Monday, January 31, 2011

The Over-Utilization of Pronouns

Some people like to speak in cliches. Others like to speak in metaphors. Certain special people even like to speak in tongues. All of these forms of communicating language to another person are either annoying or frightening on a certain level. That brings me to another type of annoyance with regard to language and that's people who speak in pronouns.

It's perfectly alright to begin a story with a person's name, we'll say, Chuck Willard-Foolhardy, and then refer to this individual as "he" in the succeeding sentences, so long as no other character is identified. However, if a new character makes their presence known in a story, we can't go back to that pronoun, especially if the other character is also male. If we were to refer to one of them as "he," we may not know which one is being talked about.

This brings me to a couple people I know, one in particular, whom basically speaks in pronouns. She'll bring up a person's name, Buck Dolittle, at 1:42 pm EST and at 6:49 pm EST, she'll say something like, "Yeah and he went bungee jumping from the rim of a basketball hoop." I'll look confused and of course ask the rational question, "Who?" She'll then say, "Buck Dolittle, of course," like I'm supposed to know that.

There is almost always a fairly long gap between the original specific reference and the pronoun(s). This becomes confusing, because many other topics and people will have been discussed between those two points in time. Also, when multiple people or things are discussed and the words "he," "she" or "it" are used on multiple occasions, representing different nouns, this makes it all the more perplexing for listeners. Here is an example:

Tanisha (at 2:01 pm EST on Jan. 13th, 1994): "So, remember that freezer I saw on sale? Do you think we can purchase that?"

Geraldo: "Let me think about it, honey. We're on a very tight budget right now, with all the bookies we're having to pay off for all the miniature golf tournament bets we made."


Tanisha (at 3:19 pm EST on the same day): "Gosh, that air freshener is great. It reminds me of weed."

Geraldo: "I know. Are you hungry, sweetie?"


Tanisha (at 4:20 pm EST on 1/13/94): "Look at that baseball. Why is it yellow?"

Geraldo: "That's a tennis ball."


Tanisha (at 7:32 pm on the same day): "So, yeah, it's great, isn't it? It's really great!"

Geraldo: "What's great?"

Tansiha: "That air freshener, of course. What else would I be talking about?"

Geraldo: "Ehhh... I don't know. I was hoping you were referring to something else. ::as he looks down toward the nether region::"

...and so it goes. It can be a trying time following along with a regular conversation, but attempting to follow along with someone whom speaks in pronouns for a full day comprised of several references to different people, items and events, that is an entirely different beast. If one has to listen to these pronouns on a regular basis for an extended period of time, they will need to load up on excedrin, ear plugs, illegal substances and a trip to the loony bin, a psychiatrist or a singles' cruise. HE would really need IT, wouldn't HE? Indeed he would, whomever this he is. I'm not sure we'll ever know.

If crying were a drug, John Boehner would no longer be with us...

New Speaker of the House, Republican John Boehner of Ohio, has laid before this nation quite an image of himself. Just three months ago, before Republicans gained control of the House, Boehner could regularly be seen as a tough guy (sort of) and heard using very strong rhetoric. He was the epitome of what has become the Republican Party, outside the fact his skin tone confuses some with the Syracuse mascot (The Orange). But, after Republicans gained control of the house in November of last year, something happened to Mr. Boehner. He went from John Wayne to a woman on her period watching romance films. He went from an evil-sounding snarl which could be heard frequently at consistent intervals. Yes, John Boehner's image went from that of a Republican to a mother whose daughter was just wed to a drug dealer.

Due to these frequent outbursts of tears, Boehner has received his fair share of criticism from both the left and even from inside his own party. Faux News' editorialist, Bill O'Reilly, even claimed that Boehner is emotionally unstable. O'Reilly knows a thing or two about emotionally unstable people from all the badgering he's done to guests throughout the years. While it's true that Mr. Boehner has been spotted crying during the pre-game show of a basketball game, while watching the movie "The Little Mermaid" and even before, during or after sex (those Paparazzis, they watch everything, don't they?), shouldn't the guy be allowed to cry once in a while?

Okay, I understand the critique of that inquiry. "Once in a while," right? That'd be like me me implying that a crack-addicted prostitute only smoked the illegal substance and sold him/herself for sex "once in a while". Call it a hunch, but that's probably not the case.

Speaking of drugs, I have to wonder what Boehner may be taking? Have the doctors injected a certain about of estrogen into his system and removed any and every bit of testosterone he once had (it is debatable whether he ever possessed this, however)? Is Boehner actually a Hollywood actor and a very bad one at that? Or is he really the Speaker of the House, representing the party whom have prided themselves on being tough, being warmongers and being "manly" (sorry Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, among others)?

If you answered yes to the last question, you'd be correct. If you answered yes to any of the others, then there's no definitive answer to lend you at this very moment and I'll have to get back to you on that. Yes, John Boehner is a Republican Speaker of the House, a representative of the party whom holds a firm stance on gun rights, so firm they believe new borns should be allowed to carry them without a permit or license. This is the party that believes the United States should bomb any and every country whom holds one terrorist or one person whom doesn't believe that the United States is the greatest country in the history of man (and in the future as well). This is the party that calls anti-war protesters, environmentalists and global-warming believers a bunch of babies and Anti-Americans. This is the party where its members communicate one another through Tim "The Tool Man" Taylor grunts. John Boehner cannot fit this tough guy mold anymore, if he ever did to begin with.

I think for both John Boehner's sake and the Republican Party's, he will need to step down as Speaker of the House. It's obviously too emotionally draining on the Speaker from Ohio. He needs a job where he's not on camera nearly as much and will, in all likelihood, not be seen crying ever again. Some job possibilities would include: A janitor, garbageman, secretary, telemarketer or he change his party affiliation to Independent. The GOP needs this, because they can't have their tough-as-nails image destroyed, as it's one of the only reasons people vote for them in election, out of fear the party has promulgated to the American public. If they lose this fear factor, they will, in essence, lose their party. The only hope the two parties have of maintaining their current relationship is for the GOP to hire Tom Hanks, dress him as a baseball coach, and give Boehner a lecture on, "There's no crying! There's no crying in politics!" Outside of that remote possibility, the GOP may kick Boehner's behind to the curb and leave the man (that's debatable, I suppose) in tears yet again, not just from the kick, but from how he's feeling at that very moment. This will leave children scared and pointing Boehner out to their mothers, asking, "Mom what's that orange thing and why's it crying?" In answer to both questions, no one is really sure.

Saturday, January 29, 2011

"Fox" and "News" should not be placed in succession of one another...

Okay, I have to ask this, why do so many people trust "Fox News" as a credible source for news? Why? I'm not saying there aren't other biased news networks. MSNBC, especially in their late night programs, have an obvious slant to the left of center. However, they also carry with them Republicans Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan. That's not much, but that's still better than Fox, whom carries with them Shepard Smith and that's about it as far as "fair and balanced" reporting is concerned.

Infotainment, as I like to call it, is huge in this day and age. It's like an extreme version of a creative non-fiction book, where an individual takes facts and adds attractive fictional elements to make it more exciting and entertaining. In filmmaking, we have Michael Moore, but even Mr. Moore can't equal the level of "infotainment" that transpires at Fox and does so in a very slanted fashion.

There's: Megyn Kelly, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Brit Hume, Neil Cavuto, Chris Wallace, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Greta Van Susteran, Gretchen Carlson, Steve Doocy and Brian Kilmeade just to name a few. If I've forgotten anyone's name, I apologize. That's 13 hosts and/or contributors whom all lean to the right on some level, from slight (Wallace) to extreme (Hannity) to crazy (Beck).

