Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Not Review-Related (A Personal Message)

For years, I was taught how not to forgive or how to let my past wither away like the dream it's supposed to be. I was never shown how to give affection, or how to build. I was shown how to destroy, and it's taken this long for me to understand the consequences of my actions. While I try to move forward and strengthen my new self, I find it impossible to continue without feeling the ever-present weight of guilt and remorse. My lamentations increase with everyday that I haven't resolved my previous actions.

Back when I was a child, transitioning into a new school and a new way of life, I remember destroying a peer's life by issuing constant torment and physical aggression. He was smaller than I was. He was frail and had no control over what others thought of him. I focused the pain from old "friendships," the ones where things were thrown at me, I was beaten, abused, and shown no mercy. I still went back, only because I was alone otherwise. To relieve those terrible acts of violence, I passed it onto another individual, who truthfully wasn't much different from me. Now I understand that his abilities today, more so than they were before, are greatly limited. I was told he twitches, and that he has developed some sort of mental sickness.

I can't fully describe what this pain entails. Psychologically, I was ruthless against someone who told me I was worthless in high school. Granted this is to be expected, I took it so personally, the actions of this girl that didn't understand what kind of a monster I was. Over all those years, I had learned nothing, and after that year had finished, I issued forth an email that brought her parents great fear, and her to tears. I had been punished in some form or another, but it hadn't changed my behavior in the least. I was still unforgiving, no regret or conscience resisting my inability to let the past be gone. I brought grief on her for the next two years, until finally she cracked from being coerced and signed my yearbook with "I love you." I almost broke in half.

It wasn't until a few years later that I attempted suicide due to the strain that my conscience had developed. I felt so much guilt and a great hatred for myself that it felt like my brain was preventing me from performing the simple actions of day-to-day life. My skin was open from the self-inflicted wounds, and my heart slowed to a soft beat, so much that I couldn't feel it any longer. I downed the canister of medications and awaited my fate, only to have called the paramedics at the last moment. When I was placed in the hospital, my perception was plagued with the chemicals taking their effect.

All around me there were voices of people watching me. Everything was shrouded with a domineering darkness, only so much that I couldn't perceive what was fully in my surroundings. The little television blared silently from the ceiling, and then the visions truly began. A hand reached for my chest, tugging at the hospital gown I was forced to attire. A little girl appeared on the window sill, and as soon as I turned to see her, she frowned and instantly disappeared. My heart raced. I distinctly heard the words, "What's happening to my baby boy" in a broken voice, issuing forth the greatest sound of anguish that only a mother could speak it, but she wasn't there. All around me, these visions and callings echoed throughout the night, and from the fear of it all, I succumbed to the horror and disappeared from consciousness.

For days I was alone. I felt so outcast from the life I had created, and the burning in my heart was at its greatest peak of depression. My sorrows had known no end, and it rained all throughout my treatment. There was no more hope, and I had regretted calling them in the first place. Then, an epiphany occurred. Something happened while I laid in my tears, in complete helplessness. I realized that I alone could not possibly cause the downfall of the two lives I sought to destroy. The fact that they were still alive was proof enough that I did not greatly force them into the eternal void which I had so effortlessly tried to enter. There was no pain nor unpleasantness I'd made that ended lives. The things said about me in the past weren't true either, as the opinions of me were those of children. I understood, by myself, that the lessons that weren't taught by my family to me then would come from experience, and I only had to become willing to learn them.

I was born again, and now that I aim to change what once was, there is nothing that can stop me. I withstood trials and tribulations beyond what the human body is capable of in the circumstances I had enforced on myself, and I would march on and destroy those demons I had created. Should there be a day I cross those I've hurt, I will offer to them a sacrifice in which they can return the favors on me abusively. I will allow them to either hurt me in any way possible, or to forgive me and let me continue my quest of enlightenment. Until those days come, I will remain vigilant, and I will not victimize anyone ever again.

Because of this, I am the phoenix. I have risen from the dead, and now I have come to conquer my guilt once and for all. To Michael and Alexi: I am truly sorry, and I will allow you to unleash the furies I have brought you upon me.

