Othersource in Poland partnered with McKinney ad agency to build a Flash 3D engine with artificial intelligence for the McKinney website that’s launching this week.

Compared to other sites in the Semantics category, this one has an unusual level of interactivity. Users can ask the site questions, via the keyboard, using everyday language and expressions, and the proprietary “conversation engine” will decipher them and then fetch relevant results.

This means the user becomes liberated from the navigation. You no longer need background information to search the site – you just ask it a question.

Also, the site is completely index-able, bookmark-able, etc… from every page – even the video thumbnails have a unique URL. And every single page is a printable PDF, laid out for A4 or newsletter.I also found a nice blog post about it over at AdLab, Agency Site With a Chat Bot:

McKinney has built a Pandorabot-based chat bot (aka “conversation engine”) into its brand new site with a somewhat trippy interface. See if you can catch answers that were pre-scripted to make the machine sound particularly intelligent as opposed to the generic chat bot cop-outs like “Say what?” or “Come again”. – thank you, Michelle

Here’s the proper press release from McKinney.com:

McKinney.com – A Website You Can Talk To

Warsaw, Poland (February 10th, 2009) — Warsaw-based interactive agency Othersource announced today the launch of McKinney.com, a groundbreaking website created in partnership with the awardwinning advertising agency, in Durham, N.C.

Conversations with a website
Using cutting edge technologies, the new McKinney.com is reinventing the conversation had between the ad agency and its audience. Compared to other sites in the Semantics category, the site possesses an unusual level of interactivity. Visitors are able to ask the site questions, via the keyboard, using everyday language and expressions, and the proprietary “conversation engine” will decipher them and then fetch relevant results.

The functionality is groundbreaking. The back-end employs a 3D Flash engine with artificial intelligence, and the interface design is cutting-edge, making it one of the most experiential and unconstrained agency sites on the Web.

Unique tech mix
Othersource worked with linguists who understood, on a high-level, the structure of language. They also enlisted programmers familiar with semantics to help develop the sophisticated algorithm. “Creating the conversation engine’s ‘brain’ was quite labor intensive,” said Othersource Managing Partner Thomas Krotkiewski. “We enlisted two linguists (one a PhD from the University of Oxford), to analyze questions provided by McKinney, and to supply us with all possible ways the questions could be posed. If this search method fails, a backup proprietary tag search function will launch and search matching content. And finally, if the answer is still thought to be inadequate, the question is forwarded to McKinney for human processing. To be sure the conversation engine learns from its mistakes, there is a conversation history log on the proprietary Content Management System. This level of integration between conversation engine and website is completely unique,”

“We were looking for a production partner who would not only bring our vision to life, but enhance it,” added Keith Ciampa, who served as McKinney’s interactive creative director on the project. “Most true innovation happens on the fringes of the industry, by people who are passionate about what they do and willing to take risks. When we explained our vision for a conversational site, based on a completely open architecture, which could grow and become smarter the more it was used, Othersource knew we were asking for something that had never been done, and they couldn’t have been more excited to help us figure it out.”

Conversation-driven search
A proprietary tag search was built into the back end of the new site so search results can be presented dynamically, and not just direct visitors to a static page. For example, a visitor can ask a question like, “show me TV campaigns for client X from November last year” and an animated 3D tunnel will appear, with search results as moving thumbnail images, that the visitor can fly through. “As far as we can tell, this functionality is unique,” said Krotkiewski.

Like gas molecules
The site has an advanced 3D graphical interface. “The key to the 3D interface is the ‘cloud view,’ which shows a cloud of graphical thumbnails, moving like molecules in a gas, bouncing randomly off each other while also reacting to mouse input. The cloud can be filtered by the visitor to only show thumbnails representing certain types of content,” said Martin Ignaczak, Account Director at Othersource.

Flash without drawbacks
The site has overcome the limitations of Flash: “The site is fully searchable by Google, each page can bookmarked and linked to, and each view can be downloaded as a printable PDF,” continued Ignaczak. Working in the virtual

New technologies were key to organizing the project. Othersource used video-conferencing, VoIP, instant messaging, e-mails, and other electronic means of communication to coordinate the work with McKinney. “We only met face-to-face after the launch, which proves we are able to run even very complex projects completely in the virtual,” added Krotkiewski.

“We are honored by McKinney’s decision to partner with Othersource for the production — we were competing with some quite well-known US interactive agencies in the pitch. Being chosen in spite of being based overseas is quite a feat. We hope this project is the beginning of a long relationship with McKinney. We also expect it will generate more opportunities for us in the US overall,” said Krotkiewski.

“Partnering with Othersource on this project was both a rewarding and challenging experience,” said McKinney Interactive Technology Director Trevor O’Brien. “The biggest hurdle was taking existing technologies and customizing them to work together in ways they were not initially intended to. Othersource helped deliver a site that is an experiential and innovative place to interact online. It’s exciting to see what two like-minded teams can create together.”

About Othersource
Othersource provides interactive services from strategy to production to companies around the world. In 2008, the agency participated in projects for companies such as MetLife, The National Constitution Center in Boston, Accenture Poland, Puma, Imation Europe and others, in Poland, Sweden, Holland, the UK and the USA. The majority of its clients are Advertising and Interactive agencies that need support in creating campaign strategies, creative concepts and interactive production for their clients. About McKinney McKinney is an independent advertising agency that’s focused on reinventing the conversation between people and brands. Our goal is to lead the convergence of offline and online (today, 35% of our revenue is interactive and 88% of our frontline staff is actively engaged in the digital space), to identify relevant applications for new technologies and to deliver game-changing ideas that deliver extraordinary results for our clients, their customers and our people.

Founded in 1969, the Durham, NC-based agency’s clients include Coldwell Banker, Gold’s Gym, Major League Gaming, The NASDAQ Stock Market, Partnership for a Drug-Free America, ProShares, Qwest Communications, Sherwin-Williams, Travelocity, Virgin Mobile USA, Virgin Atlantic Airways, and Brown- Forman Corporation brands Bonterra, Chambord, Sonoma-Cutrer, Southern Comfort and Tuaca.

Most recently, Virgin Atlantic Airways and McKinney took top honors at the Interactive Advertising Bureau’s MIXX Awards that celebrate the “mixx” of creativity and effectiveness in digital marketing. Virgin Atlantic’s experiential launch, “Love from Above,” won a Gold MIXX in the Mobile Platforms category for the company’s first-ever WAP site.

For more information, visit our website at www.mckinney.com or the McKinney Newsroom by contacting Janet Northen at janet.northen@mckinney.com.

Additional information:
Thomas Krotkiewski
Managing Partner
Othersource
+48-601-145398
thomas@othersource.com
Timezone: GMT+1
Janet Northen
Partner & EVP, Director of Agency Communications

Janet Northen
Partner & EVP, Director of Agency Communications
McKinney
+1 919.313.4062
janet.northen@mckinney.com

The Ballad of Chris Abraham

With fingers strong he types the truth
With graceful words so slick
He opens eyes, and hearts, and minds
With his memetic tricks

Oh, once you read his graceful lines
You’ll see a different world
With thoughts that live, evolve, and change
In human minds a-whirl

He fights the endless hordes of fools
With sharpened sword of wit
Striking down the endless legion
A man of brains and grit

Remember him, Chris Abraham,
Historians to come
A man who rushed into the page
And fought the mindless scum

Via Ungab

I was just farting around Boing Boing Gadgets, enjoying the fine work over there, post amusement over seeing my business partner become immortal in a Boing Boing post and referred to as “a globe-trotting alpha male who spends winters rubbing elbows with bikini models down in Mauretius and summers either indulging in sport in Berlin or piloting yachts around Cape Horn.” Well, I started reading comments and there were some funny ones, and then an obvious comment spam about the Motorola Krave. Then, the wolves circled and the entire comment thread started mocking the shiller. Ultimately, Joel Johnson wrote the following awesome blog post, entitled, Motorola, could you please tell your viral marketer to get out of our comments?

Motorola, could you please tell your viral marketer to get out of our comments?

In John’s post about Steve Jobs’ purported tantrum, a commenter “MGOODE08″ made this remark:

I’m so glad my boss isn’t like that! I’m working with Motorola right now, and became a huge fan of the Krave (motorola.com/krave). I especially like the full touch screen display and html web browser. It’s awesome!

On the 14th, he made this comment:

Oh man this looks awesome! I hope they release a version for the Krave by Motorola. Ever since I started working with Motorola I have became a huge fan of the phone (motorola.com/krave). With a full list of features, like a full touch screen, I can’t stop obsessing over it.

“M Goode” loves this phone so much that he posted this at GigaOm:

This is a very good idea. I think it could be applied to any phones with a similar format. Ever since I started working with Motorola I have become a huge fan of the Krave. It has some of the same features, and I think a built in micropayment system would be great. It’s a fairly new phone, so if you haven’t seen it yet it’s online at motorola.com/krave. I wonder if they will jump on the bandwagon when/if a micropayment system is implemented.

When he’s not on tech sites, though, “M Goode” loves to relax with a good game:

I wish this game would get released for a mobile gaming platform, especially the Krave. I have been a fan of this franchise since it’s first release, and would love to have it on a cell phone, especially the krave. Ever since I started working with Motorola, I have become a huge fan of the krave. Has anyone else seen it?(motorola.com/krave) It’s so loaded with features, most important of which is the full touch screen layout. It’s DEFINITELY worth checking out.

He’s also really into the indie gaming scene:

I can’t wait to see this on a mobile phone platform! it would be so cool to see ti on a Krave! Has anyone else seen it? (motorola.com/krave) It’s a flip phone with a touch screen, 2 MP camera, full html browser and bluetooth functionality. Definitely worth checking out.

But uh oh! He might be considering switching from a Krave to the new Nokia:

My favorite phone right now is the Krave by Motorola. I became a huge fan of the Krave once I started working with Motorola. You can check out the full spec list online at motorola.com/krave. It’s definitely strong competition with it’s full touch screen

(He is also apparently working for Cirque Du Soleil, but we’ll let them pass for the moment because I love acrobats.)

“Follow the money,” they say, but in this case we don’t have to, because all we have to do is follow the link. Motorola, if you could be so kind as to tell your viral marketer to fuck right off we’d sure appreciate it. Perhaps you could spend the money instead on making your phones something that people actually want to buy.

P.S., I love our readers. Check out the replies they immediately started making:

I’m so glad my boss isn’t like that! I’m working for Burger King right now, and became a huge fan of the Mushroom and Swiss Steakhouse Burger. I especially like the cheese and mushrooms. It’s awesome!

I’m so glad my boss isn’t like that! I’m working for a pimp on the corner of wellwood and barrington and became a huge fan of Allie and her turrid backstroke technique. I especially like the pop and rock. It’s awesome!

I’m so glad my boss isn’t like that! I’m working with Cryptozoologia right now, and became a huge fan of the Trepanasaurus (Cryptozoologia.com/ Trepanasaurus). I especially like the way that, after the dinosaur-anteater hybrid rips off the top of a person’s head with its sharp teeth, it can suck out its victim’s brain with its nose. It’s awesome!

My friend wrote the following email to me. I asked her if I might be able to post it and she said yes, as long as I make it anonymous:

So maybe you’ll understand my irritation. Yesterday I found myself defending feminism to a couple of otherwise fairly liberal women. I’m not yet able to articulate precisely what about this conversation I found most disturbing. I’ll spare you the details, but one of them was arguing that feminism didn’t accomplish anything because women have always been able to do whatever they wanted to. To me, this just displays astounding ignorance (and how do you counter that, really?). Both of them, however, were arguing, essentially, that a woman’s primary purpose is to have and raise children. Really? And they weren’t so subtle in what they thought of me by way of implication. (It’s very possible I was reading more into this than I should have.)Now there are certain circles where I expect this sort of bullshit (and this is by no means a slight on women who choose to have/raise kids). And I’ve been distancing myself from those circles as much as I can. But it doesn’t look like I cant dodge this issue much longer, seeing as it appears unavoidable even amongst purported liberals. I’m hoping that with these women at least–I probably won’t see them again until after the new year–the issue is dropped, particularly because I don’t really feel that, in a professional setting anyway, I can really say what I think, in the way I really WANT to say it.Why, why, why in this day and age are women still most valued–even among other women–not for their brains, their wits, their gifts, their abilities, their accomplishments, but for their uterus? I had no idea this line of thinking, is this country anyway, went beyond the usual suspects. I thought that being valued for who one is, man or woman, should be a given. Or am I just pissed as an inherently flawed person because I’m not a nurturer? And what should I say/do the next time I run into this sort of thing?

Firstly, I am honored that I was included in the email — I am the only boy — with the subject line, “You’re enlightened people.”Secondly, I studied feminist theory in college and have always been a proponent of equal rights for women as they choose to define it.Thirdly, I would really love to get a discussion going about this issue because it means a lot to me, to my friend, and to loads and loads of women who value themselves for “their brains, their wits, their gifts, their abilities, their accomplishments” and not just for their uteri.

Today is Veteran’s Day, a day that pays homage to every man and woman who has served in the United States Armed Forces, in times of war and peace.  Please consider donating any amount today to help our returning troops.  If you donate now your funds will be matched dollar for dollar!

I have personally pledged to raise $1,000 of the $10,000 that Survivor Corps is raising this week to help returning soldiers in remembrance of Veteran’s Day, today — please help me make my goal. Honestly, a couple-bucks is cool — feel free to donate whatever you want. There is always the “Other” tab. If we have lots of small donations, it all adds up!  Please join me over on Facebook Cause in support of my pledge.

Our soldiers need our help now. Which is why, this Veterans Day, I’m asking you to honor their service with a modest gift to Survivor Corps’ program for U.S. Armed Forces veterans, Operation Survivor.

Survivor Corps is aiming to raise $10,000 over the next week, with your help. We currently have just over 600 members in the cause. If each member donated just $20, we would have well over $12,000. In addition, Survivor Corps is currently running a matching-gift program so your donation will be doubled for the returning troops! Please join Survivor Corps on Facebook Causes to help them reach their goal of $10,000!

Right now, about 620,000 veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), traumatic brain injuries (TBI), major depression, or a combination of the three. Many returning veterans are facing family, employment, and other community reintegration issues. Using our ten years of experience helping survivors of violent conflict find a way back to peace, within their own bodies and minds, and in their communities, Survivor Corps founded Operation Survivor to provide the same kind of life-changing services to American veterans.

NEWS FACTS
Within the United States there are over one and a half million service members that have served in military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Over thirty thousand have been physically wounded, but many more have experienced less visible, psychological wounds. Traumatic Brain Injury and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder have emerged as signature injuries of these conflicts, with recent reports suggesting an increase in rates of suicide, alcohol and drug abuse, homelessness, and domestic violence among returning service members and veterans.

These traumatic affects of conflict, left unaddressed, could have far-reaching negative consequences for the individuals affected, their families, and our country. Survivor Corps’ work in some of the most conflict affected countries in the world has shown community reintegration to be the key factor in those that overcome their traumatic experiences, and those that are consumed by them.

• 1.6 million servicemembers have deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001
• 300,000 have reported symptoms of PTSD and major depression. (RAND)
• Over 5,391 service members haveben killed in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001 (hostile and non-hostile)4,447 killed in Iraq, 944 killed in Afghanistan (iCasualties, 06 AUG 08)
• Over 30,000 injured
• Over 1,000 lost limbs
• Walter Reed Amputee Center serves 100 veterans daily

The main issues for returning soldier since WWI have been:

• Major depressive disorder
• Alcohol abuse
• Domestic violence
• Suicide
• Homelessness
• Unemployment

All of these issues repeat after each war, and are symptoms of the much greater problem facing Veterans: How to reintegrate into families and communities upon return. We’ve seen these issues in our overseas networks, US citizens have seen these symptoms after past conflicts, and we are seeing these same symptoms again today..

PTSD:

• 53% of soldiers with PSTD receive treatment. (RAND)

SUICIDE:

• Since 2002 suicide attempts have risen from 350 to approximately 2,100 in 2007. (VA)
• The Army is committing $1.4 billion this year to add to the quality of life of a soldier including an informal peer support program through distribution of ACE of hearts playing cards.
• ACE cards: Ask your buddy, Care for your buddy, Escort your buddy.

SUBSTANCE ABUSE:
According to the Department of Defense heavy drinking occurred in 18.5% of those individuals from the U.S. Armed Forces surveyed.

• 41% of veterans who drank reported problems at work
• 24.7% of veterans who drank reported problems at home
• 31.2% of veterans who drank reported depression

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE:
A study conducted by the National Institute of Health showed returning veterans listed alcohol as the second most frequent cause of spouse violence.

UNEMPLOYMENT:

• 11.2% of returning young male veterans are unemployed (US Dept. of Labor)

HOMELESSNESS:

• 40% of homeless men are veterans. (National Coalition for the Homeless)
• 200,000 veterans are homeless. (NCH)
• Already 600 returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan have sought transitional housing services from the VA. (NCH)
• Women are 2 to 4 times more likely to become homeless. (NCH)
• After Vietnam, it generally took 9 to 12 years for veterans’ to become homeless…Returning veterans from Iraq are seeking housing services only months after returning. (NCH)

OPERATION SURVIVOR

Ongoing conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan are creating a generation of veterans in the United States from all branches of the armed services and all 50 states who are struggling to overcome physical and psychosocial injuries. Most combat veterans convalescing in military hospitals across the country will survive physically, but getting on with their lives after returning home to their families and communities is proving a significant challenge for hundreds of thousands. Among the 1.6 million who have served since 2001, suicide is on the rise, as is unemployment and incidents of substance abuse and domestic violence.

The successful reintegration of returning service members is an issue that will have a long-lasting impact on American society, and may become the single defining struggle facing this new generation of veterans. Survivor Corps and its partners are determined to avoid the mistakes made when veterans returned from Vietnam, which resulted in tens of thousands of post-war suicides and over 200,000 men and women living on the streets.

To head off this tragic outcome, Survivor Corps will build peer support programs at the community level that will bring service members and veterans together for mutual support and encourage both individual responsibility and collective action to help others in need.

Survivor Corps is offering an alternative “treatment” that can be made readily available in all communities, regardless of proximity to traditional military or govern¬ment centers of support. Our approach is nimble enough to address the needs of individual survivors, while still broad enough to build a coalition of survivors and service providers working to effect long-term positive change.

This new program will help the recovery and reintegration of hundreds of thousands of returning U.S. service members at a critical time for them and their country.

I just received this email from Frank Luntz:

To: Friends & Family
From: Frank Luntz
Re: A New Beginning
Date: November 5, 2008

---

The end of the most interesting election in modern times will also be the end of my career with Luntz, Maslansky Strategic Research. Having sold my company to the good people of Omnicom, it’s time to move on.

When I hired my first employee and opened up an office in the basement of my townhouse in 1992, I never dreamed that I would someday have the honor of working for presidents, prime ministers, and CEOs of the world’s most successful companies and most influential foundations. Our roster of corporate and public affairs clients is unprecedented for a firm of our size, and I’m so deeply proud of them and the positive impact they have had on their customers, their communities, and the world at large.

I am also grateful for the privilege of analyzing the great events and social trends of our time in so many diverse public settings. While I may have a face for radio and a voice for newspapers, the willingness of so many network presidents and executive producers to give me the opportunity to apply the skills of public opinion to explain the who, what and why of the world are some of the most fulfilling and enjoyable moments of my career. I can never adequately thank them for making life so interesting and invigorating.

But a time comes in everyone’s career where it becomes important to tackle new challenges and scale new mountains. Now is as good a time as any to get out of DC and start examining more closely what is really happening in American life and culture. I also want to take my research of words to an entirely different level, applying it where it has never been applied before. There’s a lot I still want to learn and do – and staring at the Pacific Ocean from Santa Monica, California is as good a place as any to do it from.

So while I will be leaving my home and my company, I am certainly not retiring or disappearing. I’m much too young and much too excited about what’s ahead. But I don’t plan to work as hard – at least that’s the plan. Those of you who know me well know that I work 18 hour days, seven days a week. This year alone I will have flown more than 300 days and logged 300,000 miles … and frankly … I’m tired. I need this change of scenery and change of pace to recharge my batteries and extend my shelf life.

Not everything will change, however. I have been offered and accepted the privilege of serving as “Chairman Emeritus,” of LMSR, a title normally reserved for people who live past their sell-by date. And while I may be gone, the company name will remain the same, as will the team I have painstakingly assembled over the past decade. These are uniquely capable people with solid research experience and the most creative brains I have ever worked with. I recommend them highly for all your research needs.

