I'm sure you are wondering why we up and left

Hey guys, as you are all well aware, I posted a Jar-Jar themed prompt and then we all disappeared. I want to apologize for not keeping you in the loop, but Eli promised he would be the one to tell you guys. Eli, you are being called out for that. Me and the other authors of this blog have picked up a large and time consuming project together. Us, along with a friend or two of ours, are writing a novel together. It, without revealing too many details, is about an MPD guy in the seemingly Utopian future following WWIII. When the rebellious movement threatens to take down the government system put in place young Aref is the only one who can stop it. How can he, when he can't control himself? Sorry for the bit of dramatic and shameless self promotion there, but seriously. Aref, like everyone in this society, can wield magic, but he is special, each of his personalities can wield a different one of the 4 elements, unlike most people, who wield one or more, but in harmony. We are switching off personalities perspectives in chapters as the story fits, and each one of us has control over his personality. I am writing from the emotional and indecisive fire personalities perspective. The best sword wielding badass ever. Eli is earth, the emotionally detached rock, against all forms of change, choosing gauntlets to smash his way through the opposition. Wolter is air, the whimsy and fun loving aspect in it to have a good time. His chain batons crash and smash can combine to a bowstaff called eclipse when it is time to get serious. Our main man Jasper is writing as water, the lazy, dagger wielding, occasionally sarcastic son of a gun, who has strong opinions, but chooses the easiest method to get to his end goals. Together, we are writing four totally different people in one head and body, with only one thing in common, the desire to bring peace to the conflicted society. Sorry, I self promoted again. Anyways, you will know that you have read it when the name Mr.Squiggles brings tears to your eyes. See ya and allons-y.

My Apologize

Heya messa guys. My apologize for the late-yness of mine proposal. Mine was camping witha mes Cub Scouts. Messa wanna know, was Jar-Jar meant to be a Sith lord originally? Did they just not have the balls to proceed as planned? Those unfamiliar with the theory follow this link Darth Jar Jar. Meesa see yousa and Allon-ee.

Not so Farfetch'd of an Idea Anymore

     Before I chose a team and explain to you how little I have played Pokemon Go, I want to take a moment to look at how far we've gotten. There haven't been many games of this magnitude before, which take GPS and GIS to such a level (Obviously Eli mentioned one). However the game is still new, and there are glitches once in a while.
     I have not encountered many glitches however, and so I would like to say that the game is very well developed. Personally, all of the teams have their perks. If you wish to side with the more powerful teams, then players should choose Mystic or Valor. I chose Valor for the sake of choosing a team. However, those who want a challenge should join Instinct because of its relatively low strength. Instinct is also a good option because there are not many yellow gyms. As the Geek has said before, the joke is that the gyms turning yellow is a glitch. In all honesty I say Instinct is for hardcore players, because it so difficult to rise to the top, but most people say that's team valor.
     In reality there is no difference between the teams, it is just hype. So even though I chose Valor, I gotta say I am neutral in terms of teams. This game was made to be addicting, and I abstain from playing so that I have time to do other things. So right now I don't really play as much anymore.
Overall, Pokemon Go is a great game for those who are interested. I can recommend it to people who have some free time on their hands.

Mystic-fying topic

Hey guys! So, the beginning of this debate is what do we think about the game. Despite all of the hate it has received as of late for a multitude of reasons, I love the game, even with my extremely limited data plan. I mean, I share a gig with a data hog. Now, the reason I love it is because, that, although people think it is taking away from the social aspect of life, it isn't. It is getting millions of hopeless nerds like me away from the great indoors, and out walking, talking to people. Even if its about Pokemon. It is not the game's fault that people trespass on private property, find things that would otherwise be hidden, or drive while playing. It is not the fault of the game that Pokemon show up while people are lying down. It isn't rape. It is not the games fault it was unprepared for all the people. There are only 2 things that are the fault of the game. That we don't have a good Pokemon tracker, and that glitch where the gyms turn yellow. (Just kidding, in my area Mystic and Instinct are brothers against Valor).
That brings us on to teams, I picked Mystic as soon as I made level 5, before the sway went towards it, and without being influenced by the Goldilocks effect of it being placed in the middle, the color, or any friends. I picked because of my idealism. I am an intellectual and somewhat introverted person who has always used evolution to my advantage, and goes about life with planning and strategy. That is team Mystics ideals, and I will defend that as the goal of the team for all time.

