Ching Chong Ling Long Ting Tong

I live in the Bay Area, so I don't see as much of a racial divide between Asians and other cultures because there are so many Asians here, as opposed to some other areas such as the East Coast.

UCLA is a pretty Asian-heavy populated school. So, why do I see videos like THIS?

 

I'm pretty sure that Asians aren't the only ones who talk on their phones in the library. I've seen obnoxious people from all races. Why does she have to hate like that? FYI, you don't know when you're about to have an epiphany. An epiphany is defined as SUDDEN, which means it's UNEXPECTED.

Ching Chong Ling Long Ting Tong, everyone.

Being Ninja

The state of Wisconsin is in an uproar after the Senate passed the Anti-Union Bill, restricting collective bargaining rights of public union workers. It's a big hullabaloo because people are upset that the Republican legislators could be so clandestine about an important bill and "outmaneuver" the missing Democrats, as NPR puts it. I have to say that taking out the economic components of the bill that required the presence of the Democrats-in-hiding was pretty sneaky - clever or wrong, I can't really say because my knowledge of the law is next to zero.

What I do know is this: the Democrats are just "butt-hurt" (upset) that even though they tried to run away and hide in Illinois to think of a counter plan, the Republicans still managed to pass this bill. But what I also realize is that the Republicans always say they want to turn back to the old traditional way of politics and do everything clean-cut and put all politics out in the open for the public to see. So, why be secretive? Why make a sketchy move that the public so obviously disapproves of?

We can't be hypocritical, folks. But oh Democratic senators of Wisconsin...what else did you think was going to happen when you ran away and hid? Come out, come out, wherever you are.

Pooper Paper

 So, I was visiting a local stationery store and as soon as I walk in, I see a giant display advertising "PooPooPaper". I start to read the labels and I soon discover it's made out of REAL, GENUINE ELEPHANT POO. Fantastic.


Let's take a couple of steps back now and really think about what I just said. There is paper made out of an animal's feces being sold in an actual store for profit. I'm all for supporting the environment and minimizing the effects of the human race and pollution by recycling and re-using stainless steel water bottles, but I draw the line. I used to have this notebook made completely out of recycled paper and bananas - it was kind of cool; it was not edible though, just saying. I just don't understand the point of making paper made out of poop. Is someone trying to make a statement? Because I'm not getting it.

Click HERE to find out more about PooPoo Paper.

I Have the Right

The protests and picketing at the funeral of Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder were absurd. You don't just march on down to funerals and hold up signs that say "God hates you!" and "Fags Doom Nations!". You can be anti-homosexual all you want - be a homophobic. But, don't go imposing your beliefs on other people and ruining sacred moments of others.

I'm not surprised that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that these picketers had the right to do so due to the First Amendment, but I'm surprised it was such a landslide of a vote. Also, as a side note, props to Elena Kagan (colloquial language, yes) for voting for what she believed was legally correct, though she may have been more personally offended - that is what makes a great justice. Anyways, back to the subject, so where do we draw the line? People are always saying that they have the RIGHT to do certain things. But, when you put things in perspective, you have to ask yourself, "To what extent will I exercise this right?" During a sacred, precious moment which is PRIVATE, there should be no protesting. It's wrong. You can't use language like that, either. This is just like the '50s when people were calling African-Americans the N* word - it's just really not acceptable at all. Intolerant people infuriate me.

But, when I think about it, the verdict is well-supported and I have to say I ultimately agree. They didn't march all over the casket and start yelling at the funeral attendees. They were 1,000 feet away and took the necessary steps to have a public protest. So, in that, they really can do whatever they want. Common sense-wise...SHOULD you do something like that? No.

Not at all.

I feel like that's similar to having a Jewish Holocaust victim being buried in a ceremony, and having a bunch of Neo-Nazis protesting 1,000 feet away. It's just weird and wrong. What happened to God loving every single person, just the way they were? And forgiveness?

