We respect your opinion, provided that it was our opinion first.

We respect your opinion, provided that it was our opinion first.

May 20, 2008

The Obamoron Revolution

Turning This Country Around 360º
Nick Olson

Never before in the field of American politics have the issues been so black and white. Never before have the American people been so devastated by a presidency. Never before have the American people deserved such a change, such a departure, from the egregious offenses of the current administration.

It seems that the entire American populace is aware of this, with one outstanding exception: Senator John McCain. McSame is pushing for the same routine and lack of innovation that has destroyed America. Whereas Senator Obama promises hope, change, and revolution, McCain and UnAbel promises the same worn-out recipe for disaster: one cup too old, two cups too white, and a pinch of curmudgeonliness cooked for five-and-a-half years in a North Vietnamese torture camp.

Senator Obama can break free from this madness. He is the “change we can believe in”, the revolution we have been waiting for, the radical departure from mediocrity in the white house and in America. Yet still, the McBane–of-our-existence supporters point out, quite racistly, that there is nothing novel about DaBomba. Let me first point out that Obama, unlike McRain-on-the-Democrat-parade, is black. Let me secondly point out Obama’s tenacious loyalty—even after twenty-three years of Jeremiah Wright denouncing the United States with statements such as “God Damn America!”, Senator Barack-and-roll still refused to denounce his long-time mentor and pastor. But ultimately, not even Rush Limbaugh can criticize Obama’s loyalty to Mr. Wright—after all, not only Obama, but every woman in the nation wants to stay loyal to Mr. Wright—Are not all women searching for Mr. Wright? Still, this issue seems to be of little importance; after all, Jeremiah was only a bullfrog. But most importantly, while other presidential candidates promise and have promised the same, worn-out policies, Baracket Scientist has promised politics avant-garde—Obama is going where no politician has ever gone, promising to raise taxes, increase government spending, negotiate with terrorists, and promote further governmental control of the economy. These are policies no Democrat has ever proposed. This is the change we can believe in.

May 8, 2008

A Humble Opinion

Luke Olson

It is a melancholy fact to walk through our sovereign nation that has so triumphantly raised the banner of acceptance and cultural homogeneity and continue to see, whether overt or subtle, the proliferation of prejudicial hatred. The spirit of our governmental and social democracy is tried every time society clings to vestigial taboos founded in antiquated forms of morality that further polarize interest groups that are too few in number to successfully parry the attacks of the overbearing majority. Mankind is forever evolving, adapting with time, and while we have undeniably reached an enlightened plateau, we would be fools to pleasantly look back on the abyss from which we have drawn ourselves, rather than vigilantly look forward with watchful eye to the mountain we have yet to climb. If we complacently resign ourselves to our present social tolerance we are doing an injustice not only to those who fought against such revulsion, but also to those who still intrepidly carry the banner.

What modernity has recognized so brilliantly is that morality is not predicated on social taboo. Oftentimes, the line between morality and taboo is so delicately smeared that it becomes an undifferentiated grey. This misunderstanding is surely the most perilous error in our world! Society preaches a curriculum of propriety and decorum, and its innoculation is intended to produce charming, refined and educated young men and women who can subtly and elegantly transition into society. And certainly, a man shaped by propriety and decorum will never produce anything tasteless, nor make a disagreeable neighbor, but this innoculation simultaneously destroys the distinctive beauty of his voice. Without his voice, without his poetry, his pen is seized by law and his mind is seized by common sense! We ask why it is so rare that the torrent of genius so rarely pours forth from our astonished souls. It is because on either bed resides the cool, respectable gentlemen in his summer cottage that would be washed away, so he has become skilled in averting future dangers by damming and digging channels. Each man is preordained by nature, not to conform itself to widely held societal decorum, but to cry out to man and to the world his own verse.

Great care, however, must be taken to guard against an upheaval of this propriety and a negligent plunge into the opposing polarity. Our societal revolution bears the volatile stigma of “tolerance,” but if this is the banner we pursue, then we are merely accomplishing the same end as the restrictive Victorian society that preceded us through different means. Tolerance is merely a euphemism for apathy, and if this apathy is pursued to its extremity, then while every man may cry his own verse unto the world, it is a verse lost amidst a cacophony of disordered voices all screaming at the same time. It is a verse with no meaning.

No, the aspiration to which we strive is paradoxical - it is concentration without elimination, both a new world and the old world made explicit. Each man is fashioned to transcend societal norms, to pierce the woven lattice constructed by the minds of deceived seniority. But simultaneously, these intolerable men must be delicately spun into an intertwined and unprejudiced society, a new society founded on the failure of the old! We must not exile the unbearable, or permit the permissible, but tolerate the intolerable!

The most eminent example of this modern success is the homosexual movement. Asking homosexuals, as the Church continues to do, to kindly cease pursuing their natural end is like telling Mozart to kindly remove the strings from his 7th symphony; it destroys the piece. Much like an orchestra, society should operate as a seamless whole composed of varying parts. A great symphony is composed neither of one instrument playing a melody, nor an entire orchestra playing whatever it so pleases. So too our society functions as many varying constituent parts intertwining harmoniously to create one symphonic piece. Credit should be given to the homosexual movement for continuing to battle against this deluge of societal weakness, and in helping to foster a culture of acceptance.

This exhortation, however, by no means, represents an attack on the Church or its rites. In fact, the Church has so delicately fostered and maintained a spirit of acceptance in spite of man’s caprice. Without an anchor, man would be cast to the perilous winds, blowing aimlessly amidst a deluge of passion. The Church has given man prudence, and zeal without prudence is like a boat adrift.

However, we would be remiss to believe that all social taboos have been eradicated. It seems to me that prejudicial hatred based on race, religion and sexual orientation still run rampant in our society, although the voices have grown quieter. There still exist certain fringe groups, although smaller in number and much greater in fear, that lack a voice in our society, and there is no greater injustice to a man than this, to paralyze his voice through fear and stricture. The grievances of homosexuals have been passed to more peripheral interest groups, namely what I refer to as pansexuality. The repression of our voice, no matter how small, remains a tainted mark of unequivocal shame on our society that supposedly claims unyielding acceptance within the bounds of law.

Prior to the homosexual movement, homosexuality was viewed as a disordered presentation of man’s love, that it was not only different, but unnatural. But with persistent assiduity it has been shown that homosexuality is simply an alternate manifestation of man’s love, that man’s love cannot be confined to preconceived societal standards. If man’s love cannot be bound to a heterosexual relationship, then I see no convincing reason that it should be imprisoned to a single species.

