Pip for President (P4P)... ahem, I mean Congress ;)

• Zeitgeist - The Movie (Part 1 of 3)
• Zeitgeist - The Movie (Part 2 of 3)
• Zeitgeist - The Movie (Part 3 of 3)

Think, learn, && act. It is time for good people to sew seeds of loving peace instead of terrorized war... for the harvest is coming && we must decide what we care to reap... before the wicked greedy few reap all of us && enslave our whole world. Stop war. Hold the crooked accountable. You need not struggle to believe more lies. Our leaders have not learned from their mistakes as they claim. Continuing to place illogical trust in them is not the only option. See to it that any of our living future is truly free, even if we must first endure instability to topple the institutions of control that we've grown so accustomed to. Things shouldn't be like this. Be courageous in supporting serious positive change all around. It matters. If peace is our goal, we must start over, not with foundations of mechanical war, but with new dynamic structures founded upon organic peace. This is the ideological contest, the challenge, the healthy competition. It's not simply another war with words. This is a philosophy... a perspective. Make peace!

I just had an interesting thought. Ron Paul is talking about abolishing the IRS && general income taxation... && while I applaud that goal && wish to help realize it too, I think it would be a sweet form of justice to perform this movement in the following two phases:

1. For four years, the IRS redirects all of its resources && efforts toward investigating oil companies && finding every United Statesian individual who has invested && directly profited from the success of these companies. These people are the only ones who need to file && pay taxes according to the old rules (proportionally to how much of their income was derived from their ownership of oil companies).
2. After this four-year term has expired, the IRS is closed && no more income tax shall be collected in the increasingly prosperous United States of America.

I know it's wacky... but it just might be the right thing to do! ;) Ponder it... && let me know what you think! =)

Since late June, when Emergent decided not to renew or convert my employment contract to a full-time salary, I've encountered several other incidents which have made me more introspective about my way of being lately. I've looked for new work, traveled to visit family and attend conferences and competitions, and kinda got worse in some ways before getting a couple serious reality checks.

So now it has become clear to me that my abrasive ways brought me to the brink of isolation and estrangement from my family. I have had an awesome opportunity to work on my dream video-game project with a great friend over at Backbone... but my old recalcitrant ways from back when I worked there years ago compelled a manager to intervene to veto my participation at the eleventh hour (after enlisting the additional support of some other objectors who seem to have desired anonymity). Reasons that were able to find their way back to me through my friend were the apparently disturbingly offensive texts that have been publicly accessible from my website here prior to today and also that the perceived risk I would pose is unbearably great.

This turn of events has horribly disappointed and disheartened me. I was so enthusiastic about pouring my heart into the quality of the game, in whatever capacity I could, but to be prevented just at the moment I was slated to begin has been difficult and dismaying to accept.

I am different today than I used to be. I've distanced myself from my volatile ex-girlfriend with more permanence and clarity than I could have done before. I've moved myself down to the Los Angeles area to be closer to family and friends, to maintain happier and healthier relationships, to grow roots in the neighborhood I've most wanted to live in throughout my life, and to establish a platform for more stable success in all areas of my life, including my career. I have been softening. Hearing that this site had become a justification for why I should not be allowed to contribute to the final stages of this short project I so passionately wish to work on with one of my closest friends, this caused me to reassess the whole site critically and to chop it down to this sliver of what it was. That old stuff no longer represents how I feel now.

I want to work as hard as I can on that project, as a cooperative part of the whole team, so I'm hopeful that there must be some possible way for my denial to be retracted. I don't yet know what it will take, if anything, but I'm meditating on what it could be that would precipitate my acceptance as a collaborator. I'd rather help this STHD project to achieve a phenomenal and thorough conclusion more than anything else I could possibly do for the next several weeks.

I may have exhibited consistent behavior over the past year that was perceived of as being so risky to Emergent that they felt they had to retract an offer they had already extended me. Maybe my immediate family recently almost got so fed up with my bitter non-conformist attitude that they prepared to dissociate from me. Those recent events have already been profound motivators for me to reflect on my goals and progress towards them and then to choose to go about most of my activities since with less arrogance and more humility. I'm heartbroken that while I'm trying to realize such productive changes in myself and how respectful of, and collaborative with, others I can be, I may still have to suffer one of my most magnificent, thrilling, and challenging game-development opportunities being snatched from me right as it was about to be entrusted. I so long for a chance to change their mind or to prove that I will devote myself to their highest priorities in a way that is very valuable and nowhere near the risk factor they have become concerned with, because I care so much about this particular project and its immaculate completion.

