I’ve got the Tuesday sillies!

Q: What’s orange and sounds like a parrot?

A: A carrot!

—

Q: What do you call a stick of dynamite that just got swallowed by a male cow?

A: Abominable (sound it out)

—

Q: How many churches does it take to screw on a lightbulb?

A: Nun

—

Q: How many Charlie Sheens does it take to screw on a lightbulb?

A: Won

—

Q: How many women does it take to screw on a lightbulb?

A: They can use candles to make dinner

(Yes, I know these aren’t funny)

———————————-

For my next sillies, give me some nouns. People, celebrities, places, kitchen appliances, etc., and I’ll make jokes out of them. For instance, if the word were Doctor…

I LIKE MY WOMEN LIKE I LIKE MY DOCTORS

NOT TRYING MY PATIENTS!!!

lolwut.

English Classes

In math, you learn something different every year. First you’ve got your basic algebra and geometry, and add the unit circle, logarithms, derivatives, integrals, etc. Plus, you’re allowed to advance a couple years.

In science, classes are separated by field. So Chemistry is going to be radically different from Physics and Biology. You’re also allowed to advance years here.

In history, you have to stay on the same curriculum as everyone, and it’s somewhat redundant. However, at least there’s a good deal of more in-depth discussion once you hit World 2/US/Government.

In english…

Let’s start by saying that the last new/different thing I learned in an English class was diagramming sentences.

In eighth grade.

I am currently in twelfth grade.

See a problem here?

Yes, I get the fact that some people really need to work on their grammar, mechanics, and overall writing style. Me? The latter is certainly arguable, but I’ve known how to use my semicolons and how to avoid my comma, splices (See what I did there?) for a number of years now. So I’ve spent the last four years of english (More if you don’t count sentence diagramming. I know I don’t) sparknoting books (I can read. I don’t particularly think I need practice) and writing essays. The reading part of it is both A) Not fun and B) Not improving my already-very-good vocabulary, so I consider that useless as well.

Writing may have had some merits over the years. I certainly have a more definite writing style than I did four years ago, and my writing is likely far more sophisticated. I tend to write a lot (Case in point: This post), so I’m not going to try to argue that the writing portion of English class is also a waste. It isn’t.

But why spend four years taking a subject in which only one useful skill is improved?

I get having the option of english 9-english 12. Some people need A LOT more work on their grammar and reading skills than I do, some people can’t call English their first language (Myself included, actually. I learned German slightly earlier than I learned English), and some just suck at intellectual things. That’s not their fault, and four years of English is totally appropriate in those scenarios.

English 9-English 10-English 11-English 12

English 9 honors-English 10 honors-English 11 AP-English 12 AP

Above is the average schedule. Below is my schedule over the course of four years.

I count two major differences. The first, and most obvious, is the AP tests following 11th and 12th grade. Other than that, the only big difference is sharing a class with people who know more, so less time can be spent on working on things like the difference between “your” and “you’re” (Outlined in SL’s post on the flaws in the school system) and more can be spent on writing. This is good. What isn’t good is the fact that people of similar skill to me can’t advance themselves farther by specializing more. We HAVE to have four years of English when we could accomplish everything in one. We can’t accelerate ourselves a year or two despite being a year or two ahead of our peers, in English skill terms. We’re stuck in the same curriculum as everybody else when schools should be working to accomodate their strong students as well as their weak ones.

I like my time, and for the past several years, English class has been wasting it. Damn shame.

Later,

AHS

PS: I wrote this during English class, interestingly enough.

How To Be A Badass

Don’t worry. I know why you’re here. I won’t tell anyone, don’t worry. Its okay, I know its a guilty pleasure for you. Regardless, you need to get information don’t you? Information that can be very…informative. I know your type, though, and I am sympathetic, really. Or at least as sympathetic as I can be. But the crime of being a big ole wuss is something that is truly to be pitied. For that, I will assist you with this, my post on How To Be A Badass.

1. Slash Tires

Now, you may wonder why this is on here. Slashing tires, that’s ridiculously simple. However, one must start slow. Although slashing someone’s tires is a low and cowardly way of dispatching a person (or at least making them buy a tire for a ridiculous price), it does give you the badass feeling of cutting away at something with your very own knife! Surely, its a start – even if it is pathetic (though its incredibly badass for a puss like you).