I understand that this proposal will be received principally with shock and appalling disgust, but that should only give further credence to the legitimacy of our grievance, as it is the same reaction that was held by society towards homosexuality, divorce and adultery. I understand many will consider these practices savage and unnatural, but are these not the same allegations once declared against homosexuals?

It may be argued that a sexual relationship with a member of another species is abusive, as the law states. But if this were so, would it not also be abusive to domesticate animals, forcing them into docility? Animals will often display a developed affection for particular people, and display their affection through body language. The law does not consider a heterosexual or homosexual relationship abusive if both parties express affection for each other, why should an inter-special relationship be any different?

It may also be argued that love cannot be shared between two beings of categorically different intellectual capacities, or more importantly, lack of communication. Is love not founded on enriching and symbiotic communication, some might claim? However, are we satisfied to conclude that all communication is vocal? Is language not the crown of a long development of a primordial gesticular language? Did human beings not point and grunt before they spoke? For it is surely preposterous to believe that upon man's evolution from the chimpanzee, we simultaneously learned to speak. These primordial human beings also reproduced to propogate the species, and therefore must have shared a loving relationship without words. Words cannot express the look of a woman across a crowded room, nor the gentle caress of a lover's hand. Neither kissing nor sex involve vocal communication, and they are the ultimate expressions of love. In fact, researchers at UCLA have claimed that only 7% of human communication is expressed through words, while the rest is communicated through tone of voice and body language. Why is it, then, so preposterous to propose an inter-special relationship that lacks vocal communication?

I hope that this proposal will not be liable to the least objection, and it is certainly not my intention to reverse the success of the homosexual efforts by equating our movement with theirs. I profess that I have a deep personal interest vested in this endeavor, because I have borne this insufferable stigma marked by social shame, as my anonymity displays. However, my motive is not confined to mere personal interest or the interest of my brethren, but for the public good of humanity. When we are united in each other we become more than ourselves, functioning beyond the capacity of our individual faculties, and the symphonic rhythm of our spirit mellifluously illuminates the pattern subtly emblazoned in nature. Without an unyielding tolerance of the intolerable, this rhythm is disrupted and humanity is left maimed.

March 25, 2008

In Praise of Prostitution

Bratz™ and the Western Tradition
Nick Olson

Eight-year-old Susie Simmons has had enough of Barbies. “I used to look up to her,” she said, “until I realized she’s just not very stylish.”

Much to the chagrin her overbearing, puritanical mother, Susie has traded in her ambitions of becoming a doctor/lawyer/astrophysicist/Olympic gymnast for a different set of dreams.

“Now I want to be a prostitute, just like Lilee!” Susie says, proudly displaying her liberally dressed Bratz™ doll. “She’s just so urban chic!” Susie squealed.

But the proliferation of Bratz™dolls across the country has priggish mothers across the country squealing in a slightly different tone. “Since they were first released to the public in the summer of 2001, they’ve done nothing but venerate the sex industry to the young ladies of this country,” wailed Elizabeth Williams. “That my children and your children are being taught to emulate prostitutes is abominable.”

Leading cultural analysts disagree. “The success of these dolls marks a great victory for women everywhere,” Dr. Starshyne Churchill contends, with the authority of her Ph.D. in Cultural Harmony. “From dolls to movies to accessories, the prosperity of these dolls evinces the desire of even toddlers to participate in their own sexual revolution. Now our daughters can open themselves up to an even greater level of sexual freedom.”

“How can Barbie or other dolls serve as my rolemodel?” Susie asks. “She’s only been though one divorce. What does she know of life experience?”

Susie’s mother still disagrees. “By our own volition, our children are being transformed into prostitutes,” she says, grimacing at Lilee’s inflated lips, midriff-flaunting tank top, immoderate makeup, miniskirt, fishnet stockings, and precocious bosoms.

What Ms. Williams and Mrs. Simmons fail to realize is that prostitution holds a long lasting tradition of not only societal importance, but also cultural esteem. Can La Traviata, Verdi’s greatest opera, be imagined without Violetta’s heroic prostitution? Is Les Miserables conceivable without Hugo’s whorish heroine, Fantine? Is Raskolnikov’s redemption in Crime and Punishment even imaginable without Dostoyevsky’s meek mistress, Sonya Marmeladova? No, nor is much of history conceivable without our matriarchal strumpets. How would General Joseph Hooker have faired in the American Civil War without the carnal consolation of his courtesans? Could you even be here to make objections were it not for the sacrifices of long-forgotten concubines who gave birth to your ancestors? Of course not. Could the book of Joshua be written without its harlot-heroine, Rahab? Do not even the gospels proclaim the glory of prostitution through Mary Magdalene?

Bearing this heroic tradition, Bratz™ dolls continue to circulate, encouraging our daughters to consummate their dreams in the example of Cloe, Jade, Sasha, Yasmin, Lilee and others.

“With Lilee’s help, I can finally become the prostitute MTV has always told me to be!” Susie chirps. Despite her mother’s protests, rest assured that Susie will be serving the common good in no time.

March 19, 2008

Damn You, France!

On the Cultural Necessity of Toast
Luke Olson

Some men appreciate a fine double-malt scotch, others revel in intelligent conversation, while some prefer brilliant mammary glands. I, however, am an unparalleled advocate of toast. Whether moist and covered in melted butter, crisp and slathered with mayonnaise or even withered and charred blacker than Bill Cosby’s...burnt Jell-O, toast has warranted an aggrandized position in our society that has too long escaped our proverbial scouring eye. Often ignored for it’s simple makeup and secondary role in traditional breakfasts around the world, toast has understandingly adopted a role of secondary importance, allowing other flashier breakfast selections that could hardly be deemed “refreshingly scintillating” or “playfully articulate” to assume primary importance.

Why have I, like toast, decided to shed my congenial tolerance of the widespread societal blindness to this ruinous upheaval of customary breakfast selections? Put simply: the French. The perpetuating animosity between our two countries has ballooned in the last century, and despite our concern with economic efficiency, global diplomacy and infrastructural security, the French have only constricted their grip on the throats of our national identity.

What is the pandemic atrocity of which I speak? None other than French toast. Because we sought to supplement toast with less brilliant breakfast selections like bacon, yogurt and eggs, the French have surreptitiously robbed our breakfast identity by simply adding cinnamon. Is that all we are? Can we allow governments around the world to believe that France is simply America plus sugar? How will we reply to Kim Jong-Il on the eve of nuclear holocaust when he reprimands Americans for their lack of flavor? What hope does global diplomacy have to endure that venomous stigma?

