Your reality is only partially manufactured.

Overclockin' your noggin. Only on Sumdays.

There's a lot more to the story and off-the-wall rhetoric than at first you might suspect.

It's "just" a meme... Or is it?

If you don't know, you have no idea what you're missing, and there is only one way to find out.

That said; don't be silly. +he 777 Agend^ does not (Really?) exist. Any references are purely coincidental and most likely just a figment of your imagination. 0r not.

For the time being I have been using Facebook as my writing platform of choice far, far, far (x 100,000+pictures and real-time updating and now with New! "Reality Sync") above this blog, so if you're brave and/or bored/curious, be my guest by clicking the badge to the wRight.

You never know what kind of gems you might find hidden in the rough or just how valuable they could potentially be to you and your quality of existence within this lifetime on this planet. Hey, if it's good enough for the Best of the Best, then why would you think it might not be good enough to be of remote interest to you?


Interesting is an understatement.

Once you pay attention long enough to figure out what's really going on it will blow your mind.

In a Good way.

That would be the point.

Merry +++mas.

- A! -

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Subjective and Relative Randomness

Fear not for I plan to start every radio show apologizing for the previous radio show.

In the meantime, yes, I do a lot of writing, but I simply haven't gotten into the routine of posting it as I used to. In time perhaps.

Is it funny? Is it important? Am I important? Are my ideas important?

Hell if I know.

I can't even get my mom to read my blog. No, seriously.

For those of you who don't know, I've made influencing the media a hobby of mine like no other over the last few years, but yet my mom still doesn't believe me nor remotely care it seems. So, to be a smartass, I do things like say "Hey mom, is there any one question you would like to ask the president/'powers that be'?"

Apparently she does have questions like: "Why, with oil prices low, is the government not stepping in and filling the Strategic Oil Reserves in case of future shortages (which usually happen when prices are high)?"

Within a few minutes the question is being asked to Ron Paul live courtesy of the kids at FNC...and apparently making Obama's Energy Secretary just a little more focused...but does she even care?

Possibly not, possibly so...just not enough to write back or subscribe to my blog. (facepalm)

Oh well, this is nothing more than an example of the same "ultimate cynical opposition" I've been fighting my entire life. However, it does have a bright side in that it makes everything seem almost too easy when things turn out to not be nearly as impossible as I was told there were. Hmmm...

Back to the lighter side of life...

Below is my daily "must see TV" lineup. For someone who typically doesn't go out of the way to watch anything, inclusion on this list means a lot. BTW...all other time slots are still open, so humor me with suggestions. And yes...I'll be working out again (in time to be pretty for summer) soon enough.

7-8 a.m. Get ready for work while randomly flipping between the Daily Show/Colbert Report rebroadcast of the night before, Good Day LA, and America's Newsroom on FNC. I flip to other random news channels, but those listed above are my defaults.

8 a.m. - 6 p.m. Working/commuting. Boo!!! I have recently started to tune into the FNC's Strategery Room online and Live in the background at work, as well as poking my nose around for interesting content once in awhile.

6 p.m. - 9-10 p.m. M-W = school. I'll give it a 6 for the time being.

9 p.m. onward home to reset. On Thursdays I go out of the way to watch InfoMania on current TV, but usually it's just random channel flipping from when I get home until 10:30 when the Daily Show starts.

On other "normal" nights I just make sure to get around to watching Comedy Central by 10:30 through the Colbert Report, then switch over to catch the second half of Special Report on FNC. If I'm up past midnight I watch RedEye on Fox, and in between all this I hang out around the History Channel, National Geographic, etc.

At some point it will probably occur to me to watch the more mainstream shows on TV and late night talkshow hosts, but at the moment I'm a product of my environment--an environment that has me chasing my highly amusing and occasionally fascinating tail at lighting speed.

Now you know what I see versus what I don't see on a regular basis and where my "subjective and relative" opinions/commentaries come from accordingly...lest anyone care or it make a difference in how the world spins.

And to think I stopped watching TV completely for about 5 years of my life prior to this and that I'm contemplating cutting myself off from TV again because it is causing me to be way too focused on "TV world" instead of the real world. Damnit Hollywood...sometimes you work too well.




P.S. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there. ;)

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Hi, I'm Barry for ShamWow...

(copy of my most recent Facebook update)

Allen Simpson at 10:11am February 25
After watching Obama's speech last night, and all the repeated standing ovations (on cue/script?), I still think Barry and the kids could sell the f*ck outta some ShamWows.

And it's even funnier that after I posted that comment via my cell phone last night, the thing immediately reset. WTF? lol

Still funny though.

(insert standing ovation)


Monday, February 23, 2009

The Saga Continues...

For those of you who have been keeping tabs on me or the weekly radio show, you may have noticed that my normal sidekick "Super Roger" has thus far been replaced by Niya (a.k.a."Goldilocks") this semester. The official reason I give on my radio show is that "he's on a slow boat to Panama".

Because he is.

Don't ask me. As previously hypothesized, I don't think he is actually running drugs for the CIA because obviously the operation would be much more sophisticated and using, say, the Coast Guard cutter instead of the almost seaworthy sailboat. But, either way, here's the journey of sailing to Panama in his own words lest anyone care.

Judging by the sound of it, the boy seems hell bent on making the news.


Happy Monday!!!

I've really got to get a less computer-centric life.



("Episode 6", by Super Roger)

Greetings from Nicaragua,

I have an entertaining story for you, if you have the time--

When we left Acapulco, the next stop to check out of Mexico was Huatalco. There, I was intrigued at the Port Capitan's verrrry thoroughly checking our papers and interrogating us as to when and where, and for how long, so after he was a bit more confident in our intentions, I asked him if he had made any big scores recently. He told me that a few weeks back, a small submarine had been caught loaded to the gills with cocaine just outside of Mexico's be continued...

