When first drafting this essay I went to great lengths to deconstruct both the far right views of literal creationism versus the far left views of Darwinism. I had reduced both of them to materialistic goals of trying to explain the world. Literal creationists assert claims that don't mesh well with the physical evidence presented by Geology. Darwinists assert that the world created itself and thus DNA codes in effect write themselves. A simple experiment where two inorganic particles are meshed together and result in an organic particle would prove evolution, however to my knowledge this has never been done. I assert that the human race was created by the grace of God and that the biblical creation story is about as literal as the book of Revelation, since snakes do not talk ect. Evolution can perhaps account for prehistory and the physical evidence present in the world at large, but there was a totally a divine hand involved at some point and thusly the missing link. It is a relevant topic about how easily humans can be divided over frivolous matters and does fit in with this discussion of the end of history. However I felt like I spent too long with tearing down both arguments and less time on the decline of civilization itself, I may deal with this issue in depth at a later date.

I had this idea for a novel once where the corporations fake an apocalypse. I had plenty of ideas for how they might go about it. Naturally a capitalist would profit more from a complete controlled society, so let's speculate on how to get there. First you need to crush differences of opinion, the best way to do this would be to make them fight to the death. The process of this, of course, would be a long one so the trick would be to make them worship the same thing a pure capitalist would - money itself. Once you have a society made purely materialistic, with all beliefs reduced to but a mere idolatry of money. The trick is to make the society in question openly acknowledge their materialism but never condemn it. There are a great many dangers in taking life too seriously. Once people truly take their consumer based lives too seriously and are willing to do whatever it takes to make the ends meet, a clash of civilizations can begin which the capitalists can then exploit. There are many conspiracy theories about how this is done or accomplished, and many of them point a finger at some conspiracy lurking in the shadows plotting to destroy civilization. The true conspiracy is very apparent, it only works with near full participation, to blame this on anything material is to not do the evil plan proper justice. I find there is no greater culprit than the pride of life itself - society's vast materialism and lack of a thorough introspection. Once a people believe what they are told, you can tell them whatever you want to, a capitalist with a sheer lack of proper business ethics would be much obliged an opportunity to exploit that. Let us contemplate absolute Atheism as the ends to the means of a society completely poisoned with its own materialism. Let us envision the regulation of the internet as the beginning of a domino effect, a rhetorical war on information with the end result being an internet as useless and uninformative as television itself.

For in my quest to unravel the tragedy of history I have found are no greater enemies to mankind than outright materialism and the darkness of ignorance. Mankind's true enemies are these such concepts, and not any member(s) or other such materialistic division of the human race. We are all one race in a struggle against such darkness. Regardless of what you believe in philosophically there is one thing you should know and understand about economics. Capitalism itself is based on materialism and it is necessary for our daily lives.There seems to be no way around this and this is an accepted fact of life in the Western World. However over time a society believing that is was evolved from monkeys shall become such monkeys entangled in a class struggle analogous to survival of the fittest. The corporate world is a macrocosm for this, as the empires expand buying out the little guys not indifferent from a Tyrannosaur in a world of sheep. All is good and well as long as the market is regulated. But see capitalism is based on being ever expansive, no different than the empires of the Old World. Alexander the Great didn't need to try to conquer the India, but there was more money in it. I was taught in World Civilization at the University of Tennessee that Wal-Mart was now the largest economy in the world (2004), which would in turn make them among the greatest of all empires. As the world changed, warfare changed. The Old World notions of rape and pillage were not forgotten but they were transformed into a legacy of underdevelopment. When one rapes and pillages everyone that participates in the raids gets a little bit of the profit, but when one underdevelopments only the investors that paid for the raid reap any reward.

