Trial By Press? Why America Needs To Be Patient In The Trayvon Martin Case

It is a sad state that so many people seem to be in favor of this so called "trial by press". Ever since O.J., we, as a society, have decided to crucify people that are involved in controversial events and seem to take pleasure  when we destroy said people's reputations before they get their day in court. Sure, some (one could even say most) of these people end up being guilty, but for every O.J. Simpson there is a Kobe Bryant. For every Scott Peterson there are people like Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and David Evans (the defendants in the Duke lacrosse rape case from 2006). It is a crying shame that people care more about Nancy Grace's opinion (Grace can rip apart and label any potential suspect as guilty, but the fact is there is a murderer on the streets due to her actions as a prosecutor that resulted in a mistrial. A Georgia court called her actions a, "disregard of the notions of due process and fairness," before overturning a conviction of arson/murder and setting the defendant free) than they do about the rights to due process granted to every citizen by the United States Constitution. Yet, despite her using false testimony while acting as a prosecutor for the State of Georgia, many people hold her opinions on legal matters in high regard...or at least react as if they do when she, and others like her, get on their high horses and declare suspects guilty before they even get the chance to face a judge and/or a jury of their peers. 

Now I'll get into the specific case that has led me to write this. At this point, what does ANYONE really know about this Trayvon Martin case? That the press is reporting that a white guy killed a black kid? That, if Martin's killing was in fact a murder, that it HAS to be a hate crime? George Zimmerman's family says he is Hispanic so it does not make sense to me why everyone is calling him white. Also, a former CNN anchor, Joe Oliver, (who just so happens to be black) said, "in this one spark incident, that [the portrayal of young, black men] wasn't the case. Race had nothing to do with it." In addition to being a CNN anchor, Oliver happened to know Zimmerman, personally, before this whole incident occurred. Although most major news sources have decided to just report on the protests by different groups who are angry at the handling of this situation, CNN did decide to report one fact that has been released; (albeit buried at the bottom of a long ass article) Zimmerman was, "bleeding, from the nose and back of his head." Those same news sources that are calling Zimmerman a white man have also have chosen to use a mugshot of him from an unrelated case in 2005 and put it next to a picture Martin from a few years ago where he looks like a little kid. Doing this is extremely prejudicial, and I believe that the media should feel obligated to report all news stories from a neutral point of view. That of course will never happen because being neutral does not bring in ratings a.k.a advertising revenue. All of that withstanding, I agree that it is POSSIBLE that race had something to do with the shooting, but it is far to early to jump to that conclusion. What if Martin attacked Zimmerman? What if that attack was because of a threat by Zimmerman towards the boy? Nobody knows yet because the police are doing their job and not leaking very much information to the press. A story was leaked yesterday that said there was evidence of Zimmerman being attacked, but who knows if that is even credible because IT IS TOO EARLY TO TELL! Potential self-defense shootings are not as simple as all of these protesters want them to be. They take time for the police to gather all of the evidence, interview witnesses and come to a conclusion. Another thing that the media is also, for the most part, choosing to ignore is that the facts of this case will be presented to a grand jury on April 10th. In Florida, prosecutors have two ways to charge a suspect: by information where the prosecutor acts within his own authority, or a before a grand jury. In a case such as this, with no eyeball witnesses, it seems that a grand jury hearing is the fair way to decide whether or not Zimmerman should be charged. With only circumstantial evidence, charging Zimmerman without a grand jury could be like, uh, I don't know, charging Casey Anthony with capital murder? It may please the media for a time, but in the end, it will backfire. While a grand jry is not the speediest way, I believe it is the fair way, even if it does mean the press will have two more weeks to continue to sully Zimmerman's name without really knowing what happened that night. Basically, I just believe people need to relax, be patient, and wait for ALL of the facts in the case to come out. I know this can be hard when a the death of young person is involved, but in the end it is what needs to be done. I also believe that the mainstream media (CNN, FoxNews, ESPN, MSNBC, etc.) contributes more to racial tensions in this country by bringing race into EVERY story that involves conflict between two people of different heritages. I know that they think they are helping, but they are not. They report something such as a black kid getting shot by a "white" guy (saying he is Hispanic does not sound nearly as controversial or as "juicy") and it snowballs out of control, when the fact of the matter is that no one knows a damn thing yet. Oh yeah, and regardless of whether the shooting was racially motivated, justified, or a straight up murder, there is absolutely no reason for the federal government to be involved in a local shooting. The local police need to man up, do their job at their own pace and not be influenced by pressure from outside sources. "Quick" justice is not the answer. As angry as people are now, it will only get worse if the police feel that outside pressure, move too quickly, screw something technical up in the process of finding out that it is, in fact, a murder and then George Zimmerman ends up going free anyways. 