Now, I'll be the first to admit that Fox had a good gameplan upon their network's inception. What is this gameplan, you ask? Fox wanted to stand out from the rest. That's what a lot of entertainers do. In order to get noticed by the mainstream, to garner good ratings, to make more money, they have to try and stand out from the rest. This is why we have shock rockers. Generally speaking, this is why we have controversial entertainment. That's what Fox wanted to do, to differentiate themselves from CNN, PBS, CBS, NBC and ABC, among others. So, they took that idea and ran with it. They then decided to run their "news" in an extremely slanted fashion, toward the far right of the political spectrum. Instead of admitting this bias, since they were far different from any other "news" network, they decided to try and implant the message into citizens' minds that they were the only unbiased network. This can be clearly seen in the network's slogans, such as "Fair and Balanced" and "We Report, You Decide". This gives viewers the impression that the network is central, unbiased, with their only intent being to report the news and allow the public to draw their own conclusions. They then spouted to their viewers that all other networks were biased toward the left and through this manner of thinking, it made them appear unbiased. Through this, Fox has told their viewers, "No other news network is reliable. Fox is the only place you'll hear of this story, the only place you'll get this kind of reporting. Every other news network is liberally-biased. We're not." Through this, many viewers wind up believing they can't trust any other news channel and end up not listening to any other outside of Fox. Their views then coincide with what Fox preaches and no one else.

Like I said, as much as I don't want to admit it, it was a clever way to manipulate the masses and that is exactly what they've done for the past 14+ years.

Now, it's highly debatable whether ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and/or PBS have any actual or significant bias overall. However, it is not debatable with Fox. I'm sorry. I don't care what anyone tells me. I don't care if they pull one unbiased report in the 14+ years of Fox's existence. It's not going to convince me. Just as I can admit that MSNBC is biased toward the left, Fox is biased to the right.

For regular Fox viewers, try to watch CSPAN, CNN, PBS, ABC, CBS or NBC for a week. Just watch. Watch as they relay the news unto you without much opinion. From Brian Williams to Katie Couric to Diane Sawyer to Wolf Blitzer to Charlie Gibson and beyond, pay close attention to the ratio of news they spew in comparison to opinions. Remember what facts and opinions are. I think many regular Fox viewers have forgotten the difference. Facts can be backed by credible sources. Facts can back a person's opinion, but opinions are not the equivalent of facts. It is my opinion that the death penalty is wrong and we'd be better off as a country if we abolished it, but this is not a fact. This is an opinion. I can find sources to back up my opinion, but once again, that does not make it a fact. Just because Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly or Glenn Beck say they believe something to be moral or immoral, it is just their opinion. It is not a fact. If Brian Williams relays a story about the war in Afghanistan and doesn't state what he thinks, he is relaying news, facts, that which is backed by reliable sources.

So, give these other channels a gander, a fair look and then go back to watching Fox and ask yourself what the differences are. Honestly, what are the differences? When Sean Hannity bashes on Democrats, on Barack Obama, etc., is what he is reporting factual? Or opinion? When Katie Couric reports on a trip Obama makes to China without mention of how she feels about the trip or the money that was spent, again, is what she is reporting factual or is it opinion?

The fact is (yes, fact) Fox News is biased. How biased they are is debatable, but they are biased. I see their slogans as false advertising, because outside of Shepard Smith, they are anything but "Fair and Balanced". They also don't give viewers an accurate reflection of the facts, so "We Report, You Decide," once again, is not an accurate representation of how the network conducts itself.

Listen to Bill O'Reilly and how often he bashes Republicans compared to Democrats. Listen to Sean Hannity and make a similar observation. Do the very same with Glenn Beck and other Fox personalities. You'll find that they don't criticize the Republican Party or any members of it very much. They will continually bash on the Democratic Party and its constituents, however.

These aren't gentle pokes at the Democratic Party either. Often times, these are very divisive, angry, hate-filled statements. Whether they compare President Obama to Adolf Hitler, Democrats to Nazis or they claim that Obama is a tyrant, trying to strip Americans of our rights and is leading us to a dictatorship, these are extremely slanted exaggerations and hyperboles, stated only to catch a person's attention and present a "wow" factor. That's all it is. It's about ratings.

The fact that Fox is the most watched cable news network is irrelevant when speaking of bias. Just because an Adam Sandler comedy hits number one and sets records at the box office, doesn't mean it's one of the top comedies of the year, let alone all-time.

Fox has manipulated the masses for over 14 years now and unfortunately, so long as people buy into their slanted message, they will continue to do so. Unfortunately, the saying, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" presents a dual-sided element in the case of Fox. On one hand, ratings wise, Fox obviously isn't broken, so there's no need to alter their ways. However, on the other hand, from a bias perspective, it's been broken since the network's inception and needs to change its ways in order to give American citizens an accurate representation of daily news. It's about time Fox lived up to their slogans and presented Americans with "Fair and Balanced" coverage and allowed people to decide for themselves, based on this unbiased coverage, what to believe.

Not sleeping for four consecutive nights can cause a few problems...

Okay, so I slept SOME, but not much. I usually get between 7 and 8 hours of sleep per night. From Monday night through Thursday night, I averaged maybe 4 hours a night. I'd finally fall asleep around midnight, wake up a few times throughout the morning, before finally waking up around 6 or 7 and not being able to fall back asleep. Stunningly, I was able to be semi-productive over the week and miraculously managed to workout all five days. No, I'm not sure how I accomplished that feat either.

I was also quite floored by how much writing I was able to get done in that same time-frame. The lack of sleep really caught up to me yesterday, as it was the first day in a while I didn't post a blog. But, I slept 8 hours last night and feel rejuvenated! It being a Saturday and all, I'm not sure how much I'll get done in bloggerworld, but feel that more is yet to come for the day.

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Sarah Palin's WTF Moment

Following President Obama's State of the Union Address, former beauty queen and sportscaster, Sarah Palin, had this to say to Faux News' Greta Van Susteren, "His theme last night in the State of the Union was the WTF -- winning the future. And I thought, okay. That acronym? Spot on. There were a lot of WTF moments throughout that speech."

Now, I'm not going to try and take the moral high road here and claim I've never written those three letters in succession before. Believe me, I have, often times at the expense of something Ms. Palin did or said. However, let's not forget what the GOP likes to claim, that they're the party of family values. Ms. Palin claims to be a Christian. So, why then use that acronym, when it stands for "What the F***?"

Also, who does this former sportscaster think she is? Like I mentioned, there have been numerous occasions when I have written "WTF" after hearing or observing something Sarah Palin said or did. She has had plenty of WTF moment, to be certain. In fact, it's kind of funny when one thinks about it, because in the grand scheme of things, WTF has Sarah Palin done? This is what many people were asking in the run-up to the 2008 election. A lot of independents and those sitting on the fence with their vote, after learning more about Palin and hearing her speak, said, "Eh, WTF has she done? I'm going to vote for Obama."

WTF indeed. I honestly wonder how many times Katie Couric mentally stated this acronym when she interviewed Ms. Palin in the run-up to the 2008 election.

Couric: "Have you ever been involved in any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?"

Palin: "We have trade missions back and forth, we do. It's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia. As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there, they are right next to our state."

Couric: "WTF?"

Couric: "And when it comes to establishing your worldview, I was curious: what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this to stay informed and to understand the world?"

Palin: "I've read most of them, again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media."

Couric: "But, like, what ones specifically? I'm curious."

Palin: "All of 'em, any of 'em that have been in front of me over all these years."

Couric: "Can you name a few?

