Adam: Going unSteady

In the past five years divorce attorneys have reported that the amount of prenuptial agreements has increased.

This isn't surprising considering (as I'm sure all of you have heard hundreds of times) the divorce rate in America is 50% for first marriages according to Jennifer. But what a lot of people don't know is that Baker has also found that 67% of second marriages end in divorce and even more surprisingly 74% of third marriages end in (you guessed it) divorce.

These types of statistics upset me. At no point in life are you less than a coin flip likely to end your marriage. For those of you who are technical, Webster defines marriage as:

a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage

Contractual relationship recognized by law? Is that what America thinks of marriage? No wonder half of them don't last. It is also no surprise that more and more Americas are getting prenups. In the eyes of Webster marriage is nothing more than dating for adults. I guess once you are finished dating you want your class ring back (or in adult terms your retirement funds).

I believe marriage is something more than just between a man and a woman. I believe it is a commitment before God. If God is removed from marriage then it becomes corrupt and faulty.

This is exactly what has happened in America, we have taken the engine out of the car and have no idea why it doesn't run. I have no problem with the divorce rates in the country the only problem I have is the government selling a cheap imitation and calling it marriage. If you are going to remove the central purpose from marriage then call it something else. I think differentiating the two relationships would help identify the source of divorce rates. If you are in a consensual contractual relationship recognized by law call it what it is... a civil union. If you are in a consensual contractual relationship recognized by God call it what it is...marriage.

Go Bucks

Travis: Facebook Stalkers.

In present day American society we have things that profile us. We have a drivers licenses, a social security number, bank accounts, credit cards, all these objects and more offer information about some of our most private affairs. We are typically private with this sort of sensitive information. We don't flaunt our credit cards numbers or social security numbers, unless your the life-lock guy. However, what sort of information do we flaunt? If you have a Facebook profile, chances are there is a large portion of yourself being “flaunted” to anyone and everyone on the internet, which can lead to detrimental consequences.

Take for example a story by the about a man by the name of Isaac Vicknair. Vicknair accumulated high amounts of debt through student loans via the government, and Vicknair was determined not to pay them. Vicknair tried to stay off the grid. He even quit jobs and relocated, all to avoid being tracked down by the debt collectors, which he did successfully for 10 years. This lead Vicknair to a job selling solar panels, where his boss advised that he set up a Facebook page to continue relationships with clients. After one day of having his personal and professional information on Facebook, the government debt collectors had tracked him down via his Facebook information, and began the process of forcing Vicknair to set up a payment plan, or garnish his wages. [1]

Another example comes from a recent poll of employers. Presently, 53% of employers research by seeking out a potential candidate's Facebook page, 2 in 5 employers saw something that dissuaded an employer from hiring said employee, and 28% of employers admitted to firing an employee due to content found on their Facebook page. [2]

As a young adult involved on Facebok, I am constantly being under pressure to keep my Facebook pages clear of any compromising photos or other materials because my Facebook life, is an extension of my real life. And with job recruiters, employers, and even police using facebook as a means of investigation, we all need to be mindful of our projected image online.

What do you think? Is it right for employers to look at our social networking sites to make hiring decisions? Is this an invasion of privacy? Or are we just filled with a false sens of privacy while were online?

Brian: A Ray of Nope

Last night, the Tampa Bay Rays had a chance to clinch a playoff birth at home. They had the best record in baseball, and are on the verge of beating out the big bad Yankees for the AL East title. This was another huge step for the once woebegone franchise.

After the game, ace pitcher David Price tweeted that he was embarrassed by the Rays fanbase.

So what was the problem?

Well, they were going to clinch that playoff spot in front of roughly 12,000 fans.

Tampa Bay averages 22, 913 fans per game, which is 52% stadium capacity. That means they were at roughly 30% stadium capacity on a night in which they almost clinched a playoff spot.

Tampa Bay is the 54th most populated city in the nation, and they can't fill a baseball park for the best team in baseball? Cincinnati is below them, population wise, and they are ranked much higher in attendance. Heck, Toledo is below them in population and their Triple-A team (who isn't fighting for a title) averages around 9,000 per game!

I was listening to the Scott VanPelt show today and they were discussing this, and one former player said the problem was the economy. He chastised Prices' comments and argued that people had less money, and weren't willing to spend it on baseball tickets. He said that Price couldn't understand because he was a millionaire.

This may be true for some cities like Detroit, but Tampa Bay's economy is ranked as the 25th largest regional economy in the United States. Their economy has shrunk by 0.2 percent since the recession.

So what is the excuse now? Not to mention you can get tickets to Rays games for as little as $5. You are telling me that people living in the 25th largest economy in the US can't pay for a few tickets? People in Tampa just flat out don't care what the Rays do this year, next year, or any year for that matter. Price was right - he should be embarrassed by the fans of Tampa Bay.