2. Get Into Fights Over Women

There’s no better way to prove your manhood than to punch the closest person in the face due to them looking at your girlfriend or girl friend in the wrong manner. There’s no better feeling in the world than to crush someone’s nose under your right hook to his big, fat, acne-filled face. Or hers, if you’re fighting a lesbian (I’ve seen it happen before). Hell, for the fun of it, just start a fight with someone looking at you the wrong way. Then you get to be a dick and a badass! Score!

3. Fall Into The Wrong Crowd

Alright, here’s where you start to make your mark. Gangs are simply people who have failed to be badasses and are just giant wussies. Bad crowds, however, are filled with people with minds like yourself, Young Wanna-be Badass. Once you are accepted into a wrong crowd, you need to become the leader. To do this, you need to do drugs, fight all the time, spit on your teacher, cut class, and sag your pants super low. After becoming the leader of the wrong crowd, you can officially drop out of high school.

4. Drugs

Deal em, do em, dump em. If you become the leader of a wrong crowd, taking drugs instantly makes you look cool. Selling them is a ticket to the KKK – the Kool Kidz Klub. However, be aware of what you are taking. Don’t take any hardline drugs – you want to be badass as long as possible, and if you die due to drugs, then that will be a certain roadblock.

5. Get Arrested

This is easy to do after a while. Simple, really. This goes hand in hand with Step Four. You can do this in a variety of ways. Public intoxication, trying to buy drugs from a cop, trying to sell drugs to a cop, fire at a cop, set off fireworks in front of the police station, take a huge shit on the cruiser’s hood…really, any of these are possible. Now, this leads me to Step Six…

6. Go To Church

Now, when you are in prison, you’ll likely become some big jail bear’s prison bitch. As you are anally violated every day in the showers by five different men, you will likely wonder why this is happening to you and you will hate it with such a burning passion (if you like it, quit reading because you can’t be a homosexual and be a badass. Its like being short and being tall. Not possible.) that you will want to eradicate it. This, instinctively, will lead you to church over time. After this, you’ll become a former convict turned religious fanatic badass! There’s only one thing missing…

7. Get Your GED

Of course, the final step is to go back to school. Get your GED. Because a real badass gets his high school diploma with all of his other bad crowd members. Reestablish brotherhood with those men as you advance from working at McDonald’s to becoming the janitor at your local movie theater.

Congrats, you’ve officially lived as a badass!

A little something I’ve noticed

It’s that I keep using little in all of my titles.

More seriously, I’ve noticed that many groups have a tendency to insult the intelligence of those that disagree with them. Now, this bothers me: two individuals of “equivalent” intelligence and similar backgrounds can reach wildly different conclusions: I was raised in a conservative, Christian environment. I am now a moderate agnostic. I have a friend raised in a similar manner who participated in similar classes at the later levels of public education (middle, high. Classes are quite far from what I mean by intelligence, but a true meter in this regard is very, very hard to come by– we as a species still haven’t done so.), and he is still a conservative Christian– not a very good sample size, admittedly, but I think it gets the point across– a given conclusion can be reached in a myriad of ways, especially when said conclusions are by and large a matter of opinion and/or priorities.

So, that said, I come to the question of why people will choose a single conclusion, or a single set of conclusions. Why do we have  silly things like the partisan system, or conflict over trivial differences, such as that between a single sect of a given religion and another? (By sect I mean the lowest division, nothing with truly significant differences.) Or even arguments over semantics, like the frequent use of the word “ain’t” in common speech?

I can only see a few conclusions. One of them is fairly obvious, methinks: people like to be in a group, and groups of people like to make people join them. For good reasons, perhaps. My conviction to maintaining rationality (an extension of which, I believe, is being the closest one can be to absolute neutrality until an undeniable proof is made.) frequently places me in situations I don’t like to be in. That is to say, I am forced by my beliefs to argue against virtually everyone in my life at some point, and as one would expect, that can tend to result in a level of alienation (depending largely upon pre-existing relationships, as well as relying on people who understand my motives for doing as I do).  That alienation? Only a select few are willing to impose it upon themselves, or at least to do so for the reason I mention above. Many will follow friends, elders, or generally anyone that has managed to establish themselves as reliable, mature, or responsible. Some will reach conclusions on their own, and once they have done so, follow them to the bitter end.