I Can Stand a Black Man, I Just Can't Stand Obama

Recently, one of my friends posted this image on Facebook. I began to type a comment on it, but I realized it had just gotten too long and I decided that this would be a better medium to express my thoughts on the absurdity that this picture portrays. I know that in today's society minorities are the only ones "allowed" to get offended, but I happened to find this image to be pretty damn offensive. I do NOT support Barack Obama, but I am NOT a Republican. I am an Obama opponent, not because of his skin color, but because of his politics. If Ron Paul was the same exact person except he was black, I would support him as much as I do now. In fact, not supporting Obama is an understatement. I think he is a terrible president, but he possibly could have done a decent job had he waited 8-12 years to mature and get some more political experience. I saw this man, who is supposed to be the leader of this country, get pissed off while having a look of disgust on his face during an interview on television, as well as doing the same thing a few times while trying to mediate between political parties. While I probably would have resorted to physical violence and screaming if I were in charge of getting the Republicans and Democrats to compromise, I am not the president. The president can not act rattled or annoyed. He needs to be cool, calm and collected at all times. To me, portraying a strong, calm image is one of the most important traits to possess for the president of the United States. This is one of the many reasons that I have lost so much respect for our Commander in Chief. While I disagree with everything that this picture stands for, it brings up an interesting issue. I would be willing to bet a significant amount of money that there are more blacks out there who voted for Obama because they share his skin color than there are white people who do not like him and did not vote for him because he is black. As for any black person who reads this and disagrees, please inform me of a few of the president's acts that fall into line with your political beliefs and that you fully support. Obamacare does not count, unless you can explain the ins and outs of it to me because I consider myself pretty well informed on politics, but I still do not understand exactly who will be effected and how exactly it is changing our current system. Outside of his health care reform, I can think of a few things that may have appealed to you. Do you like that he is a serial liar and just tries to use buzz words and lies just to please his crowds (the current Republican nominees are just as guilty). Do you like that he is taking terrorists who, by their own admission, only regret that they did not kill MORE Americans during the attacks on 9/11, onto American soil to give them trials under US law? Do you like how it takes about two seconds to look up a video during Obama's 2008 campaign where he says that under his presidency no US dollars would be spent shutting down LEGAL medicinal marijuana dispensaries, and then two months into office he started ordering the DEA to raid them (talk about taking away jobs...)? How about how he promised to veto the NDAA bill (which would have overturned some of the scarier parts of GWB's Patriot Act) and then backed down from yet another promise and signed it into law anyways? Could it possibly be that you (this one is specifically for you, Jarred, as a black man in the military) believe that it is America's responsibility to police the world by attacking foreign lands to force our values on them. Just like we did by spending hundreds of billions of American tax payer dollars intervening in and bombing Libya. I thought Democrats were traditionally anti-war, but I guess not. Maybe if you are a black man you do not care about securing the boarder between US and Mexico because your buddy Obama obviously does not. This, however, is very important to me and I do not like how the issue has seemingly been ignored for the last three years. I believe that this is because Obama is scared of angering many of the Hispanics that voted for him in 2008, when in reality, just because they do not speak perfect English, does not make them stupid. Many of the ones who vote want the boarder secured so the criminals who make the image of all immigrants look bad will be stopped. These are just a few of reasons that I quickly assembled on why I happen to dislike Barack Obama. When it comes down to it, I just think he is a liar (more than the average politician) and has lied on many issues that happen to be important to me. I stuck with issues unrelated to the economy because as much as Obama has fucked that all up, most Republicans probably would have done the same (except Ron Paul who actually understands the economy...or maybe he's just a physic). For the record, I would hate Obama just as much if he were a short, white, red head as long as he had the same principles he has today. This leads me to the final and one of my biggest problems with Obama's presidency. It is not a criticism of the man himself, but rather the country that he leads and how we have reacted to having a black president. Now that our country has a black president, we need to stop making race such a big deal. One of my biggest concerns with his presidency is how the race card seems to come up so often. Let us take a trip down memory lane back to 2002. George W. Bush had not yet fucked up his presidency. In fact, his early handling of the attacks on 9/11 made him so popular that people were talking about his Secretary of State, Colin Powell, running for office once Bush's term expired. When asked about his thoughts on running Secretary Powell said that he had considered it, but if he were president he would want to be known for his policies and principles, and would not like all of the news just focusing on how he would have been the first black president**. I wish more of America would adopt this view. The demographics of America are changing and changing fast. We need to stop with all of this playing of the race card because we will only pass it on to a younger generation. A generation that would be fine without our stupid ass racial issues because by the time they are our age the amount of people in each race will be about equal in the US, with mixed race children fast approaching those who are purely one race. In the words of Ron Paul, ‎"Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called 'diversity' actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist." It is a shame that so many criticisms of the president are considered racist. Look at Newt Gingrich's (who would most likely be just as bad of a president in his own way) comments on Obama being a "welfare president." That was considered racist by some, when it is a fact that the number of Americans on welfare has almost doubled since 2008.  As the leader of the free world, one needs to be open to all sorts of criticism without the race card continuously being played. Criticizing the government is one of the cornerstones of a democracy. That is all I have for now, but I would love to hear from a black person about a list of policies that you have enjoyed that came from Obama's camp. Oh, and Osama Bin Laden does not count either. Obama did not order that Bin Laden be hunted and killed. That order came down ten years ago. 