Trust your Instinct

Hey Guys,
So, to address the matter at hand. I have been a Pokemon fan since the games came out. I also played Ingress, Niantic's first AR game, for three years before Pokemon Go came out. So naturally I knew the day it came out that the game I had been waiting for since the initial announcement(1.5 years before) had come out, and I have been playing it constantly since then. Everyone is giving it a hard time for the servers and crashes, but as any new game, there are bugs that will be fixed. This is coupled with the HUGE load the first day. There were 50,000 downloads on Android when I got the app the first day it came out. That is why the servers were down more often. Now, they haven't crashed in 20 hours, and have 99.64% up-time in the last 24 hours. Id say that's a huge improvement over the first day.
Then there is the game itself. I love the game, because, like Ingress it give me a reason to get outside and off of the computer. I have met everyone from 5 year olds to 60 year olds playing this game, and almost everyone has been friendly, and willing to talk. There is some nice competition, with nothing too extreme.(of course there are always the one who take it too far.)
On to the matter of teams. Unless you are living under a Snorlax, you know that there are three teams in the game, Valor, Instinct, and Mystic. Once you  reach level five, you can choose a team and battle against other teams for control of gyms. There are numerous team stereotypes, some of them holding true (though not to the extreme extent). Basic rundown is, Valor and Mystic are highly competitive, both with a easy competition with Instinct. Valor is filled with the people who work the hardest, sometime until 1 or 2 in the morning. Mystic are the smart ones who over-analyze the game, and Instinct is filled with people who don't care about super competitive (I just made a new word). All of these stereotypes hold somewhat true, but not to the extent of the memes.
 I personally like instinct. I made it to twenty on that team, and there are less of us, which leads to a nice challenge. I'm one of the strongest in my area for my team, so I get a lot of the gyms to myself. I think Spark is the best leader, especially the way the memes portray him. I have no life outside of games, working and this blog though, so I may have a biased opinion to begin with. Thanks for reading, feel free to comment your views.
-Eli

Lets GO! Get a Life

Hey Guys,
Since Wolter was too lazy to post a topic this week, I have decided to post for him. This is one of the most controversial issues facing america today. Pokemon Go. There are two parts to this, taking a break from the super serious issues. First, what is your view on the game. Second which team. We will not hate on you (even if you chose valor). I look forward to the discussion.

What is with the Gendermandering?

     Hey guys, sorry for the late post, I was a little busy this week. During this topic I would like to say that gender-based partitioning in the workplace or any other professional setting is absurd. If a woman can do the same work as a man, then they should get the same pays, opportunities, and benefits. As Eli has mentioned, in general (I am not saying in all cases) women are physically weaker than men, but if they can do jobs that require physical labor just as well as men, then I say they should be able participate. This goes for any field whether it be physically or mentally demanding
     As for gender based stereotypes, I feel that it is up to each individual person to figure out what they want. In a relationship for example, it should be up to the couple what roles they assign each other. If the man wishes to shoulder the responsibility of asking the woman out, or paying the bills, as tradition goes, then that is their choice. If the woman wants to do it, then by all means I don't think it should be discouraged. What I am trying to get at is that it is up to each individual to figure out what they want socially. Of course it will not be as easy as I make it out to be. After all, people have assigned gender roles since ancient times when the hunting was partitioned for men, and gathering berries was assigned to women. Some people may have a difficult time breaking from it. 

Roleing over the competition.

Hey guys. I personally think that gender roles, despite the evolutionary advantage they gave our species in the past, have come to a point where they are no longer needed. However, we can not ditch completely the fact that the 2 genders are different. We must accept those differences as we accept the inconsistencies between 2 people. However, in this movement for the rights of women, things are being warped. There are groups out there trying to make women "more equal if you will" with people fighting that men are nothing but misogynistic pigs, and that they should be treated poorly because of their gender, and the wrongs that our ancestors have committed. Just the same as no Caucasian should be punished, or treated worse, because of the slavery that their ancestors put in place or because of the racism that some still hold today, no man should be treated poorly because of the actions of men throughout history. I agree with equality coming into place, but true equality, with the females taking the pains, as well as the pleasures, that society has laid out for men, and vice versa. If a girl hits a guy, he should be allowed to retaliate in kind, without shame for hitting a girl. Females should be taught to ask males out on dates, and maybe even pay some of the time, instead of waiting for people to come along bearing promises of free dinner all the time, and even rejecting that from time to time. If people of both genders asked each other out, and paid based on their incomes, codes of values, and every other possible variable, than the world would be more equal. I also believe that this one change would be the first step to taking gender roles to absolute ambiguity. True equality is what I strive for in any circumstance, and hate when things are unfair. However, fighting too hard for equality can often make people lose sight of what equality is. Take the police brutality case that has been going on for a while, just because some police officers get out of line, get hungry on power, or are just racist jerks, even the good officers of the law are getting a bad rap. People hate police officers now based on what a few of their kind did in the absence of values. Equality must be had by all, and if some members of a certain group or their ancestors before them believe(d) otherwise, than the group as a whole should not be treated any worse. Otherwise, we all stoop down to the level of the people that we hate. It is not easy to accept everyone despite all of the difference, but with some hard work, we can destroy stereotyping, as well as unequal treatment across the boar. See ya and allons-y

