Buy Xanax Without Prescription Best Prices Guaranteed

Pretty much no one nowadays takes any personal responability for their actions. Look at Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. He still refueses to admit he had anything to do with the firing of the attorneys even though all the evidence points to him doing so. All he has done so far is pretend to not remember anything and blame all of his subordinates for what happened. Look at the TB patient who flew all around the globe potentially infecting people. He blames everybody else, even though he was repeatedly told not to travel and to seek medical treatment. Apparently his wedding was more important than the health of anyone else besides himself. Then he has the nerve to say that quarentine procedures are unconsitutional. Ok Mr. Big Shot lawyer good time proving that case while evryone on those planes sues your ass. Akon is the latest egomaniac to emerge. He's already in hot water for dry humping a 14 in the Caribbean. Now at the recent K-Fest in Fishkill Akon hurled a 15 year boy from the stage after he threw something at him. [youtube]yT7Z-uTAbEc[/youtube] He has released a statement from his lawyer saying he did nothing criminally wrong. Um shouldn't there also be an apology in there saying how you were sorry you threw a 15 year old off of a stage? Or is that ok now for a grown man to beat up a kid. If you throw something you deserve to be kicked out of the concert not hurled from the stage. Why is this considered acceptable behavior? Why isn't he being kicked off of the Gwen Stefani Tour and dropped from his record label? Where are Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson on this one? Oh so when you hurt somebody with something you say on the radio it's not okay and you should be fired, but when you actually try and hurt a 15 year old that's suddenyly fine? All these corporations that claim to care about values apparently don't care either. So wrtie or email Akon's record label Universal Music Group and Verizon Wireless who also sponsors him and tell them that beat up 15 year olds isn't acceptable behavior. Also boycott the Gwen Stefani tour until she kicks him off. Send a message that just because your famous you can get away with whatever you want. People need to be shown that there are consequences to their actions. Otherwise society will just keep going to hell in a handbasket.

This post is called news in brief because I give brief summaries of the days news and I'm also writing while my underwear. New Hampshire Gets a Little More Gay: NH apporved a bill to allow gay civil unions. Obviously the whole gay storyline from the Sopranos inspired them to approve the unions. The government also voted to change the states bird to the Cock. Russians Aren't Going to Take it Anymore: So the US has started another arms race with Russia over plans to install missle defense stations in Europe. Hurray we get to fight a new Cold War! I'm sure our troops would like to take a break from Iraq and spend some time cooling off in Siberia. Way to go W you never fail to disappoint with your stupidity. $P4MM3R Gets Canned: One of the world's top spammers was arrested so people's inboxes should be a little less full too day. Of course now I don't know where I'll get my my free V14GR4 and other P3N1$ enlarging pills. Fly The Infectious Skies: Some dumbass flew all around the world with a rare and dangerous form of tuberculosis after being told not to fly several times. The other passengers on the plane are being alerted and possibly treated. I order to prevent this thing from happening again anyone sneezing or coughing before boarding the plane will be shot. Better safe than sorry. Jon Lovitz is Still Alive!: Apparently and he signed a life time deal with the Laugh Factory to appear there every Wednesday. So now if your wondering what to do on a Wednesday night in L.A. you can always go see Jon Lovitz or go to a back alley and watch a coat hanger aportion, altough the abortion is slightly funnier.   That's it for today L8TR.

