On Happiness

     With many uncertainties lying in wait this year, let us not forget what makes us happy.  Not that happiness serves ultimate purpose for our lives, but that it offers emotional renewal while building psychological resilience.  From happiness we often find joy... from joy we frequently discover love.  Consider happiness the emotional gateway to high-frequency energy, boosted esteem, and healthier living.  Happiness is a choice... an emotional acceptance of circumstance... a deliberate pursuit of joy... a consciously (and eventually cultured), positive response to the realtime events that surround our every day.  While happiness (the emotion) challenges happiness (the action) to accept individual responsibility for behavioral choices, the ultimate merriment yields a beautiful sense of being.

     Concisely examined and quaintly abridged...

     Happiness is doing what you love and loving what you do.  Happiness is a continual means to even greater ends and not an end in and of itself.  Happiness is a certain self-satisfaction in a job well-done, a conviction adhered to, or a good deed done right.  Happiness is listening to your favorite song, while driving fast on the highway, and taking a glimpse at the stars above.  Happiness is seeing the smile on your family’s face when you come home from being gone a long time.  Happiness is a function of loving others wholeheartedly… it is proportional to the amount you give of yourself—the more you give of yourself, the happier you feel.

     

How to Base Jump Off the Fiscal Cliff

     As 2013 quickly approaches, Americans set lofty New Year's resolutions.  Commitments to better health, wealth, and success fill the charts.  Stocking the pantries with organics from Whole Foods, saving (or investing) with vigor, and devoting extra effort to career (or personally) enhancing endeavors, Americans storm the "new year" with a sense of renewal and personal ownership.  In the meantime President Obama cuts short a luxurious holiday getaway on Hawaii to assist the U.S. Congress and Senate in their Budget talks... hoping that the proverbial "fiscal cliff" can be averted.

     What is a fiscal cliff?  I sure hope it doesn't get in the way of my holiday vacation!  Scour the internet and you will find generalities describing it as the conundrum the U.S. faces at the turn of 2012.  Yet, more ambiguous solutions to solving the previously vague "cliff" may also be attached.  Talks of tax hikes (or reductions), expenditure reductions (or increases), and legislative expirations (or enactments) confound popular media.  Whatever the fiscal cliff is, it doesn't sound good.

     Yet, I posture: who really cares?  The popular news networks ring the buzzword "fiscal cliff" dozens of times during any given 1-hour news block.  As if the public inherently understands what this enigmatic monetary problem is, politicians and pundits ring the buzzword again and again (as if it were self-explanatory)... sometimes interchanging (R) and (D) next to interviewees and "respectable" members of government to clarify the incredibly perturbable debate.

     Before you hastily google "fiscal cliff", here's a news flash, America... the fiscal cliff has come and gone.  Our chance to peek over the ledge and determine whether or not we appreciate the view has passed.  In 2011, the United States' debt to GDP (Gross Domestic Product) ratio exceeded 100% for the first time since our country's inception.  In laymen's terms, this means that our country owes more to debt than its total market value assets.  Simpler speaking... we owe more than we're worth.

    The last U.S. federal balanced budget occurred in 2001.  Since then, Legislators and Executors merely attempt to marginalize our annual deficit (not to be confused with debt).  Annual deficits increase exponentially and add to our national debt... a national debt that currently surges past 16 trillion dollars (1 trillion dollars larger than our GDP in 2012).  Unable to balance a federal budget in the last eleven years, the federal government propels the country's fiscal health into economic insolvency.  I'm sorry, but the country's macroeconomic statistics seem more alarming than a tritely conceived "fiscal cliff".

     Brass tax... the Federal government continues to grow annually at an alarming rate.  The country's insatiable desire for Federal entitlement programs and paternalistic policies exponentiates the government's capital needs.  A divided populace  narrowly condones overt liberalizations of the U.S. constitution which appropriate greater federal powers (while stripping more civil liberties).  With a decreasing number of tax payers invested in the federal system, an economic schism forms... a nearly 50-50 split divides citizens sustaining themselves on the government dole from those who must contribute to it.  A population defined by decreasing family integrity, declining scholastic aptitude scores, and degrading physical health standards prove that the average American typically fails morally, mentally, and physically to take responsibility for himself.  Victim to those who would usurp power from the weak-hearted, ignorant, or purely apathetic, America (today) faces much larger issues than a "fiscal cliff".

