Just thought I'd mention something that is bugging me. The news today has been filled with "Columbus was a horrible guy." Oddly, the two major reasons for this claim are, according to these articles, is that he:

• Really thought he was in India and named Native Americans thus
• Brought smallpox to the New World, thereby decimating populations

Okay... Well, I was just thinking about how this seems like two pretty horrid reasons to refuse to celebrate Columbus Day or to make students put Columbus on a mock trial (several schools do this, and invariably find him guilty of crimes ranging from genocide to misrepresenting the Crown. Sentences range from life in prison to execution).
Simple facts.

1. No, he did not "discover" America in the literal sense, since others lived there and in fact other Caucasians had been there centuries before. However, no one knew of this land--at least not in Europe. Albeit accidentally, Columbus brought the New World into the limelight and changed history.
2. While he did not prove his (and other people's) theory that the world is round by sailing all the way to India, his trip did also push forward the debate and appeared to inspire others to try the same.
3. Why is smallpox always held against him? If I accidentally give you a cold because I was carrying it but didn't realize it, am I an evil guy? What about all those people who travel to Mexico, drink water, and become sick? That must mean the Mexicans are evil because their normal flora makes us sick! Just seems ridiculous to blame someone for that, especially considering that smallpox nearly decimated the Caucasian population in America as well, and remained a massive threat until the vaccine allowed us to eradicate it.
4. This is not a response to a complaint, but Columbus's own diary has some interesting parts about how he viewed the native population. He seemed excited to meet them and, while he did discuss possibly converting them to his religion, he did not in any way suggest using force; he felt they would be quite friendly and open-minded. Future explorers were not so kind or understanding (read: conquistadors).

So I guess I am trying to just say that I hate revisionist history. At one point, Columbus was a hero. Now he is an evil man who should not even be mentioned except as the bringer of TEH SMALLPOX OMG! Did he do things that were bad? Oh, I'm sure. Did he screw up some? Of course. Guess what? He was a human, and humans tend to do that kind of thing for some crazy reason. Face it, if it weren't for him, history may have been drastically different, and quite possibly in a bad way. Accept that, and don't go saying he was a totally mean and evil guy.

Okay, so... Someone posted this on Facebook, and I figured I'd share this. Swine Flu 1976 This is from 1976, when the first H1N1 scare occurred.

For reference, the swine flu vaccine killed many more people than the actual swine flu did.

To make matters worse, they are intending to institute vaccination for it in grade schools across the country. This is a vaccine with little to no research as to its efficacy. The kids will be becoming essentially beta testers for something that historically killed more people than that which it was supposed to protect against.

Health care practitioners are supposed to get it; some places have threatened to fire those who don't comply. Interestingly, so many healthcare workers are refusing, that if the hospitals and whatnot actually followed through on their threats, they'd pretty much shut down from lack of nurses and doctors.
Think about it... health care professionals... medically trained people... many are refusing to get it, and yet the government and other institutions are pushing to give it to all school children.

I am, incidentally, very much in favor of vaccinations. I think children should be given the regular battery of vaccinations. I believe people at risk should get the regular flu shot. But I am VERY much against this vaccine. It has little supporting safety research, and its predecessors were deadly.

Here's an interesting conundrum for those of you who are interested in English. Does anyone know when the term "kidnaped" fell out of favor and was replaced with "kidnapped"?

For those of you that don't know, Teen Choice is sort of like what the Academy Awards is for people who weren't somehow a Disney celebrity. Not really--it's hosted by Fox--but there always seems to be at least one celebrity that was churned out by the Disney celebrity pipeline.

Anyway, I don't watch these things just like I never watch the other awards shows, but on reading a few summaries, I thought I'd comment on one person. Miley.
Miley Cyrus, better known as "Hannah Montana," the daughter of Billy Ray Cyrus (of "Achy Breaky Heart" fame), and one of the biggest celebrities Disney has ever produced of course won awards and also performed.

