What is good for the goose is no longer good for the gander?

Violence has been around since the beginning of mankind. Cain killed his brother Able in the very first murder. This is of course if you believe in the teachings of the Bible. Whether it is a random act of violence or a terrorist act; almost everyone belongs to a group, or school of thought, that can be motivation for these actions. Are we to condemn a whole group just for the actions of some?

I find it awfully funny how everyone is so quick to damn Muslims for terrorist acts perpetrated by a few. Yes I know there are many people who have committed these atrocities but the percentage of Islamic extremists who have committed these acts are small in comparison to the religion as a whole. I know that Americans have developed what I would like to call a "rotten apple spoils the bunch" mentality when it comes to issues of this nature. So is every Muslim really to blame for the attacks on 9/11, Paris(the Charlie Hebdo and the most recent attacks), London bombings, or the Boston Marathon bombing? I am just naming a few but I know there have been plenty more attacks. I know that terrorism by Islamic extremists is a real threat and a serious issue. I am not making light of this very real issue. I am, however, trying to show a little perspective on this.

Let's move to a different topic for a second. Most recently there was the tragedy is Colorado Springs. Robert Lewis Dear took what I will call and arsenal of weapons into a Planned Parenthood clinic and murdered three people and injured at least nine more. Not only did he open fire on these people but he also had propane tanks that he had assembled around a car. Now, to me, this seems like something that is supposed to strike fear in a certain population. According to Merriam-Webster the definition of terrorism is the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal. Being pro-life is a political stance, if I am not mistaken. Seems like terrorism to me. SO do we lump all pro-lifers together and say they are all prone to acts of violence because of the act of Mr. Dear? 

Let's slide over a little to the Black Lives Matter movement. Now it may be a stretch for me to call these folks terrorists. However, I certainly do. They are trying to enact some sort of political change and they are destroying their own cities and perpetrating attacks to intimidate people into making these changes. This, in my opinion is mild in comparison to the others but the fact remains the same. Should we condemn all African-Americans for the action of these folks?

Now as I was writing this there was another attack at a center for people with developmental disabilities. The people who carried out these acts ended up being Muslim. Hours before their identities were know I hear many people going ape shit about they are Muslim. Making comments like they must be Muslim, I can't wait to find out they are refugees, and other such comments. This just goes to prove my point. There is no innocent until proven guilty for the Muslim community. I am of course going to get shit for being a Muslim "sympathizer". I can assure you I am a people sympathizer. I think all life matters, not just my own. In America we don't have a Muslim problem, we have a violence problem. No matter what nationality, religion, ethnic group, or race people come from. until we take a stand on ALL violence this sort of thing will continue to happen. It is high time we work on the overall problem, This is just the opinion of one asshole....I don't expect you all to agree but you should have read this with an open mind.

Let Brian Williams Go Back To Work

Personally, if Brian Williams died tomorrow I wouldn't even shrug my shoulders. Be careful how you read that. I didn't say I want him dead. The point I'm making is this.. I know the man's name in passing and nothing more. I don't care about what he does for a living or who he is as a person. For all I know, he's already dead.

This is an opinion blog and not the news, so I don't have any moral compass to stand by. We just tell you what we think and you read it or don't. We don't serve a specific side of the ethical or political fence. I just take a topic I want to write about and say whatever I feel with no repercussions. Brian Williams doesn't live in that world and he's recently made headlines for basically embellishing on a story that happened to him during the war. If you haven't heard about it, this video will explain.

I used the word embellish because he didn't flat out lie. He was involved in an attack, but he told everybody that his helicopter was hit by a rocket when in fact the helicopter he was following got hit instead. Maybe he misremembered it, like he claims, or maybe he just wanted to be the cool guy at the party and tell the story in the way that made him seem better to his audience. A colossal fuck up nonetheless.

I think we, as Americans, should hold our news anchors to the highest moral standards. If they lie, they should be fired without severance. If they tell inaccurate details, whether honest or accidental, they should have heavy consequences for those actions. They are being paid a lot of money to give us factual news that is held to a certain ethical platform and I believe we deserve it in return. However, that isn't the world we live in.

The one we live in has Fox News correspondents apologizing regularly or fumbling through news stories in whatever way fits their political agenda. While that video was politically one-sided, it was also very factual. I get it, Fox is the joke of the news world. They do whatever they want and we just shake our heads at it and move on with our day. Just like anything that comes out of Florida.