Maybe it's time Tampa takes its talents elsewhere - Las Vegas anyone?

Alan: Minimum Wage Rage

In South Africa, there was a recent minimum wage raise, which attempted to improve the lives of the lower-class working citizens throughout the country. At first glance, minimum wage raises seem to be a wonderful and necessary change in order to give aid to the hard working people who aren't receiving the just treatment and payment that they deserve. This view, however, doesn't take into account the larger picture.

With the minimum wage raise in South Africa, as with other similar raises in other economically developing countries, the measures taken in an effort to help the lower class, ultimately serve to disrupt and decrease the lifestyles of the lower-class. Due to the lack of resources in many of the national industries such as manufacturing, many companies are forced to downsize, or to close their doors. In reality, these wage increases only serve to strengthen the middle class, and further marginalize those who had been struggling to scrape out a living on meager salaries, that they are no longer earning due to being let go.

South Africa already has one of the highest unemployment rates in the world, and with the recent wage increases, these unemployment rates are climbing. Along with higher unemployment comes higher crime rates, violence, and a greatly decreased standard of living throughout the country.

There was a similar situation in Honduras just a couple of years ago, when the then president Mel Zelaya opted to double the minimum wage. this resulted in hundreds of thousands of unemployed workers, because their employers were no longer able to pay them the new wages. Although this was certainly not the only factor, it helped to pave the way to the coup that would happen in Honduras later that year.

Minimum wage increases need to be taken in slow steps in order to secure improved conditions, but not at the expense of further oppressing the already downtrodden.

What can we as U.S. citizens do about this oppression? We can continue to support international aid programs, NGOs, and push our government to support these developing countries more than we already do. We, as a nation, certainly do give millions of dollars in foreign aid, and we also chose to support various markets with our imports from countries such as South Africa and Honduras. That being said, we also make choices that are made largely to further our own interests ONLY and do not take into account what negative effects these choices can have on the people in these countries.

For example, we chose to have a military presence in many of these countries, such as Honduras, but refuse to give them the real help that they need economically. We aer failing in our economic responsibility to be fair to the people of many of these countries. Under NAFTA and CAFTA, we are exploiting workers all over this hemisphere and creating working conditions that are ripe for minimum wage rage. As one of the world's economic superpowers, we have a responsibility to carry our fair trade which helps to give sustainable development to the most impoverished workers around the world.

Hopefully, we can keep our responsibilities in mind, and acknowledge that our actions as purchasers have power. Hopefully, we can make responsible decisions that positively affect the whole of humanity. Even choosing to buy fair trade coffee is a step in the right direction and can be a powerful symbol. A symbol for peace.

Adam: Blazin the Trail

Legalize it, Legalize it, think of the tax money, it is harmless!

I am sick of idiots trying to push for pot to be legal. Hippies have been slamming us with this B.S. harder than a 16 year old Girl on her cell phone to my car. An under cover investigator in a Chrysler assembly plant found workers drinking beer and smoking the reefer during lunch break. This is, of course, is the same plant Obama visited earlier this year and was quoted saying:

“It's workers like you that built this country into the greatest economic power the world has ever known."

Good one Pres, with a comment like that I wouldn't be surprised if during lunch break his nose is the same color as the house he lives in. Anyway, point being we bail these crappy car companies out to help them continue making cars no one wants to buy. Now on top of that out of MY pocket comes drug money for the worthless car company to have enough hash for the company picnic.

What does this have to do with not having ganja legal? Well aside from crafting terrible cars and receiving praise from the president, Jive took the lives of three innocent tourists in Utah. A zonked tour bus driver rolled the vehicle while transporting passengers last month. The cops had found traces of the green dragon in his system.

If kush was legal would you want to be on the same road as that guy? Or millions of others that are greater than or equal to his irresponsibility? Drunk driving is bad enough as it is.

Crunk driving now? No thank you, keep your filthy tax money, the government is pissing away all of our tax money as is. The last thing I want is an elementary school funded by doobie money.

Go Bucks

Travis: Frrrrreeeedddoooommm...of information.

Let me start off asking you a quick question, “how's your Internet?”, no really, how is it? Do you enjoy being able to go anywhere you want, downloading whatever you want, reading whatever you want? (I.e. The Filibust)

Well enjoy it now, because there are several gigantic entities that don't want you to be able to do so.

As we sit here at our computer, on our beloved neutral Internet, broadband providers are attempting to limit the access to the Internet sites that you go to everyday. Companies that provide both Internet and Televison are advocating for the censorship of their competitor's websites. For example, if you use verizon for internet and TV, they would very much like to censor sites such as Netflix, because their watch instantly option is a competitor. Corporations are looking to control the information that you and I take for granted. Even more so, think about having AT&T broadband, and being unable to compare prices to TimeWarner because AT&T blocks their website. Hopefully the FCC will not bow down to their advocacy as they do in nearly every other aspect of their bureaucracy.