     The country faces more than economic problems.  Our fiscal woes reveal deep-seated character deficiencies... and a lack of real perspective.  America did not fall off the fiscal cliff years ago, it base jumped... and is now accelerating to whatever ultimate fate awaits it at the bottom.

     As you shed a few pounds of holiday weight and explore various new year's resolutions this weekend, consider packing a parachute for America's base jump off the fiscal cliff.  Politics in 2013 expose more than a looming financial crisis.  They reveal the proverbial "man in the mirror"... the image citizens see of themselves after they critically evaluate their individual impact on the American legacy.  For those concerned about time, don't worry.  Perspective is always clearer at terminal velocity.

   

     

A Simple Reason for the Season

     I'd like to wish you a Happy, Merry Hana-kwanza-mas!  I mean... Merry, Happy Christ-anza-annukah... or is it Happy and Merry Kwan-annukah-mas?  Gosh, I get so confused this time of year.

     On the brink of Christmas Eve, people all over the world rush to the shopping malls, dining halls, and local churches.  Men who haven't seen the inside of a Macy's in 364 days brave a unique retail hell.  Women with online printouts of power tools and propane grills storm the local hardware stores (perhaps for the first time in 364 days).  Children await neatly wrapped gifts... perhaps even counting them as they begin to appear under the tree.  The nuclear family (though that be rare) chases the ghost of Christmas past... cherishing memories of old, fusing them with traditions of new, and trying ever-so-strongly to maintain a budget.

     With a conglomeration of holidays taking place within November and December, the time of year embodies more than a simple holiday celebration... it becomes its own SEASON.  The interplay between commerce and celebration strengthen.  The line between sensibility and sentimentality blend... creating a unique Seasonal spirit.  Such a spirit emboldens fiscal inhibition, dietary liberalism, and overt materialism... add a dash of religion, a splash of tradition, and a sprinkle of fiction for good measure.  A season creates its own spirit... a spirit so intoxicating that in its wake leaves individuals poorer fiscally, physically, and emotionally.  A type of "Holiday Blues" overcome avid holiday participants, often inspiring lofty New Year's resolutions and ambitious savings plans.

      I don't mean to downplay the good things that occur during the holidays... the moments that inspire miracles... the amount of goodwill and cheer that such seasonal spirit naturally promotes.  For each gift received is a gift given by someone.  For each card written with love is a heart warmed by reading such  loving words.  Conspicuous and inconspicuous acts of good friendship abound during the holidays.

     But what is everything else?  What do reindeer, chocolate-covered marshmallow snowmen, and grinches have in common?  Where is the polar express going and where did Christmas trees come from?  Ornaments, wreaths, outdoor/indoor lighting, inflatable lawn decorations, seasonal cards... a holiday for Christians, Jews, and Africans... a holiday for Pilgrims and Indians... a holiday for restoring motivation and goal-orientation... gifts and food... food then gifts... an occasional religious experience followed by gifts and food.

     During this tumultuous season, whereby the gravity of its spirit seems to suck everyone into a bizarre parallel dimension of goodwill and retail crankiness, I hope that we can all take a moment to focus our energies on something important.  Not in religious superiority, retail condescension, or vague apathy... but in REAL observation and respect for the magnitude of such seasonal abnormality.

     Perhaps we should all take a moment on this Christmas Eve to set aside the cookies, forget about a fat, white-bearded man dressed in a tight red onesie, and establish a simple reason for the season.  Free from commercial advertisement, fiscal stress, and Martha Stewart-esque interior design... a clearly crafted expression of our seasonal sentiments.  Lest we submit to lunacy, this... this crafted expression becomes the simple reason for our departure from normalcy.  To some, an establishment of tradition, religion, or pure commercialism.  To many others, a sobering calibration of true and nobel intentions to preserve notional values from a beautiful sacrifice and its consequential transformation of a spiritual worldview.

     Whatever your reason this season, keep it short and sweet.  For me this season, I assert simply... Inspire good and abide good faith (and avoid those extra sweets!).

Friendships of Good People

“Without friends, no one would want to live, even if he had all other goods.”

Aristotle

    Friendship.  What is it?  Who do we share it with?  Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics describes friendship using the greek word "philia", which denotes a more expansive concept than in modern English.  In his paper titled Friendship in Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics: An Essential Component to the Good Life, David Thunder describes philia as "a mutual attraction between two human beings... a general sociability, a desire to cooperate in shared activity of any sort, from the utilitarian business transaction to the close, personal relationship of true friends".  Philia (sometimes referred to as philos) interchanges with our modern definition of the concept... love.