And if you are looking for advice and guidance, I’m definitely still around and still in business.

To end on a personal note, I did not learn until the death of my father how much he enjoyed my frantic calls asking him for help or guidance – and that he missed them when I grew old enough to handle these tasks on my own. You don’t realize how much I appreciated the chance to serve you – even when the calls were late and the tasks were tough. While I have made my share of mistakes, I do not regret a single minute. You have given me a very fulfilling life, and I thank you for making it worth living.

Frank

Here’s a version of this email online.

I am sitting here in Berlin, Germany, listening to NPR on 104.1 FM (yes, we have National Public Radio on-tap in Berlin, it is true), and I am rooting for Barack Obama. I have to admit that I voted Republican in the last two elections, in 2000 and 2004, because I was appalled by both Gore and Kerry. I was passionate about Bill Clinton during his eight years in office and preferred anything to Gore or Kerry, to be honest. That said, I want Barack Obama to win because the world wants Barack Obama to win.

After church yesterday, I got to talking to my fellow parishioners and they want Barack Obama. These are not your traditional European communists you hear about, they’re devout Christians — born again — who are probably considered pretty conservative in the context of Europe. However, in the context of America, even a right wing wingnut European is still relatively liberal by American standards.

When Berliners look at Barack Obama, they don’t see someone who will set race riots afire, they don’t see someone who will turn America into a Marxist-Leninist stronghold, they see a man who is sophisticated, education, trained, has a brain in his head, went to the best schools, has explored the world, cares about civil rights, and who will most likely be willing to span the broken bridges across the Atlantic to Europe and Russia and try his best to rebuild them and begin to regain the trust, admiration, and even envy that much of the world had fifty-years ago.

To them and to me, Barack Obama will be able to return the United States to the hands of the rational. A United States with a better separation between Church and State. Maybe even a country in which Jesus Christ is the co-pilot and not the pilot any more. Where saner, more peaceful, minds prevail. A nation willing to put away its herald and sword, stop with the Christian Crusades, the preemptive strikes, the unilateral military conquests, and the obsession with being Exceptional. Exceptionalism is the most dangerous aspect of the George W Bush and Neocon White House.

“When the United States looks abroad, it does so from an assumed position of moral and spiritual strength. For as long as the United States has existed, a perceived sense of its exceptionalism has permeated the way that Americans view the rest of the world . . . this view has been reinforced by the material reality of US economic and military strength. The essence of American exceptionalism is a celebration of the uniqueness and special virtue of the United States. It rests on the belief that the United States has a special role to play in the world, and unique qualities to bring to this role . . . The roots of the concept stem from the Puritan vision of America as a ‘shining city upon a hill’, a society designed to serve as a moral example to mankind.”

The idea that America is any better-suited than any other nation to lead based on some sort of Divine Inheritance or Plan is ludicrous and very insane, especially when no one else in the entire world agrees. I am a big fan of Mike Signer’s concept of exemplarism:

“Exemplarism is the principle that the United States could best serve the spread of liberal democracy by being an enviable example to the world—the shining light on the hill, the beacon. Being a good example requires strengthening the institutions that assure individual liberties, the rule of law, and the prosperity born of industry and commerce. Adherents to exemplarism would find themselves in agreement with Kant’s principle of noninterventionism into the affairs of other nations.”

Telling yourself and everybody around you how amazing, brilliant, noble, moral, and generous you are when you’re the biggest and meanest and best-armed and best-outfitted man in the room is hubristic and kind of pathetic. Delusional, actually, and certainly not the best way for a man — or a country — to be. America is kind of being an International douchebag.

I must admit that I have a special weakness for exemplarism’s belief in the “principle of noninterventionism into the affairs of other nations” even if you don’t like the way other nations are running their households. There is a certain amount of independence and internal liberty associated with being sovereign. Sovereignty, to me, is holy. To me, exporting culture, policy, morals, or any concept of character or politick is poor form, especially when it is at the tip of a sword.

What scares me about American Exceptionalism is that it allows just about any behavior based on the premise that we can do no wrong. That any move we take to help is helpful, that any gift we have to give is welcome, that any feeling a foreign nation could feel is grateful.

When America thinks the entire world is so “insane” and “drunk” that only America cane make the important, sober, choices, then it is in fact that America is the Nation suffering from mental illness. You know what they say, right? If you think the entire world has gone mad, that the entire world is against you, that the entire world is violent and full of unrest, the unappealing truth might just be that you’re severely paranoid and might be the most mentally ill in the room. There is no way that the entire planet is conspiring again the United States — unless, of course, we have gone one step too far.

I am told that we have gone one step too far; however, Europe and most of the world is willing to let bygones be bygones because we’re loved by the world, at least mostly. Berliners no longer trust America but they’re willing to give Barack Obama a chance — they’re not willing to give John McCain a chance, sadly.

They see in John McCain an angry, malicious, foolish man — which is fine; however, in Sarah Palin, they don’t even seen some harmless vice presidential candidate, they see a very dangerous indicator that the McCain/Palin ticket will more assuredly take the United States to an even darker, more jingoistic, more conservative, descent into fascism.

When I tell people these things, especially on Twitter, I get the strangest response, even from the Democrats: “America is the best country on earth.” “America may not be perfect but there is no better country on earth.” “I am proud to be an American — I am patriotic, surely.” Alternately, I also get, “I think we have gone too far as a nation — we have descended into a self-centered feeding frenzy rife with elbows and short-sighted land-grabbing.”

To me, I am somewhere in the middle. I love the foundation of the Nation. I love the literature, the heart, the soul, the worlds, the music, the history, the compassion, the Faith, the persistence, the curiosity, and confidence, the optimism, and even the cocksureness! I love the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence. There is a reason why many nations worldwide have patterned and even plagiarized our Constitution, to be sure.

Hell, Europe loves the idea of America! Basically, we are a nation that, in its source code, has embraced all that is liberté, égalité, fraternité; however, the world had not been able to enjoy our uniquely American version of liberty, equality, and fraternity for all the foaming at the mouth and the bared fangs! There is a fear that this mad-dog may have gone too far into its rabies and is too far gone.

In Barack Obama, they see that maybe what America has been doing for the last eight years as been a sort of postpartum, post-911, depression. That the Nation, all big and clumsy, hung over, and feeling a little sick, is finally reemerging from darkness into light — luckily, just in time, when the world needs a leader in the community and not just a dangerous paranoiac who lives in the dilapidated house at the edge of town.

The rest of the world has not given up on us as Americans or as America. Have we as a nation give up on ourselves?

If you have not been keeping on top of all of the great comments streaming in to the AH Poll entitled “If John McCain died or became incapacitated, would Sarah Palin be competent to be President?” you are really missing out! Some of them are the most insightful, thoughtful, and brilliant collection of thoughts representing the best and the worst of the right and the left! Roll up your sleeves and batten your hatches because you’re going to have one hell of a ride. Oh, also, these comments are in reverse-chronological order so the most recent are at the top. If you want to keep track of them live, please go visit them where they love and breathe. Read below for the most amazing Sarah Palin comment thread of the Internets!

And, here’s an embed of the poll, if I’ve piqued your interest by now:

This is an op-ed written by Jerry White, founder of Survivor Corps and author of I Will Not Be Broken: Five Steps to Overcoming a Life Crisis, on the Fourth of July, 2008:

My first wish is to see this plague of mankind, war, banished from the earth.” These are not the words of a pacifist or peacenik. General George Washington, the canny military strategist and first leader of the American army, recognized that war is a horror. While we bask in our independence today, let us also recognize the price paid by those—then and now—who fight for it. After the Revolution, 25,000 Americans lay dead. About 25,000 more were seriously wounded or disabled. That is a high price, indeed, for our freedom. Since 1776, the world has fought more than 300 wars, and nearly 40 conflicts still rage. The cost remains steep.

Today, 1.6 million Americans have served in Afghanistan and Iraq. Over 4,000 are dead. Those who return are missing limbs, are disfigured, are coping with traumatic brain injuries. Still others have less visible wounds. Over 300,000 now exhibit symptoms of post-traumatic stress and alienation here at home. They have broken marriages, unchecked anger, thoughts of suicide. Their military service may be over, but they and their families (including over two million children) remain profoundly affected. The costs related to stress and depressive disorders may reach $6 billion over the next two years, according to a recent study by Rand.

And that’s where we, as civilians, must activate. We must commit ourselves as everyday people to reach out to these wounded warriors to help them overcome. Because I am here to tell you, nobody survives trauma alone.

I have spent the past twelve years building a global network of people helping each other overcome the terrible cost of war—helping “victims” become “survivors.” In over 116,000 peer visits across the war-torn regions of the world, we have learned a few things about what separates those who lie down and embrace their suffering, and those who rise above, rebuild their lives, and rejoin their communities.

Survivors who successfully overcome traumatic injuries follow five basic steps. First, they Face Facts. These people don’t run from the truth of what’s happened to them. They don’t deny injuries, or disfigurement, or anger. They look at them, and incorporate them into their lives.

Second, they consciously Choose Life. It is crucial to remind ourselves and each other why life is worth living. Rising suicide rates must be addressed head on, because most of these individuals don’t want to die as much as they want their pain and despair to end.

Third, true survivors Reach Out. They reject isolation and divisiveness. They know that, to move out of a war victim mentality and onto the path of positive survivorship, they must drop their shell of anger and resentment.

Fourth, survivors have to Get Moving. Those traumatized by war, whatever the condition of their bodies, must get active. We all must take responsibility to do what it takes to “get in shape” for whatever the future may hold.

The fifth—and perhaps most crucial key to resilience and recovery—is to Give Back. Survivors recognize that it’s better to be a benefactor, not just a beneficiary. Everyone can have a role to play and contribute in big and small ways to our families and neighborhoods. To the veterans who served in war, I say learn to serve again. Become active members of your communities. Show your strength, creativity and work ethic to your friends and neighbors. You may look different, you may feel different, but you can still contribute.

And to the United States, as we struggle to recover from the war trauma we experience as a nation, I offer the same practical advice: Face Facts. Choose Life. Reach Out. Get Moving. Give Back. Families and citizens remain divided over whether we should have gone into Iraq in the first place. The Revolutionary War was no different—many wanted to avoid war or align with England. (Benjamin Franklin’s own son, William, the Governor of New Jersey, remained loyal to Britain throughout the war, as did nearly 20% of the colonists.) But at the end of the war, then as now, we emerge as Americans.

When we can admit our imperfections and share our strength as survivors, as Americans, we are united. Certainly, as victims of war we have pain. We know loss and sacrifice. But we are still strong. Because it is more than just pain that unites us. It is our shared hope for humanity—our ability to overcome—that binds us together.

I am convinced that within each human being lies an inextinguishable flame, an irrepressible voice whose refrain is unmistakable: I choose freedom. I will not choose to hate, to wallow in self-pity, to retaliate. I instead choose to live, to thrive. I believe that this is the American way. Some say we are becoming less resilient and more cynical as a nation. And, if we keep making excuses and pushing our responsibilities to each other away, that is the path we will be on. But, I think we are better than that. I believe strength and generosity can be found within each and every one of us.

So, let’s honor our Day of Independence by uniting in empathy and support for families struggling with fresh wounds. In our mutual survivorship, there is no “us” and “them”—no civilian versus military, democrat versus republican, victim versus survivor. We are united in our commitment to one another. Choose resilience and optimism. Choose to reach out to those who are suffering. Let our lost loved ones, and their memories, cheer us onward and upward. And as fireworks explode behind the Washington Monument this July 4^th, let it commemorate and shout out America’s characteristic optimism and can-do confidence that we can and will overcome this “plague of mankind.”

George Carlin was my first adult comedian. My dad — my parents — loved him. He was a true disruptor and free thinker, using comedy as his platform. Please check out George Carlin’s Wikipedia entry and the lovely obituary from the New York Times.

George Carlin, the Grammy-Award winning standup comedian and actor who was hailed for his irreverent social commentary, poignant observations of the absurdities of everyday life and language, and groundbreaking routines like “Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television,” died in Santa Monica, Calif., on Sunday, according to his publicist, Jeff Abraham. He was 71.The cause of death was heart failure. Mr. Carlin, who had a history of heart problems, went into the hospital on Sunday afternoon after complaining of heart trouble. The comedian had worked last weekend at The Orleans in Las Vegas.

Recently, Mr. Carlin was named the recipient of the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor. He was to receive the award at the Kennedy Center in November. “In his lengthy career as a comedian, writer, and actor, George Carlin has not only made us laugh, but he makes us think,” said Stephen A. Schwarzman, the Kennedy Center chairman. “His influence on the next generation of comics has been far-reaching.”

Mr. Carlin began his standup comedy act in the late 1950s and made his first television solo guest appearance on “The Merv Griffin Show” in 1965. At that time, he was primarily known for his clever wordplay and reminiscences of his Irish working-class upbringing in New York.

But from the outset there were indications of an anti-establishment edge to his comedy. Initially, it surfaced in the witty patter of a host of offbeat characters like the wacky sportscaster Biff Barf and the hippy-dippy weatherman Al Sleet. “The weather was dominated by a large Canadian low, which is not to be confused with a Mexican high. Tonight’s forecast . . . dark, continued mostly dark tonight turning to widely scattered light in the morning.”

Mr. Carlin released his first comedy album, “Take-Offs and Put-Ons,” to rave reviews in 1967. He also dabbled in acting, winning a recurring part as Marlo Thomas’ theatrical agent in the sitcom “That Girl” (1966-67) and a supporting role in the movie “With Six You Get Egg-Roll,” released in 1968.

By the end of the decade, he was one of America’s best known comedians. He made more than 80 major television appearances during that time, including the Ed Sullivan Show and Johnny Carson’s Tonight Show; he was also regularly featured at major nightclubs in New York and Las Vegas.

That early success and celebrity, however, was as dinky and hollow as a gratuitous pratfall to Mr. Carlin. “I was entertaining the fathers and the mothers of the people I sympathized with, and in some cases associated with, and whose point of view I shared,” he recalled later, as quoted in the book “Going Too Far” by Tony Hendra, which was published in 1987. “I was a traitor, in so many words. I was living a lie.”

In 1970, Mr. Carlin discarded his suit, tie, and clean-cut image as well as the relatively conventional material that had catapulted him to the top. Mr. Carlin reinvented himself, emerging with a beard, long hair, jeans and a routine that, according to one critic, was steeped in “drugs and bawdy language.” There was an immediate backlash. The Frontier Hotel in Las Vegas terminated his three-year contract, and, months later, he was advised to leave town when an angry mob threatened him at the Lake Geneva Playboy Club. Afterward, he temporarily abandoned the nightclub circuit and began appearing at coffee houses, folk clubs and colleges where he found a younger, hipper audience that was more attuned to both his new image and his material.

By 1972, when he released his second album, “FM & AM,” his star was again on the rise. The album, which won a Grammy Award as best comedy recording, combined older material on the “AM” side with bolder, more acerbic routines on the “FM” side. Among the more controversial cuts was a routine euphemistically entitled “Shoot,” in which Mr. Carlin explored the etymology and common usage of the popular idiom for excrement. The bit was part of the comic’s longer routine “Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television,” which appeared on his third album “Class Clown,” also released in 1972.

“There are some words you can say part of the time. Most of the time ‘ass’ is all right on television,” Mr. Carlin noted in his introduction to the then controversial monologue. “You can say, well, ‘You’ve made a perfect ass of yourself tonight.’ You can use ass in a religious sense, if you happen to be the redeemer riding into town on one — perfectly all right.”

The material seems innocuous by today’s standards, but it caused an uproar when broadcast on the New York radio station WBAI in the early ’70s. The station was censured and fined by the FCC. And in 1978, their ruling was supported by the Supreme Court, which Time magazine reported, “upheld an FCC ban on ‘offensive material’ during hours when children are in the audience.” Mr. Carlin refused to drop the bit and was arrested several times after reciting it on stage.

By the mid-’70s, like his comic predecessor Lenny Bruce and the fast-rising Richard Pryor, Mr. Carlin had emerged as a cultural renegade. In addition to his irreverent jests about religion and politics, he openly talked about the use of drugs, including acid and peyote, and said that he kicked cocaine not for moral or legal reasons but after he found “far more pain in the deal than pleasure.” But the edgier, more biting comedy he developed during this period, along with his candid admission of drug use, cemented his reputation as the “comic voice of the counterculture.”

Mr. Carlin released a half dozen comedy albums during the ’70s, including the million-record sellers “Class Clown,” “Occupation: Foole” (1973) and “An Evening With Wally Lando” (1975). He was chosen to host the first episode of the late-night comedy show “Saturday Night Live” in 1975. And two years later, he found the perfect platform for his brand of acerbic, cerebral, sometimes off-color standup humor in the fledgling, less restricted world of cable television. By 1977, when his first HBO comedy special, “George Carlin at USC” was aired, he was recognized as one of the era’s most influential comedians. He also become a best-selling author of books that expanded on his comedy routines, including “When Will Jesus Bring the Pork Chops?,” which was published by Hyperion in 2004.

Pursuing a Dream

Mr. Carlin was born in New York City in 1937. “I grew up in New York wanting to be like those funny men in the movies and on the radio,” he said. “My grandfather, mother and father were gifted verbally, and my mother passed that along to me. She always made sure I was conscious of language and words.”

He quit high school to join the Air Force in the mid-’50s and, while stationed in Shreveport, La., worked as a radio disc jockey. Discharged in 1957, he set out to pursue his boyhood dream of becoming an actor and comic. He moved to Boston where he met and teamed up with Jack Burns, a newscaster and comedian. The team worked on radio stations in Boston, Fort Worth, and Los Angeles, and performed in clubs throughout the country during the late ’50s.

After attracting the attention of the comedian Mort Sahl, who dubbed them “a duo of hip wits,” they appeared as guests on “The Tonight Show” with Jack Paar. Still, the Carlin-Burns team was only moderately successful, and, in 1960, Mr. Carlin struck out on his own.

During a career that spanned five decades, he emerged as one of the most durable, productive and versatile comedians of his era. He evolved from Jerry Seinfeld-like whimsy and a buttoned-down decorum in the ’60s to counterculture icon in the ’70s. By the ’80s, he was known as a scathing social critic who could artfully wring laughs from a list of oxymorons that ranged from “jumbo shrimp” to “military intelligence.” And in the 1990s and into the 21st century the balding but still pony-tailed comic prowled the stage — eyes ablaze and bristling with intensity — as the circuit’s most splenetic curmudgeon.

During his live 1996 HBO special, “Back in Town,” he raged over the shallowness of the ’90s “me first” culture — mocking the infatuation with camcorders, hyphenated names, sneakers with lights on them, and lambasting white guys over 10 years old who wear their baseball hats backwards. Baby boomers, “who went from ‘do your thing’ to ‘just say no’ …from cocaine to Rogaine,” and pro life advocates (“How come when it’s us it’s an abortion, and when it’s a chicken it’s an omelet?”), were some of his prime targets. In the years following his 1977 cable debut, Mr. Carlin was nominated for a half dozen Grammy awards and received CableAces awards for best stand-up comedy special for “George Carlin: Doin’ It Again (1990) and “George Carlin: Jammin’ ” (1992). He also won his second Grammy for the album “Jammin” in 1994.

Personal Struggles

During the course of his career, Mr. Carlin overcame numerous personal trials. His early arrests for obscenity (all of which were dismissed) and struggle to overcome his self-described “heavy drug use” were the most publicized. But in the ’80s he also weathered serious tax problems, a heart attack and two open heart surgeries.

In December 2004 he entered a rehabilitation center to address his addictions to Vicodin and red wine. Mr. Carlin had a well-chronicled cocaine problem in his 30s, and though he was able to taper his cocaine use on his own, he said, he continued to abuse alcohol and also became addicted to Vicodin. He entered rehab at the end of that year, then took two months off before continuing his comedy tours.

“Standup is the centerpiece of my life, my business, my art, my survival and my way of being,” Mr. Carlin once told an interviewer. “This is my art, to interpret the world.” But, while it always took center stage in his career, Mr. Carlin did not restrict himself to the comedy stage. He frequently indulged his childhood fantasy of becoming a movie star. Among his later credits were supporting parts in “Car Wash” (1976), “Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure” (1989), “The Prince of Tides” (1991), and “Dogma” (1999).

