But, it also feels like a distant memory now, doesn’t it? I had to struggle for a moment to remember if it was last year or a couple of years ago. It was a hard time for all of us, wondering what the future held.

One person who had to be more nervous than the rest of us was Jonathan Vilma, the linebacker who faced a year-long suspension when the scandal first erupted and the iron fist of Roger Goodell cast down judgment. Despite all that persecution, however, Vilma is telling the folks at the Times-Picayune that, despite the “raw deal” that was the so-called “Bounty-gate,” he is glad he took the pay cut to stay with the team.

Vilma and Will Smith each took a big cut to stay with the team. Vilma is also fresh after healing up a knee injury that’s bothered him for a couple of years now, and things look bright for the Saints defense. No matter what you think of Rob Ryan, he is certainly enthusiastic about where things are going, too.

Of the moves the Saints have made in the off-season, I don’t think any could be as important as keeping those two. It took a big paycut (Vilma went from $6 million with bonuses to $1.2 million), but they could end up being huge boons for a defense that New Orleans needs to see.

You may think it odd that I’m already talking about football when the school year isn’t even over and we only just finished baseball. However, as a friend of mine who is much more knowledgeable in sports than I am likes to say, it’s a year-long sport.

Despite what has happened in the past, it’s always really important for players and fans to remember that each year is a brand new one, and you can’t rely on the past to get you going. Sure, your team may not have changed more or at all, but someone has and it could be the difference between winning and losing seasons.

Reports began coming out as recently as yesterday that the Obama administration was hoping to promote Susan Rice to the prestigious National Security Adviser position sometime in the near future. Note that I did not say he’d try. You see, that’s the rub that will get the Republicans all in a tizzy – it’s not a post that requires a Senate hearing or even their approval. He can just do it. The biggest news source on this is ForeignPolicy.com’s The Cable.

Insiders with ties to the Obama administration tell The Cable that U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice has become the heir apparent to National Security Advisor Tom Donilon – a post at the epicenter of foreign-policy decision making and arguably more influential than secretary of state, a job for which she withdrew her candidacy last fall amid severe political pressure.

Here’s the thing, though. The e-mails released recently concerning the Benghazi cover-up don’t show her as part of the process that led to the “hateful video” talking points. It is a lot more likely that she was handed the talking points and did what she was told. Ambassador to the United Nations is not a part of the State Department, and is an on-again-off-again cabinet-level position (was from Ford to Reagan, wasn’t for H.W. Bush, was for Clinton, wasn’t for W. Bush and is for Obama).

One thing I will venture an opinion on: Republicans should tread lightly around this bait. Right now, there is just enough evidence showing Rice had no direct involvement in the talking points to make trouble for Republicans who want to go out and trash the potential move. If I could advise McCain and Graham, who will be the most vocal on this (bless their hearts, they want to look like they’re doing something right), I would tell them to lay low on this one. There are better, more winnable and, God knows, more important fights. Sure, “Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs” sounds pretty important, but the front lines of the national security defense force will always be the alphabet soup of agencies, a post she will never, ever be qualified for or be offered a job at.

You may not know the name “Glenn Jacobs.” He is very libertarian, having spoken on Lew Rockwell’s show a couple of times. Again, a name you may not know all that well, but that’s okay. If, however, you watch World Wrestling Entertainment, you are aware of the tag team champions, Team Hell No. Glenn Jacobs is the masked monster commonly referred to as Kane.

Kane is demonic. He is sadistic. He is powerful. He summons fire from the four corners of the ring when he is proving a point. Or angry. Or just feels like it. It’s hard to tell sometimes, really. But, Kane is also libertarian. And he cut one hell of a promo recently.

Pictured: Freedom and liberty without the intrusion of government.

Meanwhile, in Tennessee, one of the more well-known backers of the Internet Sales Tax is the state’s lieutenant governor, Ron Ramsey. Ramsey has called the tax “not new” and “not unfair.” And, sure, he’s entitled to that opinion, I guess, even if he is completely and totally wrong. But, if I were Ramsey, I’d watch my back now. Because a demonic, hell-spawn wrestler is onto his game.

“Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey claims that the Internet sales tax mandate is not a new tax. Nor, according to Ramsey, is it an unfair tax. Ramsey is wrong on both counts. I, therefore, invite Lt. Gov. Ramsey for a policy debate on the issue of the Marketplace Fairness Act in a public forum at his convenience.”

That is a quote from a wrestling news website and, yes, it is pretty spot-on in most of what it reports. However, if you want a slightly more reputable source, or at least a second one, go here. Honestly, I can only hope the meeting takes place in the squared circle and has Kane in full costume. Mask and all. And I hope he stays in character while schooling Ramsey on the damage the Internet sales tax can do to the country. If you are thinking “Well, what can a professional wrestler POSSIBLY know about economics and politics,” well…

And, while libertarianism can get insane (which is why I tend to avoid the label although we tend to be about 70-75% in agreement), I think Kane… I mean, Jacobs… really does a fine job of tearing the idea down. He’s anger over the tax was noted in US News and World Report.

Mind you, Jacobs is not the only libertarian wrestler. He said he was introduced to the political philosophy by the man wrestling fans know as Val Venis, a character who, according to Wikipedia, “was introduced with a series of vignettes that showcased Venis’ life style on and off the set, the most notable of these featuring Venis in bed with prominent real-life porn star Jenna Jameson.”

I love professional wrestling.

Don’t ask why. I’m honestly not real sure.

We all complain about Congress not listening to us… regardless of political affiliation. With its approval at an all-time low, lower than even Barack Obama’s or the Lakers’, I have decided to take it upon myself to fix it and return it to something we can be proud of. And, this is a totally non-partisan solution. And it involves apps. AND it makes C-SPAN watchable. So we can all be happy.

As we all know, polling is a large driving force behind modern politics. Do polls show they want more bi-partisanship? They’ll go for it. Does polling show you shouldn’t be so extreme in something? Political behavior henceforth will reflect that… Sometimes. Sometimes, they only listen to other political elites and we don’t ever get what we as voters want. Well, let’s do real-time polling with actual results, shall we?

First, this involves some extra government spending. Sorry, my conservative friends, but we’ve gotta spend a nickel to make a dime (unless you’re someone I happen to know who got that phrase backward once…). For this, we need only a few hundred thousand. And, it will actually involve a tax. So, yeah, this is a sudden turn off for you of the Red States. But don’t worry, I’m going to make it up to you in wonderful (non-sexual) ways. Actually, I can’t promise that little parenthetical part. We have some freaks in Congress.

So, this money will go into some wiring, copper plates and 435 car batteries, initially. Also, we will have C-SPAN work up an app for iOS and Android (suck it, Blackberry). The app will have you log in with your voter registration (name and birthday for verification). It will then load video of whatever is going on in Congress right then, with you choosing the Senate or the House of Representatives. Specifically, it will feature a camera pointed at your legislator (your Congressman or Senator) as the main video, with a smaller video in the corner kind of like a Skype call, but instead of showing you, it will show either the House Speaker, Senate Majority Leader or the person speaking at the time.

When it comes time for the chamber of Congress you’re watching to vote, you will notice both a green check mark and a red “X” at the bottom of the screen. They will be inactive buttons until your legislator votes. At that point, you can hit either the check or the X. After the entire chamber votes, then the fun begins.

Remember the battery, copper plate and wiring? Well, if more than fifty percent of the voting public dislikes the vote cast, then that battery will be activated, delivering a painful shock, much like a dog’s shock collar, only to the groin instead of the neck. After the shock, the head of the chamber will ask if anyone wants to change their votes. The ones who were shocked will either change their vote or we will all realize they have some messed up sexual wiring.

The tax I mentioned? The app costs $0.99 and you have to pay $0.99 more after every 50 votes you make. Revenue raising, baby.