Admirably, General Mills presciently foresaw this cultural apocalypse and released Cinnamon Toast Crunch, but it was too little, too late. The French had already audaciously anaesthetized America under the auspices of our inattentiveness. Sound odd? That’s because the French stole alliteration too.

Toast is only the next in line of a long history of concessions to the French. Is there anything French about French fries? Do the French even eat French fries? No and no. Yet they pompously twirl their emasculated moustaches as they watch their feeble culture pervade an American dietary staple. What type of mustard do 69% of American households purchase? French’s. As is showcased by Notre Dame, they can’t even speak English properly, yet they insist on the superiority of their poorly formed English. Moreover, can anyone deny that the Eiffel Tower is any more than a transparent attempt to create a larger and more elaborate phallus than the Washington Monument? Could anyone truly believe that any Frenchmen in any age could possibly be better endowed than George Washington? Tourists, who have made the Eiffel Tower the most popular monument in the world, sure do.

While we have quenched our thirst for French libel by launching claims of cowardice and hypocrisy, the French have furtively taken from us all that we hold dear. The name of our fearless first president will be forever stained, a happy meal will never again be truly happy and no man will ever fully appreciate hairy women.

The French have stolen our food and our masculinity for too long. From this point forth, French fries shall be referred to as Francophobic fries, Notre Dame shall be respelled Noter Daim, alliteration will be used whenever possible, the name Frank shall be phased from the English language and French phrases like “laissez-faire” and “joie de vivre” will be relentlessly butchered. Tomorrow morning, when you sit down to the breakfast table, don’t reach for a strip of bacon or a bowl of cereal. Simply satisfy yourself with a fresh piece of whole-wheat toast, perhaps even rye or sourdough. Don’t stain its purity by topping it with eggs or jam. Accept toast for what it is – not French.

March 17, 2008

Save Money, Drive More

Solving the Twin Problems of Global Warming and Social Security
Dylan Key

Around 60 years ago, after several years of hard fighting, protecting freedom across the globe in the conflict known as World War II, our grandfathers returned home to the United States. Once reunited with their wives and sweethearts, they had one desire, to get it on. 9 months later, the deluge began, as babies (who, believe it or not are the consequences of such wanton sexuality) began to appear in deliver rooms across our nation. These babies are, of course, the “Baby Boomers”.

Now those same babies are old wrinkly and ready to retire. Luckily, good old President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in yet another example of his prescient leadership and courage, developed the Social Security program, to maintain adequate life styles for these great old Americans. Social Security is funded by the workers of America, money which will in turn be paid to us when we retire.

However, social security has not had to deal yet with the retirement of such a large number of workers. Most pundits are in agreement in saying that Social Security could quite possibly collapse under the weight of a large new enrollment of Baby Boomers, and that the taxes from the remaining work force will not be able to sustain Social Security.

Another great problem facing our country is the threat of Global Warming. Global Warming, a product of the factories and industry of white big company conservative pigs, is about to wreck havoc on our world’s ecosystem. The rise in temperature of sea waters, caused by the increased reflection of sun rays that are unable to escape the doomsday net of Greenhouse gases (which come from those same old ignorant conservatives), will drastically effect life as we know it.

Believe it or not, I have a solution. These two problems, both of which are hindering our natural progression to a Hegelian model of intellectual fulfillment, must be turned against each other. See, Global Warming will cause the Polar Ice Caps to melt, which will increase sea levels. Low lying areas throughout the world to flood. Retiring Baby Boomers prefer, above all things, to move to Florida, which is precisely one of those low-lying areas that will be decimated by Global Warming induced flooding. This flooding will eliminate substantial amounts of retirees, which will remove the strain on Social Security, and allow our hard-earned dollars to be saved for our own retirement.

So, tomorrow, steal the keys to your conservative neighbors' SUV and crank that engine. You’ll be saving U.S. taxpayers dollars.


The Consummation of Indignation
Nick Olson

Sheer outrage. Sheer, unparalleled outrage. Today will forever herald the capitulation of courtesy and the victory of vulgarity. Though some day the world may be saved, though future victories may come, though Bush will be overthrown and though even the rainforests may some day be replanted, the heinous atrocity committed today will forever remain a blemish on the character of the human people. The deed effected on this infamous date will forever pollute our nature; even in memory, our children will bear this stinging stigma with the full retribution of remorse.

Though I fear the foulness of such a deed may poison my mind and my readers’ minds even in recollection, though it stains my fingers as I type, justice demands such sacrifices that such deeds be exposed that they may be convicted and recognized as the pinnacle of perversion.

While I was today at Starbucks picking up my regular Chai Tea Latte with a triple shot of liberal cynicism, the barista managed to utter words so obscene and abominable as would make Rush Limbaugh cringe.

As he superciliously placed my drink down for me to pick up, with a jeering smile, he uttered the words, “Good morning, sir!”

Traumatized, appalled, I sacrificed my latte and threw it in his face. When the manager came over, I demanded that the brute resign immediately, and then proceeded to escape that den of depravity.

Never have I heard such desecration of modern values. In one sentence, the fiend had managed to forge a triune vulgarity that offended my every sensibility. Though even now I gag at the memory, modernity implores me to vivisect the utterance, that others may recognize the wickedness of this abomination.

The first word the reprobate thrust upon my ears was “good.” And what a word to begin with!—in a single word, the villain had imposed upon me an objective morality, encompassing every conservative vulgarity: that of sexual restriction, including a homosexual anathema, that of the suspension of the right to choose, whether that be abortion, drug abuse, murder, suicide, incest, or rape, that of all moral imposition! In a single utterance, the beast had managed to violate every sensibility of every modern person. But he did not stop his obscenity there.

The second word the barbarian forced upon this world was “morning.” After offending every personal truth, this man proceeded to narrow-mindedly exclude three-quarters of the world. Was it morning in China, oh barista? How about in Africa? How did this racist, uneducated bigot manage to squeeze in even more imprecation? Undoubtedly this lesser demon is a product of The Demon and his administration; indeed, the education system has collapsed under Bush. As a result, our country is now brimming with atrocities such as this monster. But even those two strokes were not enough for him; no, he continued his profanity.

“Sir”—with a mockingly facetious respect, the wretch capped off his crime by imposing upon me sexual strictures. All my past hopes that man had ascended beyond his naiveté were crushed as I was personally attacked and caged within a conservative gender role. With a single, crushing word, the barista doomed me to years of therapy and sexual exploration in order to re-determine who I am. Thus his triune obscenity was complete, and he simply stood there grinning like Nero over his inflamed Rome.