We got fuel and food and took off for the Gulf of Tehuantepec. Our Commodore (boat owner) had heard horror stories of the erratic winds, and was a bit timid of the crossing. Our Captain wanted to go to sea and tack back in under sail, but the Commodore would hear none of it and insisted that we beat right across as quickly as possible -- so beat we did. 25 knots of wind and crashing water right over the bow with about an 8 knot head current rendered us about 1.5 - 2 knots speed over ground. After the shift change of the third day, Captain Moyer and I were topside reading, when the little Yanmar engine spitted, then sputtered, then coughed and went to sleep. We looked at each other, then tilted our heads the way puppies do, and glanced at the tachometer, which is located at the bottom of the cockpit side combing. Yep, zero RPM. Moyer turned the ignition off to silence the engine alarm.

A few seconds later, the Commodore bounced up through the companionway and said, "What's going on?" Moyer, sitting crouched with his elbows on his knees, looked over his book said, "I think we're almost there." The Commodore looked around, seeing nothing but breaking waves on all corners and said, "Why did you stop the engine?"

Moyer, quoting Captain Ron said, "We had almost enough fuel to get us there, and we're out of fuel." The Commodore didn't find the humor -- but I did!

When Alan (Commodore) finally gained composure and climbed up topside, we had already emptied our spare jerry cans into the diesel tank and Moyer had met him going down to prime the tiny engine. The GPS showed the nearest fuel about 65 n miles away, in Guatemala, or more importantly, 14 hours away under current conditions. We had enough fuel for about 8-10 hours of motoring. Luckily, about 7 hours later the wind turned in our favor (barely) and we were able to limp into Guatemala at about 3 knots, under sail. We heaved to at about 3AM, 1.5 n miles from the entrance to the channel and waited until sunrise to enter the country.

After motoring the rest of the way through the anchorage to the fuel dock, we took on 48.5 gallons of fuel in a 50 gallon tank -- that is, after we waited for about 6 hours for the electric company to restore power to the fuel dock, and make the pump work again.

Meanwhile, we watched a US Coast Guard Cutter dock, and about 3 hours later, Liberty Call. We were on our way to the little cantina for food as they were disembarking. I got into a conversation with one of the senior crewmen aboard and he urged us to call upon his ship if we found ourselves in need of fuel, water or even food. They were leaving in 3 days, also headed for Panama. I asked him about the submarine from a few weeks ago, and first he was like, "What submarine?" I just kept looking at him and grinning. He said, "Who told you about that?"

Then he gave me the skinny. An aircraft spotted a mini-submersible and radioed the Chase, his ship. They intercepted the 40 foot vessel and arrested four Columbia crew, and 18,000 pounds of 100% blow. Then he showed me all of the kills on the side of their ship, which looked like a WWII Ace's fighter plane. 20-something pot leafs, 7 snowflakes (cocaine) 3 icons that are hard to describe for heroine and one Jolly Roger, for a pirate ship.

Anyway, blah, blah, blah, now I'm in Nicaragua getting ready to see a bit of the village near the Marina Puesta del Sol.

I don't have any good pictures yet, but I'll get some to you soon. Meanwhile, you can see these two stupid ones. During the beating of the Tehuantepek, the boat was creaking and banging and a halliard was slapping the mast and the engine was yelling, so I donned earplugs to get a bit of sleep. When I wouldn't respond to my 2AM wake-up call for watch, Moyer thought it would be funny to snap a picture of me "Sleeping through my watch."

After a day of ridicule, the next night I decided to wake him up for his 4 AM watch James Bond style by lowering the furled jib's sheet down through his berth hatch and beat him about the chest with a coiled up note that read simply, ""relieve the watch..."

See ya--


Friday, February 20, 2009

The (relative) Size of the Universe Debate (again)

(In response to a blog posting by my Facebook rocket-scientist friend Doug...the address of which is :) For the record, my ADD (my default scapegoat) prevented me from reading the entire thing, but since I'm still stuck on interjecting philosophy and "the human perception of space" into the grand scheme of things, I figure my comments are still relatively relevant to the debate I didn't fully read. lol


The ants still cannot figure out how big the Earth is and are now arguing about which theory is right? Hell, might as well bring "God" back into the equation while we're at it. lol

Personally, I would like to suggest an "agnostic" approach to scientific theories of the universe. Since the bottom line is we simply don't know--because we don't have the technological capability and possibly the intellectual capacity to understand such concepts--perhaps everyone involved should first admit that they are little more than a relatively advanced, yet still clueless monkey before picking sides in any such ultimate argument.

What if the universe is the equivalent of a super-advanced game of Second Life--where the characters are designed to be self-evolving and self-programmed instead of pre-built and directly controlled by a "higher power"?

What if the concept of an all-knowing force exists, but is completely passive and simply monitors the progress of life as it progressively designs itself?

How many Software Engineers does it take to change a light bulb?

None. It's a hardware problem.

What if space ultimately turns out to be the same type of comical scenario except reversed? To be honest, I don't trust the Big Bang theory because it defies what I perceive to be logical in the same way the Bible suddenly just begins all at once. When it comes to things as epic as the concept of space and the size and function of the universe, I don't trust the capability of man's technology to do anything but enhance perception of things. Relatively thinking, it wasn't all that long ago the Earth was flat for Christ's sake, so, all things considered, there is a chance all these theories are completely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things because we are simply just not advanced enough to remotely understand what we are dealing with yet.

As we understand it, nothing can go on forever, and so until we can find a provable explanation of that concept, I believe we simply aren't nearly as advanced as we often think we are.

It never hurts to try though, and space exploration is good in that sense, although I think philosophy (the "software" part of the equation) may one day become part of our/the quest to conquer space and time.

Ant-brain over-heating...I'm going to go dunk it in some TMZ nonsense to cool off. lol

Hi Doug!

Thursday, February 19, 2009

So much for taking over the world.

Worth reading.

Doh! So, ummm...what's plan C then?



Bonus --> Tiger hug on page 2.

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

...and I barely made it through college on Cliff Notes...

(an email I just wrote to The Strategy Room {or as I like to call it-"The Strategery Room"}, the online-broadcast, behind-the-scenes Fox News talkshow)

As Congressman Paul is pointing out, there needs to be a much different approach.

How can you understand something unless you know something about it (much less FIRST HAND)?

Being the smartassed "outside the box" thinker that I am, I would have snuck (I guess that isn't technically a word) in a provision allocating at least $500,000 to have a Ferrari airdropped at random under the guise of "research". Wait, I take that back--I wouldn't be that bold--I would simply have them airdrop an American-built, electric powered Tesla convertible instead.

