Outraw's Blog

♫♪‎30 best albums of the last decade (2000-2009)♫♪

outraw — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 21:44:30 +0000

‎1. Mandala – Rx Bandits (2009)
2. Grand pecking order – Oysterhead (2001)
3. Relationship of command – At the drive in (2000)
4. A poet’s life – Tim Armstrong (2007)
5. To the five boroughs – Beastie Boys (2004)
6. The mouse and the mask – Danger Doom (2005)
7. Real gone – Tom waits (2004)
8. American IV – Johnny Cash (2002)
9. Party Music – The Coup (2001)
10. Renegades – Rage against the machine (2000)
11. White blood cells – White stripes (2001)
12. Weezer – Weezer (2001)
13. Lovesick, broke, and driftin’ – Hank III (2002)
14. De-Loused in the Comatorium – the Mars Volta (2003)
15. Franz Ferdinand – Franz Ferdinand (2004)
16. Animals should not try to act like people – Primus (2003)
17. Skull & Bones – Cypress hill (2000)
18. Speakerboxxx/ the love below – Outkast (2003)
19. Steal this album – System of a down (2002)
20. Fire & Hail – 357. String band (2008)
21. Assjack – Assjack (2009)
22. Wolfmother – Wolfmother (2006)
23. Blood money – Tom Waits (2002)
24. Songs for the deaf – Queens of the stone age (2002)
25. On the front lines – the Causalities (2004)
26. Hell yeah – Horropops (2004)
27. Elephant – Black eyed peas (2004)
28. Rancid – Rancid (2000)
29. Drunken lullabies – Flogging Molly (2002)
30. Highly evolved – The Vines (2002)

P.s. This list is final! I don’t care what you think about this list. I don’t care if you think it’s missing something. I don’t care if you think something that’s on it shouldn’t be. This is the music that moved me in the 2000’s and if you don’t like it, piss off.

America 2084

outraw — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 15:40:52 +0000

I’ve been torn up by the recent Supreme Court decision to overturn Teddy Roosevelt’s as well as other campaign reforms. I am always an advocate of free speech first and as an advocate of free speech I applaud the court for recognizing that “Hillary the movie” is no different that any other piece of media. It is no different that Fahrenheit 911, or Zeitgeist, or 60 minutes for that matter and has every right to be covered under free speech and every right to obtain funding from any source as well as any amount; however as a opponent of corporatism this ruling has me quite vexed. I feel stretched thin, losing sleep at night, and I just don’t know how to react. This is probably by far the most important Supreme Court ruling in my lifetime.

As a student of media I feel that censorship of any documentary cannot be tolerated. This movie is someone’s intellectual property; the federal government has no right to abridge production or distribution of said film. The idea that the Federal Election Commission can stop a political documentary from being distributed is new to me. If I were to make a political documentary, which I have done in the past, I would fully expect to promote, distribute and finance the film anyway I see fit. Why does the Federal Election Commission have authority over the entertainment industry anyway? Shouldn’t they be more concerned with direct contributions to candidates? Why can big oil and coal buy candidates off directly, but yet they can’t spend freely on political adds? I mean I should be celebrating this decision. This is a big win for free speech, but instead I’m hanging out with Glenn Beck; curled up in the fetal position saying to myself “I need my foil hat, I need my foil hat, I need my foil hat.” It makes me wonder what else has been censored; what other documentaries, books have we yet to see?

While the idea of having lots of foreign capital in our electoral process scares the hell out of me this blatant censorship of press goes against the core principle of the first amendment. My two greatest fears with this ruling is that: 1) with corporate interest having higher stakes in government will mean bigger government, bigger authoritarian style government; much more scary and oppressive than you will get with lefty style socialism. 2) with trade unions and non-citizens having nothing to stop them we could have a western version of the E.U. in a matter of decades.

