The worst play in all of sports  


Is basketball's blocked shot where the defender swats the ball aggressively into the stands.   I feel so awkward watching a defender act all tough after such a move even though it's still the other team's possession.   There's absolutely no reason to "swat".

If a defender kept his arms straight he'd 1) be less likely to be called for a foul 2) have a better chance of blocking it (b/c he'd be as "high" as possible), and 3) be more likely to retain possession.

This play has always bothered me, but I just caught five minutes of a UCLA special.   Jabbar used to just "catch" an opponent's shot with the gentlest of blocks.   It was such a thing of beauty.

The NBA is dead.

you continue to dig your own grave  


"Then why would you specify a bottle if that wasn't your intention???"

Can't you read? I said bottle as an answer to her bottle or tap. when i sat down, i.e. BEFORE she asked that question, i only saw the bottles of beer listed on the menu as my options.

go back to the original post. i broke down each statement made and the order in which i remember them happening.

you are slow.

powered by performancing firefox

No, Dos Equis wasn't just in a bottle  


"It's common sense that a Dos Eqis at a mexican themed restaurant would be in a bottle."

First of all, if any restaurant was going to have Dos Equis on tap, it would be a mexican restaurant. I assume that's what you meant.

But, the problem was that I didn't even consider draft beer as an option when I sat down. If you remember, when I looked at the menu, I asked why there weren't prices next to the beers. I was looking for the cheapest "beer" (i.e. not coors light, etc) on the menu. Normally, at a bar with the regular stuff on tap, I would get a Stella. But, I always forget that they tend to charge more for Stella b/c it's "foreign". So, i've been trying to mentally ingrain that into my head and find a domestic draft beer.

Whether it was because I didn't see taps when I was at the bar, or whether it was because i started to think of the place as a "restaurant" when we sat down at table, I don't know. But for whatever reason, the idea of draft beers were lost on me. So, I was choosing from the Bottles listed on the menu. Because Dos Equis apparently comes in both bottles and draft at the restaurant, the waitress had to ask. Instinctively, I said bottle, b/c that's what was on the menu, but my cheapness sense kicked in. Mentally: wait, drafts are cheaper than bottles. let's see what they have on draft. If you notice, I went with a domestic beer on draft, the cheapest of the cheap (uh, I assume blue moon is american, but i could be wrong).

So, it's even more logical that the waitress could confuse my saying "bottle" to go with the water.

Let's take out her question of "bottle or tap/draft" and my "bottle" out of the dialogue. Now you have this:

I'd like a dos equis lager, lager. [pause] Hmm, what do you have on draft?

a normal customer could do that. They see dos equis on the menu, and that's the beer they are going to go with, unless they have something unique on tap.

It's rare that a person would prefer a bottle over a draft, but then ask what's on draft. The only reason they'd do that if they were cheap, like I am. So, even though i said "bottle" right away, I then changed my mind (again, b/c i didn't realize there was an option right away).

And when I ask for water at a bar, i always throw it in after an order of alcohol as "oh, and can I also get a water when you get a chance". Three reasons for this: 1) it's lame to drink water at a bar and I don't want to be mocked for it by either the bartender or my friends 2) I don't want the bartender to think I'm cheap. They work on tips and some people don't tip on water and 3) I don't want to tip for the water, so I get it with the real drink so i can tip all on one event.

This is the way I always do it. This is the way I will continue to do it. And that's the way I did it on saturday (although tipping wasn't an issue w/ a sitdown meal)

Unacceptable Dates  


Heroes: 12/4/06 --> 1/22/07
and then 3/4/07 --> 4/23/07

House: 9/26/06 --> 10/31/06
and then 12/12/06 --> 1/9/07 --> 1/30/07
and then 2/13/07 --> 3/6/07 --> 3/27/07

Studio 60: 12/4/06 --> 1/22/07
and then 2/19/07 --> ???