The point of this exercise would of course not be that such an investment is ("completely") necessary, but if such a thing succeeded (it might be really easy with pretty words and last-minute "emergency" deadlines that prevented them from being read in the first place), it would bring light to where THE TRUE PROBLEMS in this country are emanating from --> special interest when certain people are given the power to hand other people's money to others without having any concept of just how precious it is to the well-being of those in "less-insulated" circumstance.

If Ron Paul did something like that "just as a joke", it might illustrate things and gain more attention than all the preaching he's been doing. If he took off the "good guy" mask and put on the smartassed bad guy one just to make a point...well, it is certainly INFINITELY more forgivable and potentially beneficial to the future of the country than the previous bank bailout that was pushed through by BOTH Obama and McCain. To think that people who live and act like Paris Hilton are getting the money (courtesy of the government) from people that live and act like me is frustrating, and all the people need is a lightning rod at this point.

This is probably why I won't be able to run for Congress until "the new Empire" begins...whatever the heck that means.

Hi Judge! Hi Mr. Paul! Hi kids!

BTW...It's pretty funny that you designate the "legs" chair...but yet it makes perfect sense. Seeing the way things work behind the scenes is what makes the Strategry Room so great. What's most amusing about it is--it reminds me of the way the current political system works in a way.




Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Parallel thinking...GRRR...WTF?!!!


No, seriously, GRRR...

Notice how I specifically spell GRRR with 1 G and 3 R's. Why? Because it references my somewhat rare personality and was developed as part of my "rap" rhetoric back in the day, but we'll get to that in a minute.

I am upset at the moment.

Why? Because last night when I was minding my own business perusing Facebook to pass the time as usual, a posting popped up from some random "internet friend" I had accepted over the weekend under the moniker "No Left Turn". It's not that I completely agree with that ideology or anything at this point, but even the big boys in the spotlight seem to be allowing anyone interested to befriend them via Facebook, so I just accept random friend requests because it's always interesting to see different people's viewpoints as expressed in their postings.

In this specific instance, the posting was about some article about Darwin written by what I would describe as an "aspiring Republican pundit", S.E. Cupp. I couldn't get into the article enough more than to read a few paragraphs, because it seemed a little--well, for lack of a better word--biased. Anywho, that is pretty much irrelevant. The crux of the story is that accompanying the article was a picture of S.E. Cupp, who happened to be a relatively attractive girl...and at the same point that article popped up, S.E. Cupp herself popped up in the "People You May Know" sidebar of my Facebook page.

Hmmm...interesting. Well, being the curious type, I Googled S.E. Cupp to get some background info on the author. Here was the top hit:
Red S.E. Cupp · Women's Issues
Red S.E. Cupp is the home of S.E. Cupp, co-author of "Why You're Wrong About the .... ... - 156k - Cached - Similar pages -

Naturally, what caught my eye was the "tygrrrrexpress.comblah, blah, blah" part. Until this point I thought my creative radio last name coined out of the blue, on the spot in my radio class was completely unique. So, at first glance, I thought--oh, how cute, perhaps my reputation as a writer/blogger isn't quite as esoteric as I thought...assuming the "tygrrr" reference was somehow related to me and my last few years spent bombarding the media and later whatever mystery audience I had with pretty intense commentaries and radical proposed solutions based on my personal life experience. The link takes you to her webpage, which I quickly browsed and then went to sleep with the impression that she was intelligent, yet not exactly what I would call and independent thinker--having a viewpoint that seems to come from a sheltered and thereby relatively one-sided, "red" environment.

No worries, I came from a similar environment myself--so I can relate and understand where she is coming from even if I don't necessarily agree with her on all points after seeing what I have seen. I went to bed thinking that somehow my reputation preceded me, but that I would get around to exploring the details in the morning.

Fast forward to this morning when I went through the usual motions and then picked up where I left off last night--or so I thought.

Upon closer inspection, it appears "The Tygrrrr Express" (with 4 R's) has nothing to do with me, and is some secretive right wing writer whose viewpoints are what unfortunately could give Republicans that "selfish, self-centered, self-righteous asshole" label from an outside perspective. Doh!

Damn, I mean, I know I have been told that I am perceived as cocky at first, and I know I damn sure talk about myself a lot these days (it's one thing I know the most about that seems to be giving me the most problems lately--lol)...but I am far more compassionate towards others and willing to openly discuss any and all viewpoints.

This "Tygrrrr Express" blog I discovered comes across as far more abrasive and "toeing the Republican line" at first glance.


This is NOT good. Here I pride myself on flooding the world and media stream with my myraid of original ideas complete with esoteric symbolism and highly layered, often complex hidden meanings from which they are derived, and by pure coincidence some other guy has been using an almost identical spelling of the name Tygrrr...the only difference being 1 R? What are the fucking odds of that?


Well, this is damn sure an interesting scenario. Apparently the guy's name is Eric and he has no readily posted contact info, so I can't even send him a WTF email, but his blog has been in existence since March of 2007, so there apparently may be a very real chance his and mine are two completely separate entities that have had no knowledge of each other's existence. I sure as hell have never heard of this guy until last night, and to be honest, am quite disappointed that one of the personal brands I have been developing could so easily be mistaken for this guy. Oh well. That's the way the cookie crumbles. At least it turns out he is using 4 R's not 3, and my entire name and that "tiger" aspect of the imagery comes from a totally different place dating back to the 7th grade for me, and has been in use for years in my writings.

I highly doubt any of this information is relevant enough that anyone cares to have read this far, but just in case, for the sake of future trademark protection, allow me to explain where my "Allyn Tygrrr" radio name comes from. As it mentions in the first line of the description, this blog is just my scratchpad of life, so forgive me if this content is written only for my own venting and peace of mind even if it is of no interest to anyone reading it.

Firstly, when given that "If you were an animal, what animal would you be?" question back in junior high, I thought about it for a moment, and then replied "a white tiger". Why? A white tiger is beautiful, strong, perceived as passive (but not when necessary), "master of his environment", and, most of all, rare. That was it. No more, no less that I can recall.

