Tonight was the first round of performances for the top twenty dancers on So You Think You Can Dance.

First off, wow. This was an amazing round of performances, with only one falling slightly flat for me. And to be fair, it's from the dancer I expected the least from.

But, secondly, and possibly more important to the competition as a whole... At the very end of the show, as the credits rolled and Cat Deeley announced the local news to follow, there was a bit of text mixed in.

Some folks may have heard about the so-called "texting parties" that so greatly influenced the outcome of American Idol. Well, that won't be a problem with So You Think You Can Dance. There were a few lines of text that went by during the credits that stated that if the producers identify any "power texting," voting with the aid of "technological enhancements," or other forms of vote-bombing, they have the right to reject those votes.

I don't watch Idol, so I can't complain about who did or didn't win. In fact, I can't even say who actually did win. But I can say that I'm glad to see that this Fox competition is being run a bit more honestly, fairly, and openly. This is the kind of transparency that competitions like this, which are largely based on the votes of the viewers, should champion.

And Kayla, with that samba she did with Max... That's why I watch this show. Hot.

Yeah. I saw it. Now I'm reviewing it.

This film was hyped more than any movie since Dark Knight. Cross-promotion in Esurance and Burger King commercials, commemorative toys and glasses, teaser trailers two years in advance of release, interviews on nearly every major channel, a pre-screening for our troops in the Middle East. Not to mention, every Trekkie out there has been looking forward to this film with an ambivalent mix of dread and anticipation.

Suffice it to say, general expectations were high. Even given that, I tried to go in completely unbiased. This is something I'm quite capable of, given that my experience with Star Trek goes only so far as watching a few episodes of the original series late at night on basic cable, and watching Star Trek 4 just for its campiness (this was the film where the crew travelled back in time to 1984 to save a blue whale; very convoluted, yet fun in an it's-so-bad-it's-good kind of way). I'm no Trekkie.

That said, I loved this film.

Chris Pine has received loads of praise already as the young Jim Kirk, and I add my voice to the choir on this. He was excellent, and my hat is off to J. J. Abrams on picking up this relatively-unknown talent. Coincidentally, thanks to his performance, Chris Pine's IMDB page has seen a 900% increase in popularity since the film's release. Not too shabby.

Simon Pegg as Scotty is charming as hell, and Karl Urban, playing Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy, is outstanding. Even Eric Bana, who's never been anything wooden in any role I've seen him in, is utilized well.

The script is perhaps the most unexpected standout. As has been touted by Abrams for quite some time now, this film isn't made strictly for Trekkies, it's made for everyone. There is nothing here that requires any previous knowledge of Star Trek lore. There are very few instances of nonsensical techno-babble, and even those few are explained in layman's terms immediately. My suspended disbelief was never shaken, there were no dues ex machina, and the characters were all written much better than I would have ever expected of a Star Trek film.

The special effects were spectacular, the action was intense, and I left the film with a smile on my face. What more can you ask of a summer blockbuster?

Also, I'd like to include a side note about the plot: I'd heard a Trekkie or two complain about a certain event in the movie that they claimed contradicted the storyline of the original series. To this, I can only say that if you're not intimately familiar with the entirety of the Star Trek universe, you won't even know what they mean (I didn't till I looked it up, and still don't care in the slightest).

If I were to quantify my review for the movie... I'd say it gets a solid 90% from me. A truly fun film to watch, and suitable for the completely uninitiated Star Trek fan. Go see it.

Yes. That's right. The Republican Party have proposed a resolution to rename the Democratic Party. They wish to call them "The Democrat Socialist Party."

First of all, let me just illustrate how effective this "change" will be. According to the latest ABC poll, only 21% of Americans are registered as Republicans. And this "resolution," if passed, is a piece of paper.

Michael Steele, in his typical Michael Steele fashion - that is, swallowing some pride and agreeing just enough to appease the hardliners, but not so much as to alienate the moderates - claims that he agrees with the resolution's depiction of the Democratic Party, but would rather not see it officially become the party-wide policy.

Michael Steele, in this half-assed agreement, half-assed disagreement, claims that he agrees that Obama is taking America down a "dangerous" path to European-style socialism.

What exactly is so dangerous?

"Socialism" is a word that John McCain, Sarah Palin, and Fox News began throwing around during the election, hoping the dirty stain left on the word by Communism would frighten voters. And this campaign ploy, this cheap word, hasn't gone away.