This brings me to my next possibility: humans do not like to admit, take responsibility for, or otherwise associate themselves with the act of being wrong. This is more conjecture on my part than the first possibility, however, but I think it is at least mostly a valid conclusion. Have you ever questioned a friend’s beliefs, even in honest inquiry, and received anger or alienation as a result? I have. Several times. People in general seem to hate losing arguments, and those that do seem to hate admitting they lost even more. So they turn to natural emotion: they perceive the fellow arguer as aggressive for taking it to a point they otherwise didn’t see, or perhaps remained intentionally ignorant of, and so they will either lash out or simply abort the situation.

That one doesn’t segue as nicely as the first did: my third, and final, possibility mentioned in this post is that people simply don’t care. Now, you have the wholly justifiable question, anonymous reader, of why those who don’t care bother to disagree. It took me quite a while to realize the answer to this myself: it’s a combination of the first two possibilities listed here. If they do not care, are forced to take a side (I’d argue that non-apathetic neutrality requires more commitment than any single other side) by social custom (“groups like to make people join them”), they will not like to admit being wrong. Therefore, they will take their side, and they’ll lash out whenever someone has the audacity to remind them that there are, in fact, other viewpoints.

If I hadn’t made it clear already, I do not like that. I believe it is the responsibility of a man with any power whatsoever to consider all sets of conclusions, and to argue thoroughly with himself on whether or not one is to be followed over another. I’m aware, however, of what a lofty goal that is, and so I simply do my best to keep prodding those who would otherwise remain complacent.

Thank you for the time, anonymous reader.

Oh, no big deal. Just the Government breaking the law. Nothing to see here.

According to some of my friends, the 2009 movie “The Box” was pretty horrible. And, really, that’s not all that surprising. You’ve got a family who’s given a ‘box’ with a button inside. If they so choose, they can press this button, which would cause one person on earth to drop dead instantly, for the pretty sum of $1 million.

Really, there aren’t too many places a movie can go from there. The button kills the president? Great, now two-thirds of America is happier. The button kills Bin Laden? Four-thirds of America is happier. The button kills a family member? The entire movie becomes a tragic revenge story where the tragic death of some husband/child is mentioned in some way during every intense moment, thereby making the movie, well, horrible. Not really much to work with there.

 Just as a note going forward, I don’t actually know how the movie goes. The only reason I even bring it up is because I find the concept itself fascinating. I mean… Would YOU press it?

It’s a hard question, to be sure. $1 million isn’t exactly chump change, and given the fact that there are nearly seven billion people on this earth and the average person has met a couple hundred of them, you’re looking at odds of around 1/20,000,000 (at worst) that the person you kill is someone you actually give a crap about.

On the other hand, it’s murder you’re committing. Someone’s going to die because your selfish rear-end decided that life would be better with a few more Benjamins in your wallet. Could you live with that? Plus, there’s always the off chance that the sudden death of some guy from <Insert location here> gets traced back to you. Trading a trip to the slammer and an oceanful of guilt for a million dollars seems like a bit of a rip-off, no? Which leads us to our two big questions:

1) Would those running America press that button?

2) Would those running America be permitted by law to press that button?

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to answer #2. There’s no way in hell that the United States Government could knowingly allow the death of one of its residents without totally ignoring the U.S. Constitution. And, last I checked, the Constitution happens to be a big deal.

The gist of one of the, if not the most well-known passages of the Declaration of Independence reads like this: “Blah blah, blah blah blah blah, people hold the inalienable rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, blah blah.” So, yeah. The founding fathers decided that when America declared independence from Britain, they’d make it pretty clear that the Government can’t be responsible for anyone dying. So that box is definitely being thrown somewhere in the vicinity of a nuclear testing plant and being blown to bits.

Or is it?

This brings us to question #1. This one , in theory, should be just as easy as question #2. America is not legally allowed to press the button, so they don’t press the button. Sadly, there are more factors at play than the law of the land. If you haven’t heard, America just so happens to be in a multi-trillion dollar debt crisis that also happens to be growing by massive sums every day. Try as they might, Barack Obama and the extremely and blatantly split houses of Congress and the Senate just have not been able to slow this fall into the abyss of debt. To them, the button might look pretty tempting at this point.

But, since this is a multi-trillion dollar deficit, $1 million isn’t doing a whole lot of good. So, let’s raise the stakes a bit. Let’s say this button is worth $19 billion. It’s still not fixing the problem, but it sure looks like a nice little band-aid until better solutions can be thought up. Sadly, the exchange wouldn’t be fair at all if we didn’t up both sides of the ante, so let’s add to the casualties a bit. Let’s say we change it to about, say…

53,800 deaths.