Anywho, fast forward to decades later where, as an adult, Allen has decided he is a creative genius and is using his little ant brain to create epic, surreal storylines to try and affect the world for the better. The "tiger" theme has come up throughout my campaign as my chosen political animal (compared to donkeys and elephants, it is naturally one that gets listened to), and when combined with my natural childlike take on things, was developed into a puppet character that I won't get into the details of describing further since now I am begining to fear true, unacknowledged and uncompensated theft of my real "gem" ideas.

I always like to think that I have such a seemingly limitless ability to create new ideas that I need not fear having a few taken here and there or sharing them openly because I have a thousands more saved up and thousands more where those came from, but now this has got me concerned about outside forces "diluting" my image and potential branding. Nonetheless, if nothing else, there is ample evidence of my creative ideas and their original genesis throughout my story, so I'm not afraid of anyone actually trying to steal credit for what I've created.

Which brings us to the other part of the equation. "I'm rated triple R bitch."

Do not take offense, for that was just part of my "rap persona" and lyrics I wrote but never finished a few years back. In trying to truthfully describe myself by drawing clear lines as to what I stand for and what I do not stand for in life in the context of "aggressive" rap lyrics, the "triple R analogy" was my answer to XXX in describing my feelings on such things. God knows I've seen a lot more of the Hollywood fast lane than most people, but my true persona is much more respectful when it comes to sex and passion then to pay for it or take instruction from whores on film above my own adventurous, fun-loving, and curious intellect. Since XXX represents porn which equates to having disrespectful by default sexual interaction with others, I rated myself as RRR instead. As a blessed human being I obviously have the proven ability to perform "like a porn star", but yet I am disgusted by people who do porn because they do not have respect in our society, and have willingly traded in long term-happiness and respect for short-term pleasure, something that I completely disagree with, and that is a bigger turn-off than it is a turn-on.

Sue me.

Yet in the "rap game" one is required to put forth a strong image of just what they are capable of, and my approach is to entertain and improve society with my words and actions not destroy it like so many others, so RRR was a clever way of putting that "I am a badass" but "I limit who gets to experience that" together in a creative way. It also had hints of inspiration from my crotch rocket (which I was using as an analogy in one of the songs on the subject) which happend to be a CBR900RR at the time--RR denoting "very cool and fun" in my mind.

Since another side of my apparently overly-creative personality could be considered "G" rated in its ability to always give people and things close to me innocent and humorous animal-like pet names and characteristics (probably dating from my Sesame Street childhood, I relate really well with Disney films too) , the G was a perfect prefix. My personality basically covers the full spectrum, and GRRR was a clever way of presenting that.

When it came to creating a "professional" radio name to use on the air, I was put on the spot (I had the time it took to fill out the sheet and turn it in in class), and so I naturally combined things that were close to my mind at that point in time. The alternate spelling of Allen as Allyn and Tiger as Tygrrr simply was another creative attempt pointing out how things that sound the same can be different, and the audience would never no the difference. In doing so I was tongue-in-cheek poking fun at people who use the word "luv" interchangeably with the world "love", and that is one of the most basic covers I have noticed people using for a deceitful nature here in the concrete jungle of Los Angeles.

So, in summary, I am my own man, please do not confuse my writings or opinions with any similarly-named nonsense.

(As if you read this far...)

That is all.

As you were.




Friday, February 13, 2009

This explains A LOT...

This is a (relatively) long one, and we all know it's extremely difficult for my ADD-enhanced brain to pay attention to anything that isn't extremely fascinating for long, so, in theory, that means this is relatively compelling. With all my semi-secret plots and theories about how to change and save the world as well as my own very interesting life's story, many people are somewhat confused if not intrigued by my rare combination of personality traits and behavior, but I think this article makes things a little easier to understand.

Happy Friday the 13th! and/or early Valentine's Day!!! :)



The Creative Personality

Creative individuals are remarkable for their ability to adapt to almost any situation and to make do with whatever is at hand to reach their goals.

By: Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi

Of all human activities, creativity comes closest to providing the fulfillment we all hope to get in our lives. Call it full-blast living.

Creativity is a central source of meaning in our lives. Most of the things that are interesting, important, and human are the result of creativity. What makes us different from apes—our language, values, artistic expression, scientific understanding, and technology—is the result of individual ingenuity that was recognized, rewarded, and transmitted through learning.

When we're creative, we feel we are living more fully than during the rest of life. The excitement of the artist at the easel or the scientist in the lab comes close to the ideal fulfillment we all hope to get from life, and so rarely do. Perhaps only sex, sports, music, and religious ecstasy—even when these experiences remain fleeting and leave no trace—provide a profound sense of being part of an entity greater than ourselves. But creativity also leaves an outcome that adds to the richness and complexity of the future.

I have devoted 30 years of research to how creative people live and work, to make more understandable the mysterious process by which they come up with new ideas and new things. Creative individuals are remarkable for their ability to adapt to almost any situation and to make do with whatever is at hand to reach their goals. If I had to express in one word what makes their personalities different from others, it's complexity. They show tendencies of thought and action that in most people are segregated. They contain contradictory extremes; instead of being an "individual," each of them is a "multitude."

Here are the 10 antithetical traits often present in creative people that are integrated with each other in a dialectical tension.

1. Creative people have a great deal of physical energy, but they're also often quiet and at rest. They work long hours, with great concentration, while projecting an aura of freshness and enthusiasm. This suggests a superior physical endowment, a genetic advantage. Yet it is surprising how often individuals who in their seventies and eighties exude energy and health remember childhoods plagued by illness. It seems that their energy is internally generated, due more to their focused minds than to the superiority of their genes.

This does not mean that creative people are hyperactive, always "on." In fact, they rest often and sleep a lot. The important thing is that they control their energy; it's not ruled by the calendar, the dock, an external schedule. When necessary, they can focus it like a laser beam; when not, creative types immediately recharge their batteries. They consider the rhythm of activity followed by idleness or reflection very important for the success of their work. This is not a bio-rhythm inherited with their genes; it was learned by trial and error as a strategy for achieving their goals.

