The inspiration to write comes from a mysterious place for me. For example I was watching a television show this evening that weaves the stories of rude, toxic, and surreal characters, through a number of equally absurd situations.   And if not for the brilliance of dialogue and deep blanket of humanism these tales of personal tragedies and lucid debauchery would be far away from my television and likely still in some kitchen drawer somewhere.   During this show’s most recent episode, I heard a couple lines that sparked such a vomiting of existential internal dialogue on my part that I just started typing and thought I would share.

As we as humans dance in between the worlds of reason, rationalization, and purpose we find ourselves in a constant struggle between what is right and what is wrong.

The problem with this endless waltz is that neither exits. There is no right. There is no wrong. There are only the consequences of our actions and what effect they have on ourselves and those around us.

But this simple reality escapes our narrow vision as we search to categorize and toe tag every experience we have.  Each movement, each word, each success, and each transgression… all packaged into a statistic, study, or theory in hopes of discovering yet another theory as to what drives us forward.  The answer is Life.

Life is what moves us towards another day.  The days before drive the days ahead and everything we’ve done plots the map for what we shall become.

Many charlatans of reason will claim the past is not your future, that you can become anyone you wish to be at anytime.  However, the loop hole to this black hole of wisdom is that our past is, and always will be who we are.  The materialization of character is a myth of a biblical value.  We are all who we have learned to become, as the essence of change is a learned evolution not an offspring of decision.

The tragedy is within those that believe these charlatans of hope.  Some wait for a sign to validate their baseless desires, and hold tight to the vision of immediate change.  But immediate change demands the presence of a chaotic upheaval, an unwavering and unnerving catalyst that upends the foundation of what we believe.  Only then does immediate change stand a chance at existence.  Without this catalyst we live only for slight, enlightened evolutions, which lead us slowly and methodically to the place we wish to be or merely to where we have arrived.

There is no right. There is no wrong.  There are only the consequences of our actions, and our learned perceptions of the actions of others.

And once again, this post was inspired after watching a more absurd than normal episode of Californication. Go figure. I need to start watching more Reality TV. I’ll go to bed sooner.

Web 2.0 and the social networking phenomenon has changed the way we communicate forever.  Once lost acquaintances and passersby have now become staples in our lives constantly reappearing in the forms of Status Updates and unsolicited pokes.  What used to be a host of static fond memories has now become yet another life story in our forever growing book of former faces.

Facebook, like blogging has given a voice to those that enjoy having an outlet of release.  I am certainly guilty of this.  With Facebook I can keep in contact with friends I would otherwise have lost contact with, I can promote this blog, and also share articles, videos, and information with my “friends” that I personally find interesting or important.  I don’t have to send this information to anyone, and it is strictly by choice for others to visit my profile, but its in the material we choose to post that is creating this monster of open information.

With social networking as it is today, the idea of privacy is being slowly stripped away.  Most times I find this evolution of sorts to be a step in the right direction, it gives the world another avenue from which to find connectivity that transcends languages and borders. But no matter the progress that is made there will always be those that will vault themselves over the line into the area of too much information.

The kings and queens of this royal line jumping are those that think Facebook is the perfect medium to display their ultrasound pictures as profile pictures.  To me this is crossing the line into absurd.  Some of these people  I haven’t spoken to or seen in real-life for over ten years and all of a sudden I am taking a welcome look at the inside of their uterus because I wanted to write them Happy Birthday.

I don’t need documented proof to believe you’re pregnant.  I get it, you, like most other humans are capable of procreation, congratulations.  If these people are so interested in sharing their wonderful news so intimately with us, why not take it a step further? Post a video for us of the conception that took place because mommy and daddy got really drunk at a party four months ago and forgot to wear a condom.  I mean, if you’re going to show us the result of the story, at least include the beginning and the climax as well.

I thankfully know of one married couple still walking along the line of sanity.  As I walked into their kitchen many months ago, there on their kitchen island in a small unassuming frame was the ultrasound of their now beautiful baby girl.  It was at this sight that I took a breath and smiled at the sight of common sense. Not only was this photo not in the living room for all to see, it was in their kitchen, where typically only those close in relation will share its space with you.  Its these people that will likely be a part of the child’s new life and therefore an ideal audience for your placenta’s debut.

Maybe in my aging years I am turning a tad prudish in my observations so I have to leave the door open to make amends if these uterus portraits become the norm.  If these pictures start showing up more often and the women of tomorrow shout in unison that their fetuses should be able to be seen by anyone that owns a computer, I will join them in their fight for acceptance.  I will voluntarily subject myself to a scrotal ultrasound and post the results to my Facebook profile. I will name the image Sydney (non-gender specific) and allow people to congratulate me on my healthy testicles.

And the evolution of our species continues…

As the United States continues to spin out of control, taking the majority of the world with it, it shocks me that the election polls are as close as they are.  I suppose this is what happens when a portion of the population receives all of their information from heavily biased (see:flawed) sources.  These sources not only broadcast blatant lies as part of their scheduled programming, but also brainwash their listeners/viewers to hate any other outlet of information.