This isn’t a one-for-one conversion, mind you. In this scenario, America would make only $353,159.85 per life given, or about one-third of the amount-per-person output of the button that we’ve already said America wouldn’t possibly press. So there’s no way America presses this one, right? Especially not 53,800 times, right?

Wrong.

In what may be the most unsung tragedy in the United States, in the midst of lost jobs, growing debt, and global warming, FIFTY-THREE THOUSAND AND EIGHT HUNDRED people die every year from smoking-related causes despite not being smokers. Really, I couldn’t care less about the 400,000+ smokers that die every year from smoking-related causes. Those guys had it coming a mile away. But to think that one-ninth of the people that die from smoking-related complications/diseases don’t actually smoke is sickening. These are people who could live and contribute for years and years if some jerk hadn’t decided to light up and pump cancer-causing chemicals into the air, just waiting to be inhaled. Heck, the biggest at-risk group for secondhand smoke is children under the age of five. Thanks to smokers, there are children that die 72 years before life expectancy statistics say they should.

And guess what? Smoking is LEGAL. America isn’t blind to statistics. Statistics are used to make a case for new laws all the time. The odds that Barack Obama has heard about the hazards of secondhand smoke are roughly the same as the odds that a human child will be born between one day and two years after his mother becomes pregnant with him. He KNOWS people are dying. Everybody in a power position knows that smoking kills innocents. This isn’t alcohol. Alcohol actually requires the drinker to do something stupid under the influence in order to be dangerous to the outside world. At least at that point the drunkard can be found, tried, and convicted for Vehicular Manslaughter/Murder/Assault/Arson/Whatever and thrown into the can. There is no way to use someone’s lung cancer to find the person who smoked the cigarette that caused it.

Cigarette taxes bring in $19 million per year as of 2007 (And, honestly, that figure is definitely much higher now) to help fix the debt crisis. And, in the meantime, thousands of people are dying for the bottom line. No matter how the story is spun, there’s no excuse for the kind of negligence being displayed here. This isn’t a smart profit; this is mass murder.

The worst part? There isn’t a damn thing anyone can do about it. There is absolutely no way, given the selfish nature of America’s leaders, that someone in power takes the initiative to stop this. And it’s sad. In no way does making smoking illegal remove it from the country entirely, but it gets it out of the public eye and away from the people who want to live their lives. And it isn’t going to happen. The United States is going to keep pressing that button, and unlike you and me, they aren’t going to feel any remorse.

So much for the supreme law of the land, huh?

Peace,

AHS

What American High Schools Are Doing Wrong, Pt 1

Have you ever wondered what life would be like if you were an idiot?

Well, thanks to America’s high school system, there’s no need to! We’re all being made into idiots (except those who intentionally avoid the system, and in a typical situation, those guys end up beiong potheads anyway).

Wait, what was that? You’re showing me your transcript with a 4.6 GPA and a plethora of AP classes? That’s cute. But the point is not that certain people in a school are stupid. No, America’s schools are turning everyone into brainless zombies.

Let’s start off with how the major subjects in any core curriculum are taught.

MATH

I often hear the gripes of my less mathematically motivated peers. They can be paraphrased quite simply into examples like these:

“I have to memorize so many formulas for the trigonometry test!”

“The Quadratic Formula is so long, I don’t wanna memorize it!”

“How the hell do you even do this problem? It’s impossible to memorize this crap!”

Two common words in all of these: Formulas. Memorize.

Memorizing formulas…memorizing formulas…memorizing formulas…

YOU’RE DOING IT WRONG. If you think memorizing is the key to doing well in math (especially higher math), just drop any math class you’re taking right now and never look at a math problem again. Please. Sure, memorization is a key aspect to learning math just like it is in any subject, but the “why”s are far more important than the “what”s. How that formula you’re memorizing was derived or found. Why a certain method of solving a problem is the most efficient. Every great mathematician acquired these skills, which is why they had the ability to eventually conjure formulas of their own. It’s perfectly understandable that the art of problem solving (also happens to be the title of a book; it’s great for competitive mathematics) is a hard concept to teach, but making the effort to teach it will yield a far greater number of skilled mathematicians than if schools opt to force students to memorize formulas instead. Teach students how those formulas originated. Even better, let students figure out how they originated using certain pieces and ideas from the puzzle. We are not machines, after all. We cannot memorize every formula nor the conditions on when to use them, so adaptability is the key player in learning Math.