His 1997 book, “Brain Droppings,” became an instant best seller. And among several continuing TV roles, he starred in the Fox sitcom “The George Carlin Show,” which aired for one season. “That was an experiment on my part to see if there might be a way I could fit into the corporate entertainment structure,” he said after the show was canceled in 1994. “And I don’t,” he added.

Despite the longevity of his career and his problematic personal life, Mr. Carlin remained one of the most original and productive comedians in show business. “It’s his lifelong affection for language and passion for truth that continue to fuel his performances,” a critic observed of the comedian when he was in his mid-60s. And Chris Albrecht, an HBO executive, said, “He is as prolific a comedian as I have witnessed.”

Mr. Carlin is survived by his wife, Sally Wade; daughter Kelly Carlin McCall; son-in-law, Bob McCall, brother, Patrick Carlin and sister-in-law, Marlene Carlin. His first wife, Brenda Hosbrook, died in 1997.

Although some criticized parts of his later work as too contentious, Mr. Carlin defended the material, insisting that his comedy had always been driven by an intolerance for the shortcomings of humanity and society. “Scratch any cynic,” he said, “and you’ll find a disappointed idealist.”

Still, when pushed to explain the pessimism and overt spleen that had crept into his act, he quickly reaffirmed the zeal that inspired his lists of complaints and grievances. “I don’t have pet peeves,” he said, correcting the interviewer. And with a mischievous glint in his eyes, he added, “I have major, psychotic hatreds.”

In memory of George Carlin, here they are:

• Shit
• Piss
• Fuck
• Cunt
• Cocksucker
• Motherfucker
• Tits

I guarantee that this will freak your shit out!

I am a Twitter Addict, I have to admit, and it is for many reasons! Why?  Well, because Twitter is an important and immediate connection I have to both my friends and colleagues, from anywhere and any time. And, Twitter is also an oracle to me! When I have a question or need advice or a recommendation, I just “ask Twitter,” tapping my 1,304 followers for their experience, hope, and joy. Well, another reason I love Twitter is because of their “promiscuous” API, which drives innovation. One such innovation is the Twittering Teddy, which is the brain “child” of the gang over at The Advance Guard, Steve Coulson and C.C. Chapman, et al, on behalf of the gang over at My Home 2.0.

My friend Momotaro, the fellow who created the banner for Memes.org, was so amused by the first comment that someone posted onto my blog post, Don’t Save the Whales and Don’t Save the Rainforest Either, that he created the following anthology of really intelligent put-downs, I Hope a Whale Beaches Itself On You — it is bloody brilliant!

1. 1. jenn wrote:

      i think you are a fucked up person considering you dont care about anything but your self i hope a whale beaches it self on you

      Thursday, January 3, 2008 at 6:46 pm #

   2. Saul wrote:

      One thing is true if you are an extremist you are off balance. If you are a fundamentalist in any direction you are off balance. All this needs is a holistic approach. Make money, but don’t sacrifice your children for it. Save whales but make sure to not be depressed by the fact that you might not. Fucked up is what happens when you forget what is most important to your existence and your families existence – which is in the here and now.

      Thursday, January 3, 2008 at 7:14 pm #

   3. johndoe@aol.com wrote:

      blow me, bitch! you need a brain.

      Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 4:04 am #

   4. Chris wrote:

      johndoe@aol.com »

      Charming.

      Tuesday, January 15, 2008 at 5:06 am #

   5. Jessie wrote:

      I just happened to come across this essay because I was looking for an animal to write about for English class. I clicked on the logo because I am absolutely terrified of whales. I think your writing is very good, and I do agree that one should not focus on one single cause, forgetting about one’s loved ones. However, there are a large host of people who manage to care very deeply about vital causes such as hunger or poverty, and still put much devotion into family and personal life. I think I am going to traverse your writings, Chris.

      Thursday, January 31, 2008 at 10:38 pm #

   6. taylor wrote:

      u r sick and u should not be so cruel u selfish thing!

      Tuesday, February 5, 2008 at 10:17 am #

   7. John wrote:

      Good job! A+

      Friday, February 8, 2008 at 6:19 pm #

   8. noneyabuisness wrote:

      YOUR STUPID. YOU MUST BE AN ANIMAL HATER YOU FACKOO. how can you not feel bad for them? your such a…gosh

      P.S. (save the polar bears) wolfs are awesome!

      Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 3:00 am #

   9. logan wrote:

      save the d*** whales this guy dosen’t now what he is talking about the dumb A** what the H**l is your prob. beach a whale on him.

      Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 6:57 pm #

   10. logan wrote:

       jhon shut the heck up you dumb A** gosh!

       Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 6:58 pm #

   11. logan wrote:

       jessie you shut up to what is your guyzes problem save whales

       Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 7:00 pm #

   12. Jennifer wrote:

       WAT DA HELL IS UR FUKIN PROBLEM U DUMASS UR SICK AND STUPID!!! HOW DO U NOT FEEL BAD FOR THEM, U DON’T HAVE A FUKIN HEART AND AND UR SELFISH SO GO TO HELL!!! IT’S FOR PEOPLE LIKE YOU THAT WHALES ARE IN DANGER
       GO SUCK A DICK!!!!!

       Sunday, February 24, 2008 at 10:53 pm #

   13. Saul wrote:

       Jennifer – you really made me laugh. You are so eloquent in your deep discussion of a relevant topic. What have you done for the whales today?

       Monday, February 25, 2008 at 8:48 am #

   14. Chelsea wrote:

       I think you are the biggest low life i have ever heard of the Whales and the rainforests deserve to be saved. how dare you write that appalling colunm it’s disgusting!!!!!!! I’m 13 and i think thats saying something

       Monday, March 3, 2008 at 8:12 am #

   15. Chris wrote:

       Chelsea »

       Cheslea, did you read the article?

       Monday, March 3, 2008 at 10:00 am #

   16. Emiily Scott wrote:

       Hey you need to seriously sort ya self out! Why the hell don’t you care about anything but yourself! I hope you sometime need a transplant and dont get one and then ypu need someone but nooo we shouldn’t SAVE YOU!

       Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 3:00 pm #

   17. Nancy wrote:

       YOUUUUUUUUUU ARE GAYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

       Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 3:01 pm #

   18. Abe wrote:

       BAHHHH HUMBUG!!!
       SAVE THE WHALES!
       NOT YOU!
       YA STUPID WITCH

       Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 3:02 pm #

   19. Ben wrote:

       Not that i agree with him, but he has every right to express his opinion on the subject, he does have some good points, but…

       Thursday, March 6, 2008 at 12:51 am #

   20. Sydney wrote:

       KILL THE CHRIS!! KILL THE CHRIS!! cMON EVERYBODY, DONT SAVE THE CHRIS ABRAHAMS!!! considering he doesnt care about anything but himself. hes gonna ruin the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!

       Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 1:42 pm #

   21. Sydney wrote:

       SCREW U TOO BEN!!

       Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 1:42 pm #

   22. Chris wrote:

       Sydney, you mean “Kill the Humans,” right? I never named any particular whale, such as Shamu or Willy, right?

       Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 6:19 pm #

   23. Chris wrote:

       Oh, and I should also add, “Don’t Save the Humans,” either.

       Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 6:19 pm #

   24. Cecily wrote:

       I AGREE WITH JENIFER!!! WHOO-HOO! I SAY EVERTHING SHE SAYS!!!

       Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 9:00 pm #

   25. sydney wrote:

       u r a total psycho!!! If u dont want to help save the wonderful, beautiful, gorgeous planet god gave u to live on, u have mental issues!! U shouldbe locked up somewhere in SOLITARY DETENTION!!!!! SAVE THE WHALES!!!!!!!! and dont listen to this stupid idiot fag chris abraham, who says “kill the children!!” u were a kid once, how would u feel if u were a kid browsing the web, and came cross a site saying ‘kill the children’?? Whats wrong with you?? ur momma musta dropped u on ur head or something when u were a kid. peace!!

       Saturday, March 8, 2008 at 9:22 pm #

   26. korney wrote:

       ur a fag it is porple like u that kill the world off!! if someone to have there world stay around for awhile then that is there buisness dont tell them how to live there life so go kill ur self

       Sunday, March 9, 2008 at 12:01 am #

   27. Tookie wrote:

       i think that u should have a heart for creatures lives and u should balance it out with ur family. whales and other animals have lives just like us and have families too but r being hunted and seperated from them. u can do simple things at home too u know. by the way, why did u bring this subject up anyway sam? is it something related to u?

       Sunday, March 9, 2008 at 8:40 am #

   28. Tookie wrote:

       hey jerks! leave him alone! mhe can freely express himself. i dont agree with but dont put him down for his personal opion!

       Sunday, March 9, 2008 at 8:55 am #

   29. Bobby wrote:

       Tookie, we are not jerks, WE are just freely expressing ourselves, and i think that when Chris was a baby his momma dropped him on his head, fed him stupid juice, and then sucked his brain out with a vaccum. TO CHRIS: YOU ARE A STUPID RETARDED A** H***!!! I hope one day, you need serious help, but the people say “No we are using that to save the whales.” Than ‘technically’ we are not sayng “KILL THE CHRIS” But we are still killing you. Go to hell. I agree with anyone who says chris is a dick.

       Sunday, March 9, 2008 at 3:59 pm #

   30. Thomas wrote:

       I agree with Bobby, if he means a DIRTY dick.

       Sunday, March 9, 2008 at 5:23 pm #

   31. Andrew wrote:

       You are a FART, SHIT

       Monday, March 10, 2008 at 8:21 am #

   32. and wrote:

       You DA BIAN

       Monday, March 10, 2008 at 8:22 am #

   33. Chris wrote:

       I call all you crazy 14-year-olds the Whale-Qaeda!

       Monday, March 10, 2008 at 12:10 pm #

   34. Melissa wrote:

       okay i think there needs to be a balance. You should be able to spend the majority of your time in your life, but also take the time to help others, including the whales. Yes, the theme of saving yourself first and the world will follow suit, is a popular one, and if you think about it, it makes sense. You can do your best and until you can be your best, and that includes home life.

       so i agree with you Chris (guys don’t freak out on me), but maybe you could have said this in a less offending and extreme way.

       Save the whales, but save yourself and the people in your life too, is what i think you’re trying to say.

       okay i’m done ahha

       Wednesday, March 12, 2008 at 8:36 pm #

   35. Sydney’s BFF wrote:

       Whatever Chris you’re a jerk. There’s a difference between expressing your opinion gently and then there’s just insanity. You’re nowhere in between, you’re a psycho person. In your quest to kill off the children and whales and all things beautiful just because you’re not, you have proved to everyone who visits this psycho site that you actually do care by attracting more attention to the cause. Thanks Chris, for helping save the whales, but you still belong in a strait jacket somewhere until you see a poor whale being harpooned and you’ll see what it’s really like. Until then, read all these messages people leave you and PLEASE, PLEASE reconsider you opinion. Suppose someone was looking for a house in your neighborhood and shot and killed you because they wanted your house to be yours. Well that’s what it’s like to be harpooned by some jerk-off fishermen
       SERIOUSLY DUDE TAKE SOME DEEP THINKING TIME FOR YOURSELF AND RECONSIDER. SAVE THE WHALES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

       Wednesday, March 12, 2008 at 11:55 pm #

   36. Sydney’s BFF wrote:

       Oh and in my previous message I meant to say they wanted your house to be theirs.

       Wednesday, March 12, 2008 at 11:56 pm #

   37. Lasse wrote:

       wow, thats what i call a discussion! @ all you radical americans talking about saving the world while driving huge ass cars to the next steak house drive-in; whales are just animals and they deserve to live and than to be eaten like any pig and cow you guys have for breakfast. enjoy everybody

       Friday, March 14, 2008 at 4:49 pm #

   38. elly wrote:

       ur an ass.fuck u

       Sunday, March 16, 2008 at 9:14 pm #

   39. Chris wrote:

       What does “ur” mean and what is “u?” Fuck University? What are you trying to say to me, Elly?

       Monday, March 17, 2008 at 12:04 am #

   40. fsdasjkfsdfjk@hotmai wrote:

       thats rite dont save those bastards

       Monday, March 17, 2008 at 2:51 am #

   41. Sydney wrote:

       “ur” is an abbreviation of youre and “u” is an abbreviation of you. idiot.

       Friday, March 21, 2008 at 5:04 pm #

   42. Chris wrote:

       Duh.

       Friday, March 21, 2008 at 7:16 pm #

   43. What the hell wrote:

       u sicko how could you be so fucking fucked up in the head. whales deserve a right to live, unlike you. fuck you

       Saturday, March 22, 2008 at 10:33 am #

   44. Chris wrote:

       You did not read the article, did you? Can you read? I am beginning to think that we need to save the children, save the teens, and work on sub-literacy and illiteracy in the US, Australia, and other English-speaking nations that suffer under the weight of such ignorant activists.

       Saturday, March 22, 2008 at 12:31 pm #

   45. Syzmatomtia wrote:

       98% of all species on earth have fallen to extinction, without the help of man. The other 2% will eventually face extinction as well. It is indeed a natural progression of any ecosystem for old species to pass away and new species to be born.

       Saturday, March 22, 2008 at 4:17 pm #

   46. Ashley wrote:

       U R A ass hole 4 not saving the whales u should be more caring. U need to get a life and a personality.&&&&&&U should go and fuck yourself…………….
       ……………………
       THANK 4 NOT CARING ABOUT ANYTHING BUT YOURSELF (((((NOT))))

       Sunday, March 23, 2008 at 2:48 am #

   47. J. Miller wrote:

       Request permission to use the image ‘don’t save the whales’ for a university newsletter cover with theme ‘taboo’. Please.

       Wednesday, March 26, 2008 at 4:34 am #

   48. Chris wrote:

       Yes, please use it as often and as freely as you like!

       Wednesday, March 26, 2008 at 10:46 am #

   49. Lila wrote:

       People’s pathedic lives are not half as important as that of the whales, rainforests, and etc. Go fuck yourself and save the fucking whales you cock sucker

       Friday, March 28, 2008 at 12:04 am #

   50. Monica wrote:

       Is this a social experiment?

       Friday, March 28, 2008 at 12:16 am #

   51. sarah wrote:

       Dude, love the whales and stop being a hater. How would you feel if people took you out of your home and killed you?! It wouldn’t feel good would it?

       Friday, March 28, 2008 at 5:10 pm #

   52. Chris wrote:

       sarah »

       That was a very persuasive argument.

       Friday, March 28, 2008 at 5:50 pm #

   53. Ashely wrote:

       WHAT THE SAM HELL R U THINKING DUMBO IF U WANNA THREAT THOSE ENDANGERED CREATURES U’LL HAVE TO GO THROUGH ME AND THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT WROTE ABOUT UR STUPID PARAGRAPH AND JUST SO U KNOW WHALES R MY FAVORITE ANIMALS SO INSTEAD OF NOT SAVING THE WHALES LET’S KICK U OFF OF EARTH AND NOT SAVE U!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!U SHOULD DO A WEBSITE CALLED http://WWW.CHECK OUT HOW STUPID I AM.COM U SHOULD REALLY DO THAT U WILL NEVER WIN

       Wednesday, April 2, 2008 at 12:08 am #

   54. Chris wrote:

       Did you read the article? Do you know how to spell? Can you take your finger off the shift key, please?

       Wednesday, April 2, 2008 at 8:58 am #

   55. Smilee wrote:

       rele have u got nuffin better to do wiv ur life than write horrible stuff about whales. if u hate whales so much y not keep it 2 urself?? anyways i love whales and i dont kno how any1 can want them 2 b killed … so plz stop writin horrible stuff!!!

       Monday, April 7, 2008 at 5:25 pm #

   56. alley wrote:

       You are a sick person. Don’t save whales? How cruel. You should think twice.

       Sunday, April 13, 2008 at 2:15 am #

   57. Aman wrote:

       Chris Abraham kill that bicth.

       Wednesday, April 16, 2008 at 3:24 pm #

   58. Aman wrote:

       Theres a bicth named Chris Abraham
       He should die

       Wednesday, April 16, 2008 at 3:25 pm #

   59. Aman wrote:

       Chris Abraham does not have the right to live.

       Wednesday, April 16, 2008 at 3:28 pm #

   60. Chris wrote:

       Whale-Qaeda!

       Wednesday, April 16, 2008 at 4:32 pm #

   61. nunyabusiness wrote:

       Chris, I understand the ability to express your feelings, but maybe you should do it in a better way. I AM A CHILD, AND WHAT YOU JUST SAID SICKENS ME!!! I also feel the need to say that whales are my favorite animals, and this is so out of line and wrong. They are part of our ecosystem and you should be ashamed of yourself. What people are doing is taking mothers away from their babies, or taking away a wife or husband. Do you have a wife? A kid? A mom? How would you feel if someone shot one of them? Not to good, huh? I think that you should really reconsider and think about how whales are one of the smartest mamals and have feelings and families too before you write such things.

       Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 3:49 pm #

   62. nunyabusiness wrote:

       oh, by the way, I’m not the same “NONEYABUSINESS” as one of the earlier ones, I didn’t see that one. By the way, I also agree with sarah.

       Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 3:52 pm #

   63. Chris wrote:

       What you you mean by child? 8? That is the age of a child.

       Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 10:30 pm #

   64. nunyabusiness wrote:

       actually, I’m seven. so think of how smart i am— unlike you. i was looking for whales because i like them, and i found this.

       Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 11:46 pm #

   65. nunyabusiness wrote:

       oh, and you also, you must have no come back because all you said was the child thing.

       Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at 11:47 pm #

   66. chris abraham wrote:

       It was not a come back. 7 is very young and you are brilliant. No, I would not want my family to be shot. And, if you’ll read the article I wrote, I never said one thing about hurting whales. I sort of said, “don’t let your family get shot before you save the whales.” My blog is too sophisticated for someone your age. I am pretty sure my site is blocked by the net nanny software your parents should be using.

       Wednesday, April 23, 2008 at 9:11 am #

   67. bree wrote:

       wow ur fucked up whales are the best and its because of ass holes like you that our animals are becoming endangered and extinct

       Sunday, April 27, 2008 at 12:11 am #

   68. Dannii wrote:

       You are so mean, and i hope u rot in hell bcoz u r so mean n u dont vcare about anyone but yourself bcoz ur so selfish!!!!

       Sunday, April 27, 2008 at 11:04 am #

   69. Kaitlyn and McKenna wrote:

       CRAP YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

       Monday, April 28, 2008 at 8:02 pm #

   70. Chris wrote:

       Crap me?

       Monday, April 28, 2008 at 9:26 pm #

   71. shmo wrote:

       YES U!!!! WHAT DO U THINK!! U ARE SOOOOOO RETARDEDLY STUPID!! I WISH I COULD MEET U IN PERSON WIT SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT HATE YOU SO WE COULD SERIOUSLY DAMAGE UR FACE!!!!!

       Thursday, May 1, 2008 at 10:23 pm #

   72. SHMO wrote:

       good job nonyebussiness, i spelled that wrong. its good that young people are taking an intrest in saving our world!! keep it up!

       Thursday, May 1, 2008 at 10:25 pm #

   73. shmo wrote:

       hey anyone who hates chris lets almost kill him to see howq he likes it them feed him to the whales!!!! that will show him!!!

       Thursday, May 1, 2008 at 10:30 pm #

   74. Chris wrote:

       Yes. That would be fantastic, you Whale-Qaeda!

       Thursday, May 1, 2008 at 11:52 pm #

   75. Chris wrote:

       Shmo, you amuse me.

       Thursday, May 1, 2008 at 11:54 pm #

   76. shmo wrote:

       glad i do cause i will be writing stuff quite often. FYI!!!

       P.S. what does Whale-Qaeda mean?

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 12:04 am #

   77. shmo wrote:

       ugh.. u piss me off soooo much!!!! u arogant, retarded, stupid fool!!!!

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 12:05 am #

   78. Chris wrote:

       

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 12:35 am #

   79. wafflez wrote:

       i cant believe that u would make a website based on not saving the whales…u wanna kill whales? u might as well just fuckin kill me! better yet, kill urself! the world doesnt need bastards like u here to ruin it! ppl wanna help keep the world a better place and help the enviornment!

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 12:44 am #

   80. SHMO!!!! wrote:

       WOO HOO!!!! I LOVE U WAFFELZ! ( THATS ONLY CAUSE I KNOW U!) WE SAID! WE DONT NEED TO CHRIS, GO DIE IN A HOLE. AND I AM VERY LITERATE THANK U VERY MUCH!