     According to Aristotle every interaction between two human beings accords a measurement of friendship.  He postured that interactions were not merely convenient, platonic, or acquaintance.  Each interaction defines a friendship according to pleasure, utility, or goodness (of good people).  

     I cherish a beautiful day, today.  My wedding anniversary.  While I'd desire to write romantic, sweet-nothings to capture my emotion, I feel better inclined to highlight a concept frequently overlooked in successful relationships: friendship.  Without friendship, true love doesn't exist.  As Aristotle argues, friendship of good people is love.

     Friendships of good people (as Aristotle refers to it), embodies what we all innately imagine love to be.  The concept behind this friendship derives from complete selflessness.  Take for example a husband who cares solely and wholeheartedly for the needs of his wife.  He sets aside his personal needs and insures that his wife's needs are met.  Accordingly, his wife works tirelessly to serve her husband's needs, while foregoing her own.  Each individual reinforces each other's needs, demonstrates humility in service, and further strengthens the relational bonds of friendship.  This demonstration, Aristotle believed, defined love.

     In a society laden with "friend requests" and obligatory Christmas cards, I challenge the reader to consider the deeper sentiments of friendship and its affect on those around us.  A moment of reflection would reveal that our every interaction accords a degree of friendship with the individual we interact.  These interactions prove more intimate with our spouses and loved ones.  We honor them when we exhibit the friendship of good people.

     Oh, and to my wife (here enter sweet-nothing previously avoided),  I'm honored to be your husband and marvel at the fruits of our friendship... I love you dearly and cherish each moment with you! (Brownie points... #public display of affection)

     

Connecticut: A Challenging View On Political Agenda

     Gun law activists mobilize in response to Connecticut's recent tragedy.  Their outcry for stricter gun laws and greater oversight on the sale of arms begins to fill the news.  Pundits respond by posing two distinct aspects against each other: our culture versus our guns.  Familiar mantras resurface: "guns don't kill people, people kill people" and "it's our culture that enables violent gun use".  The country frames the issue, ceiling the box it believes it belongs in... narrowly establishing the paradigm for which others must be expected to debate.

     This debate is rigged... politicians and pundits hold the public hostage to moronic statistics... reducing the argument to emotion and sensationalism.  Taking the public down their specified rabbit hole for political gain, they avoid the tough questions... they defer real and logical discussions.  We've got to wake up, folks!

     The CDC reported in October of 2012 that the United States averaged 16,799 homicides per year of which 11,423 were the cause of firearms (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm).  The unknowing gun activist may engage the apparent statistic... that roughly 2/3 or all homicides are committed by firearms... but what do these numbers mean?   I contend that while guns make the act of homicide more successful it doesn't make mortality more rampant.

     In the same report, the CDC cites that over 36,000 people commit suicide annually... nearly 35,000 people die annually from motor vehicle accidents... just under 25,000 people unintentionally fall to their death... and a whopping 32,000 people unintentionally poison themselves to death.  These numbers indicate that people have proven to be statistically more likely to intentionally (or unintentionally) harm themselves... by way of something other than a firearm... than to inflict harm on others.  Why is this relevant?

     When is the last time you saw politicians mobilize to reduce national suicides? Guns don't kill people, people kill people (suicide... case and point).  When have you seen them legislate staircases, buildings, and bridges... can we blame such objects for death falls?  Despite massive numbers of motor vehicle deaths, why aren't politicians taking cars off the streets?  We've proven less capable to responsibly own these 2-ton machines than firearms.
   
     The real question: why are politicians and activists alike so interested in prohibiting or protecting gun laws?  Statistically, firearm-related homicides contribute a fractional amount to the nation's annual mortality rate... numerically paling in comparison to more psychologically startling fatality acts such as suicide.  What's wrong with our Constitutional right to bear arms (2nd Amendment)?  If we deem such an amendment to be flawed, should we consider adding an amendment to restrict motor vehicle ownership (which has proven far more dangerous)?

     Politicians and activists ultimately know that it's not about principle... it's about power.  Strict constitutionalists and loose constitutionalists debate the relevance of expressed and implied powers of the constitution.  As more loose interpretations of the constitution take center stage like divas and strict interpretations sit on the sideline like poorly fabricated sock-puppets, the country idles in the audience... waiting to throttle the sensationalism of popular media.