If Brian Williams is going to be the first reporter held to the highest standards of the internet when it comes to his honest news reporting, I'm absolutely fine with NBC pulling out its bull whip, the internet getting its pitch forks, and us all setting a very clear example of Brian Williams. If this is what we're gonna do from here on in, I'm all for it. This isn't that though.. you and I know it. This is just the hype train the internet is hot on for the week, and while Brian Williams is suspended for the next six months in his home, watching other reporters on Fox make up shit every week at their leisure, the internet will be moving on to whatever new activities are going on in the Kardashian household. We'll forget that we all cared about Brian Williams and we'll hold no other news reporters to the same standard we set for him in this case.

Remember Joseph Kony? Surely you remember the social media star born of being a Ugandan rebel leader who had a surge of popularity on the internet due to how he treated children? Did we save those children? Nah. Did we catch Joseph Kony? Absolutely not. So he just got his fifteen minutes of fame and we moved on just like we'll do here. Put Brian Williams back to work and be realistic. Americas standards aren't changing, because we only care about what social media tells us to care about for the moment it's relevant on our feed. 

When does it all end?

I find it interesting that people are always calling things demonic or Illuminati symbolism. I get it. You have nothing else to bitch about. You have to tarnish everything people do because you have nothing better to do. Personally I don't care what the symbolism is in music videos or in performances. If you are afraid that something like that will influence the youth of today, then maybe you should start at home and not worry about what other people are doing.

Now I don't want to lump ALL Christians in the same group because not every Christian is close-minded and allergic to acceptance, however, most of the people I hear bitching about this claim to be Christians. I see it everywhere, though. Jay Z had Illuminati symbolism in his performance says one guy. Such and such is going to hell for the demonic lyrics in his song. My favorite is "play this song backwards, they have demonic phrases". Does everything have to have a hidden meaning?

Now what got me started on this was the fact that I saw a video on Facebook today from Good Fight Ministries. Now I know this will give them some press and I am OK with that. What I am not OK with is people trying to tell you what to see and that only their perception of something is true. Now is it possible they are correct? Well sure it is. Is it possible that these situations are totally benign and they are just reading into things? That is also true. I am not foolish enough to say that there are no Satanic messages in music nor are there any Satanic people trying to get their message across in music. I AM saying that not everyone is trying to add people to their cult or religion through music and videos.

Well these folks at Good Fight Ministries made a video stating that Katy Perry was, and I am paraphrasing, a vehicle for Satan trying to recruit the unsuspecting youth into Satanism. At the time of writing this article I haven't been able to find all of the interviews the clips were taken from. SO I can't say it was taken out of context. However, I have heard some musicians and artists say "I sold my soul to the devil" and mean that they are now a part of the machine that is about money not music anymore. I wouldn't take it literally meaning they sold their soul to Satan so they could have the fame and fortune.

With all that said I am not blind. I do see the symbols in performances. I do see the likenesses to these things people are complaining about. To me it is just entertainment. If I am doing my job at home to show my children what is right and wrong then I don't have to worry about society "corrupting" my children with their so-called perversions. This brings me back to the statement I made a million times. How does it hurt you if someone else wants to lead a life of sin, if that is what you call it by them being gay or using satanic imagery? I think just let people live their lives and not be so judgmental. Whatever happened to the sayings, "Only God can judge" and "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".  The aforementioned video is posted below if you would like to take a look. This is just one assholes opinion. Feel free to make your own. It is not my job to tell you how to live or what to believe.

Is a McDonald's Ad Really That Serious?

During the Superbowl last night, millions of Americans got to see McDonald's latest attempt to recover from a very rocky PR atmosphere lately. Over the past few years, in light of Americans becoming more health-conscious and seeking more information behind the foods they eat, McDonald's has been under fire for serving what would be considered a deep fried, more acceptable form of dog food to the masses. Partner that with the protests last year for raising the minimum wage at fast food restaurants and it's safe to say that none of us idolize the advertisers that have to sit and come up with a way to paint their products in a positive light.

In the ad, McDonald's requested customers at random to commit public acts of affection. The result being that their meal is free in return. The prices were deeds such as "One big family hug" or as they requested one patron, "Dial up your mom, tell her that you love her."

The next day I get on my Facebook feed and I see this beaming blog from Gawker, where author Hamilton Nolan saw fit to tear apart McDonald's recent PR campaign. Hamilton said that "normal, presumably middle or lower class Americans seeking cheap food are made to grovel and put their most tender family dynamics on public display." From this phrase alone I can tell that Hamilton is both not lower to middle class and also must hate his family. After all, if you're going to attack a company for simply asking you to tell your mother that you love her as payment, there are much deeper issues in your family tree than what is for dinner. If you feel the need to go one step further and completely disparage that company for daring to ever ask someone to hug another person for money, I assume you must have been molested by Ronald McDonald.