A Few Notes: 


**I remember hearing this story in 2007 or 2008, but due to Google's terrible new search program that only brings me Wikipedia articles and forums I can not find the story, but I am 85% sure that it is true.
--I just now figured out the magical invention of the hyperlink. Tried to go back and source some of lies that I accuse him of, but got too lazy. Google any yourself, if you do not believe them, remember: these are just my opinions on the president. I am ALWAYS up for a good political debate as long as you know your facts.
--I use the term "black people" rather than "African Americans" on purpose. I am sorry if this is offensive to anyone, but I personally think that "African Americans" is a ignorant, politically correct term that is sometimes inaccurate. In addition to not all blacks having ancestors from Africa, (Jamaica and other Caribbean islands produce people with black skin too) I personally do not care where your great-great grandparents were born. I'm not a European American, I'm an American, just like black people are Americans. It is 2012. Forget about where your family was from and just happy to be an American!

Michael Wilbon: Racist, Ignoramus, Fool

Yesterday news broke of a blockbuster trade in the NBA that would have sent Chris Paul to the Lakers, Pau Gasol to the Rockets and sent a few new rebuilding pieces to the NBA owned Hornets.  For some reason, that is still not 100% clear, NBA commissioner David Stern vetoed the trade.  The consensus among sports writers is the unprecedented move was terrible and wrong.  Some have even asked for him to be fired.  I was interested to see what some of my favorites commentators thought, so I tuned into Around the Horn and the PTI on ESPN.  I wanted to watch with an open mind, but as soon as I heard them start talking, I knew in my gut someone was going to use one of the most offensive terms I can think of.  I knew it would either be Bomani Jones or Michael Wilbon, and when Around the Horn ended without Jones using it, I just had a sick feeling that it was only a matter of time before Michael Wilbon’s ignorant ass uttered the phrase “plantation owners” to refer to the group of NBA owners.  Slavery was one of the, if not the, low point in our country’s history.  As a white person, I am ashamed of it and I think it is sad that my race would follow in the footsteps of so many other early cultures in enslaving another group of people.  That being said, I find it VERY offensive when I hear someone compare a group of whites to plantation owners, simply because they made an ill informed decision.  Not only is it just a stupid thing to say, but someone like Wilbon, who covers the NBA for a living, should be above saying something that is so untrue.  I have had this feeling for a while, but I believe Wilbon is a racist and should be fired for his ignorant comments.  When a white person makes any comment that is even remotely racist, they are immediately asked to step down from their post, especially at ESPN.  By comparing a group of white people to the most despicable group of whites in our country’s history, I believe saying something like that is just as bad as when someone who is not black drops a racial slur, such as the “N” word.  Just because the majority (remember Jay-Z owns part of the Nets now and Michael Jordan owns the Bobcats) of the NBA owners are white and the majority of the players are black, does not mean it is okay for someone in a public position, like Mr. Wilbon, to make such a stupid and ill informed comparison.  While whites are still the majority in the US, it does not make it okay for someone like Wilbon to say what he did.  Remember, this is the same man who said he would like to take a year off just to follow Adam Scott around the country so he can heckle his caddy because he said he wanted to shove his trophy up Tiger Woods’s black ass.  Hey Mike, Tiger’s ass IS black.  He didn’t say he wanted to shove it up there BECAUSE it is black.  There is a difference, and that difference is HUGE.  If you consider that to be a racist remark and think what you said is okay, you are truly out of touch with the current state of racial affairs in our country.  Even thirty minutes after your utterly ludicrous comments, I am still pissed and offended and I believe attention needs to be called to your ignorance.  To quote the great Ron Paul, “Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called 'diversity' actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist.” Michael Wilbon, you sir, are a racist and I think you should take some time off (or just do us all a favor and resign) to get your head out of your ass.  

