I don't have cable television, as many of you know. So, when I get "out" for a few days, I usually get to watch some television that is not included in my regularly sheduled programming. Along with that, I get to see things in HD. Anyway, I don't pay too much attention to people on television, as my two stations are a little fuzzy anyway. This last holiday though, I found myself wondering why women wear so much make-up? Not all women....just some of them.
The part that I don't get, is that a lot of women wear so much make-up, that when they take it off, they no longer even look like the same person. This is confusing to me....it seems like everyday must be Halloween for these women. They spend time in the morning painting their face to make it look like they are someone else. This just seems like some self-esteem issues to me, but I guess I could be wrong, maybe they enjoy spending all that time to look like someone else.
So, congrats to the women everywhere who don't put so much powder and junk on their face that they look like a different person....because that is scary to me.
Monday, December 01, 2008
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
McRib is back!!!
Is there really enough people that keep ordering this to keep bringing it back. Seriously?
C
C
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Part II
So I have been thinking of the previous post entitled part I, and have hashed it out at great length with a band member of the notorious band The Black Squeeze ( if you are in Austin, find out if they are playing...usually at Trophy's. You should only go if you like hearing good music...if you like Kenny Chesney, rascal flatts, or insert crappy rock band on radio here, then you shouldn't go, it would be lost on you. )
Anyway, so this need to have social acceptance is the same for everyone. It doesn't matter who you are or where you come from...it is there. What hasn't always been there, at least not to the point it exists today, is a willingness to forego more "basic" needs to some extreme in order to attain this need. It is evident everywhere, and seemingly not confined to the social perameters of socioeconomic status like so many other things. Certainly it seems more prevalent amongst a lower SES, but not confined to it. I have reached the conclusion that it is mainly the fault of mass media....television, newspapers, magazines. People feel compelled to have the latest and most fashionable ( coincedentally, usually not cheap) phone, or television, handbag, jeans, shoes, car, house and so on and so on. But the bigger question is, why and how did people start to get this way. Once again, I think over time, people have been programmed to think this way, and most don't even realize it.
If you consider the goods and services industry before the large and exponential expansion of mass media, people didn't seem to be this way...as much. There has always been the existence of the "rich" or "aristocratic"...but that historically never had much emphasis on the way the average person lived. Before the rise of mass media, large in part, jeans were jeans, shoes were shoes, handbags and handbag. Slowly, people began to believe that if they didn't have the best and newest things, they were not as apt in the social heirarchy as someone who did. Virtues were eroded in lieu of materialism. The weakest people were the first to crack, whether this weakness is from circumstance, social setting or whatever it may be, these people started to believe what they were being fed, and just new if they didnt' have the newest cell phone, they couldn't sit at the cool kids lunch table. Slowly, others began to follow suit over time. Eventually, the newest and best products became a neccessity and not a luxury. Therefore, it is acceptable to buy an new iphone in favor of some more responsible application of your money, because you "have to have it", just as you do food, shelter, and water.
The unanswered question , is why do people have this innate desire to feel accepted? I am sure that some could argue that it is part of the evolutionary process, which I don't buy. They would point out that "animals are the same way, they are social creatures." I can't argue with that, this is true. However, the argument in the animals case could much more strongly be linked to evolution than people's. Most ( some animals are very solitary, which weakens this argument further) animals are social creatures, they rely on social connections as a very basic necessity for survival "strength in numbers" and the like...this I agree with. So the argument may go, "well, certainly humans at one time were living like this as well. They formed social networks as a means to survive...look at earlier civilizations and cultures." This I also agree with, but in keeping with the concept of evolution, my take is this. Humans have reached a point where survival is perfectly attainable and even easy without any form of social acceptance into any group. You don't have to be "accepted" to go to the store an buy food, buy fuel for your home or car, get a job, hold down a job, buy clothes, buy a house, ect., ect. You can be perfectly self sufficient even to the point of great comfort without having any social acceptance. This being the case, that if evolutionary instinct is where this need comes from, the need should be getting much weaker instead of much stronger.
All that to say, in the words of someone much smarter than me ... " If you really don't want people to accomplish anything, then get them talking about things like sociology and economics."
And on that note, that is all I have to say about this discussion, also because it is hard to type so much.
Anyway, so this need to have social acceptance is the same for everyone. It doesn't matter who you are or where you come from...it is there. What hasn't always been there, at least not to the point it exists today, is a willingness to forego more "basic" needs to some extreme in order to attain this need. It is evident everywhere, and seemingly not confined to the social perameters of socioeconomic status like so many other things. Certainly it seems more prevalent amongst a lower SES, but not confined to it. I have reached the conclusion that it is mainly the fault of mass media....television, newspapers, magazines. People feel compelled to have the latest and most fashionable ( coincedentally, usually not cheap) phone, or television, handbag, jeans, shoes, car, house and so on and so on. But the bigger question is, why and how did people start to get this way. Once again, I think over time, people have been programmed to think this way, and most don't even realize it.
If you consider the goods and services industry before the large and exponential expansion of mass media, people didn't seem to be this way...as much. There has always been the existence of the "rich" or "aristocratic"...but that historically never had much emphasis on the way the average person lived. Before the rise of mass media, large in part, jeans were jeans, shoes were shoes, handbags and handbag. Slowly, people began to believe that if they didn't have the best and newest things, they were not as apt in the social heirarchy as someone who did. Virtues were eroded in lieu of materialism. The weakest people were the first to crack, whether this weakness is from circumstance, social setting or whatever it may be, these people started to believe what they were being fed, and just new if they didnt' have the newest cell phone, they couldn't sit at the cool kids lunch table. Slowly, others began to follow suit over time. Eventually, the newest and best products became a neccessity and not a luxury. Therefore, it is acceptable to buy an new iphone in favor of some more responsible application of your money, because you "have to have it", just as you do food, shelter, and water.
The unanswered question , is why do people have this innate desire to feel accepted? I am sure that some could argue that it is part of the evolutionary process, which I don't buy. They would point out that "animals are the same way, they are social creatures." I can't argue with that, this is true. However, the argument in the animals case could much more strongly be linked to evolution than people's. Most ( some animals are very solitary, which weakens this argument further) animals are social creatures, they rely on social connections as a very basic necessity for survival "strength in numbers" and the like...this I agree with. So the argument may go, "well, certainly humans at one time were living like this as well. They formed social networks as a means to survive...look at earlier civilizations and cultures." This I also agree with, but in keeping with the concept of evolution, my take is this. Humans have reached a point where survival is perfectly attainable and even easy without any form of social acceptance into any group. You don't have to be "accepted" to go to the store an buy food, buy fuel for your home or car, get a job, hold down a job, buy clothes, buy a house, ect., ect. You can be perfectly self sufficient even to the point of great comfort without having any social acceptance. This being the case, that if evolutionary instinct is where this need comes from, the need should be getting much weaker instead of much stronger.
All that to say, in the words of someone much smarter than me ... " If you really don't want people to accomplish anything, then get them talking about things like sociology and economics."
And on that note, that is all I have to say about this discussion, also because it is hard to type so much.
Monday, August 25, 2008
My favorite commercial
I first saw this commercial last year when I first moved to Missouri. I thought it was terrible then, and then I never saw it again. I could only assume that whoever was in charge of it decided is was so asinine, ( an observation I arrived at the first time I saw it) that they decided to pull it. It is a commercial by one of the big local hospital systems here, peddling their own insurance programs. Let me set it up for you. Two women are talking. The conversation is about healthcare. One woman is confessing to the other that she is going to have to drop her health insurance for her, her husband and her kids due to the rising costs of everyhting, not just health insurance. The other woman of course is shocked by this, as she should be, and proceeds to tell her to call said hospital system, as they have their own in house insurance plan, which she assures patron #2 is very affordable and easy to get a quote. All this is good and fine, what floors me is the overall context of the commercial. The two women are sitting and having lunch. This lunch is in a fancy italian restaurant, and both women have meals in front of them. Not only that, but they also both have a glass of wine. So I am monday morning quarterbacking from couch and thinking. Okay, italial food for lunch 7-8 dollars, glass of wine 4-5 dollars, plus tip, roughly 12-13 dollars for lunch. This is the part that is so hilarious to me and depressing at the same time. I rarely eat out for lunch, once, maybe twice a month, sometimes not even that and I have never spent 13 dollars. Furthermore, if you are drinking wine at lunch, I am not sure what kind of job you are going back to, probably none. This commercial epitomizes a lot of the problems in america. I can't afford health insurance for my family, but I can afford 15 dollar lunches because " I deserve it" or whatever other ridiculous reason people use to justify their own severe lack in judgment or responsibility. If my wife is ever telling me that we need to drop our health insurance due to finances, and I find out abuot 15 dollar lunches, someone is going to be in a timeout of the serious kind. But, I know she would never do anything even remotely akin to that level of stupidity, far from it. I am just making a point. And, so continues my growing disappointment and contempt for big business/mass media/commercialism.
