Author: admin

When I first entered this blog, I really didn’t know what to expect, judging by the title. I did notice that this weblog was submitted for a re-review. When the page loaded, there was a little banner above the posts, saying that the blog had moved with a link to the new web address.

The old address was on “Blogspot”, and the new one was the authors own domain. The one thing that kind of puzzled me was why Charlie “the author”, had submitted his weblog for a re – review. One of the reasons being is, both the old and the new weblog looked the same. Same lay-out, same colors ect.

The weblog itself had a 3 column lay-out which I was never very keen on myself. In the left hand column, there were several links which were very humourous. There was an “About Me” and an “About This” links. They both made me laugh.

After I got through several of his links, which he had both on the right and left side panels, I started reading several of the archives. His archives dated back to June 2003.. Each entry was entertaining in it’s own way. What may be amusing for some readers, may not be amusing for others. I went through several archives, and there were only a few entries I really laughed at.

There was one entry where he talked about a time where his door key broke off in his lock . He tried to get it out by taking the lock apart with a screw driver, but it didn’t work. Then he thought of using WD-40, until he realized he didn’t have any so he used olive oil instead. But all he got out of that was a slippery door knob and a dog wanting to lick it. Now that is one of the few entries I chuckled at. I just didn’t find a lot of the posts amusing.

Now for the design, It is a very simple blue and white template. As I said earlier on, there are links on both sides and the entries are in the middle. To me , some of the links and the archives are not spaced enough. The entries are very well written and very easy to read. The posts are also quite long. I feel the design could use some work. If you have time to spare, drop by and pay Charlie a visit. Like I said, what some people may find humourous, others may not. I just didn’t get much out of it.Where the Hell Was I?

This was not my first stop at ‘Patriot Paradox’; I actually first saw the site a couple of months ago (around the time of the site’s last review), but haven’t visited since then. From the first look, it’s clear that this weblog will center around conservative American politics and values, from the American flag and quote in the header to the suggested reading list to the name of the site itself. This is a blog that immediately suggests it will contain views and opinions from a very specific and very strident viewpoint.

I dug into the ‘About’ page to learn more about the site’s author, Nick. The information is presented in an interview format, and definitely reinforced my first impressions — many of the answers deal with conservative politics, America, Christianity, and the author’s rather strong opinions on those and related topics. Browsing through the archives, I found mostly the same, with occasional posts used by Nick to introduce himself (in the very first entry), discuss his favorite comic characters, and advice regarding RSS technology, for example. But Christian conservative commentary is the order of the day at ‘Patriot Paradox’, and the vast majority of the recent entries deal in some way with American politics, religion, or patriotic themes. If that’s your bag, you’ll find much content of interest within this site.

In terms of design and features, ‘Patriot Paradox’ is fairly standard, with a three-column layout featuring a central region for text framed by areas dedicated to blogrolls, a poll, archive links, ads, and more. Comments, trackbacks, and search features are also enabled and easily accessible. Deserving special mention is an ‘extra’ called ‘King of the Blogs‘, which is a blog contest run separately by Nick, but linked in the sidebar.

To be honest, it’s difficult for me to review a site like ‘Patriot Paradox’. I have little personal interest in politics, find that I have few opinions in common with the author, and am a bit taken aback by the fervent partisanship evident in many of the posts. It’s simply difficult for me to relate to many of the entries personally.

That said, I feel that a good review should reflect how well the author accomplishes his or her mission. Nick certainly gets high marks for consistency and persistence in that regard — there are few surprises here, and my first impressions of the site were echoed throughout the posts I read. I do, however, feel that as a blogger concerned largely with politics, Nick could provide and encourage more discussion and debate over the topics he introduces. I found quite a few entries containing quoted news items and minimal or no personal commentary — I would prefer to see more discourse and individual perspective on the stories, rather than just a catchy title and perhaps a quick one-liner. Nick’s unique viewpoint and opinions show through in the longer, more analytical posts, but these are too few and far between for this type of site, in my opinion.

With Nick’s strong and passionate views, I would have expected a more involved readership (both for and against his point of view, most likely), but I don’t see strong evidence of this in the recent comments on posts concerning current events. I believe that a political, highly partisan weblog such as ‘Patriot Paradox’ would be enhanced by more in-depth and compelling analysis by the author, and a stronger sense of community throughout. Nick seems to be on his way there, but may have a bit further to go. I give ‘Patriot Paradox’ 3 out of 5.Patriot Paradox

Patriot Paradox. First and foremost I will say that I did not like this blog, not one iota. Political blogs, especially political blogs written by the Christian/Republican contingent of American society are something that I normally avoid at all costs. Having said that though, for the purpose of this review, I do believe it achieves it’s aim as an informative, patriotic/political blog. I mean, Nick is so patriotic he got married on July 4th! In all seriousness, if you’re into politics of all sorts or if you’re one of the people who are actually paying attention to the American Election these days, then this blog is definitely one for you.