     My sorrow deepens as the media reduces such an event to power politics and cliche tabloid headlines.  The issues associated with such a tragedy transcend gun laws and cultural mores.   They expose a conspicuous war on our constitution... a bloodless but fatal engagement, which has hidden a great many tragedies within American society... leaving a multitude of grieving families unconsoled... lest their losses parade a political position.

    Grief overwhelms my pen.  My deepest condolences are to the families of the victims in Connecticut.  To the innocent and heroic victims in Connecticut, your life and sacrifice are remembered.
     

   

Someone Somewhere (Poem)

A poem to stretch your perspective...

In a place far from here, a place near there,

Someone somewhere is doing something for everything.

A nobody becomes somebody while fighting for one thing,

One thing that means everything to everyone somewhere.

Sometimes it is nothing for anyone anywhere else,

But for someone somewhere it is something everywhere.

For nothing done is everything lost for someone somewhere,

All forgotten in a place near there, not far from here.

So for someone somewhere another’s anything is everything

That gains something for everyone one time in some place.

A dream about something and someone some place near,

Where someone somewhere will somehow everything.

Bike helmet: Use it or Lose it!

     I recently noticed a UPS delivery person carting dozens of package via her bike and bike-trailer.  Atop her head was a curiously small bike helmet that was so small she had to steer her bike with one hand while her other hand fastened the helmet to her head.  Our state does not carry a law for people of her age to wield bike helmets (though UPS may have), but it begged an important question: what's the point in the bike helmet?  Had she toppled her bike, she would have used both hands to brace her fall (allowing the helmet to fall off her head) and risked a serious head injury!    

    This trend of foolish bike helmet use grows among young bicyclists in my neighborhood as well.  They all wear bike helmets (how responsible)... but they leave the chin straps unfastened (dumb).  I understand that bicycle laws in our state require many of these young folks to wear helmets... but the older folks are not (http://www.iihs.org/laws/HelmetUseCurrent.aspx).  Nonetheless, unfastened bike helmets defy both the intent and functionality of the required equipment.  While many of our safety conscious states mandate that individual bicyclists dawn their helmets,  I suppose the laws don't explicitly require these bicyclists to fasten these cranial safety devices to their heads.  What sort of shallow legislation leaves out these important details!

     Personally, I don't care whether you have to pick up your brains off the curb or not after a major spill... it should be your personal choice as to whether you use a bike helmet or not during your Sunday Fun-day.  But let's not put on false pretenses.  Individuals wearing unfastened bike helmets defeat both the intent of the law and the functionality of the equipment... so,  use 'em or lose 'em, folks!

     

Wrapping Paper: The New Commodity

     With the fiscal cliff fast approaching, American investors scour the markets searching for financial safe havens.  Again, talks of investing in commodities flood the popular news networks.  Buy gold.  Silver.  Oil.  Cattle.  Land.  Stark predictions fill the tabloids: The world order is collapsing... the good ole' greenback depreciates beyond recognition...  apocalypse looms in the near-future!  So, of course, commodities would be worth more than the green rags in your wallets.

     Now, don't get me wrong.  I think gold and silver are viable investments.  Additionally, I believe oil will maintain significant value for the foreseeable future.  I don't know much about cattle and land, but they sound more reliable than paper money in the event that a geopolitical holocaust starves the world of order and sound judgment (thereby stripping the civilized world of its method... leaving mere madness and hellish chaos).  If the economy as we know it spirals into a financial cesspool, these standard commodities probably give the greatest chance for fiscal strength.

     With Christmas just around the corner, however, I'd like to offer an additional commodity: wrapping paper.  Wrapping paper has proven to be both socially irreplaceable and limited in supply.  Sure, it sounds funny (even stupid), but so is the concept of wrapping paper!  Since when did we have to double surprise people with gifts?  It's not enough to give someone a gift (which would be the first surprise).  We must also conspicuously wrap it in delicate paper ornate with stamped reindeer and undetachable tape (surprise two).  Though ridiculous, wrapping gifts has become a social norm.  Rarely does one receive a gift that is not wrapped, packed, or bagged with special love and a hallmark greeting card.  As long as we perpetuate such hilarity, wrapping paper remains a mainstay in American gift-giving.

