This article bothers me  


but i don't have the time now to rant about it.

I love playing with numbers involving the Knicks payroll  


usually, i'll try and build a team of superstars with their 104 million payroll. but today, i noticed that if you combine the two teams in the middle of payroll (#15 and #16 out of 30), they equal 109 million!

The knicks are out of control.

You could put the spurs and suns together for less than 90 million.

The Black Yankees want a monument in monument stadium  


i wanted to write "plaque" for that first monument in the title, but i'm not sure how to spell it. anyway, here's my rant...

"I think if I ever got to talk to him, he would be all for it. This is like God, Mother and the Fourth of July. Who would be against it?"

To me, that speaks volumes of why it SHOULDN'T be done. I'm tired of people doing PC things just b/c they are PC. Of course everyone would be for it. But that doesn't make it "right". If the monuments are supposed to be about the YANKEES, then it should be exclusive of all other things, regardless of their importance.

So what if they played in yankee stadium? So did a lot of bands. Should they get a monument as well? I bet the redsox have played more games in yankee stadium over the years. Let's put up a statue of Pedro.

Bush annoys me even on mute  


I have the tv on, but on mute (i'm listening to music, doing work, etc etc). Meet the press is on, and i THINK they are talking about Iran. They keep showing clips of bush talking and i'm getting so angry.

He says something, pauses, and does his patented "I just said something so obviously simple and true" smirk. This is government at its lowest. Bush: "listen, i believe evil is bad, ok?" [smirks]. That's what i imagine he's saying. Instead of wasting his breath stating the complex issues of foreign policy in ONE sentence, he should just pass out colored bracelets during his state of the union address. Then we can all be on the same page.

For those of you who swear by team chemistry  


I would like you to address the issue that there's a good percentage of players on each team who don't even speak english. A whopping 37% of the dodgers roster hail from latin america (of course, some or most of them must speak english).

If you believe so much in the intangibles of a player, and team chemistry, and lockerroom cancers, would you be ok with a GM/owner saying "we don't want player x b/c he doesn't speak english and it would ruin our chemistry"

oh, snap.

Council of Gods  


wow, who's left? larry david is out b/c that latest season of Curb was so sitcommy. Neyer is out for obvious reasons (he's a borderline mark at this point). Maynerd is still in. there's really only a need for one Saber guy, but i can't decide between Billy Beane or Bill James. Netcop is out (he's a one trick pony).

Horatio Sanz?

Websites that i wish existed  


1) pictures and explanations of every tattoo in the NBA
2) an explanation of all the fueds in rap. History of, songs documenting, etc etc. something written by someone older than 15 would be nice.
3) that's it for now. I just wanted to make sure steve got started on those two things.

the downward spiral of technology (posted on tom's site)  


first, answering your question:

I have no idea what i'm talking about when it comes to business, but my guess would be that Apple's goal is to dominate the market that involves, but doesn't include, computers. They've lost the computer war (even though they make better computers), but have made a nice little niche or themselves with the Ipod. With Tivo, they'll get their foot in the door with the living room / entertainment center revolution. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that in 20 years, the very idea of a "computer" is outdated.

Now, onto the bigger issue. This might be the first time in human history that technology is actually going backwards. Businesses are spending an unusual amount of time trying to protect their assets instead of creating new ones. The next generation for Tivo doesn't look promising: they are going to superimpose their own commercials on top of the commercials that we now skip through.

CBS is attempting to put something forward called a Flagship _____ (can't think of the word now). Basically, tv programs will have codes embedded in them that will prevent copying.

What's going on here? Big business is so worried about losing any of their profits, that they are spending all their R/D on defense instead of offense. There will be a time in the near future where we can't even tape a tv program. We will long for the days of 1985. Everything on the net is becoming "premium". We'll never have another Napster again.

Not since NHL '96 has something "new" looked so bad compared to its predecesor. The future is not bright.

How much better would be....  


if they actually did things like list all the trades that happened today all in one nice chart. Now, maybe they've done that by now, but i wont know, b/c i'm boycotting them for the rest of the week. I got an email at work that was two words: Malik Rose?!?! I feared the worst, but had to confirm it at There were 3 or 4 articles on NBA trades. and they were all worded so awkwardly. I don't need two paragraphs on a trade. Well, a well-thought-out analysis would be ok AFTER you list the players. A and B for C, D, and E. that's it. One line. Then discuss away. This does me no good: Team 1, looking to get younger and longer, was shipping around A to anyone who would listen. Team 2 decided to take a chance, but are giving up two younger players in C and D. But along with A, team 1 will be throwing in B, who might be the steal of the trade. Player E will also be going to team 1 to balance out the contracts.


Comments on comments  


1) limp bizkit comment - clearly you missed the point. the fact that they always sucked (as you say), makes their rise and fall even more interesting. Why did they fall, how fast was the fall, and so on and so forth. It seems like all their fans turned at once. I want to know why.