Thursday, August 07, 2008
Part I
My good friend Joel brought up an interesting discussion the other day. This will be part one of the discussion, and one must understand that text on this topic simply will not get the job done, but it is something to think about. The discussion centered around Maslow's heirarchy of needs, and poverty in America. The contention or observation posed was that the need for social acceptance has moved higher up in the heirarchy than most of what is found in the esteem grouping of the pyramid, and in some cases, albeit indirectly, above some of the basic fundamental needs for survival. This may be too strong an assertion. But certainly it could be argued that the need for social acceptance has far exceeded the need of accepting personal responsibility. I did say need, because accepting personal responsibility is in large part what allows us to function as humans, and not as other animals, thereby categorizing it as need. I realize this is somewhat of a simplistic view, but for this purpose, I will leave off discussion of all the many facets of our characters that make us decidingly human. Furthermore, many of these other facets have their roots in accepting personal responsibility.
An Aside: I get very suspicious when anyone starts to instruct or educate me on "the poor in America". Certainly cases of abject poverty exist and a true humanitarian effort is needed ( i.e. personal responsibility by someone or some group) to assist these cases. The point is, that America has the richest poor people in the world. 1/3 of the *poor* population is obese. Obesity and poverty are two conditions that absolutely cannot be reconciled with each other.
Back to the topic,
Why do people feel it necessary to spend way beyond their means in order to obtain some sort of "social acceptance"? A quick example is the family that "can't afford" health insurance, but has a family cell phone plan and a 35 thousand dollar Tahoe. Don't tell me it doesn't exist or is very isolated....I see it everyday. This is just a broad example of what the discussion centered around. How did we get to that point? Who is to blame? Why does this seem to be prevalent more among a low socioeconomic status of people? Is it really more prevalent among a low socioeconomic status of people? More to follow on this discussion, as I think it is a good one.
--Steak
An Aside: I get very suspicious when anyone starts to instruct or educate me on "the poor in America". Certainly cases of abject poverty exist and a true humanitarian effort is needed ( i.e. personal responsibility by someone or some group) to assist these cases. The point is, that America has the richest poor people in the world. 1/3 of the *poor* population is obese. Obesity and poverty are two conditions that absolutely cannot be reconciled with each other.
Back to the topic,
Why do people feel it necessary to spend way beyond their means in order to obtain some sort of "social acceptance"? A quick example is the family that "can't afford" health insurance, but has a family cell phone plan and a 35 thousand dollar Tahoe. Don't tell me it doesn't exist or is very isolated....I see it everyday. This is just a broad example of what the discussion centered around. How did we get to that point? Who is to blame? Why does this seem to be prevalent more among a low socioeconomic status of people? Is it really more prevalent among a low socioeconomic status of people? More to follow on this discussion, as I think it is a good one.
--Steak
Monday, August 04, 2008
Upcoming events
Well,
I have been away for awhile. No new news really to report. I had a great idea for a blog the other day, but I have since forgotten what it was. I really need to start writing down ideas when I have them, because they appear so few and far between. It has been a good long while since I have been able to see any good live music. The last live concert I saw was Aaron Watson at the Wormy Dog in oklahoma city. So, I am very much excited about the blues festival coming up in september. Really, I am just going to see one band, JJ Grey and Mofro, but I am sure there will be some other good acts, after all, it is a blues festival. They have a new cd to be released titled "Orange Blossoms" or "Orange Blossom Special" or something like that. I am very pumped about that. It is so very appreciated that outstanding music can still be found and people are still making it. Just the other day, I was informed by someone that XM radio now has a kenny chesney channel, which is apparently all kenny chesney songs all the time. It is unfathomable to me that there is enough people that like kenny chesney that much, that it now requires a full time radio station devoted to that garbage heap Kenny and his "people" call music. It is really sad for someone to be a kenny chesney fan, really it is. I feel sorry for anyone who is that way. I wouldn't choose to most readily describe a kenny chesney fan as ignorant, or having bad taste, or being a moron. Despite the fact that all those descriptors may be applicable, really, I just feel sorry for them, because if you will let someone convince you that kenny chesney is music so good it needs its own radio station, then you would and could be convinced of absolutely anything....seriously. kenny chesney fans should never be allowed to read " A Modest Proposal", lest the air be full of the sweet smell of roasting babies.
I have been away for awhile. No new news really to report. I had a great idea for a blog the other day, but I have since forgotten what it was. I really need to start writing down ideas when I have them, because they appear so few and far between. It has been a good long while since I have been able to see any good live music. The last live concert I saw was Aaron Watson at the Wormy Dog in oklahoma city. So, I am very much excited about the blues festival coming up in september. Really, I am just going to see one band, JJ Grey and Mofro, but I am sure there will be some other good acts, after all, it is a blues festival. They have a new cd to be released titled "Orange Blossoms" or "Orange Blossom Special" or something like that. I am very pumped about that. It is so very appreciated that outstanding music can still be found and people are still making it. Just the other day, I was informed by someone that XM radio now has a kenny chesney channel, which is apparently all kenny chesney songs all the time. It is unfathomable to me that there is enough people that like kenny chesney that much, that it now requires a full time radio station devoted to that garbage heap Kenny and his "people" call music. It is really sad for someone to be a kenny chesney fan, really it is. I feel sorry for anyone who is that way. I wouldn't choose to most readily describe a kenny chesney fan as ignorant, or having bad taste, or being a moron. Despite the fact that all those descriptors may be applicable, really, I just feel sorry for them, because if you will let someone convince you that kenny chesney is music so good it needs its own radio station, then you would and could be convinced of absolutely anything....seriously. kenny chesney fans should never be allowed to read " A Modest Proposal", lest the air be full of the sweet smell of roasting babies.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Gaining ground
Time for another installment of......hillbilly heaven.
Not really, I don't have any great hillbilly stories as of late, but I will post one the next time it happens. Regardless of that, I still enjoy living in southwest missouri, and will be a little sad when I have to leave.
I have been running 4-6 times a week for about two months now. I know you are thinking "Wow", "Great", and maybe even " Liar". But it is true, I have stuck to it pretty well. The problem that I am incurring is somewhat new and frustrating to say the least. Throughout my life, anytime I have decided to get back in shape, it really was no big deal to just start running 3-3.5 miles to whip myself into shape. The problem now, is once I finished school for the second time in eight years, I was at an all time high as far as weight goes. I finished school tipping the scales at 232 lbs.....I think just enough to fight in the heavyweight division. Therein lies the problem. Running now, my legs and knees give out long before my lungs, and the easy 3--3.5 miles is not so easy anymore. In fact, at about two miles, my legs are in much more of a crisis than my lungs are. My lungs are ready to meander along for another two miles or so, but my legs and knees are throwing on the brakes. I guess with enough time, my legs will finally adapt, but I find myself thinking, what if they don't. Have I passed the point of my body being able to handle that kind of strain? Who knows, but I will keep sticking with it in hopes of getting in better shape, with the ultimate goal really just being to live past the age of 62, which is apparently not an easy feat for men in my family. All in all, I have lost about 10 pounds or so, but carrying 222 at a jog is still rather taxing.
C
Not really, I don't have any great hillbilly stories as of late, but I will post one the next time it happens. Regardless of that, I still enjoy living in southwest missouri, and will be a little sad when I have to leave.