I'll say it: Barack Obama is a liar. Surprised? Secretly happy? Are you shocked, and demand to hear some evidence? Well, Stephen Colbert has the evidence, and it turns out to be pretty flimsy: Obama recalled reading an article when he was nine years old, and it turns out it wasn't in Life magazine, as he thought, but in Esquire. But it doesn't matter. As Al Gore found out in 2000 and John Kerry found out in 2004, complex positions on issues and factual reality is trumped by attack labeling. By "attack labels," I mean those wonderful soundbites, usually just a few words and never more than a sentence, that are used to turn a politician into a caricature. It's similar to the doublespeak that has given us wonderful phrases such as the "death tax" and "we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." The fact of the matter is, Americans get their news from a wide range of media and sources that are in constant competition with each other for audience. Detailed, subtle analysis is not the best way to win in that marketplace. So the only way to get a message out is to make it short, memorable, and catchy. If your message can't be repeated at the watercooler in the time it takes to fill a paper cup, you've already lost. Any time spent making sure the message matches reality is time wasted. They went after Kerry with "flip flopper," among others, and they went after Gore because he "said he invented the Internet." The Gore label, for example, was originally based on a poorly-worded statement that Gore made. A fake quote was spread by mainstream media in a clear failure of the marketplace of ideas. Meanwhile Gore did deserve some credit for understanding and promoting the Internet from the Senate before anybody else, according to Vint Cerf. This was so effective that years later we still get to hear "funny" comments about Gore inventing the Internet from people who've never even heard of Vint Cerf. So it is inevitable that they will go after Obama the same way. The only question is, what will the attack label be? I think it has to satisfy a few criteria:

• It must be short, the shorter the better;
• It must be memorable and catchy;
• It does not have to accurately represent reality, but it must at least on the surface reflect some quote or action by the candidate; and
• It must have truthiness, so it "feels" like the truth. For example, Al Gore's pride goething before a fall sounds like a great story. It should have the qualities of an urban legend.

I have already heard some candidates for the label we will no doubt see applied to Obama:

• Barack Obama is a liar. This is the one I talk about at the beginning of this post. The truthiness here is that Obama is too good to be true. The emperor has no clothes, and everyone was afraid to point it out because of the race thing. He's written a couple books, so it's just a matter of breaking out the fine-toothed comb.
• Barack Obama doesn't have enough experience. He certainly looks young, right? And, uh, he's never been a governor. The only way to dispel this one is to actually looking through his rather impressive resume, which takes time and effort and will therefore not happen. The truthiness here is style over substance.
• Barack Obama is too much of a risk. Now I would never say it would be risky to vote for a black person because I'm not racist, but think of all the dangerous racists that are out there. Do you think the KKK will take this sitting down? We must keep him out of the white house for his own protection. My gut tells me that this is a sympathetic viewpoint... it's not like a white president has ever been shot.

We have a lot of time to kill between now and the elections, so it's quite possible the attack label will be something we haven't even heard of yet. There are still lots of opportunities for him to misspeak. But I figured I would include a poll to make it democratic: please vote on which of the attack labels you think is most likely to be used against Obama. If we get a good amount of votes, maybe we'll do one for Hilary Clinton too. I think Edwards has already found his in this $400 haircut business. Maybe we'll do some for the Republican candidates, but quite frankly the Democrats suck at this sort of thing so I'm not sure it would be very interesting. [survey_fly]

The Virginia Tech murders got plenty of coverage in the press and on the Internet, but none of the writers here at Unsought Input weighed in on the subject. Really, there wasn't anything left to say that hadn't already been said a hundred times on a hundred channels already.

But now there is something interesting going on that isn't getting enough coverage. Did you know that there are two more casualties to add to the list of 32 people killed by Seung-Hui Cho? In addition to murdering and wounding all those people, Cho somehow managed to kill common sense and reason in thousands of commentators and high school principals across the country.

For example, school officials at Clements High School in Texas kicked out a student because they thought he posed a threat. No, he didn't threaten anyone, or buy guns, or stalk girls, or anything like that. He made a level in the game Counter-Strike based on a map of his high school. And posted it on his MySpace page.

For those of you who are out of the video game loop, Counter-Strike is a first-person shooter where you fight a bunch of terrorists, or alternatively fight a bunch of anti-terrorist troops. As you can imagine, it involves a lot of shotting and blowing stuff up. It's most fun when you compete and cooperate with other players.