And oh boy did she perform. She wore a rather revealing outfit given her supposedly moral standpoint. There was an ice cream truck there in her dance routine, and she actually did a somewhat racy pole dance on the truck's pole.
Okay, so... in her acceptance speech, she went on a rant about how she thanked God for her being here. And that's where my major problem lies. First, we're talking an audience of 12-19 year olds, and she's basically pretending to be a stripper. This is WONDERFUL encouragement for children. Then, she has the audacity to somehow act holier-than-thou and essentially pray onstage to a God that would probably be rather ticked off at her at this point, assuming he even cares enough to be watching her strut around at the Teen Choice awards.

This is the same girl who, not long ago, had some rather racy nude pictures taken of her (apparently not showing anything, but considering she's not even 18 yet, and she keeps touting God as her personal go-to guy...yeah).
My philosophy is that, if you believe in God, that's fine. If you're a celebrity and you do, that's great too. Heck, I don't even care when someone proselytizes me (I used to have a Moonie friend, so I know all about that) as long as it's done with respect and they take no for an answer. But...Strutting around like a wannabe slut, getting nude photos done, and then announcing happily that you're soooo religious and it's totally God's doing that you're where you are and you and He are really close buddies... Really?

I hate hypocrites.

(p.s. This is not meant to bash on religion in the slightest... just on those who use it so conveniently and publicly in stark contrast to what they actually are like as people)

Well, it's time for another brief rant by me. Granted, this one is not as interesting as the last one, but it is on a somewhat important topic.
Some of you may have read that a Harvard professor who was, incidentally, black, was arrested by officers for what amounts to disorderly conduct. Immediately, President Obama condemned the cops' actions and said that they had "acted stupidly" (his words exactly). Publicity has been extremely harsh and calls have been made to see the cops suspended or even fired. Oh, I'm sure you may have guessed that the cops in question are white and that this has been panned as a case of blatant racism. Ultimately, the charges were dropped.

To give you an idea of how this has been so blown out of proportion to where it is no longer about this professor, it is actually a chore to find the arrested individual's name in the news articles about it. He has been made into an African American "Everyman" and the cops into impersonal Straw Men who look for any excuse to lock up 'uppity Negroes' (a phrase used in one news article). For the record, his name is Henry Louis Gates, Jr.

Before you jump on the bandwagon and say that there was no justification for the arrest, I urge you to take a look at the basic facts. Someone saw an individual breaking into property owned by this professor. The cops responded and discovered Gates doing the breaking in and claiming to own the property. The cops naturally asked for identification, but was instead met with hostility. He got verbally abusive, and it is unclear whether he even complied with the request for identification. Insults included such mature comments as "I'll speak with your mama outside," certainly something he learned in the many rhetoric classes he must have attended during his doctoral education.

The cops state that they arrested Gates after a crowd formed. In other words, they put the handcuffs on when he refused identification and then started to abuse them publicly. Keep in mind also that all the cops knew coming into this scene was that someone was breaking into a building convincingly enough to freak out the neighbors, and yet the professor treated it like a personal affront and railed at them for asking for information that would confirm his story.

I fail to see how this is even an issue of race. Someone acted stupidly, got arrested, and got lucky in that the charges were dropped. It annoys me that the entire nation is saying "OMG poor victimized black person" and not looking at the details that seem to show that the cops were not entirely in the wrong. Could it have been handled differently? Perhaps. I wasn't there, nor was anyone else who is going nuts over this story. But it was hardly entirely unjustifiable. It also annoys me that the President decided to jump in on it and essentially call the cops stupid. This is added to other such brilliant things as comparing his bowling skills to the skill level of special olympic athletes and ordering a photo op of Air Force One flying low over New York in spite of warnings that this would cause a panic (which it did with people calling 911 screaming "oh my god it's 9/11 all over again!!!). But I guess that's fodder enough for an entirely new rant sometime.



...seriously, wth... Flying a large plane low over NYC without giving any sort of warning and somehow expecting people to NOT freak out???