As we press forward in the 21st century, capitalism continues unabated. The markets become closer together and the people themselves become close together through the internet. This could be a good thing, but the fact remains that the means do not justify the end. The people of the world cannot be conquered by hostile takeover but only through mutual understanding. The internet taught me that and that is why it will one day be shutdown. There is no money in mutual understanding and a rejection of materialistic means that have kept us blind from such for so long. Even hip-hop artists tried to warn us of this. Tupac Shukar said that we needed to make some Changes and he got shot. Biggie Smalls said 'Mo Money, 'Mo Problems and he got shot as well. Their messages left unheard as the next generation rapped on and on about Gold Chains and spinning rims all the while proclaiming that Tupac and Biggie inspired them. Our problems are still here and they are still bigger than hip-hop. This isn't a new concept or without precedent, the same thing happened in the 70's when music devolved from social philosophy into disco. This sad tale is but an analog with a thousand other dead heroes because there was just no profit to be had in pointing out that profit was ultimately pointless. In the modern world we believe we can buy happiness, but we feel like we are missing something in the end.

Regardless of what social, theological or philosophical school of thought that you subscribe to, material means all meet the same ending. Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. The scales of justice themselves tipped in strong favor of the overwhelming mass of the bottom line as the governments corrupt in favor of the greater wealth of the commercial empires. One by one the nations fall into the same supermarket checkout line, the end result of the works of greed and deceit all the while the secular authorities teach the children that they are but the descendants of mere apes. As entire cultures are consumed in this vacuum, national sovereignty erodes to the point where this no longer any checks and balances, nor is their consumer advocacy, nor any form of oversight. At this point the safety net was long destroyed, crushed under the weight of the bottom line of a one world consumer society's misguided ambitions and desires and the entire social order is left to plummet into the abyss of absolute darkness. This such is the hypothetical blizzard of the world that will only result in the winter of our discontent when all of the great words of the heroes, the philosophers, the poets, the prophets and the honest historians are ultimately forgotten.

And inevitably there will be this day, when all of the resources of the world have been plundered to the point that the wealth of the nations all sit together in the same vault, the capitalists now content to become communists . At which point the new emperors shall fancy themselves as gods, just as the emperors of old once did, for their materialistic accomplishments of conquering the entire world. When this has come to pass, these emperors will then want slaves and become interested in human souls themselves. And they are going to come to you and attempt to brand you as their slaves. An entire generation truly believing itself to be the descendants of mere apes and completely ignorant of the glorious past that came before this point. That cursed day when everyone is asked to sellout, the finality of a cruel world built on betrayal in the name of fattening the bottom line. The circle now completed since the new emperor's of the world's constituents are no longer in demand of rights, history erased, the dissidents repressed eternally and the next generation shall only know what they are allowed to. The whole of society reduced to mere animals by their own designs and excuses, all beliefs degenerated into pure atheism where there is no longer any intelligent question since everyone truly believes that they are nothing more than the descendants of mere apes. The eerily humbled remnants of a once great world civilization reduced to but mere automatons oblivious to the true culprit of their real ancestor's vanity. The tragedy of history forgotten now complete and ironic of its own demise.

This is merely a hypothetical scenario which can be prevented from ever happening. The internet can be the light of a pure democracy, save the internet and damn the empire.

It was in a report on the intention of the world's second-largest brewer, Belgium's InBev, to buy control of the third-largest, Anheuser-Busch, for $46.3 billion. The story asserted: "The (alcoholic beverage) industry's continued growth, however slight, has been a surprise to those who figured that when the economy turned south, consumers would cut back on nonessential items like beer. ..."

Nonwhat? Do not try to peddle that proposition in the bleachers or at the beaches in July. It is closer to the truth to say: No beer, no civilization.

The development of civilization depended on urbanization, which depended on beer. To understand why, consult Steven Johnson's marvelous 2006 book "The Ghost Map: The Story of London's Most Terrifying Epidemic -- and How It Changed Science, Cities, and the Modern World." It is a great scientific detective story about how a horrific cholera outbreak was traced to a particular neighborhood pump for drinking water. And Johnson begins a mind-opening excursion into a related topic this way:

"The search for unpolluted drinking water is as old as civilization itself. As soon as there were mass human settlements, waterborne diseases like dysentery became a crucial population bottleneck. For much of human history, the solution to this chronic public-health issue was not purifying the water supply. The solution was to drink alcohol."