I’ve always said for years that it’s unions and corporations that undermine and overturn the basic principals if our Constitution. With unlimited involvement from these entities the only way to bring this corruption to a halt is to rethink the fundamental roll of government. We need to recognize that the motivation for the corporations to be involved in our government is the size of the government itself. In other words if the government is small there is nothing for the corporations to control. I’m starting to get the feeling that health reform is the least of our worries now. With special interest unlimited the government will just grow and grow. It won’t matter who is the White House or Congress whether it’s a Democrat or Republican. I feel like any day now I’m going to wake up in 1984 with a television that never turns off and a barcode tattooed on the back of my neck. Perhaps this is an exaggeration, perhaps I’m over thinking this a little, but honestly are my fears completely unfounded?

MUSIC FROM THOSE WHO LOVE LIBERTY part 4

outraw — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 16:23:19 +0000

This is Deltron 3030, they are an Anarchist hiphop group that hides there criticism of the government through a sci-fi storyline.

Here are some of the lyrics to Virus:

I wanna devise a virus
To bring dire straits to your environment
Crush your corporations with a mild touch
Trash your whole computer system and revert you to papyrus
I want to make a super virus
Strong enough to cause blackouts in every single metropolis
Cuz they dont wanna unify us
So fuck it total anarchy
Can’t nobody stop us

Livin’ Leviathan Loca!

outraw — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 16:22:21 +0000

This quarter I’ve declared political science as my corollary, which is practically a minor(except it is required), so I’m taking political theory 270. This class has some interesting reads (which I will be commenting on throughout the quarter), some I’ve already read, most I haven’t. The readings include a spectrum of political theorists such as John Stuart Mill, Rousseau, Emma Goldman, John Locke, and of course Carl Marx. We seem to be moving chronologically through these works. Our first read is Thomas Hobbes “Leviathan” which is new to me. To me this concept is really strange. I’ve read many political books and I’ve argued both for and against many political ideas, but I don’t think I’ve ever read up on such a theory that defends absolute power. Even Chinese legalism had a hierarchy. Hobbes seems to be certain that the only way to maintain a state is to concentrate power to one individual. Wow! Where do I get in line to complain? Unlike many of my colleagues I am not in favor of the abolition of our state or any state for that matter, but I may make an exception for the state described in the Leviathan. In my opinion the reason our Constitution is the oldest in the world that is still in use is because it denies absolute power, but as I thought about it I realized that I was projecting my own personal America into this juxtaposition. When you look at the principals behind the Leviathan in comparison to our own government there are much more parallels than contrasts. Like the rights of the sovereign: to halt protest, to decide what doctrine shall be taught, to dictate property rights, and defend the country without question of actions taken or fear of punishment by the subjects. The few liberties that are given to subjects in the Leviathan also mirror the American justice system. So we’re living it baby! This sounds just like the Bush-Obama administration. Livin’ Leviathan Loca!

MUSIC FROM THOSE WHO LOVE LIBERTY part 3

outraw — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 16:19:25 +0000

this is an indy band called The Gitmos.

the philosophy of liberty

outraw — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 16:17:08 +0000

Angry rant (rabble rabble rabble)

outraw — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 16:16:36 +0000

Glenn Beck is a crybaby! Seriously, what kind of news caster cries on air, how pathetic, and un-professional. and don’t try to act like that was real emotion. Make no mistake Beck works for crony corporate news and will say anything outrageous to get ratings, and as soon as Obama’s out of office he’s going to go back his old ways because that’s what’s best for his ratings. He uses emotionalism to make his points and get viewers’ attention. If your going to feed a kid cod liver oil you got to put some sugar in it first. The sugar called the performing arts. He, Keith Oberman, Limbaugh, and Lou Dobbs are all a bunch of over-emotional poor excuses for journalists. You can’t even call this nonsense journalism! That is a gross misuse of the term and a knock on all real journalist everywhere.