Friends and colleagues, I am a man of hope. I know that one day the world will grow beyond such visceral ignorance. But search yourselves today, that we may save the world from one less casualty. The next victim of moral, temporal, and sexual imposition may be your loved ones! I exhort all man now, liberate yourself from any and all moral, temporal, and sexual strictures! Embrace freedom!

Perhaps I overreact. Perhaps the barista was actually acknowledging our dismal state of affairs and had actually said “good mourning.” In which case, I applaud our barista and encourage all others to join in his mourning for our sad, sad state, which may never escape from its moral and sexual enslavement.

March 11, 2008

Byzantine Postmodernism

On the Beauty and Complexity of Modernity
Luke Olson

Despite the beauty and complexity of the modern world, there are some who speciously allege it to be bereft of purpose or propriety. Some even have the audacity to call modern man ignorant. These accusations are not only subversive, but ignorant not only to the social breadth of the modern world but of its intellectual, psychological and sexual compass as well. The modern world is like a big party on a rainbow and everyone is invited! I intend to address these assertions, as I am one of dissimulation and satyriasis, by reinforcing the complexity and superiority of the modern world. I therefore put forth these twelve considerations:

1. After centuries of obsequious submission to the strictures of religion and the “Father,” we are now triumphantly free to consult the horoscope, our magic 8-ball and therapists. Never before have our mothers so dictated our fate.

2. Instead of adhering to a transcendent principle of truth, goodness or beauty, we have now shed the limitations of “truth” and celebrate relativity, which is a euphemism for the “booty principle”, that is, agreeing unequivocally with the most attractive girl (or that which most resembles a girl in desperate situations) in the room, no matter how idiotic she is.

3. After protracted oppression by the constraints of belief in a hell and a Satan, we have discovered the true root of evil: George Bush. This has been known ever since Kanye West revealed that Bush caused Hurricane Katrina, ate the last unicorn and is a robot recharged by children’s tears in his recent hit “You ain’t no man.”

4. Why read old Arthurian tales with big words like perspicacity, hirsute or insipid when every tale of love, betrayal and nobility can be adequately expressed in a 3-minute youtube video with vegetables and falsetto?

5. We have the new Star Wars trilogy, which invariably involves more flashing lights and shiny stuff than the old ones.

6. Linguists have consistently shown that languages develop towards simplicity, and English is no exception. Modern vernacular allows men a vast expanse of expression never previously available to such masters of language as Tolkien or Dostoevsky, e.g. “Man, that straight-billed baseball cap is dope!” or “Damn Herman, show me ya grill!” It’s only a matter of time before I can score a smokin’ hot wife with a series of grunts and bodily contortions.

7. “You my hoe” is finally a compliment.

8. Antiquated forms of dance that merely disguised men’s intentions behind a curtain of manner and a fluidity of movement have now been extirpated and replaced with a much more flattering and primal form of dance referred to as “spasmodic loins,” in which the man violently gyrates his hips into a frenzy so as to most naturally express his intentions for the recipient of his murderous hips.

9. Modernity has everybody’s loveable, but slightly effeminate little brothers: Canada and Zac Efron.

10. Unlike antiquity, modernity presents us with a myriad of solutions to boredom, such as chillin’, just hangin’ or being real.

11. In an attempt to more fully pronounce our primal virility we have strayed from the harmonious and soothing piano concertos of Chopin to a more expressive reflection of our discordant soul – Kanye West and his impeccable appraisal of the human condition, “Do that mean God gon’ make my kids be stupid as well.”

12.a. The emergence of relative truth and the sexual revolution have given us an unprecedented amount of sexual outlets involving every orifice or appendage imaginable, despite their utter superfluity in reproduction. This manifests itself in sexual relations involving two men, or two women, or two women and one man, or two men and one woman, etc. Perhaps with continuing assiduity in this area, we will one day be able to shed the confines of same-species relationships to extend this list to a man and a dog, or a woman and two kangaroos, or two men, a woman and a gaggle of geese, or even a man, a bear, an elephant walrus, a platypus, the Kool-Aid guy and several congenial turkeys. Of such I dream.

b. This erosion of platitudes is in no way related to an atrophy of modern intelligence. I mean, just look at all the ways I can intelligently express my sexual frustration! I am salacious, I’m as prurient as a heifer in heat, even Jesus couldn’t heal my lechery, to be libidinous or not to be unlibidinous, I am licentious to kill, or even, I have extreme bouts of satyriasis.

With these twelve considerations, I hope to have exculpated modernity of ignorance and excess. If modern man successfully continues to shed his strictures perhaps he will soon be enlightened enough to shed his humanity...and his clothes.

Shocking Archaeological Discovery

Recent Archaeological Discovery Has Catholic Church in Tremors
Luke Olson

PHNOM PENH, CAMBODIA – Earlier this week, in Southern Cambodia, a team of attractive, racially diverse and sexually open-minded archaeologists uncovered an artifact with a crude carving of Christ depicted as a vampire. An inscription beneath the drawing read 'De Sanguine Cristo', meaning in Latin ‘On the Blood for Christ’, a slight variation of the traditional Christian passage, 'De Sanguine Cristi', or ‘On the Blood of Christ.’ The Christian understanding of the passage is the cornerstone of their faith in which participants receive the body and blood of Christ in order to participate in a divine union with God. With this discovery, that belief is deeply threatened.

“We feel that our opinion is that this is pretty much decisive evidence against the Christian religion, although not decisive in the sense that we’re trying to impose,” said Nahash Rainbow-Haus, an adjunct professor at Harvard University and member of the archaeological team, who has also been blessed with soulful eyes and a roguish grin, “and we are very excited to forge a new trail for humanity – one that exists without the strictures of a man-made religion. I vote first for the removal of the strictures of clothes.”

The artifact itself stands 18 inches tall, and depicts Christ flying through a dark night sky with long, canine-like fangs and a vial of blood wrapped around his neck. A crude speech bubble is drawn around his head with a Latin phrase that is roughly translated as “Vlah! I vant to suck your blood!”

The controversial vampiric depiction of Christ, however, is causing a stir in some religious circles over the proper worship of their Redeemer. “The House of the Dead shall be resurrected by the blood of the innocent,” said Count Chocula, the figurehead of a little-known, but scrumptiously delicious chocolate cereal, “I [expletive deleted] hate that cereal, but I thought the subtlety of marshmallows in the shape of severed heads and detached organs would get the children on my side.”

In the past 100 years, there have been a plethora of ancient texts uncovered with controversial interpretations of Christ, Mary Magdalene and his Apostles ranging from the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Gospel of Judas, but none have proved to be as contentious as the rough carving, which carbon dating places at 36 C.E. The discovery uproots a fundamental element of western religion that has come under fire in recent decades from leading intellectuals of our time, such as Dan Brown, Rosie O’Donnell and throngs of manic-depressive teenagers who wear makeup and eat their feelings.