One manifestation of energy is sexuality. Creative people are paradoxical in this respect also. They seem to have quite a strong dose of eros, or generalized libidinal energy, which some express directly into sexuality. At the same time, a certain spartan celibacy is also a part of their makeup; continence tends to accompany superior achievement. Without eros, it would be difficult to take life on with vigor; without restraint, the energy could easily dissipate.

2. Creative people tend to be smart yet naive at the same time. How smart they actually are is open to question. It is probably true that what psychologists call the "g factor," meaning a core of general intelligence, is high among people who make important creative contributions.

The earliest longitudinal study of superior mental abilities, initiated at Stanford University by the psychologist Lewis Terman in 1921, shows rather conclusively that children with very high IQs do well in life, but after a certain point IQ does not seem to be correlated any longer with superior performance in real life. Later studies suggest that the cutoff point is around 120; it might be difficult to do creative work with a lower IQ, but an IQ beyond 120 does not necessarily imply higher creativity.

Another way of expressing this dialectic is the contrasting poles of wisdom and childishness. As Howard Gardner remarked in his study of the major creative geniuses of this century, a certain immaturity, both emotional and mental, can go hand in hand with deepest insights. Mozart comes immediately to mind.

Furthermore, people who bring about an acceptable novelty in a domain seem able to use well two opposite ways of thinking: the convergent and the divergent. Convergent thinking is measured by IQ tests, and it involves solving well-defined, rational problems that have one correct answer. Divergent thinking leads to no agreed-upon solution. It involves fluency, or the ability to generate a great quantity of ideas; flexibility, or the ability to switch from one perspective to another; and originality in picking unusual associations of ideas. These are the dimensions of thinking that most creativity tests measure and that most workshops try to enhance.

Yet there remains the nagging suspicion that at the highest levels of creative achievement the generation of novelty is not the main issue. People often claimed to have had only two or three good ideas in their entire career, but each idea was so generative that it kept them busy for a lifetime of testing, filling out, elaborating, and applying.

Divergent thinking is not much use without the ability to tell a good idea from a bad one, and this selectivity involves convergent thinking.

3. Creative people combine playfulness and discipline, or responsibility and irresponsibility. There is no question that a playfully light attitude is typical of creative individuals. But this playfulness doesn't go very far without its antithesis, a quality of doggedness, endurance, perseverance.

Nina Holton, whose playfully wild germs of ideas are the genesis of her sculpture, is very firm about the importance of hard work: "Tell anybody you're a sculptor and they'll say, 'Oh, how exciting, how wonderful.' And I tend to say, 'What's so wonderful?' It's like being a mason, or a carpenter, half the time. But they don't wish to hear that because they really only imagine the first part, the exciting part. But, as Khrushchev once said, that doesn't fry pancakes, you see. That germ of an idea does not make a sculpture which stands up. It just sits there. So the next stage is the hard work. Can you really translate it into a piece of sculpture?"

Jacob Rabinow, an electrical engineer, uses an interesting mental technique to slow himself down when work on an invention requires more endurance than intuition: "When I have a job that takes a lot of effort, slowly, I pretend I'm in jail. If I'm in jail, time is of no consequence. In other words, if it takes a week to cut this, it'll take a week. What else have I got to do? I'm going to be here for twenty years. See? This is a kind of mental trick. Otherwise you say, 'My God, it's not working,' and then you make mistakes. My way, you say time is of absolutely no consequence."

Despite the carefree air that many creative people affect, most of them work late into the night and persist when less driven individuals would not. Vasari wrote in 1550 that when Renaissance painter Paolo Uccello was working out the laws of visual perspective, he would walk back and forth all night, muttering to himself: "What a beautiful thing is this perspective!" while his wife called him back to bed with no success.

4. Creative people alternate between imagination and fantasy, and a rooted sense of reality. Great art and great science involve a leap of imagination into a world that is different from the present. The rest of society often views these new ideas as fantasies without relevance to current reality. And they are right. But the whole point of art and science is to go beyond what we now consider real and create a new reality. At the same time, this "escape" is not into a never-never land. What makes a novel idea creative is that once we see it, sooner or later we recognize that, strange as it is, it is true.

Most of us assume that artists—musicians, writers, poets, painters—are strong on the fantasy side, whereas scientists, politicians, and businesspeople are realists. This may be true in terms of day-to-day routine activities. But when a person begins to work creatively, all bets are off.

5. Creative people tend to be both extroverted and introverted. We're usually one or the other, either preferring to be in the thick of crowds or sitting on the sidelines and observing the passing show. In fact, in psychological research, extroversion and introversion are considered the most stable personality traits that differentiate people from each other and that can be reliably measured. Creative individuals, on the other hand, seem to exhibit both traits simultaneously.

6. Creative people are humble and proud at the same time. It is remarkable to meet a famous person who you expect to be arrogant or supercilious, only to encounter self-deprecation and shyness instead. Yet there are good reasons why this should be so. These individuals are well aware that they stand, in Newton's words, "on the shoulders of giants." Their respect for the area in which they work makes them aware of the long line of previous contributions to it, putting their own in perspective. They're also aware of the role that luck played in their own achievements. And they're usually so focused on future projects and current challenges that past accomplishments, no matter how outstanding, are no longer very interesting to them. At the same time, they know that in comparison with others, they have accomplished a great deal. And this knowledge provides a sense of security, even pride.

7. Creative people, to an extent, escape rigid gender role stereotyping. When tests of masculinity/femininity are given to young people, over and over one finds that creative and talented girls are more dominant and tough than other girls, and creative boys are more sensitive and less aggressive than their male peers.

This tendency toward androgyny is sometimes understood in purely sexual terms, and therefore it gets confused with homosexuality. But psychological androgyny is a much wider concept referring to a person's ability to be at the same time aggressive and nurturant, sensitive and rigid, dominant and submissive, regardless of gender. A psychologically androgynous person in effect doubles his or her repertoire of responses. Creative individuals are more likely to have not only the strengths of their own gender but those of the other one, too.