Palin: "I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where, it's kind of suggested and it seems like, 'Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C. may be thinking and doing when you live up there in Alaska?' Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America
During their interview Monday, Katie Couric asked Sarah Palin what newspapers and magazines she read to inform her worldview before being tapped as John McCain's Vice Presidential running mate. And T...
During their interview Monday, Katie Couric asked Sarah Palin what newspapers and magazines she read to inform her worldview before being tapped as John McCain's Vice Presidential running mate. And T...
."

Couric: "WTF?"

Couric: "Besides Roe v. Wade, what other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?"

Palin: "Well, let's see. There's ― of course in the great history of America there have been rulings that there's never going to be absolute consensus by every American, and there are those issues, again, like Roe v. Wade, where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So, you know, going through the history of America, there would be others but ―"

Couric: "Can you think of any?"

Palin: "Well, I would think of any again that could best be dealt with on a more a local level."

Couric: "WTF?"

WTF indeed, Ms. Couric. WTF indeed. For as many WTF moments as Palin's had, a new national holiday should be named after her, called WTF Day. I just looked up WTF in the dictionary and guess whose picture I saw right next to the acronym? Sarah Palin. I even wonder if this is how she answers the telephone, "Hey, this is Sarah, WTF?" Sarah Palin is the epitome of WTF moments. Hopefully she'll continue moving her lips and letting words emanate from her mouth, so that we can experience many more. As the saying goes (or will go in the near future), "Where Palin goes, WTF moments will follow."

http://tv.spreadit.org/sarah-palin-katie-couric-interviewpalin-couric-interview-transcript/

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/30/eveningnews/main4490618.shtml

http://www.prosebeforehos.com/video-of-the-day/10/01/sarah-palin-dumb-and-dumber/

Blog #1,000

Yeah, I kind of took the cheap route to doing this. What can I say? I like discounts, sales, cheap prostitutes, etc.

I can remember the day when all of this started. ::thinks back::. Okay, so I can't. I don't even know what the first blog was about. It probably had something to do with sports or politics or perhaps music or movies. I guess it could have dealt with religion, been a top ten list, maybe a personal story or a short story about a killer pig by the name of Dudley.

It's been quite a ride and I'll be awaiting some reward (or award), a prize of some kind, cash or maybe one of those cheap prostitutes I mentioned earlier ("Five dolla!), preferably with the name, Chastity.

Obama may want to come up with a new slogan. "Win(ning) The Future" just isn't doing it for me...

As I noted in a recent blog, I thought President Barack Obama did a pretty good job with his State of the Union Address. It lacked in specifics, but I think he accomplished what I believe he wanted to accomplish - to make it appear to the American public that he is able to bring both parties together, that he's willing to compromise on issues and that he's more of a uniter than a divider. With such angry partisan rhetoric that most people are sick and tired of, Obama, I think, tried to corner the Republicans and tell them, "If you want to continue the angry rhetoric, fine, but as we saw with the State of the Union Address, the American people believe that President Obama is a uniter, so this will only hurt your cause in the 2012 election(s)."

However, I have to say, I think the new slogan, "Win(ning) the Future" has to go. It just doesn't sound right to me. It reminds me of comedian Stephen Colbert's book, "I Am America (And So Can You)!" However, unlike Obama's slogan, Colbert came up with the title to generate laughs. Obama's slogan may generate a few laughs as well, but that was not the intention of he and his cabinet.

Slogans are generally very short catchy phrases. "Yes We Can!" is one such example. Obama used this in the run-up to the 2008 presidential election and it caught on. People would chant the slogan at rallies, "Yes We Can! Yes We Can! Yes We Can!" There were signs being made and passed around with that very phrase and being held up by many with grand pride. I just can't see that happening with "Win(ning) the Future". Can you imagine people at a rally chanting, "Win the Future! Win the Future! Win the Future!"? I don't think so. As Sarah Palin did, they could abbreviate it to WTF, but due to what many see it standing for, "What the F***?", I'd suggest they don't do that.

The Irony of hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia (fear of long words)

Hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia is the fear of long words. No, I'm not kidding. It's as if the creator(s) of this word was (were) playing a cruel joke on those whom suffer from it. I imagine the conversation went a little something like this:

Bruno: "What's next?"

Jerome: "Fear of long words."

Bruno: "Alright, so, something simple, I guess..."

Jerome: "No, let's mess with them and come up with the longest word possible. Kind of like supercalifragilisticexpealidotioius."

Bruno: "Oh, you're bad."

Jerome: "I know."

Bruno: "I like it!"

Jerome. "Let's draw a bunch of random letters out of a hat and see what we come up with."

Bruno: "How many letters are you thinking?"

Jerome: "Including 'phobia,' I'm thinking there should be 35 letters."

::draw a bunch of letters::

Bruno: "So, what do we have?"

Jerome: "Hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia. Ah, that's perfect!"

Bruno: "Indeed it is."

::both let out simultaneous evil laughs::

The Facebook Poke

There are many different features on Facebook and the quantity is growing by the day it seems like. One feature I've been a bit perplexed by and of which I was not aware until a couple months ago, is what is termed the poke.

Over the past day plus, I've been poked four times by the same person, whom instigated it all four times and happens to be someone in which I have an interest. I haven't been poked this much since I was in a mosh pit at a Kiss concert. So, what does it mean, if anything?

Out of curiosity, I looked the Facebook poke up on, as former President Bush would call it, "The Google". Unfortunately or fortunately, depending upon one's perspective, there are multiple interpretations of this very feature.

These include a way to:

1) Aggravate

2) Flirt

3) Start a conversation

4) Say hello

5) Say I miss you

6) Say I'm thinking about you

7) Say what's up?

8) Hint that you should call them

9) Hint that you should write them

10) Say I like you

11) Say I want your attention

12) Engage in a poke war

13) Say did you know Ted Haggard is bisexual?

14) Engage in a Facebook staring contest

15) Set up a streakers' charity event

There have also been perverse interpretations and there was one story where a Facebook poke led to a marriage.

So, with all those (and others, I'm sure) potential interpretations of the poke, how does one know how to interpret it? As with all things, I'm guessing it depends.

It probably depends on how well the two people know each other, what kind of relationship they have, etc.

So, what does it mean in this case specifically? I couldn't say, because I haven't a clue as to where we are in our relationship. Go figure, right?

I must admit, though, that when I first saw this Facebook feature, my dirty mind made me laugh some. It made me laugh even more due to the fact my first poke was from a male friend of mine. What can I say? I go both ways with the poke and am secure enough in my Facebook-world sexuality to admit that!

Ted Haggard Comes Out That He's a Bisexual. That Cure-A-Homsexual Class Really Worked, Didn't It?

In the current issue of GQ Magazine, former pastor, Ted Haggard, said the following, "Here's where I really am on this issue. I think that probably, if I were 21 in this society, I would identify myself as a bisexual."

When writer Kevin Roose then asked him, "So why not now?", Haggard responded with, "Because, Kevin, I'm 54, with children, with a belief system, and I can have enforced boundaries in my life. Just like you're a heterosexual but you don't have sex with every woman that you're attracted to, so I can be who I am and exclusively have sex with my wife and be perfectly satisfied."

"Exclusively" have sex with his wife? Since when? That wasn't always the case, was it? Hmm?

Mr. Haggard linguistically exaggerates with his response to Roose's question.

As it states above, Haggard said, "Just like you're a heterosexual but you don't have sex with every woman that you're attracted to, so I can be who I am and exclusively have sex with my wife and be perfectly satisfied."