There was another insinuation that part of the risk I could pose would be a lack of trustworthiness when dealing with the valuable historical software required by the project. While it's true that I love Free Software and open-source, I am no proponent or practicer of espionage. While I may believe that the current copyright system is severely broken, I don't use that as justification to infringe anyone else's copyrights. I'm not into pirating media with torrents or other file-sharing systems. I am principled and honorable. Even though I'd consider such language to be a prevalent semantic error, I doubt anyone credible could be found to accuse me of ever having "stolen" any valuable software. I don't know what I can say or do to be re-accepted to work on this game of my dreams but, if it exists, I sure hope I can figure it out soon. There's no other opportunity I'm more eager to pursue.

Wow! So much can happen in a month. I should remember that when I think this world moves too damn slow! ;)

Maybe I shouldn't bore you with my travels and travails... or should spare you details, even if it wouldn't be boring.

Here's a quick summary: Emergent is too lame for me to work there anymore (even though they still have some coolness). YAPC::NA was awesome. I gave a thoroughly well-received Lightning Talk which totally bolstered my confidence in my Perl abilities. Houston was humid! My talk && the job-fair enabled me to get a bunch of interviews with Perl-friendly companies. One has already offered me some compelling temporary werk which is way cool. My first time in Florida was nice but I don't think I'd choose to live there. Cocoa Beach was hot. My ex-girlfriend was released from incarceration to raise hell again so she and I are through (once I deliver her stuff). My huge family get-together was nice but my abrasive profane non-conformist style has strained my family to its extent... so it's time for me to mellow out because, as much as I hate unjust authority (like governments), I'd much rather not let that poison my demeanor in a way that irreparably ostracizes me from my loving and kind family-members. Catching some of the last part of Evo West && ComicCon was sweet. I'm looking forward to Evo World Finals in Vegas next month. I've enjoyed great visits with so many of my family && friends this month. I'm looking for a new place to live in Venice && a new game-development job somewhere in SoCal. Hopefully I land something good soon. =)

On July 4th, 2007, Chuck McGlawn, contributing editor of the Orange County, California Liberty ViewsLetter, sent the following message which he has graciously given me permission to edit slightly && publish here on my blog. Please let me know if you'd like to contact Chuck or to subscribe to his awesome Liberty ViewsLetter. I'd be glad to put you in touch with him. Please also enjoy his excellent article below!

It has been said that at the time of the Declaration of Independence, one third of the population was in favor of Independence, one third was loyal to the King, and the last third didn't care one way or the other. While I have always questioned the accuracy of that statement, how nice it would be if today we had such large and clear-cut factions. The problems we face today are astronomically more complex. We are, after all, at the bottom of 140 years of government schooling, coupled with a propaganda industry that is infinitely more persuasive. United Statesians are now split at least seven different ways over the same subject.

Confusion and lack of direction is likely this nations #1 problem. Coalitions are so fractured that consensus is near impossible. Navigating these rough waters makes voting a daunting task. This problem is just as evident among conservatives and liberals as it is among Libertarians. This confusion sends conservative and liberal back to their home bases, Republican and Democrat respectively. Libertarians instead just continue to factionalize. We are at a point now where we have libertarians like Erik Dondero (which some pronounce "Dunderhead") who lionizes Giuliani as a Libertarian, while other libertarians denigrate Ron Paul because he has an "R" in front of his name.

Cancellations to the Liberty ViewsLetter generally come with a reason. The reason is always an indication that we have not made our positions clear, and how can we when we ourselves are not clear about our positions.

If you would like to be clear about your positions, if you would like to remove all doubt, in order to have a clear direction, I direct you to just the first sentence of the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. This is advice that has been available for 231 years today. A careful, thoughtful reading of that simple sentence can give you solid direction, and clarity, about any candidate or issue.

The Declaration of Independence says:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness..."

What powerfully insightful words those are! First, it establishes that the truths are "self-evident" and are confirmed by observation of natural law. Then it goes on to lay out the rights of all women and men, (Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness) with the dictum that these rights are granted by the Creator (or whatever logical process has precipitated our conscious existence). That they are "unalienable," which means they cannot be taken away; not even by the government being created!

Looking closer, you have three, and only three, Rights. Simply by being born, you have the right to Life. You also have the Right to do with that life anything you want to do, which is called Liberty. Finally, you have the Right to plan and conduct that life in any way that you think will maximize your Happiness. (These are all yours, so long as what you do does not interfere with another's right to do what she or he wants to do with their life).