2) shoes - why did my left shoe become untied 4 times, but not my right shoe at all? whenever a shoe becomes untied, i know i'm going to have a problem all day. There's gotta be somethign i'm missing

3) pop culture / females. there's going to be a follow up rant on this, b/c i want to explore it further. Ever notice that women tend not to be as passionate about any long term hobbies? I don't know where i'm going with that, but we'll see.

Part II of my yellow bracelet rant  


2 months ago, i got into a pretty heated debate regarding the yellow braclets. It's a running joke now....and someone, to get my goat, sent me an article from SI. I'm going to paste the entire thing, but bold the important stuff. my comments will be in italics and blocked off.

Lance Armstrong will return to the Alps and the Pyrenees this summer in an attempt to win a seventh consecutive Tour de France title. You know what that means, right? Another six months of people wearing those yellow LiveStrong bracelets. And you know what? I couldn't be happier.

The bracelets, which debuted last May, quickly became a fashion trend rivaled only by Von Dutch hats and Ugg boots.

[fashion trend? that's like the word soggy; there is no good way to use it. Fashion is disgustingly shallow. Trend indicates a temporary interest but no staying power. So a fashion trend is just a tempoary interest by the sheep towards something regarding fashion.]

But like all trends it has garnered the backlash of trend-haters who despise anything that creeps into the mainstream.

[Already, you can see this guy is biased. Being wary of mainstream appeal does not mean that I depise any and all things that are mainstream. Refusing to just assume something is good b/c it's popular is very different than hating anything that is popular. People who automatically reject anything popular are just as big conformists as those who they try to mock. ]

We all know at least one. This is the person that brags about an underground band or an unknown clothing line but quickly labels it "dead" when it goes public because it's now been "tainted" by the masses.

[Yes, there is something gratifying about discovering something great before the masses figure it out. I'll grant the author that. The process of going "dead" when something becomes popular isn't that unique a phenomenon. By definition, if you want to appeal to the most people, you need to regress to the mean. The most popular comedians are the ones who are bland enough to not offend anyone. Cult followings develop b/c the art form appeals to a narrow, but devoted audience. When the artist wants to open the net to pull in more viewers, it becomes less focused. Less pure. it becomes "dead".

Unknown clothing lines? No comment, other than I don't think counterculture people are that shallow.]

I guess that thought process would make sense if you were egomaniacal, but I would follow the road less traveled with the LiveStrong bracelets.

[The road less travel being that which is the current fashion trend? w-o-w.]

The difference between LiveStrong and other chic fashion trends is that the bracelets stand for something.

[why, b/c you say so? Yes, the original concept was to stand for something, but there's no denying that the message has been diluted by the public. Once you put something out there, it no longer remains yours. An artist can't retain complete control of their art. When society turned it into a fashion trend, that became the new meaning of the bracelet. End of story]

I first found out about them while I was volunteering at the USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center and Hospital in Los Angeles last year. I was told by one of the receptionists that Nike was hoping to sell 5 million of the yellow bracelets to help the Lance Armstrong Foundation. As of today, it has sold close to 35 million, making it arguably the greatest trend in fashion history, not for how it looks but for what it has done to fund cancer research and awareness

[fashion trends are completely insignificant. to call this the biggest and best insignificant thing in history doesn't do it for me]
It's an amazing idea on so many fronts. Not only do the bracelets raise money for a great cause, but they are a way of showing support for Armstrong and other cancer patients and survivors. And, unlike other chic fashion accessories, it's cheap -- $1 per bracelet. It's a cause everyone can support and be a part of, no matter what your income is.

[well, aint that mighty generous of them... to allow us common folk to be like them.]

I went home from the hospital that night and bought 100 bracelets for my friends, family and classmates. At the time they were just being released and no one knew much about them but I hoped that would change when Nike began running ads about the bracelets prior to the Tour de France.

[doesn't the fact that Nike is involved set off even the feintest of signals. What does nike care about more? setting trends to make their athletes popular, or curing disease. Why don't you ask some of their slave labor to find out]

Sure enough, the popularity of the bracelets swept the country in the coming weeks and months as celebrities from John Kerry to Lindsay Lohan began flaunting their yellow bling-bling.

[wow, he mentioned a politician wearing it w/o even a drop of irony (at least intended irony). and yellow bling bling is his cute way of pointing out that this fashion trend can even be copied by the poor suckers.]

The streets were filled with people wearing the rubber bracelets. Somewhere along the way, however, the meaning of the bracelets got lost. Whether it was by people who resold the bracelets for $20 a pop on eBay or others who sold knockoff versions or alternative wristbands with slogans like "LiveWrong."

[case closed]

This is the best example of a trend jumping the shark: when the streets are littered with knockoffs and when everyone from grade schoolers to grandparents are flaunting the once-popular item as if it's still cool.

so i guess the person that this author knows who rejects things when they become popualar is the person who looks himself in the mirror. oh, this is so fight-club-ish.