Think this is all a load of crap? Feel like going back to learning your formulas? I recently tutored a kid in SAT Mathematics for a month or so and his score went up by a bit over 100 (somewhere in the 700s), far more than his rise after previous tutoring experiences. I did not teach, recite, or force on him a single formula. Yes, this is not proof of anything (as those of you who will become statisticians will learn; a singular instance is never sufficient evidence), but it has at least convinced myself that teaching kids math methodically is pointless.

ENGLISH

Okay, so I log into Facebook, a message board, or anything with an internet social aspect to it, really. Oh, boy! I’m looking forward to all of the grammatically correct and intelligent posts tod-WHOA. WHAT?

“I think your awesome”

“your awesome”

“your”

If I read that correctly, this chick has a thought about the awesome that belongs to whoever she’s talking to. But what is the said thought? …Oh, wait. I guess she just made the simple your/you’re mistake. Hell, she might have been too lazy to type “you’re” out. No big deal. Let’s just quietly move o-OH GOD.

“alright ill take you’re dog for a walk”

…That wasn’t even the result of laziness, now was it? Why, English teachers? WHY MUST I LOOK AT THIS AMALGAMATED WALL OF GRAMMATICALLY INCORRECT TEXT?

…Okay, calm down. Calm…down. Alrighty, I think it’s about time to teach everyone some basic rules that have apparently failed to reach at least a third of all high school students in their 4 years of mandatory English classes.

Your = Possessive. i.e. “Your soul belongs to you, unless you are a ginger.”

You’re = You are. i.e. “You’re a ginger, so you have no soul.”

They’re = They are. i.e. “They’re weak pushovers who have bikes.”

Their = Possessive; group. i.e. “We should steal their bikes.”

There = Location. i.e. “The bikes are over there.”

It’s = It is. i.e. “It’s dangerous to go alone, take this.”

Its = Possessive pronoun. i.e. “The cat broke its leg so it couldn’t have gone alone anyway.”

“Should’ve” is a contraction of “should have”. “should of” is an incorrect phrase and a kitten dies every time you write it. Same with “would’ve”/”would have” except replace the s with a w.

And with that, I’m done for this section. I don’t even have to elaborate what English teachers are doing wrong here, that’s up to you to figure out.

Science and History along with other weaknesses of American secondary education such as exploitability will be discussed next time. Till then, toodles!

You know what sucks?: Feminism

And thus, I kick off my series of criticisms/complaints about stuff that I dislike. Wait, that’s wrong…

AND THUS, I kick off my series of criticisms/complaints about stuff that I LOATHE WITH EVERY FIBER OF MY BEING.

Better? Yes? No? *crickets*

First on the docket: Feminism

Feminism holds a special place in my heart. For the record, I’ve never hated a person. I’ve never hated a thing that doesn’t regularly take lives. I’ve never hated a place for reasons other than irrational sports hate. Thankfully, I am allowed to say that because feminism is an idea. And an incredibly flawed, stupid, idiotic idea that’s never been true to its name or definition.

Allow me to clarify. Feminism, by definition, is the advocation for social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men. So far, nothing’s lost on me. I get the fact that women hate being paid less than men do. I somewhat get the idea that women think that they’re pidgeon-holed into certain professions. Heck, I even get the idea that men should shut up about women staying in the gosh darn kitchen.

I hear a lot about feminism. I hear a lot of women (and some men, as well) complaining about how women don’t have an equal slice of the proverbial pie. These men and women often claim to be “feminists,” which, again, are people who advocate for women’s social, political, and othertical (No, this is not a word) rights to be equal to those belonging to men. Again, I get it. It makes sense.

But you know what really grinds my gears?

The fact that I hear none of these “feminists” clamoring for women to become draft-eligible. The fact that I haven’t heard a single one say “Hey, maybe it would be a great idea if the woman paid for half of this exorbitantly priced engagement ring!” Or what about “Huh. Maybe chivalry could be renamed ‘being nice,’ so maybe EVERYONE could practice it!”. I dunno, it just seems like people clamoring for equality should be, you know, clamoring for equality.

Heck. It’s even worse in the eyes of a silly high school student. Recently, someone in my high school’s student council decided it would be a good idea to try Homecoming Sadie Hawkins style. For those of you who don’t know, a Sadie Hawkins dance is a simple (and brilliant) concept: Girls ask guys to homecoming.

WHOA.

And, suddenly, the world of high school has tipped on its side. Thanks to a beautiful site called Facebook.com, I can briefly summarize the ensuing hilarity with a few status quotes:

“Sadie Hawkins, you say? guess I’m spending Homecoming on my couch with some ice cream!”

