Portrait Of A Horny Agnostic
As A Young Man

You don't gotta send an Angel down , Lord.
Just some good company
to liven my spirits,
who digs things I dig (that I can afford.)

Maybe it's blasphemy
to request one with nice tits,
gray eyes and chestnut hair. (So I don't get bored.)
No More Latin honey!
I can't stand their awful fits.

On each these facts we can be in accord
I know my luck is out and has been poured,
and we aren't that chummy.
I lack faith that never quits
So far though, all these prayers have been ignored.

You don't gotta send an Angel down, Lord
nor a Playboy™ bunny.
But maybe if time permits
send me something sweet I haven't explored.

• 0 comments. Got something to say? Come at me, bro. »

F o r E m i l y

Murphy was his name.
But No Longer!
He will be never the same.

Half man, some skin on his face
Half machine, his metal flesh
All Cop, To Be There, Just In Case
Detroit's Hero Where man and Machine mesh.

Murphy was his name.
But these days, he does not recall
So Call him ROBOCOP, If To You It's All The Same
I hope he stays, Here to protect us all.

• 1 comments. Got something to say? Come at me, bro. »

I Herby Officially Coin The Following Phrase:

"Sex has many risks, but abstinence has few rewards".
-D. James McSaddle April 2007

If there is any justice in the universe, I am pretty sure that this bitch is going to die alone.

• 1 comments. Got something to say? Come at me, bro. »

On Christianity's Most Important Holiday
We Shed Some Light On An Age Old Controversy


Medium: Drawn in a notepad at the bookstore, colored with Photoshop.

Afterward:

It is the belief of this author that the Cadbury Bunny that clucks like a chicken in the television commercials is a genetically engineered mutant created by the government whose initial inception was moved forward because of its potential military applications.

• 1 comments. Got something to say? Come at me, bro. »

The Proust Questionnaire
Caving Into Peer Pressure And Giving Into Cultural Exhibitionism.


1. What is your idea of perfect happiness? Freedom to do exactly as I please with unlimited material comforts.

2. What is your greatest fear? Being stuck. Being without options and opportunity.

3. Which historical figure do you most identify with? Theodore Roosevelt.

4. Which living person do you most admire? Nelson Mandela.

5. What is the trait you most deplore in yourself? Laziness.

6. What is the trait you most deplore in others? Laziness. Also, incuriousness and dishonesty.

7. What is your greatest extravagance? Fine toiletries and clothing.

8. What is your favorite journey? The quest for purpose. I'm figuring out how I can use my gifts
to be useful, and it is a good time actually.

9. What do you consider the most overrated virtue? Humbleness.

10. On what occasion do you lie? I am known for my superfluous honesty.

11. What do you dislike most about your appearance? Pastiness. Also the post-college Lard.

12. Which living person do you most despise? Dick Cheney, this guy is evil scum in the sense that only people who believe in the physical existence of the Devil can understand.

13. Which words or phrases do you most overuse? "What the Eff?' "For Fuck Sakes!"

14. What is your greatest regret? Having never developed the ability to live, experience and understand the alternate time lines of my existence that would have been produced by choices other than the ones I had actually made so that I could verify if regret was justified. Fuck, me!

15. What or who is the greatest love of your life? Pizza? Maybe nature.

16. Which talent would you most like to have? Musical talent.

17. What is your current state of mind? Vacant. Thirsty. ::stares off, drools::

18. If you could change one thing about your family, what would it be? The cast and characters.

19. What do you consider your greatest achievement? Mostly how I have personally affected a number of folks. I have helped make the philistine and apathetic into the curious and the motivated. This is ironic given my current status as a wayfaring stranger.

20. If you were to die and come back as a person or thing, what do you think it would be? Toll booth collector. Mostly because God hates me.

21. If you could choose what to come back as, what would it be? A traveling author who gets into adventures, fights, and says profound new things about his culture and the human condition. It would be like if Hunter S. Thompson, Ernest Hemingway, and James Bond had a child.

22. What is your most treasured possession? My shower.

23. What do you regard as the lowest depth of misery? Being trapped in a situation where you have no options or opportunity.

24. Where would you like to live? D.C., New York. Maybe Ireland or Malta.

25. What is your favorite occupation? For Myself? See traveling author.

26. What is your most marked characteristic? My defiance of authority.

27. What is the quality you most like in a man? Most people would say, "a huge cock", but penis' other than my own frighten me. So I will so with strength, boldness, resolve and wisdom.

28. What is the quality you most like in a woman? Nice milkers, a pretty face. Also I like when they have strong nurturing qualities. Plus, wit, humor, articulateness.