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Financial Crisis, Or "How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Debt"

My family wasn't raised rich, that's for sure. We've had our great deals of negative numbers, but we've always pulled through. It hasn't been until recently that I've discovered that we are strangely less funded than before. This, of course, is unfortunate, and it got me thinking a bit.

I've wondered about the real start of "money." The concept, and how we based its wealth. It was so important, apparently, that it bought out Judas and forced him to betray Jesus, and then Jesus used his lightsaber or something. I didn't read that far into the story to know what happened, but I'm straying from the point. The point is that whatever Judas was offered was seemingly a fair amount of coin, but what made that so important or so much more wealthy than his friend's life? Well, it's supposed to be a symbol of greed and treachery, and how the two join together and create terrible deeds. It's a symbol of how human Judas was in that he was sold out to a meaningless amount of blood money.

Human has one great weakness: greed. Greed is the state of mind in which an individual feels they deserve something over another. If one person is ill-keeping and consuming, they basically rob others the joys and necessities that they deserve. If that person is ill-spending and hoards their money, they don't provide enough wealth for the rest of us to use in order to share. I've looked at these two opposing wills, and I've made the observation that both are like political parties: Liberals and Republicans. Liberals spend, Republicans store. Neither of these two groups advances us much farther into the future, because they constantly debate about things we should have agreed on decades ago. If there's one thing that brings the two groups together, it's that both manage their richness in poor ways.

The insatiable desire to want more and more devours a person's concepts of fairness and life-worth. They glance over the things that bring us together and focus more on those that tear us apart. It's not money's fault, either; before the recorded point when gold and silver was the sweet shit, there was trading, and it was fair, at least to those who practiced it. It consisted of one thing transacted for something of equal worth, as according to those who agree to the bargain. There were thieves and bandits that robbed others of these goods, thus devastating families and shattering order. I think currency might have been made in order to try and prevent that from happening, and if that's the case, it sure sucks to know that it didn't work too well.

Since things are rising in price, it's about time we all stopped buying things for a second and took a breath, to look at all we've got and evaluate what we need instead of what we want. Free trade, in my opinion, is useless and time-consuming. Window-shopping is a ridiculous way to go about spending your day. If businesses sold the same things for the same price, neither business in theory would go broke, because there would be no difference in value. Everyone could have everything without the trouble of running around looking for the same thing with different price tags. I'm sure there's something about it that I don't know, but honestly, I don't think I'm far from the truth.

I guess this is all one big post asking people if they can help me via PayPal. Life is hard, and I don't expect to see anyone donating, but hopefully in the future I can afford things like internet and other such things. I'm hoping you're enjoying my reviews, those of you who read them, and know that I appreciate your following along.

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Games Not To Play: Silent Hill: Shattered Memories

Seriously, what the bitch did I just waste my time with? Anyone familiar with the "Silent Hill" franchise knows that the games are intentionally made to perform twisting mindfucks that throw the player off in any way possible, even if it means breaking what seems like reality to do it. Basically, an attempted interactive nightmare. I'm cool with that sometimes.

Sometimes. Not every single god damn time. I don't really follow the series too closely, mainly because it just looks like the same game 7 times in a row. This one, however, offered even less than that. The whole time you're playing, you're supposed to believe that the game learns about you psychologically, and then integrates gameplay based off of choices you've made to make it "the ultimate nightmare." Not once did I see any of that. The whole time you just run around being chased by the same monsters over and over again, and then just look for shit in the dark. That's it. The whole game. The plot's a little more intricate than that, but honestly, the story itself is such cocksuck that it blows, much like the rest of the game.

Harry Mason and his 7-year old daughter get in a car crash. Harry rolls out of the driver's seat, and when he comes to, he notices Cheryl's gone. He then runs into the town of Silent Hill looking everywhere for her, and he rarely crosses people to help him due to a snow storm that forces everyone to take shelter at home. Along the way, Harry receives strange phone calls and messages on his cellphone, and then the town freezes in ice, and he is chased by monsters, otherwise known as "nightmares." When day breaks or some shit, the ice goes away, and the monsters no longer chase him. Slowly Harry realizes that Cheryl is getting increasingly distant, and has somehow grown up. I'm not going to explain the whole thing, because it would be a waste of time to do so (lol, "waste of time," says the guy writing a review). Also in various segments, a psychologist reviews you about the incidents, and he asks you to do certain things that will evaluate you mentally so that the game can be more relative to your personality.