8. Creative people are both rebellious and conservative. It is impossible to be creative without having first internalized an area of culture. So it's difficult to see how a person can be creative without being both traditional and conservative and at the same time rebellious and iconoclastic. Being only traditional leaves an area unchanged; constantly taking chances without regard to what has been valued in the past rarely leads to novelty that is accepted as an improvement. The artist Eva Zeisel, who says that the folk tradition in which she works is "her home," nevertheless produces ceramics that were recognized by the Museum of Modern Art as masterpieces of contemporary design. This is what she says about innovation for its own sake:

"This idea to create something is not my aim. To be different is a negative motive, and no creative thought or created thing grows out of a negative impulse. A negative impulse is always frustrating. And to be different means 'not like this' and 'not like that.' And the 'not like'—that's why postmodernism, with the prefix of 'post,' couldn't work. No negative impulse can work, can produce any happy creation. Only a positive one."

But the willingness to take risks, to break with the safety of tradition, is also necessary. The economist George Stigler is very emphatic in this regard: "I'd say one of the most common failures of able people is a lack of nerve. They'll play safe games. In innovation, you have to play a less safe game, if it's going to be interesting. It's not predictable that it'll go well."

9. Most creative people are very passionate about their work, yet they can be extremely objective about it as well. Without the passion, we soon lose interest in a difficult task. Yet without being objective about it, our work is not very good and lacks credibility. Here is how the historian Natalie Davis puts it:

"I think it is very important to find a way to be detached from what you write, so that you can't be so identified with your work that you can't accept criticism and response, and that is the danger of having as much affect as I do. But I am aware of that and of when I think it is particularly important to detach oneself from the work, and that is something where age really does help."

10. Creative people's openness and sensitivity often exposes them to suffering and pain, yet also to a great deal of enjoyment. Most would agree with Rabinow's words: "Inventors have a low threshold of pain. Things bother them." A badly designed machine causes pain to an inventive engineer, just as the creative writer is hurt when reading bad prose.

Being alone at the forefront of a discipline also leaves you exposed and vulnerable. Eminence invites criticism and often vicious attacks. When an artist has invested years in making a sculpture, or a scientist in developing a theory, it is devastating if nobody cares.

Deep interest and involvement in obscure subjects often goes unrewarded, or even brings on ridicule. Divergent thinking is often perceived as deviant by the majority, and so the creative person may feel isolated and misunderstood.

Perhaps the most difficult thing for creative individuals to bear is the sense of loss and emptiness they experience when, for some reason, they cannot work. This is especially painful when a person feels his or her creativity drying out.

Yet when a person is working in the area of his of her expertise, worries and cares fall away, replaced by a sense of bliss. Perhaps the most important quality, the one that is most consistently present in all creative individuals, is the ability to enjoy the process of creation for its own sake. Without this trait, poets would give up striving for perfection and would write commercial jingles, economists would work for banks where they would earn at least twice as much as they do at universities, and physicists would stop doing basic research and join industrial laboratories where the conditions are better and the expectations more predictable.

From Creativity: The Work and Lives of 91 Eminent People, by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, published by HarperCollins, 1996.

Psychology Today, Jul/Aug 96
Last Reviewed 14 Oct 2008
Article ID: 1095

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Yellowdog Democrats and Yellowcat Republicans

So what does it all mean?

(insert creative license)

I'll go ahead and propose the general definition as those that are willing to compromise with the opposing side (or invent a 3rd, completely original solution) to whatever the problem or debate at hand may be.

Now then, I have no clue if this is accurate, but since we all know I own the color yellow as part of my ADD And ADHD Affirmative Action Coalition from last year, hopefully they will only use it in a conciliatory, productive, and efficient manner.

So there I was watching the first prime time presidential address (after the fact, I was in class during the live broadcast), and was amused to see the word "presidential" highlighted in yellow. Although, interestingly enough, it was enough to make me pay attention to Obama's speech (I had otherwise not been paying as much attention to politics as usual lately as I was just letting the Obama team make their own decisions before entering the fray).

What I found most amusing, is that I realized my intended use of the color yellow as a visual reminder of my ADD to help others help me stay focused, instead turned into something of a themed color scheme in and of itself, at which point it seems I became more distracted with seeing the color yellow everywhere then remembering it was supposed to be guiding me towards focusing my creative abilities in a productive and tangible career direction.


Well, the good news is the common thread is apparently well woven between the lines at this point; now I must only reprogram myself to see the color as a reminder to make a list and focus on it rather than focus on the fascination with the use of the color itself. I was going to go as far as to propose asking people to wear yellow ties if they are speaking of things that are highly important and that I need to pay attention to, but then I realized I actually wanted the color to symbolize an arbitration-type mindset politically, so at this point I'm torn.

To anyone actually reading this who has been following me and God knows my trail of unique and often controversial commentaries on current, you will be pleased to know that I am going to make a conscious effort to return my radio show content to higher-level philosophy and politics again this week, not just my random first-hand "state of society" social litmus test demonstrations.

However, for lighter, more amusing entertainment, I may still take the time to regale you with the highlights of stalking the paparazzi last weekend etc.

Since I did note some things on the magic nonsense box that got me scowling this morning, there is a very good chance I may be commenting again as the day goes on.


P.S. I just realized "Yellowdog Republicans and Yellowcat Democrats" technically rhymes better, but since the common denominator was supposed to be the political symbolism of the color not of the arbitrary animal attached to it, I suppose people can make up whatever associations they want as long as it gets us to an improved and sustainable model for American society if not the entire global human condition.

Carry on.

Sunday, February 8, 2009

Allyn Tygrrr the Smartassed Paparazzi Stalker

I'll post all the photos from my perspective as soon as I find my memory card reader. In the meantime, in this photo sent to me by Michelle (the intended primary reporter/classmate), I'm on the left wearing the gray baseball cap, black jacket, holding my cell phone up, and smiling! :)

Ironically they kicked us out of the Grove (boo!!! Grove management hypocrisy...I think they must be "on the take") with our cameras and crew, so we just came back and I used a cell phone camera instead. Since we kept the cameras rolling and my mic hot as we were getting kicked out, there is still a chance this most recent misadventure could be cut together into something pretty damn humorous.

It certainly was an interesting and educational day. To be honest, I think the paps get a bad rap. They were cool enough all things considered, and if I were a celebrity, I would find it amusing watching them fall all over each other trying to get "the shot".

