This may just be my cynicism talking but, let’s face it, democracy is not all its cracked up to be. It sounds like a great idea with the “we the people…….” bit but the fact of the matter is, there are good reasons why it’s turned into a disappointment. Here are 5:
1. Everyone can vote.
I realize this is what democracy is all about, and I just don’t think it’s a good idea. Why would we want everyone to vote? It just doesn’t make sense. When I look around I see a lot of people who have a hard enough time deciding what to wear in the morning… and many who don’t do a good job. If they don’t have the faculty to pick out their clothes in the morning, what makes us think they will be able to pick out reasonable government officials?
Do we really want everyone to vote?
Click American Idol’s Alexis Cohen to see a video of her in action!
These kids will be voters in about 8 years.
2. We got rid of literacy tests.
In 1965 the National Voting Rights Act got rid of literacy tests, mostly because the motivation for them had been discriminatory against African Americans. Although I don’t agree with discrimination; I also don’t agree with letting people who are illiterate vote.
“…democracy as a form of governance can function only if the voters are informed about the political life. The rational explanation for the literacy demands, in our time, is that illiterate people are not sufficiently informed about the political candidates and their political programs; for that reason, they are not able to make a truly appropriate decision.” Leonard at Meti Online
3. No one does the research.
Either no one has the time, or no one takes the time, to do the research needed to make a responsible decision when it comes to voting. I think that I probably do more research on politics than 90% of the voting public and I still feel like what I know right now is not enough to make good decisions for the nation. It’s just plain irresponsible to vote without doing the research.
4. We push voter turnout.
Why in the world do we encourage people to vote? The people who don’t want to vote probably shouldn’t be voting in the first place. I think we should encourage people to do research. Then the people who weren’t going to vote, and probably shouldn’t vote anyway, still won’t vote and the people who do the research are probably going to put that hard work into action, and are going to vote without the push from some advertising campaign on TV.
5. Elections are popularity contests… but not real ones.
What do people look for in a candidate? Well, we would hope that people would look for experience and qualifications, but that’s wishful thinking. The majority of Americans vote from an emotional viewpoint. Barack Obama is a perfect example of this.
How many people have you ever seen faint about how qualified and experienced someone was? No one. People faint because their emotions get the best of them. Tele-evangelists have been doing it for years. Its all a popularity contest, who has the most charisma, the best smile, the most handsome face, that’s who wins. It’s like middle-school student government elections. Except for it’s not a “real” popularity contest, because if it were, we all know Chuck Norris would be our president.
Note: I’m not ungrateful for the people who gave their lives for the country: I think they fought to keep us and our freedoms safe, not for democracy specifically.(Also, I realize that the United States is not a true democracy; it’s a constitutional republic. I know, I know.)
The thought entered my mind when I was driving and noticed a Darwin-fishwithlegs on the back of a Prius (stereotypical…yes, I know). I’ve seen them a thousand times, but this time it struck me differently. I thought, “Wait. What’s really going on here?”
It’s obviously a play off of the Christian fish we so often see on the roads. At first it’s kind of funny; in a creative way. But what is it really saying?
This idea is first suggesting that this person is not a Christian and proud of it. Proud to have Darwin as his/her…..moral teacher?? …See my point? As if Darwin and Jesus are competing for recognition in the same arena. To me, this is outlandish and ignorant.
1. Jesus wasn’t a biologist.
2. Darwin wasn’t a moral teacher or a Savior.
3. Christianity is not a theory
4. Darwinism is not a religion.
My second thought about it was, “what is the purpose of this?” Obviously this person doesn’t follow Darwin as a moral teacher or Savior. This person is actually just saying that he/she is more advanced, and more evolved than the Christian; that a Christian is a lower life-form than a Darwinist. Yikes. That’s a slippery slope.
This was the most interesting part of it all. Why might you ask? It’s because right underneath this Darwin-fishwithlegs was this bumpersticker:
A Coexist bumper sticker. An idea in which tries to promote natural human equality and living in unprejudiced harmony with each other. Ah ha ..what a hypocrite. The very fact that you think that people who have a certain belief (Christians) are of a lower life-form proves to me you actually believe quite the opposite. Caught red-handed by yours truly.
Next time you decide to spend $300 on random, liberal bumper stickers to cover the backend of your Prius, think about what you are really saying , otherwise you could end up being the subject of my next article.
There’s no better way to say “I Love You” and “I’m An Idiot” at the same time, than to register a star in your loved one’s name. It is what they call “killing two birds with one stone”. There can be nothing sexier than those three little words alongside blatant self-deprecation.