I have been running 4-6 times a week for about two months now. I know you are thinking "Wow", "Great", and maybe even " Liar". But it is true, I have stuck to it pretty well. The problem that I am incurring is somewhat new and frustrating to say the least. Throughout my life, anytime I have decided to get back in shape, it really was no big deal to just start running 3-3.5 miles to whip myself into shape. The problem now, is once I finished school for the second time in eight years, I was at an all time high as far as weight goes. I finished school tipping the scales at 232 lbs.....I think just enough to fight in the heavyweight division. Therein lies the problem. Running now, my legs and knees give out long before my lungs, and the easy 3--3.5 miles is not so easy anymore. In fact, at about two miles, my legs are in much more of a crisis than my lungs are. My lungs are ready to meander along for another two miles or so, but my legs and knees are throwing on the brakes. I guess with enough time, my legs will finally adapt, but I find myself thinking, what if they don't. Have I passed the point of my body being able to handle that kind of strain? Who knows, but I will keep sticking with it in hopes of getting in better shape, with the ultimate goal really just being to live past the age of 62, which is apparently not an easy feat for men in my family. All in all, I have lost about 10 pounds or so, but carrying 222 at a jog is still rather taxing.
C
Monday, June 23, 2008
And it continues....
Doodle,
I got your sports listing, you have some good ones, ( see comment section) and will give a full break down in the future. Barrel racing is boring, so I don't care what the crowd does or what you want to call it. GSP team 2 soccer was the pinnacle of what a true sports team is, thereby making soccer a sport if for no other reason than that.
Kelby, your theory has been reviewed and approved. The committee will also recognize sex as a sport. Furthermore, the committee would like to consider "angry sex" an extreme sport....kind of like bullfighting.
Steak
I got your sports listing, you have some good ones, ( see comment section) and will give a full break down in the future. Barrel racing is boring, so I don't care what the crowd does or what you want to call it. GSP team 2 soccer was the pinnacle of what a true sports team is, thereby making soccer a sport if for no other reason than that.
Kelby, your theory has been reviewed and approved. The committee will also recognize sex as a sport. Furthermore, the committee would like to consider "angry sex" an extreme sport....kind of like bullfighting.
Steak
Thursday, June 19, 2008
More sports commentary
Brandon,
I agree, golf is extremely hard (although you are one of the few people I have played a round with, and you know I pretty much mastered it by the fourth hole) , and Tiger is an athlete. However, I regret to inform you, that upon further review, tennis is still not a sport and swimming was ruled out due to the shaving of body hair by males.
I agree, golf is extremely hard (although you are one of the few people I have played a round with, and you know I pretty much mastered it by the fourth hole) , and Tiger is an athlete. However, I regret to inform you, that upon further review, tennis is still not a sport and swimming was ruled out due to the shaving of body hair by males.
Comments Appreciated
I appreciate the comments about the sports posting. A couple of things in reply. Brandon, I did allow that Ping Pong was a sport, the crowds are not typically quiet for that. While tennis certainly takes great stamina, physical conditioning and athleticism, it is not a sport because the crowd has to be quiet. Doodle, the gallon challenge falls into the awesome category, kind of the opposite of cheerleading, which is boring. Neil, I like your argument. The problem is, you now have to develop a universally accepted definition of what athletic prowess is. It also allows anything where two people are competing to be a sport, such as hot dog eating, playing video games, fighting for the arm rest at the movie theater, looking for a parking space in a croweded parking lot just to name a few. That is fine, I just refuse to accept "gaming" as a sport. Also assuming that in some of those cases, the people engaged have the new universally accepted definition of what athletic prowess is. The spectators and their collective actions have to be accounted for, otherwise, I don't think this discussion would even be neccessary. I guess it depends on if you believe whether the tree that falls in the woods makes a sound or not. Mindi, you obviously didn't read the post if you have to ask that question.
Lastly, all I really care about is that no one tried to tell me how golf is a sport, which was the real point of the whole post.
Lastly, all I really care about is that no one tried to tell me how golf is a sport, which was the real point of the whole post.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
The Results are In
Thanks to those who voted. The results are that Kenny Chesney is the biggest hack in country music today.
Thanks for playing.
C
Thanks for playing.
C
Sport VS. Recreational Activity
Those of you who know me, know that I refuse to recognize golf as a sport. It is merely a recreational activity. I know what some of you are already thinking, because I have heard it before.... " Tiger Woods is truly an athlete, he is in great shape and bench presses 400lbs., blah, blah, blah." First off, he is the ONLY golfer that is in that kind of shape. Secondly, that doesn't make golf a sport. If that were the only criteria, then perhaps it is also a sport when Tiger Woods takes out the trash. Heck, it must be a sport anytime someone of athletic prowess takes out the trash if that is the argument being used.
I came up with a theory as to what is a sport and what isn't. It went something like this. Anytime you are in direct physical confiict with an opposing person or animal, that would make it a sport, as long as it applied to something people would at least historically consider to be a sport. In other words, when someone or something else is trying to keep you from accomplishing whatever it is you need to accomplish to win. This theory works great, until you consider track and field competitions, one of the oldest sports around. Sure, you are racing against other people or trying to throw the shot put farther, but they don't get to trip you or grab your arm while you are trying to beat them. Therefore, it doesn't follow the theory.
I have caught some golf and tennis over the past couple of weeks ( as you sometimes do when you only have two television channels). That is where I discovered what truly keeps something from being a sport. The fact that the audience ( after all, recreational activities don't have crowds) has to remain quiet when golfers and tennis players are hitting. Huh? You want to call this a sport, but people have to be quiet at the most critical moments? Seriously? This has to be the clincher for what is and isn't a sport, even more than the first criteria mentioned above.
The whole crowd doesn't have to get quiet when a baseball player is trying to hit the ball, or when a quarterback is throwing a pass, or when sprinters are racing to the finish line, or when a basketball player is shooting a free throw. I just don't get it. It can't possibly be a sport when the audience is supposed to quiet and reserved. No way, no how, period. So, by combining the two theories, it is easy to see what is a sport and what is a recreational activity. It must satisfy both of these criteria to be considered a sport, and not just a recreational activity. Track and Field gets somewhat of a bye due to historical significance and the fact that criteria two carries more weight. It doesn't mean that you can call anything a sport, just because it satisfies the two criteria, I guess you can, but that makes you a moron. Me throwing firecrackers at a spiderman poster while someone tries to block them and three people scream does not constitute a sport. It does not satisfy the first criteria, because that has not historically been considered a sport. New sports to be added to the list will have to stand the test of time in being considered a sport before they are even allowed to be considered against the aforementioned criteria. So, what we have based on that are as follows. ....
Swimming: RA Basketball: Sport
Diving: RA Football: Sport
Golf: RA Baseball: Sport
Tennis: RA Soccer: Sport
Cheerleading: Boring Nascar: Sport ( I said it)
Figure Skating: RA Ping Pong : Sport
Dancing: RA Volleyball: Sport
X-Games: RA Dodgeball: Sport
Mini Golf : RA Mini Golf with "prison rules" : Sport
Bowling: RA Bullriding: Sport
That is the list for now. Please feel free to add any you can think of, or dispute my claims. However, if I don't agree, I just won't publish you comment....fascism...not a sport.
C
I came up with a theory as to what is a sport and what isn't. It went something like this. Anytime you are in direct physical confiict with an opposing person or animal, that would make it a sport, as long as it applied to something people would at least historically consider to be a sport. In other words, when someone or something else is trying to keep you from accomplishing whatever it is you need to accomplish to win. This theory works great, until you consider track and field competitions, one of the oldest sports around. Sure, you are racing against other people or trying to throw the shot put farther, but they don't get to trip you or grab your arm while you are trying to beat them. Therefore, it doesn't follow the theory.
I have caught some golf and tennis over the past couple of weeks ( as you sometimes do when you only have two television channels). That is where I discovered what truly keeps something from being a sport. The fact that the audience ( after all, recreational activities don't have crowds) has to remain quiet when golfers and tennis players are hitting. Huh? You want to call this a sport, but people have to be quiet at the most critical moments? Seriously? This has to be the clincher for what is and isn't a sport, even more than the first criteria mentioned above.