Think of it as American Idol, but with substantially less Ryan Seacrest. Actually, scratch that. Let’s get the low-information voters involved, too. If Seacrest is involved, we’re guaranteed to get that many more voters. All of a sudden, we have a democratic process. And when it comes time for elections, we simply get rid of the ones who were shocked so much they couldn’t possibly have any illicit affairs anymore.

Everyone wins.

Anarchism

I need to apologize here. I am going just a wee bit outside the original timeline I was planning to use, but Anarchism needs the proper introduction.

When most people think of anarchism, there is a sudden image of V plotting to blow up parliament. Some history nerds might believe that the original Guy Fawkes was an anarchist. However, they fall truly short of the definition. Anarchism is the desire for a people to be stateless. It is the belief that all government does is get in the way. Rather than wish for transition, these folks believe that government in all forms should be abolished.

At the center of this, around the turn of the 20th century, was an idea. We refer to it as the Propaganda of the Deed, which sounds like the Hitler way to win a game of Monopoly.

Goebbels wanted the four railroad squares for nefarious purposes.

The term, actually, is a lot more complex than its meaning: Actions speak louder than words (sorry, Joe Goebbels) (you’re a dick for stealing my name). There are four key events that more or less ushered in the era of anarchism and anarchist terrorism.

• 1881: the assassination of Russian Tsar Alexander II, by the group Narodnaya Volya
• 1894: the assassination of the French president Marie-Francois Sadi Carnot
• 1894: Bombing of Greenwich Observatory in London
• 1901: the assassination of American president William McKinley in September 1901, by an anarchist, Leon Czolgosz.

These events actually at one point led the international community to believe that there was a vast, interconnected anarchist organization. There wasn’t, but that kind of tinfoil-hat thinking is always fun.

Anti-Colonialism

Much like anarchists, anti-colonials had a wee bit of a problem with government. That’s about where the similarities end, however, and where a sense of nationalism enters the terrorist’s feelings. This era of terrorism came around the end of World War I with the Treaty of Versailles (the thousandth one, I think). Primarily wanting to break free of British rule (there were anti-colonial movements elsewhere, but since the sun never set on the British empire, we can only assume other people wanted some of the sun for themselves), many of these groups found out that “terrorist” had become a really bad word. The preferred “freedom fighter,” but that wasn’t happening when their opponents was politicians, who would never, ever use name-calling as a means discourse with another side, right???

Neo-Left

First of all, my liberal friends, this is not some partisan hackery. This is an actual description of the next gen terrorism.

Think of the Neo-Left as the Wii U of the terrorist history.

The Neo-Left wave of terrorism was the Soviet/Communist era of history. The Western world (headed by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher) saw itself as the savior of the masses. In response, using both terrorism and nationalism, the Soviets encouraged leftist groups in developing nations to do whatever they needed to get recognized and, more importantly (to the Communists), disrupt the West’s anti-commie movement. In Latin America, for example, groups moved from the countryside to the cities, and one revolutionary wrote a book called The Mini Manual of the Urban Guerilla, which if you are still considering the Wii U a good analogy for the Neo-Left movement, would make one hell of a Donkey Kong game.

In the 1980s, this wave of terrorism began to die down. Though that might have been self-inflicted, seeing as how this became the era that high-jacking planes had become popular.

Religious

Oh. Oh no. Do I have to do this? …The page of notes dictates it must be so. Deep breaths, everybody. I’m not sure any of us are ready to talk about this at all.

The 1980s, while being the era in which the Neo-Left movement as we knew it died, was also the era in which religious terrorism became a thing. Now, I think it’s important here to realize something: religion had almost always been a factor in some way when it came to a lot of terrorism. Especially in the era of the Neo-Left, when nationalism had taken a more prominent role than even in the Anti-Colonial wave. With nationalism comes ethnic identity, which usually overlaps with religion. Take the Irish Republican Army, for example.