I was on a role typing this.

Hey Guys,
        First off I want to say that I got a new keyboard, so if I have typos, just read what I meant it to say. This is a topic that I can't really make my mind up on. I think that some Gender roles have their place. Like the example Geek used in the prompt, of men hitting women. I think that a man should never hit a woman except for cases of self defense. Men naturally are bigger and stronger, which puts us in the situation of having to exercise self control in order to avoid seriously hurting the woman in question (as always this is just most cases, not necessarily all of them). Not saying that a woman couldn't hold her own in a fight, she is just at a disadvantage. (Although I'm a pacifist and really don't think anyone should be hitting anyone.) I do think that when it comes to dating men do have a large responsibility, although this will vary from relationship to relationship. Some men enjoy buying things for their significant other, myself included, so we don't see it as a responsibility but a right, and some women don't want or need the men to care for them that way, and are happy and willing to pick up the tab. Everyone in a relationship should be respectful to the other person, and show that how they will.
        I think gender roles in the work environment are stupid. Unless it is a job that a woman physically could not do, in which case then they shouldn't get the job, but then men who are physically unable to do the job should not be able to get that job either. (for example fire rescue, you need a larger build and more muscles to be able to do some of the things that they do, however if a woman is physically capable of performing at the level required, let her do  it I say.) However, in fields like business and science, women should be able to get the same jobs at the same wages men do. I also think that the societal norm of the stay at home mom/wife should not be there either. I know plenty of families where the mom works and the father is perfectly capable of caring for the kids and cleaning the house. I also know some people who enjoy that kind of work, as opposed to a regular office job. All in all, I think some gender roles have their place, but it depends on the person (or people) in question and the situation.
-Eli

Controversial Issues Gender Role Out

Hey guys. As it seems, my buddy Eli is always doing the most controversial issues. I am gonna stop that temporarily with an issue that plagues our nation today. Gender roles!!! Wolter actually gave me this idea with a statement he said in a video call. I bet he won't be able to guess what it is, as it set a long path of thought going that ended here. Anyhow, with the role of feminism taking it's place here in our society, women are getting more and more rights. However, many of them do not want some of the basic responsibilities of being truly equal. Inter-gender fights (hitting a girl) are not accepted. Asking people out is still the role of the man, as is paying for most things resulting from it. There are many more things of this type that are big issues as of late. Discuss them all is my idea. How equal should we be? Should there be gender roles at all? If so or not, how does this relate to the issues mentioned before? What other issues are under this category? Having opened such a can of worms see ya and allons-y.

Trumpin' Yall

Hey guys, I want to start by apologizing for not coming back on time. I had some stuff blow up in my personal life and, I should be back now. As a person who has grown up in both an upper class american home and a low to middle class american home simultaneously, I could say that I am relatively purple.(Specially since I have always lived in a swing state). I can say, hopefully without offending anyone too bad, that the Republican, Democratic, and Libertarian candidates suck. So, even the biggest 3rd party candidate would not be a good choice. Honestly, I think that if the Tea Party had decided to do something this year, they might have had a chance. Either way though, that is not what voting for a 3rd party this year is about. It is not to get that person in office, it is to send a message, a smack to the face, with the help of whoever gets in office being horrible, that it is time to shed the ways of bipartisanship, and allow other parties to have a shot at success for the good of a country. It is to show our american citizens that a 3rd party vote is not wasted. We just need enough people to do this next year, so that our beautiful country can be truly great again. See ya and allons-y.

