|
| There isn't content right now for this block. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
 In light of the past political issues that I have experienced with bloging on my website I now feel the urge to write a short diatribe against companies that fire bloggers for posting a picture of themselves in uniform. The applied term for getting fired because of personal blogging is called getting dooced. It's probably a good idea to read up on some frequently asked questions if you are a blogger. Blogging is so very much mainstream now that even Business Week has a front page article on how businesses should not ignore it but rather embrace it. Now I wouldn't advocate busting the company that you have just been hired to like Mark Jen did. However, I do think that as long as a blogger doesn't write about his or her company negatively, disclose internal information, or write about their company at all then a blogger's website should be thought of in the same light as any other aspect of that person's personal life.
Blogs are meant to be open. They are meant to be a place where one can allow themselves to practice their first amendment right. Ideally to express anything they so desire with only one's self censorship imposed. Only one person's own politics should be the ones that are displayed on their blog. A website promoting the textual embodiment solely of one author should indeed be motivated solely by one author. Actually I believe that would be the whole point of an individual owning their own blog. Once that individuality is taken away does it not simply turn the website into yet another oligarchical, committee, compromising news outlet? When one finds their blog threatened by the politics of third parties, such as their workplace, the whole point of owning a blog is defeated. At that point it is not your blog. I for one will keep my blog my own property. I for one will fight to keep my property no matter which entity wishes to censor my intellectual outpouring. My blog will remain pure unadulterated me... even when it means unrated adulterated :-P
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So the other day I happen to see this One drivel advertised on the tele in black and white displaying all these well known Hollywood types and their big fat faces. So what did they all come together in support of? Quite a noble effort really... taking my money from my paycheck. But not just my paycheck, yours too. Oh and one more thing, they want you to be happy about it and tell your friends, coworkers, and next door neighbors its a good thing. Who do they want the money to go to? Charitable organizations like these. Well for now I'll assume that these organizations are reputable so at first this proposal doesn't seem like that bad of an idea. I mean someday I might like to give some of my money to aid those in need around the world. But not now, only when I'm old and have amassed enough money to not be poor myself.
So this proposal effectively forces me to pay for aid today when I need to invest that money today so I can more effectively give tomorrow at a time when it won't seriously negatively affect my checkbook. Only an oxymoron could come up with the idea of forced charity. Not to mention we're talking about the government deciding where this proposed aid goes... and that's always worked in the past right? Umm no, try wrong. Oh, and it should come as no surprise that the UN isn't a solution either. How much money does the One campaign call for? Just 1% that's all. You know, of the little 'ol US Budget. Hummm sounds so simple... but I wonder why they don't give an estimate of what that really means on their website? Well here I can help with that; the proposed US Budget for 2006 is 2.57 trillion dollars. FYI trillion means 12 zeros, that's $2,570,000,000,000 folks. Guess what 1% of 2.57 trillion is? Let's see just take off two zeros... $25.7 billion in US dollars.
Billions of dollars all gleaned from US tax payers so that it can go to support foriegn political graft and to prop up foriegn dictatorships guised in smoke under the euphemism "humanitarian". You know what... I think I'll pass and stick to deciding where my money goes myself... because guess what, I will do a better job of it. Don't worry ladies it's not the same as saying no to Brad Pit at the wedding alter. Remember his job title is an actor which means he's paid to do actions, kind of like a human puppet (actually I'm just jealous). Quite a noble effort to steal my money and finagle the general public all at the same time. Catching these kinds of fallacies before they get out of hand is really easy: Just say no to big useless, bungling, blundering government. Oh, and by all means give to charity, just don't give to the government. Trust me, as much money as they waste now they don't need control over more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's a group in Korea called the Strong People Blood Pledge and they're a gang. That's right you don't want to mess with these people. The last one who came up against them, well they "dragged the 21-year-old into the urinal and pummeled him until he was covered with real-world bruises". But you'll never guess that they're a gang of computer gamers who hang out in a PC cafe. LOL
http://www.time.com/time/interactive/entertainment/gangs_np.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