Another massive entity looking to control to how you use the web is no other than the U.S. Government. Here is a quote from President Barack Obama himself:

“you’re coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don’t always rank that high on the truth meter. And with iPods and iPads; and Xboxes and PlayStations — none of which I know how to work — (laughter) – information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation. So all of this is not only putting pressure on you; it’s putting new pressure on our country and on our democracy.

So information is putting pressure on our democracy? Please! The freedom of information IS democracy! The freedom to believe what you want, formulate and opinion how you want, WRITE what you want, thats Freedom!

Now the President does not list “the Internet” explicitly, but he does go on to state every form of new media, except for the Internet. Regardless, its obvious that he is writing about bloggers, and any other sort of information provider that he does not see as truthful. Which begs the question if we can't choose what information to believe, because obviously were too stupid to process what is fact and what isn't, then who does? The government? News corporations? Institutions? The Internet empowers the individual, and is the epitome of freedom. Several forces don't want it to because its their chance to control another portion of our lives.

What do you think? Do companies have a right to control what sites we go to? Is information on the inernet a “distraction” from truth? Filibust.

Brian: Get on the Wagon

Ladies and gentlemen, it's time to jump on the bandwagon of the BCS busters.

I'm talking about Boise State, TCU, and Utah crashing the BCS party this year.

All three.

First, let's start with Boise State. I have been arguing for their merit in the national championship game for years, and I will continue to do so until they get their due. They beat a good Virginia Tech team in the opener on the road. Before you all go "but VaTech lost to James Madison...FCS James Madison!," just remember that James Madison isn't a terrible team. They are currently rated 37th in the Sagarin ratings (an unbiased, stats driven rating) for all Division I teams. What does this mean? It means that VTech lost to a pretty good team. Basically, not as damaging as people think. Which further means that the win for Boise is still a good win. They also have a chance to beat Oregon State this week, which will pad their resume. Also, Boise State has played the 29th hardest schedule so far, which is the toughest out of any team in the top 25 so far. Still skeptical? Well then you aren't looking at the facts. Moving on...

TCU has beaten two good teams from BCS conferences in Oregon State and Baylor (PS, kudos to Oregon State for manning up and scheduling some tough games). Utah has beaten a good team in Pittsburgh. These two teams play each other on November 6th, and both teams have a great chance in being undefeated when they meet. With our current perceptions, the loser will be automatically kicked out of the BCS and the winner will still fight for a spot.

Why does it have to be like that? If two teams from a BCS conference were to meet that late in the season, with both being undefeated, the winner would likely be headed to the national championship game and the loser would still go to a BCS bowl. This should apply to these two teams as well. If TCU finishes 12-0 and Utah finishes 11-1 with their only loss to TCU, then why should Utah be excluded from the BCS talk?

Unfortunately, NCAA sports is more about perception and politics, and less about the actual teams and play. The media and public fuel this fire, and it's the reason it may never change completely.

Don't fuel the fire people, but allow the sport to grow and evolve.

And that includes allowing the "little guys" into the party.

They turned 21 a long time ago.

Alan: UN Believable

This week, world leaders are coming together in New York to engage in a summit on global goals to fight poverty, hunger and disease. Over 150 heads of state are coming together to discuss the Millennium Development Goals that were initiated in 2000. These goals include:

1. Eradicate extreme Poverty and Hunger


2. Achieve universal Primary Education


3. Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women


4. Reduce Child Mortality Rate


5. Improve Maternal Health


6. Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria, and other Diseases


7. Ensure Environmental Sustainability


8. Develop a Global Partnership for Development

Why are these diplomats coming together in New York to discuss such things? New York just so happens to be the headquarters of the United Nations.

The United Nations was formed in 1945 after World War II in order to replace the League of Nations and address international conflicts to bring about peaceful resolutions. The organization has grown since 1945 to encompass nearly every sovereign state in the world. There has also been a growth in the understanding that in order to truly confront future conflicts, basic human needs ought to be met all over the world. The UN has many programs to address these needs including the World Food Program, the UN Children's Fund, the World Health Organization, and many others.

In addressing thse Millennium Development Goals, the UN has set the bar high, and has made substantial progress towards accomplishing these ends. Unfortunatly, they are still largely falling short of attaining all aspects of their aspirations.

This is due largely to a lack of support for the United Nations. Within the United States, there have been growing sentiments over the past few decades that the UN is not an organization that is fit for the challenge of leading the world. The perspective from the United States is that as the global superpower, we ought to dominate global politics, and to that end, we largely do. The UN has made several concessions including allowing China's continued presence on the Security Council, that has confronted the U.S. view as what is conducive to progressive geo-political advancement.

The UN, as an international peace seeking organization, does not have the political or economic agenda that the sovereign states do. The UN is not interested in advocating against the U.S. on the principle that it just wants to advocate against the U.S. It is instead interested in advocting for all citizens of the world. If our interests conflisct with the interests of the UN, maybe we should take a step back and consider why that may be the case.

