Talking about the Issues: Monkey Touching to Utensil Violence

This is a great video clip from a live show the Flight of the Conchords did in New York City. And it brings up some very sensitive and important issues. For one, monkey touching - when is it okay? Is it a new pandemic? And how can it be stopped? Another one: Why are kids calling each other names like 'Jork'? What is a Jork? And then of course the most serious issue: utensil violence. We use them every day, and now they have become a ubiquitous tool in gang fights and even simple domestic disputes like "Why did you drink my milk?" or "Why don't you ever look at me when you tell me you love me?"I'd like to start with the monkey touching issue. I've heard new statistics from some very reputable journals that say monkey touching is on the rise. In some zoos, like the famous Bronx Zoo, and even the world famous San Diego Zoo, strange bald patches are showing up on their monkeys. It seems to be more frequent with Spider monkeys and Tamarins, but zoo keepers are concerned for all of their primates. The public is divided on the issue with some people claiming that the monkeys invite the touching with their provocative howling and throwing of feces. Others believe the monkeys are being victimized. I for one and ambivalent to monkey touching. It just seems to be another way of self-expression, and I'm not going to weigh in on who touched who first.

The second issue is equally interesting, if not a little more disconcerting. As many of us are well aware, American English vernacular has been spiraling for years now. If I were to say that there was a paucity or dearth of refinement in vocabulary and word selection, it would be an understatement, and, most people would not even know what I was saying. This ties in with the trend of young kids calling one another 'jork.' Jork, as most people know, is just an unintended spelling error of the word 'jerk' which was perpetuated in online chat rooms and on instant messenger because no one knew any better. However, jork has been given a life of its own. It can also mean "someone who likes to drown bags full of cats in the Seine" or "someone who likes their toast done only on one side and becomes introverted and sadomasochistic if they don't get it just right" or "someone who eats decomposing leaves." So, as you might have guessed, calling someone a jork is indeed very unflattering. And, in many cases, leads to domestic abuse in the form of utensil violence.
This last issue of utensil violence is probably the most boggling of all the trends. Some criminals who ordinarily would have preferred a hand gun or a switch blade have turned to knives, forks, spoons, and the occasional spork to carry out their misdeeds. Some believe that this is happening more and more due to the current economic climate. With rising unemployment, businesses going broke, and weapons prices going up, criminals and would-be criminals have had to scale down their budgets and use the more accessible and primal tools that they find in the silverware drawer. The results are mixed, with some criminals and angry spouses reporting that they are satisfied with kitchen utensil performance during violent acts, swearing they'll "never go back to guns," and others saying they felt emasculated and even debased having to use a spork to rob a bank or keep a sibling in line. The climate of violence and abuse is changing, in some big ways. As utensil violence becomes more everyday, the risk of Tetanus, Lock-jaw, and not being able to pass through metal detectors due to lodged utensils increases.
All of these issues are important. I hope it has cleared up any misconceptions. Now the choice of what to do with this information is up to you. Or as Captain Planet said:
"The Power is YOURS!"

Getting Back to "The Issues"

I love it when I hear democrats say, "Let's get back to the issues." 

Historically, in elections, when democrats focus on the issues, they lose. That is why Obama has spent so much of his time on a soap box talking about a vague hope, and an unclear, but nonetheless forceful mantra of 'change.' 

And, focusing on the issues does not mean calling McCain Bush and trying to tie him to that administration. That is false campaigning. If they really want to focus on the issues they need to talk about McCain's record, not Bush's. And, if they really want to focus on the issues they need to tell people what an Obama administration would do to 'change' things. If they told America more about Obama's plans, most Americans would disagree. But, people don't vote on issues they don't know about, so instead they vote on character and personality, or, what they perceive as character and personality. So, let's talk about the issues:

Obama wants to cut taxes for the 'middle class' supposedly, and make up the difference by taxing those who make more, making our already unequal tax distribution more top heavy. 

However, his definitions of 'middle class' and 'rich' are not correct. Contrary to popular belief, people who make six figures, aren't necessarily rolling in dough. And, even people who make upwards of $50,000 a year aren't either.  And part of that is because they are taxed like they are rich, when they are not, and then those who make significantly less than them pay nothing. 

Obama wants to make more bureaucracy and government work programs like FDR did, federalizing medical coverage, and creating an 'Obama's Youth' movement. 

Now that might seem all well and good on the surface, except that when the government takes over any large organization or task, it tends to be miserably inefficient. The argument of 'you will pay less for your coverage' may be true on the surface, except if you pay less, you get less, and on top of it, you're not really paying less. To cover everyone's new "free" medical expenses, taxes will go up. And, those taxes don't go to R&D, new techniques, better training and better facilities. No, those taxes go to a new middle man. A technocrat who works for the government and tells you what the government will and won't pay for. The doctors will get paid a flat rate (regardless of their years of schooling and amassed debt from that schooling), and they will be forced to see ALL patients (even illegal aliens). But, so what?! Well, that means that doctors have less incentive to do their jobs well, and reduces the amount of time they can spend on patients, thus causing your "free" coverage to be worth just what you supposedly did not pay - nothing. 

The moral is, don't let politicians trick you into thinking you are getting "free" anything. The truth is, you pay for it. You know how everything in DC is "free"? That's because your federal taxes pay for all those museums and monuments. So, while it might appear to be "free," it's really not.

And, on liberal blogs, and news article forums I read elitist sentiments like this: "The American people are stupid. They are so easily duped by the republican machine. And those people in middle America aren't really Americans, and I sure as hell don't want them to run my country."

Wow. These comments come from people who live in big population centers on both coasts, who have no idea that most of what that they eat, and the electricity that runs their homes comes from those "people in middle America who aren't really  Americans." I love how people who live in big cities claim this moral, intellectual, and social superiority over those who live outside the city. It's a bunch of crock. Guess what? The kids who have an hour bus ride to their school from a podunk farm in rural Montana are often better educated than most inner-city kids. But, people who make these kinds of comments, that despise others who think differently than they (and call them stupid for not agreeing with them) are not inner-city products. Most of them have been fed from silver spoons, receiving their education at private institutions. Oh the irony!