Now, of the major religions, the three monotheistic ones have some of the more prominent records of terrorism done in their name. In the current climate, we like to think of Islamic Radicalism as the religious terror out there, but don’t forget the American Christian Identity movement that also utilized radical and extreme interpretations.

Islamic radicalism, however, is the most prominent of the religious terrorism wave. Three political events really motivated the rise of Islamist terror: The Iranian Revolution, the Afghan liberation and the Muslim turn of the century in 1979, which traditionally is when a “redeemer” steps forth to save the people. Oh man, did that last one have some influence. The Sunnis went at it like never before and, during this period, the suicide bomb became the biggest thing in terrorism since stealing planes.

Which Brings Us To The Present?

That’s about it, right now. However, it should be said that while these “waves” were separated into specific eras in the late 19th and throughout the 20th (and now 21st) centuries, that doesn’t mean they outright died when the era passed. Chechnya, for example, is an Islamic state, but often commits acts of violence for nationalist purposes, not religious. Though, as I mentioned, it’s more impossible to fully separate nationalism and religion than Simon and Garfunkel (in my heart, at least).

Given what happened in Boston, we need to take a step back and learn what makes terrorism. I have a single page of notes on college-ruled paper and I am not afraid to share whats on it and my own interpretations of my shorthand.

What is Terrorism

Terrorism is the use of terror (really?) to coerce somebody, and it typically does not discern between military and civilians when it comes to targets. There are several types: State Terror, Ethnic Terror, Ideological Terror, Religious Terror, State-Sponsored Terror, and the use of Terror by Organized Crime. I realize that’s a lot of big words and not all of us have a Wikipedia handy, so I’ll give you the short definition of each of those.

• State Terror – When a government decides to go into the business of terror, they can do it one of two ways. State terror is one of them. It’s direct, meaning the State (in this instance, “state” refers to a government, not 1/50 of the U.S.) engages in acts of terror, either on a foreign power or against its own citizens. It’s the dick move of politics and the best example I can think of is when Kefka poisoned a river in Final Fantasy 6 to deal with a resisting kingdom. 
  

  Pictured: State Terrorist

   

• State-Sponsored Terrorism - This is the other form of government telling the Geneva Convention to perform a physical impossibility. In this case, the state is indirectly involved. Instead of doing something itself, it just sponsors another organization that goes in and disrupts life with violence.
• Ethnic Terror – In this instance, a group really dislikes someone of a different race/ethnic group. It seems like I should have an example of this ready, but for the life of me, my Southern-bred mind can’t th-…
  

  Congratulations! You’re now on a watch list.

   

• Ideological Terror – When one group has some disagreements with another group, be it a government, civic organization, etc. they resort to violence and terrorism to make their point. The IRA is a good example. People who bomb abortion clinics are another. Simply put, this is a disagreement over ideas, mainly political. Not like a disagreement in beliefs…
• Religious Terror – …which is exactly what this is. People are more sensitive about their faith than anything else, it seems. It’s kind of difficult, because religion can be an undercurrent of any of the other types of terrorism. Israel vs. Palestine, IRA vs. England, al Qaeda vs. U.S., etc. Of those three, only the first and the last one are a direct use of religious terrorism. In the other one, religion can play a big part, but it’s not the only reason there is so much hatred.
• Terrorism by Organized Crime – This one is a Law and Order-special. You see it whenever a cop on any cop show tries to take on the mob. Car bombs, kidnappings, horses in a rival’s bed. The mob will do whatever it takes to take down anyone moving against it. Especially in a Batman comic.

What Inspires Terrorism?

In order for there to be terrorism, you need a few things: Motivation, leadership, organization, training, money and weapons. In the case of the Boston Marathon bombers, the unspoken investigation will be the feds trying to figure out all of these things. Motivation is pretty easy to figure out. News stories are already appearing talking about his “Islamic radicalization” (Note : This is not a hit piece on Islam, nor is it some vague attempt to call out Islamic extremism at all), but the remaining pre-requisites for terrorism are still unclear. And, publicly, we might not ever know.