But LiveStrong is much more than a fad. Every time I see someone wearing a legitimate LiveStrong bracelet, I know at least $1 went towards cancer research and that someone is showing their support for cancer patients and survivors by wearing yellow, the color of the Tour de France leader's jersey that Armstrong has made his own the past six years. Unlike other trendy fashion items that do nothing but benefit big companies and feed individual egos, the bracelets serve a purpose.

[yes, and that's what makes the issue more grey. You have to balance the negatives of trends and conformist thinking with the benefit of cancer research]

Although it's about as cliché to knock the rubber yellow circles these days as it is to knock Paris Hilton, people who criticize the bracelets or laugh at others who wear them fail to realize how much they have helped those affected by cancer. The day hospital at the Norris Center, along with thousands of other facilities around the country that treat cancer patients, is filled with people wearing these bracelets today. It might seem vain or foolish to think these bracelets make a difference, but they do.

Sit with a kid undergoing chemotherapy with her parents besides her, all of them wearing LiveStrong bracelets, and tell them the bracelets are a joke, that they don't mean anything, that they're just a fad. To them the bracelets aren't fashion statements, but survival statements. As tacky as it may seem to others, when cancer patients, especially younger ones, see celebrities and people they respect wearing LiveStrong bracelets, they know they aren't alone in their fight.

[well, what does it say of our society that a kid dying of cancer focuses on a celebrity instead of his family? And what do the parents tell their kid when the celebrities stop wearing them? Sorry johnny, but nobody cares about you anymore. so go ahead and die. IT'S A TREND!]

The look on the patients' faces when they see Armstrong demolish the competition year after year has proven to me that Armstrong's accomplishments have been the best medicine hospitals have had to offer patients for the past six years. It's a living, breathing inspiration to see Armstrong do what he does. It shows them that there is not only life after cancer, but that it can be better than anything they had experienced before. In a time when cancer is still the cause of 548,000 American deaths per year, according to the National Cancer Institute, watching Armstrong win the most grueling event in sports year in and year out continues to inspire people to "Live Strong."

[so Lance now represents everyone with cancer? well played Lance. Way to trick an entire population into becoming your fans. But i thought it wasn't about Lance....I thought it was about cancer]

While trends and fads may come and go, supporting cancer research and those affected by the disease is one that, like watching Armstrong win the Tour de France annually, will never get old.

[and remember, kids get their strength from this trend. so when the fad "goes"...]

I posted this comment on someone else's blog. It's about bonds.  


I'm sure you meant to say he's #3 on the list. Regardless, a lot of Bonds' issues with the media stem from when he was a kid. His father, Bobby, was an alcoholic and apparently the media was pretty hard on him. That's one of the reasons that Bonds has been so reserved and distrustful of the media.

And honestly, there is a grain of truth to the issue of race. It might be on a subconscious level, but when fans drool over Ruth, and the "good old days", one has to note that the good old days didn't involve black players. People are quick to point to the steroids, smaller parks, juiced balls, diluted talent pool, etc, but they never mention that Ruth didn't have to travel to the west coast, play in many night games, or face pitchers with more than 2 pitches (usually). And nobody had in depth scouting reports on how to pitch to Ruth.

I'm not saying that it's all about race. Of course there is the human tendency to just think that your generation was the best and that everything that comes after it is tainted. But to fully dismiss the issue of race is a bit naive as well. Barry Bonds has put up 3 of the most amazing seasons of all time. His numbers blow anything that Ruth was ever able to do. Is that recognized? Nope.

The cause cause/effect debate over whether Bonds is the media is negative towards him b/c he's a jerk to them, or if he's a jerk to them b/c they are negative towards him is unanswerable. When the media is against someone, that person will be unfairly labeled. Ewing, Murray, etc etc. I wouldn't trust anything the media has to say....or at the very least, i'd be aware of the fact that they are only painting half a picture.

i'm rethinking my status as a feminist  


I accidently started watching "growing up gotti" last night (flipped to the wrong channel, then didn't have the remote next to me). The one scene that blew my mind was when the three sons made an appearence to sign shirts or something and there were tons of teenyboppers screaming for them. Think about that for a second. 13-15 year old girls who are groupies for the grandsons of a mob boss. While these guys are good looking in the extreme guido sense, there's no reason for the girls to like them. They are horrible horrible people on the show.

I tried to come up with an alternative, but i just don't see a situation where 13-15 year old guys would be as stupid. This level of ignorance is specific to women only. The whole thing was just embarassing.

i honestly don't know how to tie my shoes  


my left shoe became untied no less than 4 times today. I don't know what i'm doing wrong. Are you supposed to make the original X tight to the tongue, or give it some leeway? which way prvents undoing better? I've tried both, and neither seem to work.

I really can't believe that we are just too cool for velcro. We should be ashamed of ourselves.

[note to self: don't forget the yellow bracelet rant...i've already forgotten twice]

I dont like how the WB calls new episodes "Fresh".