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 1:33 am #

   81. SHMO wrote:

       ooops! spelling errors. it says well said.
       and we dont need u chris

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 2:05 am #

   82. Cola wrote:

       you are one fucked up person. people like you should be extinct. i’d much rather have whales, rhinos, manatees, pandas, koalas, tigers, dolphins, elephants, ect. than assholes like you!

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 2:58 am #

   83. LOEN! wrote:

       seriously.. where does all this hate cum from? answer that!! ugh u r so fukin retarded! GO TO REHAB!!!!!

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 3:02 am #

   84. I LOVE WHALES!!! wrote:

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 3:15 am #

   85. I LOVE WHALES!!! wrote:

       [IMG]http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii46/xoxlucylou11xox/my%20sayings/whales-1.gif[/IMG]

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 3:18 am #

   86. I LOVE WHALES!!! wrote:

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 3:18 am #

   87. SHMO!!! wrote:

       GO TO THIS AND READ IT!!!! IT TOTALLY APPLIES!!!

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 3:19 am #

   88. I LOVE WHALES!!! wrote:

       GO TO HELL!!!

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 3:22 am #

   89. I LOVE WHALES!!! wrote:

       CLICK ON MY NAME AND READ IT U BASTARD!

       Friday, May 2, 2008 at 3:22 am #

   90. I LOVE WHALES!!! wrote:

       Click on this! how does that make you feel? what if you were a whale? do u want me to HARPOON u?! huh?!

       http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.all-creatures.org/anex/whales-sl-06_small.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.all-creatures.org/anex/whales.html&h=273&w=200&sz=9&hl=en&start=46&tbnid=Ea4oBdMsazeAsM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=83&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dkilling%2Bof%2Bwhales%26start%3D40%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D20%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN

       Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 1:50 am #

   91. Queso wrote:

       you are a fucking dick hole and you need to go die in hell!!!!!!!! how would you feel if i came to your house and used all your fat for oil ( the world would never run out) so wat we cant save our own problems ( im 14 i dont have a family so if i want to save the world nothing is stopping me) go to HELL FAG

       Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 2:01 am #

   92. SHMO!! wrote:

       WOO HOO!!!! U SAID IT QUESO! ugh!! chris u r such an asshole!! i f dont care about this planet, then y dont u die!!! cause noone would miss u and its people like u killing the world, while my frends and i are trying to save it!!

       Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 3:19 am #

   93. kerryraine@yahoo.com wrote:

       you are pathetic, and i was not going to respond at all, you are one person, on this planet, you are just a protazoa, a germ, and most of all insignifficant , do you honestly thibk that what you say means anything to anyone.

       Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 10:10 am #

   94. Chris wrote:

       No, Kerry, I don’t.

       Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 5:23 pm #

   95. Chris wrote:

       You guys make me crazy but I just laugh. Please, read the article.

       Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 5:57 pm #

   96. Phillip J Rhoades wrote:

       I LOVE WHALES!!!, those photos make me hungry. I only eat dolphin aggressive tuna.

       Queso and SHMO!!, the world doesn’t need your saving. Get over your sense of human importance. Get over the idea that extinction isn’t natural. It is natural. We are natural superpredators and it is our purpose to cause extinction. 98% of every life form that has ever been on this planet has become extinct, even before we arrived.

       yes Kerry, we are all unimportant, so is the whale in the ocean, and the sea turtle, and the great bald eagle. They are just species waiting for the natural end, and that end is extinction. It will come with or without us.

       Death is normal. Creatures attacking and eating other creatures is natural. This is life. This is nature. And as part of nature this is also what we do.

       Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 9:09 pm #

   97. Queso wrote:

       we make a choice to kill or not so if i want to save the world I WILL AND I CAN so you can go fuck chris abraham! you are perfect for each other! how can whales and dolphins taste good? they are blubber…you are a disgusting pig!

       Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 10:08 pm #

   98. I LOVE WHALES!!! wrote:

       are you kidding me?! THOSE PICTURES MADE ME GO FUCKING VEGETARIAN YOU FAT CANIBLE! YOU MIGHT AS WELL GO EAT YOUR DOG OR YOUR MOM! AFTER SEEING THAT MEAT IS DISGUSTING AND I REGRET EVER EATING IT! OMFG YOU MOTHER FUCKER DICK SUCKERS ARE SO GROSS!

       Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 10:12 pm #

   99. SHMO!!! wrote:

       WHAT THE HELL IS UR FUCKIN PROBLEM PHILIP!!! YES EXTINCTION IS NATURAL, BUT THE REASON THAT THE WHALES ARE GOING EXCTINCT, IS BECAUSE OF FUCKIN DICK SUCKERS LIKE YOU THAT EAT THEM!! THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO PREVENT! WITHOUT ASS HOLES LIKE YOU!, THERE WOULD BE NO PROBLEM!! YEA… U AND CHRIS SHOULD GO OUT, ITS PERFECT. UGH!!! U PEOPLE ARE SO FUCKIN SCREWED UP!! GO DIE IN A HOLE U ASS HOLES!!

       Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 1:05 am #

   100. Chris wrote:

        Mark, is that you? Mark, are you SHMO? You’re SHMO, right? Come on, you can tell me. It’s so good! You almost had be fooled. Good one!

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 2:46 am #

   101. Shmo! wrote:

        WHAT THE HELL U RETARD?!?!? MY NAME IS NOT MARK! I SWEAR TO THE WHALES THAT WE ARE TRYING TO SAVE!
        I’M NOT MARK

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 2:59 am #

   102. Phillip J Rhoades wrote:

        We are natural too. It doesn’t matter if we’re the cause for extinction or not, because all species meet extinction at some point or another. It is normal and natural for species to become extinct.

        Also, I (like two thirds of the world) have no problem eating dog meat. A dog is just another beast and just more food for me.

        The world doesn’t need saving, because the world will continue without you, without whales, without any of what is now. All that is now will fade away. All that is now will move on into non-existence. It is normal. It is natural for what is to pass away, to give way to what comes after.

        Let me say this one more time:

        Extinction is natural.

        We are natural.

        We are a natural cause of natural extinction.

        It is okay for things to die and species to end.

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 7:50 am #

   103. Phillip J Rhoades wrote:

        It is only the human ego that makes us believe we are the caretakers or destroyers of the world. We are not so important.

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 8:03 am #

   104. Queso wrote:

        God made us to be the caretakes of the world he did not want us to be the destroyers of this wonderful world we have made into a a living HELL for every thing that we think is not as smart as us so yes it is up to us to save animals from dum fucking dicks like you all.Phillip, if your so hungry why i dont come HARPOON you and your family so then you all and have a nice big dinner! how would that make you feel! oh you would be ded so i guess that would not matter!!!!! and i would feel just fine!!!

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 2:23 pm #

   105. shmo! wrote:

        Phillip, it is niot our ego that wants to save the world, we simply want to preserve it! becuase of retards like u and chris, the world and many of it animals are going to die, NOT IN A NATURAL WAY!!! THEY ARE DIYING BECAUSE OF PEOPLE LKE YOU THAT WANT TO EAT THE WHALES! WITHOUT PEOPLE LIKE YOU IN THIS WORLD… THERE WOULD BE NO PROBLEM!! get it? or is that to confuzing for your stupid little head? u r such a fuckin pig!! u need help if u want to eat ur dog. yea y dont we just cum harpoon u and chris and them feed u to the whales?? HUH??? how does that sound?
        and dont talk to us like we are five! we are very intellegent teenagers THAT ARE TRYING TO PRESERVE OUR WORLD UNLIKE DICK SUCKER LIKE U!!!

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 4:22 pm #

   106. penny wrote:

        so u Kill the Manatees, Kill the Children, Kill the Tigers, Kill the Dolphins, Kill the Bay, Kill the World, Kill the Koala, Kill the Pandas, Kill the Rhinos, Kill the Elephant or Kill the Whales. Y???? if u kill them, then u will die too! ever thought of that smart ass? yea cause even if we loose plankton, our whole ecosystem will be screwed up!! so if u kill all those animals then u will die and go to hell! God would not want u to be in his kingdom later for u to screw that up to.

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 5:08 pm #

   107. penny wrote:

        so u Kill the Manatees, Kill the Children, Kill the Tigers, Kill the Dolphins, Kill the Bay, Kill the World, Kill the Koala, Kill the Pandas, Kill the Rhinos, Kill the Elephant and Kill the Whales. Y???? if u kill them, then u will die too! ever thought of that smart ass? yea cause even if we loose plankton, our whole ecosystem will be screwed up!! so if u kill all those animals then u will die and go to hell! God would not want u to be in his kingdom later for u to screw that up to.

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 5:09 pm #

   108. Phillip J Rhoades wrote:

        It does not matter if humanity becomes extinct. We are also a natural creature and that is an end we must face. So, no I don’t care if the current world passes away. There is no problem. People cause extinction, like any dominant animal in an ecosystem it will cause a hardship on the other creatures. This is normal and natural. We are natural creatures and eating and killing other creatures is natural behavior for human beings. Stasis is not natural. The world changes. Life forms and species pass away and new species are born from what is left behind. The survival of any species currently on this planet (including the human species) is not of paramount importance. The ecosystem will recover. It will change into something new, with life forms that have never existed before. Species die out and it is normal and natural. When they die out from us (a natural creature just like any other creature) it is also normal and natural. When we meet our own extinction it will be normal and natural. Life on this planet does not need us and will continue despite what we do to the current set of plants and animals on this planet. The worst we can do is end what is, but that does not end the future of life on this planet. Life has survived ice ages, meteors, volcanic ash laden skies, and more. This world will survive us. the individual species that exist now do not matter. Their fate, our fate, it is of no consequence. The world will simply change and grow, old will pass away and new will thrive. Weak will become extinct and strong will evolve. What you lack is a full vision of the world, of life, of the universe.

        Humanity is a natural creature.

        Extinction is natural.

        Extinction caused by a natural creature (such as humanity) is natural, normal, and okay.

        The extinction of the human species (or any species) is of no great importance in the world.

        The continuation of the human species (or any species) is of no great importance either.

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 7:25 pm #

   109. shmo wrote:

        SHUT THE HELL UP!! O my god.. yes it is natural, but the way that the whales and other animals are dyeing is NOT! so shut up! idc if its natural, th whales and other marine animals cannot go extinct if we want our ecosystem to survive without major issues. stop acting like a smart ass!

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 7:59 pm #

   110. Phillip J Rhoades wrote:

        The current ecosystem will simply be replaced by a new one. The whales may not be a part of it, we may not be a part of it. That does not matter. Change is normal. Extinction is part of that natural change. We are part of the natural order. That which we do is natural.

        The way the whales are dying is in fact natural. It is caused by the natural creature that is humanity.

        Species dying out is normal, natural, and okay. It is the way things have always been. It was this way before the human creature arrived, and will be this way long after we depart.

        The mistake in your thinking, is the idea that humanity is somehow not a natural creature. The idea that humanity is somehow outside of nature. That is simply untrue. WE are a natural product of the ecosystem. We are a natural result of what came before. What we do is part of nature.

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 8:19 pm #

   111. shmo! wrote:

        there is no dounght in my mind that we are natural, but they way that the whales are dying IS NOT NATURAL!without us, they would be fine! how do u not c this? yes things die and new things replace them, but in this case when a certain species hat is sellfish becuase they want to eat an endangered aimals, this is not natural. WHY ARE U THE ONLY ONE THAT DOES NOT SEE THIS?

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 9:07 pm #

   112. shmo wrote:

        How old r u any way? cause u act like u r some old smart fart! but ur not!

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 9:08 pm #

   113. Phillip J Rhoades wrote:

        Without us they would simply die off from some other reason or creature. Species eat and decimate other species. It is in fact natural for one species to obliterate other species. Why are there so few who realize this? The reason would be the mass media propagation of the idea that ecological stasis is the norm. In fact, ecological stasis is neither normal or natural.

        Ecological change, disaster, and rebirth are normal.

        Sunday, May 4, 2008 at 9:15 pm #

   114. shmo wrote:

        so u get it? that without the humans they would not by extinct right now? o finally ur stupid liitle brain takes in some sense. that i what i have been trying to say, that yes the whales would have died without us, but the fact of the matter is that they are dying right now! yes all creatures eat eachother, but the human race is way to universal and we eat creatures that we dont need to eat, and that are supposed to live longer. GET IT YET??? if not i will be back later!!

        Monday, May 5, 2008 at 2:08 am #

   115. Phillip J Rhoades wrote:

        The point being, it does not matter if humans are the cause or a meteor or some other creature. Extinction is normal and natural. Human beings are a natural creature leading to the natural extinction of other creatures. We are not outside of the ecosystem. We are part of the ecosystem. Nothing that we do is unnatural. Everything that we do is a natural extension of the ecological system. If we’re causing an extinction or many extinctions that is only a normal and natural progression of life and evolution. We are not above nature, and what we do is a part of the natural cycle.

        It is completely and totally okay in the grand and massive scheme of life on this planet for creatures to become extinct. yes, it’s even okay for a natural creature, like humans, to cause the extinction of other creatures. It is the norm. It is the way it has always been. It doesn’t matter if it’s us or something else. Everything meets extinction eventually.

        Monday, May 5, 2008 at 4:14 am #

   116. somebody wrote:

        This is awfull. of course we must save the whales!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        Monday, May 5, 2008 at 6:32 am #

   117. no name wrote:

        SAVE THE WHALES!!! I am with shmo we HAVE 2 HELP THEM I MEAN WITHOUT THE HUMANS WHALES WOULD BE FINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        Monday, May 5, 2008 at 6:35 am #

   118. Will Litchfield wrote:

        Don’t save the whales?

        What the hell is wrong with you, jesus christ. If whales are the devils servants then you are the devil!

        Monday, May 5, 2008 at 3:38 pm #

   119. Chris wrote:

        Will Litchfield » What does that even mean? And, please don’t call me Jesus Christ.

        Monday, May 5, 2008 at 7:44 pm #

   120. Chris wrote:

        somebody » How are you saving the whales today?

        Monday, May 5, 2008 at 7:44 pm #

   121. shmo! wrote:

        thank you no name! as to you phillip… i dont inderstand why you need to wirte such long blogs, its really qite annoying! we need to save the whales becuase someone said before even if we loose plankton, you know those tiny miniscule things in our ocean, we willl be in big trouble. so imagine what would happen if we lost the whales or the manatees, or penguins, polor bears, etc. get my onsomble?

        Chris will litchfield is just a name it doesnt mean anything, dont be a wise ass. and i bet “somebody” is figuring out what to do, you cant expect everyone to just start something right away!

        Monday, May 5, 2008 at 9:43 pm #

   122. 36987 wrote:

        wow! that was insightful!

        Monday, May 5, 2008 at 10:32 pm #

   123. shmo wrote:

        ok i think that was a waste of time and space if i do say so myself

        Tuesday, May 6, 2008 at 2:21 am #

   124. Chris wrote:

        shmo! » That logic doesn’t work, Shmo. The lower the order the more important the species is: plankton and coral are essential ingredients of undersea life while whales and manatees; penguins and polar bears, higher up in the chain, are really less essential. Losing bees is a big deal, losing man isn’t. Losing algae is a big deal, losing the blue whale isn’t. That said, as we have been discussing via email, I am not a proponent of whale-killing and am in fact more of a green freak now that I have ever been. I moved to Europe, gave up a car, ride by bike, go to the green grocers and buy veggies without plastic bags and carry them home in a reusable cotton bag. When I need to go far, I choose the train, when I need to go close, I take the subway or mount my bike. My footprint is low and I am active in my community.

        What have you done for he whales or for the environment lately — besides attacking me?

        Tuesday, May 6, 2008 at 6:46 am #

   125. Chris wrote:

        shmo » Well, I am some old smart fart! I am 38! 38 is old!

        Tuesday, May 6, 2008 at 6:48 am #

   126. shmo wrote:

        geeezz!! what the heck! someones angry today?! thats good and i am gld that u are doing that. it doesnt madder where on the food chain the whales are. they obviously had a purpose on this earth, or they would not be here. why is that so hard for people to understand?? it doesnt madder where they are they are here and important, maybe not as important as other species, but they are still. After reading ur “posts” my friends were very alarmedd, and so we have been making flyers, that we are actually going to give out at school today! what do u think about that? huh? public awarness? we arent adults, so we cannot do as much, but we ARE DOING ALL THAT WE CAN WITH WHAT WE ARE GIVEN!!!!
        O and by the way, about my last six blogs were not directed to you, they were to Phillip! but thank you for telling me ur age, becuase i was wondering about that!

        Tuesday, May 6, 2008 at 12:47 pm #

   127. Chris wrote:

        shmo » I appreciate you for engaging with me and for opening yourself up to this conversation and for calling me out on being controversial — really, the title of my article has very little to do with the whales or the rain forests, it has to do with family, but I knew that “Don’t Save the Whales” and the graphic would get a lot of attention. How old are you?

        Tuesday, May 6, 2008 at 1:53 pm #

   128. shmo wrote:

        it doesnt madder what the objective is, you diplayed this on the iternet,and now you have to live with the consequences.
        I don not need to reveal my age, that is of no importance.

        Tuesday, May 6, 2008 at 5:53 pm #

   129. Chris wrote:

        shmo » Well, je ne regret rien.

        Tuesday, May 6, 2008 at 10:33 pm #

   130. shmo wrote:

        what the heck does that mean?

        Tuesday, May 6, 2008 at 10:40 pm #

   131. Chris wrote:

        shmo » “je ne regret rien” means, “I regret nothing.” In French.

        Wednesday, May 7, 2008 at 2:31 pm #

   132. shmo wrote:

        and how do u think that i would know that?

        well ok then, becuase u better be prepared for people to continue hating you for what you have said and posted, especially if the whale situation becomes worse.

        Wednesday, May 7, 2008 at 10:04 pm #

   133. Chris wrote:

        shmo » Well, I do expect illiterate and ignorant people to continue to write poorly-written sub-literate comments full of swearing and very little thought, that’s for sure. It has been happening for well over 3 years.

        Thursday, May 8, 2008 at 8:16 am #

   134. shmo wrote:

        i think that the people that write on here are very literate, intellegent, and that swearing is common, becuase of the posts that u have posted. just shut up… u write on here too!

        Thursday, May 8, 2008 at 1:00 pm #

   135. shmo wrote:

        and there is a lot of thought that goes into writing, i should think that u know that… but maybe not!

        Thursday, May 8, 2008 at 1:00 pm #

   136. Chris wrote:

        shmo » There is no literacy or intelligence. The English and grammar is appalling — including your grammar and spelling. You should be ashamed. I hope you get into college.

        Thursday, May 8, 2008 at 3:06 pm #

   137. shmo wrote:

        what the heck! this is only cause it doesnt madder! if i was turning in a paper for a grade then it would be good. when people are on here we dont care if the spelling is wrong!
        I’m not ashamed! idc.
        and i will get into college. there is still thought that goes into it, whether u believe it or not!

        Thursday, May 8, 2008 at 11:39 pm #

   138. kevin wrote:

        BLOW ME!!!!!!………. A BUBLE!!! I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT SHMO HAS SAID! THERE IS THOUGHT THAT GOES INTO THESE (WELL NOT REALY MINE) BUT WIT EVERYONE ELSES! AND YES I AM NOT USING GOOD LANGUAGE, BECUASE I DONT CARE WHAT U THINK! U NEED TO RECONSIDER UR IDEAS AND HOW U DISPLAY THEM!

        Friday, May 9, 2008 at 3:21 am #

   139. shmo wrote:

        well thank u for ur agreeing, but ur words did not really prove my point. but thats ok! thanks! i think so too!

        Friday, May 9, 2008 at 3:22 am #

   140. Chris wrote:

        shmo » You undermine all of your arguments because you communicate sub-literally… it really does madder (sic) — all the time. There is never a time when it doesn’t madder (sic). The entire world will dismiss comments like these — dismissing you as poorly-versed and poorly-informed. Ignorant, really, although I know you aren’t, Shmo.

        Friday, May 9, 2008 at 7:04 am #

   141. shmo wrote:

        shut up!! therea re times where u can use akranims and poor spelling ( like i just did) cause it

        Friday, May 9, 2008 at 9:43 pm #

   142. shmo wrote:

        noone cares!i am not poorly literate! infact i love to write and english is one of my best subjects. i will admit that i am a bad speller, but thats ok, cause WHEN I CARE ABOUT IT… i will fix it and re-read my work, but on here, iam not going to waste my time! get it?