Next, the framers make a vitally important assertion. "That to secure these rights," (notice here that these are rights that we had even before we had governments to "secure" them) "Governments are instituted among [Wo]Men". Please note here exactly what is being said, that "We The People" are going to engage in a contract with our (soon to be formed) government to "secure" (protect) our rights. It is also important to note that people make government, and therefore precede government. This means that government is the agent to, and servant of, the people, and not the reverse.

Now the framers are going to designate from where our government gets its just powers, and at the same time put an important limitation on that governmental power. The Declaration of Independence says, "Governments are instituted among [Wo]Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." There you have it. If government gets its power from the governed, it follows that people cannot create a government and give to government powers that those people do not possess. Let me say that again. If government gets its power from the governed, then the government cannot have powers that people do not have.

Does a person have the right to defend their own life? Yes, so then it follows that people can institute a government and share with that government the power to protect life. In fact, that is the justification for a military.

Does a person have the right to defend their property? Yes. Sharing that right, a police department can be justified, and charged with the job of protecting property.

Do you as a person, have the right to take money from others and me and give that money to someone else that you think needs it more? The answer is no, so, it would follow that if a person does not have that right, then neither can that person (nor can a large group of people) justly create a government, and give to that government the power to take money from you in order to give it to someone else that the government thinks needs it more.

This means our national government has no Constitutional authority to extract taxes from you to educate children, no matter how badly you may think children need educating. It means that our national government has no Constitutional authority to extract taxes from you to fund welfare, no matter how needy you think some people are. It also has no Constitutional authority in health care, business promotion, democracy spreading, regime changing, or any of the thousands of other things that the national government is presently financing.

Apply this to immigration. Do you have the right to prevent someone from entering your property? The answer is yes. But do you have the right to prevent someone from entering another's property? The answer is no. If all people are created equal, do they not have the right to move about the planet of their own volition, in pursuit of their own happiness? Of course they do.

How about abortion? If it is government's job to protect life, then a question arises: At what point does "Life" begin? At conception? At birth? When the brain begins to function? What defines such "functioning?" This core question of when life begins is a dauntingly difficult question. No simple answer has been found to be widely agreed upon and it seems unlikely that any conclusive resolution to the quandary will be found any time in the near future. The major related problem we face today is that this most fundamental question must be answered before laws can be written regarding abortion.

Please keep thinking. The future has always been wide open and every moment that becomes "now" shall be different than all those that have come before. Closed-minds remain ill-prepared for just survival in every possible now and in every possible future. Challenge confusion. Diminish fear. Free your mind. Liberate others.

So I was reading the July 2007 issue of Motorcyclist magazine && have a bone to pick regarding the Perspectives: Full Circle article by Mitch Boehm on page 33. I guess this blog post will be my open letter criticizing some of his conclusions.

Boehm talks about government meddling in riders' sport && business. He mentions their penchant for parroting their do-gooder mantra "We'll save you from yourself" as supposed justification for such meddling. He relates the cautionary history of Missouri Senator Danforth who had a knee-jerk reaction to the perceived hazard of the bigger faster sport-bikes, mistakenly assuming them to be statistically more life-threatening than smaller meeker bikes. This Republican proposed legislation which would have had a severely negative impact on what street-bikes could be purchased. The foolhardy Senator had neglected to conduct even the most cursory research on the subject though. The premise that high-horsepower super-bikes were a greater mortal threat turns out to be "ass-backwards" because most inexperienced riders buy the more under-powered bikes for their affordability && they turn out to unsurprisingly be the ones who suffer bodily harm && death with greater frequency. So Boehm acts like we just got lucky dodging that bullet but it was apparently too close for comfort for him. Then he goes on about the "swell of bone-headed riders" && negative media attention (with a prime example being the American Chopper stupidity disparaged on the Last Page, 138). He attributes much of the negative attention as being fueled by a new generation of riders who "don't give a rat's ass." Then he has this retarded last paragraph advising readers to ride responsibly, setting a good example by shaming the so-called idiots both verbally && socially when one is unlucky enough to encounter them (us) && to keep watch && remain willing to fight Big Brother.

I'll talk about shame. It's a shame Boehm doesn't realize how cowardly && inconsistent he's being. Maybe I can help clarify. Is the enemy that is deserving of your ire more the government or the new generation of bolder, more defiant riders? Are you scapegoating the latter there due to your own pathetic compliance with the former?