     Wrapping paper suffers from scarce supply but high demand.  Some may think they can retrieve another roll from the local supermarket, but they have never run out of wrapping paper and been forced to fuse two dissimilar patterns.  It's absurd!  If you're going to secure your favorite prints, you have to buy dozens of rolls of wrapping paper from your local door-to-door school fundraiser.  Limited designs create quick sales in large magnitudes... no one wants awkwardly dissimilar wrap jobs.

     What about directions for using wrapping paper?  No one teaches a man how to wrap a gift.  The art implies inefficiencies which exhaust large amounts of wrapping paper.  Before long, a man's "flop-chop n' fold" method expends multiple rolls of wrapping paper on a few oddly shaped gifts.  Subsequently, more wrapping paper is purchased.  A new print is required.  More wrapping paper is purchased to match old wrapping paper.  Increased demand causes short supply.  Short supply creates ever increasing demand... hence causes ridiculous prices for cheaply crafted snowmen on weakly fabricated paper that scissors can't cleanly tear.  More school fundraisers are required to sell more door-to-door wrapping paper.  The cycle continues...

     If you ask me, with the fiscal cliff looming, forget your hoards of gold and silver... leave the oil in the ground... instead, I recommend you stock up on wrapping paper... lots and lots of snowman/reindeer/red-laced/shiny/pre-pressed/re-pressed/recycled wrapping paper.

   

    

Holiday Equality

     A recent email has been circulating the web capturing a Ben Stein interview with CBS from December 2005.  In this interview Ben Stein talks explicitly about his frustration with people picking on Jews and Christians... more generally, those you believe in God (see the following website for Ben Stein's full dialogue http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/confessions.asp).  Specifically, he calls out atheists on their assault on Christmas... highlighting the way they push vague generalities that couldn't otherwise indicate a celebration dedicated to religion i.e. "Holiday Trees" or "Happy Holidays".  I applaud Ben Stein for his boldness and unique perspective on the social issue, but what if we demanded a stricter paradigm on such religious assault?  Instead of demanding the persecution to desist, what if we called for atheists and agnostics to assault each holiday equally!

     If "Merry Christmas" should be turned into "Happy Holidays," then what does that say for every other holiday we celebrate?  In all fairness to Atheistic semantics, we should honor each holiday with a vague and unsentimental "Happy Holidays".  Forget Happy Valentine's Day, Happy Memorial Day, or Happy 4th of July.  Instead, let us associate them together... religious or irreligious... as vague "Holidays".  In fact, why should we consider saying "Happy Thanksgiving"?  Instead, let us relish in good food and cheery fellowship in the name of yet another "Happy Holiday".

     Sure, Atheists would say that they oppose the overtly religious symbols of the Christmas Holiday because such expressions are offensive... but aren't we abridged religious freedom as American citizens?  If I didn't believe in love, could I complain that Valentine's Day was offensive and should be referred to as a mere "Holiday"?  If I didn't believe in our Independence, would I be justified in calling Independence Day, "Holiday"?  It sounds stupid, right?  Because inevitably most people don't care how others celebrate their personal holidays... religious or irreligious.  If anything, our nation has promoted diverse religious expression since its inception.

     Hence, the movement to abolish Christmas captures simpler but deeper frustrations from within the Atheist community.  How can you disprove God (see Stephen Hawking's "The Grand Design" for ideas)?  The quest must exhaust devout Atheists.  Ultimately, Christians are content when they cannot fully explain God... they define this as faith.  Atheists are stricken with anger when they cannot disprove him... this is called doubt.  To wit, the celebration of Christmas to Christians won't change even if the title does... because their faith is rooted in the spiritual sentimentalism of the season.  But what do Atheists gain if the season is still celebrated but the title changes?

     I say, let 'em have it... they need it more than Christians.  But just one request of those doubting Atheists... please treat EVERY Holiday with equal disrespect!

Beware: You Might Be a Libertarian

     Approaching the "fiscal cliff" (whatever that actually means), a new political hybrid emerges.  Conciliatory Democrats gawking at overt spending increases explain their true political ideology... "I'm fiscally conservative but socially liberal".  Oh, well that makes sense.  NOT!

     What does that mean to be fiscally conservative but socially liberal?

     When you meet these people (and they are everywhere!), ask them.  They'll be more than happy to explain their seemingly peaceful hybrid.  Here's an example mini-dialogue:

***

Me: What does it mean to be fiscally conservative but socially liberal?

Them: I think we should manage our money responsibly... like anyone else. But I'm also in favor of abortion, universal healthcare, and welfare.  Republicans typically don't support those things.