        Friday, May 9, 2008 at 9:46 pm #

   143. shmo wrote:

        no one cares!i am not poorly literate! infact i love to write and english is one of my best subjects. i will admit that i am a bad speller, but thats ok, cause WHEN I CARE ABOUT IT… i will fix it and re-read my work, but on here, iam not going to waste my time! get it?

        Friday, May 9, 2008 at 9:46 pm #

   144. lizzy wrote:

        well, i would first like to say that i have borwsed this web all over and have read every blog, so that chris could not call my uninfromed.
        Now, why would you evoke such an image on the web if ur point was totally different? i guess for attention- public awarness- but dont complain now.
        My family is complete. i have two wonderful children, i live in australia where i am a marine biologist, and my husband studies mamal existence. so why should we not save the world? even if my family was messed up, i would still save the world, becuase i care. all the “stupid wahle queadas” as u say are doing the same thing, but in smaller picture, as they cannot do as much as us adults. i do not agree that you descriminate against them, becuase they are trying to make our future bright and becuase they care. if we dont trust them… then who will? and who will fix our previous mistakes?
        as i have read these blogs, i can agree with both sides. not the family issues, but if we should get involved. as few have said, god has made us care takers of this world, but is it our job to fix it? i mean there are two sides, a) that god has everything planned out that we fix what has been odne, or b) that he has the future organized that we dont need to help. now to decide which one to go with, you need to follow what you believe, and stick with it, dont give up.
        as to the teenagers, keep up your commitment to our planet and follow you dreams, they will come true.
        Chris, i would appreciate if you would stop bashing my fututre and yours. they are literate and i see shmos point of how puncuation and speeling doesnt madder, i dont care right now either.
        Phillip~ i have to agree that you have some excelletn points! but then again i am back to my spiritual ways of believe what you believe.
        chris i must say that your arrogance is very… excentutating. it shows that you will commit to what you have started, and that is good even though you get so much grief. i do believe however that the grief you get is very apprehensive and undersatndable.
        thank you for reading my long speil, feel free to blog back to me for info and advice of how you can help.

        Saturday, May 10, 2008 at 4:02 am #

   145. shmo wrote:

        wow! lizzy i am so glad that you have said that! you are seriously living my dream, i mean australia, thats my goal! well thank you, i am glad that adults see us as a bright beacon for them in the future! and that some think we contribute a lot! thank you

        Saturday, May 10, 2008 at 4:04 am #

   146. Chris wrote:

        lizzy » How can you be an adult woman with children and a scientist husband and be able to write like this, “My family is complete. i have two wonderful children, i live in australia where i am a marine biologist, and my husband studies mamal (sic) existence. so why should we not save the world?” Mammal! Mammal! The job your husband does every day is studying Mammals, with two els. Besides, “excentutating” isn’t even a word, so I don’t even know what my arrogance is! Egad! The future is ruined if the entire island of Australia is subliterate, even the wives of marine biologists! Good lord! Please tell me that you’re a 14-year-old girl just pretending to be a mom and wife because otherwise you’ll make my cry.

        Saturday, May 10, 2008 at 7:28 am #

   147. Chris wrote:

        shmo » What is an “akranims?”

        Saturday, May 10, 2008 at 7:29 am #

   148. shmo wrote:

        see like i said, i am bad at spelling. like a.k.a. or t.t.y.l how they satnd for stuff. c’mon use some common sense and sound it out.

        Saturday, May 10, 2008 at 1:33 pm #

   149. lizzy wrote:

        i hope you do cry, i am speaking like this to prove a point. i’m not going to say what it is, or you would never have to find out. we also have differnet ways of speaking, learn that you bone head!

        Saturday, May 10, 2008 at 1:36 pm #

   150. cody wrote:

        yes, why try and save the world. After all it is the only planet in the solar system capable of supporting life!

        Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 12:51 am #

   151. shmo wrote:

        thank you! exactly! well… actually so far! but thats still so true!

        Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 1:48 am #

   152. Chris wrote:

        lizzy » There may be different ways of speaking but there is a dictionary for a reason and when speaking English, mammal is always spelled mammal and never mamal, especially when that personal supposedly has a husband who studies aquatic mammals. So, you’re just plain wrong, sub-literate, and — to be frank — either lazy or wrong.

        Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 12:59 pm #

   153. Chris wrote:

        shmo » I will use common sense next time if you spend the little bit of time trying to sort out what I am trying to say, too. Meet me half-way.

        Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 12:59 pm #

   154. shmo wrote:

        no! ok i am done trying to undertand what is wrong with you.
        to everyone that reads these, dont listen to chris abraham, do as much as you can to help our world and dont let anyone stear you away from what you believe.

        Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 7:14 pm #

   155. Chris wrote:

        shmo » Oh, egad!

        Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 10:49 pm #

   156. lizzy wrote:

        i am with shmo, there is no point in this website. afternoon chap! good bye!

        Monday, May 12, 2008 at 1:58 am #

   157. Chris wrote:

        lizzy » I appreciate it. Thanks for coming.

        Tuesday, May 13, 2008 at 2:35 pm #

Apparently I am sage when drunk on Chimay:

So Chris returns from Germany, and we all head out for Belgian food. After a few glasses of Chimay, I turn to Chris, our resident web-guru, and say, “Can you explain why I haven’t posted an entry since Thanksgiving? It’s like there’s a quality-control censor in my brain.”

To which he replies, “Dude, that’s publishing. Not blogging.”

Touche.

According to Chris, if I just let the words rip, I’ll give you reason to visit Trashcan more often and not just when “some place burns down.”

So onto the New Year’s Resolutions…

I don’t know if orcas has actually read Don’t Save the Whales but I don’t think so because here’s the comment he or she left over at My Selfish Attitude to Life on Whales:

i cant believe u!! the only person in the world who hates whales!!whales r just like humans only bigger and they dont go around killing people for fun!! they hav minds and brains and i hope they attack u in D.C. whales r the most thrilling in the world and u r just a cold blooded murder if u dont like them and want them 2 die. u just better rethink this because its making a lot of people angry and well people being angry leads 2 violence. and thats just as bad as killing the whales!! ur a SELFISH man!!!

I met Lori Gottlieb years ago now and I am a passionate fan. There are even rumors that I will be mentioned in an upcoming Atlantic article, “Marry Him:  The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough,” which will be coming out in the March issue available online this Friday.Forget about me me me for a minute — this is about Lori.  Lori was just on NPR today and will be on the Today Show tomorrow.  Here’s an excerpt from her email:

“I’ll also be interviewed about the piece on The Today Show this Friday, 2/8 (NBC, between 8 & 8:30 a.m..).  And NPR ran my commentary today that speaks to some of the points in the Atlantic story.  You can hear that at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18751687.”

I think Lori is smashing and I am so happy to be a part of this article and this project.  When the article comes online on Friday, I will reveal all of the awful details of my interview — what I said about love, marriage, etc.  Egad! To quote Lori in her email:

“Thanks again for your great quotes and insight.  Either we’re all really cynical, or we’re just depressingly reality-based, and true love, like religion, is indeed the opiate of the masses.”

Amen, sister! Anyway, if you’re not yet a Fan of Lori Gottlieb, please check out her Official Lori Gottlieb Web Site. Also, check out all the magazine articles she has done in the past:

• Glamour UK (Jennifer Lopez cover profile) October 2007

• MSN (“Are You the Last One Single?”) October 2007

• Grazia magazine/UK (Nicky Hilton interview) September 2007

• Grazia magazine/UK (Courtney Love interview) July 2007

• MSN (“Left Out in the Cold”) April 2007

• The New York Times (“Teaching Movie Moguls to Wipe Drool”) March 2007

• Grazia magazine/UK (Eric Mabius “Ugly Betty” profile) February 2007

• MSN (“Valentine’s Day Survival Guide”) February 2007

• The Los Angeles Jewish Journal (“When D-A-T-E  Becomes a Four-Letter Word”) January 2007

• Women’s Health (“It’s All Relative”) December 2006

• The New York Times (“My Mother the TV Writer”) November 2006

• MSN (“First Date Fumbles”) November 2006

• Glamour UK (Sarah Michelle Gellar cover profile) November 2006

• Glamour UK (Christina Aguilera cover profile) October 2006

• MSN (“Got Kids?”) September 2006

• MSN (“Single Parent Pickup Tricks”) August 2006

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (“Snips and Snapshots”) May 2006

• Glamour (“Party of Two and A Half”) April 2006

• The Atlantic Monthly (“How Do I Love Thee?”) March 2006

• Elle (“Who’s Your Daddy?”) February 2006

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (Singles: “Sense and Sensitivity”) October 2005

• The Atlantic Monthly (“The XY Files”) September 2005

• Red magazine, UK (Teri Hatcher cover story) September 2005

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (“Once Upon a Heeb”) July 2005

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (“Mama Said…”) June 2005

• The Los Angeles Times (Calendar: “As Biological Clocks Go, His is More Like a Travel Alarm”) May 2005

• The Los Angeles Times (Calendar: “Please Leave a Hidden Message After the Tone”) April 2005

• Fresh Yarn (“Sleepless in JFK”)

• The Los Angeles Times (Calendar: “Don’t Make Me Laugh”) March 2005

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (“The Court of Cupid”) February 2005

• Elle (“Insignificant Other”) November 2004

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (“Political Bedfellows”) October 2004

• The Los Angeles Times (Calendar: “To Win With Defeatism”) September 2004

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (“Guilty of Being Too Guilty”) September 2004

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (“Wandering Back Into the Fold”) September 2004

• Glamour (“Little Black Book”) September 2004

• People (“Colors Insulting to Nature” Review) August 2004

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (Singles: “SWF Seeks Same”) August 2004

• Redbook (“Sweet Revenge”) August 2004

• People (“Grosse Pointe Girl” Review) June 2004

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (Singles: “Competitive Coupling”) June 2004

• People (“What to Keep” Review) May 2004

• People (“Like the Red Panda” Review) April 2004

• Glamour (“Why I Love Going to Work”) April 2004

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (Singles: “Vanity Body Plates”) March 2004

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (Singles: “V-Day Gestures”) February 2004

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (Singles: “Full Disclosure”) November 2003

• People (“Save Karyn” Review) September 2003

• People (“Family Trust” Review) September 2003

• Glamour (“Bed Test”) August 2003

• People (“Sushi For Beginners” Review) June 2003

• L.A. Weekly (“French Fry Nation“) June 2003

• People (“Rescuing Patty Hearst” Review) March 2003

• The Los Angeles Times (Sunday Calendar: “A Degree of Humor“) March 2003

• The Los Angeles Times (Sunday Calendar: “Out of the Deep End“) February 2003

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (Singles: “Prozac Jewess“) February 2003

• Farallon Films: Odds & Sods (“The Penis Diaries“) January 2003

• Glamour (“Tummy Troubles”) January 2003

• Redbook (“My Big Mistake that Turned Out Great”) December 2002

• Stanford magazine (“A Blonde’s Bombshell”) December 2002

• Minnesota Monthly (“Father Knows Best”) December 2002

• The New York Post (“Teens on Film”) November 2002

• People (“All is Vanity” Review) November 2002

• Redbook (“You Won’t Believe Who I Married”) October 2002

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (“Inside the Cult of Kibu”) August 2002

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (Singles: “Literary Speed-Dating”) August 2002

• People (“Confessions of a Sociopathic Social Climber” review) July 2002

• Elle (“The Ex-Girlfriends Club”) July 2002

• People (“Angels” review) June 2002

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (“Faith in Unique Places“) April 2002

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (Singles: “Will the Real Jew Please Stand Up?“) April 2002

• People (“Slave to Fashion” review) April 2002

• People (“Advanced Sex Tips for Girls” review) March 2002

• This Side of Doctoring: Reflections From Women in Medicine December 2001

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (Singles: “L.A. Jew”) November 2001

• People (“Last Year’s River” review) November 2001

• The New York Times (“A Home Office Needs Its Boundaries”) October 2001

• ChickClick (Interview with “7th Heaven’s”Beverley Mitchell) October 2001

• The L.A. Jewish Journal (Singles: “The Rabbi-Bad Boy Complex”) October 2001

• San Jose Mercury News (“The World Below” review) October 2001

• Mademoiselle (“Brunch With…” columns) September, October, November 2001

• People (“Long Time No See” review) September 2001

• Mademoiselle (“My Childhood Friends… Today”) September 2001

• Redbook magazine (“The Most Hated Women in America”) August 2001

• Modern Bride (“Destination San Francisco“) August 2001

• Seventeen Magazine (“Forgive or Forget?”) August 2001

• Mademoiselle (Health News) July 2001

• The San Francisco Chronicle (“High Maintenance” review) July 2001

• iLife (“Wired Women”) July 2001

• Farallon Films: Odds & Sods (“Fish Girl“) June 2001

• Time Magazine (“Thirtysomething meets ER“) April 2001

• The San Jose Mercury News (“A Stethoscope on the Soul”) April 2001

• Mademoiselle (“Cocaine in the Corner Office”) April 2001

• CosmoGirl! (“Disordered Eating”) April 2001

• The Industry Standard/Year In Review (“Inside the Cult of Kibu“) December 2000

• Time Digital (“Is There a Geek in the House?”) December 2000

• The Industry Standard (“Seeking Seclusion“) November 2000

• The New York Times (“When Six Figures Add Up to Zero“) October 2000

• The Industry Standard (“From Glitterati to Digerati“) September 2000

• Webdelsol Editor’s Pick (“All the King’s Horses”) July 2000

• Salon (“But Enough About Me: Does Writing a Memoir Give People Carte Blanche to Analyze Your Life”) June 2000

• Salon Table Talk (a week-long online chat with the author) June 2000

• Oxygen.com (Breakup Girl: “Hooking Up at 35,000 Feet”) May 2000

• DrDrew.com (“Liposuction Lessons”) April 2000

• Oxygen.com (Breakup Girl: “Club Med School”) April 2000

• Stanford magazine (“Left for Dead”) January 1999

• Selected Columns from Salon Magazine, 1998: •Bad Chemistry: When your lab partner is an obsessive compulsive, not even the data is safe •Breasts on the Brain: Anatomy is grueling enough without a gang of unweaned college boys drooling over the specimens •Horrible Harvard: An interview at Harvard Medical School reveals the ice behind the ivy •Behind Closed Doors: When my favorite professor revealed that he was human, too, I knew I’d never look at him the same way again •Survival of the Earliest: Competing for grades is one thing. But facing off for parking spaces means all-out war •Penile Ponderings: In search of vestigial vaginas and other ethical dilemmas •Ghosts on campus: Within the cozy community of campus life, there are plenty of cracks to fall through

• Slate (Guest Diarist) August 1998

• The Outlook (“15 Minutes”) February 1998

Check out this loving comment in response to Don’t Save the Whales,

“i’m not sure of what your point is?! whats wrong with trying to save the whales, or any animal for that matter? why are you saying that only whales shouldn’t be saved? why not all other endangered species? i think you are wrong as i know many do, but i do not see your selfish view as to be right, yes you can look after your family or whatever your trying to say, but why not doing things for other people or animals other than yourself? please enlighten me with your selfish attitude to life.”

There is no cause so noble that you should sacrifice your children to its altar. Shame on you.

After 15-years in DC, I have noticed that those noble activists who are saving the world have yet to save themselves, their marriages, their families, and their children.

The children of many of the founders of these organizations are a mess, with boys and girls as scared and abandoned as the children of their more celebrated Hollywood celebrities and New York robber barons. They are cared for by nannies and oftentimes never see their parents for weeks at a time.

All because one or more of their parents are making sacrifices for a higher, nobler cause: saving the whales. Or some similar cause celebre.

The illusion of nobility associated with saving pagan babies, the rain forest, the whales, or the trees is pure distraction from the things that matter most in this life which is saving yourself, protecting and loving your children, your spouse, your parents, your family, and your community.

If you have all of your ducks in a row, if your children are happy and well-adjusted, if your health is good and you get enough sleep and exercise, if you still chase your spouse around the bed pretty regularly, and you call your mother, with energy to spare for yourself, then you have the right to save the whales.

Otherwise, you are chasing phantoms, you are wasting your time, and you had better still yourself enough to remember why you got married, why you had children, and whether the whales really matter to you any more or if you’re just used to saving the whales.

Otherwise, let the whales fend for themselves for a little while while you get yourself together.

If you disrespect your own family enough to abandon them for your noble cause then the whales are better off without you. Resign from your save the whales campaign immediately, move to New York, and settle in to a life on Wall Street.

If you’re going to be ignoble, you might as well do it for money. The entire order cetacea recognize hypocrisy when they see it and they don’t want any of your filthy lucre anyway.

(Special Thanks to Paul Roberts of P.R.A.D.E. (Paul Roberts Amateur Design Enthusiast The blog for the untrained but discriminating design eye) — the Photoshop God — who hooked me up with the Don’t Save the Whales graphic)

Related Posts

• Will Subliterate 17-Year-Olds Save the Whales?
• Wisdumb of Crowds: SAVE THE WHALES
• Kill the Humans Who Save the Whales

Some great comments follow:

Comments

Understandable sentiment, and an easy crutch for our own apathy, but life is not so black and white.

To continue with a racial theme and abuse an overused metaphor, would you have had Dr. King abandon his quest for civil rights in favor of couples therapy?

Granted, whales and trees are not sentient beings like the African Americans who were fire-hosed in Selma, but it’s naieve to write off noble ambitions because one’s self is not already enlightened.

In many of the great religious traditions service is actually means to personal salvation. Through serving others, we can learn to help ourselves and our families.

It is a shame that such impulses are not instinctual (hence the reason why airlines have to remind to you put on your oxygen mask before assisting your neighbor), but we are contradictory beings.

Accept the ambiguity and respect both service to others and our quests for personal virtue. They go hand in hand.

Posted by: David Gelles | April 11, 2005 10:32 AM

There is no apathy in my life. And there are also many distractions. I have spent years dancing with dolphins and whales as a SCUBA diver and know them more than many and for this I am grateful.

What is more noble than the ambition of saving oneself?

Doctor King was a whale, if you will. He was saving himself, his family, and his community. I am surprised that you overlooked that.

So, maybe I am not so naive.

And the most valuable lessons are in fact gleaned from serving others, but try to keep it local. As in your spouse, your children, your parents, your family, your friends, your community. If you have energy left over, then spend it along the same vein.

The nature of the world is not really as it seems. Try to only serve others you can touch, see, feel, help, interact with, and live with.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 11, 2005 10:47 AM

Dr. King was a philanderer saint.

Beethoven was an abusive genius.

Ghandi…well, he was all good.

The point is that we can’t put our life’s work on hold to get in the zen of changing diapers.

I know you’re neither naieve nor apathetic, so don’t come off like it by saying, “saving pagan babies, the rain forest, the whales, or the trees is pure distraction from the things that matter most in this life which is saving yourself, protecting and loving your children, your spouse, your parents, your family, and your community.”

If people don’t save the trees there will be no more familes to save.

Posted by: David Gelles | April 11, 2005 10:57 AM

As for one’s life’s work, it makes more than more sense to me now that Roman Catholic priests are celibate. There are fewer distractions.

I am not saying that one should not perform one’s life’s work. But not to the harm of what really matters.

And I am not talking about one’s life’s work, nor am I talking about destiny. What I am saying is that no matter how noble one’s life’s work may seem and no matter how important one’s destiny is, it is not remotely as important as serving your spouse, your children, your family, and your community.

There is nothing as modest, as honest, as life-affirming, and life-changing as that.

There is more harm done by a man who has a destiny, a noble aim, a a life’s work than anything else.

You mentioned Dr. King, Beethoven, and Ghandi.

I will mention some other men who have had life’s work and noble aims who lost site of themselves, their children, their family, and their community:

Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Idi Amin, Hideki Tojo, Kim Il-Sung, Chiang Kai-Shek, Moammar Al Qadhafi, Pol Pot, Francisco Franco, and Mao Zedong.

All men who didn’t put their “life’s work on hold to get in the zen of changing diapers.”

To take it one step further, these men, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Idi Amin, Hideki Tojo, Kim Il-Sung, Chiang Kai-Shek, Moammar Al Qadhafi, Pol Pot, Francisco Franco, and Mao Zedong, might have turned out differently if their mom, dad, family, and friends where better parents to them.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 11, 2005 11:34 AM

cop out.

Posted by: David Gelles | April 11, 2005 11:56 AM

There are many highly-gifted people in the world who have been treated like the young Gautama.

They are coddled, protected, and spoiled so that they may be allowed to focus on their destiny.