“Dude man, I’ve been saying for way too long now, so all you fascists better listen up,” said Dylan "Gaping Soul" Tucker, a local teenager known for his whiney, pitiable poetry and his extensive Asian tattoo collection, “A lot of us have got things to say, and we’ve been saying them, or wanting to say them, and this just proves it, and now we’re gonna start saying things, and you’re all a bunch of damn fascists. Oh, and conformity is the death of individuality.”

Several of Dylan’s friends, who were physically linked to him with chains of body piercings, echoed his statement with a chorus of “yeahs” and “that’s right.” Dylan, however, wasn’t available for further questioning because he choked on an excessively large feeling.

Despite the novelty of the discovery, the western world is suffering from extensive ramifications from various social organizations, especially the VZEA or, The Vampire and Zombie Enthusiasts of America. Raymond Lofton, referred to by his peers as Vampiric Destiny, was kind enough to take a break from his FPSMMORPG (First-Person Shooter Massive Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game) to speak with us on the condition that the only light allowed into the room come from a pale computer screen, so as not to upset what he called “totally glazed over eyes”, and that Jerry, our news editor, continually press F6 to cast Bestial Howl for his level 79 Druid Warlock. “Man, I’ve always loved zombies,” said Lofton, a self-proclaimed level 14 zombie enthusiast, “and it totally makes sense that they’re like the henchmen of God. I mean, they’re just so wicked awesome. Did you see 'Dawn of the Dead' where the no-legged zombie attacks the girl with the big rack in the parking garage? I mean that’s Darwinian evolution and societal handicapped awareness bundled into one gruesomely awesome scene.”

Pamela Cranson, a visiting archaeologist from Stanford University, who also has a Ph.D. in open-mindedness, expressed her opinion, “It seems that after thousands of years of lies, deceit, prevarication and redundancy in the highest rings of the Catholic Church, we have discovered that Christ’s original intention was not for us to eat his body and drink his blood, because that’s just crazy. Rather we are to gather for him the body and blood of others as a penitential sacrifice for our wrongdoings.”

The recent development has many questioning the authority of Scripture and the Catholic Church, and although many believers have remained faithful to the Holy See, such concrete evidence as this is causing an unparalleled societal turmoil.

SexxyPrincessUnICOrnFairyStar73 told reporters on Instant Messenger that “religion is like so totally gay,” and that her “mom only does it cuz shes jealous of how omg HOTT I am and cuz she doesn’t want me to be with Timmy cuz dad NEVER kisses her like that!!!11”

Marketers, however, are already taking advantage of the new depiction of Christ, and are marketing him as a social revolutionary. Abercrombie & Fitch has begun mass production of T-Shirts with a print of Christ with fangs, ruffled hair and wild eyes on the front and "What Would Jesus Do?" printed on the back. A recent Marlboro ad shows Christ returning to his cellar in Jerusalem after an exhausting night of ravaging the town. Leaning against his coffin, the rugged, dangerous-looking Christ stares despondently out the window and lights up a solitary, slender cigarette as the camera pans up to the moon. Reportedly, the vampiric Christ will even be appearing on next month's box of Wheaties.

"As marketers, it is our duty to turn controversial images and figures into diluted shells of their original self by mass-producing the image on T-shirts, coffee mugs and bumper stickers until the image is rendered utterly sterile," said Rich Hampton, Chief Director of Marketing Affairs at TGC (Thank God for Capitalism), "Vampire Christ is simply the next Che Guevara."

When Fr. Wojciech Giertych, the official theologian of the Papal household, was questioned about the recent discoveries, he stated, “Are you stupid?,” and mumbled either a voodoo incantation over my soul, damning me to an eternity of excruciating pain or something in Polish.

The widespread panic that has cataclysmically rung throughout every demographic has still received little response from the Catholic Church. Whether these discoveries will spell the dawning of a new age or simply another short-lived controversy remains to be seen, but for the first time in thousands of years, the integrity and legitimacy of the Catholic Church is wavering.

March 10, 2008

Cogito Ergo Suck

The following was attached to the back of my final paper for my philosophy professor, Dr. Dwyer:

Descartes is a Douche
Luke Olson

I’ve been doing stuff for a long time, and I pretty much know it – Descartes is a douche. Cogito ergo sum? More like cogito ergo suck. He’s not even cute. In fact, I woodunt make babies with Descartes even if he was the last dum frenchie on earth. I have lots of reasons to belief that Descartes sucks, which I wanna talk about. My thesis is that Descartes is an infinite pussbag of undulating suck; howsoever, Dr. Dwyer is cool and people even kinda like him.

The first way that you can know that Descartes sucks is that if you made him into an action figure no one would want to play with him. His karate chop move woodunt work and he dusnt even have telekinesis. Even the green lantern wood beat him. The green lantern sucks.

Reason number two. Descartes gets you no chicks. Chicks are cool. Therefore Descartes is not cool.

Third, he could’ve at least grown a sweet moustache, but instead he grew a dum stringy one. Tom Selleck didn’t have a stringy moustache. Burt Reynolds didn’t have a stringy moustache. I bet the real reason he grows a dum stringy moustache is to hide his upper lip tentacles. One time when i was in Mexico (pronounced Mayheeko) and I saw an old man make a fart in a cup and then smell it, and I asked him why was he doing this. He said, “Because Descartes sucks.” (Old man. Old Man Quote Book. (My Printer: My House, 1422). Ninety-eleven.) This is how I knew that I was on to something. Then he told me that I had cute thighs. This is how I knew that he was on something.

Furthermore, the proof is in the pudding.

Finally, why the butt doesn’t he just write in English? It’s not like its that hard; Plato did it and so did Moses (just go to the freakin bookstore and you’ll see). Even Jesus spoke English. Hitler is the only person who wrote in french anyways, and who likes Hitler? Therefore, Descartes doesn’t like Jesus, children or rainbows.

However, Dr. Dwyer is not like Descartes. He has no stringy moustache, prolly gets you more chicks than Descartes, and while his action figure might still lose to the green lantern, he’s still pretty cool. Just like a really smart guy once said, “Ummmm…I guess Dr. Dwyer is kinda cute.” Sometimes he even makes funny jokes, and that’s why Descartes tries to entice him with succulent chocolates.

In conclusion, if you like to suck, then by all means go join the suck party with Descartes. He likes country, cant dance the trotske, and is anti-cookie monster. Dr. Dwyer, however, is a world-class friend and gives the cookie monster an occasional sponge bath. Plus Dr. Dwyer is smarter than Descartes. That’s why Descartes is dead and Dr. Dwyer is not.