“screw the people who decided to make this a sadie hawkins! CHIVALRY, you stupid bigots. girls dont ask guys. it just isn’t right. we aint made for this”

“darn this im leaving this is bullcrap” (This one is slightly paraphrased)

Good grief.

So, the average feminist would love a Sadie Hawkins Homecoming, right? It gives the girls a chance to do something they never do, and promotes fairness among sexes. So why is there such an issue with asking a guy to a school dance? And, in that vein, why not help the guy pay the tab for that expensive, fancy dinner you eat before you go? Since as long as I can remember, teenage girls have accrued so many silly social advantages that it’s become the standard for the strapping young lads to do the heavy lifting while the young ladies keep saying “No… a little to the left. That’s goo- no… a little more… wait, that doesn’t look right, try moving it…” (You get the picture)

For the record, this isn’t the only culprit for my blatant sexism, but it’s certainly the biggest one. Someday, I’ll probably write about common misconceptions about female intelligence versus male intelligence, including my fresh take on why I think the male brain is easily the superior of the two. For now though: Reasons for my sexism, part one.

Adios,

AHS

Protected: A little bit of insight into the mind of AHS

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

About x, when 98 < x < XP

The smart ones out there have probably guessed my interests based on the title alone, along with the intended meaning.

Windows 98 and Windows XP are both operating systems (for the record, fuck Vista, fuck 7, and don’t even talk to me about Macs) and Windows Me debuted between the two. Along with the variable x and the “less than” operations, you probably guessed that I’m a computers/math geek.

In fact, I am an 18 year old freshman in college and I plan to double major in Mathematics and Computer Science. I hardly even know how I got here myself, as I was generally a failure in high school, barely scraping by with a barely acceptable grade point average, but various odd events have landed me acceptances into a decent number of good schools. Not gonna complain about that, but my primary goal at this point is to cease my previous foolishness and actually completing my work. You’ll probably hear me ranting about my academic struggles as well as my social struggles. (I was born mildly to moderately autistic and managed to reverse my disorder manually to some degree. Don’t give me any of that sympathy crap though, save it for the people who cannot manually solve their problems.)

My interests are pretty much limited to my two major choices, playing video games, and hookers. Wait, did I just say hookers? That’s an odd way to type out “poker”. Anyway, the main discrepancy between myself and a normal person that people have noticed is that I’m a specialist at heart. I end up becoming great at activities I focus on, but I consider any study or activity that I am not interested in a waste of time, to the point where I despise some subjects, such as History. (The fact that Samuel Adams was the second U.S. president doesn’t help me drink his beer, does it?)

As for the stuff I’ll write about…I don’t even know, guys (if you exist). I’ll have to look elsewhere for inspiration. But for now, toodles.

About the Savior With Sarcasm

Hm, quite a curious person. Yes, I’m talking about you. The one who is reading this post. This post that is about me.

I suppose I should quit being myself and actually write. I’m a seventeen year old high school senior who is currently living in Ohio. I am a college-hopeful who wishes to attend The Ohio State University or the University of Cincinnati, majoring in Premedicine or Prepharmacy (I haven’t made my mind up in that regard yet). Often, you’ll hear me bitch about the difficulties I have in my life regarding college – applications and such. This bitching will likely be stuck in somewhere just so I can get my daily rant quota.

As for my interests, you’ll quickly discover my love for history. I love any sort of history (with the notable exceptions of sub-Sahara Africa and India) but I hold a particular interest for Pre-1700’s Europe, 1500’s Japan, 200’s China, and 1890 – 1945 (pre-WWI to the end of WWII). I am also partial towards alternative history. My other interests mostly revolve around nature (hunting, hiking), movies (comedies, action), and reading (fantasy, alternative history, historical manuscripts).

My love for history has proven to me that I am very analytical in the way I approach things. Despite the fact that I am a liberal arts oriented person, I hold an interest in the sciences, biology and chemistry in particular. Regardless of that fact, I shall most often analyze something and dissect it based around historical precedents. Naturally, this sort of interest also falls over into politics. That is where you’ll most likely see my opinion about things. Politics, social issues, economic issues, and foreign policy are all valid topics that I shall likely write about, along with sports, entertainment (mostly movies, maybe some music and video games), and the struggles of a high school senior are also likely to make an appearance.

Only so that I can meet my ranting quota, of course.