He's trying a bit too hard to illustrate his infinite devotion to his wife. He tries to compare a heterosexual not having sex with "every" woman he or she finds attractive and him "exclusively" having sex with his wife. That's a very poor comparison to make. It'd be like if I were to say, "Yeah, well, you don't do every illegal drug on the market, so I can be happy without partaking in any such substances."

His statement is an attempt to cast himself in a brighter light, as he juxtaposes an exaggeration on the part of Kevin Roose and compares it to a non-exaggeration on the part of himself. This is to suggest that Mr. Roose or another heterosexual is more promiscuous than Mr. Haggard, or at least giving readers that illusion. He's also trying to say that heterosexuals shouldn't judge him for who he is or what he has done (not "exclusively" have sex with his wife), as he tries to insinuate fault with them based on pure exaggeration and potential speculation to contrast his words of devotion and exclusivity.

Nobody is saying that a heterosexual should engage in intercourse with every person he or she may find attractive. No one is saying Mr. Haggard shouldn't be fully devoted to his wife. But, let's not attempt to play innocent by utilizing informal fallacies to paint a more positive picture of yourself, Ted.

No More Color-Coded Terror Alerts!

I just read that the government is FINALLY going to do away with the color-coded system for terror alerts, which was initiated under then President George W. Bush following the 9/11 attacks.

Ever since its inception, I saw the color-coded terror alerts as scare tactics and a clever way to bait and manipulate the public for a boost in approval rating. The polls even showed this. Within a few days of the terror alerts being raised a level, Bush's rating would increase a significant margin. As time progressed, its efficiency waned.

There was talk from President Obama that something would be done about the color-coded system, but I hadn't heard much discussion about it in his first two years in office. I'm thankful that by April, we will no longer have to hear the following at the airport, "Homeland Security is reporting that the terror-alert level is Periwinkle, with Cerulean zig zags, Magenta horizontal lines, Fuchsia vertical lines and Violet polka dots." Yeah, I got very tired of hearing that.

I wonder what the blog-posting record is for a four-day span...

Yes, I'm cheating by writing this, but eh, whatever. I'm amazed at how I had what I termed "blogger's block" just a week ago, as in the past 4 days (not including this one quite yet), I've posted 28 blogs equating to 58 pages (double-spaced). I'm not sure what has gotten into me, but it feels pretty good. I remember when I finished my most recent manuscript. I was in such a flow, I finished the 200+ page book in 7-10 days. The way I'm rolling right now, perhaps I should begin a new manuscript. Hmm... decisions, decisions...

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Singles Ads I'd Like To See

Sometimes I'll rummage through the singles ads, because some of them are rather hilarious. I read through some of these and I have to wonder, "Is this part of a joke or a dare or are they serious?" So, I'd like to have some fun in making up singles ads.

Politician
"I like long walks on the beach, telling people what they want to hear without actually meaning what I say, going both ways (in every way) and promising the impossible. Call me to make a donation to my campaign, I mean, to make all of your dreams come true!"

Stoner
"Dude, I so want to date right now. Wow. I mean... You know? Anyway, I like long walks on the beach, eating lots of snacks, watching 'Half-Baked' and listening to Pink Floyd. Oh and I like to smoke weed. Far out, man. Call me if you want to get high, go to jail and stuff. Peace."

Mime
" !!!!!"

Dick Cheney
"What do you want? Do you want me? Well, fine then, come and get me! Yeah, I like long walks on the beach, shooting friends in the face and doing all I can to be nicknamed Darth Vader. Call me if you want to wind up seeing a shrink for the rest of your life or if you want to apologize to me on national television because you got in my way during pheasant hunting. Argh!"

Bill Clinton
"Hey baby. How's it going? Yeah, come here. You and I both know I know what I'm doing when it comes to the ladies. I've bit my lip long enough. Let me help you to bite yours. Call me if you want to play with my saxophone and make sweet music. Oh and I like long walks on the beach."

George W. Bush
"Yeah, uh, so... Um... I like long walks on the beach and... Well... Anyway... If you want a man who's not going to misunderestimate you, who will supply you with the finest coke in Texas and who will make you feel smart every time you talk to him, then I'm your guy! Call me and like an OBGYN, let me practice my love with a woman such as yourself!"

Psychologist
"I'm not here to talk about me. Let's talk about you. How do you feel? What do you want from a man and from a relationship? Do you like long walks on the beach? I know I do. How about 'The Notebook'? Country music? George Clooney? Pole dancing? Well, if you want to feel constantly analyzed, to be asked more questions than a child would ask and always wonder if you're being judged, then I think we could have something special together. Call me and while we build a strong relationship, we can find out what all is wrong with you."

Doctor
"Hey. I may not be much to look at, but I do make a lot of money. I don't like to do much, but I do like long walks on the beach. If you want a man willing to poke and prod, to use all his tools to make you feel better, you may want to give me a call."

Model
"I don't have much to say. I like long walks on the beach and I'm hot. Call me."

Head Football Coach
"I don't know about the guys you've been with previously and what kind of effort they gave in making the relationship work, but let me tell you something about me. I give 110%! That's all I know how to do! I like to bark, scream, speak in cliches, take long walks on the beach and punish people for not doing what they're told! If you like a my way or the highway kind of guy, whom will protect you from anyone holding a camera or microphone, call me and I'll stay up all night to study your playbook until I master it!"

Valley Girl
"So, like, I'm like, for sure, you know? Like... I mean, totally! I like just so want to meet a guy like right like now. Like... I mean, I like think I have like a lot to offer and stuff. I like like long walks on the beach and like talking about stuff and I mean, I like totally like to do other stuff, you know? Anyway, like call me if you like want to like do some stuff."

Glenn Beck
"Now, let's think about this. ::busts out the chalkboard:: Okay, now see this dot over here? That's me. See this one way over here? That's you. See that third dot? That's another woman. See that 4th, 5th and 6th dot? Those are three more women. See the link? Do you see what could happen? It'd be the greatest event in the history of man! So, call me and while we will do plenty of walking on the beach and long walks at that, let's have a little fun with four other women and fulfill our magical fate. Oh, and Democrats are Nazi Socialist Commies."

Two Big Life Events Creating Surreal Paradox of Emotion

About 20 months ago, I woke up on a Sunday morning (May 31st, 2008) and knew something was wrong. I had no idea what it was and I had hoped that perhaps it was just a case of over-sleeping and I'd feel better the following day. Unfortunately, this wasn't the case.

Over the next few days, my extreme fatigue was met with other symptoms, such as tingling in my limbs, numbness around my face and in my mouth and an extreme foggy sensation in my head. When the condition hit its peak, it was difficult for me to walk, to get out of bed and impossible for me to drive or do much of anything outside of the house.

The next year and a half, I was a pinball to doctors all across the Columbus and Cleveland areas. These included: Neurologists, neurosurgeons, neuromuscular specialists, ear-nose-throat doctors, regular physicians, specialists with AVM (arteriovenous malformation), seizure specialists, etc. I underwent a multitude of blood tests, a glucose-tolerance test, had MRI's of my head and also my back/neck, an EEG, a couple Q-Sart's, a couple EMG's, a sleep study and a skin biopsy from what I remember. My tegretol dosage was altered a couple times, first increased and then decreased. The doctors placed me on neurontin and when that failed to produce any results, they had me try klonopin, which I had to stop taking after a couple days due to some awful side effects. The doctors often times saw subtle signs that something was wrong, yet were never able to confidently diagnose me with anything. These theories ranged from: AVM, guillain-barre syndrome, small-fiber neuropathy, small-fiber sensory neuropathy, depression and a side effect from my medication.

Through the past 20 months, I've been told anything from: You show signs of multiple sclerosis, could have diabetes, could have this condition and these symptoms for the remainder of your days, could lose your legs if the AVM is active and as it has a tendency to do when active, progressively get worse, etc.