Oh the fun one could have with a great sense of humor and a little creativity.


Saturday, February 7, 2009

What good is having sh*t if you're too lazy or busy to use it?

(insert video)

Let's talk about cake.

It's hilarious how I forget things all the time and then it always comes back to me in the same pattern.

Friday, February 6, 2009

Brutally Refreshing Honesty

The best part is I had the audio running from this on the computer when Sarah is talking about the "poo" paradox. At the same time, Infomania is on TV silently in the background.

I forgot that, and from the angle I was at, when I looked over at the TV from across the room, I saw Conor's Christian Bale impersonation lip synced to Sarah's poo segment.

That almost inspired me enough to rewrite my editing class project. I so need to to find a way to work with you guys.

I admire your honesty Sarah. I was wondering what the deal with women and "number 2" is anyway. Funny story, one time my ex-girlfriend was in the bathroom for a "longer than made sense" period of time. This is before the misadventures in better living through chemistry, so at this point the delay in the bathroom was more humorous curiosity than anything else.

I knocked on the door, and after getting several comical responses, I stuck my fingernail in the lock and walked in. Low and behold there was Candy, acting awkward, as the toilet seat was down.

I said:

"What's going on?"


"Uh...OOO-K. What's in the cup?"

(she was holding one of those big token cups from the casinos in Vegas and covering it)


(brain goes WTF?)

There is no punchline, except that as the sequence of events came together, it turns out "number 2" had gotten stuck in the metaphorical fishbowl, but then the fishbowl wouldn't flush, so she had removed the small goldfish and apparently had plans to transfer them via Circus Circus cup to an undisclosed location until such time as the toilet could be repaired rather than bare the indignity of having to call me to fix the toilet having seen that she "poo'd" in it.

Sincerely, lol is used too much, but that was a real lol moment.

There is nothing like a hot pseduo-celebrity standing there trying to hide the goldfish from you because that is how some women apparently feel about such things behind the scenes.

Oh, silly, silly humans.

Wanna see WTF I'm talking about?

It's a free country:

If this doesn't make you laugh, there is something wrong with you.




Whoa! No seriously, whoa.

Well, here's a more impassioned one for you.

Regarding the Octopsycho "mom"...

Alright, we all know part of my campaign "for the future of humanity" is built largely on such "radical" tenants as breeding licenses to prevent innocent lives from being brought into the world in below-acceptable and wanted, well-prepared for circumstance.

Normally everyone would live in their little insulated selfish bubbles and continue doing their own thing, the responsible ones seeing no problem because they are responsible, and the others seeing not problems because they are IDIOTS.

Exhibit A.) This chick. I just love it when God drops the examples to make my case right in the same city.

She should have been sterilized at birth. Wait, nix that. Her mother should have been sterilized at birth with a trust account setup to provide an optional ability to have children ONCE CERTAIN BARE FUCKING SANE minimal requirements had been met.

Oh, poor thing, you had a fucked up childhood, so your solution is to rationalize creating 14 fucked up childhoods?

Step into my office. Why? Because you are fucking fired.

This is absurd. But what is even more absurd if not criminal, is how many times similar scenarios repeat themselves across this country and around the world on a daily basis that go unnoticed and unpublicized simply because they are not so grotesque and large scale in their perpetration. She made the headlines for having Octuplets (which isn't even in the spell checker!!!) and people saw that as a good/rare thing?

Not the intelligent, sane, considerate, responsible, sustainably-minded people?

Oh, well I guess that explains it.


Now then, lets take a sampling of the state of the art in hip-hop, rap music shall we?

Sex is easy to sell to irresponsible idiots because it feels good. Unfortunately the consequences of sex can be the complete destruction of individual lives literally from the point of conception, and then to society as a whole from that point on.

Shame, shame, shame, shame, shame.

But the only problem is, these people ironically have no shame, which is what makes the entire scenario of selfish, shortsighted, destructive idiots breeding freely so paradoxical. How far does it go until everyone realizes behavior like this is choking the world's resources, and ruining innocent lives by bringing them into the world with an inferior set of genetics if not circumstance?

Where did the term "baby's mama" come from? Is that supposed to be funny?

Is it funny that some stupid people are allowed to roam freely destroying the lives of others in such subtle ways?

God is trying to make the point I have been arguing for years now. This chick's views of what is right, wrong, and rational cannot be trusted, and so who is going to put a leash on such scenarios before our society is literally brought to the level of Idiocracy?

What is it going to take to protect the rights of the human spirit to be brought in to this world under humane circumstance? Why is this not apparent to every single person that applies for welfare?

If we are going to financially support breeding, we need to make a concerted effort to support breeding the right genetics that will further mankind not just create and unneeded workforce of...people that rationalize causing harm to the world and others (read gangsta rap and gang culture) because they were brought into this world by accident to people that shouldn't even be allowed to cross the street?

The only lemonade-making silver lining of this scenario is that it is being brought into the light front and center, but this woman is going to have to come up with an infinitely better excuse than "I'm going to school" to face me.

Fuck that. Fuck her for that "living on imaginary credit" mindset, and not focusing her delusionally grandiose "love" on supporting one living being before introducing and entire social death sentence of them into the social cesspool.

If you live in the city, look around at the graffiti and the gangs. That is what this women likely brought into this world instead of an unprecedented family of Rhodes scholars, and we don't need more graffiti.

(No disrespect to the children as they are the innocent victims, but they became the problem the second they were brought into this world under problematic circumstance by the idiot with the pussy and the doctor that helped her. WTF?)

I can speak from personal demonstration of responsible behavior, because of all the wild, fun, crazy, irresponsible things I have done, remotely allowing the chance of bringing an innocent life into this world until I was beyond well-prepared for it is simply not an option, and EVERY girl I have ever slept with knows and understands this front and center (i.e. the "worst case scenario backup abortion talk") prior to any of the fun but risky adventures in the hay. Protect the children by not having them! Of course, as I have experienced my entire life, it is ironically hard to convince an idiot they are an idiot, so the least you can do is remove their ability to multiply before it becomes a liability to the existence of humanity and life itself.