The whole crowd doesn't have to get quiet when a baseball player is trying to hit the ball, or when a quarterback is throwing a pass, or when sprinters are racing to the finish line, or when a basketball player is shooting a free throw. I just don't get it. It can't possibly be a sport when the audience is supposed to quiet and reserved. No way, no how, period. So, by combining the two theories, it is easy to see what is a sport and what is a recreational activity. It must satisfy both of these criteria to be considered a sport, and not just a recreational activity. Track and Field gets somewhat of a bye due to historical significance and the fact that criteria two carries more weight. It doesn't mean that you can call anything a sport, just because it satisfies the two criteria, I guess you can, but that makes you a moron. Me throwing firecrackers at a spiderman poster while someone tries to block them and three people scream does not constitute a sport. It does not satisfy the first criteria, because that has not historically been considered a sport. New sports to be added to the list will have to stand the test of time in being considered a sport before they are even allowed to be considered against the aforementioned criteria. So, what we have based on that are as follows. ....
Swimming: RA Basketball: Sport
Diving: RA Football: Sport
Golf: RA Baseball: Sport
Tennis: RA Soccer: Sport
Cheerleading: Boring Nascar: Sport ( I said it)
Figure Skating: RA Ping Pong : Sport
Dancing: RA Volleyball: Sport
X-Games: RA Dodgeball: Sport
Mini Golf : RA Mini Golf with "prison rules" : Sport
Bowling: RA Bullriding: Sport
That is the list for now. Please feel free to add any you can think of, or dispute my claims. However, if I don't agree, I just won't publish you comment....fascism...not a sport.
C
An addenum to Kelby's mortgage post
Most of my readers probably see Kelby's blog, if not, they should check it out. This post is, well, an addenum to his most recent post, which can be found here. www.westtexasconservative.blogspot.com
One thing that should be pointed out, is that with this scenario, which is the best way to go, there will be 2 months out of the year where you actually make 3 payments instead of 2. For example on the 3rd, 17th, and 31st of a given month. Those 2 extra payments are what builds a very large chunk of that extra equity, as they should be roughly 100% principle and no interest. This usually isn't an issue, since you will also get paid 3 times a month for 2 months out of the year if you are paid every 2 weeks. If these two month don't coincide, make sure you keep that extra money aside when you have to make 3 mortgage payments in one month.
You also have to make sure your lender doesn't put this extra cash in some sort of holding account, which they sometimes do. They sometimes will not apply it to your principle unless specifically instructed to do so, so when they get that extra payment twice a year, they put it into this other account and it just sits there, which doesn't help you out much at all. The program Kelby is speaking of may do this for you automatically , I am not sure.
C
One thing that should be pointed out, is that with this scenario, which is the best way to go, there will be 2 months out of the year where you actually make 3 payments instead of 2. For example on the 3rd, 17th, and 31st of a given month. Those 2 extra payments are what builds a very large chunk of that extra equity, as they should be roughly 100% principle and no interest. This usually isn't an issue, since you will also get paid 3 times a month for 2 months out of the year if you are paid every 2 weeks. If these two month don't coincide, make sure you keep that extra money aside when you have to make 3 mortgage payments in one month.
You also have to make sure your lender doesn't put this extra cash in some sort of holding account, which they sometimes do. They sometimes will not apply it to your principle unless specifically instructed to do so, so when they get that extra payment twice a year, they put it into this other account and it just sits there, which doesn't help you out much at all. The program Kelby is speaking of may do this for you automatically , I am not sure.
C
Monday, June 16, 2008
Wall Street Traders find the best party in NYC
I really can't believe this video. As in I can't believe these guys are for real. Sadly I think they are. I can't stop laughing at this video. I can't remember the last time I ran into tools like these guys, maybe never.
Friday, June 13, 2008
Mowing the grass and taking names
So yesterday I decided to mow the grass. It was getting a little unruly, and I am planning on leaving town this weekend, so I didn't want it to get out of hand over the weekend. I was afraid that my Wal-Mart mower would not be able to handle the grass if it grew much more. So I started to mow. I was mowing in the back yard when my neighbor that lives behind me approached me. So, I killed the mower and began talking with him. He apologized for being a bad neighbor and not introducing himself sooner, which of course was no problem.
He is 83 years old and a very enjoyable fellow. We spent 20 or so mintues talking about his wife, garden, his cancer, his stroke, his Japanese doctors who he "wasn't too sure about at first, because I lived in Japan". He also informed me that he would like to cut a branch out of my tree, because it was broken and he didn't want it to fall on my head when I was mowing, which I thought was nice. I examined the branch, and it was not broken, only a branch with a knot in it that makes it bend downward, however, I could tell he was very much excited about the prospect of this, so I gladly consented. Anyway, here is what struck me about the coversation....
I don't know what age this happens at, but at some point, it seems that you have to end all sentences with "see", because this is what he kept doing, and this is not limited to just him. I have encountered countless old people who like to end their sentence with "see".
" My neighbor wanted me to help him plow his garden, he is 86....see"
" I had a stroke about 4 years ago, and my brain was screwed up, so my strength was gone too, did you know that?, if your brain is screwed up you don't have any strength.....see"
" My wife told me I better come and meet you before I cut that tree limb down...see"
" The guy that used to live in this house was a full blooded indian...he was from Oklahoma....see"
" I tried to go and visit him once, but I got lost...see....I wil have to go back and try to find his house."
" When I had my stroke, I would get lost real easylike see, I had to stay at home for 7 or 8 months because if I left, I would get lost and couldn't get back home .....see"
" If I was 75, and felt as good as I do now, I would go and put me in an application at Wal-Mart down there see, and look at me, I am going good nowadays, but if I felt like that when I was 75, I would go down there and get a job and put those things on the shelf see.....I am real strong now since I started taking flax seed oil....see...that is how they treat cancer in Canada see."
" I am not going to get another job, because I want to live a long time, so I just work around here see."
The last comment was followed by him putting his wheelbarrow under my tree and standing in it, as it wobbled to beat the band while he cut that limb down. I was on my way to stabilize it for him when I turned around and saw him in that very precarious position, but apparently not as precarious as stocking shelves at Wal-Mart, but he was already done...and looked very satisfied for it.....C
He is 83 years old and a very enjoyable fellow. We spent 20 or so mintues talking about his wife, garden, his cancer, his stroke, his Japanese doctors who he "wasn't too sure about at first, because I lived in Japan". He also informed me that he would like to cut a branch out of my tree, because it was broken and he didn't want it to fall on my head when I was mowing, which I thought was nice. I examined the branch, and it was not broken, only a branch with a knot in it that makes it bend downward, however, I could tell he was very much excited about the prospect of this, so I gladly consented. Anyway, here is what struck me about the coversation....
I don't know what age this happens at, but at some point, it seems that you have to end all sentences with "see", because this is what he kept doing, and this is not limited to just him. I have encountered countless old people who like to end their sentence with "see".
" My neighbor wanted me to help him plow his garden, he is 86....see"
" I had a stroke about 4 years ago, and my brain was screwed up, so my strength was gone too, did you know that?, if your brain is screwed up you don't have any strength.....see"
" My wife told me I better come and meet you before I cut that tree limb down...see"
" The guy that used to live in this house was a full blooded indian...he was from Oklahoma....see"
" I tried to go and visit him once, but I got lost...see....I wil have to go back and try to find his house."
" When I had my stroke, I would get lost real easylike see, I had to stay at home for 7 or 8 months because if I left, I would get lost and couldn't get back home .....see"
" If I was 75, and felt as good as I do now, I would go and put me in an application at Wal-Mart down there see, and look at me, I am going good nowadays, but if I felt like that when I was 75, I would go down there and get a job and put those things on the shelf see.....I am real strong now since I started taking flax seed oil....see...that is how they treat cancer in Canada see."
" I am not going to get another job, because I want to live a long time, so I just work around here see."
The last comment was followed by him putting his wheelbarrow under my tree and standing in it, as it wobbled to beat the band while he cut that limb down. I was on my way to stabilize it for him when I turned around and saw him in that very precarious position, but apparently not as precarious as stocking shelves at Wal-Mart, but he was already done...and looked very satisfied for it.....C
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
A Response
To Mindi: If orange money is used, you only get orange money in return. When was the last time you didn't get change back when you used green money. Same idea, if the store doesn't have it, then they say " I can't make change for that, sorry." It will work, trust me.