A Comical and almost Hillaryious Election

     I have to say that there are many negative things to say about both the Republicans and the Democrats this year, more so than previous elections. I have to say there hasn't been an election with such polarised ideals in a while, which is one of the reasons many agree with this. I have to agree with Eli on this one here, because both candidates have simply gone beyond crazy into the comical and funny area. I have to say that if Obama was somehow able to run for a third term along with these two candidates, I would vote for him instead. However, since the two major parties have become more and more polarized, the time for a third party is ripe. A majority of Americans don't have just republican or democratic ideals, they are in a neutral middle ground. If a third party with sufficient support were to rise in this middle ground, then we may have a serious contender.
     In this election I don't think it will happen, because just as Eli said, voting for a third party is basically throwing your vote away at this point in time. Nobody really knows the third parties as well. Still, if we start voting for third parties in this election, and the candidates in the next election are just as idealistic, then I believe we should all look to a party that can serve as a middle ground. Keep in mind this will only work if the next election is as crazy as this one. This one was too sudden for third parties to take advantage, but if they keep their eyes peeled, then a third party may be able to snatch the victory.
     I say that we vote for a third party, whichever one suits you, and show the candidates that if they are not going to take this seriously, then neither are we. 

Lets throw a Third Party

Hey guys,
I know most people view voting for a third party candidate as wasting your vote. However, I think this election year, if enough people do vote third party, then it can send a message to the current political system that we don't want anymore of their self-interested politicians. I think that the entire government system in america needs fixing (totally different topic). However if one of the two front runners have to win my choice would be Trump. Before all the hate speech starts, let me explain why. I don't approve of Trump or any of his ideals, especially those involving segregation of minorities. However, I do think that his ideas are so far-fetched that he will have a hard time getting congress to do anything about it. He and Congress will just cancel each other out, causing four years of very little progress. When I think about Hillary, and how she only thinks to complete her own agenda, and her party agenda, she could do a lot of damage by getting elected, because Congress would more likely to agree with her.
-Eli

I elect to start a debate

        Hey guys,

This is the first actual post for a while, so I figured I would chose an easy topic to start. What are your views on the election. Please feel free to comment, and since this is naturally a more controversial, please know that none of us will judge you for your posts/comments, and feel free to join the discussion.

-Eli

Back in Backish white

Hey everyone, sorry for making you guys wait all summer. We are getting back into the swing of things, done with vacations and whatnot, so I am happy to inform the word, nay, the entire Internet that we are going to start posting again. One of us will post a discussion question Sunday nights, and the others will respond to it. As always, feel free to chime in with your thoughts.
-Eli

I don't know why this blog doesn't always post right

Hey guys, felt you needed some explanation on why we are gone. Wolter is currently on a multi-continental trip that promises to take several months, I am keeping myself busy with my life and Eli can't do it without us. We will be back when Wolter returns from his last stop, India. See ya and allons-y

Note to self: finish title later

Hey Guys, I would put this post off for a while longer, but i'm leaving to go camping until Tuesday, and WiFi will be a bit spotty. I believe that procrastination is a double-edged sword. I think that doing things last minute leads to a better work, because you spend less time off task while you are working, and your vision for the final product does not change. However, procrastinating too long can lead to incomplete or even un-started final products.
-Eli

Stress

Proposal for yesterday! What are your guy's opinions on procrastination as a whole?

Mind Blowing - and Land Blowing Concept

     Eli has put up the basic history of the nuclear bombs, so I do not feel it is necessary to dive into it. I would like to say that the purpose of nuclear weapons is pointless, because they were made to obliterate a nation as a last resort. However, this would mean that the other nation would also fire off its nuclear warheads, causing utter destruction. I understand that in the past, the bombs were made to end a war, and they served the purpose effectively. However, the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were at a primitive stage, but were still effective forms of destruction. It is unnecessary for anything of greater destructive power. Obviously there are are a few exceptions such as the anti-meteor nuclear warhead prepared for a cosmic threat, but other than that, the extra firepower is just overkill. Nuclear weapons are the most dangerous things that humans have invented, but we are making it worse and worse.  An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind, but a head for a head leaves everyone dead.