The plot is, to say the least, weird. I understand that's the whole point, but it becomes so abstract that it's impossible to make sense of it. Usually you need logical answers as to why things happen, BUT I GUESS NOT IN THIS CASE. Turns out Harry's a ghost, but somehow people are able to communicate to him and physically interact with him. Since this is true, why doesn't Harry tell them about all the shit that's been happening, and the "nightmares" that keep chasing him? I don't know about anyone else, but if I were being chased by naked monsters without faces and everything turns into ice and blocks my path, I wouldn't hesitate to ask for a little clarification. I'm sure this isn't what Harry does all the time. I've never heard of anyone who just took a paranormal incident as a given and walked it off without telling anyone about it.

Oh, and it's for the Wii. Yeah, you're supposed to be convinced that you're in the game because you have to shine a flashlight around and pick up objects and shit. Horror games that are interactive with the player bother me. It's not MY story. It's the character's. I want to believe I'm the character in the game, but if the game starts psychologically analyzing me, at least use the info given to present me with something to be scared about. It's just monsters and item finding, and then subtle references from the psychiatrist sessions. For a game that claims it takes your personality and uses it to make new situations, it sure doesn't cut it.

That's the warning label it gives you at the beginning. It's implying the game has the ability to read into your fears and create situations based off of those fears. Not only does this warning flat-out lie to you, it's only there to draw your attention in and make you feel like you're actually being "played by the game itself." That sons my bitch. It's like when movies use the line "based on true events." It's not a REAL event. It's loosely tied to something that happened, but isn't fully parallel to the actual event it's based on. "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" was supposed to be based on Edward Gein, the man who killed, dismembered, and displayed his victims like furniture. Ed wasn't a chainsaw-wielding retard; the chainsaw was put in to make the movie more interesting. So, just like that, when you see this warning for the game, it's automatically telling you, "Guess what, this isn't 100% true. Only about 20% of this message is relevant to what's going to happen in the game. Just thought I'd tell you that so it will scare you."

So play it or don't, your choice. Silent Hill can only be so creative.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Because People On YouTube Don't Like You

Yeah, I figured I'd start this one out as an answer to a question rather than beginning with one and THEN explaining it. The question is:

"Why don't more people subscribe to my videos?"

That's what a lot of people are concerned about these days on the internet. Ever since programs like Tosh.0 have come up, people have been awaiting their 15 seconds of fame, only to be met with the disappointment of finding only 53 people have watched their video in the past two months. It's not all their faults, you know. The people who go to YouTube look to be entertained, not to watch you hold your shitty digital cum-corder while your friends make inside jokes and dance around like monkeys first discovering tools.

"Gee whilikers, Mr. Waack," you might say, "What about people who are always on the front page? They seem to get a lot of views." It's simple, really: YouTube is like a big television set that values quantity over quality. The more you can fill up a website like YouTube with video blogs, "Let's Plays," shitty reviews (unlike mine) and so forth, the more chances there's going to be a commercial interest going for them. That means company advertisements will look for the videos with the most views and host their nonfunctional products on them, which, in turn, will pay the user some minimal amount of money. THAT'S the real reason people want to be famous on YouTube. Greed and attention. That's the gist of it.

About those people on the front page: Have you ever taken a look at the usernames? They look pretty familiar, don't they? Yeah, they do, because those are the video makers YouPube is looking for to market their shit. "Fred" is the top of my hatelist on that website. It just goes to prove my point about quantity being more important. For those of you who don't like wasting your precious brains away, "Fred" is a character some kid made up years ago, who edits his videos in fast motion so that it makes his character sound like a kid, or some sort of hyperactive little shit that should have been aborted upon arrival. ANYTIME he puts up a video, it's a big hit. People are simple and love funny noises and actions, so this makes Fred the ultimate breath-waste jester of our time. Other names like these are "Shaytards," "CTFxC," "JLovesMac1," and so on and so forth. Talentless hacks that look partly good on camera but get too much spotlight.