They distiny is as likely to be that of a surgeon, a scientist, a lawyer, a competitive skater, an athelete, a beauty queen, a pianist, a painter, a poet, or a priest as it is the King of the Whales.

There needs to be balance in all things. And what is the saddest part of this entire conversations is that the same man who said, “The point is that we can’t put our life’s work on hold to get in the zen of changing diapers” is also the man who spent months living in India.

I have never focused this on not saving the whales or not saving the forests but rather how much easier it is to forgive the distraction from the truth if that distraction is in fact popular or noble.

It’s neither nuclear family and Wall $treet, nor domestic abuse and whales.

There are countless great parents who are plenty involved with money, and plenty of awful parents who do invaluable work for their communities but are awful husbands and wives, who are awful parents to their children, and who are able to rationalize their entire failure because they have done some things that really don’t matter too much at the end of life really anyway.

There is another black and white annoyance: that money equals bad and activism equals good.

Sometimes entropy isn’t death. very often, it isn’t. Sometimes to struggle so hard for something that is so far removed and so not part of one’s life is like struggling in quicksand.

Not only is it a waste of energy, but the unintended consequence — sinking faster and being alienated from a helping hand — is worse than anything you could ever imagine.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 11, 2005 1:16 PM

there will always be that group of people bordering on lunacy who are dependent on a false sense of altruism to prop up their self-esteem, which suffers from things like failing to take care of their families or failing to succeed in relationships. it’s a shame, really.

Posted by: sam | April 12, 2005 8:30 AM

Sam, that’s the perfect way of saying it. And I can even make it more generic to better support my point, if you don’t mind, “there will always be that group of people bordering on lunacy who are dependent on a false sense of destiny to prop up their self-esteem.” The same stuff that makes the chairman of GE great and successful is the stuff that makes up the chairman of WWF as well.

My concern — and the reason I wrote the piece — is that the chairman of GE doesn’t suffer from the “noble aim” aspect, which might make the avarice and work ethic and profit motive more authentic and honest.

And is that better than a false sense of altruism?

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 12, 2005 9:32 AM

Yes, the avarice and work ethic may be honest and authentic, but avarice is a product of disappointment toward selfless service. Avarice and profit are easy. They come naturally, but so does the violence instinct. It is the mark of a civilized human to control such instincts.

Take each point in this discussion to the extreme. If tomorrow you woke up and walked outside to a world composed of either selfless service or “avarice and work ethic and profit motive”, which would you prefer?

Posted by: Bryan | April 12, 2005 9:49 AM

Chris, Dickens had the same reservations as you about what he termed Telescopic Philanthropy. You’re not alone!

Posted by: Mike | April 12, 2005 10:38 AM

In their purest form, I would choose service. I have a dear friend who is Mormon and she told me that service is the most important thing to the LDS. But when it comes to service, nobody is a professional and the service is inclusive of the family.

I like that. That makes sense to me.

I am also not saying that there is anything wrong with an obsessive workaholic president of Save the Whales.

I mean, there needs to be sacrifice in life and pain in order to grow and evolve.

But when a child is involved — when a family is being made — then things indeed should change.

Take each point in this discussion to the extreme. If tomorrow you woke up and walked outside to a world in which you would have to choose between saving all the whales and saving one child, which would you choose?

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 12, 2005 11:05 AM

With regards to Telescopic Philanthropy, I see the same thing with Mr. Margaret Thatcher. The thing is, with spouses, there is a certain level of conscious or unconscious choice in the matter.

With children, there is no choice in the matter. Although the subsumed spouse might become toxic and bitter — or not — at the loss of self to the shining qualities of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, there is still no less of a choice, really, in the matter.

It boils down to, if you’re unhappy, leave.

But choosing to have children is an entirely different matter.

Having children can either be the most generous or the most selfish act in the entire world.

An additional note is that psychologically-speaking, the same people who end up in a role such as Mrs Jellyby’s or Mrs Thatcher’s tend also to have narcissistic qualities.

And narcissists are the most compelling mates and the most incapable of being partners and parents. Funny how that works.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 12, 2005 11:16 AM

Without reading each entry and assimilating them all to produce a cogent statement (because I’m busy at work), let me make the following observations and then close with the greatest quote ever spoken.

1) There are causes noble enough that you should sacrifice your children. Chief among them is service to your nation in a time where its existence is threatened. As Abraham Lincoln once said to women grieving the loss of their children during the civil war,

“I cannot refrain from tendering to you the thanks of the Republic they died to save. I pray that our heavenly father may assuage the anguish of your bereavements and leave you only the cherished memories of the loved and the lost and the solemn pride that must be yours to have made so costly a sacrifice upon the alter of freedom.”

2) Nobody (worth hearing) is suggesting that saving the whales is more important, or equally important, to tending to our social fabric. What they are saying, if you listen with a carefully bent ear, is that through fostering care for things other than ourselves we create a society that by virtue of its interest in things besides itself, takes good care of itself. Without a strong social network, these other less paramount causes could garner no attention.

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; because there is no effort without error and shortcomings; who does actually strive to do the deed; who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”

Theodore Roosevelt (26th U.S. president (1901-09), 1858-1919)

Posted by: Justin | April 12, 2005 12:44 PM

could we change “whales” to “the unborn”?

Posted by: max solon | April 12, 2005 12:48 PM

I fully agree with you, but isn’t that called duty? And isn’t that the choice of the child? The child is not being sacrificed for the parent but rather the child is sacrificing his own life. That soldier is a whale. That soldier is sacrificing his life for his spouse, his children, his family, his friends, his community, and his country.

Entirely different, in my opinion, but important none-the-less.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 12, 2005 3:56 PM

Yea. I see the problem.

We should take control of our families and sort out all our family problems.

What about taking them to the ocean? We could all look for the whales together!

No, waste of time. What if we don’t sort out our problems when we’re there? We might all get lost in some sadly transient awe at the beauty of the whales – or probably just the idea of whales. For precious moments we’d forget the problems we went there to sort.
My family is not weak!
And who’s driving?

And if all the whales are gone anyway because of whalers, or depleted fish stocks from crazy fishing, or deafening submarine engines interfering in their songs, we’re only going to get frustrated at humanity’s impotence in the face of these vital industries.
I can do without that.
And they have no rhythm as far as I can tell.

Let’s relax with the tv newstoons and a healthy tuna salad, and save up the money from work for a good holiday one day. Disney? Hope we don’t use it all up on therapy first.
Or they grow up.

Forget the whales. You only live once.

Posted by: Hugh Whiting | April 12, 2005 9:48 PM

I think you’ve got your focus slightly wrong here, because you’re centering on “activists” when you should be thinking of all parents.

I know several handfuls of people who were scared and abandoned children, and the few who were raised by nannies were the lucky ones. Some of those abandoned children had parents at home, but they were so involved in business that they never saw their kids. It’s not about “activism,” it’s about abandoning your family for anything, and we shouldn’t confuse the two.

All the actual activists I’ve known share their activism with their families (I used to work for the Sierra Club, so I’ve known a few).

P.S., and this is a note for everybody, because this is the third time I’ve seen the error today: IT’S SPELLED “GANDHI.” G. A. N. D. H. I.

Posted by: Rika Youngblood | April 12, 2005 10:28 PM

i disagree with your assessment that the whales can fend for themselves .. they have no chance at all when their home is polluted, their food depleted, and their migration paths are congested with oil tankers .. what’s worst, we have the power to wipe out the planet (not just a single species) with just a push of the button (in 2002, we were just seven minutes away from midnight on the doomsday clock).

i have yet to run into children of the green movement who “are a mess”. on the contrary, having attended an ultra-liberal college of a progressive town [santa cruz], i have met and befriended many of these second-generation hippies who continue to uphold the various -ISMs (re: liberalism, idealism, etc) and values of their parents. what a wonderful gifts these hippies of yesteryears have given to their children.

this legacy echoes the teachings of the wisdom keepers of the mohawk nation, who teach their people to respect the land, and that “… everything they do affects the Seventh Generation and we must think of the unborn faces looking up from beneath Mother Earth”.

though my parents were not part of the green movement, i do believe in it .. and i will save the whales for the both of us.

Posted by: nam lamore | April 13, 2005 4:20 PM

Hugh, the entire time I read your comment I thought of the dolphins from Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy! — thanks for that. But I have to tell you that I don’t really give a rat’s twat what you get up to.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 13, 2005 8:23 PM

What absolute twaddle.

Where is your evidence to back up the existence of these orphans of ecology? Don’t you think that there are people that put work before their family in all walks of life?

You’re being deliberately provocative. Get a life. Spend some time with your own family and friends instead of wasting your time attempting to bait people on the internet for your own pathetic amusement.

Posted by: Vilnius Terence | April 14, 2005 10:59 AM

I think you are bang out of order the people that save the whales are good people and are doing good. I am sure 9 out of ten would not neglected there families because of it and the ones that do are yes in the wrong when I was a little girl saving the whales was my dream
whales are mammals just like we are they are getting killed by there own species which is not right you are saying we should be stopping the robberies and the murders but by killing the whales you are doing the same to them you are murdering them and robbing them of a family something’s need looking after and at least there are SOME descent people out there that will do it not everyone sees life in the same way you do. if you had a pet dog for example and someone was trying to kill it you would do everything you could to save it because it is part of the family some people see whales in that way. How would you feel if you were just sitting at home with your family and someone shot a harpoon at you? Well that’s what it is like for them.
just imagine(I don’t no if you have kids) that you were sitting at home with your kids and someone captured you or killed you just think about what it would do to your kids but at least they would have other family or they would have the opinion of foster care or adoption. but those poor whales probably don’t have help like that they would be all alone and maybe too young to know how to survive on their own so I think in the future instead of being lost in your own little world and think its the saving the whales that is doing it think again because they need as much help as we do. And if you are so bovered about the community I hope you are out there doing something for it. Infact why don’t you go out there and do something now instead of wasting your time writing this web site moaning about there whale savers and do something for the community yours sincerely jess

Posted by: jess | May 13, 2005 9:31 AM

this is sick we can save ourslevs we have a voice of our own but the whales dont so if they cant speak to stick up for themslves who will? because it is clear u wont. i would and that is a fact u mybe should listen because it is your people that is causing the problem with the whales.

Posted by: stephanie | May 23, 2005 4:41 AM

If the vast majority of people who aren’t inclined towards saving the whales and such, were instead spending their free time trying to truly take care of their families, spouses & communities I might see validity to your argument…as it is this post just looks like liberal-baiting to me.

Whatever. You guys are right. We suck. Money is king. Whatever.

Posted by: Cary | June 21, 2005 2:53 PM

You can always catch a liberal if you use a whale as bait!

Posted by: Chris Abraham | June 21, 2005 4:44 PM

what a stupid article.

Posted by: Urb | June 21, 2005 9:05 PM

Your argument is astonishing to me. If you can honestly re-read it two times and not see the mile-wide holes in your reasoning you might need to take some time to think things over. Really.

Suffice to say that if this is the way you feel then I’m thinking that you have some learning to do about what a relationship is, what a marriage is and what raising a child is. Let’s set your gloss on activism == children raised by nannies aside. That is a deep issue with a whole spectra of situations that you are lumping into the most negative terminus.

You don’t raise a child by commiting yourself to voluntary servitude to him or her — nor do you ‘make a family’ by staying home and staring at them 24/7. Strong people with strong convictions raise children that share these traits. Strong marriages are not made by two people who spend all their time on each other. The best thing you can do for a child is to inspire her by setting an example of what a person can do in this world.

To hold the opinions that you express within the context of your personal mores is one thing, but to insult *activism* at large and to call people who give a damn and are doing somehting about it bad parents bullshit on stilts.

Posted by: anon | June 22, 2005 12:09 PM

You have the honor of missing my point entirely. I think you might be suffering from some sort of deep-seated guilt.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | June 22, 2005 1:29 PM

we as humans have a responsibilty to care for all living creatures of this earth as they all have a right to live and we are the ones who have destroyed their homes and species. So it is a responsibility of ours to try protect those species in danger because of the selfish act of others.

Posted by: Amy | July 9, 2005 1:47 AM

you obviously is idiot, u must be someone who cares only about urself. please open u eyes and see what people like u are doing to animals. IDIOT

Posted by: lin jia yi | July 11, 2005 8:13 AM

first of all Mr.Abraham does make a point, if your life isn’t well put together you shouldn’t particate in any other extra curricular activities. However,he fails to mention other activities people particate in that aren’t for the environment,anmails/endangered species,or other worthwhile cause that never the less can disrrupt homes,childhoods,& break families such as:homeless, needy, abuse, disabiled, & feed the children. but these aren’t mentioned, why . . .?

Posted by: integra | July 11, 2005 4:14 PM

Mr.Abraham I must say you speak of neglected children,& husbands. can you prove anything you say? And if you can tell us how many people are neglected because of their parents jobs, hobbies, and everyday life who aren’t rooted in some cause and are just living in a regular town, would you? There are problems in life & marriage due to nothing but their own faults, to not think so & live in a perfect world is denial.I suggest you open your eyes.

Posted by: integra | July 11, 2005 4:35 PM

Mr.Abraham,I respect other people’s opinions.You do not.That I refuse to respect,the lives of others & how the are lived are not yours to dictate to.You probley have a nice apt. in a upscale N.Y. neighborhood. Must be nice. You’ve had everything handed to you in a silver spoon. I don’t discriminate agianst the rich even though i am not. But for the poor who live in the wild or country nature is greatly loved,respected,&cared for.

Posted by: integra | July 11, 2005 4:49 PM

Mr.Abraham, you must watch your views & how you express them because you can offend many people,I was very offended by your statements and took it personally.It hurt,and I thought of all the others you’ve hurt by this. I suggest you apologize to the envirnmental community.I don’t apphreciate your calling Dr.King a “philanderer saint” and suggest you appologize to the black community as well.One day you may wake up and see how precious our world is.

Posted by: integra | July 11, 2005 5:01 PM

Mr.Abraham, this is my last post.I know your thinking “thank god”. But in short i will speak a quote of love ,honesty,& truth. ” The wonderous world under sea & land, in the big scheme of things one life may seem insugnifficant but it’s the greatest gift we know and we cannot let this world of light, love ,and beauty perish.”

Posted by: integra | July 11, 2005 5:09 PM

Mr Abraham, YOU ARE A CRAZY, CRAZY TOOL.

Posted by: Mad Anne Bonney | July 11, 2005 10:20 PM

Mr Abraham, YOU ARE A FREAKY FREAKY FREAK.

Posted by: Mad Anne Bonney | July 11, 2005 10:21 PM

My ex long ago abandoned our son for native american/worker/prison issues. The worst part is my 18-yr-old son who was dragged to the W.T.O. when he was 13(although it makes for a good story to say he’s been teargassed)-my son only sees the hypocrisy in the hardcore activists–thinking of them as angry and sad without any stability or truth.

Posted by: christina | July 12, 2005 7:19 PM

Your thoughts are disturbing because if you cannot enjoy the utter beauty we have in our world you are really disturbed. This page is sick and unfortunatly I visited this sight BLAH….SAVE THE WHALES

Posted by: Crystal | July 12, 2005 8:22 PM

Save the Earth, KILL YER SELF!!!!

Posted by: Martin Jones | July 26, 2005 4:17 PM

love animals keep them safe. would if u were a whale oh yeah lets just 4get u. u r nothing.GOD put thing here 4 a reson life is a leason. u will get whats coming.SAVE WHALES,CARE 4 THEM.

Posted by: ryah | July 26, 2005 8:59 PM

i have only 1 thing 2 say about ur article

“THE HELL”

Posted by: emman | July 27, 2005 5:32 AM

i have only 1 thing 2 say about ur artical

“THE HELL”

Posted by: emman | July 27, 2005 9:50 AM

Sorry I don’t think like you At ALL!!!

Posted by: Bobbie | August 1, 2005 3:48 AM

You are really twisted aren’t you. so you think we should focus on other things no we shouldn’t im 13 and i am trying to save the animals from people like you. Sick people who are self centered and don’t care for others. You need to get your head out of your *** and open your eyes. You wouldn’t like for someone to kill you without question and make lipstick or shampoo out of you would you??? Animals that live in the water are being killed for your convience so you can have shampoo. i don’t think so buddy. I bet you go out there and kill them so you can be satified. Well you know what we’ll stop people like you from hurting the animals we love. Without or with out your help. So when all the animals are gone we’ll start making shampoo and lipstick out of people like you so you know what it fells like to be them. So you know how much pain people put tem through. Woould you like a harpoon explosive shot into your brain and blow up and kill you then hit you repeatedly with an axe. So you need to get your head out of your***

Posted by: Cayla Rene | January 31, 2007 12:50 PM

You are really crule huh? dude you have to save the whales. they are killing the whales just so they can make soap to rub all over your body .well i am 13 and i am trying to save the whales . so people like yuo dont get to kill them. you are really wrong and dont care one bit about the animals under the sea. well you should.whales , orcas , sharks and other mammals die just to make new and stupid improved products. you are a *** and you need to care about the animals they have dont nothing to you and you want to kill them well dont. cause me and my friends cayla will beat your ***
you need to care. well would you want to die just to make lipstick and shampoo.

write back and i will tell you more abourt the animals you need to car eabout what they do for you there are only a hundred remaining in the world .soon there will be no more and then it will make you happy huh well you need to get your head out of the gutter . when all the animals are gone what are u gonna do we are gonna blame you!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: ALexa RAe | January 31, 2007 12:50 PM

you might think that whales dont matter but your wrong. ya you need to take care of your family but we also need to save are world. all of you that sont think that the whales arent important than you SUCK.

Posted by: chalsea | February 15, 2007 6:44 PM

What are you talking about> Yes its important to have a stable life at home for your family and children, but if the enviroment itself isn’t saved by these noble people an other people around the world then that home you are trying to stabilze and love will not exists and the ones you love will suffer, because people like you thought it was unimportant to save the whales!!! So if we dont start repairing our enviroment now we will end up suffering for it later on!!! So wake up and save the Whales ASSHOLE

Posted by: Someone | February 20, 2007 8:53 PM

Dont blame the whales or conservationists for human frailities and faults.

I have a great husband and marriage, great kids with whom i spend alot of my tme, I also support Whale conservation with time and money i have availiable. Get a grip!! Its not the Whales fault thatthey are being slaughtered… It is HUMAN GREED and arrogance. It is not the whales fault the people lose sight of everything but their cause….It is HUMAN STUPIDITY and again arrogance. Dont blame the whales and their plight for human faults after all it happens with more than just save the whales.

Miri Furlong
Graphic Artist
design@ethnic-aotearoa.co.nz
www.ethnic-aotearoa.co.nz

Posted by: Miri Furlong | February 21, 2007 2:21 AM

you are so self centered!! how would you feel if some body wanted to kill you!!!! don’t even try to say you wouldn’t care!! I’m elizabeth christian and i think everyone should help save the whales!!! LOSER!! FREAK!! WEIRDO!!

Posted by: Elizabeth Christian | February 28, 2007 1:59 PM

you are the biggest idiot on the face of the earth!!! you don’t understand the value of life its self!!! tou are so retarted!!!!!!!

YOU IDIOT!!

Posted by: Elizabeth | February 28, 2007 2:02 PM

YOU ARE SO RETARDED!! hope you choke on a piece of beef jerky!!

Posted by: elizabeth | February 28, 2007 2:20 PM

your stupid!!!
dont say dont save the whales because you need to save yourself first. i love whales and im trying t save whales and im only 17 i have loving parents who are also trying to save whales and were not disfunctional or falling apart or any thing you said were just fine and to generalize that all people who try and save our planet are neglecting their families is BULL. your just pissed that you cant save the world and you probably cant fix your own family.

Posted by: Zayna | May 18, 2007 8:00 PM

You are very stupid. No more comments.

Posted by: Gabriel | May 28, 2007 9:07 AM

I may well be stupid, but I am not alone. Thanks for joining me.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | May 28, 2007 12:22 PM

SAVE THE WORLD! SAVE THE WHALES!

Posted by: Mauricio J. Solórzano | June 6, 2007 12:27 PM

God Agrees with Chris Abraham That We Should not Save the Whales (well, at least Paul does… but then, he’s a rabid homophobe and a chauvinist pig, so…)

In any case, it’s in the scriptures, so it’s right.

1 Timothy 3

This saying is trustworthy: “If anyone aspires to be a leader of his community, he desires a noble work.” Such a leader, therefore, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, self-controlled, sensible, respectable, hospitable, an able teacher, not addicted to wine, not a bully but gentle, not quarrelsome, not greedy; one who manages his own household competently, having his children under control with all dignity. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of God’s house?) He must not be a new convert, or he might become conceited and fall into the condemnation of the Devil. Furthermore, he must have a good reputation among outsiders, so that he does not fall into disgrace and the Devil’s trap.