I presume myself to be "new generation" even though I can't fairly speak on behalf of anyone but myself. I zoomed by a Highway Patrol car today at double the speed limit, shirtless && in shorts. They might have radioed ahead but they don't even attempt to pursue at 150 miles-per-hour with their inability to split lanes. I haven't hurt anyone && am not out there actively trying to injure or kill others or myself. It might happen but it's certainly not my intention. I simply love the thrill of life at speed && the ever-present risk of death which people delude themselves to think they can ever be well shielded from. I usually wear protective gear to mitigate some of my risk but I'm still pretty fragile, feeling like a cheese-ball in a razor-storm out there. The government doesn't respect me so I don't respect it. I don't give a rat's ass. I don't give a flying fuck.

I hate Big Brother even more than Boehm && I think he has lost sight of the fact that us new-genners (or whatever he wants to label us as) are fighting in the best way we know how. We're doing what we want to do && telling the government to shove its mantras && unsolicited salvation up each politician's ass. I also happen to be running for President in my quixotic way. We each fight with different strengths && focus.

You want to shame me verbally && socially for being an idiot? How about I shame you for being too damn timid to stand up to the government && fight as you claim you're eager to do. You've turned yourself against other riders because they're more courageous && ballsy than you. You've been deceived into thinking you need to operate in some pseudo-stealth mode. You errantly imagine we all can hunker down to avoid detection by the meddling authorities. That's totally wrong. Fuck that! Maybe if more of you old-generation farts would stand the fuck up && resist more loudly, actively, && aggressively, we'd have more of a fight on our hands. So who's the idiot? Why the hell should I give a rat's ass about an increasingly irrelevant, out-of-touch, religious, prejudice, closed-minded, unjust, irrational, parasitic, luddite, cowardly, antiquated, greedy, deceptive, meddling government again?

Thanks for the article, Boehm. Sorry we have to fight each other. I'm trying to get us onto the same page. Please keep up the good work, everyone at the magazine. Let's keep our heads on && our engines hot.

P.S. High five to Motorcyclist for an almost perfect verdict on page 44 regarding the Gilera Fuoco. My only complaint there is that you wrote "America" when you seem to have meant "United States." I'd be glad to see it beefed up && brought to all the Americas but I expect the U.S. to have the most egregious do-gooder legal exhaust restrictions which are the major hindrance I imagine they would need to overcome && we have quite a lucrative market for performance vehicles here so it's likely worthwhile for them to do it. Things would be much better still if we had fewer restrictions on everything. Don't trust authority. History proves authorities never deserve much if any trust.

I've been thinking about this saying a bit. To a Christian, it might sound like:

Do you love your black friend but hate niggers? What about loving your Muslim friend while hating Islam? Love your gay friend but hate fags? Love your Mexican friend but hate immigrants?

There are all these ideas && parallel practices. Then there are practices which jump the chasm. Such chasm-jumping practitioners justify hating the real present soul because it is an emissary of the hated group. It's not always such a far leap. It depends how rancid && stagnant the group-hate is.

There are lots of contingencies in this. A group would have to be defined either from within or without in a fashion that can be relatively supported by the other side. Thus, the group becomes identifiable (even if only vaguely so). Take "intellectuals" for example. Oh no, smart people make mistakes! Who could've guessed? Only the smarties && they missed the boat. Just what we need is more fear of intelligence!

So you might hate those who can be identified as intellectuals while loving your brilliant acquaintances. Hate soldiers except those you know. Hate the federal agencies of FBI, CIA, ATF, IRS, USPS, etc. but appreciate the agents. Hate the police force but respect the officer. Hate the recording industries but support the musicians.

Don't jump the chasm or the shit sandwich. Don't hate the individuals. Don't hate the groups either if you can help it. I know it's tough. That's what I think... for now.

P.S. I need to conduct more research before I can be certain about this but I have thankfully begun to entertain the idea that Ron Paul would make a better President than me && that I should withdraw my candidacy && cast my support for him. He reminds me fondly of Alan Keyes from the debates before the 2000 election. Ron Paul has voted against wars (including those fought on ideas like terror, drugs, or immigration instead of just being declared against a nation or territory), transgressions of liberties && privacy (like the PATRIOT act), && has what seems to be an outstanding record for diminishing the scope && offense of government every chance he gets. I'm dismayed that I wasn't previously familiar with such an awesome congressperson. I've been told I should research Dennis Kucinich as well since he advocates impeachment for Bush && Cheney. If I do end up concluding another Presidential candidate would do a better job of it than me, I anticipate withdrawing my candidacy (in a visible way on the home-page of this site) && casting my vote && support for such a superior candidate instead. I'd prefer someone else handle the role better than I could.