Office: 2/22/07 --> 4/5/07

I assume that these long breaks are done so actors can film movies. If that's not the case, then that's completely unacceptable. By the time the show comes back, most people have lost interest.

Bottled water, Part II  


See, you can't even follow a written argument. In your version of the events, you don't even mention what the waitress said. I find that odd. She was the one who introduced the idea of bottle or tap. Where is that in your version?

I'm not just saying that I was misunderstood. I'm taking responsibility for the misunderstanding. I should have first made sure that when i said "bottle" that it was clearly referencing the beer. Furthermore, I shouldn't have switched my order from bottled beer to draft so haphazardly. That's the main reason for the confusion.

Correlation does not equal causation. your "proof" that I said bottled water was that you thought i said it before the water came and obviously the waitress thought it to. But maybe the cause is that I said something that could be misunderstood as that. You are somehow taking credit for thinking of bottled water before it actually came out.

get lost.

When I ordered my drinks last night, here are the statements that were made between me and the waitress:

1) Me: "I'd like a Dos Equis Lager" {mispronounced Lager}

2) Me: "Lager" {had to repeat the word Lager}

3) Me: "and a water"

4) Her: "Bottle or tap/draft?" {honestly can't remember if she said tap or draft}

5) Me: "Bottle"

6) Me: "wait, what do you have on tap?"

7) Her: {lists the beers on tap}

8) Me: "oh, I'll take a blue moon"

The order in which I wrote those statements is what I think happened. However, I'm fully willing to admit that #4 might have come as i was saying #2 because there was an awkward pause after i stumbled over the words the first time (i made a mental note of that because I was mentally practicing how to say dos equis before she came to the table). If #4 comes early, then #5 might have come right after #3 or maybe before #3. But I guarantee these were the only lines said.

Needless to say, I was very surprised when she brought me my beer, then the round of tap waters, and THEN a bottle of water for me. When I started to express my confusion, the knuckle draggers that I was with insisted that I had asked for a bottle of water. After a couple of seconds, I understood where the miscommunication came from, but they wouldn't listen b/c they had two infallible arguments:

1) They heard me ask for a bottle of water

3) There are three of them, and only one of me.

Now, few people understand the burden of being so superior to the people around you, but the pressure can be overwhelming. For the record, here's what obviously happened:

A) Because I said "Lager" twice, it could have sounded like "I'd like a dos equis Lager, Lager [which sounds like bottle] and a [slurred together to sound like "of"] water.

B) When I answered "bottle" to her beer question, it was so close to my water request, that people associated the words together. Bottle and water next to each other in speech must mean a bottled water. This is the most likely scenario because there would have been some overlap between the waitresses comments and my own. She didn't seem overly sharp, and was writing down our orders, so there may have been a delay in her awareness that dos equis comes in both bottles and draft. [This is even more probable when one realizes that she was Stumped when I asked her what's on tap. She started with an "uhhh" and then trailed offer after 3 beers were listed.]

Now, here's what's NOT likely.

C) I asked for a bottled water. Why is this not likely? Because Freudian slips, or just general mispoken words tend to result from something that's on the mind. I would never, ever order a bottled water. To be honest, I wouldn't even be confident that they existed at a place like this. Furthermore, when someone misspeaks, it's done out of mental laziness. The speech is such 2nd nature, that it's almost done by impulse. However, I was as aware of my speech at that moment as I have ever been. Again, i was preparing to say dos equis lager in my head in the minutes preceding the order AND i heard myself say it incorrectly when I ordered. I was fully and 100% aware of what i was saying, word for word. I have a VIVID memory of what I said.

There's not a doubt in my mind that I did not order a "bottled water". Now, i'm FULLY willing to admit that my order could be misunderstood. A "throw momma from the train, a kiss" type of situation. I harbor no ill will at the waitress for messing up this order. It was an honest, and most likely repeatable, mistake.

