As a child, I remember my awe of father's ruthless precision in killing snakes. There was the rattler that tried to kill my mom in the basement, the bullsnake that wrapped itself a around a lamp cord in the bedroom, and the black snake that came after me in the shed. All three met the same demise.

A mite slow to play sports myself, father was a mongoose. Each encounter ended the same - a fatal blow behind the head delivered via shovel or hoe left the body angrily convulsing and mouth desperately gasping for life.

To me he was a hero. To the serpents, a monster. And when he looked himself in the mirror every night, he was merely a man doing whatever necessary to protect his family and defend his farm.









The snake is a metaphor for carpetbaggers. I was born in Alabama in 1862. 

And father shed no tears while laying waste to those bastards from New York and Philadelphia.

Chickens In Pots; A TV In Every Living Room

An abundance of poor is necessary to enable the comfort of the rich. Voltaire said something like that. When the rich lack comfort, they set their eyes upon foreign lands. GE best prospers when Cambodia is being bombed and Marines are in Haiti. The military industrial complex prospers during conflict, but uncertain outcome of conflict threatens the nation. The rich must remain satiated to prevent new war. I suppose in that vein, our national security has been most at risk in those moments that threatened the institution of poverty itself.

In the mid 19th century, the fall of slavery provided the promise transcendence, but that's bullshit. The whip was traded for the noose, and the black populace remained enslaved. No major wars following Civil War, killing of natives continued but that was status quo.

The mid 20th century threatened everything. The GI bill provided the opportunity of education to the masses of returning soldiers, depriving society of an easily exploitable poor. The unions also gained power in the mid 20th century, and shooting union members fell out of fashion. The rich were forced to waste resources on improving working conditions. South Korea.

This is why the Vietnam War was so important. Imagine millions of young people, sitting in the quads of universities across the nation. Plotting. Organizing. Smoking weed and spreading anti-establishment bullshit. They had to be sent overseas to be killed. The further profiteering was merely a bonus, the important outcome was to break down a potentially explosive movement. No one returns from military service the same.

It's not enough to keep the poor abundant, they must also be controlled. The only thing that saved us during the rise of the middle class was the ability to pit the newly formed middle class against the poor. Race riots and the drug wars.

With the natural dismemberment of the middle class over the past two decades, new means for controlling the poor must be established. High society lacks the intestinal fortitude of its forefathers to enforce the obedience of the poor through violence. Imprisonment has become increasingly less frightening; conditions are more agreeable than ever; warm food and a bed can be had by all in this institution. If there is no fear and no middle class buffer, there is nothing to protect the rich from the poor. New methods must be established.

Aldous Huxley shows us how - control through the use of sex and narcotics. Technology has allowed these to be combined in new mediums; media. The tv provides escape, and young men can be distracted by the gaming consoles connected to them. Put a tv and Playstation in the living room of every housing project and crack den in America. The aim is not to brainwash, the goal is thought evacuation. Sometimes the poor will steal from each other, but if everyone is provided the same, the market will be saturated and the incentives to steal removed. Everyone must receive a television and cable. No one can be allowed to go without.

If we can devise methods to shuffle young men to and from work while filling idle time with these distractions, the rich can remain in comfort. The women can be oft be counted on to take care of themselves. Ensure the poor girls continue getting pregnant at early ages before they can attain education. Keep abortion difficult to access, if not illegal. Children are the most important impediment to success.

--------
The economist says giving people food for free decreases incentives to work. The activist says we must help those who lack the means to help themselves; think of the children.

It's interesting that people in America still go hungry. Not to say it's surprising. None of your elected officials have experienced hunger. To be hungry is awful, to die of hunger is an awful, painful, miserable experience. I have never died of hunger. Biden grew up comfortably middle class. Obama has a compelling backstory, but was never hungry. No current US Senator has experienced a lack of sleep stemming from hunger pangs. They don't know what it's like to pray for sleep to take away the pain. This is an important distinction. The poor do not provide the money for politicians to be elected, the rich do. We must continue electing politicians unable to empathize with the poor.

And what if no one was hungry? What if all citizens felt they led lives worth living? Then who would fight our wars? It's the proposition of a dangerous world with no honor.

The REAL Reason Dave Will Die Single

I was trying to figure out dinner tonight and engaged in the following inner monologue:
"Is that mold?
"Whatever, it's cool.
"It's a good thing I don't have kids."

