peachiekeen

I was just reading through my blog posts and realized that many of them are Private or Password Protected (P, PP). How odd, this is. The average reader of my website (all three of you!) must think I do not care about this blog or have anything interesting to say.

I do have interesting things to say. The problem is, my subconscious has a one week rule. Here are the steps of the one week rule:

1. Write an opinionated blog.

2. Post said blog to internet.

3. Wait one week.

4. ???

5. TEAR DOWN THAT PIECE OF UNINTELLIGIBLE DRIBBLE!

Everything I write seems idiotic about one week after writing. Extreme cases of the “one week rule” can be seen with the “12 hour rule,” also known as the “Why I Update My Facebook Status So Much Rule.” Yes, it’s because the scared little girl inside me doesn’t want to seem incompetent.

I’ve started fighting this urge to erase with my facebook status. My current facebook status is “I am addicted to updating my status, and promise to let this one stay up until it expires. Addictions must be dealt with.” That is how I am combating the “12 hour rule.” In order to defeatoblog this… disease? Plague? Leech upon my very existence?… I will not be marking anything private or password protected on this blog… ever again! You have my word, good sir. My word.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I’ve been quite the insomniac. The night I went to sleep at 6:30, I made some headway with my AP Government summer assignment. We have to get 3-5 news articles a week, summarize them and state our opinion. I’ve really been getting in to copyright law and infringement recently, especially with this whole Google-Viacom case. I wrote a page rant about Viacom for my opinion, but decided to delete it all because it was… unprofessional. The tone of my opinions have been lighthearted and comical and colloquial so far, almost as if… as if… I were* writing a blog. (*Was? Were? What’s the rule about that?)

So I figure, hey, this good content for a blog. Maybe I should just get in the habit of doing this and make this a My Opinion on the News blog. Probably be more interesting than the Preachings on Ethics and the Internet blog it is today. Please excuse my bullshitting about Russian politics. (Though I really did read that article about McCain like two months ago.)

Article found at: OK WTF? Newsweek deleted the article? I had a link, but it no longer works…

Summary: The new Russian president and George W. Bush met together for the first time as heads of states. They disagreed about the U.S.’s proposed plan to protect Poland and the Czech Republic from Iran. The plan would entail creating and arming U.S. missile bases in the Czech R. and Poland. Russia argues that the countries our missiles would be in are former satellite states and are way too close to Russia for their liking, and they’d have to point their missiles at our missiles. (And then we’d point our other missiles at their other missiles, and they’d put super long range missiles in Bolivia and then Obama/McCain will turn in to JFK.) (Cold War, anyone?)

Opinion: Firstly, Newsweek’s obvious bias against Bush can be seen throughout this article (i.e. article title, quotes about Bush, diction). I’m not saying I support Bush or the Republican Party (haha), but seriously: why doesn’t the media understand that making fun of Bush isn’t cool? It’s so cliché! It’s totally what a pseudo-political freshman’s MySpace survey would say! But more importantly, it makes Republican claims of the evil “liberal media” more legitimate. And biased news articles degrade the quality of the magazine (though maybe I countered my point right there). So making lame - oh, excuse me, I meant “shocking and eye-opening” - comments and undertones like this about Bush are only doing more harm than good. Though it is possible that I read it all wrong since I, myself, am biased against Bush. Okay, on to the Russians.

Am I missing something here? Don’t I remember reading that McCain denounced the Russian election in Google News? Maybe I am missing something, but it seems to me that Bush is not listening to his old buddy buddy, McCain. That can only help McCain, I suppose. But still, I thought Bush liked him and wanted to endorse him? This information puzzles me. Well, as far as I’ve read online about the election (because I used to be somewhat of a Russia aficionado - har har har), it wasn’t what you would call a “fair” or “democratic” election. I mean, I guess I can understand why Bush wouldn’t want to piss off the nuclear Russians by demanding to see the real Russian leader (Mr. Prime Minister)… But still, isn’t meeting with this man in the first place an acceptance of an undemocratic election in Russia? Isn’t Bush basically giving him the right to represent Russia without support of the majority, and thereby making this a precedent for future dealings with Russian leader(s)? I imagine it’s going to be hard to undo all of Bush’s “dos,” and the next U.S. president really doesn’t need a Russian president breathing down their neck because they went against former talks. Okay, on to the missiles.

This seems an awful lot like the Cuban Missile Crisis. Using the CMC as historical context, I would suggest the U.S. be either way more nice to Russia or to be more tactful about it. For example, instead of calling them “missile bases,” call them “freedom launch pads for peace.” Instead of putting in U.S. weapons, sell the weapons to the countries and let them control the missiles on their own (but still give our support whenever they ask for it). Also, getting the western hemisphere under control would be ideal. Not a military control, but of the diplomatic kind. There’s a pretty big communist presence in Russia (did you see that military parade they had?), and I wouldn’t put it past one of their politicians to strike up a deal with Cuba or South American countries under the influence of Marxism, or really - any U.S. enemy will do. They aren’t that hard to come by. We must especially be wary of this new president: if he is truly a puppet of Putin, then Putin is trying to form an authoritative government, which means he’s not afraid to play dirty.

I hope no one Russian visits this website, or I’m going to feel like a downright fool.

I’ve become quite the insomniac. A few nights ago I stayed up until 6:30 AM and then woke up at 1 PM. And it’s because I don’t really want to sleep. I used to love sleeping. I couldn’t get enough of it. But now I feel like whenever I sleep I’m not being productive. Guess I’m quite the little capitalist, eh? I also have a problem with getting up, it tends to make me late. So I might as well stay up 10 hours than oversleep and piss off my friends.

I’m getting a haircut tomorrow (today?) for the first time in nine years. Yes, that’s right. Nine whole years. These past nine years, I’ve either had my mother cut it or I’ve cut it myself. I’m going with my dear friend Linnea, who will be documenting the event. If things work out, Madeleine will also be a witness and hold my hand through this thing. I haven’t gone for so long because my last experience involved Super Cuts, an asian immigrant who could barely speak English, a ridiculously short haircut, and lots of teasing. This time, however, I’m going to a real salon. With real hairdressers. If I think anyone in the salon cannot speak English adaquetly, I am walking out and finding another salon. If they cut my hair badly, I think this whole event might set me back another ten years. But I hope not. Wish me luck! I will be sure to post pictures.