The new york post has an article about this new gadget people are buying that can scramble cellphones within a certain radius. here's the link if you want it, but it's not THAT interesting.

I'm just bothered that these people think they are fighting a crusade against rude people. There's nobody who hates cellphone abuse more than me (i don't think that's an exageration), but that still doesn't excuse people using these new instruments. If you were comparing degrees of rudeness, i think it's pretty clear that "being loud" takes a backseat to "ending a strangers conversation by pressing a button".

The fact that people are so selfcentered is a two fold problem: 1) They don't notice when they are annoying others (read: the loud person on the phone) and 2) They think they are entitled to not being annoyed or inconvenienced in anway (read: the person sitting there complaining about the person on the phone).

Thus, a person who buys a machine is equally inconsiderate as the person on the phone in the first place. And on top of that, they don't even have enough self respect to solve the problem in a less passive-agressive manner. Could asking someone to be quiet create a confrontation? Perhaps, but if you aren't willing to be placed in such a situation, then maybe you don't care enough about the issue. Maybe you should just shut up, and put some headphones on instead of trying to play james bond with your scrambler.

Forgive me if my facts are a little distorted, as i wasn't sober when i was told this story, but the general gist is this:

At the other end of the galaxy, a star did what all stars eventually do; it burned out and imploded onto itself creating a super dense mass (you know the deal, black holes, and such and such). Anyway, the thing that was created was only 10 kilometers in length, but created such a force that in 1/8 the of a second it created the same amount of energy that our sun gives off in thousands of years (if i remember the numbers correctly). This explosion was observable from here. Furthermore, experts agree that any planet/life within 10 light years of this object was instantly destroyed. It was if the death star was getting tested out.

Now, assuming there is life out there (which there has to be just based on the law of averages), the question is: should we care that entire worlds were just destroyed? The answer is no. If you run the numbers, there is a huge number of planets with life. HUGE. And thus, there is almost an infinite number of deaths occuring on a "daily" (for lack of a more objective measure of time) basis. As such, a whole planet being wiped out really doesn't skew the numbers as much as you would think. And, figuring that all these lives died instantly and w/o pain or the knowledge of what was coming, then the horror of the situation is even lessened.

So, if an alien from a planet who was destroyed happened to survive b/c they were on vacation or something, and are now reading this blog, I just want to let them know that I don't care that they died. I better not be seeing any green bracelets for relief funds!

Did Maria write and direct Undercover Brother?  


I didn't catch the movie from the beginning, nor did watch it straight through, but all i can say is "wow". I suppose they think they were doing something noble by openingly addressing racial stereotypes, but they failed miserably. This movie was bad. And it had that annoying SNL guy in it....the sidekick from night at the rocksberries (sp).

And as a side note, there was a commerical for an air spray (sort of like lysol or something). Nothing of note, until the very end when the woman holds up the can and says the catchphrase. I'll never learn the answer to this, but for some reason they had to computer generate her hand and the can. It was so fake looking. I can't imagine why they did this.

Someone find this for me  


Fell asleep while watching an all-star game marathon on ESPN classic. I was really impressed with the rosters for the 1987 team (combine the lakers/celtics of the 80's, and throw in Dr. J, Jordan, Olajawan, etc, and you get an idea of what was going on). I've tried to find a link that has all the rosters archived. I can't find it.

I've had this problem before....trying to find something from the past that has too many current links. Any ideas?

The Nu-Retro  


some three point contest shooter was wearing "the jersey from the syracuse of the original teams". This jersey was bright red and orange, with a fancy script that said "nats". I'm pretty sure that the Nationals did not wear this jersey.

How far can the NBA take it? All these teams are wearing jerseys that I don't recognize. When were the hawks bright yellow?

I hope a team goes all the way, and comes up with 82 different jerseys. Why not?

3 Point contest - Small sample size, but....  


Man, that looked bad. 19 as the highest score in any round? Single digit scores? Who were these guys, I've never heard of them. Is the NBA really that bad? How can the talent be declining so rapidly? It's so embarrassing. An obstacle course that involves making a bounce pass? P-U.

Continuing the Amazing Race Rant  


When last we left it, Amazing Race was becoming more X-Treme to the Max....Since people liked couples that fought, the producers gave them more bickering. Of course, these heel characters were so one dimensional, that they made the evil foreigner heel from the mid 80's WWF look complex by comarision. There's only so much you can discuss and analyze about a woman who is constantly yelling at her boyfriend.

Along the same lines, it's impossible to truly develop a character when you limit their experience to a high stress, but non diverse, setting. The high stress of the race actually hurts the show, instead of helping it (assuming that character develop is the reason you are watching. If you aren't, then the other issues will be discussed later). To a certain degree, you'll be able to see if the characters crumble under the pressure or if they are "clutch", but that's about it. That, and whether they own up to their own mistakes or take out their frustrations on others is all there is to the show. It's like how Real World now only shows you how people act when they are drunk. Yeah, it's fun for awhile, but it's unsatisfying.

