Friday, January 16, 2004

Meg thinks she can win our little, or rather, incredibly grand scuffle, because she has some seven foot tall oak-tree armed minions with flowers, squirrels, and butterflies living in them. Well whoopdie-fuckin'-do, she has some hippies. You think the mention of LEAVES was accidental? Hah!

This next one takes some logical connetctions. Meg thinks that the word coerce seems sexual. I argued AGAINST coercion by Meg Ryan. She accuses me of wanting to do the bad thing with Meg Ryan. CLEARLY, Meg has comprehension problems.

Not only that, but I think the tables can be quite easily turned on her. SHE's the one who brought up the subject of me doing the nasty, seeming to suggest some sort of disposition to think of me sexually. Not only that, but she suggested I would be doing it with someone named Meg. Moreover, she continues to "be nice" to be by insisting that I may run my own country under her rule. Who but a helpless lover would give someone an entire country? Like the marijuana incident, it's clearly no mistake. If it is, it's a damning mistake. Oh how you've slipped up, Meg.

That of course brings up the question of why she's so infatuated with me. I'll tell you why. It's my mad dictator skillz. Even she implicitly ackowledges that I'm more awesome. Well, don't be a pussy like her. Be explicit. Exclaim loudly that you love Erik, and hate Meg.

Thursday, January 15, 2004

Dictatorial Brawl Part I

Meg thinks she's pretty damn good, what with her superior blog design and post-categorizing abilities. Well, I strongly urge you all not to be taken in by her flashy gimmickry and lies, and instead stick with the more honest dictatorially-inclined person here. ME.

Look, Meg's blog is called Trigger Happy. Sure, she may be using it in the traditional sense, but more likely, it just looks like a ripoff of Trigger Happy TV. My blog title is an esoteric reference to an old Flaming Lips song. Score one for me.

Also on the subject of blog titles, mine seems to suggest a name for the country that I end up dictating. Surely she doesn't plan to call her country Trigger Happy. Oh, she does? Then she's a stupidface.

How much do we even really know about this Meg character? Everyone knows I'm an expedient young college student living in Texas. Therefore, I'm a rugged, yet thoughtful man, the perfect kind of rough, brutal and aggressive, hormones-raging anger coursing through my veins to dispose me towards violent actions, but enough intelligence to do it well. As for her, we know she's named Meg. For all we know, she's Meg Ryan. Jesus, do you want that chick-flick star coercing you? Damn right you don't.

She's also clearly insane, but not in the good way:

What? I am aware that there are three reasons above, yes. That means nothing to me. I simply said I made my decision based on two reasons, so, obviously, one of them wasn't included. ..It takes one to know one? What the hell are you talking about, silent voice? I am not gay, shut up. I hate you.

Where as all of my hilarious, strangely-out-of-place commentary is directed at other people, she doesn't even have any supporters, so she has to invent them and talk to them in her mind. So obviously, she has psychological problems, where as I am a potential psychology major. See all of the good things that accompany my rise to the top, and all the failures that accompany hers? Please, remember them when you decide on whose death camps you want to visit this summer.

Meg, of comments fame, has a new blog. You should read it.

Wednesday, January 14, 2004

In my Cultural Implications of the Information Society class today, we had an awesome discussion on privacy, and of course, the right to it. Well, the instructor kept asking how people come to the conclusion that they have a right to privacy. Being inclined towards logic and reason, I insisted that people only have a right to privacy on their own property.

Of course, there were more far-reaching issues such as why people want privacy. I can't vouch for everyone else, but I don't value privacy TOO much, because I'm thoroughly convinced that I don't do anything wrong or bad, and I think I'm awesome, so it wouldn't bother me if people knew what I was up to.

Getting to the real point, some girl responded "You keep asking why we should have privacy. Well, why NOT?" This attitude is very philosophically irresponsible. Consider, she's clearly the one trying to establish a right to her privacy, so she has to establish the reasons for the right. She didn't seem to have grasped that basic principle and AH! NO! I like the class because it's fun, but more importantly, it would seem I'm smarter, at least philosophically, than the rest of the students. Score one for Erik!

Monday, January 12, 2004

Damned lies

NPR's Justice Talking was talking justice today, and posed an interesting question I'd never considered before: Is it okay for professors to teach that the Holocaust never happened? It's a good question.

I'm going to give the diplomatic answer and say that it all depends. If a private university were to allow professors to teach false information, then that's its business. Of course, institutions that propogate lies also fall into disrepute, which is once again, their business.

On the issue of public schools: I disagree with the idea of tax-funded schools mainly because I'm opposed in principle to taxing people. Buuuut, since they exist already, it would just be stupid to remain agnostic on the matter. I think it's morally wrong, if a school if publicly funded, to teach anything but the truth. With people forced to pay and children forced to go, it's morally unacceptable to lie to them, as there isn't a legitimate alternative. Though, if parents were given tax breaks to pay for private schooling, then I'd say that public schools can teach all the lies they want.

Sunday, January 11, 2004

The Simpsons

As a once hardcore Simpsons fan, I have a question about tonight's episode. Is Lisa going to be tortured? She refers to Principal Skinner as Principal Tanzarian, even though no one is legally allowed to mention Skinner's past as Tanzarian "under penalty of torture."

So, I ask: where is the torture?

Someone found my blog by searching for why teenagers sag their pants. In an effort to accomodate the wide range of visitors and answer everyone's questions, teenagers sag their pants because they're teenagers, and therefore, stupid.

Of course, I don't sag my pants even though technically being a teenager, and I have friends that don't, because we're all what you'd call "the cool kids." Wearing your pants up is sort of the modern day equivalent of smoking in the high school bathrooms.

Breakin' Up the Beetle

Claims that individualists are heartless, apathetic bastards because they think that yes, even the poor should be forced to deal with their own problems, are way off. I adhere to reason and logic, and I apply my philosophy consistently, but dammit do I have a conscience getting in the way of being a badass about it.

My cat was having fun with a beetle just a minute ago. I hate beetles. They're crawly and buggy, they have those disgusting, beady... adorable little eyes. I felt odd about feeling so sorry for something that probably isn't even self-aware. What's worse, it had already lost two legs, wasn't going to survive, and I had a pretty huge crisis of conscience trying to decide whether I should kill it instantly or hope it finds some good prosthetic legs. The only rational option was to kill it, but I felt really bad about it, seeing him dropped off at the pool, only to find that "oh my god there's something draining the pool!" [As a side note, it'd be horrible to stay alive after being flushed, swimming with the feces and such. Just like a public pool.]

That's about it really. I think really, the anecdote is meant as an "In your face, collectivists! Unforced compassion DOES exist!"