Often the most pure fluid available was alcohol -- in beer and, later, wine -- which has antibacterial properties. Sure, alcohol has its hazards, but as Johnson breezily observes, "Dying of cirrhosis of the liver in your forties was better than dying of dysentery in your twenties." Besides, alcohol, although it is a poison, and an addictive one, became, especially in beer, a driver of a species-strengthening selection process.

Johnson notes that historians interested in genetics believe that the roughly simultaneous emergence of urban living and the manufacturing of alcohol set the stage for a survival-of-the-fittest sorting-out among the people who abandoned the hunter-gatherer lifestyle and, literally and figuratively speaking, went to town.

To avoid dangerous water, people had to drink large quantities of, say, beer. But to digest that beer, individuals needed a genetic advantage that not everyone had -- what Johnson describes as the body's ability to respond to the intake of alcohol by increasing the production of particular enzymes called alcohol dehydrogenases.

This ability is controlled by certain genes on chromosome four in human DNA, genes not evenly distributed to everyone. Those who lacked this trait could not, as the saying is, "hold their liquor." So, many died early and childless.

The gene pools of human settlements became progressively dominated by the survivors -- by those genetically disposed to, well, drink beer. "Most of the world's population today," Johnson writes, "is made up of descendants of those early beer drinkers, and we have largely inherited their genetic tolerance for alcohol."

Johnson suggests, not unreasonably, that this explains why certain of the world's population groups, such as Native Americans and Australian Aborigines, have had disproportionately high levels of alcoholism: These groups never endured the cruel culling of the genetically unfortunate that town dwellers endured. If so, the high alcoholism rates among Native Americans are not, or at least not entirely, ascribable to the humiliations and deprivations of the reservation system. Rather, the explanation is that not enough of their ancestors lived in towns.

But that is a potential stew of racial or ethnic sensitivities that we need not stir in this correction of Investor's Business Daily. Suffice it to say that the good news is really good: Beer is a health food.

So let there be no more loose talk -- especially not in summertime -- about beer not being essential. Benjamin Franklin was, as usual, on to something when he said, "Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." Or, less judgmentally, and for secular people who favor a wall of separation between church and tavern, beer is evidence that nature wants us to be.

Due to unforseen circumstances (i'm moving for an Intership), AyoDoggie.com will be brain dead for awhile, anytime upto a year

GOOD DAY YOU BASTARDS!

Some people are born rich; others are born poor. That's not fair! So let's even it out. Of course, not everybody who's rich was born rich. Many people become rich through their own hard work, intelligence, talent, skill, and enterprise. But that's not fair, either. Intelligence and natural talent are a result of good genes. Hard work and enterprise are a result of good upbringing. That gives people with good genes and a good upbringing an unfair advantage. So the only way to level the playing field is for everybody to contribute according to their abilities, and everybody to receive according to their needs. What could possibly be more fair than that?

And, if those who have more to contribute don't want to give up what's theirs, that's not fair! So the government should step in and take it by force to redistribute among those who just don't have the talent, skill, or motivation to produce more for themselves. After all, isn't the role of government to ensure fairness?

But the problem is bigger than any one government can solve. People all over the world are born into vastly different circumstances, with different opportunities. Some people are born in third world countries with corrupt dictatorships and little technological advancement. Other people are born in America, where generations of individual and economic freedom have created a culture where even the poorest of the poor, who live on government subsidies, are rich by the standards of most third world countries. How do we make that fair?

We would have to redistribute the wealth from America, and all the other first world countries, to all the third world countries. If all the wealth in the world were redistributed evenly, we'd all be living at barely above subsistence level, and nobody would be able to afford to invest in (or even to buy) technology, science, or medicine. When the whole word's standard of living was reduced to the lowest common denominator, and all progress and advancement was beyond everybody's reach, perhaps it would finally be fair.

However, once that was accomplished, there would still be people with ingenious minds and obsessive-compulsive work ethics, and some who are unfairly gifted with various sorts of talents. Those people would still be inherently driven to produce things that provide unique value to others. And those who value what they produce would inevitably find ways to pay them for it. Then the people with superior minds or talents or skills would start to amass more than others. And that just wouldn't be fair. So what do you do with the ones who are too intelligent or too talented or too industrious to support the paradigm of universal equality in all things? You would just have to get rid of them (which is exactly what they did in the Russian and Chinese revolutions). The problem is that there will always be more of those people. They will keep cropping up, because life is not fair.