Comment, rate and subscribe is by far my least favorite string of words put together now. That's all you see from these shitty videos. Why do you have to ask people to follow you? If you were good, wouldn't they do that already? I mean, it's not so hard for people to make their own decisions in life. I don't think you have to demand that people continuously watch your stupid antics onscreen regularly, so long as they might want to in the first place. YouPube should be used as a place where you go to find certain things you wouldn't find anywhere else, but now they're making it even harder to do just that. When someone wanted to find a clip from a commercial or a movie, they'd search and it would be right there. Now, copyrights from film productions and other sources, it's considered "stealing their material," then taken down for no one to enjoy. Fuck that, now I can't watch Gilbert Gottfried roast Bob Saget. That was the best performance.

Well, I've answered a lot in a short amount of space. If you're just starting and you REALLY want to become a hit, don't try so hard. Seriously, you shouldn't need to plea that people subscribe to you. If you've got a talent, or if you have something new to provide to the world of arts, people will recognize it, and it'll be a success. For those of you who keep on doing the wrong things, the title's the answer to your burning question.

On a side note,
people are relentless on that website. Seriously, read some of the comments people post. It's awful.

Saturday, September 11, 2010

"Happy Aniversary."

That's what they're going to call 9/11 from now on. It's never going to be a normal day. Instead, it will be a marked event on a calendar, like it's some sort of holiday.

9/11 was a tragic event which devastated many people in 2001. I remember when I was in 7th grade, in literature class. Immediately the teacher was alerted to turn on the news, and there we had seen, before our very young eyes, a national tragedy unfolding. We didn't understand. Nobody did, and then finally we found out that the planes which crashed into the towers were hijacked and purposefully flown at them. Fortunately, I lost no one on that day. Those who did still feel the effect, and it almost seems like whenever 9/11 rolls around every year, somebody's got to step up and say something about it. I'm aggravated by it, personally. Not because it was a catastrophic event, but because they won't let it go. Pearl Harbor happened once long ago, but we don't really talk about that much on the day it happened, do we?

As for this mosque business; Honestly, who do these self-righteous "Americans" think they are? What will they prove by forcefully rejecting a building because it's owned by Muslims? If they hadn't noticed, New York City is a pretty cultural, colorful spot. Chances are, more than likely, some Islam believers were caught underneath the chaos as well, before any accusation was made against them. Nations always need someone to blame, and I haven't heard anyone make such ridiculous claims as America has. Don't get me wrong, I love my country, but I just hate pretty much everyone in it, especially those who simply can't get along with others because of their beliefs or skin color. That's some 1700's bullshit right there.

The thing is that I won't interject with all this commotion. There's no point for me to involve myself in a fight no one will win. People feel like they need to be so political and so involved about things. No one's listening to them in the big ol' grand scheme of things. The regular civilian opinion is worthless, and no matter how many people you can find that agree, there's a pretty small chance anything is going to be done about it. Not here, anyway. In South Africa, not long ago, they made it legal for gay marriages to take place. South fucking Africa. Africa, which is well-known for disease, starvation, and third-world ideals, has already moved past an argument Americans have been in constant debate for years and years and years. I think the problem is that people are afraid that if gays get married, then something will happen to them, causing THEM to be gay. Something along those lines. It's like when some priests come out of the closet, but prior to their doing so they advocate against homosexuality. Sometimes the more passionate against something you are, the more likely you will change because of it.

So happy "anniversary," everybody. Go out and complain about how things are so horrible and that the government owes you some kind of apology. Meanwhile, I'm going to take a nap, play Team Fortress 2 and be overall merry.

Tuesday, September 7, 2010

Load Already, Damn It

People are always talking about how the "future is now." We've got all sorts of new trinkets, gadgets, and electronic goodies. So much, in fact, that we forget how it used to be. I don't like sounding all old-timey, but I seriously think we had it made in the 80's and 90's. People are very fascinated with all this new technology, when really it's less convenient than we tend to think.