About two months into the health ordeal, I began feeling quite depressed. One or two doctors started stating that depression can be quite a powerful phenomenon and may be the reason for my symptoms. It was the whole chicken and the egg argument. I had to keep explaining to them, "Depression did not cause these symptoms. I became depressed after I felt the symptoms." To me, it seemed rather common sense, but they still had their doubts. Also, with the before-mentioned dire possibilities coming to light, I began to feel even more depressed, asking such questions as: "Will these symptoms ever pass?" "Will they ever find out what is wrong?" "Will I be ever be able to work full-time?" "Will I ever be able to live independently?" "Will I ever be able to date and find love?" "Will I be able to go out much, socialize and make friends?" "Will I ever find happiness?" I had put my entire life on hold. The little things in life, that which I took for granted and failed to appreciate over the years, had been stripped from my possession, not knowing if I'd ever feel the joy of possessing them again.

A couple months ago, I went in to see a seizure specialist at the Cleveland Clinic. She suggested that since I was still suffering from auras, sometimes of the mass variety, there would be no harm in me switching my medication. She said that being on tegretol for so long (11 years) could result in it having a sedative effect, so she switched me to another seizure medication, lamictal, which she said could potentially help with regard to the tingling sensation as well. So, I was slowly weened off the tegretol over the course of about a month and my dosage of lamictal was slowly increased over the course of between one month and two months.

After I was completely weened off the tegretol and my lamictal dosage was increased some, I woke up one morning and realized the symptoms had decreased in intensity. It's now been about four weeks since I felt this change and things have been progressively improving in that time-frame. I've been trying not to get overly excited, as I have two appointments at the start of February, one with a sleep specialist and another with a neurologist, but for the first time in close to two years, I actually feel a sense of optimism and it's quite an amazing feeling. I really can't begin to describe it.

My entire outlook on life has changed due to what has transpired over the course of these past 20 months. For a while, I felt as if the symptoms would never vanish as I wished they would, that I may need spinal surgery and a second go-round of brain surgery, that I may one day lose my legs and that the rest of my life, I'd be in a constant struggle to make end's meet financially and to obtain happiness. I now have a new-found life and energy. I look forward to waking up in the morning. I can't help but wear a goofy smile throughout the day. To have had so much that one takes for granted ripped from them for a decent period of time and to then possess them again, it makes me that much more appreciative of the little things in life.

On the opposite end of this hope is fear. Almost seven and a half years ago, I went through a very difficult relationship. All people say that, right? This was different. All people say that too, right? Well, yes, but that's true in this case. I even have a 200+ page manuscript about the events to prove it. It started in the summer of 2003. On February 20th of 2003, I had a seizure while in my Spanish class. It was the first seizure I had experienced since I was placed on tegretol in August of 1999. Due to this unexpected turn of events, I panicked and this added stress triggered more seizures that afternoon. After I went home, I immediately called my neurologist to schedule an appointment. He told me that I had one of two options: To be placed on an additional seizure medication or to undergo brain surgery to remove the tumor which was likely triggering the seizures. Without much hesitation, I said I wanted to undergo brain surgery. While it was most definitely the more risky of the two options, I saw an additional drug just being a temporary solution, not a long-term one. I had perhaps become desensitized to the tegretol, having been on it for three and a half years at that time. I just saw it as a constant cycle. I'd get placed on a second medication and once I became desensitized to that, I'd get placed on a third medication and so forth. To go along with all the potential side effects of medications and the potential damage it can do to one's body in the long run, I was adamant about not going that route. Brain surgery, in my mind (no pun intended), was the only possible long-term solution.

Due to this decision I had made, I spent the majority of the summer in the hospital, getting tests done, undergoing an extended EEG just to make sure the seizures did in fact derive from the tumor and setting everything up for the surgery. This made for very little time to go out, socialize, date or anything of the sort. One day, I received an instant message online from someone I had never spoken to before. She had obviously read my profile, because she brought up how she enjoyed writing as well, poems in particular. She was 21, in college and judging by her picture, appeared to be rather cute. So, in between all my hospital visits that summer, I began talking to her more and wound up meeting her. For 3-4 months, we talked and saw each other rather regularly. After my surgery, my mother gave her a call to let her know the procedure went as hoped. Since I couldn't drive for a time after the surgery, my mother was kind enough to drive me to this individual's house and the three of us chatted for a while. It was nice. In the summer where I had very little time to go out, make friends or date, it helped take my mind off my health ordeals to have a person to talk with fairly regularly, with something to look forward to after my surgery - a relationship.

About a month later, I found out this individual had lied to me (and my mother) about everything and I mean everything. She then set me up and got me into trouble. This turned my life upside down. Just a month removed from undergoing brain surgery and having a hope instilled in me that I may one day be without seizures to being released from that very high and dropped like a skydiver without a parachute from 20,000 feet. I won't go into vivid details about what happened, but that day in September of 2003 and for the following 6 months, life was a living hell for me. I no longer knew what my future held. I no longer knew if I'd be able to utilize the college degree I was to earn before long. I no longer knew much of anything.

Fortunately for me, things slowly began to turn around in my favor through those 6 months and what could have been an awful turn of events for me wound up being a slap on the wrist. However, the after-effects of this event would linger for many years to come.

For a long period of time, I was uncomfortable around the opposite sex. Even if they were at the opposite end of the room, I felt discomfort. I started keeping to myself more and just sticking to my studies. I didn't even think about the possibility of dating. I placed an invisible shield around myself, as to not let anyone prod their way in to penetrate and potentially damage my core as this lady had done. I numbed myself, so that while I couldn't feel love, I couldn't feel pain. I was emotionless. All the feelings I had taken for granted for many years, I had no more. Many family members of mine believed I'd never date again. I, myself, believed this also and that I'd never garner a romantic interest or any kind of feeling for the opposite sex again.

This level of discomfort and numbness was constant through 2005 and part of 2006, but things slowly began to turn around in the second half of the year. While I was still very much uncomfortable and frightened by the idea of dating, I began finding women attractive again and not feeling as uncomfortable when in their presence. This resulted in a very short, two-week dating stint. Right away, I noticed some red flags, but in hindsight, I'm sure the reason I broke things off was a combination of the red flags and my continued fear and discomfort with dating. My trust for others, especially women, had been shattered. My willingness to be open and make myself vulnerable to others, especially women, all but vanished. But, in 2008, something happened to alter that course.

From 2006-2008, some friends of mine and I frequented a local lounge. It was a neat little atmosphere, the food was good, it was relatively close to each of us, we knew the people whom owned the place and got great prices because of that. But, there was someone whom worked behind the bar that I took a liking to and didn't realize it for some time. She and I had known of one another for quite some time, as we went to the same high school, but she was a couple grades below me, so we never really associated with one another in those days. With each and every visit to the lounge, however, I talked with and got to know her better and to go along with her beautiful exterior, she seemed extremely laid back and like a lot of fun. At that time, however, I was still quite reluctant on relinquishing the shield I had placed around me for some time. Due to this, I wasn't able to establish any sort of cognizance regarding my feelings toward a person. I had all but shut down that component of my system. In my mind, this woman was just a friend, a fun person to hang around, someone that was easy to talk to, etc. That's all I saw her as for close to two years there. In February of 2008, that changed.

It was known for a little while that I was going to be moving out-of-state, from Omaha, Nebraska to Columbus, Ohio, but that reality didn't strike me until about 2-4 weeks before the move. I had lived in Omaha for 26 of my 27 years at that point. It was my home, where I grew up, where all my friends lived, where all my memories resided; it was the only place I knew.