It's off to Buffalo in about five hours - who's ready for a four day rager?

Facebook's Value

is currently $19.41.  Maybe it would be worth more if it was good for more than just two things: attention-seeking (which is why all my blog posts get posted on my Facebook), and stalking. It's also good for shorting (back to talking stock prices), but that's only because investors are apparently as deft as we knew they were. Within the attention-seeking value of Facebook we identify two subgroups: complaining (e.g., feel bad for me, this thing happened and I wasn't willing to confront the perpetrator because I was scared and/or it wasn't societally acceptable so I'm foisting it upon you instead, etc.) and braggadociousness (e.g., my use of 'braggadociousness' is pretty fucking awesome). In this note I do both, because, as has been established via myriad mediums, I'm pretty awesome.

So I ran the Turning Stone half marathon this morning, and it really reinforced how big of assholes runners are. After the race I watched the finals of a four day billiards tournament, got some chow, and just wandered around watching old people transfer their children's inheritance to some Indian Nation one 50¢ lever pull at a time. By this point I'd changed, sporting a nondescript t-shirt, shorts, and sandals. Yet I kept seeing people walking around with their numbers still safety pinned to their shirts and wearing the medal around their necks (every finisher gets a medal - it's like an elementary school track meet). Good job, you finished, congratulations. But seriously, you look like an asshole wearing that ribbon around your neck. Besides, it's heavy and the ribbon has sharp threads poking out. It can't be comfortable. You're uncomfortable to boot? That makes you an asshole and an idiot. I'm not impressed.

The reason I'm not impressed is because I beat you (get ready for the complaining-to-braggadociousness transition). How do I know I beat you? Because real runners win real hardware.

Now give me some likes.

What Happens If Our OTHER Running Back Goes Down?

Cranking out some ideas for my first article featured in Arrowhead Addict. I'm excited about working with the idea of 'who's more indispensable' going forward - it wrangles with the strategic balance of roster building in weighing who provides not just the most value to the team, but also the most net value (i.e., but for that player's presence, what is the team able to achieve?). 

Jamaal Charles is the best running back the Chiefs have. I could recite his accomplishments and drone on about how I believe he will come back from last year's injury just fine, but there's no use in preaching to the choir here. What you may not be ready to hear is that Charles not only fails to carry the title of "most indispensable to the team," he's not even the most indispensable at his position; Peyton Hillis's presence is more important to our success this year.

To avoid being immediately suspended from ever writing again, let me qualify that paragraph by saying I'm not merely judging what a player brings to the table - I'm also evaluating how readily their talents can be replaced. A 1,600 yard season for Charles and 1,000 yard season for Hillis are reasonable expectations. But without Hillis, we have no change-of-pace bruiser. Currently on the roster at fullback are Shane Bannon, who spent his rookie year in 2011 on the practice squad, and Taylor Gentry, an undrafted rookie out of North Carolina State. Unless one of these guys exceeds expectations during training camp, there is no reliable replacement to run between the tackles and provide burly backfield pass protection if Hillis goes down.

Last year Jackie Battle led the team in rushing while Thomas Jones ranked third. They're never coming back. Dexter McCluster caught 46 receptions and was second on the team in rushing while averaging 4.5 yards/carry in 2011. McCluster is also 5'8", 170 lbs. He's a serviceable substitute for Charles, but not Hillis. He's an exciting player who may not deliver Pro Bowl talent, but can provide  backup if needed to move in from wide receiver. Additionally, with the glut of receivers the Chiefs suddenly find themselves blessed with, moving McCluster back into the backfield wouldn't be that damaging to the receiving corps - we should still have a solid set of receivers plus Moeaki at TE. Cyrus Gray also intrigues me, and provides about the same size as Charles.

There is no doubt in my mind that Charles's contributions will be greater than Hillis's this year. Yet in the event of some unforeseen event depriving us of this extraordinary backfield duo, I'm gritting my teeth and professing a preference for keeping Hillis. Besides, we'll need a bruiser in January to run out the clock as Peyton Manning watches the time wind down to zero to record our first playoff win in far too long. 

So whaddaya think Addicts, is there enough talent on the roster to compensate for another year without Jamaal Charles? Or should I stop writing and just go back to reading Arrowhead Addict from the sidelines?