Now why would a student replicate his high school in such a game unless he was using it as a simulation to train for an attack on his school? In the weeks since the VA Tech massacre, thousands of people would think that's a very good question. That's because they are scared out of their wits.

Why would he do such a thing? Listen, in high school I bought a game named Sim City 2000 (no I will not let you download it for free). One of the first things I did, after getting the hang of how to build a city, was build my home town. My home town was a dismal failure because I lived in a suburb with no industry and there were some scale issues, but that's beside the point.

Later in my high school career, I was president of the computer club. Yes, I know that also makes me king of the nerd patrol, whatever, I have to represent. One of our projects was to build a map of the school in the game Doom (or maybe Duke Nukem, the memory is getting hazy). It was a lot of fun, trying to get the textures right, figuring out where to put the power-ups so that the game would be fun to play.

It never occurred to us that we were doing anything wrong, or that we could use this map for plotting elaborate scenarios. It never occurred to me that building my little home town in Sim City and then unleashing tornadoes on it was wrong. That's because the whole idea is ludicrous.

Why do people play video games? Because, like any game, they are interactive. Some games take interaction to the next level, allowing you to do more than just explore virtual places - you can build your own. This appeals to the same kids who loved Legos when they were younger, and while they may not be the star quarterback or head cheerleader, they are hardly murderous misanthropes.

But what about the link between video games and violence? It turns out the link isn't quite that simple. Apparently only unstable people are really effected by violent video game content, but not any more than they are by violent movies, or even increases in room temperature.

What about the link between Cho and Counter-Strike? Uh, did he ever even play Counter-Strike? Or any video games for that matter? Does anyone actually know, or are they just making it up to get on TV?
After a tragedy like this, people want closure. They want to be able to do something to make sure it doesn't happen again, or find something to place all the blame on. Unfortunately, Cho was a self-important nutjob who refused the help that was offered to him at every turn. There's not really much we can do about that, so bring out the scapegoats and lose the rationality.

Tom Merriman and the “I-Team�, apparently Cleveland’s lame version of the A-Team, did a report on a local poet for Fox 8 News. Unsurprisingly the segment did not go well. They interviewed, well ambushed then later interviewed, Brian Yax, a local poet who goes by the name “Uncle Bad Touch�. Yax wrote poetry on raping and murdering women as well as children which were posted on his Myspace profile, which have been removed since the airing of the interview. Apparently the point of the interview was to make Yax look bad for writing this poetry and apologize for doing so. Quiet frankly the whole thing was ridiculous. So what if he writes offensive poetry? He’s 22 years old; of course he’s going to do offensive things. In case you didn’t notice the hair and the clothes, he wants attention, which is exactly what this dumb story gave him. I’m sure all of his friends told him how cool he was for getting on the news. At the end of the segment they talked about free speech and the stupid anchors asked what can be done about offensive speech like this. Obviously they are too stupid to realize that free speech was designed to protect offensive speech. Too many people say, “Well I’m all for free speech, but…�  There is no "but," people, either you are for free speech or you aren’t. The minute you start censoring things because you don’t like or agree with them then free speech goes out the window. I didn’t see anybody complain that the news is offensive. Quite frankly I was offended when Tom Merriman brought out the woman whose daughter was raped and murdered to “surprise� Yax and make him feel guilty. Way to use some one else’s pain and suffering to boost your ratings Tom. Tom criticized Yax for saying that he didn’t care that her daughter was murdered. Tom Merriman doesn’t really care either, but he sure pretended to be concerned during the interview. I’m sure a few hours later he totally forgot about her and her daughter and went onto the next person to exploit for ratings. Yax is a douche and his poetry is offensive and poorly written, but because of the First Amendment he has the right to express himself in anyway he wants as long as he doesn’t harm anyone else. The news puts images of murder, rape and violence on every night for entertainment and no one calls them out on it, so it is hypocritical for them to pick on one individual. Freedom of speech is an integral part of our country and if you don’t like it then you can exercise your freedom of speech and shut up.