Let me start off with my favorite example. When I was growing up, the big thing to have was the Super Nintendo Entertainment System (SNES). It was sleek, had unforgettable games, new buttons were introduced, and overall, a pretty kick-ass machine that said it all in it's name: Super. There were no loading screens, nothing to wait for, no problems that you couldn't fix with a brief dust blow in the cartridge. It was sweet, simple, and it would be 50% better if it had a sex hole on the side. The SNES certainly had its pros, and it's hard for me to think of its cons, other than that there were some really shitty games, which is just the norm for any console. The only effect that's made the SNES hard to use has been time itself. It still works, but the games aren't as high quality as they used to be when I was a kid.

Compare that to my newest console, the XBOX 360. It's a good console, and it certainly has its fair share of good things, however I can easily, EASILY tell where it lost its paddle going up Shit Creek. First off, Xbox Live costs $50 a month. Other consoles have online multiplayer for free, but even those share the next problem: Loading times. Deep fried Jesus on a stick, does loading time piss me off. I'm convinced that you spend a majority of your life waiting for things. It's been true throughout the ages, but in today's terms, it's more evident than ever before. When you put a CD in the 360, you turn on the console, wait for the menu screen to pop up, choose to play the game, wait for 6 minutes for the game to load, press start, wait 3 more minutes, choose a character, wait 5 more minutes... By the time you get to play the game, it's already been a week since you turned it on.
Why does so much time have to be wasted on shit that was immediate in the 90's?

To put it in easier terms for those who don't play video games: Imagine you're planning on seeing a movie with your friends at a theater. You wait in line, buy a ticket, wait for each other to get done buying snacks and drinks, walk down a huge hallway, go to the second-last screen, find a seat, and wait for the movie to start. That waiting period is understandable, as it provides time for people to come a little later before the movie begins, but imagine if there wasn't a movie. What if you just had to do all that just to watch the previews and go home, would you say it was worth all the effort and money spent? So you buy a movie on DVD and watch it at home. Then what happens? The DVD glitches up, and scenes start skipping. "What the bitch," you say to each other as Scarface eternally does a line of cocaine onscreen, forced to be frozen in that spot until you either clean the DVD or pronounce it broken and shoot each other's heads in frustration.

"Future is now" my ass. The future was in the 90's. That's when things did well enough to stand on its own instead of requiring constant recalls due to errors in the technology. This was back when phones called people instead of acted as hand-held sensory overload. Back when things did what they needed to do and nothing else. So who tells us we "need" the shit we've got these days? Is it so important that you're able to check your Twatter accounts every 10 seconds on the road going at 60 mph? Is it a requirement that you wait 50 years to play "Nazi Zombies?" So fuck it, I've lost hope in technological advancement. We forgot how important it was to live, and now we're all just asking for a faster way to go to our graves. In revolt, I suggest we all do a little self-righteousness. Find one piece of modern technology you own, or something that you absolutely don't require, and trash it. Don't litter or anything, just destroy it and make it sad it existed in the first place. It's your choice what stays or goes.

Goodbye, phone.

Saturday, September 4, 2010

Mac vs PC: A Fight No One Gives A Shit About

This is what the typical computer master-debater looks like.

How many times, people? How many times must I log onto some program, where I'm forced to be surrounded by ignorance and failure, to be mocked for the choice of computer I use?

The endless bickering between computer users of Microsoft and Macintosh has gone on ever since both were introduced to the public. Constantly there are comparisons being made with one another, and each argument fails to convince the other of switching their brands. This battle has gone on literally my entire life, though I had not known it at the time. 4 years before I was born, the first Macintosh was released. The first PC was released a year later. 26 years have passed by, and neither side has gone forward far enough to convince me that one is better than the other.

Instead of focusing on the positives first, I'd like to focus on the many, many negatives between the two models. I'm not going into too much detail, because I don't enjoy nitpicking. Let's start off with Microsoft, as that seems to be the computer most people like to brag about:

The Microsoft computer was initially the same project as Macintosh back in the glorious days when internet was restricted to military use only. Bill Gates, owner of Microsoft, and Steve Jobs, owner of Macintosh, actually worked on the project together, impressing IBM with their progress. I'm not sure about the details with the split between Jobs and Gates, but if I had to guess, it was a quarrel about who shot first: Han Solo or Greedo. Gates developed computers differently from Jobs, in the sense that Microsoft is relatively customizable. What that means, in essence, is that users are able to use this technology to a sinister advantage, creating viruses and worms to destroy other computers. So there's one problem with owning a PC: if you happen to go to the wrong website, whether you know it or not, harmful shit will start to fry your hardware, causing you to either buy software to locate and delete said harmful shit or teach yourself how to manually remove it. There are other ways too, but that's not the point. Another problem is that there are hundreds of files that make things complicated to search for. There's a search option, but rarely I'm ever able to find the ONE file I'm looking for due to all the similar-sounding shit that barrages the tiny window.