Above the Influence: The Propaganda Machine - An Interesting Look on Marijuana

In addition to supporting the full legalization of marijuana for responsible use among adults, I believe it is important to get rid of the negative stigma that is associated with smoking pot.  As a society, we  don’t look down on a man who chooses to have a few beers after work or woman who goes to the bar to celebrate with her friends on a Friday night.  We also do not deny these people jobs.  Why should puffing a joint with one’s friends be any different?  Many of us are getting to the age where we are starting to apply for jobs that put us in the “real world”.  Many of these jobs require us to take drug tests.  The common thought amongst many people is that these drug tests help keep the so called “hard drug” users out of the work place.  This is so far from the truth it is unbelievable.  What these drug tests really are, are another way our society tries to keep marijuana users down.  I have yet to meet someone whose work asked them to go in and take a drug test that day.  Most know when they are coming, have a general idea of when they are, or can even set them up at their own convenience within a week or so.  These policies effectively allow people to use hard drugs, if they choose to do so, as long as they stay away from THC.  Let’s take a look at these “hard drugs” that most drug tests look for and how long they take to clear out of your system:

·         Heroin – Considered one of the most dangerous drugs known to man – 24-48 hours

·         Cocaine – Again, very dangerous, addictive and accessible – 24-72 hours

·         Ecstasy – Once legal, but now considered an illegal party drug – 1-5 days

·         Methamphetamine – It’ll give you a nice pretty smile like Christian Bale in The Fighter, but even if you get the nice Heizenberg (a Breaking Bad reference never hurts) stuff – 1 day – a week

·         PCP – Don’t even know anyone who has done PCP, but even if you could find it and use it – 1-5 days

·         Marijuana – 3 weeks – 2 months

There you have it; even the most dangerous of drugs will most likely be out of your system within a week while weed will stay in your system for much longer.  The only other drug to take longer than a week to clear your system is Methaqualone, commonly known as Quaaludes.  Good luck trying to find those, though, because I’m pretty sure they’ve been off the market in the US for ten or more years.  Just make sure, if your travels take you to South Africa, and you feel the need to party hard, that you don’t have a drug test waiting for you upon your arrival back in the States.  