Me: Who should spend money on those things?

Them: We should.  Don't you feel that we should support people in need?

Me: I do... that's why I do!

Them: What do you mean?

Me: I work a job to support my family... I give additional savings to my local church or mission... and I muster what I can to assist when neighbors appear to be in need.

Them: Yeah, well, I mean.  We all do that.  That's just a part of being a good human being... taking care of those around us.

Me: 47% of Americans don't pay taxes. An estimated 18% of Americans are unemployed, underemployed, or have stopped searching for work.  Are these the Americans that are taking care of those in need?

Them: Well, we should be taking care of them... that's my point.

Me: Who should be taking care of them? The 53% that do pay taxes ... the 82% of working-aged Americans that have secured reasonable job security (for now)?  Or do we each have an obligation to take care of our own families, missions, and neighbors... as you previously stated?

Them: We all have an obligation to our own families... that would be silly not too.  But we should help those who are in need, too.

Me: Who should help them?

Them: We should.  I already said that.

Me: Who is "we"?

Them:  You and me... you're starting to irritate me!

***

     Ultimately, we find that a reasonable discussion lends a reasonable conclusion.  Most of us want to be financially conservative... which typically indicates that we want to restrain unnecessary expenditures and live within our means.  Most of us believe this way because this is how we are forced to make ends meet in our homes.  If we spent like the federal government in our homes, we'd probably be forcibly removed from our homes, cars, and children... bankrupt and destitute on the streets... because lenders wouldn't give us money we hadn't proven to pay back, and job markets wouldn't hire us for jobs because we hadn't proven ourselves responsible.

     So, the "fiscally conservative" sentiment reigns true of most Americans... conceded.  Yet, what of social liberalism?  When I speak with most people (Democrats or Independents) who espouse this ideology, they almost always concede each American's individual obligation to each other.  While the Federal Government can be a vessel for giving/charity/assistance, help for those in need must be derived from the people for the people.  Circling back on a previous notion, who then is responsible for meeting the needs of those in need?  We are... as most social liberals will admit.  So, where does the Federal Government fit in?

     This, I posture, leads to infinite confusions about Federal mechanisms for assisting people in need.  Debate as to whether the private (us) or public (government) sector more adequately fulfills specific needs typically ensues.  Nonetheless, the concept of "us" as "you and me" NOT as "you and me via a federal medium" prevails.

     In circuitous fashion I lament that most people espousing this absurd hybrid of fiscal conservatism and social liberalism express libertarian hues.  For the tried-and-true libertarian, the predominance of responsibility lies on the individual and not the government... for who can take care of his neighbor better than another neighbor?  Libertarians espouse financial responsibility... because they try to limit the size of Federal Government... typically to a size representative to the express powers in the Constitution.  The natural reduction in government and associated public services streamlines federal taxes, federal laws, and federal entitlements (which some will undoubtedly miss).

     Yet, libertarians typically espouse social liberalism... not in the collective sense of the term but in the independent sense.  A libertarian may not believe in abortion, but he doesn't believe in the Federal Government's right to abridge or revoke that right to the populace at large.  With more rights decentralized to the state and municipal level, libertarians believe (as most of us innately do) that our individual mandate to assist each other leads to greater efficiencies in local welfare programs, state-lead medicare, or timeless good samaritan-ism.

     Next time you hear of someone richly espousing their enlightened political ideology... fiscally conservative while socially liberal... shake their hand and observe their befuddlement as you say, "We need a few more LIBERTARIANS like you to get our country back on track!"

Plato and Pop Culture

     How to begin a blog so confusingly labeled "Plato and Pop Culture"?  Like many others who have thrown their two cents on the worldwide web, I too intend to throw my frequent (or lesser so) penny-wagers for the world to critique.

     According to Plato, "All the gold which is under or upon the earth is not enough to give in exchange for virtue".  This, my ultimate expression of the juxtaposed label to this writing, reveals a hopeful theme for future blogs... a renewed discourse on virtue and its essential role in defining pop culture.

     Trite evaluations of our nation's social trends would bore the heck out of today's reader.  An engaged (and hopefully entertaining) perspective on different elements of our society, however, serves to promote higher levels of citizenry and encourage intellectually grounded ideas.  

     This blog site should entice the scholar, the statesman, and the consummate professional... inspiring thought provoking sentiments and fruitful wisdom... lending insights and ideas that would restore virtue in pop culture.