Republicans are all about small government when the democrats are in control. Frankly, I’m getting sick of the lip service. They are equally corrupt and so are their ass-sucking political pundits like crybaby Beck. Yes, yes we do need to tell the other side of the story. The other side to crybaby Glenn Beck’s story is that he’s not concerned with the roll of government, or the victims of 9/11. He just has a poopy diaper. If someone would just change him and give him a bottle he’d stop crying and go right to sleep. His favorite food is whaaa burgers and french cries, def lepperd sux! Some say that Beck’s questions are important for the pendulum sway of democracy, which would be find if he were asking questions of relevance. He is a crony corperate lie. he does nothing to start any real debate. He uses anagrams and arguments that are frivolous and un-debatable due to their logical fallacies within. Could you imagine if Walter Cronkite used acronyms of a president’s name to sway public opinion about him. They would have committed him. Well, if your counting on a crony corporate news-goblin correspondent like crybaby Beck to help you with challenging the system, you might as well embrace commie-socialist, big government uber alles right now.

In case math seems a little fuzzy, the combined amount of trustworthy newscasters on FOX+CNN+MSNBC+ABC+CBS+any crony corporate networks= a big fat ZERO! Olbermann=liar, ed sholts=liar, bill O’riely=liar, lou Dobbs=liar, Beck=big fat corporate liar. All these people are here to sell ad space and nothing else. yeah, Beck stimulates conversation,… conversation amongst conspiracy theorist, and I assure you anyone who buys what he or any of these other crony corporate welfare pirates are saying are definitely not thinking. If they were thinking they wouldn’t call protest anything but grassroots. If they were thinking they wouldn’t attack the President’s policy by using Nazi symbolism. If they were thinking they would turn off the damn TV and pick up a mother fucking book! Black as a backroom deal, 6 feet under with an air tight seal. The press, for the blinded mice. Controls what you eat and wear. What is in and what is out. NO MORE! media control! The devil in disguise, is the ABC, Fuck the CNN, Lying NBC. Fox and CBC, UPI and BBC. The USA today is the real 666. Kick the addiction to lobbied news or embrace big government uber alles right now.

why welfare doesn’t work

outraw — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 16:13:52 +0000

“Programs that are labeled as being for the poor, for the needy almost always have affects exactly the opposite of those which the well-intended sponsors intended them to have.”
-Milton Friedman

Why is it that the lowest among us stagnate? Have you ever noticed that generations of families continue to live in the projects again and again? Have you ever noticed that those who are below the poverty line must have the thickest resolve if they want to make an honest living? We cannot defend, but certainly we can understand why some in this situation would turn to selling drugs or committing theft to supplement the income that the government steals from them. Government sponsored housing is the biggest scam since the Great Depression and it’s time that it be unmasked for the penny-pinching monster that it is.

In 1964 President Johnson started his infamous War on Poverty and it worked,… temporarily. The Johnson administration saw the impoverished population go from 34million to about 24 million, a modest improvement. It was successful enough that the Nixon, Ford, and Carter administrations continued different yet similar versions of the policy; however to their dismay the numbers stagnated. Reagan thought that adding lower taxes would help the poor,…it did not, in fact by the end of Reagan’s first term the numbers were right back where they started and by the end of Bush 41’s tenure it was a whopping 40 million! The Census bureau’s said in 2005 that the numbers are around 37 million, but it is expected to be higher in 2010 due to the recession.

So, why didn’t it work? Tens of billions of dollars later, why do we still have all these people on government assistance? The “War on Poverty” is no different than the war in Nam, or the war in Iraq, or a War on drugs. Not only can it never be won through conventional means, but it’s not supposed to be won. No, the truth is it is to be endlessly continued in order to exploit both the poor and the well-to-do while giving the illusion of helping society. The government provides amenities like cable TV, cell phones, and other non-necessities in order to make a life of poverty as comfortable as possible. The amount of aid given to the poor is based on income, so for every step forward you take the government pushes back to insure that you will not rise above the fray. If you’re rich and you are punished for your successes, what do you do? Well, you angrily write a check as you pay more taxes while maintaining your lifestyle, but what if you’re poor and punished for your successes, what then? The only way to keep the government out of your wallet when you’re poor is to go under the table, become a criminal.