Posted by: Mark Harrison | August 13, 2007 7:13 AM

I am surely and indeed a Godly man. Fuck the whales.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | August 14, 2007 11:19 PM

i’m not sure of what your point is?! whats wrong with trying to save the whales, or any animal for that matter? why are you saying that only whales shouldn’t be saved? why not all other endangered species? i think you are wrong as i know many do, but i do not see your selfish view as to be right, yes you can look after your family or whatever your trying to say, but why not doing things for other people or animals other than yourself? please enlighten me with your selfish attitude to life

Posted by: Save The Whales | August 17, 2007 1:06 PM

I got a scolding from Chalsea, “you might think that whales dont matter but your wrong. ya you need to take care of your family but we also need to save are world. all of you that sont think that the whales arent important than you SUCK,” because I wrote an article called Don’t Save the Whales.

For your amusement, here are all of the comments from Don’t Save the Whales:

Understandable sentiment, and an easy crutch for our own apathy, but life is not so black and white.

To continue with a racial theme and abuse an overused metaphor, would you have had Dr. King abandon his quest for civil rights in favor of couples therapy?

Granted, whales and trees are not sentient beings like the African Americans who were fire-hosed in Selma, but it’s naieve to write off noble ambitions because one’s self is not already enlightened.

In many of the great religious traditions service is actually means to personal salvation. Through serving others, we can learn to help ourselves and our families.It is a shame that such impulses are not instinctual (hence the reason why airlines have to remind to you put on your oxygen mask before assisting your neighbor), but we are contradictory beings.

Accept the ambiguity and respect both service to others and our quests for personal virtue. They go hand in hand.

Posted by: David Gelles | April 11, 2005 10:32 AM

There is no apathy in my life. And there are also many distractions. I have spent years dancing with dolphins and whales as a SCUBA diver and know them more than many and for this I am grateful.

What is more noble than the ambition of saving oneself?

Doctor King was a whale, if you will. He was saving himself, his family, and his community. I am surprised that you overlooked that.

So, maybe I am not so naive.

And the most valuable lessons are in fact gleaned from serving others, but try to keep it local. As in your spouse, your children, your parents, your family, your friends, your community. If you have energy left over, then spend it along the same vein.

The nature of the world is not really as it seems. Try to only serve others you can touch, see, feel, help, interact with, and live with.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 11, 2005 10:47 AM

Dr. King was a philanderer saint.

Beethoven was an abusive genius.Ghandi…well, he was all good.

The point is that we can’t put our life’s work on hold to get in the zen of changing diapers.

I know you’re neither naieve nor apathetic, so don’t come off like it by saying, “saving pagan babies, the rain forest, the whales, or the trees is pure distraction from the things that matter most in this life which is saving yourself, protecting and loving your children, your spouse, your parents, your family, and your community.”

If people don’t save the trees there will be no more familes to save.

Posted by: David Gelles | April 11, 2005 10:57 AM

As for one’s life’s work, it makes more than more sense to me now that Roman Catholic priests are celibate. There are fewer distractions.

I am not saying that one should not perform one’s life’s work. But not to the harm of what really matters.

And I am not talking about one’s life’s work, nor am I talking about destiny. What I am saying is that no matter how noble one’s life’s work may seem and no matter how important one’s destiny is, it is not remotely as important as serving your spouse, your children, your family, and your community.

There is nothing as modest, as honest, as life-affirming, and life-changing as that.

There is more harm done by a man who has a destiny, a noble aim, a a life’s work than anything else.

You mentioned Dr. King, Beethoven, and Ghandi.

I will mention some other men who have had life’s work and noble aims who lost site of themselves, their children, their family, and their community:

Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Idi Amin, Hideki Tojo, Kim Il-Sung, Chiang Kai-Shek, Moammar Al Qadhafi, Pol Pot, Francisco Franco, and Mao Zedong.

All men who didn’t put their “life’s work on hold to get in the zen of changing diapers.”

To take it one step further, these men, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Idi Amin, Hideki Tojo, Kim Il-Sung, Chiang Kai-Shek, Moammar Al Qadhafi, Pol Pot, Francisco Franco, and Mao Zedong, might have turned out differently if their mom, dad, family, and friends where better parents to them.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 11, 2005 11:34 AM

cop out.

Posted by: David Gelles | April 11, 2005 11:56 AM

There are many highly-gifted people in the world who have been treated like the young Gautama.

They are coddled, protected, and spoiled so that they may be allowed to focus on their destiny.

They distiny is as likely to be that of a surgeon, a scientist, a lawyer, a competitive skater, an athelete, a beauty queen, a pianist, a painter, a poet, or a priest as it is the King of the Whales.

There needs to be balance in all things. And what is the saddest part of this entire conversations is that the same man who said, “The point is that we can’t put our life’s work on hold to get in the zen of changing diapers” is also the man who spent months living in India.

I have never focused this on not saving the whales or not saving the forests but rather how much easier it is to forgive the distraction from the truth if that distraction is in fact popular or noble.

It’s neither nuclear family and Wall $treet, nor domestic abuse and whales.

There are countless great parents who are plenty involved with money, and plenty of awful parents who do invaluable work for their communities but are awful husbands and wives, who are awful parents to their children, and who are able to rationalize their entire failure because they have done some things that really don’t matter too much at the end of life really anyway.

There is another black and white annoyance: that money equals bad and activism equals good.

Sometimes entropy isn’t death. very often, it isn’t. Sometimes to struggle so hard for something that is so far removed and so not part of one’s life is like struggling in quicksand.

Not only is it a waste of energy, but the unintended consequence — sinking faster and being alienated from a helping hand — is worse than anything you could ever imagine.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 11, 2005 1:16 PM

there will always be that group of people bordering on lunacy who are dependent on a false sense of altruism to prop up their self-esteem, which suffers from things like failing to take care of their families or failing to succeed in relationships. it’s a shame, really.

Posted by: sam | April 12, 2005 8:30 AM

Sam, that’s the perfect way of saying it. And I can even make it more generic to better support my point, if you don’t mind, “there will always be that group of people bordering on lunacy who are dependent on a false sense of destiny to prop up their self-esteem.” The same stuff that makes the chairman of GE great and successful is the stuff that makes up the chairman of WWF as well.

My concern — and the reason I wrote the piece — is that the chairman of GE doesn’t suffer from the “noble aim” aspect, which might make the avarice and work ethic and profit motive more authentic and honest.

And is that better than a false sense of altruism?

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 12, 2005 9:32 AM

Yes, the avarice and work ethic may be honest and authentic, but avarice is a product of disappointment toward selfless service. Avarice and profit are easy. They come naturally, but so does the violence instinct. It is the mark of a civilized human to control such instincts.

Take each point in this discussion to the extreme. If tomorrow you woke up and walked outside to a world composed of either selfless service or “avarice and work ethic and profit motive”, which would you prefer?

Posted by: Bryan | April 12, 2005 9:49 AM

Chris, Dickens had the same reservations as you about what he termed Telescopic Philanthropy. You’re not alone!

Posted by: Mike | April 12, 2005 10:38 AM

In their purest form, I would choose service. I have a dear friend who is Mormon and she told me that service is the most important thing to the LDS. But when it comes to service, nobody is a professional and the service is inclusive of the family.

I like that. That makes sense to me.

I am also not saying that there is anything wrong with an obsessive workaholic president of Save the Whales.

I mean, there needs to be sacrifice in life and pain in order to grow and evolve.

But when a child is involved — when a family is being made — then things indeed should change.

Take each point in this discussion to the extreme. If tomorrow you woke up and walked outside to a world in which you would have to choose between saving all the whales and saving one child, which would you choose?

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 12, 2005 11:05 AM

With regards to Telescopic Philanthropy, I see the same thing with Mr. Margaret Thatcher. The thing is, with spouses, there is a certain level of conscious or unconscious choice in the matter.

With children, there is no choice in the matter. Although the subsumed spouse might become toxic and bitter — or not — at the loss of self to the shining qualities of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, there is still no less of a choice, really, in the matter.

It boils down to, if you’re unhappy, leave.

But choosing to have children is an entirely different matter.

Having children can either be the most generous or the most selfish act in the entire world.

An additional note is that psychologically-speaking, the same people who end up in a role such as Mrs Jellyby’s or Mrs Thatcher’s tend also to have narcissistic qualities.

And narcissists are the most compelling mates and the most incapable of being partners and parents. Funny how that works.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 12, 2005 11:16 AM

Without reading each entry and assimilating them all to produce a cogent statement (because I’m busy at work), let me make the following observations and then close with the greatest quote ever spoken.

1) There are causes noble enough that you should sacrifice your children. Chief among them is service to your nation in a time where its existence is threatened. As Abraham Lincoln once said to women grieving the loss of their children during the civil war,

“I cannot refrain from tendering to you the thanks of the Republic they died to save. I pray that our heavenly father may assuage the anguish of your bereavements and leave you only the cherished memories of the loved and the lost and the solemn pride that must be yours to have made so costly a sacrifice upon the alter of freedom.”

2) Nobody (worth hearing) is suggesting that saving the whales is more important, or equally important, to tending to our social fabric. What they are saying, if you listen with a carefully bent ear, is that through fostering care for things other than ourselves we create a society that by virtue of its interest in things besides itself, takes good care of itself. Without a strong social network, these other less paramount causes could garner no attention.

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; because there is no effort without error and shortcomings; who does actually strive to do the deed; who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”

Theodore Roosevelt (26th U.S. president (1901-09), 1858-1919)

Posted by: Justin | April 12, 2005 12:44 PM

could we change “whales” to “the unborn”?

Posted by: max solon | April 12, 2005 12:48 PM

I fully agree with you, but isn’t that called duty? And isn’t that the choice of the child? The child is not being sacrificed for the parent but rather the child is sacrificing his own life. That soldier is a whale. That soldier is sacrificing his life for his spouse, his children, his family, his friends, his community, and his country.

Entirely different, in my opinion, but important none-the-less.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 12, 2005 3:56 PM

Yea. I see the problem.

We should take control of our families and sort out all our family problems.

What about taking them to the ocean? We could all look for the whales together!

No, waste of time. What if we don’t sort out our problems when we’re there? We might all get lost in some sadly transient awe at the beauty of the whales – or probably just the idea of whales. For precious moments we’d forget the problems we went there to sort.
My family is not weak!
And who’s driving?

And if all the whales are gone anyway because of whalers, or depleted fish stocks from crazy fishing, or deafening submarine engines interfering in their songs, we’re only going to get frustrated at humanity’s impotence in the face of these vital industries.
I can do without that.
And they have no rhythm as far as I can tell.

Let’s relax with the tv newstoons and a healthy tuna salad, and save up the money from work for a good holiday one day. Disney? Hope we don’t use it all up on therapy first.
Or they grow up.

Forget the whales. You only live once.

Posted by: Hugh Whiting | April 12, 2005 9:48 PM

I think you’ve got your focus slightly wrong here, because you’re centering on “activists” when you should be thinking of all parents.

I know several handfuls of people who were scared and abandoned children, and the few who were raised by nannies were the lucky ones. Some of those abandoned children had parents at home, but they were so involved in business that they never saw their kids. It’s not about “activism,” it’s about abandoning your family for anything, and we shouldn’t confuse the two.

All the actual activists I’ve known share their activism with their families (I used to work for the Sierra Club, so I’ve known a few).

P.S., and this is a note for everybody, because this is the third time I’ve seen the error today: IT’S SPELLED “GANDHI.” G. A. N. D. H. I.

Posted by: Rika Youngblood | April 12, 2005 10:28 PM

i disagree with your assessment that the whales can fend for themselves .. they have no chance at all when their home is polluted, their food depleted, and their migration paths are congested with oil tankers .. what’s worst, we have the power to wipe out the planet (not just a single species) with just a push of the button (in 2002, we were just seven minutes away from midnight on the doomsday clock).

i have yet to run into children of the green movement who “are a mess”. on the contrary, having attended an ultra-liberal college of a progressive town [santa cruz], i have met and befriended many of these second-generation hippies who continue to uphold the various -ISMs (re: liberalism, idealism, etc) and values of their parents. what a wonderful gifts these hippies of yesteryears have given to their children.

this legacy echoes the teachings of the wisdom keepers of the mohawk nation, who teach their people to respect the land, and that “… everything they do affects the Seventh Generation and we must think of the unborn faces looking up from beneath Mother Earth”.

though my parents were not part of the green movement, i do believe in it .. and i will save the whales for the both of us.

Posted by: nam lamore | April 13, 2005 4:20 PM

Hugh, the entire time I read your comment I thought of the dolphins from Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy! — thanks for that. But I have to tell you that I don’t really give a rat’s twat what you get up to.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | April 13, 2005 8:23 PM

What absolute twaddle.

Where is your evidence to back up the existence of these orphans of ecology? Don’t you think that there are people that put work before their family in all walks of life?

You’re being deliberately provocative. Get a life. Spend some time with your own family and friends instead of wasting your time attempting to bait people on the internet for your own pathetic amusement.

Posted by: Vilnius Terence | April 14, 2005 10:59 AM

I think you are bang out of order the people that save the whales are good people and are doing good. I am sure 9 out of ten would not neglected there families because of it and the ones that do are yes in the wrong when I was a little girl saving the whales was my dream
whales are mammals just like we are they are getting killed by there own species which is not right you are saying we should be stopping the robberies and the murders but by killing the whales you are doing the same to them you are murdering them and robbing them of a family something’s need looking after and at least there are SOME descent people out there that will do it not everyone sees life in the same way you do. if you had a pet dog for example and someone was trying to kill it you would do everything you could to save it because it is part of the family some people see whales in that way. How would you feel if you were just sitting at home with your family and someone shot a harpoon at you? Well that’s what it is like for them.
just imagine(I don’t no if you have kids) that you were sitting at home with your kids and someone captured you or killed you just think about what it would do to your kids but at least they would have other family or they would have the opinion of foster care or adoption. but those poor whales probably don’t have help like that they would be all alone and maybe too young to know how to survive on their own so I think in the future instead of being lost in your own little world and think its the saving the whales that is doing it think again because they need as much help as we do. And if you are so bovered about the community I hope you are out there doing something for it. Infact why don’t you go out there and do something now instead of wasting your time writing this web site moaning about there whale savers and do something for the community yours sincerely jess

Posted by: jess | May 13, 2005 9:31 AM

this is sick we can save ourslevs we have a voice of our own but the whales dont so if they cant speak to stick up for themslves who will? because it is clear u wont. i would and that is a fact u mybe should listen because it is your people that is causing the problem with the whales.

Posted by: stephanie | May 23, 2005 4:41 AM

If the vast majority of people who aren’t inclined towards saving the whales and such, were instead spending their free time trying to truly take care of their families, spouses & communities I might see validity to your argument…as it is this post just looks like liberal-baiting to me.

Whatever. You guys are right. We suck. Money is king. Whatever.

Posted by: Cary | June 21, 2005 2:53 PM

You can always catch a liberal if you use a whale as bait!

Posted by: Chris Abraham | June 21, 2005 4:44 PM

what a stupid article.

Posted by: Urb | June 21, 2005 9:05 PM

Your argument is astonishing to me. If you can honestly re-read it two times and not see the mile-wide holes in your reasoning you might need to take some time to think things over. Really.

Suffice to say that if this is the way you feel then I’m thinking that you have some learning to do about what a relationship is, what a marriage is and what raising a child is. Let’s set your gloss on activism == children raised by nannies aside. That is a deep issue with a whole spectra of situations that you are lumping into the most negative terminus.

You don’t raise a child by commiting yourself to voluntary servitude to him or her — nor do you ‘make a family’ by staying home and staring at them 24/7. Strong people with strong convictions raise children that share these traits. Strong marriages are not made by two people who spend all their time on each other. The best thing you can do for a child is to inspire her by setting an example of what a person can do in this world.

To hold the opinions that you express within the context of your personal mores is one thing, but to insult *activism* at large and to call people who give a damn and are doing somehting about it bad parents bullshit on stilts.

Posted by: anon | June 22, 2005 12:09 PM

You have the honor of missing my point entirely. I think you might be suffering from some sort of deep-seated guilt.

Posted by: Chris Abraham | June 22, 2005 1:29 PM

we as humans have a responsibilty to care for all living creatures of this earth as they all have a right to live and we are the ones who have destroyed their homes and species. So it is a responsibility of ours to try protect those species in danger because of the selfish act of others.

Posted by: Amy | July 9, 2005 1:47 AM

you obviously is idiot, u must be someone who cares only about urself. please open u eyes and see what people like u are doing to animals. IDIOT

Posted by: lin jia yi | July 11, 2005 8:13 AM

first of all Mr.Abraham does make a point, if your life isn’t well put together you shouldn’t particate in any other extra curricular activities. However,he fails to mention other activities people particate in that aren’t for the environment,anmails/endangered species,or other worthwhile cause that never the less can disrrupt homes,childhoods,& break families such as:homeless, needy, abuse, disabiled, & feed the children. but these aren’t mentioned, why . . .?

Posted by: integra | July 11, 2005 4:14 PM

Mr.Abraham I must say you speak of neglected children,& husbands. can you prove anything you say? And if you can tell us how many people are neglected because of their parents jobs, hobbies, and everyday life who aren’t rooted in some cause and are just living in a regular town, would you? There are problems in life & marriage due to nothing but their own faults, to not think so & live in a perfect world is denial.I suggest you open your eyes.

Posted by: integra | July 11, 2005 4:35 PM

Mr.Abraham,I respect other people’s opinions.You do not.That I refuse to respect,the lives of others & how the are lived are not yours to dictate to.You probley have a nice apt. in a upscale N.Y. neighborhood. Must be nice. You’ve had everything handed to you in a silver spoon. I don’t discriminate agianst the rich even though i am not. But for the poor who live in the wild or country nature is greatly loved,respected,&cared for.

Posted by: integra | July 11, 2005 4:49 PM

Mr.Abraham, you must watch your views & how you express them because you can offend many people,I was very offended by your statements and took it personally.It hurt,and I thought of all the others you’ve hurt by this. I suggest you apologize to the envirnmental community.I don’t apphreciate your calling Dr.King a “philanderer saint” and suggest you appologize to the black community as well.One day you may wake up and see how precious our world is.

Posted by: integra | July 11, 2005 5:01 PM

Mr.Abraham, this is my last post.I know your thinking “thank god”. But in short i will speak a quote of love ,honesty,& truth. ” The wonderous world under sea & land, in the big scheme of things one life may seem insugnifficant but it’s the greatest gift we know and we cannot let this world of light, love ,and beauty perish.”

Posted by: integra | July 11, 2005 5:09 PM

Mr Abraham, YOU ARE A CRAZY, CRAZY TOOL.

Posted by: Mad Anne Bonney | July 11, 2005 10:20 PM

Mr Abraham, YOU ARE A FREAKY FREAKY FREAK.

Posted by: Mad Anne Bonney | July 11, 2005 10:21 PM

My ex long ago abandoned our son for native american/worker/prison issues. The worst part is my 18-yr-old son who was dragged to the W.T.O. when he was 13(although it makes for a good story to say he’s been teargassed)-my son only sees the hypocrisy in the hardcore activists–thinking of them as angry and sad without any stability or truth.

Posted by: christina | July 12, 2005 7:19 PM

Your thoughts are disturbing because if you cannot enjoy the utter beauty we have in our world you are really disturbed. This page is sick and unfortunatly I visited this sight BLAH….SAVE THE WHALES

Posted by: Crystal | July 12, 2005 8:22 PM

Save the Earth, KILL YER SELF!!!!

Posted by: Martin Jones | July 26, 2005 4:17 PM

love animals keep them safe. would if u were a whale oh yeah lets just 4get u. u r nothing.GOD put thing here 4 a reson life is a leason. u will get whats coming.SAVE WHALES,CARE 4 THEM.

Posted by: ryah | July 26, 2005 8:59 PM

i have only 1 thing 2 say about ur article

“THE HELL”

Posted by: emman | July 27, 2005 5:32 AM

i have only 1 thing 2 say about ur artical

“THE HELL”

Posted by: emman | July 27, 2005 9:50 AM

Sorry I don’t think like you At ALL!!!