Time to Intervene

Now that all Americans have reportedly been evacuated from Libya and the U.S. Embassy has been shut down in Tripoli, I'm glad that President Obama and his administration have proposed economic sanctions. Freezing the assets of Gaddafi is something I also agree with, obviously. I think it's interesting that in the 21st century, the fastest, and often times the simplest, way is to "attack" financially. Although Gaddafi has a reported amount of billions and billions of dollars, he's trapped in a corner, no?

He's doing everything he can to cling to his power, though the people have spoken. I feel like this is an accelerated version of the American Revolution inspiring the French Revolution. But I hope the Libyan Revolution is 10x more successful with positive long-term effects, than the French's in the 19th century. Anyways, it is like a good domino effect, where the corrupt and dogmatic regimes across the globe will slowly fall one by one. But how will the UN, the world, and the United States react? How much influence does the UN Security Council actually have, and how fast can they act? But of course, we have to think of the humanitarian aid that must be sent to Libya and protecting the foreigners in Libya who must be escorted safely out of the country.

My brain starts to hurt when I start to think about all the things that must be considered before taking any action, politically. I just hope the United States plays it smart and doesn't start something we can't finish and simply works with the international community as a whole to solve this crisis.

*Cue Secret Agent Music*

When I think CIA, I think of retinal scan security, laser technology weapons, hundreds of passports and identities, and whatever else the media feeds me. I'm a human being, what can I say?

But when I read news about anything CIA-related, it's big hype. Just like Raymond Davis, currently held in Pakistan - illegally or legally, I don't really know.

Apparently, he's not an agent, but a protector of U.S. officials. The U.S. government insists that he maintains diplomatic immunity because he is part of the "staff" at the United States Embassy in Islamabad. If, indeed, Davis works for the Embassy, in accordance with the Vienna Convention of 1961, he must be offered diplomatic immunity in order to perform his duty - which, supposedly, is to "protect case officers when they meet with sources," according to NPR. Of course, the United States is going to bring out the BIG GUNS...not literally. We're going to threaten Pakistan and say we'll cut off our billions of dollars of funding if Davis isn't released - that's how it always works, no?

All governments do shady things, and I, personally, believe that the United States government should do whatever it takes to put the safety of OUR nation first. (I'm reminded of the West Wing episode where the President approves a clandestine assassination of a foreign minister.) So, if Davis is actually an agent doing reconnaissance on militant groups, so be it. I won't hold that against him.

Groups and Unions, What Role Should They Play?

We're all hearing about the protests in Wisconsin due to what President Obama calls "[the Republican] assault on unions", according to The New York Times. The Republican party is known for their general dislike of unions and the new Congressmen who have taken over the House are obviously aiming to limit the negotiating powers of union workers, such as teachers.

When I think unions, I think of my AP U.S. History learning and why labor unions were first established - to fight corrupt, large businesses. Of course, over time, the unions have been steadily gaining more clout; the benefits and such of being part of a union are something to take into consideration when first looking for a job, no? But all in all, what's wrong with having large groups of people band together to fight for (maybe) higher wages and more workers' rights! Well, I have no problem with it. My only concern is this: Where do you draw the line? How much power do you allow these unions to have?

Yes, there are companies that labor unions fight against for better wages and work hours, and whatnot, but honestly, we all know that conditions now are a little bit better than oh, say, the early 1900s when Teddy Roosevelt went around as the big "trust-buster". Our economy is slowly getting back up on its feet, so people are suffering - a majority, if not all.

No matter how much you disagree, I don't think it's right for the Congressmen to simply "walk out" and leave the state to avoid having to confront the issue. This extreme act only displays their immaturity and inability to deal with these kinds of problems head-on, to fight for what they believe in. Same goes for the all the Republican legislators who have done so in the past, too, (click HERE to read about past walk-outs). Grow up, folks. Grow up.

Who Are Our Allies?

Iran still has a nuclear missiles program in the works.

Israel is our supposed ally. But, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has gone on for too long.

Why do we have such issues in the Middle East all the time? The U.S. government wants to support a U.N. Security Council statement denying support to Israel's continued settlement. It's a political move, but I think that it's appropriate seeing that Israel continues to make illegal settlements onto Palestinian land. Israelis claim that they own this land after the Six-Day War in 1967, but nobody in the international community recognizes this land as Israel's. In fact, it's still considered illegal. Although Israel is an ally, the United States is making, what I believe to be, a right move towards international diplomacy. If we ever want peace between Israelis and Palestinians, these "settlements" and communities of Israeli civilians need to be dissipated.

