Justice: Some like it hot

So I was listening to my podcasts and on the Magic School Bus James Cagle was talking about a variation on a Lorwyn block deck, Quick n' Toast, called Justice Toast or White Hot Justice. Though Lorwyn block is past (rotated out early October to make room for Zendikar), this caught my interest. I am a strong believer in Archon of Justice, for whom the deck is named. Quick n' Toast was originally a three to five color deck, based largely on aggressive creatures and controlling the board. Justice Toast replaces a couple of the cards with Archons of Justice. The Archon is a 4/4 flier for three and two white, which, when it is put into a graveyard from play, removes a permanent from the game. This is a solid, solid card and Cagle explains why it was so good. I'm not going to bore you with any further Magic-related details, since at this point you're all either confused as a groundhog in a croquet game or as bored as a tree with beetles.

This argument made me thoughtful. Cagle was very persuasive and encourages this build with hard facts, such as the deck's winning records and its effectiveness against other decks in the format. His inflection and tone are very casual, although his tone is serious. He pauses during his explanation of the deck to allow either his cohost to put in his thoughts or to allow the listener to think about some point he just made. He emphasizes the Archon's effectiveness against some of the more terrifying cards in the format (Cloudthresher, Oona, Garruk, etc.) and its strength before its effect activates. Not to mention its similarity to the original Toast build and how well that deck did. All in all, Cagle convinced me and made me think about how obscure, possibly unplayable cards can be quite good and, if it was still Lorwyn block season, I would definately consider building Justice Toast and running out to play it.

Celebrities vs. Important people

I remember the first time I found out that my parents are paid less than a major league baseball player. I also remember how infuriated I was at how idiotic America is. You see, my parents are both surgeons. My dad is a trauma surgeon, saving the lives of people who are injured in accidents and other distressing circumstances. My mom is a breast surgeon (please boys, no snickering), saving the lives of many women who would otherwise fall to cancer. And these good people are paid less than some idiot who can swing a bat or run with a ball. Personally, I think that there's something HIDEOUSLY wrong with that. Also, I heard that airplane pilots are paid less than your average bartender. Again, my point is proven. The man keeping you up in the air and alive is paid less than the man who makes you your alchoholic beverage. If you were old enough to drink, that is. And if you're reading this and you're not Mrs. Cardona, what are you doing with that whiskey? Put that away. '

I think that this unfairness of monetary distribution is probably part of America's overemphasis on leisure. We put our own comfort above our safety or the wellbeing of others. I won't deny that I myself have been guilty of this. I have. Quite frequently. I am also aware that if I don't stop, this post will make me a hypocrite. This is a sacrifice I am willing to make. I think that America has to get off its butt and pay more to the people who matter. Johnny Depp isn't going to save your life if you get in a car accident. Brett Favre isn't going to fly you safely from Minnesota to Florida. Kayne West isn't going to teach you how to calculus. But he will do this. So we need to pay essential jobs more than nonessential jobs.

And if you disagree, I'd like to have a conversation with you. No, that wasn't intended as a threat, I'd honestly like to hear your reasons why you think that sports stars and celebrities should be paid more than the hard working people who keep us alive and make our world work.

PS: Look at the bottom of the page for my awesome campaign poster!

Animal Rights

I really feel strongly about animal rights and I feel I have a completely different side than Hearne or Singer. I feel that animals have rights, but not in the same sense as humans. They're not humans. Some are closer than others (apes, dolphins, etc.) but they're not at the same level of sentience as humans. And if they are, they're hiding it really well. I feel that animals should be well treated and respected, especially in respect to their habitats. Even animals to be slaughtered should be well treated until we kill them. Because let's face it. If it weren't for us, they wouldn't exist. This BS that animal rights activists spout about freeing farm animals? You know what that would be? Near genocide. Those animals couldn't survive on their own. And if we all stop eating meat like those bizzaros want us to? Again, genocide. That's what those races of animals were bred to do. Be food. And if they stop doing that, what will they do? Absolutely nothing. Farmers who breed cows and pigs and other food animals will stop selling them, will become poor and will be unable to feed their animals. And that will result in those animals starving to death. And then we'll see those cute cows on the endangered species list. Do you want that? No. Keep buying steaks.

I do, however, agree that animal testing has to be moderated somehow. The examples given by Singer mortified me and I am shocked that such things are allowed to occur. We rant and rave against torture of our fellow man, but mice and cats and who knows how many other animals are being tortured for no good reason? Now don't take this the wrong way. I'm not some PETA freak who wants to go and "rescue" all the animals from labs. I understand that mice breed at a ridiculous rate and are good for cancer research and that they're not allowed to test on humans (Which is dumb. There are 6 billion of them and increasing...). But the electric shock or starvation test? Thoroughly unnecessary. There should be a government organization set up to regulate this kind of thing.

So yeah. I don't agree with Hearne or Singer. I think they're both going about it the wrong way. They both had good points, but I still don't think either of them quite had it.