ones gone?" Hello they are not even on your radar! Anyway am I jaded when it comes to all women? No, absolutely not. I've said before I think (e:Lilho) is an impressive and very cool young lady. And could I chill with (e:Ladycroft) if I thought she were evil? =) But when it comes to relationships and marriage I am incredibly, nearly off the scale jaded. I do not even remotely wish to open up to someone in that way. Nowadays in general we don't treat each other with the kind of compassion, love and respect that makes relationships successful. Maybe someday I'll meet someone who completely changes my mind about this stuff.

New Orleans - I was afraid of this happening but I'm really not surprised - people are using this horrible tragedy as a vehicle to get their political messages across. I know there are legions of people out there who jump on any opportunity to blame Bush for anything and everything that happens in this world. To me this is all in extraordinarily poor taste. I surfed over to The Nation yesterday and predictably David Corn opened his weasel mouth and started spouting this shit. I mean, shit people the bodies are still fresh! There are people killing each other and starving, and the best some people can do is start in with the "Blame Bush" rhetoric? This tragedy is still ongoing! It is wasted energy and wasted time to start arguing about this shit already when we should really be doing everything we can to help. I am so disappointed and disheartened.

There is one thing that makes me so angry that I shake - and that is the fact that our government has dragged their collective ass in getting those poor bastards in New Orleans the help they need. If this were New York or DC or San Francisco you can bet your balls that there would have been NO delay in getting funds and mobilizing the necessary assets to get the relief to people who need it. This makes me believe that the elites in DC and NY don't give a shit about the South - they're just ignorant rednecks and inferior to us northerners, right? Oh my God this shit is so ridiculously inexcusable. We all should be ENRAGED at how the relief effort has gone down so far. Whoo, whoooooo....breathe Jason.....

Why not have an (e:strip) relief drive? If we really wanted to we could organize a relief effort and collect money, food, clothes, blankets, whatever - and send it to the proper organizations. I don't know if this is feasible or if anyone is interested. I just feel like as a group we could do a lot of good.

Jason

PS - (e:Paul), (e:Ajay), (e:Uncutsaniflush) - seriously your guys' comments cracked me up so much. LOLBOMB!!!!! Hehehe. (e:Ajay) is the Ric Flair of (e:strip) - because when the ladies think of him...they think "alllll niiiiight loooooong" Hahaha

There are literally BILLIONS of reasons why guys shouldn't waste their money or their time getting involved in the modern dating game. It is a losing proposition for all men except for the very best looking and the richest of us. Why put the women on a pedestal like you do? Why kiss their ass and jump through hoops just to MAYBE find out if she's interested in you? There are so many things that are annoying about dealing with women in relationships. I'll give you one of my faves.

You know what really bugs me? When they want to sleep over. Oh, great! you think as you ponder the bedroom acrobatics. No no no! It's a trap! Before you know it, she'll have stolen all your sheets and 95% of the bed space, leaving you freezing and with one ass check on the bed, one ass cheek off the bed. And then in the morning you won't even get any head, but she'll be all like "Jason get me a glass of water." What? A favor for a favor!

And then after you've gone and gotten her breakfast and coffee, you'll come back home and she will give you some shit like "So Jason do you like my looks better than my personality, or my personality better than my looks?" This is a loaded question, and the only appropriate answer is "Jeezus!! Stop reading Cosmo!!! If I liked quizzes I would be taking night classes!!"

And then she'll start bugging you about spending the entire next day with her. What? Maybe I have other things going on that day, or maybe I just want to hang out by myself. No I do not want to go see a movie. No I do not want to go shopping, good lord. All I want is peace, quiet, good food and no hassles!

Do the right thing - save your cash, your time, and your precious sleeping hours. Just rub one off and go to sleep. You'll be glad you did!!!!

Jason

Check out this new reality TV show ready to hit Europe (you can bet it will be on our TV stations as well)!



There are times when I have to shed my humility and pat myself on the back for understanding the complexities of human nature, and for my prophetic wisdom in understanding how things are going to shake out in the future. Now there will be a reality TV program dealing with the reduction of the human male to sperm donor status. Some people say that reality TV doesn't accurately reflect our nature. I have to disagree - it does mirror our own nature (however packaged and contrived the shows are), and in some cases also shapes our reality as media tends to do.

I've said before it is only a matter of time before men are relegated to sperm donors and ATM machines. Now the idea has been implanted. The thing that is so aggravating is the horde of emasculated she-men out there who are complicit in the systematic destruction of the male. The oppresive court system with laws tilted enormously against men, the politicians and their lap dogs who go along with it just so they stay in power, the media happily advocating it - it is enough to make a guy want to pack up and move to the mountains.

Just as there is an argument now as to whether or not marriage is a "right", there will be an argument as to whether or not having a child is a "right" as well. Should there be public funds going towards sperm banks so women can have a child whenever they want without actually having to deal with those ridiculous, hateful, cheating, violent men out there (that is to say, any male at all)? Wait and see - this reality TV show is only a reflection of the attitudes of millions of women out there who can't find "the perfect flawless man" and still want children. Remember fathers don't matter!