On another note, it makes me a little more nervous with Israel's reports of Iranian's transporting of, what the U.S. government is saying is, "unknown" goods/products to Syria through the Suez Canal. Sketchy.

A Natural Right

Is every human being entitled to freedom and liberty? The United States was founded on the principles of "natural rights." We are entitled to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Former President George W. Bush had his Freedom Agenda, which is based on this idea of a natural right to liberty - every mean wants to have his own liberty. In this opinion piece, Lee Smith talks about how President Bush has the right to say he was right. Everyone judged the Freedom Agenda, because this policy towards the Middle East seemed doomed for failure after what happened in Iraq.

But, looking back, the former president wasn't so far off, was he? The people of Egypt have spoken and have been heard by the government, as evidenced by the former President Mubarak's addressing of the public and his resignation. Sure, we're not sure if this transition of power will remain within the confines of the legal restrictions of Egypt's constitution, but fundamentally, the people's outcries reflect this idea that every person wants liberty. I think each "man" is entitled to it, too.

So, when everyone was bashing President George W. Bush for his ridiculous notions of being idealistic and wanting democracy everywhere, think about right now, this very moment. It won't' happen over night, but it's happening. The repressed will rise up, some day.

O'Reilly vs. Obama

From what I saw online of the discussion between Fox News Bill O'Reilly and President Obama, it's obvious where O'Reilly stands - no doubt. But we already knew that O'Reilly leans towards the "right" end of the political spectrum.

Overall, I think the conversation went much better than a conversation between Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck and the President would have went. However, I still don't like this whole "let's-interrupt-the-other-person" thing. If you ask a question, even if you're having a debate of sorts, you have to let the other person finish. Whenever I watch the news and the news anchor asks a liberal and a conservative questions, the two representatives of their political parties start going at it. Nobody lets the other finish. You just look like a fool who can't control yourself if you just start talking and talking and try to talk OVER the other person.

But I think that O'Reilly did a good job representing Fox News, putting them perhaps in a more moderate light, since Obama's administration did say that Fox News wasn't a real news network - ouch.

Under Age

There are a lot of laws that have to do with age in the United States - drinking, smoking, federal punishment, etc.

When I heard about the 13-year-old boy who was viciously attacked in Philadelphia, I just feel sick to the stomach. He was kicked, dragged around through the snow, hung upside down from a tree, thrown upon a fence, and even more, by 7 teens. These teens, by the way, go to an alternative school because they have reported behavioral issues - GEE, I wonder why?

I hear about bullying, but I've never actually witnessed something like this. Seeing the images caught on videotape by one of the attackers' cellphone makes it just that more real and personal. How could nobody have seen this happen? Do communities not pay attention to their fellow citizens anymore like they used to? Is everybody just too busy to look around, look outside, and check up on his/her neighbors?

This boy is right though - the friends of the attackers will continue to bully him. What can he do? Realistically. Change schools? The attackers are minors and will thus go to juvenile hall or some other correction facility. In federal prison, they would serve something around 20 years, but no - they're only in juvy.

Naughty, Naughty

I see this article by The Telegraph about alleged American involvement in the uprisings and rebellions in Cairo, Egypt, and I think to myself, "This isn't the first time..."

Sadly, the United States has backed rebellious groups in countries, particularly Iran, to overthrow or undermine the government. So, these accusations aren't all that surprising. I think the United States needs to stop trying to install democratic governments across the globe - you can't force people to do what you want and have happy nations. The United States is a protector and support of democracies; this does not mean we have the right to go to other countries and impose our ideals and beliefs on them because we believe that democracy is the only way to go. This just makes our relations with the international community that much more tense and difficult.

Oh WikiLeaks.

Compare:

President Ronald Reagan's State of the Union Address in 1981


President Obama's State of the Union Address in 2011

Enough said?

2011 State of the Union Address

"Where does it go after the words are spoken?" That's what I heard while watching the live stream of Wall Street Journal commentators online.