To Toddi: So very good to hear from you. I hope things are well. I still plan on returning to the Go Away ranch one day for a stay. I told Bill as much at Kelby's rehearsal dinner (what a great time by the way) and his reply was " I dare you.", which sounds like an invite to me. I don't know when it will be, but I will be back that way someday. Me and the wife to be are planning on moving back to Texas somewhere, we don't know exactly where yet..I would like Amarillo, but that got an absolute executive veto from the missus...she has two more years of residency in Oklahoma City, and I may possibly try to get into an OMS residency, I will just have to see how that plays out. Rural Missouri is a very interesting place but I like it....and on that note...my story for the day.
I recently found out, that in the state of Missouri, it is still legal to brew your own moonshine or stump whiskey. What is stump whiskey you ask? Well it is like this. Someone says, " I know a place where you can put twenty dollars in an old stump, and the next day some "stump whiskey" will show up. So you just have to find said stump ( they can tell you where it is) and put in your money there and the next day you go back and magically some stump whiskey has appeared. I have not found this magical stump, but I have tried some stump whiskey, and the words stout and firey come to mind. Although you can't sell your moonshine, it is perfectly legal to concoct a certain amount of home brew for your own personal use...now if I could just find a distillation kit somewhere.
C
To Toddi: So very good to hear from you. I hope things are well. I still plan on returning to the Go Away ranch one day for a stay. I told Bill as much at Kelby's rehearsal dinner (what a great time by the way) and his reply was " I dare you.", which sounds like an invite to me. I don't know when it will be, but I will be back that way someday. Me and the wife to be are planning on moving back to Texas somewhere, we don't know exactly where yet..I would like Amarillo, but that got an absolute executive veto from the missus...she has two more years of residency in Oklahoma City, and I may possibly try to get into an OMS residency, I will just have to see how that plays out. Rural Missouri is a very interesting place but I like it....and on that note...my story for the day.
I recently found out, that in the state of Missouri, it is still legal to brew your own moonshine or stump whiskey. What is stump whiskey you ask? Well it is like this. Someone says, " I know a place where you can put twenty dollars in an old stump, and the next day some "stump whiskey" will show up. So you just have to find said stump ( they can tell you where it is) and put in your money there and the next day you go back and magically some stump whiskey has appeared. I have not found this magical stump, but I have tried some stump whiskey, and the words stout and firey come to mind. Although you can't sell your moonshine, it is perfectly legal to concoct a certain amount of home brew for your own personal use...now if I could just find a distillation kit somewhere.
C
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Mad Money
I was talking to my buddy Chris last night...the one that lives in Texas, not Missouri. Me and Chris like to talk about all kinds of things...mainly he tells me how boring being married is, and I tell him how totally awesome ( I actually use that phrase) being not married is, and that I am thinking about backing out of my wedding and moving to Australia...assuming the women there shave, which I think they do.
We often like to solve all of the worlds problems when time permits and his baby, allows us to do so. So I got to thinking last night, that we should have different colored money for people that receive any state or federal subsidies, or "welfare" if you will. What is the purpose of this different colored money you ask? Simple really. The money would look exactly the same as our current money, only it would be orange or red or something like that, instead of green. The colored money would have the exact some monetary value as the green money we currently use....and here is where the problem gets fixed. The colored money, we will call it orange from here on out, for the sake of brevity and carpal tunnel risks. The orange money could be used as current money with one exception...it would not be accepted for the purchase of tobacco, alcohol, or firearms. That's it, that is the only difference. It works just like regular money, only no booze, tobaccoo or guns can be purchased using it.
I know you are thinking, what if they just put the check in the bank and then withdraw the cash? Well, most of these people don't have a bank account anyway, because they live on a strictly cash basis, as in, wait for the check on the first of the month. Furthermore, it would be very easy to have the bank separate the two accounts within the one account and have available funds categorized as "subsidies" or not. It wouldn't be that hard. If someone deposits orange cash or a govt. check, they get orange cash back.
To further allow this to happen, you will also no longer be able to buy tobacco, alcohol or firearms with personal check or credit cards. It will have to be cash only...the green kind. This will create some inconveniences, but a small price to pay to not have to watch someone buy booze and cigarettes with my tax dollars.
I am sure some of the welfare geniuses will decide to trade an orange twenty for a green five, so they can buy their alcolhol. Fine by me, this should be perfectly legal...because that way, I get fifteen of my tax dollars back that don't get wasted on cigarettes, so if the guy can't smoke as much, maybe in 15 years I won't be paying for him to have an oxygen tank he can lug around or the medications to treat his emphysema that my tax dollars gave him.....so hopefully he won't sue me for buying him cigarettes and indirectly being responsible for his "medical " problems.
People should be able to drink and smoke all they want. People can make that decision for themselves...none of my business. But they should have to pay for that themselves.
We often like to solve all of the worlds problems when time permits and his baby, allows us to do so. So I got to thinking last night, that we should have different colored money for people that receive any state or federal subsidies, or "welfare" if you will. What is the purpose of this different colored money you ask? Simple really. The money would look exactly the same as our current money, only it would be orange or red or something like that, instead of green. The colored money would have the exact some monetary value as the green money we currently use....and here is where the problem gets fixed. The colored money, we will call it orange from here on out, for the sake of brevity and carpal tunnel risks. The orange money could be used as current money with one exception...it would not be accepted for the purchase of tobacco, alcohol, or firearms. That's it, that is the only difference. It works just like regular money, only no booze, tobaccoo or guns can be purchased using it.
I know you are thinking, what if they just put the check in the bank and then withdraw the cash? Well, most of these people don't have a bank account anyway, because they live on a strictly cash basis, as in, wait for the check on the first of the month. Furthermore, it would be very easy to have the bank separate the two accounts within the one account and have available funds categorized as "subsidies" or not. It wouldn't be that hard. If someone deposits orange cash or a govt. check, they get orange cash back.
To further allow this to happen, you will also no longer be able to buy tobacco, alcohol or firearms with personal check or credit cards. It will have to be cash only...the green kind. This will create some inconveniences, but a small price to pay to not have to watch someone buy booze and cigarettes with my tax dollars.
I am sure some of the welfare geniuses will decide to trade an orange twenty for a green five, so they can buy their alcolhol. Fine by me, this should be perfectly legal...because that way, I get fifteen of my tax dollars back that don't get wasted on cigarettes, so if the guy can't smoke as much, maybe in 15 years I won't be paying for him to have an oxygen tank he can lug around or the medications to treat his emphysema that my tax dollars gave him.....so hopefully he won't sue me for buying him cigarettes and indirectly being responsible for his "medical " problems.
People should be able to drink and smoke all they want. People can make that decision for themselves...none of my business. But they should have to pay for that themselves.
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Shopping for groceries
I usually go to the grocery store 2 times a month, because I hate going so I try to buy enough to last me at least two weeks, which always results in me over -buying pretty regularly. I recently read somewhere, that the average American throws away $600 worth of food each year. When you think about it, that is A LOT of food, even with the current prices...for myself, that is roughly 4-6 months of food. I know I don't throw away near that much, because I only spend a little more than twice that for groceries for the whole year, but I do throw away some. You know how it is, you just let food sit until it spoils, because you just don't really want to eat it. Or you just keep collecting canned goods and boxed food and the old gets pushed to the back and keeps multiplying.
In light of this, about two months ago, I decided to try to cease and desist on my throwing away food, both for the money reason, and because it doesn't seem right, almost criminal, to throw away food while people are starving, even here in America; simply because I let something spoil because it doesn't sound appetizing, or because I buy too much at the store and the old gets pushed back to the back of the shelf. I have made a concerted effort to have all perishables consumed, and many of my canned goods and boxes of food eaten before I go back to the store for more. This had led to some interesting and delicious foods, and some not so much so.
This has also allowed me to not accumulate comestibles at a rate beyond which they can be consumed. It also keeps me from buying too much of the same thing, because I know I will have to try and eat all of it.
In light of this, about two months ago, I decided to try to cease and desist on my throwing away food, both for the money reason, and because it doesn't seem right, almost criminal, to throw away food while people are starving, even here in America; simply because I let something spoil because it doesn't sound appetizing, or because I buy too much at the store and the old gets pushed back to the back of the shelf. I have made a concerted effort to have all perishables consumed, and many of my canned goods and boxes of food eaten before I go back to the store for more. This had led to some interesting and delicious foods, and some not so much so.