Jason

I wanted to continue this discussion, but instead of having the comments fade into obscurity as I write more entries I decided to create a new journal entry to continue the discussion. I think this stuff is worthy of discussion, so let's do this! I'll start with the last comment:

(e:Ajay) writes:

[size=s](Jason), I do come from a long line of soldiers, so being a soldier is not an unknown for me. I was objecting to the standard "liberal media" and other BS. The media is most definitely NOT liberal. Just because an occasional anti-war story creeps through it does not make them "liberal". If you really care to understand what this "war" is about (and it is/was NOT about defending America, just to make it clear. It was NOT about installing democracy there either; if democracy was that important, why are the 3 closest US allies (KSA, Kuwait and Pakistan) non-democratic? In Kuwait and KSA women have minimal rights. But I digress), then you should be open to other views, and make your own mind up instead of blindly believing whatever National Review (there's a "liberal media" rag for you :) ) tells you. How come you never criticise the war? I think it was Roosevelt who said, "dissent is patriotic".

Coming to the issue of the solidiers being harassed, of course it is wrong. I will take issue with anybody who thinks harassing a uniformed service member is OK. It is not. By linking (in your mind) the harassment and the "liberal media" or "liberal professors", you are just as bad as the jackasses who harass the soldiers.[/size]

Well first of all I am relieved to hear that you are against soldier harassment. In this manner you agree with the basic premise of the article. The point of the article wasn't to say "lib media this, lib media that" - it was to highlight the treatment some of these guys and gals are getting on campus. What can I say, other than some people enjoy being misanthropes?

Whether the media is "liberal" or not depends on who you are talking to. A lot of liberals object to it being called the liberal media because it is not pushing the opinions of the far left wing. The mainstream media does not read like The Nation, so how could it be liberal? I understand this point of view, and put that way I definitely agree. Many people in conservative circles tend to lump everyone left of center into the "liberal" category. They don't realize how fractured the left really is. No, I wouldn't say that the mainstream media is far left wing but I would say that it is without a doubt tilted to the left more often than not. This manifests itself in a few ways, such as the headlines that are printed, how the articles frame a subject, what information is omitted, the language that is used, and misinformation. This stuff is self evident - you do not need to read conservative rags to see the situation for what it is.

Cherry picking the odd right-leaning quote from a mainstream media outlet is a very weak strategy - if I had to make a post every time the mainstream media shapes a story in favor of the left I likely would not post about much of anything other than the media. So if you say to me that the media isn't liberal because it doesn't carry the torch of the left wing I would agree, but don't make the mistake so many other people do in ignoring or denying very basic truths about how the press shapes their "product". The exploding success of Fox and other right wing media outlets is only a result of having a product that is unique - they differentiate themselves by airing scoops that nobody else on TV or radio will cover, and providing different angles than other news media. It is SOSDD from everybody else.

Someone please tell me who else besides the right-leaning media will cover soldier harrassment on campus? The only time soldiers are any good to the left is when they are in a casket or when they beat up a poor, helpless insurgent. Nobody on the left wants to shed positive light on our soldiers or anything they do. These people have titanium plated, diamond encrusted testicles and the left absolutely refuses to tell their stories. Why is this? Political reasons? Without a doubt. Saying that I should not believe NR because it's a conservative rag is silly - someone on the left or the mainstream media should be covering this stuff as well if they want to shed the labels they have been given and retain credibility.

Of course, when someone is a right-leaning person, they can't possibly think for themselves! Nobody who can actually form coherent, logical thoughts could POSSIBLY come to a different conclusion than what the left offers! If they do, no it is not because of careful consideration or life experience, it is because of brainwashing and weak minds! There is not a conservative alive who thinks for themselves! Personally attack them at all costs! They're drinking the Kool-Aid of course! What a shallow, silly thing to say - especially when there isn't an effective counter argument to the article I posted about soldier harrassment on campus. If people here really want to know what I read on a regular basis, I will offer it up honestly:

National Review
The Nation
The New Republic (although you have to pay to read their full articles, wtf)
Town Hall
Huffington Post on Yahoo
Talking Points Memo (I learned of this one passively through you, (e:Ajay))
Washington Monthly
Fox News
New York Times

I check out a variety of media sources. The reason for this is because you can learn different angles dealing with the same story, and you can read about different subjects each side champions. Although I lean to the right I'm interested in all points of view. I've said I don't know how many times on this very journal that I'm open minded and willing to listen. I've asked the lefties on this site for their opinions. I'm the only political person on (e:strip) who is willing and humble enough to challenge what they think. This whole kool-aid, think for yourself nonsense will never stick. Partisanship is not useful - it is groupthink. Ultimately what I want isn't to take sides, but to learn the truth. If I'm wrong about something I will admit it. In this way I am light years beyond most people.

About the Iraq war - (e:Ajay) is correct, I do not criticize the war. I do not say much about the war at all. I have family fighting in it so I keep quiet in general. In my journal I have said that I think it was a mistake to go into Iraq, and that our focus should have been squarely on Afghanistan - it seems to me that we left one mission half-finished before we started another one. I do not make a connection between 9/11 and Iraq - a more accurate connection would be 9/11, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. I'm not like other people and I will not speculate on the reasons for the war and pass it off as fact. The most interesting theory I have heard is that there are numerous ancient artifacts in Iraq that Saddam had control of which could possibly give us much more information as to the origins of humanity. It is allegedly very shocking information - too dangerous to be let out into the public. Now obviously it sounds far-fetched, and it is - but it is much more interesting than the blood for oil argument - yep that petrol we're stealing from Iraq should be arriving here any day now. Is this enough criticism, or is there something specific that someone wants to ask me about? Ask away and I'll give you my honest opinion. I don't always toe the line like everybody else.

Jason