March 9, 2008

Reflections from May 18th

A Sobering View of Our Superficial World
Dylan Key

Like most of the people on the Internet, I'm a very priviledged person. I have a family who loves and supports me, I have enough resources to attend college, I have a job, food at regular mealtimes, and a bed to sleep on. And, like many of you, I sometimes, nay, often, take these things for granted. Well, today I'd just like to try to bring life back into perspective. So if you're reading this, if you could just try to turn down your music and the TV, and take this moment to reflect on something that I think will touch all of you.

The past few months have been very difficult. The Virginia Tech Massacre, The War in Iraq, the uncertainty of the lives of our future generations with the threat of Global Warming. However, here sitting in my plush five bedroom townhouse with all the essential amenities of civilization, these dangers seem far off. It's hard for me to relate to them. But tomorrow is the anniversary of something that I know allowed us to take a breath outside of our over-protected bubble and actually FEEL, the dangers that 90 percent of the world have to cope with everyday.

I am of course talking about tomorrow's Preakness. Can you believe it's been only a year since that fateful day when Barbaro's bone's collapsed down the stretch. I know for you, and for me, it feels like Eons. Barbaro was a hero to all of us, for those few weeks between the Kentucky derby and the fateful Preakness, he lifted all of us to happiness, and in those treacherous months of treatment, he touched all of us. He died over the winter, and since then we've all been just going through the motions of our daily regiment, unable to concentrate, dwelling and wallowing in our despair at the dying and death of this noble steed.

Sometimes we would wake up in the morning, and in those few moments before our minds were fully concious, we'd think "Hey, todays looking alright" and then someone would ask us for the Elmers glue and we'd be reminded of Barbaro, and we would be brought down to our shattering grief.

Tomorrow will be an opportunity for all of us to lay our sorows and despair at the foot of Barbaro's dead corpse and have him free us from our torment. And I hope we all will finally be able to move on. Our realationship to Barbaro will cease being one of tragedy and tears, but one of respect and gratitude for Barbaro's heroic life. I have a challenge for all of us. The next time we're working on a craft and squeeze a little bit of Barbaro out of that bottle of Elmer's promise me you won't break down into tears, but instead, together with our entire broken nation, hail Barbaro, the noble steed.

March 6, 2008

Liberty and Death

The Declaration of Independence from Religion
Nick Olson

When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for the elite to dissolve the ethical bands which have impeded them from progression, and to assume among the powers of science, the separate and unequal stations to which the Laws of Science ordain men and women, superciliousness and self-vindication require that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that men and women have evolved separate and unequal, in varying levels of superiority and inferiority, that God, who retards ethical and social evolution, is dead, both demographically and existentially, that whenever any form of religion or obscurantist faction rejects these truths, it is the right of the elite to cleanse society and institute such a progression that lays its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to science shall seem most likely to effect their Sexual Freedom and Pleasure. When a long train of abuses and usurpations evinces a design to reduce these truths under absolute Superstition, it is their right–it is their duty to throw off such ethical shackles, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such is now the necessity that constrains us to cleanse our former systems of religion and ethical limitations. The history of present religions, particularly of the Christian Church, is a history of repeated irrationalities, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Moral tyranny over ethical freedom. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

Religion has refused to submit to the Sciences, the most wholesome and necessary discipline of the public good.

Religion has imposed upon society innumerable strictures of such a senseless and meaningless nature that they not only forestall societal progression but also directly suppress it. Such strictures include religious observances and practices, prayer, and church services.

Religion has repeatedly instigated war and civil strife over matters of inconsequential inanity, including the crusades, the French wars of religion, the thirty years’ war, the Inquisition, the Cristero War, the 9/11 attacks, and the current war on terror.

Religion has impeded sexual freedom, confining sexual expression to one orifice and two people of distinct sex, repressing the libido, the consummate source of man’s happiness. Particularly, religion has oppressed and condoned the oppression of homosexual love and affection, inventing grandiose assertions that sexuality is such an action in such a form so as to have merely one proper way of performance. Additionally, religion has put forth unfounded admonishments of fornicators and adulterers, who are performing in perfect accordance with nearly every other species in nature. Religion has betrayed man’s happiness by reprimanding nearly all forms of sexual expression, including, but not limited to masturbation, homosexuality, bisexuality, trisexuality, incest, consensual pedophilia, bestiality, and necrophilia.

Religion has not only acquiesced to the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, but has castigated birth control and sexual protection, spreading sexual ignorance, indirectly causing such plagues to proliferate through society, most notably the sexually transmitted disease that is the unwanted fetus.

Religion forbids the abortion of fetuses, which either have such insignificant nervous systems such that negligible pain is caused them, or they have sufficient brain capacity to realize the benefit of not being born into this world. In forbidding abortions, religion has caused mental, financial, and emotional strife of countless victims and encouraged the proliferation of the inferior.

Religion has demonized the pleasure of self-indulgence, as exhibited in its rebuke of sexual license, gluttony, and any other appetitive fulfillment.

Religion has extolled the enervation of the body with bodily neglect, flagellation, starvation, and other forms of wanton self-destruction.

Religion, particularly Christianity, has distorted the most fundamental tenets of society, praising the Everyman and scorning the magnanimous, rewarding the lowly psychologically and economically but condemning the superior, and inverting the natural scientific law of evolution which rightly favors the mighty and scorns the lowly. This inversion of principles that coerces the superior into subservience to others manifests its offenses politically, economically, and most heinously, ethically.

Religion has obstructed the progression of science, stymieing advances ranging from astronomy to medical advances, opposing the blessings of stem cell therapy, cloning, and psychiatry.

Religion has made demands of society to waste its resources and capabilities on the elderly, who are a financial, economical, and emotional burden upon society.

Religion has repeatedly endangered humanity, subjecting it to care for criminals unfit for society and undeserving of human life.

Religion has anathematized the virtue of pride and extolled humility, reducing man to a pusillanimous state of impotence.

Religion has proscribed excessive use of certain narcotics, which allow for an ecstasy greater than anything offered by religion.