Mac's turn. Macintosh has become increasingly popular in the past decade, due to the iPod bringing light to MP3s and convenient size. It also brought innovation through unique design and interpretation. Artistically, Macs are impressive. Functionally, they're cockballoons full of fart gas and the helium from airhead customers. Macs are not known for an extensive library of games, nor are they known for convenience in tech support, considering you have to BRING YOUR CRAP TO THE STORE EVERY TIME THERE'S A PROBLEM. They have a "Genius Bar" where total dweebs tell you what's wrong with your shit, as if you didn't already know. The waiting lines are atrocious, and usually they give a misdiagnosis, like doctors do. Also like doctors, Macs are overpriced for tiny little advancements in technology. It's complete dickery.

Here's what sons my bitch: It's time to talk about what the arguments are about both computers, according to the users. Let's start with what PC says about Mac.

PC users argue that "Mac has no games." Who cares? They're games. Do you realize how much of a nerdy concept it is to even consider arguing about that? Games don't define a computer's functionality, because if it did, it would be a gaming console and not necessarily a computer. Another argument entails that "Mac isn't customizable." To what degree? What defines "customization?" There aren't many products for Mac users to install inside their computers, because Mac likes to be all "super secret kool kid'z klub" about their shit, but what needs to be put into a Mac that it doesn't have already? Graphics cards? Again, that would only be important, truthfully, if it were a computer solely meant for gaming. The last argument I'll put here: "Macs don't have a right click mouse." Shoot yourself. Get a mouse that has it, and it won't be a problem.

Mac about PC: "Microsoft computers crash easily." Computers tend to do that due to age or poor materials used. It's not a big inconvenience to get up and go get a part that's been damaged in the computer, and it's easy to install by yourself, granted you know what you're doing. "PCs get viruses." So do Macs, albeit not as many due to Macs having different coding than PC. Those viruses made for Macs tend to be pretty bad, too. They'd have to be, if you spent a lot of time developing something on a computer different than the others. "There's more stuff in a Mac to start with than a PC." Like what, "Widgits?" Those stupid little gadgets on your computer that do nothing but clutter your hard drive full of more shit you don't need? GarageBand, the dmub music-making program that's overused in commercials and movies as filler music? What does it come with that you absolutely require? If you can explain it to me, please do, otherwise I'm sure it doesn't affect the way you live in the slightest. "Macs have less blinking lights." That's a real argument, and it's fucking stupid. If you can't handle lights that indicate what's working and what isn't working, you're shit out of luck.

What computer do I prefer? Neither, and both. If a computer prints documents, reads emails, and finds porn, it's good enough for me. What I don't need are endless suggestions about what I should get to make it run faster or more efficiently. What I don't need are add-ons that give me better optimization. I don't want to spend a lot of money on shit that expires or is a mandatory replacement within the course of a year. Most of all, I don't need to be told what kind of a person I am for choosing what kind of computer I use. I happen to own a Mac, and I don't tend to think I'm an "elitist, snobby, money-wasting fag." I can also work with Windows, and I don't tend to think I'm an "elitist, snobby, money-wasting fag." That's the middle ground between users. That's the way they view each other. Not everyone, mind you, but the ones who have all the time in the world to study every component of their crappy crap, their shitty shit, their assy asses... I'm running out of things to call both these shitbags.

My advice: Choose what works for you. What's easiest for you to figure out, what components you want, and fits your kind of personality.Don't be fooled by what other people tell you if they start talking about what's better than what, because ultimately, you'll hear about the negatives of the other option. When you find something you like, you don't need to brag, you don't need to show off. You'll be happy, and you won't have people ready to stab your back. You will if you play Team Fortress 2, but literally you won't need to worry.

Gates and Jobs should hang.