Terrorism itself has a few precipitants (“things that come before it” if you’re reading this from prison or an Atlanta public school) and a few pre-conditions (“things that must happen”). For the former, there needs to be grievances, which come in one of three categories: Economic, political and/or cultural. You will also need a social movement to get the pot sufficiently stirred. If you’ve ever read the book Romance of the Three Kingdoms or, more likely, played the Dynasty Warriors series, you’ve seen the precipitants in the form of the Yellow Turban/Scarves rebellion.

You also saw this disturbing compensation he’s holding.

The pre-conditions necessary for terrorism are modernization, urbanization and an established government. A tribal nation is a lot less likely to have terrorist organizations as we know them now, basically, but wearing a lion pelt and threatening to summon the spirits of an ancestor to devour children is probably a lot more awesome.

Now, along with all this, you need an actual reason to commit an act of terrorism. I’m not talking about “I want to scare you” as the reason. I mean, there needs to be something a terrorist wants out of the deal. For example, publicity. Revenge is another. Simply causing disorder and catastrophe aren’t outside the realm of possibility either. Maybe a terrorist organization wants concessions or to force obedience. Or, maybe they thought Justin Timberlake’s new album was awful. I’m not saying I’d bomb anything over it, but I could see it and Taylor Swift’s latest being perfectly legitimate casus belli.

Too far, music industry.

Using social media to solve crime and seek out suspects is not new, but to do so one a scale like this is unique, but not for long. The Internet itself has evolved to a point where often the social media outpaces the news outlets by sometimes a half hour. The FBI already stated today that they frequently turn to the public for tips and information in cases, and this one is no exception. Already, I’ve seen people retweeting photos of one of the suspects rounding a corner after the explosions.

Bottom Left: White Cap AKA Suspect 2.

The Internet is a wonderful tool. It is perfect for research, news following and even sometimes news gathering. It is also a depressing place filled with people who are paranoid and wear tinfoil hats after chewing off the aglets on their shoelaces. In case you didn’t know, that’s what the plastic tips on shoelaces are. And if The Question is anything to go by, their true purpose is sinister.

The Internet fuels 9/11 conspiracies. It is where InfoWars really gets down and dirty with the paranoia. It is where I go to seek shelter from the cruel, harsh mistress that is reality. And, while I believe people are certainly capable of helping out, there is now an even greater number of paranoids with access to information. Have you ever seen one of the episodes of Law and Order: SVU where they set up a tip line? Notice how each and every time they complain about all the crazies calling in. The FBI just set up the biggest tipline ever and I cannot imagine it going well at all.

Still, there is some hope to be found here (See: Picture Above). There are people who truly care and want to help. There are also Internet vigilantes who will stop at nothing to find out whatever they can in order to help. There is also InfoWars, but if you don’t make eye contact, you should be okay. So far, I’ve stayed under Alex Jones’ radar and I intend to stay that way while trolling him every so often on Twitter.

I should Photoshop myself inside the helicopter and send it to Alex Jones.

However, the larger point to all this, if you can get past my cynicism (which is a mountainous endeavor, I know), I really do think it’s pretty rad how we’ve managed to somehow funnel and yet diversify all at the same time our info sources. Everyone is on Twitter now. Even my mom (Hi, mom! Sorry I used a bad word in my post the other day!). Everything is on Twitter now. Facebook is a little less accessible because of privacy settings being way more stringent, but it’s no less awesome how quickly things spread. We often get little micro stories on how people on social media rally to find a lost dog or relative or locate a stolen vehicle. What the FBI has done is take that to an incredibly huge scale

Only time will tell if it will work. I suppose I have faith enough in humanity. If “humanity” doesn’t include Alex Jones and his fans, which I don’t think it does.

So, right now, let’s talk about writing.