This has also allowed me to not accumulate comestibles at a rate beyond which they can be consumed. It also keeps me from buying too much of the same thing, because I know I will have to try and eat all of it.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Tony Armas
I was thinking today how RBI baseball is the greatest baseball game of all time. Seriously, they should have stopped making arcade baseball games after they made that one and just given up.
I was noticing today that my voice was a lot lower than it usually is. It does that sometimes, and I don't really know why, but it is pretty sweet when it does that. I always imagine that I could be some sort of radio announcer or sing Barry White songs at a bar in the airport and get tips from 55 year old women with wrinkles and sagginess who just love the sound of a sultry bass voice eminating from the depths of well-marbled chest such as mine. Perhaps I could find some sugar momma who wouldn't make me work and just by me bon-bons by the dozen and get me all the newest video games...which I wouldn't really care about as long as I had RBI baseball.
Steak
I was noticing today that my voice was a lot lower than it usually is. It does that sometimes, and I don't really know why, but it is pretty sweet when it does that. I always imagine that I could be some sort of radio announcer or sing Barry White songs at a bar in the airport and get tips from 55 year old women with wrinkles and sagginess who just love the sound of a sultry bass voice eminating from the depths of well-marbled chest such as mine. Perhaps I could find some sugar momma who wouldn't make me work and just by me bon-bons by the dozen and get me all the newest video games...which I wouldn't really care about as long as I had RBI baseball.
Steak
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Long time No post
Well,
I know it has been awhile since I posted, but I have been rather busy. I went to Oklahoma City couple weeks ago, and have spent 2 of the last 3 weekends turkey hunting to no avail, nonetheless, I had a good time. I enjoy everything about it, except for the getting up early in the morning.
For those of you wanting to know, Diesel is doing great. Although, we did have a problem at school the other day, because he keeps trying to use his cigarettes as currency with the other kids. This doesn't do a lot of good, since none of the other kids smoke, and furthermore, it appears to be against school policy. So, I guess that means no more prison movies or television shows for him, he is picking up bad habits from those.
I have also survived a couple of tornadoes since I last posted. I was lucky enough to sustain little to no damage, and my house was okay too.
So this is what has been bugging me lately, sadly, I am guilty of it too, but have made a concerted effort to stop this.....I am absolutely sick and tired of listening to people complain about the price of gas and the price of food. I understand the costs are going up, and that is unfortunate, but enough is enough. It is ridiculous that this is all anyone can talk about, and most of that talking is complaining. We are fortunate enough in America to historically have paid a very minimal amount of our income toward transportation and sustenance. The average american spends less than 10 percent of his or her income on food, compared to 1/3 in most other industrialized nations, specifically in Europe. We still currently, even at close to 4 dollars a gallon, spend much less on fuel than other consumers in other nations have been spending for years, not just recently.
We are slowly becoming a victim of our own success. People want to moan and complain about fuel and food prices, but they don't want to give up the luxuries that they have grown so accustomed to as a result of our extremely minimal cost of living over the last few decades. It is easier to complain of rising costs than it is to keep using that old cell phone or cut off the cable. People "have to have" a new cell phone or big screen tv or 100 HD channels. People "have to have" a new car or new clothes. And please, please for my sanity, don't complain of prices at the pump and then go in the same gas station and spend 1.29 on a 20 oz bottle of water.....you just paid almost 8 dollars a gallon for that bottle of water. People have developed the mindset that they are so entitled to these luxuries, that suggesting a decrease in spending on those items is almost an attmept to strip their civil rights. I just don't get it, I guess it is just something to talk about as much as anything. People just want to have something to complain about, so there it is.
People want to complain about all the money that oil companies are making. True, they are making boatloads of money. This is what happens in free market and capitalistic economy. I bet those same people have not been complaining of the low cost of living they have enjoyed for so many years as a result of the very same principles that allow oil companies to make so much money.
In closing, I am tired of listening to people complain about fuel and food prices, if it is becoming that much of a burden, perhaps it is time to re-evaluate what is a "necessity" when it comes to spending one's money. If only necessities are being purchased ( can't think of the last time I saw this happeneing anywhere) and it is still causing a bind, then perhaps some complaining can be allowed.
Music currently listening to - The Black Keys "Attack and Release" - fantastic album.
Craig
I know it has been awhile since I posted, but I have been rather busy. I went to Oklahoma City couple weeks ago, and have spent 2 of the last 3 weekends turkey hunting to no avail, nonetheless, I had a good time. I enjoy everything about it, except for the getting up early in the morning.
For those of you wanting to know, Diesel is doing great. Although, we did have a problem at school the other day, because he keeps trying to use his cigarettes as currency with the other kids. This doesn't do a lot of good, since none of the other kids smoke, and furthermore, it appears to be against school policy. So, I guess that means no more prison movies or television shows for him, he is picking up bad habits from those.
I have also survived a couple of tornadoes since I last posted. I was lucky enough to sustain little to no damage, and my house was okay too.
So this is what has been bugging me lately, sadly, I am guilty of it too, but have made a concerted effort to stop this.....I am absolutely sick and tired of listening to people complain about the price of gas and the price of food. I understand the costs are going up, and that is unfortunate, but enough is enough. It is ridiculous that this is all anyone can talk about, and most of that talking is complaining. We are fortunate enough in America to historically have paid a very minimal amount of our income toward transportation and sustenance. The average american spends less than 10 percent of his or her income on food, compared to 1/3 in most other industrialized nations, specifically in Europe. We still currently, even at close to 4 dollars a gallon, spend much less on fuel than other consumers in other nations have been spending for years, not just recently.
We are slowly becoming a victim of our own success. People want to moan and complain about fuel and food prices, but they don't want to give up the luxuries that they have grown so accustomed to as a result of our extremely minimal cost of living over the last few decades. It is easier to complain of rising costs than it is to keep using that old cell phone or cut off the cable. People "have to have" a new cell phone or big screen tv or 100 HD channels. People "have to have" a new car or new clothes. And please, please for my sanity, don't complain of prices at the pump and then go in the same gas station and spend 1.29 on a 20 oz bottle of water.....you just paid almost 8 dollars a gallon for that bottle of water. People have developed the mindset that they are so entitled to these luxuries, that suggesting a decrease in spending on those items is almost an attmept to strip their civil rights. I just don't get it, I guess it is just something to talk about as much as anything. People just want to have something to complain about, so there it is.
People want to complain about all the money that oil companies are making. True, they are making boatloads of money. This is what happens in free market and capitalistic economy. I bet those same people have not been complaining of the low cost of living they have enjoyed for so many years as a result of the very same principles that allow oil companies to make so much money.
In closing, I am tired of listening to people complain about fuel and food prices, if it is becoming that much of a burden, perhaps it is time to re-evaluate what is a "necessity" when it comes to spending one's money. If only necessities are being purchased ( can't think of the last time I saw this happeneing anywhere) and it is still causing a bind, then perhaps some complaining can be allowed.
Music currently listening to - The Black Keys "Attack and Release" - fantastic album.
Craig
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
The Wide World of Sports
I have arrived at the realization that I am no longer a sports fan of the professional nature. I still enjoy various sporting activities myself, and even watching some sports. I can still easily sit down and watch college football or basketball, any high school sporting event ( with the exception of girl's basketball) or go to a baseball game of any kind. There is something about going to a baseball park to watch a baseball game that will always appeal to me.
Basically professional sports have been slowly losing appeal to me over the years. At this point, I am quite certain that none exists. I cannot remember the last time I watched an entire professional basketball or football game. I think it has been at least 3 or 4 years. I think I caught a game or two of the baseball playoffs last year, but only because that is what the " house " was watching.
I have been trying to figure out why sports, specifically professional sports have ceased to interest me. I don't think I can pinpoint the reason if I had to pick one. However, I will make an attempt to explain it, as much to myself , if for no other reason. One issue, I think has to be the money. I find it impossible for me to relate to the emotion shown by players of professional sports. I am even further put out anytime there is any degree of whining or moping about a loss. I don't understand. I am supposed to watch this, and then somehow feel connected to what is going on enough to feel sorry for someone who makes 10 million dollars a year? It just seems too far-fetched and impossible. I just can't make myself care with regards to that.