Friday, September 3, 2010

I Promised Myself I Wouldn't Do This: Jostin Beeburr

"Hate" is a strong word, and I tend to use it quite a bit out of its original meaning. For instance, I like to say "I hate people," when really I dislike most of you. I use "hate" loosely, as well as other words which I probably can't say here, lest I get kicked out for even daring to type the same letters together in a sentence. However, I cannot possibly use "hate" to describe my disapproval of Justin Bieber. No, such a simple way of saying it would feel like it didn't have value, since I blurt it out so often. So what words could I say to describe Bieber?

Well, I glanced in a thesaurus to look up possible terms I could use, and this is what I got: He is repugnant. He is bad blood. I loathe him. I despise every fabric of his being. He is anathema to my taste in music. Never, and I mean NEVER before in my life have I ever wanted someone to melt in some freak chemical-related accident as much as Justin Bieber. His fame is unfathomably enormous, and his stupid haircut makes me want to vomit bats.

"But Mr. Waack," you would ponder, "Why do you spite him so? What has he done to cause such grief in your heart?" I'll tell you what he's done to me. He's reminded me that even the least talented kind of person is able to be bought out, sold, mass-distributed, and greedily attention-whoring. His kind of people belittle the public by making them feel like he is some sort of supreme being. His fans are completely brain numb, focusing on him rather than their own lives. They obsess over his premature build, his high-pitched voice, his preppy Ken doll clothing, and his ability to not really sing while fake music is played over his filthy lip-syncing mouth. It's a disgrace to the music industry.

He's not alone when it comes to my passionate detestation of fake artists. This whole new "auto tune" bullshit has made people believe that there's talent behind a robotic voice synthesizer. T-Pain, Kanye West, blah-de-blah-de-blah, I could go on and on with the lists of talentless hacks who utilize this little goldmine of shit. What happened to real music? You know, the kind that had history behind it, with real voices and character? People just discovered they absolutely suck at singing, which is easily one of the most sought-after talents in the world. Count how many times on shows like America's Got Talent people go on stage, attempting to sing popular songs. Then, count how many fail. It's usually somewhere around 70% of what they put on-air. I'm sure my math is wrong, considering they don't show all the acts, so if I had to guess, it's somewhere around 90% or more.

Justin Dweeber. That inexperienced flit. There's footage of him crashing into a glass door and getting a water bottle thrown at him, only to react like any total pussy would by saying "Ow, that didn't feel good." You know what else doesn't feel good? Listening to absolute shit with electronic drumbeats added behind a voice that only 14-year-old girls can make. That's what hurts, Justin, not a half-water water bottle. Seriously, how long is this shit going to go on? How many more times am I going to turn on my computer and open my web browser, only to find Justin "No Talent" Bieber in headlines again? HOW MANY MORE TIMES, DAMN YOU?

Probably about as fast as you can say "puberty."

Thank you, website I found picture from.

Thursday, September 2, 2010

The Next Hitler: Everyone, Apparently

Few can deny that Adolf Hitler was one of the most insidious, ruthless rulers the world has ever known. His plights against humanity still leave a scar on the earth, and the Second World War is referenced commonly to compare battles and motives of current events. Few can match the level of complete evil and power that the man had used against humankind. Needless to say, Hitler was shit (lol, Shitler).

Here's why I've posted the world's smallest biography about Hitler: these days, his name means nothing. Don't get me wrong, he remains one of history's greatest nemeses, but his name and his political stance in Germany is being dealt out in debate like a breadline during the Great Depression. I call it "Hitler's Hump:" If you can't find a reasonable explanation for why you dislike a politician, a popular figure in media, or your run-of-the-mill citizen of your country, you compare them unjustly to Hitler. That's like playing the race card, only instead of winning arguments with guilt, it's making the user of Hitler's Hump look like a complete shit-for-fuck.

Recently, during Michael Ian Black's stand-up performance in Ohio, a member of the audience randomly blurted out a Hitler's Hump about Obama, comparing America's president with Germany's dictator. Black was enraged, and being the brilliant mind he is, tore that audience member a new one using logic. I imagine that guy didn't learn anything of course, because who goes to stand-up shows to learn? If people went to performances to learn, we'd have a lot less hecklers. Personally, this is the first time I've heard of Michael Ian Black doing something serious, and I was pleased.