Over my final 2-4 weeks in Omaha, I began going around and saying goodbye to friends. A bunch of them even threw me a going-away party at the before-mentioned lounge. While I was going around town, seeing friends, giving/receiving hugs and saying my goodbyes, I realized there was one person I had the most trouble saying goodbye to and that was the bartender, my friend, at the lounge. It was so difficult, I actually wound up saying goodbye to her on three separate occasions, at the going-away party and twice more after that. I didn't understand what was going on and was utterly confused by it. I had been without any sense of emotion for four and a half years. I hadn't a serious interest of dating in that time. I hardly even looked at women in that very time-frame. But, here I was, going to sleep at night and not being able to get her out of my head. Like with my health ordeal, I didn't realize what I had until it was gone. As I began to realize I'd be moving 500+ miles away, it soon dawned on me that I wouldn't be seeing her anymore and this reality hit me like Mike Tyson on a stuffed animal.

After the move, I still couldn't stop thinking about her. When I'd talk to friends of mine on the phone, I'd find a way to bring her up and see how she was doing. When I talked to my mother, I brought up the fact that if I hadn't moved, I would have asked her out. I wanted to come forward about my feelings at that time, but bit my tongue, because I didn't think it'd be fair or right of me to do that, having just moved out-of-state. When I visited Omaha a couple times in the following six months, I made sure to see her. I was again tempted to open up to her, but as I was surrounded by friends and family whom wanted to see me while in town, I didn't feel it was proper to do that. I wanted it to be a private matter. The next time I came to town, I invited her to hang out with my brother and I at his place. She seemed to be pretty confident that it'd happen and I thought it'd be the perfect opportunity for me, once my brother left us alone, to finally let her know how I felt. Unfortunately, she was unable to make it that evening. Not long afterward is when my health problems started and I had to put my entire life on hold. I still had feelings for this woman, but once again, I felt it wasn't the right time. I had contemplated moving back to Omaha, but lost sight of that possibility at the condition's inception. Because of this, I didn't know when or even if I'd be moving back home and due to the uncertainty of my health and also of my moving back, I felt it'd be pretty pointless to open up to her.

However, like I mentioned earlier, about a month ago, I began feeling a change with regard to my health. The intensity of the symptoms seemed to wane somewhat and for the first time in what seemed like ten years, I had reason to smile. Immediately after I felt these positive changes, I thought of her. I was finally recovering, could once again see the light at the end of the tunnel (that light being Omaha) and after three years of biting my tongue, after seven and a half years of not feeling such emotions, of being able to come to terms with it myself, of being able to express it to another, after the move out-of-state and the rough 20-month journey I had with my health, through all of that, I still had feelings for her and those very feelings, if anything, escalated.

That brings me to today. Over this past month, she and I have been communicating much more regularly. There has been some flirtation, some complimenting, lots of laughter and a large quantity of smiles shared between the two of us and I've decided to finally come forward about what I've felt for three years this upcoming Sunday. With each and every passing day, however, I become more frightened.

It's something I never thought I'd experience again. I almost forced myself not to feel anything again. To actually feel something is remarkable, but with the potential of love comes the potential of pain. Seven and a half years ago, pain was inflicted upon me like never before, by a woman I had trusted with all my heart, only to tear my heart out and with seeming glee. To actually feel something for a woman again, I'm very excited, yet very scared. I sincerely hope that my first experience with such emotions since that nightmare in 2003 will not end on a sour note Sunday. Due to this fear, I keep debating with myself and going back and forth on the matter, whether I should or shouldn't open up in 4 days. In the end, I imagine I'll be very hesitant this upcoming Sunday, but I've promised myself I have to go through with this. Even at the risk of her shooting me down and me regressing a bit with regard to dating, due to the further pain inflicted upon me with the rejection, I'll at least be able to not regret my inaction and I'll at least be able to forgo the hypothetical questions. As much as I don't want to experience pain again, I finally want to have the opportunity, for the first time in seven and a half years, to experience love.

Wouldn't it be funny if...? (Part 2)

A few years ago, I wrote a blog entitled, "Would it be funny if...?", where I listed off ten very random, unlikely events that I'd find quite funny if they did happen to occur one day. I'd like to do that again here. I'll just have to make sure my hippocampus and amygdala are in line, so I don't repeat any from the first list onto here.

Wouldn't it be funny if...

...Jason Statham was a co-lead star of a gay porno alongside (and inside) Lance Bass?

...George W. Bush wrote a couple of new books entitled, "Dictionary for Dummies" and "Thesaurus for Dummies"?

...MTV played music videos?

...Wolf Blitzer starred in the reality television show, "The Bachelor"?

...lawyers were required to smoke marijuana before entering the courtroom?

...the E-Harmony commercials' background song was "The Beautiful People" by Marilyn Manson?

...the main criteria for awarding someone the title of Mr. Universe was to see how long the men could handle the shake weight?

...there existed the sport of Sumo Wrestler Tennis?

...mime's did stand-up comedy?

...Bill O'Reilly orgasmed on the air while yelling at a guest? (Oh, check that. I'm being told that's happened a few times.)

Repulsive? Me Thinks Not!

The other day, a good friend of mine gave me the compliment of a lifetime. She said I'm not repulsive, so I've got that going for me, which is nice.

(By the way, if this friend is reading this, I'm not mad at all. I just thought the wording was funny. 'Tis all good and stuff...)

Nuclear vs. Nucular

Isn't it nice that our current president, Barack Obama, knows how to correctly pronounce the word "nuclear" (as opposed to "nucular," which was frequently uttered by former president George W. Bush)? Yeah, I think so too.

What pundits are missing regarding President Obama's State of the Union Address

Following President Barack Obama's State of the Union Address last night, I listened to the post-speech reactions from both left-leaning pundits and right-leaning ones.

Both sides made a valid point, but completely missed something that was critical in my eyes and which may illustrate the overwhelming approval of the speech by the public via polls.

On the left, there was the usual cheerleading going on, but one point they made which I found to be true was that Obama's message, the plans he laid out were very center to slightly left-of-center. Obama was not using far left rhetoric. He made statements to show support for his Democratic base, as well as statements which would likely garner some Republican support.

Over on the right, again, there was the typical criticism of the president, but they made one point which I found to be accurate as well. They said that the president's speech lacked in specifics. He painted the future and his plans with a much broader brush than some had hoped.

Following the speech, CBS conducted a poll, which found that a near unanimous 92% of the American public approved of the plans Obama had laid before them and 62% believe that the two parties can work together to move this country forward.

So, why the mixed reactions from the pundits and the overwhelming support from the public?

Obama may have lacked in specifics, but I think this was mostly based on strategy. In November, the Democrats lost control of the House and with that. They had solid majorities in both houses of Congress, but as the country was angry at Washington in general and because there were more Democrats than Republicans in Congress, the people punished the majority party more so than the minority one. With this, the president knew and knows he will have to try and find some common ground between the two parties if he wants to get anything accomplished over his final two years of his first term. He knows he'll have to make some concessions here and there in order for this to happen.

Also, let's keep in mind how divided Washington has been over the years and this was amped up a notch following the Republican's big day in November. Republicans were clamoring that "The people have spoken" and "This was an anti-Obama/-Democrat vote" and "This gives the Republicans a mandate for the next two years". Just last week, the House passed a symbolic vote to repeal Obama's health care plan. The rhetoric has often times been angry between both parties over Obama's first couple years in office and it hasn't progressively improved or anything. If anything, it's progressively gotten worse. In November, the American public didn't vote against the president's policies or the Democratic Party. They voted against incumbents. They voted against how things were or weren't getting done with these incumbents. They were voting to change things around a little bit, because they were sick and tired of the status quo and they wanted to shake up Washington in any way they could. Congress had the lowest approval ratings in their history not long ago. People are sick and tired of the angry rhetoric, the divisiveness and the reluctance for the two parties to come together in a compromise in order to improve the citizens' daily lives.