The planet is only so big. There are only so many resources, and so much "love" to go around. That woman can't even provide for herself, much less a pet, much less one child, much less 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, or God-fucking knows and can prove in court 14.

The fact that she is indignant instead of humbled and apologetic to the children and society shows what the problem is, and when you apply that prism to analyzing much of the other behavior that is tolerated if not mass-promoted and encouraged in certain dysfunctional sub-cultures, well, it's time to draw the lines more safely if you ask little ole semi-important me.

Spreading one's "love" and time and resources so thinly is not LOVE, it is selfish behavior that causes the feeling of the opposite of love on the other parties involved. Were you a wanted, minimally prepared for, expected child from good stock? Then, chances are, your quality of life, and the way you pass that on to others, is much better than if the odds are stacked against you from the start. Use a positive propaganda campaign to encourage this, not a set of black and white rules that abusive personality types will abuse the hell out of without the shame of others.

"Two is fair and right for everyone involved." There's a place to start. Using pain as an excuse to cause more pain is still causing pain instead of happiness, which is obviously not what God wants. Do the math and get back to me.

I rest my case your honor.

Breathe Allen breathe.

OK, I'm better now. These kids got lucky because of the media and society, it's all the unseen ones that need better parents in the first place.




It's too bad Michael wasn't using the drug in a more respectable way (i.e. spiritual/creative vs. frat party-ish), because he could use his overnight popularity in a "martyr-type" context.

BTW...oh, YES, my parents would have condemned the living hell out of me had I attempted such a thing (which is why I've had so much drama in the wake of my obviously relatively well known by now storyline).

Sadly, the reason they would be so tragically judgmental is because they do not have first hand experience with what they are "legislating" on, and consequently have formed their strict opinions along the f*cked up behavior of others. I completely understand that side of the fence, because it is where I came from, and where I boldly, blindly stood until I was in my late 20's. I didn't want to be like the f*ck-ups on drugs, so I piled them all together and looked down on them.

Years later after seeing the Hollywood perspective I decided to reformulate my theories with experience after realizing it is ALWAYS the person that is more of the problem than the inert substance, and the results of my study resulting in realizing the lines are drawn so wrong that they actually create the problem. Very bad things mixed with less-bad things + IDIOTS with no clue what they are doing = a totally FUBAR "war" on human nature and the truth. Some would argue this is a bad thing in the age of instant global communication.

The problem is the people and the context in which things are used, but separating the good, from the bad, from the ugly when people are too blindly opinionated to form first-hand opinions is a Catch 22. With sheriff Roscoe chasing fame on the heals of blind rules. Why not just outlaw lies or sex or beer and start taking notes on the effect in law enforcement personel and on society. Someone needs to command the enforcers more reasonably, or allow them to gracefully avoid causing problems where are arguably are none.

I don't look up to athletes as role models to begin with, and I obviously don't represent the intellectual capacity or thoughtfulness of the average person, but there needs to be some better behavioral role models in America.

Phelps is somewhere in between, but his case might start a proxy battle if it isn't handled reasonably by both sides. They need to create "behavioral" no harm, no foul-type policies regarding soft drugs like weed. It is the lesser of the evil compared to alcohol (just look at the regrettable and dangerous, destructive mindset/behavior one causes versus the other), so it's frustrating that Phelps brought it into the spotlight under such less-than-ideal circumstance, and then totally backed down instead of just openly and honestly using his celebrity to explain his state of mind, feelings on the subject, and obvious peer influences leading to it.

The fact that the system itself can rob the people of millions of dollars while getting up in arms about something as harmless and otherwise positive as a burning bush caught on film is oxymoronic at best. Since the word moron is in that previous word although it might not even be a word according to the spellchecker, it can't be a good thing to have such WTF policies governing.

Require tests, requirements, and training just like concealed handgun licenses, and as long as people act responsibly, does it matter where their state of mind is? Look at religion and compare it to weed, then find a happy medium.



P.S. No, I haven't been by a mosquito in recent history, one of the few benefits of living in the concrete jungle of LA. lol

Firing up the afterburners...

Howdy kids!

So, here we go again apparently...

I am officially starting my blog over again and using this new Blogger location as the transitional location between MySpace and most likely going through the effort to start using WordPress (I heard it was the best, most flexible option). In certain circles I assume my reputation precedes me, but anyone who knows me knows I am an exceptionally cool person and friend to have, so even if some of my more radical theories and preaching about how to save the world from the status quo strike you as WTF-ish, fear not, for that is exactly the point.

I have a tendency to approach things from unusual angles in order to encourage healthy debate above and beyond the bilateral sides that are all-too-often presented by most who do not think for themselves much less outside the proverbial box. Although my writings in the past have developed something of a cult-like following, I never displayed them in a professional format nor tried to actually engage the marketing efforts to capitalize on them, however, with the addition of my radio and TV training to the mix, I will try to aim my commentaries and content in that direction in the future.

I just discovered the Fox News Strategy Room and online live feed today, so it seemed like an obvious way to rejoin the debate. Here's the email I just sent entitled "Logic?".

Why not run the "stimulus package" through an efficiency screen to calculate the relative "bang for the buck" of each component individually. If the idea is to create employment to prevent people from falling through the proverbial cracks, then the idea would be to use any money spent as efficiently as possible.

Assess the "cost per job" of various components, then determine which, if any, components have the ability to create jobs that will create a system/structure that will create more jobs. I hate to say it, but after taking an inventory on how globalization is affecting the American standard of living, perhaps some Ron Paul-esque protectionist strategies need to be implemented until the system is re-stabilized and can be built on a more solid foundation.

Rather than further separating the people into the "haves" and "have-nots", is there a way to restructure the system to simply create a proportional, percentage-based downgrade in lifestyle?

On an unrelated note, I think if Hollywood is given money, it should do double-duty and be allocated to create specific educational programming to be used in schools and prisons. The money should NOT be allowed to create more "junk food" distractionary (yes, I know that isn't technically a word) entertainment when there are so many glaring holes where it is needed to improve the collective standard of society and America's ability to compete on the global scale.



P.S. Here's something to make you think a bit deeper: