is a fancy word for suicide.

I know, I'll piss off a lot of people who read this. If you're one of these people, blame Andrea for encouraging me to write this.

The other day I was watching one of those Bible movies on TBN (because I was sick and bored and I couldn't think of anything else to do). It was portraying men who died in holy wars as these noble heroes who will go to heaven. Depending on what you believe, that may or may not be true.

So what happens when you die fighting in a holy war? You die, of course. However, you're guaranteed a spot in heaven. You also get a page in the religious texts about what a noble thing you had done. Your wife and kids get to brag about how you were such a holy man and all that. Gee, dying must not be so bad after all, right?

What do you do when you go on a suicide mission? You disappear from this world and leave everything behind. By everything I mean your wife and kids (not husband because women with families are smart enough not to do this kind of thing). So you die in some holy war over who has the better god. Back home, your wife and kids have to fend for themselves. One less person providing for the family means the mother has to take over both roles. The kids have to grow up with no father figure and that can also cause a lot of problems. Why put them through this kind of torture?

I believe in God, and I have faith. However, I will never accept most of the things that religious people do. Holy wars, I believe, are insignificant arguments over who has the better imaginary friend. What's the point? If you ask 1000 people, you might get 2500 answers on what their religious beliefs are.

Also, what if you're following the wrong religion? Then being a martyr will just get you into a deeper circle of hell.

TO MY FEMALE READERS:
The males are always killing themselves in holy wars for some noble cause. It's always so easy to die, isn't it? When they do die, they leave their wives behind to do everything that they used to do together, especially raising the kids. Is that honestly the right thing to do? Would you be happy if your husband killed himself for some meaningless war so you would have to be all alone for the rest of your life? Maybe if you hated him, but in most cases, I think you would say no.

That's right.

I know. Nobody wants to pay taxes. After all, the evil government eats away your hard-earned money and funds stupid special interest groups with your blood money.

If you're a financial institution who is looking to loan out more money, of course you hate corporate taxes. They mean less money in your reserves, which translates to you being able to lend out less money and therefore make less profits.

If you're a middle class American, you hate taxes. You're not poor enough to get all kinds of government aid programs. You pay taxes to take care of the Baby Boomers who are retiring, other people's kids, other poor people, big businesses (I'll explain later), etc..

If you're poor, you hate taxes. You already live paycheck to paycheck. The unskilled job you have at the local factory isn't economically viable anymore thanks to globalization. Globalization means that factory job that you're getting paid for minimum wage will either get shipped to some third world country you didn't even know existed or it will be given to the next lowest class on the totem pole (illegal aliens, anyone?). Because you're not economically viable, you can't afford to pay any taxes. Stupid government should be helping you instead of collecting taxes from you.

If you're rich, you have every reason to hate every kind of tax ever imposed on anyone. After all, you're filthy stinkin' rich! You're on top of the world! Of course you don't want to help out everybody who's beneath you. It's their fault they can't be as rich as you are.

If you're a politician, you hate taxes. You hate taxes because you know that saying you need to raise taxes (even if it's inevitable because of the economic situation) will automatically cost you any hopes of winning.

If you're a Reaganite, you hate taxes. You know that lower taxes will guarantee that the economy will grow regardless of current and prospective circumstances. That's why you say that lower taxes will always result in higher tax revenues in the long run no matter what.

So why do taxes suck so much? Because you give away your hard-earned money to help somebody you hate that you don't want to support.

Then one day something bad happens. An economic recession hits. The lenders lent out all the money they could lend, and nobody can pay them back. Who do they go to? They go to the GOVERNMENT to give them blank bailout checks.

The middle class shrinks and many of its members join the poor class. The poor stay poor or get poorer. The poorer, more numerous poor demand more tax dollars for social services like Medicaid and food stamps.

The rich argue that none of this is their fault. Well, they were affected by the economy too. In fact, they lost all of their millions of dollars in corporate shares. With the reduced payout, they want the government to give them more tax breaks to make up for the loss in capital gains.

While the federal politicians have some leeway, the state and local politicians know that they can't have budget deficits. However, even in the Federal government, you can only sustain a budget deficit for so many years before a real crisis forces you to balance the budget. That means during a recession, the politicians have to raise taxes or cut spending to make up for the lost revenue. They scramble trying to figure out how many programs they have to cut or how many taxes they have to raise before they commit political suicide. Why did George H. W. Bush lose to Bill Clinton in 1992? "Read my lips: no new taxes."

If you're a Reaganite, you have no idea what the hell you should say about any of this. Oh, I know: damn all the stupid Liberals for ruining everything!

This is where we are right now. If you're stuck in a tough situation and you want any help from anyone, shut up and pay your taxes. You heard me. If you don't want to pay any taxes, you're a freeloader. EVERYBODY benefits from tax dollars in the form of social services. The only discrepancies that exist do so because some people pay higher taxes than others and some people benefit more from tax dollars than others.

If you don't think you benefit from tax dollars, go live a self-sustaining life in some remote jungle somewhere.

---------
I'm not saying that the New Deal (which didn't get us out of the Great Depression) is any better than Supply-Side Economics ("Reaganomics"), it's clear that Reaganomics don't work. If it did, we would have a trillion-dollar budget surplus right now, even with the ridiculously high amounts of military spending.

The Olympic Torch is under high security right now because of the massive protests all over the world against the Chinese control of Tibet. China is an evil Communist country that deserves to not exist, and there is no reason why Tibet should be free.

While protesters all over the world are all "FREE TIBET," what kind of freedom are they referring to? Just ask the Dalai Lama.

You see, the Dalai Lama is just a fancy name for a Tibetan monarch. The current Dalai Lama is the next in line to rule over Tibet. Because China is such an evil country, the Chinese took over Tibet and enslaved the masses. China also provided with horrible things like electricity, running water, and a prosperous economy. I know. It's horrible, isn't it? The poor Tibetans.

What does the Dalai Lama have to gain with a free Tibet? A restore to the throne, of course! While the Dalai Lama ruled over Tibet, the Tibetans had to live in lifelong servitude. Disobeying the Lama would result in cruel and unusual punishments like eye gouging, pulling out tongues, and disemboweling.

Why is this fraud getting such international attention from peacekeepers everywhere? Because he's a politician. He has nothing to lose (he lost the throne, so what more could he lose that's of any value to him?) and a country to gain. The worst part of it is that everybody's in on it: from the Nobel family to the CIA.

Dalai Lama's not much of a monk. He gets paid shitloads of cash just to give the same cliché speeches about peace and freedom that we already get enough of. All for what, to restore a tyrant back into power so he can enslave the Tibetans who don't know any better?

I don't care what China does. If you ask me, the Tibetans are better off under Communist rule, because under Communism, at least everyone's well provided for. From the looks of it, China's better off getting rid of Tibet. If they let the Dalai Lama do whatever he wants to with Tibet, maybe then he'll finally shut up and rule over his stupid country. That's highly unlikely, though. China's other option would be to ignore protests and do nothing, which is downright impossible because of current circumstances.

No matter what China does, the overwhelming majority of Tibetans won't see any significant improvement in their lives.

Remember folks. The lesser of the evils is still evil, and the enemy of my enemy is not my friend.

"Free Tibet" my ass. The protesters deserve nothing for their ignorance in this issue. Give them no support.