I get it. In this political world where everyone needs to take a side, your blog has clearly chosen the liberal path that exists to try and make waves out of nonsensical issues. At least I'll have the decency to admit that I do it because I'm an asshole who writes about whatever he wants. I have no boss or higher authority who tells me to feel a certain way about social topics. For that reason, I've decided to unlike Gawker so I don't have to listen to their one-sided ramblings any longer.

I am not defending McDonald's because I believe they are a moral or innocent company by any means. They probably should raise their minimum wage some and it wouldn't hurt if they looked into changing their food. You see, this isn't conservative vs. liberal, I'm just a think-for-myself kinda guy. I wish the internet were full of more of the same.

Shots fired.

You Mad Bro?

What an incredible game that was. It had awesome defensive plays, touchdowns everywhere, impossible catches, and brawl that made WWE start calling agents. Now everyone knows there has to be a loser in every game but how you handle losing shows the character have.

Seattle showed they have no character. Not only from this loss but with how they handle themselves in general. I can’t take the overrated Richard Sherman talking his shit all day. Yeah you make a couple plays here and there but I hear more about you running your trap than making plays on the field. Shut up and play ball.

Moving on to Marshawn Lynch. Dude, get a damn grip. No one is trying to fuck you over by asking questions. Every other player in the NFL sucks it up and answers questions because that is what the job calls for. Oh, don’t let me forget the shoe fiasco. There was no need for that distraction. Just play the game.

Now to the loss of the Super Bowl. Bruce Irvin, if you are going to be mad at someone and throw a punch, make sure you hit the right person. That would be your retarded quarterback.  Who throws the ball on 1^st and goal from the one yard line? What a way to ruin a great game by acting like some spoiled 5 year olds in Pop Warner. How about acting like you make millions to play a kids game for a job. There is no need to start throwing blows because you are pitching a fit from losing a game.

In the end, I have to give the Patriots a well-deserved congrats. They never stopped playing and did what they had to do to become four time Super Bowl champions. I do have one thing left to say. This is a little advice from a former middle school wrestler. Gronk, learn to sprawl bro.

Chris Kyle Should Not Have His Own Holiday

In case you haven't heard, Texas Governor Greg Abbott sent out a tweet that said, "I have declared February 2 to be Chris Kyle Day in Texas." If you've been living under a rock, Chris Kyle is the American soldier who the American Sniper film is based on. Kyle accumulated 160 confirmed kills out of 255 probable kills during his illustrious career with the Navy SEALs. Get your hate speech and rhetoric ready internet, because I'm gonna tell you why this was an ill-conceived idea.

I will preface this by saying that I am not anti-war or anti-military. I think war has its place when it is absolutely unavoidable. I respect the men and women who fight for our country. They're both American heroes and simultaneously just doing their job. I don't mean that to undermine their duty or bravery, but that will be further explained later in this post. I am also from Texas. So while the rest of the internet will surely have people on a particular side of the political fence that will say Texas is foolish and immoral for creating such a holiday, very few will be like me and residing inside of it.

Chris Kyle is an American hero. He did an excellent job as a Navy SEAL during our war with Iraq and he should be commended for that. Which he has been, by the military themselves, The New York Times for American Sniper's 37-week run on their Best Sellers List, and by Hollywood through the film that was made about his life. Not only has he been remembered, he's been glorified more than any member of the military ever was. I'm not here to argue for or against if he's earned any of his previous accolades. However, I do not believe he should have a holiday, in Texas or otherwise.

First and foremost, he's a killer. I do not say that to take away credit for the accomplishments he's made. I've stated my thoughts about the job he did in Iraq, but you cannot take only the good side of what he did and ignore the ugly parts. If you give a man a holiday for being an exceptional sniper, you're also giving a holiday to a man for being an extraordinary murderer. For all the lives he saved, he also took some away. The reason he murdered people is still relevant. That's not me painting the picture the way I want it to be seen, as some would say. It's seeing the entire canvas for what it truly is.

We have a Memorial Day for our fallen soldiers. That's not to say that some members of the military don't deserve a certain amount of unique praise, which they do receive from the military themselves and by those close to them. Hell, if they're good enough they may even get awarded by the President of the United States. There is no shortage of praise given for those men and women who put their lives on the line, but we don't have enough days in the year to handpick out every soldier who did a great job and give them all holidays. Is Chris Kyle more special to us than the 3,493 Medal of Honor recipients we've awarded for their dire moments of courage and bravery during battle? No, he's not better than them. We shouldn't put him singly on his own pedestal simply because he has a movie about his life. He was a great man, like many who came before him, and he should be honored on Memorial Day with them.