However, the knuckledraggers around me who insisted that I said bottled water are the real culprits here. It's so sad and pathetic that I can understand how their minds work better than they can themselves. No wonder this country is such a mess. People don't even have the capacity to understand why they think the way they do.

Now, I know they were just being stubborn towards the end to pile on. But if they really couldn't see why they connected "bottle" to "water", then ....... ok, there's no end to that sentence. then they suck, i guess.

powered by performancing firefox

No, i will NOT sit back and enjoy Wild Hogs  


Something strange is going on
in America.
Somehow, it's become the social norm to look down on people who have refined
tastes. There used to be a time where people aspired to better
themselves, and took pride in being able to distinguish between the qualities
of things. Now, if someone has the opinion that something is not high in
quality, they are looked down upon for being elitist. The new
mantra for America
has become "like what i like, and if you don't, then you are just being a
contrarian." Actually, I would probably be mocked for using
the word contrarian, but you get the point.

There's no better example of "the race to the bottom" than
movies. Box office numbers have become the new gage of quality, and
as long as the masses pay money, then the movie must be good. Wild
Hogs is the #1 movie in america,
so it must be good, right? Wrong. I don't care if every
single moron walks out of that theater laughing, it means nothing to
me. Mass appeal will never be an accurate gage of quality.

The sad part is that if you try to explain why a movie like Wild Hogs isn't
funny, the sheep get defensive. They try to make a strawman out of you,
claiming that your standards are too high. "I'm sorry, your holiness,
that not all movies are Michael Moore Documentaries." These are the
same people who wrongly assume that people who have heard of OPS can't actually
watch or enjoy a baseball game..that it's all just a bunch of data points in
their excel spreadsheets.

Every genre of every artform has quality work. There is "good"
pop music, just as there is pretentious Indy music. For the record,
I can appreciate the idea of a low brow comedy. The caveat being
that it has to be done right. And it's pretty obvious that today's
standards to get a movie green lit is not quality. A studio head
does not sit back and say "is this movie good?" but rather "will
this movie make money?"

My standard for comedy is pretty simple (and two fold). 1) Did it
make me laugh? I assume that's a pretty universal standard that everyone
adheres to. And of course, it's very subjective. People
are going to disagree according to their own tastes, and that's entirely
ok. However, people fail to account for the 2nd prong of the
test: 2) could I, or my friends, have come up with the same joke in under
10 minutes.

When I saw the trailer for Wild Hogs, I had the entire movie in my
head. Eventually, I will read reviews to see how accurate I am, but
here's my best guess:

4 middle aged men are having a mid-life crisis. They feel stuck in
a rut. They have stereotypical, nagging wives and kids who don't
appreciate them. One of them (my guess, the Travolta character, b/c
he's the only one who looks like he could pass for "cool") decides
they all need to have an adventure. Tim Allen is the
"normal" guy, Joe Everyman. He's the one that the (is
there a word for male soccer moms? there should be) soccer-dads will
relate to, and the soccer-moms will associate with their husbands.
The Fargo guy (it's a shame I don't
know his real name, b/c i think he's a GREAT actor) will be the overly
whiney/scared character. A combination of Millhouse and Chucky (from Rug
Rats). Every time there's a mini adventure on the trip, he's going
to be the "voice of reason" and the one most scared about
it. Of course, towards the end of the movie, he'll step up and be
the bravest in the most dire of situations.

And Martin Lawrence will play the black friend.

Now that the players are out of the way, here's what's going to qualify as
laughs: 1) the guys, while trying to be cool, will be very
uncool. They'll buy biker clothes that aren't quite
right. It will look like they are trying too hard. I imagine
they'll shop together, and you'll get a few cut scenes of them coming out of
the dressing room with more and more ridiculous outfits.

2) They won't know how to operate their motorcycles. At first they'll be
driving off the road, not being able to steer and hitting semi movable objects
(trees? bushes?)