International Star Registry sells their cheapest star naming package for $54.00. This includes a certificate, a sky chart, a booklet on astronomy, and a letter of congratulations. So what are you actually paying for? Everything here costs less than five bucks. It’s unbelievable to me that someone can actually sell this. It’s a great idea, because it’s not like oil, you’ll never run out of stars. Even if you did, no one will ever know that they share a star with 18 other “lucky individuals”.
This is funny. It’s funny because they send you a letter of congratulations. Congratulations for what??? I can only imagine that it would be written in a very sardonic and condescending way; probably quite sarcastic, because they can’t be serious.
Surely anyone can make oodles off this demographic though. If people pay $54.00 to name a star after someone, they will pay for anything. Living in Maine gives me hope that my new business will be off the ground sooner than expected.
If naming a star seems a little bit too cliché, don’t fret. I’m going to sell snowflakes. Wait, did I say SELL snowflakes? What I meant was that you could NAME a snowflake, you won’t actually get anything other than a piece of paper and a drawing of where this snowflake was found. I plan to undercut the price of the star registry by 60%. That’s right, you can name a snowflake for $21.60. Now that’s a steal!
Do yourself a favor, if your special someone names a star after you this Valentine’s Day, make it your last Valentine’s Day together.
Google, the most profitable internet website ever, continues to whine about the recent news that Microsoft might buy Yahoo. Wait. Google? You’re Gooooogle; how can you complain?! You have a verb named after you. Read the rest »
A new show on Fox, is exactly the type of show that everyone wants to watch. We watch as other people put the truth of their values, morals, and integrity on the line for money. Why? Because we love to watch idiots. They’ve been asked the questions before the show while being hooked up to a lie detector. The results of the polygraph are kept secret until the questions are asked again in front of millions of people. They tell the truth, they win money(up to $500,000). They lie, they don’t. No one but the most severely doltish pinhead would ever be a contestant on this show. And let me tell you why. They are asked questions like, “Do you wish you were still single?” “Do you think you will still be married in 5 years?” “Have you ever lied to get a job?’ “ Have you ever tried to get a coworker fired?” “Have you ever spied on your coworkers in the bathroom?” The problem is not the questions though. It’s answering them… truthfully.
But luckily I am here to save people the trouble of deciding whether disclosing everything they’d rather not, is really worthwhile.
I have created a formula in order for contestants to figure out if it’s all worth it.
(W-J)/2-F-D > 0
W= Winnings from the show
J= Potential earnings from job lost because of show.
Must divide by 2 because you will end up splitting it all with your spouse when you get a divorce.
F= Friends
D= Dignity
After plugging in the numbers we will most likely find that a person gains nothing from being a contestant on the show. The real winners are the people who watch the show on TV. While keeping their deepest darkest secrets inside, away from millions of American viewers, they are able to fulfill their desires of deception, gossip, and reality television all at the same time.
Many people know her as a Saint, as one of the most profoundly generous and loving people in all of history. She’s been awarded many peace prizes and honors for her supposed humanitarian work. (She’s now in the company of people like Ghandi, and …Al Gore.) This doesn’t surprise me though, people have been misinterpreting her “holier than thou” attitude for love and kindness for many years. You can’t tell me she didn’t do it for fame. Every time she walked into the barren streets of a third world country people worshipped her. People gathered at her feet and flocked to see her as I’m sure she made certain all the cameras were watching while she fed a starving child. How can people be so blind? So gullible? I’m going to let you in on a little secret. She’s NOT a Saint (she won’t be for another several years!) and she has been deceiving people on this point for a long time.
She was a part of an organization that has lead to innumerable amounts of death and destruction. (Crusades anyone?) It’s an organization that was made rich by selling licenses to heaven, indubitably pirated from the Man Upstairs. She is a hypocrite and a liar, no one has ever fooled the world into believing such a ridiculous scheme as hers. Her name should bring fear and anger to the hearts of everyone who hears it. Her name is…Mother Theresa.
She’s not what you think. I have taken some quotes from Mother Theresa to explain exactly what I mean:
“Everybody today seems to be…terrible…”
She seems to be a very negative person. Her glass is obviously half empty when it comes to faith in humanity. She seems to think that she is somehow better than everyone else, because she does some charity work.
“Be faithful…in…your…lies.”
What does this teach our children?
“I do not pray…”
She’s a hypocrite. She’s telling us in one breath that she’s an overly pious Christian and then the next breath, she doesn’t pray.
“in…children … begins the disruption of peace of the world.”
This is what happens when you teach children lessons like “being faithful in your lies”, Mother Theresa. (By the way, you can’t be a Nun and a Mother at the same time!…… So deceiving.)
“…decide that a child must die…”
This is just disturbing.
“I am a little pencil…”
What?! She’s obviously insane.. or strung out on drugs. Rumor has it she was a drug addict.
“I know God … trust me…”
That’s a cocky statement if I ever read one.