Observing the natural world, is survival of the fittest fair? No! And there's a reason for that. Nature is intensely competitive. And human nature, being part of nature, follows the laws of nature. That's why the most successful economies are those based on free enterprise. Because capitalism is based on human nature. The redistribution of wealth is an attempt to ensure the survival of the least fit at the expense of the fittest. It's a recipe for reverse evolution. It has never succeeded. It will always fail. Because you can't reverse or repeal a law of nature.

What those who claim to want "fairness" are really seeking is control. They don't like the seeming randomness of the free market. They're disturbed by the negative attitudes sometimes expressed in free speech. Freedom, in general, bothers them.

So, it doesn't really come as a great surprise that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, among other prominent Democrats, seems to think fairness requires the redistribution of public opinion. Conservative talk show hosts apparently have more market share on the "public airwaves" than liberal talk show hosts. That's not fair! Never mind that the reason they have more market share is because that's what the market wants. That's what the listeners have chosen to listen to, of their own free will. In the time-honored tradition of the free market, radio stations book the programs the listeners want to hear.

So, if the liberal lawmakers want the public to listen to liberal radio, but the public isn't interested, what are the liberal lawmakers to do? Make a law, of course! In the interest of "fairness," they can legislate that any station that airs conservative views must give equal time to liberals. And if the stations' profits go down because they can't sell as much advertising on programs nobody wants to hear, then that's just tough, isn't it? After all, we have to be "fair," don't we?

The liberals who support the "Fairness Doctrine" will be quick to remind you that the airways are, after all, "public." But what does that actually mean? Perhaps, if the airwaves are public, it isn't fair for private enterprises to profit from them at all. Does that mean all radio stations ought to be nationalized? How about television? Perhaps all forms of media should be nationalized, -- in the interest of fairness, of course.

Bookmark/Rate this post:

It isn't that low interest rates have done much good. Mainly, these low interest rates have supported the bankers' bottom lines instead of being used to save banking customers and consumers any money on their interest. Low interest is just another way that the Federal Reserve has bailed out the nearly-collapsed banking and mortgage industry.

The Fed has signaled that it is unlikely to cut rates further and may boost rates if inflation gets out of hand. Well...inflation is out of hand, but the Fed has their magic hand on the percentages. They will never get entirely out of control thanks to creative central banking.

The common line is that bleak news keeps investors from stepping into the market. What market? We are, after all in a overall slowdown. Investors that are still around are watching their backs and find very little worthwhile investing in that is truly significant. The world of creative banking has the cure for deserving investors. Wise investors are wisely wary.

The tougher and more appropriate message would be that the Fed won't continue to bail out Wall Street at all. Wall Street has been helped enough. Let them reap what they have sown or better yet, look at the theoretical law that touts "survival of the fittest" in the animal kingdom. The business world isn't designed to be bailed out. Bad business decisions need to be honored with "come what may".

"Confidence" will be a temporary problem. We will all survive long-term and the bad business decision makers will be gone and hopefully living in trailer homes on the prairie or the barrios where they belong without continuing to infect the lives of Americans and global economic policy the world over.

Since I put on an extra half hour to my commute, I’ve found that what was once a luxury (my commute on the express from Harlem to midtown was about 25 minutes) has literally become a fight for survival. I’m in Astoria now. Despite signs and brand new glass bus shelters up and down 30th Avenue, I am of the assumption that the Q18 is an urban legend. It never comes. So down the hill I go.

Ten short blocks and 7 minutes later I’m at the station. (I walk briskly.)

Positioning myself at the end of the platform has always been my standard strategy for beating the crowds and grabbing a seat, because people naturally swarm near the train’s midsection; that’s usually where the station entrance is. But this isn’t really news to anyone, so I’ve had to throw it all out the door because now even stupid people know the ends of the train are always less crowded.