29. What do you most value in your friends? Wit, humor, articulateness...I like good company.

30. Who are your favorite writers? Joyce, Hornby, Hemingway, and Lincoln.

31. Who is your favorite hero of fiction? Spider-Man.

32. Who are your heroes in real life? Spider-Man.

33. What are your favorite names? Fredrick, James, Annabelle, Gabriella.

34. What is it that you most dislike? Cat dander and traffic.

35. How would you like to die? Heroically before the surly bonds of age and frailty emasculate me.

36. What is your motto? The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

37. Who is your favorite painter? Warhol, Brandon Bird, Alex Ross.

38. Who is your favorite musician? (Just one? ROFL!) The Beatles.

39. What is your favorite song? Strawberry Fields.

• 1 comments. Got something to say? Come at me, bro. »

Free Speech Is Supposed To Be Disruptive. How Else Could It Inspire Change?
This week the United States Supreme Court* heard arguments on the U.S. Court of Appeals case, Morse V. Fredrick, better known as the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" case.

*It turns out that the Supreme Court is just a regular court with sour cream and tomatoes.

As a high school senior, Joseph Frederick was suspended for 10 days for displaying a banner that said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus". He did this across the street from his high school during the 2002 Winter Olympics Torch Relay.The council for the school district is Kenneth Star who is the former Clinton Impeachment Czar, Chief Player Hater, and now a federally appointed buzz kill. Starr has said that schools "do not have to tolerate a message that is inconsistent with its basic educational mission".

As Justice Alito said, "I find that a very, very disturbing argument. . .because schools have defined their educational mission so broadly that they can suppress all kinds of political speech". Which is absolutely true. A school could define that their educational mission is to be fiscally responsible and that criticism of the schools continued use of antiquated history books printed during the Eisnehower administration is in conflict with the schools "educational mission".**

** We all know the true purpose of public schools has devolved into keeping half-witted bureaucrats and administrators employed.

I was a senior in high school during the tragic murder-suicides at Columbine High School. Weeks after Columbine, a student from my high school was suspended because, outside of school he was suspected of possessing firearms that were not registered.

During art class I made the remark that, "It doesn't make sense that they would suspend him, because his time out of school only gives him more time and opportunity to plot our violent and bloody demise". I was critical of school policy through a satirical remark. It was not obscene and it did not present a clear and present danger. I was suspended for three days because I made an effective criticism of Principal Douchebag's*** poor decision making. I threatened to contact the ACLU, but they made it clear to me that they were in a position to fuck with me in numerous ways, regarding things including but not limited college admissions.

*** Names have been changed to protect the douchey.

We should all be concerned about this not just because students rights are at risk, but the wrong decision on this case could set an ugly precedent. Essentially the criteria for limiting the speech in this case is that if the said speech is disruptive to the goals and ideas of a government institution then it is not protected. Will this prevent newspapers and full grown adults from being able to criticize the White House, Congress, The Supreme Court, the schools, and the IRS? Will this author be sent to Gitmo based upon this blogpost? Maybe, he could use the sunshine and ocean views, though he is not so much interested in the electrical testicular trauma and water-boarding.

The Deputy Soliciter General Edwin Kneedler said that they might pursue a ruleing that would narrowly limit speech that they say advocates drug use.

First, how do you get that out of this case? The banner "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" promotes drug use about as much as it promotes Jesus. Second, is it so wrong for a student to be critical of a school or government's drug policy? It can be argued that that drug policy in the U.S. is shallow, condescending, racist, inaccurate and hypocritical. If this particular topic is not protected speech would it not appear that no topic is protected speech?

What it will come down to is whether or not the Olympic Torch Relay was a school event and if the banner was disruptive. The main reason why speech is protected is because thoughts and ideas are powerful. Critisisim is the ultimate enemy of tyrants and oppressors. Free thought, free assembly and a free press are the pre-eminent players in the marketplace of ideas that moves our civilization forward.

The "Tinker Test" based on the landmark Tinker v. Des Moines ruling from 1969, which defined a student's first amendment rights. The 7 to 2 ruling said that the schools must have a constitutionally valid reason for limiting free speech.


The Tinker case came from three students who wished to protest the Vietnam war by wearing black armbands with peace signs. The students were suspended for this action based on the idea that they were disruptive. The majority opinion said that the students were unjustly suspended, ". . .based upon an urgent wish to avoid the controversy which might result from the expression". Ultimately the Tinker Test says that sometimes Free Speech can cause controversy but if it doesn't cause a profound disruption to classroom activities, such speech is protected.

If this Supreme Court has any regard for court precedent, it will vindicate Joesph Fredrick. He will then be able to sue the school district for millions of dollars and he will have a lifetime supply of Funions and he will be able to live out the rest of his life playing XBox.

God Bless America. And may his son toke it.

And then the LORD said, "Duuuuuuuuuuude I ate so many communion wafers, you have no effing idea!".

• 2 comments. Got something to say? Come at me, bro. »