Ideally, I believe that in order to progress towards a more unified Humanity, all countries need to yield more of their power and decisions to align with the United Nations. In this way, all peoples from all backgrounds can have a voice represented more fairly on a global platform.

That being said, it will take not only an effort of submission from the United States, but more of a submission and contribution by the rest of the world (based on the understanding that the UN will not simply be another branch of US political control). Currently, the U.S. supports 22% of the UN budget and bears most of the economic burden in fulfilling UN goals. If the rest of the world would like to see the UN's growth and presence, why not contribute more? Certainly the U.S. might have more financial resources than most, but China, the UK, Russia, and other great powers could easily help to contribute to the budget of the UN.

I believe that the United Nations is the direction that this world needs to be headed towards. When we set aside national identities and interest and trust that there is an overarching organization involved in assuring that ALL interest in ALL of the world are being met, we can unify as a human race. I belive that the United Nations and its drive to meet basic needs to prevent conflicts to benefit all citizens of the world is a great symbol of hope. A symbol for peace.

Adam: Womoney

This week the Council of Graduate Schools released the results of their study on gender and doctoral degrees. 28,469 American men earned degrees for the 2008-2009 academic year and if you couldn't guess it by now more (28,962) women earned theirs.

Women have been earning the majority of masters degrees since the 90's. They also make up about 58% of the undergraduate population. (The percent doesn't show what amount of those students went to school to get their MRS.)

Men continue to do manual labor and build the country with their hands as women leave the housewife scene and take on the new role of overachieving nerd. Is this the result of men constantly being exposed to media where the male character is a lazy idiot and his wife is the well grounded voice of reason? It's interesting to note that if a show came out with the roles reversed it would be considered sexist.

I know what some of you are thinking and despite popular believe I don't mind the change. As a matter of fact I welcome it with open arms. In generations past only one parent or spouse worked. Or as I see it, they were running at only 50% income capacity. Now that women seem to be gaining the upper hand in education this doubles the household income. Find me someone who is against that and, like a drunk frat bro, they are lying to you. Take that one step further and there could be a possible role reversal completely. Stay at home trophy husband, I'm halfway there. If you have ever seen Mr. Mom I don't think you can object.

Is women earning more doctoral, masters, and bachelors degrees a slippery slope?
Yes, if that slippery slope is in your backyard and leads to your in ground pool next to the hot tub. Because with that sort of brain paper, she'll be bringing in all kinds of other paper.

Go Bucks

Travis: 3-Don't.

Within the last 2 years, Hollywood found a huge cash cow within a "3rd" dimension. Beginning with "My Bloody Valentine" in 2008, producers found that they could make a terrible film, digitally convert into 3-D, charge a surplus for at the box office, and watch the money roll in. Then, in 2009, James Cameron's "Avatar" premiered grossing over $2,000,000,000, with the help of "newly developed 3-D technology". Everywhere were articles about these new cameras that were produced to "actually" film 3 different planes, to give the 3-D effect, rather than converting an existing film.

Here's where I come in: I bought into it. All of it. I saw ads for "My Bloody Valentine in 3-D", and I thought "dude the story will suck, but dude, its in 3-D!". I forked over the additional $4 and didn't bat an eye. I later went on to see "Avatar" for the same reason. I knew the "story" (aka, Pocahontas, Fern Gully, Dances with Wolves, etc...) and read about this "amazing" 3-D tech all over the place. I went to see this multi-million dollar POS under the same thought process; "the story will suck, but the 3-d should be sweet!" But again, $13 down the drain. On each of these occasions, the 3-D did nothing to make the film better. The plots still sucked, and the characters still sucked, all the 3-D did was burn my retina.

Were told that this is "new" and "better", but 3-D is nothing new, nor is it better. The quality of picture is terrible, the front plane of the "3rd Dimension" is the only image in focus while the rest is just a blurry mess that makes your eyes sore. The technology has been around since the 1950's and is still crap.

But let's get down to brass tax. We all know why were told that 3-D is the "future" of film. It's because Hollywood says it is. The whole 3-D film market is nothing more than a cheap marketing ploy to try and get people to not watch films from their computers or from home. It exists simply make US go to the theater, pay an addition fee, all to watch a blurry film.

Another guise that were told by Hollywood is that "3-D films offer an increased state of immersion". But if I need to pay an extra $4 and wear glasses to enjoy your film, then its not worth watching. Whatever happened to making the story the crux of a film? Why is it the image that engage me and not the characters or the story? But its just another ploy by Hollywood d-bags.

Luckily moviegoers have wised up to this lie put out by Hollywood marketers. The chart below shows the steady dissension of 3-D box office sales.

I hope that all of us continues to not get sucked into watching terrible films like the latest Resident Evil, Saw 3-D, and whatever other crappy 3-D films come out in the future. Just always live by the rule: "would I watch this in 2-d?".