If character development isn't your cup of tea, then I suppose you can actually be into the race. This is something that i would find interesting if the contests inolved some type of skill. Strategy, ingenuity, ability to adapt to new surroundings, ability to communicate w/ foreign people, etc. The race however tends to consist of thing such as finding the right key to go with the right lock. Or rolling bails of hay until you happen to stumble upon the next clue. The race is 90% a boring combination of luch, endurance, and physical prowless. Why should i care about watching which team gets lucky? One event involved driving cars that were on the brink of breaking down. Through no fault of hteir own, some teams had cars that broke down and had to wait on the side of the road until a tow truck came. Woo hoo, what fun.

and the absolute worst part of the show is that 55%-70% of it is pointless. The first legs of the race don't matter b/c they'll have a checkpoint halway through the show (or later) where everyone matches back up (oh, look the store doesn't open for another 12 hours). This might be a necessary evil to a race show....but I'm sure it can be done in a less offensive manner. For example, maybe not necessarily having the eliminations at the end of the tv hour would make things more interesting. but, as it stands now, there's really no reason to watch the 35 minutes of the episode.

And finally, if you watch the show b/c you are into seeing the exotic locations, you need help. Watch National Geographic on the discovery channel or something.

It's not that I don't get the appeal of the show..... I like it, and watch it. What i don't get is why it's so critically aclaimed. It's not really that much different than any of the other reality shows. It's dressed up in a nicer package b/c it rewards success instead of punishing failure, and takes place around the world, but that's it.

I don't even like southpark...  


but this is pretty fun.

The Race to the Mean  


regression to the mean isn't just a statistical phenomenom that relates to sports.... all things regress to medicority. Such is the case with Amazing Race.

I jumped on board a little late in the game (i ignored a suggestion to start watching a few years ago b/c i thought the person said "amazing grace"). But, what i saw i liked, and i eventually became pretty hooked. However, stepping back after this season, i realize that i don't really like the show. Instead, i like the show inside my head. the show that it could be. But it is not. And here's why.

By definition, reality shows jump their respective sharks at a faster rate than normal shows. It's too easy to streamline the things that make a reality show popular. Last season, the heel team got a lot of face time. So this season, there were multiple heel teams, each more dastardly (word?) than the next.

[oh man, i have to add this in right now before i forget. Jordan refused to endorse a black democrat for senator against a really conservative republican. quote: "republicans buy shoes too". and of course bryant gumble says it's unfair that Jordan is asked to be this leader just b/c he happens to be black. yeah, boo hoo for jordan. who cares about all the oppression that could be challenged by his presence. ugh

oh this is too much. he refused to be a 6th man in his last season with the wizzards. and he apparently threatened to make personel decisions based on who got him the ball! and he was a lazy executive.

it's really sad that even a person's character is based on results. I.E. jordan succeeded in basketball, so let's spin the facts to make him a "strong willed, competitive individual". If he was just a nobody, he'd be labeled a jerk.

Uh, since this rant is no longer about amazing race, i'm just going to bed. I'll finish tomm]

oh he's just so great  


ESPN Classic - michael jordan. They are just gushing about how competitive he is and they tell a story about him cheating at goldfish against a teamate's mom. This guy really has the wool over everyone's eyes. what's next? gushing over how he stole his friend's wife just to see if he can?

After telling a story of jordan punching steve kerr b/c kerr was getting the better of him in practice, bj armstrong says: "he always apologized after a fight"

And they are talking how good he was at playing the good guy in the media. How he never took a stand on anything controversal. How he always said the right things. There are only two reasons he would do this and neither is noble. Either he was driven by endorsement deals (cha ching), or his ego is so out of control that he needed everyone to like him.

He boycotts SI to this day b/c they wrote an article telling him to quit baseball (which he should have)!

update: Magic was talking about the dream team and how michael would stay up all night playing cards. Magic was able to hang with him the first two nights, but on the third night he wanted to rest. Michael is busting his chops and Magic says "Mike, i'm not like you. I need my rest. I can't be doing this...."

i would have given anything, ANYTHING for him to finish that thought with "I have AIDS, for crying out loud!"

Whatever happened to limp bizkit?  


Why was their fall from grace so extreme? I never liked them, but they had some mainstream appeal. I remember them being pretty popular as of their latest album (the one that had the method man song). Then what happened? Are they hated now? or are people indifferent? I think they are mocked on some level, but what was the turning point? did they have a bad album? did they fade slowly?

Someone remind me what their 16th minute looked like, b/c i don't remember it. Good riddance though.

It's my job to be repetitive  


late last night, i tried posting about Tuna. My computer froze. So, i wrote the one below tonight. Obviously, they are very repetitive. Anyone who has had yahoo eat one of their emails knows how annoying it is to have to write something over.