The Only Thing I Want Nuked Is The Leftovers

Hey guys. So, before I write on the topic I want to address the plan for the blog from now on. A proposal will go up every Monday and we will respond by the next Sunday. I apologize on behalf of both myself and Wolter for not responding to this proposal for so long. We have been slammed.
On the subject of nuclear weapons, I could speak on this subject for days upon days. I feel that they should never have been used for war in the first place, only for electrical power, if we could harness it. I think the UN should outright ban them in all countries, and permanently ban it from even itself. Because, guess which countries would have access to the weapons? Those on the security council. Who holds permanent seats on the security council? Essentially the same countries that previously had them before the signing of the act stopping more countries from gaining nuclear weapons(which worked so well). I think that the bombs need to be held from everyone. The only situation in which nuclear weapons should be used is if a country nukes another, the UN should be required to nuclear bomb their military hubs. I would love to debate this further, so put your opinion in the comments below and we can debate there! See ya and allons-y!

This post is the bomb

Hey Guys. This is a topic that I can talk about for ages, so i'll try not to bore you all to death. I'll start with a basic history of nuclear weapons. They were developed during World War II, and in order to put an end to the war, the US dropped two nuclear warheads on Japan. After a few countries had developed nuclear weapons, a treaty was signed, preventing countries from gaining nuclear capabilities after that point. Before this was signed, China, The US, France, Russia, and The UK had nuclear weaponry. Since the treaty was put into place, India, Pakistan, North Korea, and possibly Israel have gained nuclear capabilities. I believe that the UN should have possession of nuclear weaponry, but no individual countries. That way, there is a way to hold back countries like North Korea, who have nuclear weapons and won't give them up. That would stop a nuclear war that could destroy the planet, while stopping one rouge country from having all the power. Thanks for reading, despite my wordiness.
-Eli

A Fresh Topic: New and Clear

Hey guys, sorry about the long time it took for me to post; I was a little busy. However I would like to kick this week off with nuclear weapons. Should countries have them? Which countries should have them? What is the point? How do we decide who should have them? And finally, what should we do about it?

Are you Guilty?

My stance on this topic is the same as the Geek's: No matter what the causes were, a crime was committed and it should be punished. I do not think the quote that Geek has posted relates; it is simply saying that if there is doubt, then the people must be punished. I say that they must be proven guilty beyond doubt, and if they are, they should be punished to the full extent regardless of the state that they are in. No matter the reason, if a crime is committed, it is ethically improper. These ethics were decided as a collection of people, and are expressed through the law. Until a law is proven unconstitutional or unfair, then it is assumed that the majority agrees with the law, and therefore no one is above it.

Control yourself

Hey guys. This topic is a hard one for me, as i fall right in the middle. I believe, as geek does, that if there is no way to prove they weren't acting on their own accord, they should be prosecuted. However, if they can prove beyond a doubt that they weren't in control of themselves when they committed the crime, they should be pardoned. I also believe that it should be different depending on the crime. I would be more inclined to give someone a reduced sentence on theft than on murder for example. I fully believe that it depends on the situation.
-Eli

Nothing But a Cliche Quote

Better 10 innocent men are imprisoned, then one guilty one be set free.
We can't prove any person has no choice or memory of the committing of a crime.

Deathly Fear

Hey guys. This is a topic that has been on my mind for over a year now. I have had people and pets dropping left and right. Long story short, this topic is prominent. This issue is not one of being for or against death. I think we are all for it. This is an issue of philosophy, religion, science, and even ethics.
As for the philosophy and religion, I am a Christian, although my faith is most certainly in question at times. If there was the presence of a supreme and all loving god, you would think he would pace out the deaths in a family, unless it could result in a benefit for the family, despite the large amount of grief per time. This may be the circumstances. In the afterlife, as science has shown is most likely to exist, there must be some cure for all Alzheimers, all amnesia, all personality changes. You go through life, changing who you are, and then you die, and boom, there is your spouse, but no longer are you the person they loved. Long story short, it must change you into the person you were at the part of your life that you were best for all your loved ones, while giving back every memory you have ever had. Multiple spouses would have to work out. I think, somehow, it does. This is what is needed.
Say there is a family member, one who is very sick, and the family cannot afford to take care of them, but they find a way to manage. God recognizes that this is a bad situation for them to be in, so, after stretching their wallets and their faith to their limits, he takes the family member into his kingdom. If a lot of the family is sick, the process repeats.  Death can be a good thing, on a family and personal level, which is beyond a whole scientific over population excuse. Still, it would be a little nicer to be able to commune with these dead loved ones.
Now for the ethical bit. Do we extend life when the person is going to die anyways? Is it worth delaying the inevitable, putting them through all that pain and suffering, just to keep them around a little longer, to spend a bit more time with them? It is selfish to want to prolong another's life. It is selfish to try to prolong another's life, even if they want it too. Death is just life's big adventure, when it is time, take it.