Brian: Banned for Nothing

For one night last weekend, Pete Rose was allowed back into the world of baseball. He was honored by the Cincinnati Reds on the anniversary of his famous (or now infamous?) hit that broke the record of all time hits in baseball history, surpassing the legendary Ty Cobb

But only one night.

Here today, gone tomorrow.

For those of you who don't know, Pete Rose was given a lifetime ban from baseball (he can't coach, manage, work in a front office, or even go to a baseball park) for gambling on baseball during his playing days. The commissioner at the time laid down the lay and implemented this ban, and current commissioner Bud Selig has continued its enforcement.

It is one of the most unjustifiable punishments in sports history. Yes, what Pete Rose did was wrong. He should not have bet on baseball and he should have been punished by the commissioner's office. But a lifetime ban?

Harsh. Especially with the past and current steroids issue. Pete Rose's gambling did NOT affect his performance on the field or give him an unfair advantage. Some people argue that he could have potentially "thrown" games in order to win bets. If he had done that, do you really think he could have broken the record for most hits? When chasing that record, you can't regularly take games off. The closest active player to his record is Derek Jeter and he is still 1,509 hits away from breaking it.

Why aren't the players who have used steroids permanently banned from baseball? Their use of steroids affected their play and made them better than they should have been. Not to mention the fact that is tarnished baseball's reputation. And yet they are still allowed in baseball? How is that fair?

It's not fair.

It's not justice.

It's stubborn ignorance.

It was a knee jerk reaction by a commissioner who is no longer in office. Why not fix it Selig? Ban the main culprits from the steroids era and reinstate Pete Rose into baseball.

That would be the right thing to do.

Alan: Are You for Real Israel?

This past weekend, Israel made some concessions in the efforts to stride towards peace talks with Palestinians. They graciously agreed to not bulldoze areas where thousands currently live in order to build apartments and other housing structures. They have acknowledged that this moratorium on construction is what their Palestinian neighbors are searching for. They have also acknowledged that this moratorium on construction will only be temporary.

Let me preface the rest of this post by saying that I in no way believe that I have the answers to the problems in the Middle East, and don't pretend to understand everything and all aspects of the historical and cultural contexts in the area. I am not an expert on Jewish-Muslim relations in the area, and am only giving my opinion based on the knowledge that I have.

Israel certainly seems to be an un-welcomed presence in the Middle East especially to some of their regional neighbors such as Iran, whose official position is a desire to wipe the country and its people from the pace of the earth. Several of the surrounding countries in the region have engaged in actual wars (the Seven Day War, etc.) against Israel in attempts to run the small country out of existence.

That being said, Israel, you are not helping yourself. Israel is the only country in the region with nuclear capabilities and has no problem reminding the other countries in the area of that fact. More importantly, they have completely bullied and dehumanized the Palestinian people within the region. They have ghettoized these people and treat them as lesser humans. They have destroyed their homes, bombed their citizens, and refused to really engage in compromises in peace talks.

Sure, some might say that the Palestinians have had their fair share of suicide bombers in Israel, and that certainly is true. There have absolutely been Palestinian extremists who have violently attacked Israel. Unfortunately, these attacks seem to be highlighted above and beyond the Israeli attacks on Palestine.

I suppose my real issue with this whole situation is the United States' unwavering support for Israel in all things. The U.S. has time and again backed our ally in the Middle East on the basis that they are the oppressed people in the region. This, I believe, is largely untrue. Israel is very much the bully and is also an incredible oppressor in the region that we have blindly supported and aided in weapons technology, financial support, and diplomatic unity.

It is my hope that we may take a step back and look at all sides to the conflict so that all opinions may be at least heard and taken into consideration. Simply pushing for one voice to be recognized is no way to carry out diplomacy. Hopefully, with better knowledge and understanding comes less hate. Hopefully future discussions can be taken from all sides of the matter and move forward. In that way, those discussions can be a symbol for the rest of the world. A symbol for peace.

Adam: Black Gold

For more than 2,064 hours oil spewed from the gulf floor like a sorority girl on her 21^st birthday. Imagine everything that happened in your life from April 20^th until July 15^th of this year. During every event you can think of, oil was blasting out of a pipe and into the ocean. In order for you to gain some perspective I've dug up a few events on that day:

the Lakers beat the Thunder in round one game two of the NBA Finals

Kick-Ass was the number one movie in the box office (Produced by Brad Pitt)

Lady Gaga and Beyonce's Telephone was number one on the top 40 chart

and it happened just after I wrote this incredible blog

The thing that bothers me the most about this spill is, like a sorority girl on her 21^st, massive amounts of money were pissed away. Yesterday, Obama passed a sixth bailout to BP for $128,500,000 bones. This chump change plus the other 5 equals $389,900,000 IOU's from Obama to BP.