Two Products  


They are exactly equal in quality, which the purchaser knows. Product A is the same as Product B in every way, except it's not a brand name. Product B costs a lot more than product A.

Why does the majority of society pick product B?

The answer is a complex multi-layer analysis of people needing to fit in, of status symbols, and of materialism.

Tuna's analysis of the question a year ago was "people won't know that they are equal."

People who don't understand the basic concept of hypotheticals drive me crazy. The purpose of a hypothetical is to eliminate the variables you aren't concerned with in order to gather information on the variable you are. So, obviously in society a guchi bag probably is of higher quality than some random knock off on the street. But i wasn't concerned with that issue when i posed tuna the question. B/c whatever extra value a guchi bag might have, it's not the 500x it would have to be to justify the difference in prices. Instead of getting into an impossible balancing of apples vs oranges to determine how much of the purchase price is determined by quality, I tried to eliminate the issue.

And of course he didn't get it.

No real point to this post. Re-including Tuna in the political emails got me thinking about just how frustrating it was to try and pin him down on issues.



cheeser50: I'm,sticking to my original argument that people aren't sheep

Am i allowed to tell this story?  


If something funny happens, and a mentally handicapped person is involved, am i not allowed to tell the story? I'm not laughing at him per se, but rather the humerous situation i was put in. Well, I don't care if it's wrong to tell, it's pretty funny if you ask me.

I'm sitting at my desk, closing in on 6:30, and I don't hear the janitor come in b/c i had my ipod on. When i finally see him picking up the newspapers in the other office, i say "hey, how's it going". He immediately staggers back, clutches his heart, and screams "you scared me". But it wasn't in the playful tone you'd expect. This guy was upset. He then goes on a tirade about how he thought i had left already and that i shouldn't have scared him like that. I tried apologizing but he was having none of it. He said he didn't need anymore trouble since he just had to talk to his boss this morning.

I try some playful banter, while franctically shutting down my computer and packing up. He doesn't like anyone in the room when he cleans, so i'm trying to get out of there as fast as possible. Then he tells me how he's been in a bad mood b/c his mother was in the hospital. He goes to leave and i tell him that he doesn't have to, b/c i'll get out of his way. "listen sir, right now i'm going to take out the recyling. Then i will come back to this office to clean."

he leaves, i catch my breath, and think i just survived pretty unscaved. but, when i'm walking to the elevator he sees me and screams "sir, come over here, i want to talk to you". he even did the come hither finger point. Then he says "listen, i just want to say that i accept your apology 100%. i just don't want anymore trouble. have a good day."

the elevator door opens and i step in. just as the door was closing, he pulls the door open. "and i just want to tell you, i'm friends with the judge, so i'll be seeing you!"


Filthy would have a field day  


The new son of the mask commercial is a list of things that make a comedy funny. they actually admit to being paint by numbers. 1) an oblivious mom, 2) a stressed out dad. and so on and so forth. I can't tell if the commercial was done tongue in cheek. But then again, i still can't tell if Horathio (sp) Sanz is the next Andy Kaufman.

Was Tuna as bad as i remember?  


no, he was worse.

Recently re-including tuna in the political emails, i wondered "Was tuna really that bad, or has time distorted my perception." Then i was washed over by memories of the idiotic things he would say.

One of my favorites was our debate over whether people buy stuff as a status symbol. I specifically remember pointing to a girl all the way down in the first row who had a coach bag. He swore that the reason that coach can sell for such a high price was b/c it was a quality item. By his logic, the bag would have to be about 500x as good as a normal bag, considering the price difference.

The best thing about the argument was that the bag was ugly. It just had that stupid C logo over and over and over again. or maybe i'm thinking of guchie and there were tons of G's. whatever, the point is that it proved that it was a status symbol. Nobody would be a brand named product if the logo wasn't visible.

Oh, now i remember the argument. there is a choice between two items: product A was of higher quality, but had no label. product b was slightly inferior, but had a logo on it that was known for being good. The buyer would know the exact level of quality of each item. He refused to accept that most people would buy prdouct B. Oh, i'm upset all over again. Maybe i need to retake Tuna off the list.

ABC is liberal! haha!!!

A letter I wrote to the editor that was never published  


Hi, my name is *************and while I don’t live in Montclair, I do frequent many of the fine establishments that your town has to offer. I’m writing because last night several friends and I went to dinner at Mexicali Rose. I’m saddened to inform you that this restaurant goes out of its way to swindle their customers. As soon as we sat down, the waiter asked if our group would “like some chips”. I do not think we were naïve in thinking that such a request would be the equivalent of an Italian restaurant putting bread on the table. Thus, needless to say, we were stunned when the bill came and we learned that these three little baskets of chips, with an even small dish of guacamole and salsa, were an outlandish 7 dollars each.