Then the train comes. And suddenly what should be a routine commute to work has now become The Wild Kingdom. Claustrophobia sets in, but my eye is on the prize.

As I wait with my fellow passengers-to-be this side of the train doors, we seem to be impatient, but in fact we are in a silent battle with each other. It’s our own mass-transit Jihad: who will enter first? Who will claim the empty seats inside? And who will finish last, with their bag between their legs, armpits exposed, holding their book in their hand? The Loser. The outcast… Wait a minute! Don’t shove this aggression on me! I haven’t even finished my coffee! And I’m not alone. This madness is precisely why I pray for fat people to get off at my stop. Obesity has reaffirmed my belief in God. Because one fat person equals two skinny people (three wet). Laughing? Don’t. When it comes to the New York MTA, this correlation should not be taken lightly.

Everyone knows that space is at a premium. Finding your place in the morning commute can sometimes be like finding your place in the world. You’ve gotta fight. As the cliché says, when the going gets tough the tough get going. The only problem is if there’s no room, the tough won’t be going anywhere unless they get aggressive.

What I find interesting is that while men seem to be more aggressive in subway stations, women seem to take their aggression into the subway cars. Ask yourself how many times you compete for room on a crowded stairway, against the flow, like some poor salmon with a handicap struggling upstream. It’s mostly men who shove and grope on stairs and in hallways underground. Yesterday I was shoved as I walked down the stairs by a man who didn’t take kindly to the fact that my leather bag politely asked his face to move from the small lane afforded me, the narrow column through which I was meant to squeeze on my race to catch the downtown 2 express train. Yes, stairs can be deadly between the hours of 8 and 10 am.

The train is no less hazardous. But on the train, women will clobber you to death for the seat you want, while men don’t care much about standing or sitting. I can’t recall how many times someone of the opposite gender has attempted to cover my face with their ass as they begin to sit even before I’ve had the chance to get up. No apologies. No acknowledgments. Just a bunch of screeching iPOD and counterfeit coach all up in your grill.

The only thing civilized about getting on the train in the morning is getting off. Everything in between is survival of the fittest. I’ll still pick up someone’s glasses if they drop them. I’ll still open the door for someone five paces behind. Hell, I’ll even give someone a swipe at the subway turnstile.

But if you come between me and my morning express train, look out. My leather bag has a mean left hook.

*Photo above from Gothamist. The 1,2,3 platform shown is one of the hurdles I take to work every day.

Image via Wikipedia

A friend of mine once told me of a visit to a couple who had a newborn child. Proudly they showed him the first baby-book with pictures of mum, dad, first babypicture, weight etc. There was also a page about blood groups : blood groop of mammy, blood group of daddy, blood group of baby. At that point my friend (a biologist) managed to show no obvious reaction, but it was clear that the three blood groups formed an impossible combination! The beloved woman had been "playing elsewere".

WHY ?

A lot is written about love and finding the best partner. But as we know, love is just a chemical means of establishing and maintaining a relationship long enough to have one or more children together.
What are the underlying mechanisms, evolutionary advantages, survival-of-the-fittest reasons for a woman to select their partner ?

In a recent scientific study on barn swallows it was shown that changing just the red color of their feathers not only had an impact on the behaviour of the other swallows, but also on their own testosterone levels. Meaning that the looks are important, not only in humans.
Another important factor seems to be body odor (another article)

I looked for some articles about partner selection. There is a lot of crap but this one is interesting about the female mate selection in the darwinian way of looking at it.

Before going further looking at what characteristics of man are important to women in a maximise-reproduction meaning, there is one very important thing that is allways forgotten in any article I read : a woman has to make TWO choices in partner selection:

1. choose the best partner as to optimise the genetical blueprint of her childeren
2. choose the best partner to help her raise her childeren up to adulthood

And what is very important : these two partners do not have to be the same person !
Indeed, it is much more easy for a woman to get a man to be the biological father of her child (a one night stand is sufficient) than to get him into years of commitment to raise this child. Apparently 25% of women cheat on their jusband !