When people want to try to win an argument about politicians, they like to draw Hitler's trademark "Dirty Sanchez" mustache on a picture of the opponent. How does this add to a debate? What are they trying to prove, other than that they have absolutely no prior knowledge to WWII? It's inconceivable that people go so low just to try and get a pat on the back for "being creative." Whenever I hear someone using Hitler's Hump, I want to unleash my inner-chimpanzee and throw lumps of butt waste at them, screeching loudly and swinging back and forth on a tire swing. Hell, that's about the same level of advocacy in the argument. The way Nazism has been defined these days has completely changed the aspect of their beliefs. Now people question whether the person's "really a Nazi, or are they just sayin' that 'cause he's a jerk?"

So the next time you decide to compare someone to Hitler, take this into consideration: How many people has this person killed, and if so, how many were Jewish? Did they develop a new order for their country, forcing its people to bow down and submit to his/her dictatorship? Were several secret attempts made on his/her life from superior officers because they feared the decline of the nation due to their sinister motives? No? No? Not entirely so? Then kindly sit down and read a book, and don't add anything to the conversation ever again.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Shit you don't need: PS3 Slim and Other Toys

Here's what sons my bitch: There's a new toy out there for all of you who just can't get enough of holding big, hard joysticks in your hands. It's the "PS3 Slim," and it supposedly replaces the original console. I know nothing about it, nor do I truly care, but here's a question for those who do: Other than size and the new placements of ports and wi-fi and all that, what's the difference? Are people really going to have both consoles? Would the original be sold, or given away, or what?

I shouldn't even suggest "giving it away," because if there's one thing that people have a pretty hard time with, it's giving expensive things away for free. We're in a place now where every dollar counts, or so we're always told. Money itself means nothing. It's paper with men drawn on the cover. We give it value and importance, when truly it does nothing other than sit in your pocket, waiting to be exchanged again and again through filthy hands and back. I have a feeling that's how most germs spread. Not because of door handles or food, but because we just can't get enough green, but I digress.

The point I'm trying to emphasize is that we're spending a good amount on things we don't need, especially right when they're at their priciest. As a society, we rarely have the patience to wait and see how things will turn out. Instead, we claw our way to the top, trying to get in on whatever seems to be the next big thing. While this new gadget (PS3 Slim) is priced currently at $299, in a few months, probably after the holidays, the price will drop by a significant percentage. Not only that, but they will find bugs in the system and work those out in due course. Basically, if you buy things immediately when they're announced public, you might as well buy a cricket bat too, so you can constantly beat yourself senseless for spending so much on what will turn out to be an obsolete toy.

It's all material goods. I'm guilty of it myself sometimes, but truthfully, if it exceeds what I am able to afford, I allow time to take its toll on the price and see if it decreases in value. Like the pen I just ordered awhile ago; it's a butterfly knife-style pen that you can do cool tricks with. Some people bought it immediately, when it was $30. I got mine for literally half the price, which included shipping costs. It's not something I absolutely need, but it's nice to have things that you want when it's reasonable. Not when it's SOMETHING YOU ALREADY FUCKING OWN.

I can't tell you what to buy or when to buy it. That would be rude of me. What I'm saying is that we need to evaluate the current circumstances before we hop aboard the Greed Train. What people fail to understand is that things don't cease to exist if we don't get them right away. They can become out-of-stock, but they don't completely disappear off the face of the earth. Wait for someone to be disappointed with their product and decides to sell it online for cheaper. That, or maybe your friend has it, and they invite you over to play it for free. Whatever the situation, you don't HAVE to have all this electronic butt-sludge adding to your piles of worthless garbage. You can afford to wait, but there's a media-induced illusion that you can't. Trust me on this one, you can wait.

So for the sake of your own benefit and your budget, think before you spend. What you see isn't always what you get. Computers, gaming consoles, phones, and other toys are diversions to what's really going on. You're forgetting how excitingly difficult living is, and how fun it is to make your own adventures rather than play someone else's. Life is a challenge, like a console game. Don't let it pass you by and wonder what you did with your time.

This post is happy end.
Thank you."