Now, my complaint isn’t just a case of finding something overpriced. It’s the dishonesty of the situation that needs to be addressed. There isn’t a doubt in my mind that the waiters are told to phrase the question in such a way so the customer assumes they are complimentary. He didn’t say “would you like to try our home made guacamole as an appetizer?” At least if it was phrased like that, the customer would at least be suspicious about the nature of this question and could inquire as to what the cost was. Instead, “do you want some chips” clearly is meant to confuse and misguide. The question is asked right as you sit down, and not after you get the menu (note: I’m not even sure if they are on the menu, as their “real” nacho appetizer comes with cheese and is around 5 dollars). I refuse to believe that there is a single person in the entire town of Montclair who would knowingly and willing pay 7 dollars for a small basket of plain chips. It’s also worth noting that they brought us three baskets at once without ever asking how many we would like.

This practice is an outrageous scam to basically steal money from their customers.

I’ve asked around, and other people I know have also been the victim of this scam. One person actually had the “nerve” to ask the waiter about the bill, and was eventually told by the manager to never come back to the restaurant. In another situation, a friend innocently asked if he could have some sour cream on the side of his entre, only to later find out that it was an additional $2.50

I, for one, will never go back to the Mexicali Rose. I hope that this letter will protect other hard working people in the Montclair Area from being the victim of this vicious practice.


**************, esq.

Desperate Soccer Moms  


About a month or so, i got dragged to a corporate american lunch at TGI Fridays (is that it's name?). While it pained me to sell out, the free apeitizer coupon that my mom had could not be overlooked. So, when we got there it was pretty empty, but then this gathering of soccer moms starts trickling into the table behind us. This was going to get ugly....

First, the very idea of soccer moms annoys me to no end. The excitement in their eyes made me nauscious. I could only imagine how they all discussed on the phone that it's been too long since they had their last "lunch with the girls".

Overly made up, overly bubbly, and with little kids in tow, these soccer moms exchanged pleasentries (sp, word?) and sat down. I was dreading even the idea that I might overhear some of their conversations. I looked for a sharp object to gouge out my ear drums if they even began talking about politics. There was one topic that i absolutely, under no circumstances, was going to tolerate though. God help them if they bring up desperate housewives.

Well, sure enough, halfway through their lunch (which included the "oh, let's be bad and get the chicken strip apeitizers" {real quote}), they did it. They crossed the line. They didn't just bring up desperate housewives, but actually had the audacity to pose the question as such: "which character on desperate housewives do you think you are most like?"

I woke up 2 hours later in a state of confusion thankful that my body shut down and protected itself by blacking out.

The Chills  


Every day that passes is one day closer to opening day. While this has gotten me excited, I had a moment of clarity just now thinking that Bernie Williams is going to be our opening day centerfielder. [shudder]

The yankees will most likely win around 95 games, and that should be good enough to make the playoffs, but is it really that hard to envision a collapse? How can the organization with the most resources (double or triple some teams), not have a smart person running the ship? I don't think all blame can be tossed George's way. As big of an egomaniac as he is, I don't think he's dumb enough to not be able to see the light if someone had the conviction to actually stand up to him. This team is a trainwreck, and ther was absolutely no reason for it.

This collapse is going to be swift and severe. My only hope is that they plan on moving Jeter to CF next year. With some money coming off the books, and Mel retiring, it might be possible to delay the inevitable for awhile.

A monster unleashed  


Now that I've figured out how to add pictures, I might really start to take this thing seriously. I should just walk around with my camera and capture all the stupid stuff that goes with my pointless stories.

02 Exactly where I want to be  



yet another test  


skimming through my posts  


i was skimming through my posts b/c i'm debating opening this blog to the public (as of now, i think only 3 people read it and since none of said 3 ever post comments, i'm starting to think it's a big waste of time), but was worried that i may be offending some people with my rants. I noticed that my first rant on gilmore girls doesn't have the link that i tried posting. the "almost what i was looking for" was referring to a link by a writer who was complaining about the style of "talk fast to sound smart". it was a decent article, but not as angry as i wanted it to be. I'm not going to go back and find the link, but if there was any confusion over the title of that post, that's why.

that is all.

Does anything really exist other than our shadows?  


This post is really three seperate rants/issues all converging into one general theory. I don't really know how I'm going to go about organizing my thoughts. Hopefully, in a future form of blogging, we'll be able to incorporate the Matrix way of learning and just be able to instantly absorb all information. Because, really, these thoughts don't lend themselves to a nice and neat A-to-B-to-C way of thinking.

Starting from (what i believe to be) the top, I think human existence is dominated by a feeling of insignicance. The fear of mortality, of being alone, of not mattering all creates an overwhelming feeling of insecurity. Insecurity may be the only real feeling that one can possess. It might be the driving force in all of human action. The only difference is how each individual deals with their insecurity. The defense mechanisms that one develops, the vices that control them, and so on and so forth.