Let us look at the first choice : optimisation of the genetical blueprint, which is the easy one. What are the characteristics ? Healthy, tall (but not exaggerated), athletic, intelligent, sociable. In short : the popular guy of the neighbourhood. Since this popular guy has plenty of choice, it depends on her own "characteristics" whether she can get him or not. If not, she has to aim a bit lower on the popularity hierarchy. Anyway, she has to aim at the best she can get.

Now the second choice : finding a partner to raise her children. Characteristics : 1)faithful, loving dedicated etc.. and 2) having the means (as much as possible) of providing all that is necessary for her children. Ideal type : a stupid rich guy who she can dominate.

It all seems simple but it is not.

All sorts of combinations between the desired characteristics are possible and she has to pick the best combination, either in one or two partners.
Ideally : the popular guy who is at the same time rich and faithful to her.
Other solutions : a not so faithful rich guy who leaves her with plenty of money after the divorce.
I am sure you can come up yourself with all sorts of possible solutions and find some real life examples.
Do not hesitate to put them in a comment.

• Human procreation strategies [via Zemanta]
• Peter André on Harvey: "He is my son -- he's mine" [via Zemanta]

Contrary to popular belief, as historian David Barton points out, the theory of evolution was around long before Charles Darwin. As far back as the 6th century B.C., Greek writers Thales and Anaximander had propounded the theory centuries before the birth of Christ. Aristotle, influenced by his intellectual forbears, also advocated a form of evolution.

Other ancient writers like Diogenes, Empedocles, Democritus, and Lucretius, all writing before the time of Christ, added variations to the theory, including such things as survival of the fittest, natural selection, and mutability of the species.

Philosophers Renee Descartes in the 17th century and Immanuel Kant in the 18th century had argued for the theory of a gradual origin of the solar system as an alternative to instantaneous creation.

According to Dr. Henry Osborn, curator of the American Museum of Natural History, the Founding Fathers lived in what he calls the third of history’s four periods of evolution. Osborn lists almost three dozen influential writers of the colonial period who supported evolutionary theory to one degree or another. All, you will note, prior to the advent of Darwin.

All through the history of human thought, the debate over the origins of man has been a debate between two competing theories: a theistic and non-theistic explanation. Theism attributes origins to God, while non-theism attributes it to nature.

The point here is that the Founders were not in fact ignorant of the theory of evolution. It had been around for 2400 years by the time they produced the Declaration of Independence with its flat and unambiguous proclamation that man is a created being, not an evolved one, and that there is a Creator who is the source of our civil rights.

Even Thomas Paine, the most anti-religious of those who shaped the thinking of America at the time of the War for Independence (he said the Bible is “a book of lies, wickedness, and blasphemy”), rebuked the French educational system for teaching science and natural philosophy apart from any reference to “the Being who is the Author of them,” going on to say that “all the principles of science are of divine origin.” How is it, he said, “that when we study the works of God in creation, we stop short and do not think of God?”

Benjamin Franklin, one of the few deists involved in producing the Declaration, is worth noting since he, along with Thomas Jefferson, was likely the least orthodox of the Founders. And since Jefferson actually wrote the Declaration, we know what he thought on the subject.

Here is Franklin on the subject of origins: “It might be judged an affront to your understanding should I go about to prove this first principle: the existence of a Deity and that He is the Creator of the universe.” He adds, “That the Deity is a being of great goodness appears in His giving life to so many creatures.”

And again: “That He is a being of infinite power appears in His being able to form and compound such vast masses of matter (as this earth, and the sun, and innumerable stars and planets).”

Franklin goes on, “[W]hat power must He possess, Who not only knows the nature of everything in the universe but can make things of new natures with the greatest ease and at His pleasure! Agreeing, then, that the world was at first made by a Being of infinite wisdom, goodness, and power, which Being we call God.”

The point here is quite simple: you will hear some argue, falsely believing that the theory of evolution did not exist until Darwin, that if the Founders had only written the Declaration after being exposed to the theory of evolution, it might look different. Well, in point of fact, they did write the Declaration after being exposed to the theory of evolution, and it looks just fine.