I can't force myself to care who wins or loses a respective game. Perhaps this would be different if I had grown up with "a team" or something like that, and could associate that team with various times in my life, but we moved around a bit, and my dad never had " a team" but would only watch if a game was on and he didn't have any work to do, which was only a moderate amount of the time. I don't know, maybe not having "a team" makes it hard for me to care. I just can't understand why I should sit in front of a television for 3-4 hours watching a game, when I could care less who wins.
I guess that is last reason I can come up with is that I just flat out don't care who wins or who does what, or who gets the mvp, or scores "x" amount of points, or hits "x" amount of home runs. It doesn't matter to me, and doesn't change anything in my day to day life.
I don't know why amateur sports still hold so much appeal, I guess it is the whole purity thing, however, even amateur sports don't entertain me the way they once did. I can still enjoy watching a game with friends, but have found that I really enjoy hanging out with friends more than I care about the actual game.
I guess I could go on about all the other reasons that I just don't care about professional sports anymore. But I feel like they will all somehow be tied into the ones I have already given.
BSK
Basically professional sports have been slowly losing appeal to me over the years. At this point, I am quite certain that none exists. I cannot remember the last time I watched an entire professional basketball or football game. I think it has been at least 3 or 4 years. I think I caught a game or two of the baseball playoffs last year, but only because that is what the " house " was watching.
I have been trying to figure out why sports, specifically professional sports have ceased to interest me. I don't think I can pinpoint the reason if I had to pick one. However, I will make an attempt to explain it, as much to myself , if for no other reason. One issue, I think has to be the money. I find it impossible for me to relate to the emotion shown by players of professional sports. I am even further put out anytime there is any degree of whining or moping about a loss. I don't understand. I am supposed to watch this, and then somehow feel connected to what is going on enough to feel sorry for someone who makes 10 million dollars a year? It just seems too far-fetched and impossible. I just can't make myself care with regards to that.
I can't force myself to care who wins or loses a respective game. Perhaps this would be different if I had grown up with "a team" or something like that, and could associate that team with various times in my life, but we moved around a bit, and my dad never had " a team" but would only watch if a game was on and he didn't have any work to do, which was only a moderate amount of the time. I don't know, maybe not having "a team" makes it hard for me to care. I just can't understand why I should sit in front of a television for 3-4 hours watching a game, when I could care less who wins.
I guess that is last reason I can come up with is that I just flat out don't care who wins or who does what, or who gets the mvp, or scores "x" amount of points, or hits "x" amount of home runs. It doesn't matter to me, and doesn't change anything in my day to day life.
I don't know why amateur sports still hold so much appeal, I guess it is the whole purity thing, however, even amateur sports don't entertain me the way they once did. I can still enjoy watching a game with friends, but have found that I really enjoy hanging out with friends more than I care about the actual game.
I guess I could go on about all the other reasons that I just don't care about professional sports anymore. But I feel like they will all somehow be tied into the ones I have already given.
BSK
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Fighting the Good Fight
Been awhile since I have been on. So if anyone still checks this blog, they will get to see the new posts. I had to stop blogging for some time due to carpal tunnel syndrome, but am recovering nicely and am in good spirits today. Now, on with the bloggerdom....
Those of you who know me and stay in touch with me will read this with an air of familiarity. Those that don't, this will come as not wholly a surprise, if we have at least had a few conversations. I decided some while back that I was starting a crusade against commercialism in its entirety. I guess it all started about the time that I was moving from TEXAS to missouri after I finished up at school. As I entered into adulthood, there were many new responsibilities, educational opportunities, and a lot of driving. Things like buying a house, finding a downpayment for said house, insurance of all kinds (disability, life, auto, homeowner's, prostate, nuclear attack, transmogrification). I bought a decent house in missouri, a nice little spread, 1600 sq ft, right on the edge of town. The house is nice, and old. It was built in 1982, and had not been updated since then.
Immediately, everyone had all these ideas of how to "fix up" the house, all of which involve money in varying amounts. I am all for a little dressing things up, and spent a little money on paint, and installed some light fixtures and ceiling fans. What I have found, is that is not enough for the average person anymore, as I will explain a little more later, but for now, another anecdotal story.
I recently got engaged, for those that don't know. I understand that historically a wedding and engagement ring are methodologies to encourage people to spend lavishly. However, this didn't soften the blows or rancid taste left in my mouth from dealing with people about this.
First the engagement ring. I did a lot of research about this. In doing so, I visited several jewlery stores in both missouri and oklahoma city. I realize the nature of sales is to encourage people to spend more money, especially if one gets paid based on percentages. What I cannot, and will not allow, is for people to try to sell me something and somehow attmept to connect it to my emotions, self-worth, respect, etc, etc. I ran into this alot when looking at engagement rings. Here are some of the phrases I encountered and some of my responses....
" You can't put a price on love".....ME : " I am not buying love, I think that is illegal in oklahoma, I am buying a diamond"
"This is the best way to show her you love her"
" Remember, she will wear this forever"
And my personal favorite " Any girl likes a bigger diamond, I know I do" .....ME: " When I decide to ask you to marry me, I will keep that in mind. "
Seriously, How much I care for my fiance is determined by how big a diamond I buy, that is what everyone is telling me? I meditated on this and it annoyed me. So I decided, I would only spend a certain amount, and refused to go over that, no matter that I could afford to easily go over that, because the whole scenario kept putting me off.
The beautiful and intelligent lady friend, now fiance-friend I suppose, has already encountered the same thing in looking at wedding details. Typical sales pitches are all the same as above in some form or fashion. All of them attempt to tie in a persons self-worth and respect with how much money they spend, how nice the flowers are, how nice the invitations are, what designer made the dress, where the reception is at, how big and beautiful the cake is, and for those of you who have been married, the list goes on and on. Once again, I have no problem with comforts, amenities, elegance and the like. However, I simply cannot tolerate when material possessions, ideas, events are somehow tied to my personal value and importance. Frankly, I feel both sad and amused by people who fall for this.
Understanably, the wedding business is mostly predicated on engaging people's emotions to get them to spend more money, and more than likely was one of the first business models to do so, as it is a big deal, and carries a significant amount of importance. The concerning aspect, and the reason for my battle against commercialism, is that this has simply spilled over into every facet of life for a large percentage of the population. You have to have a new car, a new phone, new furiture, new appliances, new clothes, new shoes, and on and on. I don't have an aversion to new things, however, I am of the opinion that I buy something new when I need it, not because some commercial or person tells me I need it. The disconcerting part of the trend is how a seemingly increasing number of people of all walks of life equate the newest and nicest thing with the value of another person. I just don't understand it. I still have shirts I wore in high school, and see no use in giving up on a garment, just because it is old. (Coincidentally, I can no longer fit in the jeans I wore in high school, or would wear them as well).
The fiance-friends contention is " Well, you buy a lot of hunting a fishing stuff" This is true, I do. I also use all those things. I dont' own one piece of hunting or fishing clothing or equipment that has not been used. Furthermore, I don't buy the top of the line, high dollar, most expensive equipment.
As a byproduct of this crusade, I have become somewhat of a minimalist. I try to buy as little as I can, and limit what I buy to what I need. This is the reason I have two empty bedrooms in my house with no furniture. I have no need for more furniture, I don't really need all of it that I have for that matter. This is the reason I have all used and or garage sell furniture, with the exception of my mattress. This is the reason I rarely buy new clothes. This is the reason my TV is from 1992. None of these things say anything about my personal value, unless you believe everything you hear and see in the media and from those annoying friends who are all about material things.
Lastly, because of these things, we have decided to get married in Mexico, for that reason, and the reason that is will be a blast.
Steak
Those of you who know me and stay in touch with me will read this with an air of familiarity. Those that don't, this will come as not wholly a surprise, if we have at least had a few conversations. I decided some while back that I was starting a crusade against commercialism in its entirety. I guess it all started about the time that I was moving from TEXAS to missouri after I finished up at school. As I entered into adulthood, there were many new responsibilities, educational opportunities, and a lot of driving. Things like buying a house, finding a downpayment for said house, insurance of all kinds (disability, life, auto, homeowner's, prostate, nuclear attack, transmogrification). I bought a decent house in missouri, a nice little spread, 1600 sq ft, right on the edge of town. The house is nice, and old. It was built in 1982, and had not been updated since then.