Posted by: Bobbie | August 1, 2005 3:48 AM

You are really twisted aren’t you. so you think we should focus on other things no we shouldn’t im 13 and i am trying to save the animals from people like you. Sick people who are self centered and don’t care for others. You need to get your head out of your *** and open your eyes. You wouldn’t like for someone to kill you without question and make lipstick or shampoo out of you would you??? Animals that live in the water are being killed for your convience so you can have shampoo. i don’t think so buddy. I bet you go out there and kill them so you can be satified. Well you know what we’ll stop people like you from hurting the animals we love. Without or with out your help. So when all the animals are gone we’ll start making shampoo and lipstick out of people like you so you know what it fells like to be them. So you know how much pain people put tem through. Woould you like a harpoon explosive shot into your brain and blow up and kill you then hit you repeatedly with an axe. So you need to get your head out of your***

Posted by: Cayla Rene | January 31, 2007 12:50 PM

You are really crule huh? dude you have to save the whales. they are killing the whales just so they can make soap to rub all over your body .well i am 13 and i am trying to save the whales . so people like yuo dont get to kill them. you are really wrong and dont care one bit about the animals under the sea. well you should.whales , orcas , sharks and other mammals die just to make new and stupid improved products. you are a *** and you need to care about the animals they have dont nothing to you and you want to kill them well dont. cause me and my friends cayla will beat your ***
you need to care. well would you want to die just to make lipstick and shampoo.

write back and i will tell you more abourt the animals you need to car eabout what they do for you there are only a hundred remaining in the world .soon there will be no more and then it will make you happy huh well you need to get your head out of the gutter . when all the animals are gone what are u gonna do we are gonna blame you!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: ALexa RAe | January 31, 2007 12:50 PM

you might think that whales dont matter but your wrong. ya you need to take care of your family but we also need to save are world. all of you that sont think that the whales arent important than you SUCK.

Posted by: chalsea | February 15, 2007 6:44 PM

I wrote Don’t Save the Whales almost two years ago and I am still getting the greatest comments from my loyal and vitriolic readers. Huzzah! Best line goes to Cayla, “Woould you like a harpoon explosive shot into your brain and blow up and kill you then hit you repeatedly with an axe?”

Cayla Rene wrote: “You are really twisted aren’t you. so you think we should focus on other things no we shouldn’t im 13 and i am trying to save the animals from people like you. Sick people who are self centered and don’t care for others. You need to get your head out of your *** and open your eyes. You wouldn’t like for someone to kill you without question and make lipstick or shampoo out of you would you??? Animals that live in the water are being killed for your convience so you can have shampoo. i don’t think so buddy. I bet you go out there and kill them so you can be satified. Well you know what we’ll stop people like you from hurting the animals we love. Without or with out your help. So when all the animals are gone we’ll start making shampoo and lipstick out of people like you so you know what it fells like to be them. So you know how much pain people put tem through. Woould you like a harpoon explosive shot into your brain and blow up and kill you then hit you repeatedly with an axe. So you need to get your head out of your***”

ALexa RAe wrote: “You are really crule huh? dude you have to save the whales. they are killing the whales just so they can make soap to rub all over your body .well i am 13 and i am trying to save the whales . so people like yuo dont get to kill them. you are really wrong and dont care one bit about the animals under the sea. well you should.whales , orcas , sharks and other mammals die just to make new and stupid improved products. you are a *** and you need to care about the animals they have dont nothing to you and you want to kill them well dont. cause me and my friends cayla will beat your ***
you need to care. well would you want to die just to make lipstick and shampoo.

write back and i will tell you more abourt the animals you need to car eabout what they do for you there are only a hundred remaining in the world .soon there will be no more and then it will make you happy huh well you need to get your head out of the gutter . when all the animals are gone what are u gonna do we are gonna blame you!!!!!!!!!”

Well, I never knew what an astute intellectual Adolf Hilter was because I just assumed he was a monster. Surely a monster, a madman, a devil, and also an evil genius,

“All propaganda must be presented in a popular form and must fix its intellectual level so as not to be above the heads of the least intellectual of those to whom it is directed . . .”

“. . . Thus its purely intellectual level will have to be that of the lowest mental common denominator among the public it is desired to reach. When there is question of bringing a whole nation within the circle of its influence, as happens in the case of war propaganda, then too much attention cannot be paid to the necessity of avoiding a high level, which presupposes a relatively high degree of intelligence among the public.”

Whenever I work for PR, I am reminded to keep the language in the message at a 7th grade level.

The entire chapter, VI, War Propganda, is posted below. Very current and very important in understanding the current war’s propaganda strategy and campaign.

Mein Kampf Chapter VI, War Propaganda, by Adolf Hitler

In watching the course of political events I was always struck by the active part which propaganda played in them. I saw that it was an instrument, which the Marxist Socialists knew how to handle in a masterly way and how to put it to practical uses. Thus I soon came to realize that the right use of propaganda was an art in itself and that this art was practically unknown to our bourgeois parties. The Christian-Socialist Party alone, especially in Lueger’s time, showed a certain efficiency in the employment of this instrument and owed much of their success to it.

It was during the War, however, that we had the best chance of estimating the tremendous results which could be obtained by a propagandist system properly carried out. Here again, unfortunately, everything was left to the other side, the work done on our side being worse than insignificant. It was the total failure of the whole German system of information – a failure which was perfectly obvious to every soldier – that urged me to consider the problem of propaganda in a comprehensive way. I had ample opportunity to learn a practical lesson in this matter; for unfortunately it was only too well taught us by the enemy. The lack on our side was exploited by the enemy in such an efficient manner that one could say it showed itself as a real work of genius. In that propaganda carried on by the enemy I found admirable sources of instruction. The lesson to be learned from this had unfortunately no attraction for the geniuses on our own side. They were simply above all such things, too clever to accept any teaching. Anyhow they did not honestly wish to learn anything.

Had we any propaganda at all? Alas, I can reply only in the negative. All that was undertaken in this direction was so utterly inadequate and misconceived from the very beginning that not only did it prove useless but at times harmful. In substance it was insufficient. Psychologically it was all wrong. Anybody who had carefully investigated the German propaganda must have formed that judgment of it. Our people did not seem to be clear even about the primary question itself: Whether propaganda is a means or an end?

Propaganda is a means and must, therefore, be judged in relation to the end it is intended to serve. It must be organized in such a way as to be capable of attaining its objective. And, as it is quite clear that the importance of the objective may vary from the standpoint of general necessity, the essential internal character of the propaganda must vary accordingly. The cause for which we fought during the War was the noblest and highest that man could strive for. We were fighting for the freedom and independence of our country, for the security of our future welfare and the honour of the nation. Despite all views to the contrary, this honour does actually exist, or rather it will have to exist; for a nation without honour will sooner or later lose its freedom and independence. This is in accordance with the ruling of a higher justice, for a generation of poltroons is not entitled to freedom. He who would be a slave cannot have honour; for such honour would soon become an object of general scorn.

Germany was waging war for its very existence. The purpose of its war propaganda should have been to strengthen the fighting spirit in that struggle and help it to victory.

But when nations are fighting for their existence on this earth, when the question of ‘to be or not to be’ has to be answered, then all humane and æsthetic considerations must be set aside; for these ideals do not exist of themselves somewhere in the air but are the product of man’s creative imagination and disappear when he disappears. Nature knows nothing of them. Moreover, they are characteristic of only a small number of nations, or rather of races, and their value depends on the measure in which they spring from the racial feeling of the latter. Humane and æsthetic ideals will disappear from the inhabited earth when those races disappear which are the creators and standard-bearers of them.

All such ideals are only of secondary importance when a nation is struggling for its existence. They must be prevented from entering into the struggle the moment they threaten to weaken the stamina of the nation that is waging war. That is always the only visible effect whereby their place in the struggle is to be judged.

In regard to the part played by humane feeling, Moltke stated that in time of war the essential thing is to get a decision as quickly as possible and that the most ruthless methods of fighting are at the same time the most humane. When people attempt to answer this reasoning by highfalutin talk about æsthetics, etc., only one answer can be given. It is that the vital questions involved in the struggle of a nation for its existence must not be subordinated to any æsthetic considerations. The yoke of slavery is and always will remain the most unpleasant experience that mankind can endure. Do the Schwabing 12) decadents look upon Germany’s lot to-day as ‘aesthetic’? Of course, one doesn’t discuss such a question with the Jews, because they are the modern inventors of this cultural perfume. Their very existence is an incarnate denial of the beauty of God’s image in His creation.

Since these ideas of what is beautiful and humane have no place in warfare, they are not to be used as standards of war propaganda.

During the War, propaganda was a means to an end. And this end was the struggle for existence of the German nation. Propaganda, therefore, should have been regarded from the standpoint of its utility for that purpose. The most cruel weapons were then the most humane, provided they helped towards a speedier decision; and only those methods were good and beautiful which helped towards securing the dignity and freedom of the nation. Such was the only possible attitude to adopt towards war propaganda in the life-or-death struggle.

If those in what are called positions of authority had realized this there would have been no uncertainty about the form and employment of war propaganda as a weapon; for it is nothing but a weapon, and indeed a most terrifying weapon in the hands of those who know how to use it.

The second question of decisive importance is this: To whom should propaganda be made to appeal? To the educated intellectual classes? Or to the less intellectual?

Propaganda must always address itself to the broad masses of the people. For the intellectual classes, or what are called the intellectual classes to-day, propaganda is not suited, but only scientific exposition. Propaganda has as little to do with science as an advertisement poster has to do with art, as far as concerns the form in which it presents its message. The art of the advertisement poster consists in the ability of the designer to attract the attention of the crowd through the form and colours he chooses. The advertisement poster announcing an exhibition of art has no other aim than to convince the public of the importance of the exhibition. The better it does that, the better is the art of the poster as such. Being meant accordingly to impress upon the public the meaning of the exposition, the poster can never take the place of the artistic objects displayed in the exposition hall. They are something entirely different. Therefore. those who wish to study the artistic display must study something that is quite different from the poster; indeed for that purpose a mere wandering through the exhibition galleries is of no use. The student of art must carefully and thoroughly study each exhibit in order slowly to form a judicious opinion about it.

The situation is the same in regard to what we understand by the word, propaganda. The purpose of propaganda is not the personal instruction of the individual, but rather to attract public attention to certain things, the importance of which can be brought home to the masses only by this means.

Here the art of propaganda consists in putting a matter so clearly and forcibly before the minds of the people as to create a general conviction regarding the reality of a certain fact, the necessity of certain things and the just character of something that is essential. But as this art is not an end in itself and because its purpose must be exactly that of the advertisement poster, to attract the attention of the masses and not by any means to dispense individual instructions to those who already have an educated opinion on things or who wish to form such an opinion on grounds of objective study – because that is not the purpose of propaganda, it must appeal to the feelings of the public rather than to their reasoning powers.

All propaganda must be presented in a popular form and must fix its intellectual level so as not to be above the heads of the least intellectual of those to whom it is directed. Thus its purely intellectual level will have to be that of the lowest mental common denominator among the public it is desired to reach. When there is question of bringing a whole nation within the circle of its influence, as happens in the case of war propaganda, then too much attention cannot be paid to the necessity of avoiding a high level, which presupposes a relatively high degree of intelligence among the public.

The more modest the scientific tenor of this propaganda and the more it is addressed exclusively to public sentiment, the more decisive will be its success. This is the best test of the value of a propaganda, and not the approbation of a small group of intellectuals or artistic people.

The art of propaganda consists precisely in being able to awaken the imagination of the public through an appeal to their feelings, in finding the appropriate psychological form that will arrest the attention and appeal to the hearts of the national masses. That this is not understood by those among us whose wits are supposed to have been sharpened to the highest pitch is only another proof of their vanity or mental inertia.

Once we have understood how necessary it is to concentrate the persuasive forces of propaganda on the broad masses of the people, the following lessons result therefrom:

That it is a mistake to organize the direct propaganda as if it were a manifold system of scientific instruction.

The receptive powers of the masses are very restricted, and their understanding is feeble. On the other hand, they quickly forget. Such being the case, all effective propaganda must be confined to a few bare essentials and those must be expressed as far as possible in stereotyped formulas. These slogans should be persistently repeated until the very last individual has come to grasp the idea that has been put forward. If this principle be forgotten and if an attempt be made to be abstract and general, the propaganda will turn out ineffective; for the public will not be able to digest or retain what is offered to them in this way. Therefore, the greater the scope of the message that has to be presented, the more necessary it is for the propaganda to discover that plan of action which is psychologically the most efficient.

It was, for example, a fundamental mistake to ridicule the worth of the enemy as the Austrian and German comic papers made a chief point of doing in their propaganda. The very principle here is a mistaken one; for, when they came face to face with the enemy, our soldiers had quite a different impression. Therefore, the mistake had disastrous results. Once the German soldier realised what a tough enemy he had to fight he felt that he had been deceived by the manufacturers of the information which had been given him. Therefore, instead of strengthening and stimulating his fighting spirit, this information had quite the contrary effect. Finally he lost heart.

On the other hand, British and American war propaganda was psychologically efficient. By picturing the Germans to their own people as Barbarians and Huns, they were preparing their soldiers for the horrors of war and safeguarding them against illusions. The most terrific weapons which those soldiers encountered in the field merely confirmed the information that they had already received and their belief in the truth of the assertions made by their respective governments was accordingly reinforced. Thus their rage and hatred against the infamous foe was increased. The terrible havoc caused by the German weapons of war was only another illustration of the Hunnish brutality of those barbarians; whereas on the side of the Entente no time was left the soldiers to meditate on the similar havoc which their own weapons were capable of. Thus the British soldier was never allowed to feel that the information which he received at home was untrue. Unfortunately the opposite was the case with the Germans, who finally wound up by rejecting everything from home as pure swindle and humbug. This result was made possible because at home they thought that the work of propaganda could be entrusted to the first ass that came along, braying of his own special talents, and they had no conception of the fact that propaganda demands the most skilled brains that can be found.

Thus the German war propaganda afforded us an incomparable example of how the work of ‘enlightenment’ should not be done and how such an example was the result of an entire failure to take any psychological considerations whatsoever into account.

From the enemy, however, a fund of valuable knowledge could be gained by those who kept their eyes open, whose powers of perception had not yet become sclerotic, and who during four-and-a-half years had to experience the perpetual flood of enemy propaganda.

The worst of all was that our people did not understand the very first condition which has to be fulfilled in every kind of propaganda; namely, a systematically one-sided attitude towards every problem that has to be dealt with. In this regard so many errors were committed, even from the very beginning of the war, that it was justifiable to doubt whether so much folly could be attributed solely to the stupidity of people in higher quarters.

What, for example, should we say of a poster which purported to advertise some new brand of soap by insisting on the excellent qualities of the competitive brands? We should naturally shake our heads. And it ought to be just the same in a similar kind of political advertisement. The aim of propaganda is not to try to pass judgment on conflicting rights, giving each its due, but exclusively to emphasize the right which we are asserting. Propaganda must not investigate the truth objectively and, in so far as it is favourable to the other side, present it according to the theoretical rules of justice; yet it must present only that aspect of the truth which is favourable to its own side.

It was a fundamental mistake to discuss the question of who was responsible for the outbreak of the war and declare that the sole responsibility could not be attributed to Germany. The sole responsibility should have been laid on the shoulders of the enemy, without any discussion whatsoever.

And what was the consequence of these half-measures? The broad masses of the people are not made up of diplomats or professors of public jurisprudence nor simply of persons who are able to form reasoned judgment in given cases, but a vacillating crowd of human children who are constantly wavering between one idea and another. As soon as our own propaganda made the slightest suggestion that the enemy had a certain amount of justice on his side, then we laid down the basis on which the justice of our own cause could be questioned. The masses are not in a position to discern where the enemy’s fault ends and where our own begins. In such a case they become hesitant and distrustful, especially when the enemy does not make the same mistake but heaps all the blame on his adversary. Could there be any clearer proof of this than the fact that finally our own people believed what was said by the enemy’s propaganda, which was uniform and consistent in its assertions, rather than what our own propaganda said? And that, of course, was increased by the mania for objectivity which addicts our people. Everybody began to be careful about doing an injustice to the enemy, even at the cost of seriously injuring, and even ruining his own people and State.

Naturally the masses were not conscious of the fact that those in authority had failed to study the subject from this angle.

The great majority of a nation is so feminine in its character and outlook that its thought and conduct are ruled by sentiment rather than by sober reasoning. This sentiment, however, is not complex, but simple and consistent. It is not highly differentiated, but has only the negative and positive notions of love and hatred, right and wrong, truth and falsehood. Its notions are never partly this and partly that. English propaganda especially understood this in a marvellous way and put what they understood into practice. They allowed no half-measures which might have given rise to some doubt.

Proof of how brilliantly they understood that the feeling of the masses is something primitive was shown in their policy of publishing tales of horror and outrages which fitted in with the real horrors of the time, thereby cleverly and ruthlessly preparing the ground for moral solidarity at the front, even in times of great defeats. Further, the way in which they pilloried the German enemy as solely responsible for the war – which was a brutal and absolute falsehood – and the way in which they proclaimed his guilt was excellently calculated to reach the masses, realizing that these are always extremist in their feelings. And thus it was that this atrocious lie was positively believed.

The effectiveness of this kind of propaganda is well illustrated by the fact that after four-and-a-half years, not only was the enemy still carrying on his propagandist work, but it was already undermining the stamina of our people at home.

That our propaganda did not achieve similar results is not to be wondered at, because it had the germs of inefficiency lodged in its very being by reason of its ambiguity. And because of the very nature of its content one could not expect it to make the necessary impression on the masses. Only our feckless ‘statesmen’ could have imagined that on pacifists slops of such a kind the enthusiasm could be nourished which is necessary to enkindle that spirit which leads men to die for their country.

And so this product of ours was not only worthless but detrimental.

No matter what an amount of talent employed in the organization of propaganda, it will have no result if due account is not taken of these fundamental principles. Propaganda must be limited to a few simple themes and these must be represented again and again. Here, as in innumerable other cases, perseverance is the first and most important condition of success.

Particularly in the field of propaganda, placid æsthetes and blase intellectuals should never be allowed to take the lead. The former would readily transform the impressive character of real propaganda into something suitable only for literary tea parties. As to the second class of people, one must always beware of this pest; for, in consequence of their insensibility to normal impressions, they are constantly seeking new excitements.

Such people grow sick and tired of everything. They always long for change and will always be incapable of putting themselves in the position of picturing the wants of their less callous fellow-creatures in their immediate neighbourhood, let alone trying to understand them. The blase intellectuals are always the first to criticize propaganda, or rather its message, because this appears to them to be outmoded and trivial. They are always looking for something new, always yearning for change; and thus they become the mortal enemies of every effort that may be made to influence the masses in an effective way. The moment the organization and message of a propagandist movement begins to be orientated according to their tastes it becomes incoherent and scattered.

It is not the purpose of propaganda to create a series of alterations in sentiment with a view to pleasing these blase gentry. Its chief function is to convince the masses, whose slowness of understanding needs to be given time in order that they may absorb information; and only constant repetition will finally succeed in imprinting an idea on the memory of the crowd.

Every change that is made in the subject of a propagandist message must always emphasize the same conclusion. The leading slogan must of course be illustrated in many ways and from several angles, but in the end one must always return to the assertion of the same formula. In this way alone can propaganda be consistent and dynamic in its effects.

Only by following these general lines and sticking to them steadfastly, with uniform and concise emphasis, can final success be reached. Then one will be rewarded by the surprising and almost incredible results that such a persistent policy secures.

The success of any advertisement, whether of a business or political nature, depends on the consistency and perseverance with which it is employed.

In this respect also the propaganda organized by our enemies set us an excellent example. It confined itself to a few themes, which were meant exclusively for mass consumption, and it repeated these themes with untiring perseverance. Once these fundamental themes and the manner of placing them before the world were recognized as effective, they adhered to them without the slightest alteration for the whole duration of the War. At first all of it appeared to be idiotic in its impudent assertiveness. Later on it was looked upon as disturbing, but finally it was believed.

But in England they came to understand something further: namely, that the possibility of success in the use of this spiritual weapon consists in the mass employment of it, and that when employed in this way it brings full returns for the large expenses incurred.

In England propaganda was regarded as a weapon of the first order, whereas with us it represented the last hope of a livelihood for our unemployed politicians and a snug job for shirkers of the modest hero type.

Taken all in all, its results were negative.

“Here I am, brain the size of a planet, and they ask me to take you to the bridge. Call that job satisfaction, ’cause I don’t.”