“No, I wouldn’t touch a leper for a thousand pounds…”
That’s what I thought.
“If we want … to be heard…we have to keep …oil…”
She often got her hands dirty in politics. I heard she drove a Hummer.
Conclusion:
This article is completely fact-based. I quoted her from real quotes and everything I said is either fact or personal opinion.
But barely anything I said was true.
We see everyday the advertisements and articles written from a certain slant about public figures; we see it so often now about presidential candidates.
I used many of the techniques that biased writers use all the time. I took quotes completely out of context, I said things like. “Rumor has it”, just to enter the idea into your head, no matter how ridiculous it could seem from a rational point of view. I also gave many “feely opinions” and used pessimistic diction to set the tone of the whole thing. I’d just like to prove that no matter how many “facts” are in something, it doesn’t mean it’s truth. Everyone writes for their own agenda. Anyone can be made to look like a hero or a criminal. Even Mother Theresa, who is probably one of the most beautifully, altruistic human beings to ever walk the planet, can be made to look like scum of the earth.
God Bless You, Mother Theresa.
Ticketmaster, the world’s leading ticket company, came up with a great idea. They’ll sell tickets online to most concerts, shows, and sporting events around the world in exchange for a few dollars…and then a few more. They’ve done it well too. I wouldn’t want to do business anywhere else, it’s just SO convenient. Log on, enter credit card number, print. Done. The problem is that they are convenient and they know it. It’s like a pretty girl who knows she’s pretty so she flauntingly wears that miniskirt around (even in the winter) and won’t ever give you the time of day. I hate Ticketmaster the same way I hate those girls.
Unlike girls, Ticketmaster will give you the time of day… for an excessive fee (perhaps some girls operate similarly). I recently bought a ticket to a concert from Ticketmaster, as I had done several times before. I had never realized, though, how much extra was added onto the bill by the time you’re done. I should say, they are not small fees. These fees are up to 1/3 of the cost of the ticket, and there are multiple fees.
1. A convenience charge of $8.15. What is that? I have been wondering for several weeks now, who is this fee “convenient” to?…not me.
If it’s a convenience charge because it was convenient for me to log on and buy a ticket rather than go wait in line at the concert, this makes sense. However, it loses logic when you realize that the whole reason for existence of Ticketmaster is to sell tickets online. Are they saying that they charge me extra just because they exist? That’s pretty conceited, Ticketmaster, pretty conceited. I feel like charging them a fee because I exist. Having customers is pretty “convenient” to a company, wouldn’t you agree? In fact, I might go so far to say that since Ticketmaster charges me because it exists… and Ticketmaster exists because customers like me exist…then, I conclude, Ticketmaster is charging me for my own existence! (This is the most thought I’ve ever given to $8.15.)
2. I see that there is a $1.50 “Building Facility Charge” added to the full ticket price AND the “Convenience Charge”. This is weird to me because if I were to have bought my ticket at the door of the concert, there would be no fee to use the building. The only conclusion I can make of that, is that somewhere between my apartment and the arena is a building that I am being charged for using, but I don’t know which one it is. And apparently I will still need to pay it even if I avoid using every building on the way, because I was not given a choice in paying for the “Building Facility Charge”.
3. It’s nice to know you have the option to pay $2.50 for your own paper and ink used towards printing out your ticket.
4. The heading at the top of the browser says that this is the “Ticketmaster Shipping” page. There is some irony in this, because even though I paid $9.65 worth of fees for my ticket on this page, I NEVER HAD IT SHIPPED!
In 1965 the National Voting Rights Act got rid of literacy tests, mostly because the motivation for them had been discriminatory against African Americans. Although I don’t agree with discrimination; I also don’t agree with letting people who are illiterate vote.
Either no one has the time, or no one takes the time, to do the research needed to make a responsible decision when it comes to voting. I think that I probably do more research on politics than 90% of the voting public and I still feel like what I know right now is not enough to make good decisions for the nation. It’s just plain irresponsible to vote without doing the research.
Why in the world do we encourage people to vote? The people who don’t want to vote probably shouldn’t be voting in the first place. I think we should encourage people to do research. Then the people who weren’t going to vote, and probably shouldn’t vote anyway, still won’t vote and the people who do the research are probably going to put that hard work into action, and are going to vote without the push from some advertising campaign on TV.
The thought entered my mind when I was driving and noticed a Darwin-fishwithlegs on the back of a Prius (stereotypical…yes, I know). I’ve seen them a thousand times, but this time it struck me differently. I thought, “Wait. What’s really going on here?”
There’s no better way to say “I Love You” and “I’m An Idiot” at the same time, than to register a star in your loved one’s name. It is what they call “killing two birds with one stone”. There can be nothing sexier than those three little words alongside blatant self-deprecation.