Stiff Right Jab newest contributing editor, Bryan Fischer, is the Executive Director of the Idaho Values Alliance, which is dedicated to making Idaho the friendliest place in the world to raise family. Website address: www.idahovaluesalliance.com. His email: bryan@idahovaluesalliance.com.

The Drama King responds to JD's comment that the "DJ Is Dead"

LINK: ZShare.net

1. CNN News Intro
2. It's A Body
3. Noreaga Featuring Swizz Beatz - Set It Off
4. Noreaga - Get It In
5. Noreaga - Body In The Truck Part II
6. Noreaga Featuring Jadakiss - Under The Bus
7. Whooo You - (Featuring It's Him)
8. Noreaga - U Ain't A Gangsta
9. D.O.A.
10. Seduction
11. Slingin' Night N Day
12. Noreaga - Phone Call To Heaven
13. Noreaga - World Is Getting Smaller
14. I Shine
15. Hollywood
16. Outro

LINK

THE CHEF IS BACK!

New Song Features Mika

LINK: ZShare.net

LINK Inside...

LMFAO!!!

hell has no fury like a DJ scorned!

LINK: SendSpace

Murda spits over the moments "hottest" beat

LINK: ZShare.net

The big day has arrived, Weezy's new album, Tha Carter III is released (even though it got leaked by some angry DJs over a week ago), so i thought i'd give a quick review...

Previous: Tha Carter III - Leaked Songs

1. 3 Peat - the "New Orleans Nightmare" announces his arrival, dope beat
2. Mr. Carter - Featuring Jay-Z, this is with out a doubt the standout track on the album, Dwayne has some dope lines:

Blind eyes can look at me and see the truth
Wonder if Stevie do
But I'm a leave it to God not b but even u
Cause I'm a murder Y kill O and even U
Man I got summer hating on me cause I'm hotter than the sun
Got Spring hating on me cause I ain't neva sprung
Win-ter hating on me cause I'm colder than ya'll
And I will neva I will neva I will neva FALL
I'm being hated by the season
So fuck ya'll who hating for no reason

but Carter Snr steals the show with his verse:

I'm right here in my chair with my crown and my dear
Queen B, as I share mic time, with my air
Young Carter go farther, go futher, go harder
Is that not why we came?, if not than why bother?
Show no mercy in Murcielaga's
Far from being the bastard that Marcey had fathered
Now my name's being mentioned with the martyrs
The Biggie's and the Pacs the Marleys and the Marcus'
Govi got me a Molotov Cocktail
Flow even if you box well can't stop the blows
Ka-boom the Roc Boy in the room
The dope boy just came off the spoon
Also I'm so fly I'm on auto-pilot
While guys just stare at my wardobe
I see Euro's, that's right plural
I took so much change from this rap game
It's your go

3. A Milli - speaks on his Milllions, Stature etc
4. Got Money - Clubish Song featuring none other than Mr. T-Pain
5. Comfortable - Babyface on the Hook, Weezy speaks to the Ladies
6. Phone Home - Dwayne the Martian & Planet Weezy invade the Earth Rap World
7. Dr. Carter - Dr. Dwayne Carter raps advice to save the careers of various patients
8. Tie My Hands - With Robin Thicke, Wayne speaks on the after effects of Hurricane Katrina & Hope:

I, knock on the door, hope isn't home,
Fates not around, the lucks all gone
Don't ask me what's wrong, ask me what's right
And I'm a tell you what's life
And did you know?
I lost everything, but I ain't the only one
First came the hurricane, then the morning sun
Excuse me if I'm on one, and don't trip if I light one, I walk a tight one
They try to tell me keep my eyes open
My whole city under water, some people still floatin
Then they wonder why black people still voting, cause your presidents still chokin
Take away the football team, the basketball team
Now all we got is me to represent New Orleans
No governor, no help from the mayor
Just a steady beatin heart, and a wish and a prayer

