I love you man but not the government

Last night I went to a free screening for the movie coming out on Friday--I love you, man. It was a good movie! I really liked it. I like Paul Rudd. I feel like he's not self-conscious and he's not afraid to take on roles that involve him acting gay or stupid. In I love you man, Rudd's acting made me think of Steve Carrell. Overall, it's a funny movie and I liked it!

In other news, the whole AIG bonuses thing has really got everybody angry. The general public is mad at the executives that are taking home these hefty bonuses. What I don't understand is how the government failed to have the foresight to prevent this from happening. I don't understand how the government basically gave a handout without putting any conditions that cap the bonuses. Why didn't anybody in Washington do something about this huge loophole?

When I was at the gym yesterday, they were playing CNN Newsroom on the TV and they had this interesting interview. This guy was out of a job (no surprise there) and to advertise himself, he bought a billboard ad. Apparently he received a lot of offers for interviews from CEOs that saw the billboard. I thought that was such a creative idea and I'm glad it worked or his financial situation would probably be worse off cuz of the expense of advertising!

Soo I wanna share my thoughts on politics. I realized my view last night and I think it's important that I write it down so I can refer to it later when I'm interviewed on the Colbert Report (one can dream!). So up until now I considered myself a Democrat. I didn't exactly change to a Republican philosophy but I can definitely understand it. There's problems with both philosophies and I guess I don't know yet which is the lesser evil. See, in the Democratic standpoint, a shift of wealth to the lower income class is purported. Democrats want to help out the people at the bottom that 'need a hand' to get up. Whereas the Republicans have a self-righteous attitude about the money that they 'worked hard' to earn and they don't think people at the bottom, who haven't worked as hard, deserve the help. I think there are fundamental problems with both mindsets. The Democratic philosophy is too forgiving of the people at the bottom that are lazy and just waiting for the government handouts. I don't think that's right because there are people out there who work two jobs and work overtime. It's interesting because some of these people may actually jump into a higher socioeconomic class because of the amount they work and what do they get rewarded with? HIGHER TAXES! So that family is working like crazy to make a better future for themselves and all of a sudden they're expected to give even more to the lazy people at the bottom! Why does their hard-earned money go to the families that aren't even trying? I know there are lots of worthy people at the bottom that really need the aid and it's unfortunate that their actual needs get twisted up with the lazy people who just aren't trying. Now the problem with the Republican philosophy in my eyes is that it operates on the premise that the people who are at the top making a lot of money all worked hard to get there. There are undoubtedly people who really did climb the ladder and got where they are with their own sweat. But certainly there are those who had the right connections and just got there without lifting a finger. Even now, after having gotten to the top, there are some executives that actually work hard and care about things and others that are only looking at the money. So what you end up with overall is a Democratic philosophy that helps the undeserving lazy people and a Republican philosophy that helps the undeserving greedy people. Which is the lesser of the two evils?

Okay so I have a neuro practical exam tomorrow that I'm not really prepared for. Considering I just woke up, I should probably get moving. Happy Thursday!