British Petroleum has already spent $8,000,000 just trying to clean up the mistake. Smart scientists are estimating the total costs of the spill, will be greater than $50,000,000,000. I'm here today to tell you that I not only agree with said Scientists, but I back up their calculations wholeheartedly.

Where could that oil have gone had it not been dumped directly into the ocean? Well, besides running my car non stop from now until long after I'm worm food, the 4,900,000 barrels of oil (or 205,800,000 gallons) could have gone into the ridiculously profitable NASCAR industry. Considering a 250 mile race with 40 NASCAR cars only takes a messily 5,000 gallons they could have held over 41,160 races. In other words NASCAR would have been able to run on the gulf waste for over a quarter of a century.

The Indianapolis Motor Speedway seats 257,325.

Daytona International Speedway seats 168,000

Charlotte Motor Speedway seats 167,000

Bristol Motor Speedway seats 160,000

Texas Motor Speedway seats 154,861

all of these speedways seat more than the largest stadium in the world, cramming only 150,000 Koreans into Rungrado May Day Stadium. Each seat at the speedways averaging around $88.16 bucks. Might want to tack that on to BP's losses.

Is this the red coats' way of getting us back for the fiasco we pulled on them in 1773 with their precious tea? It wouldn't surprise me. It seems like people only care about the effect the oil had on the coast. This is just ignorant, take a look at the bigger picture. Realize that this is more than just a dawn commercial but, like a sorority girl's birthday party, this is an immeasurable mammoth devastation that has rippling effects that we may never fully understand.

Post. Script: Don't be afraid to use your Google account and follow this blog.

Go Bucks!

Travis: Mel Gibson; Crazy Awesome

These days the name Mel Gibson is synonymous with antisemitism, alcohol abuse, and mustaches. Now the public will be adding “wife abuser” to this list. Recently a string of audio recordings have been leaked online that recorded dramatic readings of dialogue between Mel and ex-girlfriend Oksana Grigorieva. These recordings allegedly have Mel Gibson saying such dramatic one liners, as "You look like a f***ing pig in heat, and if you get raped by a pack of n***ers, it will be your fault.", and “How dare you act like such a bitch when I have been so f**king nice." , and finally "I am going to come and burn the f**king house down.”
Before we nail Gibson to a cross, lets consider the context of these statements. Everyone hears these “words” and "voice recordings" and immediately assumes that they are directed at Mel's girlfriend, without considering the context! Personally, I believe in the creative power of Mel Gibson, and have reason to believe that he was merely working out dialogue for “Payback 2”. That's some great writing if so, and I am patiently waiting for that film. Or he could be writing a new screenplay: (cue announcer's voice)

“A father in the Bronx desperately tries to redeem his daughter wrapped up in gangs, violence, and prostitution, by avenging those who took her innocence...sometimes, when you take out the trash...it gets a little messy...in a town with no law...Gibson reigns supreme....MEL GIBSON in "Ransom at The Edge of Payback Passion" ...starring Mel Gibson.”

BOOM, cut scene! Each one of those lines would fit perfectly into such a screenplay, and I would pay double the ticket price if just to give more money to the creative mind of Mr. Gibson.

Another Gibson misunderstanding happened in 2006, when Gibson “allegedly” was drunk, and “allegedly” stated to a police officer : “F*****g Jews... The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world." . Once again, I believe in the creative power of Mel Gibson, and I wouldn't be surprised if Gibson was merely researching a character for and coming World War II film. He's already defeated The British in “The Patriot”, the Vietcong in “We Were Soldiers”, The English in “Braveheart”, and even gangs and drug violence in four “Lethal Weapon” films, maybe he was looking to have Tom Cruise's role in “Valkyrie”? Think about that before you judge Mr. Gibson. You would judge a man desiring to take down Hitler from the inside? Please.

For my final point, let's all look at Mel Gibson's filmography:
-Mad Max Trilogy
-Lethal Weapon Quadrilogy
-Braveheart (in my top 3 fav's)
-Payback
-The Patriot
-Ransom
-Pocahontas -Need I say more?

The bottom line is this: Mel Gibson is awesome. He's a firm man, he obviously comes up with some killer and disturbing dialogue for his future revenge films, he's obviously a method actor getting into the mind of a Nazi who drinks too much but wants to take out Hitler from the inside, and he directed AND starred in “Braveheart”. Before you judge Mr. Gibson, you have to ask yourself this: “Would William Wallace degrade his wife and blame jews for the problems of the world?" I think you know the answer to that one.
All of those in agreement: keep the fire.

Brian: Trade Machine

As I was watching a Hiram College soccer game the last week, our opponent scored by kicking the ball into the top left corner of the net - an area that our goalie could not reach, and therefore could not block the kick. I mentioned to my friend Brendon that if we had Dwight Howard as our goalie, it would be virtually impossible for any team to score on us.