                I believe Above the Influence is a terrible organization that spreads propaganda that leads to many people in the general public to be misinformed about marijuana and marijuana users.  We have all seen their ads on television, in magazines, on bus stops and in public schools.  I believe many of these ads to be lies or truths that are stretched very far in order to scare people from using drugs.  I understand that parents do not want their children to use drugs because, among many other reasons, they hinder the development of a growing brain.  Why not be honest about THC rather than trying to scare them out of doing them?  Does having a child make a person instantly forget what it is like to be young?  Kids may not have brains that are fully developed yet, but they are not stupid.  If you fill their heads with lies to scare them, they may believe them for the time, but then they get a little older and realize that buying weed isn’t going to fund terrorism or that the guy they buy it from isn’t going to offer them a syringe filled with heroin, what would make them think that anything else that they have learned about drugs is not a lie as well?  While the commercial for marijuana funding terrorism was pretty extreme and only on the air for a short time after 9/11, it still sticks with people to this day.  I will focus on a more recent commercial from Above the Influence that I have seen on the air in the last year.  It is the one where a couple of teenagers smoke a joint and the next thing they know they are standing next to a junk yard.  One of the boys is persuaded by his friends to jump the fence and try to outrun the junkyard dog.  This is one of the most absurd commercials I have ever seen.  You find me one person who smokes a blunt and then says, “You know what I want to do right now? I want to jump a fence and then run as fast as I possibly can for an extended distance.”  I dare you too.  Another lie that Above the Influence is trying to spread is that marijuana causes cancer.  On their website, they state that, “Marijuana smoke contains 50%-70% more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke.”  If this statistic is true, why has there never been a single instance of cancer being caused by smoking only marijuana?  After thinking about this, I decided to write them a letter and pretend to be a high school kid who has some questions about smoking weed.  I attached my letter below, and I am interested to see if they will write me back.  Trey Parker said it best, through Randy Marsh, at the end of the Future Self ‘n’ Me episode of South Park, “pot makes you feel fine with being bored, and it’s when you’re bored that you should be out learning some new skill, or discovering some new science or being creative.”  But then again, South Park is full of fart jokes so they probably don’t know what they’re talking about.  The lies seem to be working and that’s why the war on drugs is working and less and less kids are using marijuana…right?  Maybe if parents were honest and upfront with their kids, rather than treating them like they are stupid and trying to scare them, more people would wait until they were older to try pot, if they even try it at all. 

Below is the letter I sent to Above the Influence.  I tried to sound young and naive so hopefully they will respond. 

Hi, my name is Mike and I am 16 years old. I have heard many different things about marijuana ranging from what I hear from older friends who have tried it, to the things I have seen in your commercials on TV.  This led me to your site because I figured it would be a good source of information.  I read over the article and most of seems pretty over the top. When trying to use Wikipedia as a source in English class, my teacher told me it is not reliable because it is not sourced. I noticed your site does have a few sources but all of them link to government websites rather than independent studies. Would you be able to provide me a few more sources that back up the information that you provide? In particular, I find the part about marijuana containing "50%-70% carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke," to be puzzling.  When I clicked on the link that is provided after this sentence, nowhere in the entire article does it mention marijuana causing cancer. I was under the impression that tobacco smoke does not contain many carcinogens, but it was all of the chemicals that are added by the tobacco companies that cause cancer.  Anything you could tell me to help clear this up would be appreciated.  Thanks.

Thought provoking, ain't it?...

I was just browsing the comments on a story about the new movie, The Gambler, that Leonardo DiCaprio just agreed to make with Martin Scorsese.  Although I was initially excited to hear that the pair would be working together for a fifth time, after reading about how they totally cut the original writer out of the process and did not even ask for permission to remake a script that he wrote as an autobiography.  The article is very long, but in a nutshell, James Toback turned his life story into a movie script and sold it to Paramount Pictures.  That means he no longer technically owns the script, but nevertheless, it is his life story and it would have been the right thing to do to at least give him the heads up that they planned to remake it. Not what I would expect from my favorite director and one of my favorite actors. It does, however, bring to mind a particularly funny scene from Seinfeld, when Kramer sells his life story to Mr. Peterman so that he may use them in his autobiography.  Enough of the background though.  I was so intrigued, that after I finished the article, I decided to read the comments.  It was there that I stumbled upon this quote from author Robert Heinleim's book, Friday. I found it to be very interesting, as it put such an interesting idea into words so well. Got me thinking, so I figured I'd share since I have not updated this in a while. Maybe someone will find it as interesting as I did.

“I want to mention one of the obvious symptoms [of a sick culture]: Violence. Muggings. Sniping. Arson. Bombing. Terrorism of any sort. Riots of course–but I suspect that little incidents of violence, pecking away at people day after day, damage a culture even more than riots that flare up and then die down. I guess that’s all for now. Oh, conscription and slavery and arbitrary compulsion of all sorts and imprisonment without bail and without speedy trial–but those things are obvious; all the histories list them.”