Immediately, everyone had all these ideas of how to "fix up" the house, all of which involve money in varying amounts. I am all for a little dressing things up, and spent a little money on paint, and installed some light fixtures and ceiling fans. What I have found, is that is not enough for the average person anymore, as I will explain a little more later, but for now, another anecdotal story.
I recently got engaged, for those that don't know. I understand that historically a wedding and engagement ring are methodologies to encourage people to spend lavishly. However, this didn't soften the blows or rancid taste left in my mouth from dealing with people about this.
First the engagement ring. I did a lot of research about this. In doing so, I visited several jewlery stores in both missouri and oklahoma city. I realize the nature of sales is to encourage people to spend more money, especially if one gets paid based on percentages. What I cannot, and will not allow, is for people to try to sell me something and somehow attmept to connect it to my emotions, self-worth, respect, etc, etc. I ran into this alot when looking at engagement rings. Here are some of the phrases I encountered and some of my responses....
" You can't put a price on love".....ME : " I am not buying love, I think that is illegal in oklahoma, I am buying a diamond"
"This is the best way to show her you love her"
" Remember, she will wear this forever"
And my personal favorite " Any girl likes a bigger diamond, I know I do" .....ME: " When I decide to ask you to marry me, I will keep that in mind. "
Seriously, How much I care for my fiance is determined by how big a diamond I buy, that is what everyone is telling me? I meditated on this and it annoyed me. So I decided, I would only spend a certain amount, and refused to go over that, no matter that I could afford to easily go over that, because the whole scenario kept putting me off.
The beautiful and intelligent lady friend, now fiance-friend I suppose, has already encountered the same thing in looking at wedding details. Typical sales pitches are all the same as above in some form or fashion. All of them attempt to tie in a persons self-worth and respect with how much money they spend, how nice the flowers are, how nice the invitations are, what designer made the dress, where the reception is at, how big and beautiful the cake is, and for those of you who have been married, the list goes on and on. Once again, I have no problem with comforts, amenities, elegance and the like. However, I simply cannot tolerate when material possessions, ideas, events are somehow tied to my personal value and importance. Frankly, I feel both sad and amused by people who fall for this.
Understanably, the wedding business is mostly predicated on engaging people's emotions to get them to spend more money, and more than likely was one of the first business models to do so, as it is a big deal, and carries a significant amount of importance. The concerning aspect, and the reason for my battle against commercialism, is that this has simply spilled over into every facet of life for a large percentage of the population. You have to have a new car, a new phone, new furiture, new appliances, new clothes, new shoes, and on and on. I don't have an aversion to new things, however, I am of the opinion that I buy something new when I need it, not because some commercial or person tells me I need it. The disconcerting part of the trend is how a seemingly increasing number of people of all walks of life equate the newest and nicest thing with the value of another person. I just don't understand it. I still have shirts I wore in high school, and see no use in giving up on a garment, just because it is old. (Coincidentally, I can no longer fit in the jeans I wore in high school, or would wear them as well).
The fiance-friends contention is " Well, you buy a lot of hunting a fishing stuff" This is true, I do. I also use all those things. I dont' own one piece of hunting or fishing clothing or equipment that has not been used. Furthermore, I don't buy the top of the line, high dollar, most expensive equipment.
As a byproduct of this crusade, I have become somewhat of a minimalist. I try to buy as little as I can, and limit what I buy to what I need. This is the reason I have two empty bedrooms in my house with no furniture. I have no need for more furniture, I don't really need all of it that I have for that matter. This is the reason I have all used and or garage sell furniture, with the exception of my mattress. This is the reason I rarely buy new clothes. This is the reason my TV is from 1992. None of these things say anything about my personal value, unless you believe everything you hear and see in the media and from those annoying friends who are all about material things.
Lastly, because of these things, we have decided to get married in Mexico, for that reason, and the reason that is will be a blast.
Steak
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
What will they think of next?
I wanted to relay a story to anyone who still reads the blog about my day today. It was the same as most days. I came to work, did my job, played some games on the internet, read Kelby's blog, read the news, so forth and so on. Now, specifically I would like to talk about my last patient of the day. The patient had a complaint that their teeth had been hurting for a whole year. Now, here is the kicker....
Patient : " I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because my teeth have been hurting"
I sat there with a completely dumbfounded look on my face, and tried not to laugh, or yell, or some combination of the two. I found myself wondering what kind of excuses it is apparently acceptable to use for not being an adult these days......so I came up with a few.
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because sometimes I have to pee during the day"
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because my girlfriend has to use the car sometimes during the week to get her nails done."
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because if I do, I won't be able to get my welfare check"
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because my right foot is a little bigger than my left"
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because I like to eat peanut brittle"
" I havne't been able to get a job for the last year, becuase sometimes I pretend like I am Viking and it scares the people I work with."
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because my great grandfather was a Comanche."
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because I was on a roller coaster 274 days"
"I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because I am being targeted by the government"
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because my hair is sometimes tangled up when I wake up"
That is all I have for now...I will try to come up with some other ridiculous lists, because I don't have to think very hard to do that, which consequently, has caused me to not be able to get a job for the last year.
C
Patient : " I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because my teeth have been hurting"
I sat there with a completely dumbfounded look on my face, and tried not to laugh, or yell, or some combination of the two. I found myself wondering what kind of excuses it is apparently acceptable to use for not being an adult these days......so I came up with a few.
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because sometimes I have to pee during the day"
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because my girlfriend has to use the car sometimes during the week to get her nails done."
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because if I do, I won't be able to get my welfare check"
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because my right foot is a little bigger than my left"
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because I like to eat peanut brittle"
" I havne't been able to get a job for the last year, becuase sometimes I pretend like I am Viking and it scares the people I work with."
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because my great grandfather was a Comanche."
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because I was on a roller coaster 274 days"
"I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because I am being targeted by the government"
" I haven't been able to get a job for the last year, because my hair is sometimes tangled up when I wake up"
That is all I have for now...I will try to come up with some other ridiculous lists, because I don't have to think very hard to do that, which consequently, has caused me to not be able to get a job for the last year.
C
Friday, January 18, 2008
Hmmmm
I have been watching some of the presidential debates latley. I don't really claim to understand politics or much of anything else for that matter. I just can't get over the fact that the big answer to all of america's woes seems to be to throw more money at people/programs that don't work already. Hilary has a plan to infuse the economy with life, president Bush may give a bigger tax refund and so on and so forth. Every candidate that talks has some plan to strengthen the economy. The problem with most of these plans is that they involve spending more money on people and programs. The consumption tax is a good idea, but is just another band-aid in the place of the serious problems. The financial woes of the country continue to escalate, while the dollar devalues, and the best plan we have is to throw more money away.
I love the social security tax, and watching the money go out of my check every month. It is good to know that there is not even a small chance of ever seeing that again if things continue as they are. But forget about me and my self-pity, what about those that have been paying the tx for 15 or 20 years already, they probably won't ever see any of that money again either. I just don't understand it.
The solution is easy, although will never actually happen. The federal budget has to be balanced, meaning a budget should not be able to be put into effect until every dollar is accounted for, end of story. Like I said, would never happen, there is no authority to enforce this, probably not the manpower either. However, Without this, what does is matter if taxes are 5% or 55%. It doesn't. The point of taxation is to fund the government.....and people think this will all be better by putting more money in the american taxpayer population: not even close. Not to mention, that we still regularly spend more than is taken in like some wino that won the lottery.
C
I love the social security tax, and watching the money go out of my check every month. It is good to know that there is not even a small chance of ever seeing that again if things continue as they are. But forget about me and my self-pity, what about those that have been paying the tx for 15 or 20 years already, they probably won't ever see any of that money again either. I just don't understand it.
The solution is easy, although will never actually happen. The federal budget has to be balanced, meaning a budget should not be able to be put into effect until every dollar is accounted for, end of story. Like I said, would never happen, there is no authority to enforce this, probably not the manpower either. However, Without this, what does is matter if taxes are 5% or 55%. It doesn't. The point of taxation is to fund the government.....and people think this will all be better by putting more money in the american taxpayer population: not even close. Not to mention, that we still regularly spend more than is taken in like some wino that won the lottery.
C
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)