9. Shoot Me Down - The Gangster Talk Track
10. Playin' With Fire - I get the feeling he's cracked out on this track
11. Lollipop - Weezy steals T-Pain's Auto-Tune for this track, nonetheless, still a hit, R.I.P. Static Major
12. La La - Featuring Brisco & Busta Rhymes, all good verses, weak beat, expected better from David Banner
13. Good Girl Gone Bad - Weezy & Bun B speak on the troubles of the youth of today
14. You Ain't Got Nuthin On Me - Fab & Juelz murder Weezy on his own track, Juelz IMO, having the better verse
15. Let The Beat Build - HOT beat from Kanye, Weezy doesn't do the beat justice
16. Mrs. Officer - Dwayne gets pulled over by Female Cop, Shags Her, only on Planet Weezy
17. Misunderstood - Speaks on American misunderstanding him & his environment, disses Al Sharpton etc

OVERALL: 4 Mics - After the 1st listen I thought it had too many weak tracks but it grows on you, some hot verses & beats

1. Intro
2. Gangsta Rap Remix - (Prod By Dj Green Lantern)
3. Cops Keep Firing - (Prod By Dj Green Lantern)
4. Hero - (Prod By Polow Da Don)
5. Black President - (Prod By Dj Green Lantern)
6. Association - (Featuring & Prod By Stic.Man of Dead Prez)
7. Legendary (Mike Tyson) - (Prod By Salaam Remi)
8. Ghetto Remix - (Featuring Joell Ortiz) (Prod By Dj Green Lantern)
9. Seen It All - (Green Mix)
10. Esco Let’s Go - (Prod By DJ Khallil)
11. N.I.G.G.E.R. (Slave and Master) -  (Prod By Dj Toomp)
12 Be A Nigger too Remx - (Featuring Dante Hawkins) (Prod By Dj Green Lantern)
13. Surviving The Times - (Original Cool & Dre Version)
14. Nas Timeline - (Mixed By Statik Selektah) (Nararated by Nas)
15. Outro - (Featuring Richard Pryor)

LINK: ZShare.net

LMAO!

Tropic Thunder, MOVIE OF THE SUMMER?

after The Confessional was leaked early (June 10th was the release date), Bishop Lamont & his crew confront DJ Strong about his actions

Official 1st Single off of "Nigger" or "NAS" or "Untitled", whatever name he selects for the album title, its release date is now July 15th

LINK: ZShare.net

Esto es algo que en cualquier Wikipedia podrán leer, ya que no es un misterio pero tratare de darle énfasis en lo que más importa.

ROH es sin lugar a dudas la mayor empresa Indy(independiente) que existe en Estados Unidos hoy por hoy, de ella ha nacido un grupo de las mejores estrellas que estan en las mejores ligas de lucha libre (Samoa Joe y Christopher Daniels en TNA, London y CM Punk en WWE). también existen luchadores de los más talentosos actualmente como lo son, a nivel de muchos, "The Best" Bryan Danielson, Nigel McGuinness, The Briscoe Brothers....

Uno podria seguir y seguir, pero empecemos desde el principio.
ROH comienza por el año 2002. Su formato de representación es de eventos mensuales que van de hasta 6 por mes, con eventos especiales como Anniversary Show(s), Death Before Dishonor, Survival of the Fittest, Glory by Honor, y Final Battle( el ultimo del año). Hoy en día han entrado al negocio de los Pague Por Ver, de los cuales han sido los mejores PPV de Estados Unidos (mejores que WWE y TNA).

Todo empieza cuando por azares del destino, la empresa que realizaba los vídeos de la extinta ECW necesitaba una nueva promoción. cuando todo entubo en orden se realizo un evento en el cual la lucha estelar lo fue Eddie Guerrero vs Super Crazy por el IWA Intercontinental Championships, y la lucha entres Bryan Danielson vs Christopher Daniels vs Low Ki(los padres de ROH).

ahí partió el sueño, pero con su primer ante bajo. por el año 2004 el dueño de ROH comienza problemas legales con la venta de pornografía, lo que hace una gran crisis en la compañía, siendo aprovechada por TNA ( AJ Styles y Daniels empiezan a trabajar alli).

el sueño se rompía, hasta.... (Proximamente)

Articulo escrito por ZeroCool - 10/12/07