3) someone will slip in mud or feces. This will actually be a running
gag, as the guys get dirtier as the trip continues. By the end,
they will all look completely disheveled.

4) There will be a hot girl that will be one of the biker's love
interest. He'll do increasingly embarrassing things to win her
attention, and even though it would fail in real life, in the end, she finds
him quirky and charming.

5) The 4 guys will have a run-in with a real biker gang. It will start as
a misunderstanding, but will escalate until the guys have to fight
back. This is probably where the Fargo
guy steps up.

6) There will be a camp scene where they have trouble setting up the tent and
starting the fire. They will have to eat "wacky" food.
Perhaps a unique bowel movement will take place at the makeshift campsite.

7) The long arm of the law will be involved. Probably an incompetent cop
will follow them throughout the trip.

See, it took me about 10 minutes to write that. Thus, if I'm going
to enjoy this movie, it has to be something above and beyond that.
And I know if I had a little roundtable discussion with a handful of my
friends, we could make a much much better Wild Hogs in 10 minutes.
There's nothing more enraging then when a fan reviewer says "just sit back
and enjoy it. it's a comedy!" I sit back and enjoy comedy all
the time. Namely, when I'm hanging out with my friends.
If they can be funnier 1) on the fly, 2) all the time 3) without spending 80
million to produce their comedy and 4) not charge me 10 bucks, then why on
earth would I go see a movie? A show like family guy (back in its prime)
was as "low brow" as they could come. But it was done in a
original way. I could tell that the writers were not only funny, but that
the final product was the result of constant refining. I could see
how they started with an original draft that was funny, but that they kept
tweaking it to make it as funny as it could be. With Wild Hogs, all I can
see is some guy in a suit having a meeting with another guy in a suit and
daying "hey, how about 4 guys go on a road trip with motorcycles" and
the 2nd suit saying "great, run with it!"

Ok, now i'm looking at the reviews, and while it seems I was pretty accurate in
my prediction about the movie. One thing I missed was that their #1
joke is that these guys are not gay, but are put in gay situations. Oh
man, the hilarity!!!

Times Article nails it

How about instead of going to see this movie, you just write the movie inside
your own head. Are people so dumb that they can't picture the jokes
without seeing it in the movie? Where's the
originality? How is this the #1 movie in america,
but Arrested Development was cancelled? AD had jokes that made me
go "man, even if i was given the topic, it would have taken me years to
craft that joke so perfectly".

According to Rotten
(18%) and Metacritics
(27) this movie is getting destroyed by the critics. Of course, there's
still no defense to "Fred J." who commented (in part)

The critics are showing their true colors by bashing this
film. The audience is already turning on them for their incompetent analysis of
the film. You have to wonder if these critics even bothered to watch the film.
... It's a comedy. Sit back, relax and take that stick out of your butt and
laugh a little. ...why are critics trying so hard to keep people away from an
unbelievably funny movie? Wonder if it touched a nerve with them, or wonder if
they just don't like one of the stars of the movie? Something is going on or
maybe the critics have lost their minds.

Yes, Fred, it's a nation wide conspiracy to keep down Wild Hogs. A movie
this powerful HAS to be stopped by the elite.

I can't even go on anymore. just rereading the "sit back,
relax" line is killing me.

Don't think, america,
it's not good for you. Hollywood will tell us what's funny, and
we'll agree.

powered by performancing firefox

Most disturbing aspect of the drawing  


Drawing pictures all over your hand and arm, while in rehab, is just normal-crazy. What makes these particular drawings so disturbing, heck downright "call your neighbors" crazy, is that the flower is drawn upside down. Hold out your left hand as though you planned on drawing on it with your right. Clearly, the logical decision would be to have the flower start near your thumb and then grow towards your index finger. What kind of mind would draw a flower upside down. Or maybe it's worse than that....Maybe she held her left hand upside down while she drew on it.