Cuba is a soclialist country. Cuba's has a mostly state-run economy and lacks a stock exchange. Cuba's economy ranks 177th on the Economic Freedom Index. This would indeed be dangerous, and would be something to fear, were we actually on the road to becoming Cuba. But we're not. More on that later.

Now, what's really bizarre is that many point to Sweden, not Cuba, as being the chief example of socialism, and warn that we, too, could become like Sweden.

Let me explain why Sweden is considered socialist. Sweden has mostly private industry, but with many well-funded government programs available, as well as universal healthcare, government-provided education at all levels available, and does have a stock exchange. Sweden's economy is ranked 26th on the Economic Freedom Index.

Can we PLEASE be more like Sweden?

Universal healthcare, government-provided education at all levels (this is including college), a mostly private economy (this means the state does NOT control the entire economy, but rather, regulates responsibly), and these "government programs" include business start-up grants, measures to increase representation of women, granting of parental leave for new fathers, and so on. They're also really big on gender equality in the workforce, meaning equal wages for equal work.

Is this what we're fearing? Is this the "danger?"

The Republicans would have you believe that we're headed down a slippery slope towards total government control of the economy. They're bemoaning the "death of the free market." They're teabagging in the streets.

Reality is much simpler, though. The reality is, the "free market" hasn't been completely free in a very, very long time. There has been regulation in place for years; this is what the SEC exists for. Under Bush, however, and, to be fair, even under Clinton, the market slowly underwent a bit of deregulation. Had the economy been responsibly-regulated, the market collapse would most likely have been averted.

Obama is calling for stricter regulation and accountability on Wall Street. Some companies have been bailed out with government money, and as such, will be under supervision by the government to see that the taxpayers' money isn't squandered. Yes, it's true that if these policies are taken to an extreme, to such a point that the government takes control of the majority of the market, "owns" a majority of the companies, and mandates rather than regulates, we would become a socialist nation.

But that's not happening. Drafting a resolution calling the Democratic Party a bunch of socialists is more than a misnomer, it's smear tactics adopted as doctrinal party policy.

But such is the Republican Party. They can smear even the most positive aspects of their opponents. Such as the intelligence of Barack Obama - "He's an elitist."

So, go ahead, Republican Party. Draft your resolution. Vote away. The other 79% of America will write you off as irrelevant, as per usual.

I performed a nearly-40-minute set on Sunday, and I fucking killed. My concerns about the showcase at the Fizz are completely gone.

I got this spectacular set on camera, and have spent about a day or so working to create a DVD. Honestly, I don't know why I'm bothering to spend twelve to fifteen hours designing this DVD so painstakingly, given that this is a single-camera video of  mid-grade quality. Yet, here I am, working my ass off.

This thing is packed; I went all-out. The entire 40-minute set, with hand-designed scene selection, each joke in its own chapter for easier navigation, special features including an episode of the webseries I'm in, a stand-up blooper, and even the MP3 of my song, Dual-Nature. There's a special thanks page, and a contact page for booking purposes.

This is an intense amount of work. And I'm going to have to do this all over again and then some when I finally get around to intentionally filming a DVD, with multiple high-quality video cameras.

At any rate. For anyone who wants this well-designed and truly funny DVD (ignore the single stationary camera), let me know. It's called "Ken Keepin' It Real Sikora: I Do It For The Cash."

I've realized that I'll never know enough about the universe to satisfy my curiosity.

The Tunguska event has piqued my interest today, as well as human perception of time. These, of course, branched off greatly, now causing me to contemplate quantum mechanics, research mirror matter, and reexamine my rudimentary theory of relativity.

When I say "my rudimentary theory of relativity," I'm referring to a theory I posed to explain why road trips, movies, or any other essentially repetitive events seem shorter the second time around. My theory was that the first time, being a brand new experience, we take in as much information as possible; we are intellectually curious, and we're actively searching for memorable parts of the experience. During this time, we also make mental note of the "landmark" or "bookmark" moments, so to speak; on repeat viewing, or traveling the same route, we are mainly watching for these bookmarks, rather than searching for new information as vigorously as the first time. Traveling from bookmark to bookmark seems a much shorter journey than actively seeking new information. Likewise, we often overlook much of the beauty inherent in our everyday tasks, excepting the few surprises that may be thrown our way. I call this "my" theory of relativity because when I developed this rough theory, I had no knowledge of what Einstein had theorized; even now, I have only the vaguest knowledge of it.

I apologize for the tangent. Suffice it to say, my mind is running faster than I can control tonight. And I like it.