I couldn't control myself

Hey Guys, I know that geek hasn't posted yet (He will), but this is a topic on my mind, and I didn't want to forget it. I just saw Civil War, and it raised  question in my mind (you'll know how when you see it). Should someone be held responsible for an act that they (A) unknowingly committed, or (B) had no control when committing. this should lead to some good discussion. Sorry Geek for posting this before you had time to respond to the last one.
-Eli

Mine pales in comparison.

Hey Guys, as I mentioned before, this is not my favorite topic. but i'll give a brief response. Without death, overpopullation would happen quickly, the world would be starved for resources, and there would be struggles for power that would never end. So while it may be hard when we lose a loved one, overall I am pro-death.

A Grave Statement

     I must say that I haven't experienced death of family members as much, and the one's I have are all more distant relatives. However, I must say that death is something we all must deal with, nobody can live forever, and eventually people you know will die. I don't necessarily (like the Geek said) think that shedding tears is the only way to cope with death, just perhaps the most common. For those who cannot seem to get past death, I have one statement. There is only one thing that can stop you from going on with your life, and that is your own death, not someone else's. Anything else is just your mind telling you that you cannot go on, but even that can be overcome.

Hey Guys,
Geek came up with the next prompt, after days of procrastination, and asked me to post it for him. It's not my favorite topic, but it will work. What are the benefits and detriments of death.
-Eli

Terrorism (Too tired for a pun): What should we do?

     I think that terrorism is a major issue in modern society and the US should take some steps to help combat terrorism. However, keep in mind that it is a balancing act when we are talking about homeland security. There most certainly should be some level of surveillance (information about terrorists isn't going to just appear on their screens), but not to the point where it infringes on people's privacy rights. While proponents of heavy screening and surveillance argue that it is not explicitly defined in the Constitution, many critics say that it is implied in the 4th Amendment, no search without a warrant. After all, the intent of this amendment was to protect privacy. I see the validity of both points, and I think that the current level of surveillance is fine, although the government should cut back on tracking individual emails and phone calls, that seems like a large waste of money. However surveillance cameras have been a huge help, and the government should really keep that up.
     When we speak about fighting terrorism abroad, then the circumstances changes. I don't think we should be involved in foreign conflicts under the label of "terrorism" when it is simply civil war i.e. the Israeli mess. Under the pretense of "terrorism" the US has planned over 3 Billion dollars worth of foreign aid to Israel (foreignassistance.gov) , and this year half of the aid sent to Israel was military aid (CNN). Now, I think that is an absurd amount of aid to be sending a country which wants to fight the "terrorism" that Palestinians are taking out, when they are really just fighting for independence. On the other hand, they shouldn't just completely withdraw from the game, they should combat terrorism when necessary, when they know exactly where the threat is, and how they will strike. For example, the famous assassination of Osama Bin Laden was a very bold step in combating terrorism abroad. Overall, I think we should try and reduce our meddling, and cut down to only what is necessary to accomplish something important.

Oh dear...

Last edition of this post didn't post. Hey guys, I am very busy right now and feel that we already may need to take a break from posting. But as for terrorism. They rule by terror, the fear that comes with anticipation. DON'T BE AFRAID. They have only as much power as you give them by being afraid. They are the monster in the worlds closets, when they still collected scream. BTW IT ALSO TOOK DOWN MY GUN CONTROL POST!!!

Can't pun this one (too serious of an issue.)

Hey guys,
I believe that this is a difficult topic to have one "right" answer on, because as the situation changes, our response as a country needs to change. Ii firmly believe that any answer having to do with the treatment of all Muslims, or any religion for that matter, is not the way to go. When it comes down to it, a very small portion of Muslims are extremists. (Btw, I am Christian, not Muslim, so don't just blame my opinion on the assumption that I am Muslim.) I do believe that the nation should be able to monitor phone calls to areas outside of the country. This can help the government anticipate the next attack before people are killed. I am neutral on sending troops to help out in the middle east with the war on ISIS. I can understand it if the solders want to be there, however, many members of the armed forces join in order to protect our country, and it is wrong to have them risk their lives in order to help some other country if they don't want to. But, if there are people willing to serve in this manner, then I am all for helping out. It's when people are forced to risk their lives that I dislike the idea. As for ISIS's online recruiting, I say that we should attack it with all that we got. Hack their websites, remove their accounts, anything to stop it from spreading. As I said in the begging, there is no one size fit's all type of answer.. Keep this in mind when you are commenting, and coming up with the "perfect" solution.
-Eli