“Friday, I think you have missed the most alarming symptom of all.”

“I have? Are you going to tell me? Or am I going to have to grope around in the dark for it?”

“Mmm. This once I shall tell you. But go back and search for it. Examine it. Sick cultures show a complex of symptoms such as you have named… but a dying culture invariable exhibits personal rudness. Bad manners. Lack of consideration for others in minor matters. A loss of politeness, of gentle manners, is more significant than is a riot.”

“Really?”

“Pfui. I should have forced you to dig it out yourself; then you would know it. This symptom is especially serious in that an individual displaying it never thinks of it as a sign of ill health but as proof of his/her strength. Look for it. Study it. It is too late to save this culture - this worldwide culture...”

Thank you, Gary

Although I have a lot of early sports memories, the ones that stick out the most in my head are those that took place in Cole Field House.  The legendary building was home to such stars as future first overall pick Joe Smith, the late Len Bias, John Lucas, Len Elmore, and for the first few years of their careers, the 2002 Maryland National Championship team.  My earliest memory of the building was when I was six or seven years old and me and my dad went to go see a Keith Booth led Maryland team dominate whoever it was we played that night.  Every time he would dunk the ball or hit a big shot the whole crowd would yell, "BOOOOOOOOOOOOTH."  It was these early memories of Gary Williams led Terps teams that made Maryland college basketball my favorite sport growing up, a honor that it still holds to this day.  Although I do not attend UMD, I still live and breathe Maryland basketball.  I don't think any of that would have been possible without Gary Williams being at the helm of the program for as long as I have been alive.  In 1989 Williams took over a struggling program that was still getting over the tragic loss of former player and number 2 overall pick Len Bias just three years prior.  A year after taking over in College Park, his team was hit with violations dating back to the years of his predecessor, Bob Wade, that barred the Terps from playing in the post season in 1991 and 1992, kept them off of live TV, and lost them scholarships.  Even with these restrictions, Gary tried furiously to rebuild the program, which he led to a surprise Sweet 16 birth in 1994.  This would start a streak of NCAA Tournament bids that would last for the majority of my childhood.  The Terps made the Big Dance every season from then until 2005.  For a true fan of all sports from the DC-metro area, this was a welcome contrast to pretty much all of our other mediocre (at best) teams.  Although, at the time, this streak was the longest in the ACC, Gary did it without a single McDonald's All-American.  During this magnificent streak, I started to get to go to the Maryland/Duke game every other year, and I can honestly say that it was (and still is) one of the most fun days of the year, especially when we would pull out a win.  Through his coaching and leadership, Williams managed to overshadow the historic North Carolina/Duke rivalry, culminating in their match up in the 2001 Final Four; a game which, to this day, I still believe Maryland should have won if it were not for that douche bag official calling off the foul when Lonny Baxter was at the free throw line, and instead saying the foul was on Baxter, thus fouling him out of the game.  Nevertheless, the Terps returned their star players the next year and Gary led them to the 2002 National Championship.  Nearly nine years later, I can still vividly picture Drew Nicholas driving down the baseline and hitting the jumper that sealed the game.  To this day, I still consider that one of the happiest days of my life.  Gary Williams achieved all of this without many highly recruited players, and instead with players he liked and knew he could develop.  Outside of a minority few, he recruited guys that he knew fit his flex offense and would be there for four years.  He retired on Thursday as the 5th in wins among active coaches and 3rd all time in the ACC.  The fact that he is not in the Hall of Fame is a sham to me that will hopefully be rectified soon.  I also hope that the university rectifies whatever roadblocks the motion to name the court after him seems to have hit.  I just wanted to write all of this to show my support and to give my thanks to one of the greatest college basketball coaches of our generation, if not of all time.  There are so many reasons why I love Gary Williams. Whether it was his fiery demeanor on the court, his patented fist pump as he walked out of the tunnel, or him coming out to speak half-heartedly (at the insistence of the biggest cunt in the universe, former AD, Debbie Yow) to the crowd about being more well behaved after someone threw a bottle that hit Carlos Boozer's mom in the back of the head, Gary is and always will be the man.  Thank you, Gary Williams.  You have contributed to so many great moments of my youth and you will be greatly missed.