Most grossly, religion has instituted the outrageous idea of human equality, which has been falsified both by the principles of evolution and by demographics. The consequences of such atrocious equality include the demotion of superiority to the limits of inferiority, the proliferation of incompetence and ineptitude, and the abolition of slavery. As evinced by distinctive racial characteristics and by the scarcity of miscegenation, different races constitute different subspecies of humans. Given that the average intelligence quotient of an African is fifteen to thirty points below that of a European, and given that the average European exhibits five inches greater cranial capacity than Africans, the inferiority of certain races and certain peoples is clearly demonstrated. In light of this evidence, slavery is to be hereby reinstituted; certain persons are to be cleansed so as to promote the greater evolutionary good of society, including, but not limited to the mentally disabled, the crippled, the unintelligent, the unattractive, the sickly, and the elderly.

Religion has audaciously insisted on the veracity of its ethics, despite its utter lack of societal or scientific substantiation.

Religion has promoted obscurantism in such a fashion that those who antagonize our progression vehemently object to our societal ideals despite their inability to refute the benefits of societal progression.

In every stage of these offenses we have exhorted religion to redress; our repeated exhortations have been answered only by repeated injury.

We, therefore, the representatives of the intellectually and morally elite, appealing to the unerring hand of Science, do, in the name and by the authority of our established natural superiority, solemnly publish and declare that mankind is and ought to be free of his former ethical limitations, that he is absolved from all allegiance to religion, and that as free and independent, we hereby maintain to abolish all religion and religious thought, to institute eugenics so as to cleanse mankind of the inferior for the greater evolutionary good of mankind, to reinstitute slavery so as to give a proper place to inferior races, to establish consummate sexual license, and to enable men and women to live in total freedom, so as to herald the start of a new age, and with it, a new man, free from religious or ethical inhibition, in the fullness of pleasure, and thus to bring about the resolution, fruition, and consummation of mankind, in accordance with evolution and sacred Science.

Modern English Revisions

On Having the Courage to Efficiently Utilizate the Byzantine Complexities of the Linguistic Epistomology in Our Present Era
Nick Olson

Amongst the copious disciplines that students endeavor to decipher, the mastery of the English language proves itself the most onerous, due both to its capriciousness and its amalgamated nature of Latin, Greek, and Anglo-Saxon. Though I am no philologist, I wish to address the common errata and errors made due to the former, the volatile nature of English. In virtue of my youth and ebullience, I present the following list of addendums, revisions, deletions, modifications, and suggestions for usage of the English language that were made recently that one might have failed to notice.

1. The superlative is now acceptable as a means to expressing strong personal preference, especially in the cases where the speaker is too inept to express his opinion in any other manner. E.g., “Kanye West is the best rapper ever!” For added emphasis, rather than elaborating upon the qualities that render the subject great, one may add the adverb “seriously”. E.g., “No, seriously, Halo 3 is the best video game ever!” For matters of minor personal preference (as in an item that is liked but is not a favorite) the item may be described as a favorite, e.g., “This new Aaron Carter song is my favorite!”

2. The word “use” is now obsolete. It has been replaced by “utilize”, which has over twice as many letters and is more closely related with the Latin (and is therefore far more meaningful.)

3. In matters of exhortation, it is of vital importance to establish intellectual proficiency. The quickest manner of achieving this is with a thesaurus. The following example has been provided.

Poor employment of the English Language: “The cat sat on the mat.”

Excellent employment of the English Language that immediately establishes intellectual proficiency: “The quadruped, which was of a curiously but distinctively feline nature, ensconced itself upon the dhurrie.”

4. Regarding matters of argument, logic has become obsolete. It demands large amounts of concentration from one’s audience, which can only be accumulated from a modern audience with elaborate illustrations and youtube videos. Consequently, it is far more advantageous to the writer or thinker to engage an argument with a personal anecdote, preferably involving a faith-journey. Observe in this example how the counter-argument perfectly utilizes this strategy to refute the opposition.

“Fornication dissolves the sanctity of marriage, consequently damaging the foundations of society and the happiness of the family.”

“Well, in my personal faith-journey, there are lots of things that I have experienced. In fact, in my personal opinion, I think that I feel like it is a pretty much good thing to break free from the strictures of monogamy. While I married to Rick for ten months I had no idea how amazing life could be if I just took the time to explore the various wonders that I was missing out on. After all, I just wanted to be happy! So don’t enforce your rules on me, you fascist!”

5. Further regarding matters of exhortation, the guilt-trip, while formerly effective, now can be quickly identified by an intelligent person and thus lose its effectiveness. Far more efficient is the invocation of courage, as it can be applied in every situation effectively. The following examples have been provided.

“Have the courage to stand up for the sanctity of heterosexual marriage!”
“Have the courage to stand up for gay rights!”
“Have the courage to masturbate!”

It takes a great amount of courage to support something, or to protest it, or to retain apathy on the matter.

6. In matters of speech, in order to present oneself as academically accomplished, intellectually credible, and persuasive, whenever possible, utilize a British accent. (By British accent, I am of course referring to the upper-class inner-London accent. The Cockney accent will do quite the opposite of establishing intellectual credibility, and the Liverpool accent makes one sound like a drug-abusing walrus.)

7. The word “cool”, previously used informally to signify excellence, has been replaced by the word “phallic”. It may be utilized now in both formal and informal settings.

8. The abbreviation “lol”, which previously stood for “laugh out loud,” now stands for “I am incompetent. Please terminate my existence as it is a blight on all society.”

March 4, 2008

Man Seeking Woman

Homeric Personal Add
Nick Olson

Sing, goddess, the beauty of Ol’s son Nikolaus, winsome and bewitching, sending down to the garden of Eros thousandfold women with his ravishing looks. Sing to me of the man of twists and turns, the gentle curves of his muscles; sing the radiance of his locks, gently bouncing in the wind, as when a lion spots a horned stag or wild goat and fluidly rushes to attack, its illustrious mane swaying with each step, so does the hair of Nikolaus fall about his shoulders, sleek, luxurious, and shining. Sing! goddess, of white-armed Nikolaus, with his creamy calves and alabaster thighs, whose redolent scent of ambrosia makes the red mist cloud women’s eyes. Tell of his pectorals, majestically accentuated by a single nipple and a silky coat of hair, gentle enough to provide the resting place of Aphrodite herself. His oxen eyes shine with the ebullience of Hebe, yet his beard reflects the timeworn sagacity of Nestor himself.

Recount, O muse, his feats and triumphs! Strapping his supple raw-hide sandals, he flies with wings of Hermes to defeat even the swiftest of men in a foot race to his next class. With the strength of Herakles, he lifts even the heaviest of backpacks, for men are much stronger in these days, though the backpack is inundated with book upon book, which no two men could carry, and yet he lifts it with ease, as when a soaring eagle swoops down from the dark clouds to earth to snatch some helpless and trembling hare nine times, and on the tenth time clutches the helpless prey furiously in its talons, so Nikolaus snatches up his burdensome backpack to carry it across campus.