In the hopes of finding out more information about Nick Queen, I hopped on over to his about me page to garner some more personal information. It’s just the basic stuff to be found there, when and where he married, his beliefs, his political stance, the first thing he’ll say to God when he checks in with Saint Peter – stuff like that.

So with my background knowledge in hand, I started reading.

Man, this guy loves his politics. It’s extremely well put-together, I certainly cannot complain about the way Nick argues his topics (apart from the fact that I don’t agree with him on many, many issues). He’s a very intelligent individual who knows how to debate and write a convincing argument for his own beliefs. It’s actually refreshing to read such a site that isn’t all “This is what I think and if you don’t think the same thing as me then you all suck!”. In that, I give Nick props for the way he comes across – which is mostly unobtrusive.

The design of the blog is a well-structured, basic layout with the usual red-white-blue colours that tie in well with the theme. There’s several links to like-themed blogs, sites and causes and on the whole, it’s very easy to read. It makes good use of the “extended entry” codes that flip the rest of the entry out onto the same URL rather than having to go through to the individual page for the entry. It’s very convenient and makes the blog look very neat and tidy.

Just in case you haven’t already caught on, if you’re not politically inclined, you will not enjoy this blog. However, those of you who may be interested to read what a very American man has to say about his country (or rather, the people who run it), then you will probably be in your element – whether or not you agree with Patriot Paradox.Patriot Paradox

My first thoughts of the site was that it had a good color scheme, nothing clashing. With a scheme that appeals to the eye, I was hoping to read some content that was appealing as well. I wasn’t disappointed, and I believe many others will like what’s found within the many postings.

The posts are not rants, they are intelligent and humorous. Sometimes the posting is a news clip or a dedication, but always with an interesting spin on things from the author, Jim. The blog itself spans from July 2003 until now and seems to have been updated on a regular basis, not leaving the reader left without some type of update.

The design of the blog is great. Everything is separated into it’s own little section, making it very easy to find what you’re looking for, from archives, to other blogs, to the source code of the site. I was very impressed with the layout, to which credits are given at the bottom. It’s interesting to see the musical taste of the author, listed at the end of every post. Most times the song goes along with the theme of the post.

The Profile section gives a few clues as to what the author is into, some of which is typical for a 21 year old (“I enjoy my newfound legality, and have been exploiting it as often as possible.”) and others that are not, like his love of astrology. However, some of the other sides of Jim are found in the February archives.

I gave this site a 5 because I really liked the neatness of the site, everything is well organized. I also enjoyed how there is a mixture of everyday posts, news tidbits, and some dedications. The song included at the end of each post gives away some clues as to what the author likes without coming right out and saying it. The posts themselves are very well written, and can be enjoyed by a large audience.Incoherent Blather

I was greeted to an eye pleasing aspect upon entering ‘Pharyngula’. Considering the absolute encyclopedic list of information that is crammed onto this page, it was a minor miracle! The backdrop for the page, I at first took to be bubble wrap. But upon investigation, found out I was looking at Zebra fish eggs. Before I went another step, I had to find out what the title of this blog meant. The author had politely provided a link to do just that. Pharyngula, I read, is: “when vertebrate embryos of all species are most similar to one another.” I had just stepped into the world of science…. or so I thought.

The author is a professor of Biology at the University of Minnesota.

As I began to read the most current entry, a curious mix of science and politics emerged. Drawing from a myriad of sources, he weaves an astonishing web of comments on all things scientific and political. The writing was very clear and concise, with a liberal spattering of quotes from all over. He seems to be VERY well read.

There are notes to his students about recent tests and complex biology essays on subjects of interest to the author and his readers. Evolution is a common topic. He writes some very thorough rebuttals to Intelligent Design apologists. If you are interested in the evolutionist’s point of view, this is your blog of dreams.

The author has archives that go back to June 2003. In the archives I found book reviews, excerpts from student papers complete with illustrations, photos of mating frogs and an absolute plethora of scientific information, side by each with some very frank political opinions. If you are of a scientific bent, this website should be right up your alley. And is a rich, if almost overwhelming source of jumping off points to other science related sites.

He is not shy in voicing his opinion, nor does he apologize for his politics. Here is how he describes himself in one entry: “I am a scientist and a biologist. I am pro-evolution. I’m an atheist. I’m a liberal. I’m left wing. I’m, ummm, blunt.”

Now to my rating. If his stated intent was as he describes in an “About Me” section I found, “I created these pages to describe some of my past and current research and to support my teaching.” . . then he has succeeded. For I have never seen quite such an astonishing collection of scientific information in one place.

However. (And I must emphasize the ‘however’ here), if I have one criticism of this site, it would be that both his science and his politics would be better served, were they located on separate sites. I found the transitions between the two subjects quite jarring. Though his scientific analysis was comprehensive in the extreme, and he elucidated his politics clearly, they seemed to fight each other on the page, thus substantially diminishing both in my opinion.
Pharyngula