“Most economic fallacies derive from the tendency to assume that there is a fixed pie, that one party can gain only at the expense of another.”-Milton Friedman

a story of a man in denile

outraw — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:08:48 +0000

this is a story about a thirty year old blind man that can not tell a good thing when sees it. If I knew five years ago what I know now I would have been on the cutting edge of blogging. Before taking this class I had a long running blog on myspace, but I really did not use it that much, only very, very rarely. In fact I only wrote in it is when either I want to publish an essay that I had wrote for school or I just had something troubling on my mind without a close friend or family member there to comfort me. I have always enjoyed writing so it makes sense that I should like writing in blogs, right? But I guess it just never hit me that a blog might be a good outlet for music, writing, politics, none of that stuff. I must say that now that I have actually maintained a blog I see it is a whole lot of fun and practically free of charge at that. I never realized the kind of correspondence that goes on in the blogging community, or that there was even a blogging community to begin with for that matter. I never realized the blogging was such a good way to spread concepts and learn about the cultures, concepts, and ideas of others. It is like everyone gets to run there own newspaper company with out the writers charges or printing fees. I will definitely take this knowledge further in my private blog and excel in everything I want to do with it.

When I first heard of blogs I thought that they were like instant messaging only slower and more boring, but now I see it is a whole another world in there. When I first found out that we were going to be doing blogs for the class I thought that it was kind of weird. I mean what does this have to do with popular culture? Why blogs and why not more papers? Keep in mind, not that I was complaining. I’ll take a few blogs over more paperwork any day of the week. Of course now I see, it has everything to do with popular culture and then some. When we started the quarter there was a big deal going on about Kanye West and that country singer and I always thought this is what popular culture is about, stupid teeny bopper stuff that I don‘t care about and neither will anyone else in a month or so when the new “thing“ comes about, but now it seems so insignificant that I can not remember some of the simplest details about it. Fleeting moments like this Kanye West incident come and go all the time endlessly and without mercy, but this is not what pop culture is all about, oh no. It is all about concepts like the feature of hegemonic masculinity, class struggles, high culture, among other themes and the modes, technologies by which we communicate these concepts.

MUSIC FROM THOSE WHO LOVE LIBERTY part 2:women in charge

outraw — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:58:24 +0000

In the past fifty years woman’s roll in the entertainment industry had been bitter at best; as well as reflecting the stereotype that women are nothing more than a receptacle, unthinking and docile. Especially in the eighties it seemed women were portrayed as nothing more that cheerleaders for a bunch of spandex wearing jocks with big hair metal bands. This isn’t just limited to glam metal it is an epidemic sweeping all of the industry’s stages; where you find musicians you find groupies. In fact only a handful of serious female musicians ever break mainstream and the first time they say or do anything scrupulous the record companies will drop them if the public doesn’t do it first. Despite the pressures of society occasionally progressive women break through their chosen genres and change the life of both women and men in that part of the culture leaving the rest completely ignorant. The macho image put off by the early punk rock counter-culture seems an unlikely place for a woman to vent; however most early punks would agreed that the patriarchy was a manifestation of an involuntary hierarchy, part of the struggle for the lower social classes and at the heart of censorship and the world’s most oppressive governments. Crass was no exception to the punk rock stereotype; they were a very aggressive sounding band for there time.

Eve Libertine was a fan of the group when they formed in the late seventies, and became a full fledged member before their first album. Penis Envy, released in 1981, was the third L.P. of the British punk band and the only one that features exclusively female vocals and writings. Immediately after it’s seizing in 1985 it came under fire in the British press for it’s risqué name and provocative cover, but as history shows there is no such thing as bad publicity. From the first few sentences the album’s harmony with feminism is clear. Clearly in a sarcastic tone, unique to punk rock, addressing the social attitudes towards women and the notion that they are property.

People like Eve Libertine and Wendy O’ Williams may not have made a huge mark on the feminist community as a whole, but it is clear that they did have an impact on men and women in their genre. They took what was primarily a boys club and opened their minds to their own prejudice so that both sexes to enjoy it. It would be hard to imagine what the punk genre would be like without them.