A terrorizing topic

Hey guys,
Since geek is being slow, I have decided to move things along. The topic that I am choosing for today is what do you believe we need to do about terrorism, namely ISIS, in the middle east.
-Eli

This is Gunna be Interesting

     I must say that my stance on gun control is the same as Eli's. I do believe that people who want guns for recreation, hunting, and self-protection (although the last use really isn't necessary), should be able to have them. However, people in today's society have access to sub machine guns and guns that belt out bullets at an unbelievable speed. Do we really need those guns? On top of that, people don't even require much of a background check to buy a gun. Do you really want a mentally ill person purchasing a weapon that can shoot hundreds of bullets in a single minutes? Putting that aside, do you even want a mentally ill person purchasing a gun? I think not. Sadly, gun lobbyists seem to ignore this part, and are instead yelling about the Second Amendment when they have a chance. Of course, there are ordinary people who do that as well, and I don't understand why. Do you?

A fire(arm)y topic

Hey guys. This is a very controversial issue, and is one of  the issues that I fall relatively in the middle on. The Bill of Rights gives Americans the right to bear arms, and I fully agree with that. Guns can be very useful in hunting, recreation, and home defense. I believe that Americans should have every right to carry a gun, and even that Americans should be encouraged to conceal carry for self defense. However, I don't think that you should just be able to walk into a store and buy a gun. I believe that there should be government background checks before someone is allowed to purchase a firearm, filtering out any known criminals and felons. I also believe that citizens should be unable to buy fully automatic rifles, or other military guns that serve no practical purpose. This should cut down on gun violence, while still letting people defend themselves.
-Eli

Gun Control

     After a brief discussion with my co-authors, we have decided that this blog is going a little slow with the controversial matters. So today we will also be discussing gun control. Is the right to bear arms beneficial or hurtful to the country? How should the government deal with it? We look forward to your comments.

Marvel at this Post

Hey guys, I am here to answer the prompt, Marvel or DC. I vey strongly belive that Marvel is the better company. For one, Marvel was founded before DC, making it the original. Also, Marvel puts limits on their heroes, confining them to what would normally be possible for someone with their abilities and race(unlike Batman). There is also the fact that no Marvel hero is complicatedly indestructible(Unlike Superman). Even just look at the movies. Both companies are releasing films focused on internal strife. While Batman V. Superman just has two of the heroes fighting (granted, the only two that have any real popularity) Civil War pits the entirety of the Marvel Cinematic Universe against one another. Have I mentioned the fact that Marvel has a Cinematic Universe, while DC only has a few cheesy movies. All in all Marvel is far superior.
-Eli

A MARVELous DC-sion

Hey guys. My current challenge is to choose between DC and Marvel.  Short answer, Marvel. Long answer, Marvel is fantastic across the board, while DC has Superman, specifically pre-crisis Superman. That is it, I love them both. See ya and allons-y.

I Detect the Comic Appeal

     I have read both Marvel and DC comics, and I must say that I support the DC comics. Their characters seem more developed and have darker pasts. I must add that I find the DC characters more iconic. Think about it. When you think of superhero, most people would probably imagine Superman (Not the best character, but the most well known). When you think of running at superhuman speeds, your mind simply thinks of the Flash. Very rarely will Quicksilver come first. I do like the setup of Omnipresent beings in the Marvel universe, but the DC has a very good Hal Jordan story line, where they follow him from the Green Lantern to the Spectre. On that note, I must say that the Lanterns add a very rich universal history for the DC story line. They affect the DC universe from the beginning of it's creation
      I also like the villains of the DC universe better. Darkseid is simply better that Apocalypse or Thanos, and Doomsday is better than the Abomination. There is just an appeal that makes them better. I mean, Apocalypse (no matter the power) is described as a mutant, that just makes me subconsciously equate that to weakness. On the other hand, Darkseid is depicted as a god, unbeatable with vast reserves of power. I know I've hit the more major villains, and not the little ones, but I can hardly compare every DC villain to a counterpart in Marvel. However, I must say the the backstories of the DC villains (Lex Luther, Joker, Mongul, etc.) is slightly better than that of the Marvel.
     However, I will give credit to the Marvel Norse setup. I really like how they inter integrated the Norse into the universe, and I really enjoyed following the path of Mjolnir from Thor's hands to Jane's. I do like the references to the Asgardian lore, but the DC is better overall.