Currently, thanks to my wife’s generosity, I’m starting on a book that is all about bettering oneself in writing comedy. In case you didn’t know, it’s a hobby of mine. A large portion of my 10.5k tweets (as of this post) are jokes. However, given a recent look at comedy by Cracked.com’s Adam Tod Brown rekindled an interest in better learned comedy writing. Couple that with a recent post by David Burge of Iowahawk fame at Breitbart.com (a site I rarely go to, mind you):

That golf-clap is a nagging concern whenever I tweet a joke or write a blog bit. Does it provoke a genuine laugh, or is it just a cheap polemic that pushes the approval button of like-minded folks? I hope it’s the former, but when the subject is politics it’s hard to really know. The only thing you can really do is to mix it up with a healthy regimen of apolitical material to keep honest.

His post is in response to Ben Howe, a regular contributor at RedState, who has a post up at BuzzFeed analyzing a trailer to a movie by conservatives that sucks (the movie, not the post). Now, I’ve linked you to all these and I post this up on my own blog because of one reason: I want to get better.

I have no idea where I’ll end up. I’m currently at a newspaper writing sports. If something else came up that was too good to pass up, I need to be at the absolute top of my game in order to achieve what I want to. Ideally, I’d like to do something political, but that is not a field that lets many people in. So, instead, I keep my options open. Maybe I could land in radio again. Perhaps get another talk show gig. I liked that a lot. Maybe I’ll be stuck reading and writing news for a while. That would be okay.

But in any of those options, or the myriad of others that are open if I were to look, I have to improve my writing. And so, for now, I read this book on writing comedy. Also on my reading list is a book on better story writing. I still need to finish the one I got on sports writing. Then there is one on writing in villians, which I think politicians could probably contribute to a lot if they thought about how they framed opponents.

It’s a matter of bettering myself, which can only come in practice and experience. I’d like to think I have a lot of the former and I sure as hell want more of the latter.

A handful of ministers delivered the letter to the governor’s office at the State Capitol Monday morning.

Jindal wants to eliminate the state’s personal income and corporate taxes in favor of increasing the state sales tax by 47 percent and taxing services such as hair cuts, cable television and other expenses.

The proposal will be debated in the legislative session that starts next month.

Jindal’s press office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the ministers’ concerns.

The ministers represent an array of faiths, including Baptist, Episcopal and Methodist.

Bishop Gregory Cooper said he feels comfortable reaching out to the governor because Jindal told legislators his proposal is not etched in stone.

Once again, this idea of the poor and middle class taking on the burden of the taxes in the new proposal is tossed out with no supporting evidence, other than rhetoric and some scary words,  like “regressive” and “47% tax increase.” But without actually explaining with facts, the entire argument can collapse. The letter itself can be tossed out at the clergy’s first argument:

First, we are concerned that Louisiana already has one of the most regressive tax systems in the nation, putting a disproportionately high burden on low and moderate income families. Currently, families earning minimum wage (less than $16,000 per year) pay 10.6% of their income in state and local taxes; the average Louisiana family pays 10.1% of its income in taxes; while the wealthiest Louisiana families (earning over $1 million per year) pay only 4.6% of their income in state and local taxes. That is unacceptable, as a starting point.

Let’s stop right here and think for a moment. Jindal’s plan is to get rid of income-based taxation, so are the clergymen arguing for or against the plan? It doesn’t make sense to open up your arguments against a proposal to get rid of the state’s income tax by pointing out the disparity between what the poor pay and what the rich pay, does it? If you read the paragraph, if looks like the exact argument you should make IN FAVOR of Jindal’s plan. Want the taxing of Louisiana citizens to be fair? Everyone pays the same rate in a form of taxes that doesn’t allow for breaks and exemptions. Stupendous.

Jindal’s plan is centered mostly around one thing: raising the sales tax by less than two cents per every dollar you spend. It widens what sales tax applies to and boosts cigarette tax by more than a dollar, but the bulk of the proposal currently focuses on that first part. Are you going to tell me that two more cents per dollar is going to break the bank? If that’s the case, rethink your personal budget.