Taking all of this into consideration, think about Obama's plan of attack last night. If he had spoken in specifics all night, there wouldn't be a very unanimous applause for most all of the plans. The public would likely see the majority of Democrats stand up, clap and cheer and the majority of Republicans sit down with their hands in their laps, perhaps booing on occasion. However, what Obama did was speak a bit more vaguely, in order to create the illusion that he is obviously bi-partisan in his plans, that he can bring both parties together and things can get accomplished in Washington. He spoke in large-themed generalities often times last night, whether that be about education reform (do it for the kids...), America being the greatest country in the world, tax cuts, security, the soldiers' livelihoods, etc. I don't care what one's political persuasion is. If he or she sits and refuses to applaud the president when he speaks of such things, it's not going to look good in the public's eyes and as a result, there will be some backlash. With this strategy, Obama gave the impression that Washington isn't as divided as it was and with this, has put some pressure on the Republican Party and their majority in the House to deliver.

As the CBS Poll indicates, the people saw Obama last night as very center, as bi-partisan, as a compromiser willing to make sacrifices in order to get things done. If the Republican Party continues with their frequent no's, chances are a majority of the people whom approved of the president's speech last night will sit back and think, "Well, we all know Obama is bi-partisan. It must be the Republicans whom aren't willing to meet in the center. We'll have to vote them out of office in the next election."

So, the pressure is back on the Republican Party. Obama cornered them last night with his speech and if their House majority doesn't step up and illustrate a willingness to compromise with Democrats in order to move the country forward, they'll pay for it in 2012, while the president will then be elected to a second term. So, no, Obama's speech wasn't very specific, it wasn't the most exciting, but it accomplished what he wanted it to accomplish and that's corner the GOP, put the ball in their court and force them to make the next move. Well done, if I do say so myself.

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

I find this funny about the Republican Party...

It's kind of funny how it seems the majority of the Republican Party spends a good amount of their time bashing the United States government and how ineffective it is.

"Elect me. I know the government, of which I'm a part, will cause Armageddon for this country. I promise I'll make sure nothing gets done in Washington in order to move this country forward. I'm Senator Dumbas* (pronounced Doo-mah) and I approve this message."

So, what, should doctors tell their patients, "You know, Bobby, we doctors are pretty worthless. We get paid a lot of money to serve you, but at the end of the day, we cause more harm than we do help. I honestly wouldn't ever see a doctor if I were you. We won't give you shots, MRI's, catscans, EEG's, or conduct a surgical procedure. Less is more and by not doing anything, we're going to help you recover from this awful disease."

Yeah, that makes perfect logical sense... ::scratches head::

Mitch McConell's Future Job

Republican Senator (KY), Mitch McConnell, like John Boehner (R - OH), has a promising future ahead of him after he's through with politics. While Boehner will join the Big East as the Syracuse Orange mascot, McConnell will head south a ways to the ACC, where he will become the Maryland Terrapins' mascot. If/When Syracuse and Maryland face one another, it'll truly be a sight to behold. Perhaps we'll get lucky and there will be snow on the ground, so the fans can chuck a few snowballs at what will be the former politicians. Ready! Aim! Fire! Oh, and by the way, Mr. Orange and Mr. Turtle, you're welcome. If you need any more future advice from me, you won't have my number, my e-mail address or my address, so best of luck to you! I'll be sitting at home with an adult beverage and some popcorn, watching and laughing! It'll be entertainment at its finest!

http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=rcw&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=s&biw=1600&bih=684&q=mitch+mcconnell+turtle&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=QZE_TazBLpLegQer4uDQAg&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=2&ved=0CCgQsAQwAQ

http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=Cew&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=s&q=maryland+terrapins+mascot&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=iJE_TYviF8jcgQeG2ZyjAw&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=5&ved=0CFIQsAQwBA&biw=1600&bih=684

John Boehner's Future Job

After he's done with politics, I have an idea for the new speaker of the house, John Boehner (R - OH). He should move to New York and become the mascot for Syracuse. He wouldn't even need a mascot's outfit. He could dress in a suit and tie, while cheering on the Orange and I don't think many people would be able to tell the difference.

John Boehner
http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&q=john+boehner+orange&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=0pE_Td2WBc3pgQeNqLGiAw&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=2&ved=0CDQQsAQwAQ&biw=1600&bih=684

Syracuse Orange Mascot
http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&q=syracuse+orange+mascot&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=7ZE_TZKQM4GugQfj7bHzAg&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=4&ved=0CEMQsAQwAw&biw=1600&bih=684

Blogger's Block No More!

I'm quite amazed that just a few days ago, I wrote a blog entitled, "Blogger's Block," because I hadn't blogged for about a week and couldn't think of anything to write about. That's even worse than having writer's block, because one can blog about anything, from Columbo to Columbia to Columbine to a duck-billed playpus to Bill Clinton's sexual escapades to the fascination of a fire hydrant while tripping acid. Yet, I couldn't think of anything to write about. I then concluded at the end of my blog that perhaps my blogging about not being able to blog would wind up being my first step in recovering from blogger's block en route to regularly blogging again. Let me check to see how many times I said blog in that sentence. ::counts:: Five. Not bad. Speaking of numbers, this is officially my 19th blog in the past three days. I don't know what has happened over the past 72 hours. Perhaps I was slipped some speed in my sleep. I'm not quite sure. In any case, like with any problem, it's nice to be over my blogger's block, even if it's only temporary. Just watch, with this blog, I jinx myself and go back to blogger's block, only to repeat this same cycle the following week. That'd be kind of funny. Maybe. Well, in hindsight, it may be humorous. Hopefully I won't have to laugh about it in another couple weeks. I'll have to ask for more speed while sleeping. It can't be weed or else I'd have blogger's block to the extreme. I may write two or three word blogs, such as, "Gosh, I'm bored" or "Man, I want a twinkie right now" or "I'm so high. hahahahahahahahaha". Yeah, I'll have to make sure and make note of that to whomever is slipping me drugs while in my slumber. Hopefully they themselves are not high at the time or else I could be in trouble.

Boggle, Scrabble and Sudoku

Yes, I enjoy all three games and am solid at all three, especially Boggle. No one will play me anymore. So, yeah, I'm a geek and I'm okay with that. Some people enjoy Twister. Others like to play cards. Some enjoy Clue or Life. I like playing games which revolve around letters and numbers. Perhaps this is why I'm still single. I should put out a personal ad which reads something like this:

"5'9'', 156.5, dark brown hair, green/hazel eyes, dimples, fairly fit, enjoys long walks on the beach, blogging, boggle, sudoku and scrabble. If you want to have a great time, give me a jingle and we can stay in on a Friday night and connect letters to form words!"

Chad Johnson Will Again Be Chad Johnson

I just read that Cincinnati Bengals' receiver, Chad Ochocinco, is going to change his name back to Chad Johnson, what his name originally was before he felt the need to alter his last name to "Ochocinco". Thank God. I have nothing against name changes, the Bengals or Chad Johnson, but his name alteration was fricking ridiculous. He's number 85, so he altered his name to represent his jersey number. Ocho = 8, Cinco = 5. Unfortunately for him, combining the two words does not equal 85 in Spanish. In Spanish, 85 is ochenta y cinco. There is quite a difference. In English, if I wore number 11, I wouldn't change my name to one one. The number is eleven. I'm not sure who taught Johnson about language and/or mathematics, but he may want to work on that a bit, especially for how much he likes to talk.