With that in mind, if Chris Kyle deserves to have his own holiday, why was Johann “Hans” Breyer arrested in Philadelphia and held without bail until he died in a hospital bed awaiting his extradition hearing for Germany? Both of these men were merely soldiers during a war performing orders handed down to them. Both men were mass murderers and national heroes to their own countries during the time. The one difference is that Johann Breyer would have been killed by Hitler for disobeying his orders if he didn't act them out. So we live in a country that simultaneously sends the message that if you're a fantastic soldier who kills a lot of people for another country during a war, we'll seek out war crimes against you and ship you off to whatever country wants your head. However, if you do the same job for us, you deserve a movie deal, a New York Times best selling book, and your own holiday? Talk about mixed signals.

Eat What You Kill

I am not a hunter. I have never been hunting. That is important for me to preface this post with that statement, because I don't want you to be under the impression that I have a dog in the fight. I believe in big game hunting, under the right conditions. 

The liberal media and it's activist zealots will have you believe that every animal is sacred. I disagree. Unless you are a vegan, you eat or have eaten beef. Do you know where your beef comes from? Do you worry about the lives of those animals, or only the majestic animals that society deems are inappropriate for us to kill?

The hamburger you ate for dinner started out on a ranch. If he was in Texas or Arizona, some of his herd probably died from the heat. If he was in the more northern states, some of them froze to death instead. If they survived the temperatures, they were afforded the luxury of getting branded with a fire iron, getting their testicles ripped away, and their horns were cut or burned off. 

Once their beautiful life on the ranch has come to an end, they get sent to a feedlot. Feedlots are these wonderlands of pure enjoyment, where the cows frolic in the feces-filled holding pens and get chronic digestive problems from the foods they're given to fatten up. The air is always fresh with ammonia and methane due to the amount of manure. We give them drugs though, to keep them breathing.

These are the animals society has deemed it okay for us to eat. Not only that, these animals have to be raised in these conditions and fed to us in this manner if we don't all intend to hunt and we wish to sustain ourselves on meat. There are simply too many people with too high demand of beef for us to raise the amount of cows we need in a hospitable environment. However, there isn't a public outcry for the thousands of these cows every year that live an existence of torture and abuse. We instead focus on big game hunters who kill one lion in Africa and take a picture with it. 

First and foremost, the African lion is not endangered. That is a common misconception. The Obama administration has recently proposed listing the animal as threatened. If it is listed as threatened, it will still be legal to kill those lions even in America with the proper permits, but I'm not here to argue semantics. If it were to be listed as endangered or threatened and outlawed, of course I'm all for preservation of the species, but we aren't there yet. 

I don't believe in hunting these animals purely as a trophy. However, I do believe that as long as you eat the meat and it isn't illegal to hunt, I don't care what animal you kill. Why do we treat these predators as a majestic animal who deserve a more dignified death than the deer, cows, or pigs we kill regularly? I think the public has a delusion that the majority of the animals in the wild live a full life to begin with. While a bullet in the head is not the most humane way to go, the savage lifestyle of living as a free-range animal predominantly lends itself to dying either by starvation, weather conditions, or being eaten alive. They don't usually grow old and die like we assume. Darwinism is the most evident in these species. 

What is wrong with your balls?

The NFL has been in the news a lot this season. I already wrote about the Ray Rice issue. There are a ton of pressing issues in the league right now. A lot of players have addiction issue, there are PED’s being used, and more and more domestic violence claims unsettled. With all of this going on the powers that be are attacking the Patriots for deflating footballs during the game.

During the AFC championship game on Sunday January 18, 2015, between New England Patriots and Indianapolis Colts, the New England Patriots used balls that were under-inflated. They were not inflated to the league minimum. When a ball is under inflated it gives the players a better grip on the ball. The quarterback can get a better grip for passing the ball and the receivers can catch the ball better. From where I sit this did not cost the Indianapolis Colts the game.

The referee’s inspected the balls at half time. They noticed the balls were under-inflated and replaced them with balls that met the requirement. After this happened the New England Patriots still outscored the Indianapolis Colts 28-0 in the second half. If you are looking at throwing a game out because of an issue that could have impacted the game, then look at how the game went after the issue was noticed.

The other issue I have with this is people calling for a ban from the Super Bowl for the Patriots. You have got to be fucking kidding me. What happens when you do this? Do you just award the Seattle Seahawks the game? Do you make them champions on the count of forfeit? Do you put in the Colts who, after the balls were discovered as being altered, didn’t play well enough to win the game? If you want to fine the Patriots, suspend some people, take away draft pick, or all three then that is fine. Just think about things before you start handing out ridiculous punishments. Although it wouldn’t be the first time the NFL dropped the ball if they get this one wrong too. However, this is just the opinion of one asshole. It won’t amount to much in the long haul. It makes me feel better to get it off my chest though.