Obviously that would never happen, but it got me thinking: what professional athletes would a team be willing to sell the farm for in order to get that player to come play a different sport. In essence, how much should a soccer team give to Dwight Howard and the Orlando Magic in order to make him a goalie? Lets examine...

1.) USA Soccer gives gives Dwight Howard a $100 million contract to play goalie for the 2014 World Cup.

This idea is simply brilliant (not just because I am suggesting it - hear me out). Can you imagine having 6'11" Dwight Howard with his 7'5" wingspan defending a soccer goal? Not only is he that tall and wide, but he is quick and athletic. He times up his blocks better than anyone in the NBA, and that would translate well when timing his jumps in order to block goals. A soccer goal is 8 feet high, so by virtue of standing there, he can already touch the top of the goal. I would also bet that Howard is as athletic as soccer goalies and his reach would make him a more effective goalie than anyone playing right now. Sign him as soon as his NBA contract expires (2012) and that will give him two years to practice before the World Cup begins.

This would be a solid investment because having such a good goalie can allow you to be more aggressive on offense, which leads to more goals. Is there a reason US Soccer isn't considering giving this man $33 million a year to play goalie? Get him on board and the US is headed for World Cup gold.

2.) The Miami Dolphins trade Brandon Marshall, their cheerleaders, $30 million in cash, and pay the buy out to the Miami Heat for LeBron James.

Green Bay Packers hall of fame safety Mark Murphy recently listed his top recievers of all time. They were James Lofton, Jerry Rice, Steve Largent, and ... Lebron James. Let's be honest, this deal would never happen, but imagine with me. The Miami Heat are ranked 12th in value in the NBA, but their Debt/Value ratio is one of the worst in the NBA, just ahead of Charlotte and Memphis. Basically the Heat are valuable because of their arena and player contracts, but aren't making enough money to be extremely profitable. The $30 million from the Dolphins (who rank well among the NFL, plus LeBron would boost their profits exponentially) would give the Heat a huge boost economically. Plus, they would still have one of the better teams in the NBA with Bosh and Wade. With the extra cap space created, they could still pick up another quality player or two and still become a championship squad. Marshall was thrown in because he already said he wants to play in the NBA, so why not? Plus that would even out the cost of paying James' salary in the NFL. And who wouldn't want the Dolphin cheerleaders?

From LeBron's stanpoint, this would be the best career move for him in terms of money and popularity. If he said he was going to the NFL, that would hands down become the biggest sports story of the year (maybe even the decade). Not to mention that his endorsements would go through the roof as he became on of the most popular NFL players and athletes in the world. Come on, why not?

3.) Candace Parker to the Lakers for Sasha Vujacic and cash considerations.

Two main reasons for doing this trade:

First, Vujacic looks and plays like a girl, so why shouldn't he be in the WNBA?

Secondly, I have always argued that Candace Parker could play in the NBA, albeit as a role player. But she can play none the less. I also guarantee that she could beat Vujacic in basketball and in boxing.

So there.

Alan: You Mosque Be Joking

There has been somewhat of an uproar in recent weeks concerning the so called "Ground Zero Mosque." I would just like to briefly take a moment to address this issue.

First and foremost, the United States has always been a country of religious freedom, which allows any individual to practice their religion freely. The exception of this would of course be if someone's religious practices entails injury or harm to others. Unfortunatly, there are too many people in this country that honestly beleive that Islam is a religion based in that desire to harm citizens of the United States.

Yes there certainly are some radical Muslim extremists, but there are also Jewish extremists, Hindu extremists, and Lord knows that there are many Christian extremists out there as well. To lump an entire religion under the paradigm of a destructive or violent faith is a ridiculously small thing to do.

I have personally seen some of the protestors and counter protestors, and I believe that both sides are (as per usual) making extreme arguments. A counterprotestor was holding a sign that said, "What if caucasians constructed churches on Native American burial grounds? Oh wait, we did!" This is a terrible point to make, because although it acknowledges the atrocious history of oppression of Native Americans, it forces the analogy that all Muslims were responsible for the 9/11 attacks, and that we should ignore the past and force a forward movement.

The protestors believe that erecting an Islamic Community Center is an affront to those who passed away on 9/11. Newt Gingrich has even come out with the analogy that this would be as if Nazis were constructing a shrine next to the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC.

Again, this argument pre-supposes that all Muslims participate in a violent faith. It is a very bigoted and uninformed way of looking at religion. I know that I certainly wouldn't appreciate it if people judged me as a Christian based on the actions of Jim Jones.

Additionally, Newt's point, along with many of the media coverage of the controversy paints the picture of the new Mosque being erected right next to Ground Zero. This is not the case. The Park 51 Mosque is in a former Burlington Coat Factory that is several blocks away from the site of the World Trade Center. You can't even see one site from the other.