Any current McCain/Palin supporter reading the above paragraph swears I am referring to the New York Times (cue mob screams and some gosh done pandering), when in fact I am referring to the right wing media like FOX News, the National Review, and a host of other ethically and logically blurred organizations.

The reason there are so few right wing outlets (in comparison) is because the devil has a limited amount of capital from which to purchase souls to work for them.  I do try and read from a variety of sources, as there are always multiple facets to a story, and to acquire all of your data from one source is never a smart move.

Its like in high school when your buddy tells you the girl you have a crush on is a total skank, so without gathering any further information you stop courting her.  Two weeks later you hear she is in fact not a skank, but is now dating your (former) buddy.

Important lesson: Know your sources well and understand their motives.

Today more than any other day I subjected myself to a frustrating few hours by reading almost every recent article from The National Review (uber conservative “news” outlet).  Then I immediately took a shower and even had to scrub off the extra stench of manufactured righteousness, and unabashed propaganda.  Some articles, such as Point of no Return, by Mark Steyn are as disturbing as they are decently written.  Point of No Return is the perfect combination of  propaganda, opinion based historical review, misleading facts, and absolute conviction.

It is people within the same frame of mind as Mr. Steyn that likely concocted the McCain aide Mutiliation Hoax. Its the Mutilation Hoax story that has finally put FOX News and other faith based media in some hot water (see: well lukewarm at least). As the story goes, a McCain aide was assaulted and vandalized by an Obama supporter, who was described as being a large black man.  These allegations and corresponding pictures were proven by authorites to be completely fabricated.  It was nice to see Rick Sanchez of CNN take issue with this obvious ploy, as it could have escalated into the unknown in the absence of further scrutiny. Read the article and see the video HERE.

In my opinion, proper journalism is the reporting of the facts, not their creation.  In theory it is the media’s job to obtain factual information and provide it to the public so to inform us adequately so we may form our own opinions. In articles like Point Of No Return, Steyn and most right-ish accounts I’ve read, paint the picture of “us vs. them” and conclude with one version or another of, “So are you with us, or against us?” playing to the frailty of human psychology and our need for acceptance.  This tactic seems to compliment the Republican fear tactic quite handsomely.

Meanwhile, it appears those “crazy left-wing liberal rags” as they have been so endearingly named, are reporting much more factual information.

Every reporter, author, and blogger alike pen their phrases on the foundation of whatever slight or heavy bias they may have.  The crucial difference is; are those biases causing the author to distort the truth to aline with his/her perspective? Furthermore, are the writers basing their opinions on facts, or uneducated assumptions and unverified informed?

As a quick summation, the McCain campaign have positioned the following as truths at one moment or another:

Obama is a Muslim - he is not

Obama pals around terrorists - he does not, and the information provided by the GOP is completely misleading.  The entire William Ayers and ACORN associations have been explained and disputed so many times it brings the “beating a dead horse” analogy to an entirely different level. This horse has been sliced, gutted and turned into glue.

Obama wants to take away money from the middle class - this is a blatant lie and how McCain and company can read Obama’s policies and say this repeatedly with a straight face is appalling.

Obama is a Marxist, Socialist and Communist -  These are all false, and the pathetic part is that most current McCain supporters likely haven’t a clue what these words even mean.  They are simply buzz words used to instill the same type of baseless fear they did 50+ years ago. I would be surprised to hear Hannity, or O’Reilly define these types of governments properly.

If current McCain supporters are calling Obama a socialist, but will be paying LESS taxes under Obama then they paid under Bush, why isn’t Bush a socialist? ahhh right, because he starts wars. My bad.

It is the distorting of facts and the fabrication of slanderous concepts that I find borderline criminal from the McCain campaign.  Take a look at THIS video of a recent interview Joe Biden gave. The accompanying article gives perfect examples of spin reporting by the right wing media.

You can’t ask a question like, “How is Obama not a Marxist?” and claim it to be unbiased. Less than a month ago Sarah Palin’s answer to “What do you think of the Bailout package?” was completely void of any useful information (and complete sentences), but somehow there were those that claimed it was a media bias, “gotcha journalism” strikes again.   I don’t think its an unfair leap of logic to think these people are out of their bloody minds.  Its like someone asking me what colour a STOP sign is, and then claiming my answer is skewed because I am bias towards red.

Simply because a magazine, TV station, or newspaper report on something detrimental to your candidate’s campaign doesn’t automatically make it a “rag” or a partisan account, it simply means that you as a *gasp* thinking voter may have a little more thinking to do ($150k on clothes. Seriously?).

Know your sources well and understand their motives

Your vote shouldn’t be taken lightly and that is why I have always taken direct offense to someone hand feeding me faulty information and passing it off as the truth.

To be frank, anyone still backing the McCain/Palin campaign disgust me (note: this does not include all Republicans, just those current lock and step supporters) with their arguments based on fabrication and half-truths.  Its like trying to reason with a child about the boogie man.  Telling them there is no such thing is the obvious answer, but it just doesn’t work.

How you vote is your own perogative, but I suggest at least opening your mind to a number of a news sources.  Though I did not appreciate the scare tactics in the National Review today, I will keep reading, because sometimes being sure where not to get your information is as important as where you should get it.

Political news is like a relationship as there are three sides to every story. His side, her side, and the truth.