Prepare for Comic Relief

Hey guys, I decided to do one more relatively trivial topic before diving in deep tomorrow. This topic is courtesy of Geek. Which do you prefer, DC or Marvel Comics. I look forward to seeing the responses.
-Eli

Finding the Best Movie

Hey guys! So, my good friend Eli proposed we discuss the best Pixar movies of all time, thinking it would piss me off. What he didn't realize is I am one of the biggest Pixar nerds ever. I spend much time researching Pixar theory, and trying to make more connections. My favorite Pixar movie is always whatever I am researching at that moment. Right now, my favorite is Finding Nemo, as I am prepping for Finding Dory. #isitjuneyet.  I always go back to Finding Nemo however, as it is difficult to place in the Pixar theory timeline, which touches with the Disney theory timeline, though that is a story from another time. It is most definitely placed after The Incredibles, and I think it is before Toy Story.  But, I also like it because, add far as the Pixar universe goes, it doesn't matter really at all, it could be removed without consequences, even now as we know how it fits. The Lion King, although great, is not technically Pixar, and although it can be placed in Disney theory, it has difficulty finding its place in the Pixar theory. Unlike Belle in Beauty and the Beast, or Jane in Tarzan, which are related through the Duke of weasel town, I mean Weslton, The Incredibles is actually my favorite a lot of the time too, and lays the best back story for the rise of B'nL, Allinol, and the artificial intelligence. See ya and allons-y.

The Lion is the King of the Movies

     While the Incredibles is a movie with a different feel than most, I must say my favorite was the Lion King. It is well renowned among the Disney movies, and many consider it the best, and for good reason. It is a very friendly movie, as a young lion cub must learn his place in the world, and something about the setting makes it feel better than most Disney movies. Perhaps it is the childish wickedness of Scar. Or maybe it's the goofy friends that Simba makes along the journey. Regardless, of the precise cause, the movie just has an otherworldly feel to it, that makes the other movies seem like they were made in monochrome.

An Incredible Movie

Hey Guys, in response to the prompt I posted earlier, my favorite Disney/Pixar movie is the Incredibles. For those of you who live under a rock at the bottom of the ocean, this movie is about a family of superheros, in a time when they are discriminated against and hated. So they lie there lives as normal citizens until Mr. Incredible(the dad) gets kidnapped and his family needs to save him, and then the world. (Spoilers, they win). I love this movie because it shows the struggle of a family to act like normal, when they are anything but. It also shows the skill of the writers at Disney/Pixar, coming up with a completely original story, and a movie that will be remembered for generations. I look forewards to the rest of the discussions on this topic.
-Eli

A Very Animated Discusion

Hey guys, seeing as we just started this, we are going to start out with a fairly trivial matter. What is your favorite Disney/Pixar movie, and why. I figure this should lead to some light discussion before we delve into deeper and more controversial topics.

A bit about The Random Geek (The interesting one)

Hey guys. I already maintain a couple of blogs on my own, but when my friends Eli and Wolter approached me, asking if I wanted to help out on this one, I couldn't resist. For those who don't know me, I am a geek known by many names and have fingers in many bowls. Politically, I am pretty purple, but lean a little towards Democrat. To learn more about me, feel free to visit my about me page, or either of my personal blogs. C The Random Geek and Musings by The Random Geek

A bit about Wolter (The philosophical one)

Hello, I am Wolter. I am relatively new to blogging, but am eager to discuss views, with my co-bloggers Eli and the Random Geek. I am more Authoritarian and Liberal (I am considered the most liberal of the trio), although I have become more centrist as of late. I am open to new ideas, and am accepting of any social groups, and I look forward to debates with my fellow bloggers. I hope you all join the discussion as well, in an open-minded fashion, and hopefully we might discover something interesting about ourselves. 

Disclaimer: For those who find my name really cool, this is an alias, so just use a random name generator and who knows? Maybe you'll want to change your Birth Certificate :)

All About Eli (The Smart One)

Hello, I am Eli Johnson. I have never done much blogging, but figured this would be a good idea. Eager to discuss things with my bros The Random Geek and Wolter.  Politically, I fall right in the middle, favoring Conservative views on some issues and liberal views on others. I a not one to judge people based on their views of the world, so don't be afraid to comment on your viewpoint. Btw Eli Johnson is an alias so don't try to stalk me.