Now, from what I understand about Carl Jung's theory on the counter-ego / shadow generally only comes from the lyrics of a song. Granted, it's the greatest song of all time and people's interpretation of the song has litterally changed my life, but still, take everything I'm about to say with a huge grain of salt. Perhaps some day i'll have the time to read more about Jung's theory, but today is not that day. But, that being said, I think that his counter-ego only addresses the negative things about one's pysche. The negative stuff that we have to hide from our conscious to protect ourselves. Thus, the idea that people are self-destructive in an attempt to deal with their own securities is a pretty unoriginal theory. The girl who dates a lot of guys in order to make herself feel pretty, the person who intentionally treats people poorly b/c he fears being rejected, it's all textbook and cliched.

What I want to examine is whether any of the non-self-destructive (read: good) things about our daily lives are also a defense-mechanism to deal with our own insecurities. Thus, the ulimate question is posed as this: Is there anything "real" in human nature other than our counter-ego? Does anything cast Jung's shadow, or is the shadow the end all, be all, of all existence? Is it impossible to find meaning in anything?

Ok, so technically it's not an "ultimate" question b/c there are many subparts.

The seinfeld episode where the old lady, with the pony, dies was on yesterday. The gang (ugh, i hate referring to Kramer, George, Elaine, and Jerry as the gang, but i was too lazy to type out their names) was at the coffee shop, doing what everyone does when faced with death. "are we wasting our lives, what should we be doing, etc etc." Elaine asks if having coffee is wasting life. "can't people have coffee?" And of course, as was Larry and Jerry's intention, this scene got me to thinking along the Nietshce way of thinking.

If you start with the assumption that nothing really has meaning other than as a defense mechanism, then it's easier to explain why humans spend so much time focused on the insignificant. For example, I spend an extrodiary amount of time focused on Baseball. I derive great pleasure from it, and it's more of an obsession than a hobby. But, rationally speaking, i know it's insignificant. I was "destroyed" when the yankees lost to the redsox, but obviously i'm logical enough to know that it really had absolutely zero impact on my life or the world around me.

And i'm also rational enough to understand why i care so much about baseball. B/c in the end, i know it's just a diversion that i use to get away from the real problems of society. Being liberal is a very tasking existence. I know most of you will think that i go overboard w/ the emails, rants, etc etc but trust me when i say that how much I care vs. how much i SHOULD care are two hugely different quantities. Of course I get riled up when I learn of more injustices that plague us daily and how this country (and world) is in a downward spiral. but boy, aint that Jeter overated defensively?

And while it's easy to realize that my passion for sports isn't "real", the next question is whether any hobby/passion/interest that anyone feels is equally unreal. Is wanting to get married, have 2.4 kids, and the white fence real? Or is what people trick themselves into thinking what's important to them. How many people marry b/c they've really found their soul mate compared to how many people get married b/c their in their 20's and it's the thing to do? I forget the numbers, but it's something like 60% of married men and 40% of married women cheat. So, if i'm understanding things correctly, people view marriage as the institution that completes their existence and gives their life meaning, and then use infidelity as the way to fill the void that their empty marriage leaves.

Take any interest that you think is geniune, whether it's in music, someone else, having kids, sports, friends, knowledge, etc etc and ask if it's "really" important. There are extreme examples of course (someone with a huge stamp collection, someone with 20 cats, whatever), but our our interests any less absurd? So you like to listen to great music, and go to shows in the city where you discover original music? Does that really matter? And why does it matter? b/c during those 3 hours you are at the show you are happy? Is that really happiness or just the absence of misery?

I guess what i'm asking is, in order for happiness to be geniune, does it have to be based on something that is real (read: significant). B/c, in the long run, i don't find any real significance in anything. So, if it comes down to a "but it makes me happy" argument, isn't that the definition of superfical and insignifcant? And even if the thing that makes you happy is more _____ (can't think of the word. not 'complex'....hmm, maybe 'meaty') like raising a family, or being an activist, i'm still hestitant to make the next connection that it's important.

I'm starting to really believe in the cliche that there's no such thing as a selfless act. I think that some people are better at distorting their own selfishness. The person who spends so much time caring about something "noble" is still, when push comes to shove, spending their time and energy focused on something. And, getting back to my original theory, i think focusing on something, ANYTHING, is just a defense mechanism so one doesn't focus on their own insignifcance. B/c, and maybe this is just my own ego out of control, i really think that that's the ONLY thing that people really care about.

But what do i know?

worthy of its own post  


i have a long post forthcoming, but i was preparing a salad before i got started. i just cracked open a new bag of cheddar cheese croutons.

they are like cheese curls.

let the good times roll.

Peaches 'n Cream  


Remember that song? You probably don't. but there was an argument several years ago over what was a better song, "it takes two" or "peaches 'n Cream". The logical argument was that the fact that It takes two is still relevant, over a decade later, means that it has legs while PnC would probably fade out (the argument took place during that two week period where PnC was 'hot').

Well, years later, I'm listening to a internet radio station, and that song pops up. It was the first time I had heard it since that argument. While I didn't change to a different station, I didn't exactly jump for joy either.

So, that being said, I think we win.