After an "uplifting" speech from our President, what action is actually going to be taken?

I enjoyed the central theme of the speech - to come together and do what is necessary, not popular. To be quite honest, his words about the banks really reminded me of FDR and his trust-busting. But, is it really Main Street vs. Wall Street again? I thought the President wanted to bring everyone together - "one country, one people." So, why bring up that argument again.

"It's because of this spirit, this great decency and great strength, that I have never been so hopeful about America's future than I am tonight," says President Obama. And then, a standing ovation is given. Then, Vice President Biden starts to clap a few minutes later, but nobody joins him. It's so funny.

On the other hand, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin had an all-too-realistic speech. I don't think he did nearly as good of a job reaching out and connecting with the American people. I, personally, liked some of the ideas he talked about, especially limited government. But, why does the GOP have such a hard time connecting with the masses? Not the Tea-Party fanatics, the general population of the U.S.

P.S. Vice President Biden...You can't start nodding at President Obama's speech in the first 3 minutes of his speech when he hasn't said anything of real substance yet.

Click HERE for an interesting article about Mr. President's "facts" in his speech.

Whose Place is It, Anyways?

Schools. We go to school to learn. We go to school to gather the fundamentals to build upon them later in life and to develop our own perspective on the world. I don't go to school to hear teachers telling me what to believe or what not to believe. It's ultimately my decision.

Some teachers I've had are excellent at maintaining an apolitical standpoint during class discussions in classes such as AP U.S. History. But, it really bothers me when other teachers start to interject their own political biases and opinions. It's okay to take jabs at certain political parties, as long as you're making the equal amount of jabs at the other political parties. There has to be a balance of some sort, don't you think? If someone bashes CNN and MSNBC, then it's only fair to bash Fox News. When I can't figure out what political orientation a teacher has, I think that the teacher has succeeded in teaching me what I need to know - no more, no less. But, when I tell my friends, "Oh, yeah. That teacher bashes ____ all the time. They must be of _____ party," I think there's something wrong.

I know in elementary schools, high schools, and colleges across the nation, there are probably teachers who aren't necessarily doing their job. They step over the boundaries. But, how do kids stand up to that? Tell their parents? What about handling it on their own? Have we created a society where it's not okay to stand up in a classroom and say that you don't agree that abortion is the right way to go?

Perhaps. And if we have created such a society, then what do we do. Democracy is all about majority rule, but minority rights. Let's not forget that.

'Ole Huck Finn

People ban books. People censor inappropriate images. But, I don't think it's really necessary to take out the "n-word" from the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, by Mark Twain. Yes, in the 21st century we're not allowed to use the "n-word" against African-American people because it's quite offensive. I completely agree.

But Twain's infamous masterpiece was written in the 19th century, when it was normal to refer to people of black color as "n-word." So, this idea to continue reprinting of controversial novels such as this is ridiculous. We could be spending our time doing other things, no? It just shocks me that parents would sue a high school over requiring their child to read this book full of "racial slurs." Yes. In the 19th century, slavery was still a very real thing. It seems that everyone in today's society wants to sue everyone else when something bothers them - it can be anything from a cup of tea that's too hot and burns their tongue to a simple book. I think people today are just too self-involved and lack common sense. It's okay to have these characteristics, but at least recognize you have them.

Operation: Embarass the Girl

Kids are cruel; we all get that.

At school, there's always assemblies on bullying. A rising threat in today's society is cyber-bullying/stalking. Just recently, two girls were arrested for the "stalking" of a minor under the age of 16. They created a fake Facebook profile, uploading inappropriate (some nude) pictures with the minor's face photo-shopped onto obscene images.

These two girls who allegedly created this fake profile thought it'd be funny; the poor victim was teased and tormented because of all the pictures and comments on the Facebook page. Boys are mean and violent, but girls can be just plain vicious.

We wonder why there is such a high depression rate and suicide rate amongst teenagers and young adults here in the United States - this is why. People don't respect each other anymore and the internet is often used as a means of targeting people anonymously. So these two girls call this kind of hoax a joke. I think it's a joke that they're making fun of their former "friend," but in the end, they were caught and they're in legal trouble. Did they really have nothing better to do with their time than to make a fake Facebook profile?