Personally, I believe that it shouldn't matter even if they did construct the Mosque right next to Ground Zero as I think that it would be a wonderful symbol of the unity that this country so desperately needs. I think it would be a symbol of progress, acceptance, and understanding. A symbol for peace.

Adam: Ohio State vs Fichigan

Change is an important part of society. However just because we have to adapt to stay relevant it doesn't mean we have to sacrifice or compromise everything of value. Football is a living breathing organism, college football especially. Always changing and trying to stay as up to date as possible. The Big Ten is no exception.

Back in June it was announced that the Big Ten would open their arms and ask Nebraska to join their ranks. I was excited considering the damn SEC has won the past four national championships (and half of them off the face of my Buckeyes). The Corn Huskers are a strong add to the Big Ten. Because of the addition the conference had to add an extra week to their schedule and in order to plan for this. They added a bye week. And the domino effect of unforeseen changes began:

Every yeah since 1943 Ohio State and Fichigan have played each other and it is hands down the greatest rivalry in sports. In Columbus the Thursday before the Fichigan game, no matter what, TENS OF THOUSANDS of Ohio State students jump into mirror lake and get pumped during Fichigan week. What does this have to do with the bye week (which takes place November 6^th)? it means the Thursday before Fichigan is November 25^th...Thanksgiving... One of OSU's most prized traditions will be killed this year.

The reason for the 12^th team in the conference was to finally create a Big Ten championship game. Now we won't end our season roughly six weeks before bowl time thankfully. The 12 teams are split into two divisions.

Division 1: Fichigan, Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern

Division 2: Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Illinois, Purdue, Indiana

There are 13 trophies played for within the Big Ten. But the one game that matters the most is Ohio State Fichigan and of course they are not in the same division. Why in God's green earth would they separate these two teams? As soon as they set the divisions they instantly had to create an amendment that says Ohio State and Fichigan will play their last regular season game against each other. This means that we have a chance to play Fichigan back to back... why would we ever want to see a rematch in a college football season? Ohio State already catches enough flack for having a weak schedule. What better way to show our national strength then playing Mac And Cheese schools and the same team twice?! Stupid, stupid, stupid. Swap Nebraska and Ohio State and the divisions are perfect. 7 of the 14 trophy games are lost in this division cut up as is, thank God we managed to keep the mighty Purdue Indiana rivalry alive. We play Fichigan twice why? MONEY pure and simple there are nearly half a million living OSU alumni who will travel wherever the Buckeyes go and they fill the stadium Fichigan is no different. How can one team have bragging rights if we split the series? What good is Fichigan week at Ohio State's campus if they're going to turn around and jump in mirror lake again next Thursday? The Divisions are JUNK all they had to do was keep ONE game intact and they FAILED.

Nebraska joins the Big Ten on the first of July so this Ohio State Fichigan game will be the last of its kind on November 27^th its going to be a bitter sweet match up.

Go Bucks!

Travis: "Emmy's ShmEmmy's. "

Welcome to The Filibust!

I am Travis, the second head to the right on the photo above. Among these passionate writers of topics of great value, I am the Media and Entertainment writer. I'm a pop culture fiend, and an avid lover of TV and movies. But enough introduction, lets get to the goods.

---

The 62nd Primtime Emmy Awards Ceremonies were held this past Sunday evening. These awards elevate, not the best shows, but those with the most clout. Example; Mad Men winning for the 4th year in a row, when “Breaking Bad” continues to put out much more compelling television than the former.

However, my biggest grievance with this year's Emmy's are with its winner of “Outstanding Comedy Series”.

The nominations for Outstanding Comedy Series included: Modern Family, 30 Rock, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Glee, Nurse Jackie, and The Office. Two of these shows have been nominated every freaking year, won a couple and then descended into crap TV (The Office, 30 Rock). Another is a terrible excuse for a “comedy” show (Glee), another is a genre stealer and average in its own right (Modern Family), one I have not seen, thus, will not judge (Nurse Jackie), and one of these shows just came off from one of its smartest and funniest seasons, even after 7 years (Curb Your Enthusiasm). Guess what show won? Modern Family. A show that steals every nuance from other TV shows is seen as “Outstanding” in the eyes of the entertainment media elite. Please.

It is a grave injustice that Larry David's ingenious and hilarious season of “Curb Your Enthusiasm” was snubbed. Even after the show's best season, and “Seinfeld Reunion”, it wasn't enough in the eyes of the Emmy people. For shame.

I guess it could be worse. Maybe “Glee” would have won if Disney and the CW hosted the Emmy's. It could be hosted by Miley Cirus, with performances by Justin Beiber and The J-Bro's, and the Outstanding drama Emmy would go to “Gossip Girl”. Then we would have no choice but to allow hell to engulf this terrible terrible world. We would gladly jump into the lake of fire rather than be forced to grant any sort of credibility to the likes of “Glee” and “Gossip Girl”.

So I say to all of you in agreement, Keep the fire.