The Giving Pledge - One Reason Why America is the Greatest Country on Earth

Over the past few years I have heard more and more about how people are unhappy with the economic situation in our country. Since the stock market crash of 08 the issue has been raised even more about how there is a huge divide between our nation’s richest citizens and our most poor. I have always thought this is a load of crap because I believe that capitalism is the greatest invention in the history of the world. I am of the opinion that capitalism in the United States creates competition and gives motivation to our citizens to constantly come up with new ideas and inventions that make our country, as well as the world, a better place. Yet, for some reason, there are still critics out there who want to "spread the wealth around". These critics either believe that a.)wealth should be spread around between every citizen no matter how hard they work (also called socialism) or b.)the more popular choice, that anyone making a certain amount of money (over $250,000 in our current taxation system) should pay a much higher tax rate than those making less. The latter implies that our government is better equipped to spend one's money than the so called "rich" people. In my opinion, this is a bunch of malarkey. I'll save my "how the government wastes our money" speech for another time, but I'll just say that I think our government wastes a RIDICULOUS amount of money on programs that either don't work or don't help the people they were put in place to support. If we were to all live in a utopic society, things might be different. Maybe there would be no poor people, no people in need, and no one who is disabled and in need of government support, however we do not live in such a society.  I believe that the vast majority of people who believe in these higher taxes and that spreading around the wealth is for the good of the country seem to have a distorted view that the "rich" are evil people out there to squash the little guy. Whether this outlook comes from jealousy or somewhere else, I am not in the position to comment. I do know that while there is a large gap between the top 1% and the bottom 5% of our nation's wealth, this is to be expected in a society where the people are free to either work their asses off or sit around and do nothing.

This brings me to my main point of writing this: today, while I was looking up Mark Zuckerberg on Wikipedia, I came across something called The Giving Pledge. The Giving Pledge is a group, started by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett (The two richest people in the United States) that pledged to give half of their wealth away over time. Since it’s list was made public in 2010, 57 of our countries billionaires have joined and pledged to give away half of their wealth, totaling over $150 BILLION dollars. For some reason, this unprecedented act of charity has gone unreported in the mainstream news. This act alone shows me, as I hope it will show at least one person who reads this, that a country that allows its citizens to control their own wealth is a country that will flourish more than a country that tries to keep a tight grip on it's citizens money and spend it how the government sees fit.  If one were to look at some of the world's other richest people, who do not live in the US, I think you would see a vastly different trend. I don't have time to go into every crazy foreigner, but I will look at two who have stuck out to me personally. The first is Russian investor Roman Abramovich. Abramovich is the 9th richest person in Russia. From what I can find he does not give much to charity to help his fellow countrymen.  He does however employ a 40 man security team, own a fleet of three of the world largest private yachts (he had a 4th but he gave it away to a friend, if you want to consider that charity) which collectively totaled around $2 billion to build, three helicopters, a 767 commercial jet, and a collection of homes around the world, the most expensive costing about $230 million. The second is Mukesh Ambani, an Indian businessman and the ninth richest man in the world. His greed can be summed up simply through reading about his home, named Antilia. Antilia is the largest home in the world. It is as tall as a 60 story building, cost between $1-2 billion and only houses him, his wife, his three children and his mother. I think this proves that while, our country may not be perfect, it is better than any other system that has been set up around the world. There are always going to be very wealthy people, at least the Americans have a great sense of morality and giving. 

This country started from a group of people who just wanted to govern themselves and be free of governmental control over the basic things in their lives. After a century it grew into a country with budding businessmen, including John D. Rockefeller the founder of the Standard Oil Company (now the world’s largest company ExxonMobile) and the countries first billionaire. Mr. Rockefeller, on top of being one of the smartest businessmen our country has ever seen, also founded the modern philanthropy system which led to the many breakthroughs in education, science and medicine. If we continue to allow our citizens to work freely from governmental regulations, we will continue to flourish in the decades and centuries to come, if not, well greater dynasties than the US have fallen throughout the world's history...