Somebody sounds a little insecure.

For more info, click here.

Chinese Moms

If you haven't, yet, you should read the article on the Wall Street Journal about Chinese mothers; it's written by a Chinese mother, Amy Chua, who is a professor at Yale Law School.

Essentially, it talks about her approach to disciplining and raising her two daughters, instilling certain values in them. Personally, I think she's over the top. If you look at the list of the things her daughters CAN'T do, they include: 1) no going to sleepovers 2) no participating in school plays 3) not complaining about not being in the school plays 4) never being allowed to get lower than an A on anything...and the list really does go on and on.

What I was more interested in was the fundamental differences between "Chinese" or Asian cultures and Western cultures is that Asian moms aren't afraid to tell their kids the truth. These days, people in the U.S. are all about being sensitive to people's feelings. You NEVER tell someone they're fat, even though they may be overweight and you're just looking out for them. People need to hear the truth. And you know what? THE TRUTH HURTS.

A lot of Western parents are okay with B+'s, B's, and B-'s. I know that was never the case at my house; no B's allowed - really. It really instills this idea that you can achieve anything if you put your mind to it. Like Professor Chua says, you don't start to like something until you're good at it. So, instead of allowing your kids to be complacent and accept mediocrity, sometimes you have to push your kids a little to help them to understand that value of hard work.

You have to find a balance.

Arizona Rep. Shot

Democratic Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords has been shot while holding a small event at a Safeway in Tuscon. A gunman came up and shot her in the head from four feet away.

I'm ashamed to say that the gunman, who is now in custody, is reportedly in his "late teens or early 20s" by NPR. My generation really just thinks impulsively. Why did he shoot her? I have no idea what his motives are. What I do know is that you can't just go and shoot someone because you're unhappy with the status quo or because you're unhappy in general. If you're angry at a government official or policies being implemented, you write letters and formally address your concerns. You find some kind of diplomatic and peaceful way to get your message across.

Why do people think that just because you kill someone, the issue goes away? Is it some kind of attempt at becoming a symbolic martyr? You just seem like a fool, perhaps ruining things for the group of people who are trying to deal with the same issues in a more direct and calm way.

I pray for Rep. Giffords.

Shift in Power

There's a new Speaker of the House. The Republican party holds the majority in the House. I see more of a balance, now, in the government. Remember, there has to be a balance of power here.

So, why are Democrats so outraged and so determined to put Nancy Pelosi back into her old position? Maybe they're scared that Obama's absurd plans won't be passed now...Regardless, the people have spoken. They obviously are displeased with the "change" Obama and his adminstration have brought; get it? A change from the change.

Sometimes, I think that people forget that these representatives and senators are supposed to be the speakers for the people they represent. They have to always take into consideration what the people of their state or district want and be that voice in government to relay the people's desires to the people in charge. But, along the way, I think it becomes more of a power struggle and what each party wants, not necessarily what the people want.

Hello 21st Century College Students.

The Correct Term

What's more appropriate:"illegal alien" or "undocumented immigrant"?

I think that the people who come to the United States, crossing our borders, illegally, are illegal aliens. They are not simply undocumented immigrants. They are criminals who have crossed the border, cutting the other people who get green cards, apply for citizenship, and are waiting in line. Why soften it up and change the term to undocumented immigrant? Leo Laurence of Quill Magazine made some silly remark saying that the Society of Professional Journalists is advocating the changing the term "illegal immigrant" because it is politically incorrect.

Silly Leo. It's funny that the Society of Professional Journalists then goes to publish a note on its website: "The views expressed by Leo Laurence in Quill Magazine, SPJ's Diversity Committee blog "Who's News," and on subsequent television programs are his personal opinion and do not reflect the views of SPJ nor its Diversity Committee. Contrary to what has been reported, SPJ has not engaged in any initiative to end the use of the term 'illegal immigrant.'"

Is it a crime to come into the United States illegally, even if it's just so that he/she and his/her family can have a better life?

Yes.