Whom, goddess, whom does this breathtaking Adonis seek? A woman beautiful, tall, skilled at weaving lovely things, who enjoys watching dawn rise with her rosy red fingers, the enchantment of a lyre, a night of epic poetry, and pouring out libations.

Preferably non-smoker.

A Message from Your Leader

On Why You Would Be Wise to Bake Me Brownies
Nick Olson

Hello women,

Given that I am supreme master and ruler of the universe, I strongly exhort you to make me brownies. You need not read any further, as it behooves you as my subject to comply with my will. If you need proof of my sovereignty, allow me to remind you that “that government is best which governs least.” By such criteria, my negligence has crowned me not only as supreme ruler of the universe, but also as master of the greatest government conceivable.

Before you question the legitimacy of my rule, know that others have raised objections to my rule, and such objections have been squelched. The right to free speech and protest was a privilege under the American government, but that prerogative has been suspended for the good of my subjects. Indeed, the criteria aforementioned are a far more rational foundation for rule than previous criteria for rule, which include being spawned from a 3000-year-old incestuous gene pool of Egyptian pharaohs, pulling swords from stones, and being a descendent of Zeus, who, as Homer teaches us, was himself unfit to rule.

Given the governmental capriciousness that often follows revolutions, you may think yourself prudent in rejecting my request and waiting until I am overthrown. Such audacity will do you no benefit, however, as I am well prepared for such volatility. As a master of the liberal arts, I have gleaned from history and literature a vigilance for the hazards that may endanger my sovereignty. Firstly, unlike other rulers, I will beware the Ides of March. In doing so, I will undoubtedly fair better than Cao Cao, Nicholas II of Russia, or Julius Caesar.

Secondly, I will avoid apples at all costs; not only are they responsible for the fall of man, but also, through Eris, they are responsible for Troy’s downfall. Furthermore, insofar as an apple a day keeps the doctor away, by suspending the daily ration of apples, I will allow for the return of doctors, whose widespread medical assistance will universally strengthen my authority. Thirdly and most importantly, I will never invade Russia in the winter; it simply never goes well. With these tactics at hand, my rule will be everlasting, and thus it behooves you even more to bake me brownies. So be a good woman and bake.


On The Decline of The Modern Attention Span
Nick Olson


Now that I have your attention, I’d like to address the epidemic that is now plaguing the youth and adults of modern society. Try not to turn to the comics just yet, for this disease may already be affecting you and your loved ones! I realize it may be difficult, nay, impossible, to retain your attention for the span of five hundred words, but here to captivate you are some shocking statistics! According David R. Godine, Inc., only 32% of the U.S. population has ever been inside a bookstore. According to a 2003 article by Publishers Weekly, the average person spends 2.1 hours a month reading. And according to Jerrold Jenkins of the Jenkins Group, 80% of US families did not buy or read a book last year. And while these statistics are probably very skewed and total lies, they did get you past your one-hundredth word. Congratulations!

When I first read these statistics, I first wondered if it had become the case the reading was no longer “cool”. But after some research, it appears many cool people are readers, including Optimus Prime and Batman. Then I considered whether every work of literature ever written was boring and without merit. This didn’t seem to be the case either, considering the works of Eric Carle, so I concluded that the epidemic involved the decline of the modern attention span.

WARNING: The following paragraph is excessively boring. Side effects to reading it may include dizziness, nausea, loss of concentration, vomiting, depression, nihilism, and/or death. If you find yourself experiencing any of these symptoms while reading, either stop immediately or imagine Matthew McConaughey reading the passage aloud to you enticingly.

Credible or not, these statistics suggest that reading and the modern attention span have diminished greatly since the 19th century. Not too long ago, Alexandre Dumas, Victor Hugo, or Fyodor Dostoyevsky could captivate a reader for a thousand pages. But the 19th century novel devolved into the 20th century novella. From there came the rise of the graphic novel and the modern magazine. The movie industry reduced the attention span down to two hours, and nowadays, if you read a three-page Time magazine article on an airplane you are an erudite intellectual. In this, the Youtube age of ADD, the modern attention span has limited literature and other media to an aggregate of explosions, sex, torture, and, worst of all, Tom Cruise. Consequently, modern literature, cinema, and other forms of the media have been reduced to the basest of subject matters. But perhaps there is hope. You, the reader, have endured 500 words of excruciating boredom. From there perhaps, you can grow, and one day, restore the literary media to a status from which it can discuss more noble themes that do not involve Garfield the cat or the confessions of the pop star Madonna.

How Not to Write

My Über Good Essay
Nick Olson

There appears to be some confusion on campus regarding the subject of how not to write an essay. However, struggling students need not worry, as I have provided a perfect example of how not to write an essay:

“In the dawn of time God made all the stuff”
-Somewhere in the Bible

Then you gave me this stupid paper to write. So I stood up till like infinity a.m. Anywhom, My thesis is that my opinion is that i feel like Achilles is pretty much a cool guy.

Achilles is the guy on the cover of the book. He has a cool helmet and little swirlies on his chest. (The cover page of Penguin Classics.) Secondarily, he has a Mohawk which gives him at least ten cool points. My next point is that on the cover, Achilles is made of green metal so he is like the combination of the Hulk and Iron Man and the Green Lantern. Except I don’t like the Green Lantern. Also there’s a penguin at the top. It’s a penguin cause penguin’s are fluffy and cute but also versatile fish chompers and there black and white -- that’s goodness and evilness. In conclusion, homer shoudn’t’ve put a penguin on his cover.

Also, the movie Troy shows that Achilles is a cool guy. He beats people up with his cool sword moves. (Watch the movie) Also, he is Brad Pitt. Although he’s not Vin Diesel, that’s still cool. And if i remember right (i watched it like a few months ago), achilles was cool at the end (The proof is in the pudding.) Troy was basically the worst movie ever.

Achilles is a champion ergo a cool guy. That’s how he’s able to beat up the Green Lantern. (Even look at wikipedia.) And plus, if he’s not a champion, then why in the ding dong dickens would he eat Wheaties; the very breakfast of champions! (Ok so i didn’t find this quote but i know it’s in there; even ask me). In the end though, Paris beats up Achilles. That’s why I don’t like him.

In conclusion, i didn’t like Achilles or the iliad. Well i didn’t read it but it sounds boring. Who wants to listen to a fat bald man who eats donuts and beer and works at a nuclear power plant? But it’s not important ‘cause the Greeks were all dumb-dumbs anyways. The end.

PS: Q.E.D.

I hope this example sheds some light on the subject and enables our students to write better essays in the future.