Ever wonder how other people see you?

I've always been curious about this. Yet, it's virtually impossible to know, unless one were to bug some people's houses, phone lines, mic'ed someone, etc. and I'm sure once these individuals found out about this invasion of privacy, they wouldn't have very nice things to say about the curious individual. The only other way I can think of this being possible is if there's life after death and one is able to watch and listen to people interact, perhaps lending some insight in how they viewed another.

Most times, there seems to be a certain percentage of honesty when a person speaks of another to their face and also when they speak of them behind their back. There is probably some honesty in both scenarios, but it's not complete honesty most likely. They're probably more complimentary in person and more critical away from the person. One would have to try and balance these two set of circumstances to garner a clearer picture of how another sees them.

I find it to be fascinating to a certain extent. How do people in general view another as they make their presence known somewhere? How do friends or family view this same person? What do they say about him/her when they're not present? Do they genuinely mean what they say when they are present? How differently do people one associates with view him/her? Do three different friends view the same person drastically different from one another? If so, why?

I think it all depends on experience. People whom have no affiliation with another may judge them as they enter a room, but that's all it is. They have no idea what makes the person who they are. All they know is what they see with their eyes from a first-impression standpoint. Acquaintances may have a vague idea of another person, but may have trouble with specifics, since the two haven't engaged in many deep and/or personal conversations. Partial friends may be a step up, but in a more autistic sense, where they may know one side of the person very well, yet aren't cognizant of all the other sides the person presents. This can be true of distant family members too, I'd think. Friends and other members of the family may have a better idea of who the person is, where they know several components of the whole and fairly well, but still are unaware of many other components. Close friends and members of the family, along with girlfriends/boyfriends (sometimes) and spouses, I imagine, have the most accurate image of another, but even then, all of their experiences will differ, so their images of the same person will likely differ as well. Then the person him/her-self will have the very best idea, as they may not open up to certain people and may hide certain things from all others to the point where only they and maybe one or two other people are aware of the event/thought/feeling. Even the person him/her-self, though, is in a constant state of learning, expanding and changing. I think it's virtually impossible for anyone to have a clear 100% accurate reading of another, but I'm still very intrigued in seeing/hearing just how another honestly sees me. I'll never know and I doubt anyone else will, but it's interesting to think about, for me at least.

Monday, January 24, 2011

Muse kind of rules...

Just as I realized I hadn't blogged about madman Glenn Beck since I began to blog again for the first time in a couple years, the same can be said of British rock trio, Muse.

I admit, I'm an American and wasn't much exposed to them until about three years ago. So, yes, I'm a bit of a newbie. However, in the past three years, I have been a bit obsessive with listening to their music and I can say at this point in time, they are my favorite band, past or present (or future...).

I would also like to admit, although I am a newbie, I have helped provide Muse with a number of new fans, including those 50 or older. ::pats self on back::. I even went to two concerts of theirs over the past year. I had to sell two tickets for the show in Columbus, Ohio (long story) and one of the individuals I sold the ticket to, an older gentleman, said it was by far and away the best concert he had ever seen and he has been witness to many. I've been witness to my fair share of good shows for my age: Elton John/Billy Joel, Kiss/Ted Nugent/Skid Row, Alice Cooper/Blue Oyster Cult, Marilyn Manson/Stabbing Westward/Stain'd/Buckcherry, Metallica, Def Leppard, Aerosmith/Seven Mary Three, Megadeth, Foo Fighters/Red Hot Chili Peppers, The Smashing Pumpkins, Deftones, Korn/Limp Bizkit/Ice Cube/Rammstein/Orgy, Chicago/Earth, Wind & Fire, Sponge/Iggy Pop, etc., etc., etc. I don't like to speak in absolutes, because I believe there are shades of gray in just about everything. So, I'm not going to sit here and say Muse was the best concert to which I've been witness. However, I will say they were one of the very best I've seen. Between being spot-on musically in conjunction with the insane light show, stage set-up and theatrics, it was truly a unique and wonderful experience.

Muse has run into some criticism since their debut album, "Showbiz," which was released in 1999. The criticism has mainly dealt with claims that they're nothing but a rip-off of Radiohead and/or Queen. Some critics have compared Muse frontman, Matt Bellamy's voice to that of Radiohead's lead singer, Thom Yourke. Some have also said that Muse plays an epic style of rock that is very reminiscent of Queen. There's no doubt that Radiohead and Queen have influenced the band, but that's how it always is. There are other bands and musicians whom have influenced the British trio. There are musicians whom influenced Thom Yourke and Radiohead, along with Queen. Personally, perhaps because I've listened to Muse so much over the past three years, I honestly don't hear too much similarity between they and Radiohead. Both Yourke and Bellamy have great range vocally and unlike most other rock bands, they aren't afraid to break out the falsetto and reach notes that hardly any other singer in the rock business can reach. But, that's the only similarity I see (hear) between the two. With regard to Queen, I don't hear much similarity in Muse's first four albums ("Showbiz," "Origin of Symmetry," "Absolution" and "Black Holes and Revelations"). The only album I hear a good deal of influence is with the band's fifth and most recent album, "The Resistance" (2009). I don't hear an influence on the majority of songs either. I don't hear much influence on: "Uprising," "Undisclosed Desires," "Guiding Light," "Unnatural Selection," "MK Ultra" or the three-part symphony. I only hear an influence on three songs: "Resistance," "I Belong to You" and especially "United States of Eurasia". I only hear slight influences in those first two songs I mentioned, only in certain portions of the songs, but hear it throughout the third, "United States of Eurasia," which sounds like a track devoted to Queen. When it comes right down to it, however, I don't see Muse as a rip-off of either Queen or especially Radiohead. Just because Bellamy has similar range vocally to Yourke, doesn't mean they're identical and he's attempting to copy the Radiohead singer.

One thing I love about Muse is their diversity in sound and their being willing to experiment musically and attempt to expand their horizons as musicians. I don't know many bands whom can pull off a hard rocker like "Stockholm Syndrome," a spacey number like "Knights of Cydonia," a R&B-esque song in "Undisclosed Desires," electronica with "Map of the Problematique," funk with "Supermassive Black Hole," epic rock in "Resistance" and a three-part symphony, among many others.

The albums themselves are all very distinct of one another. From "Showbiz" to "Origin of Symmetry" to "Absolution" to "Black Holes and Revelations" to "The Resistance," each and every album shows a contrast to all the others and illustrates the band's attempt to expand their sound through experimentation. Due to this, I feel as if the band is anti-Nickelback, and I'm very grateful for that. It's one reason I look forward to each and every album they release, not truly knowing what to expect.

While Bellamy's operatic voice can take some getting used to, when one does, it's remarkable, especially when combined with his skills on the piano and guitar, Dominic Howard behind the drums and Chris Wolstenholme at bass guitar. As a unit, they're tremendous, both in the studio and in concert. For those whom have not heard much of the band or at all, I highly recommend giving them a chance. I finally gave them a chance three years ago, instantly fell in love and have grown to enjoy their music more as each and every day passes.

My Apologies To Jay Cutler... Sort of...

Okay, as I said I would do if his MRI did indeed show a knee injury, I would like to apologize to Jay Cutler for calling him a wimp. The MRI showed he suffered an MCL sprain. However, I do stand by everything else I stated... Mr. Cutler, best of luck healing this off-season and please don't miss any playing time next year due to a broken nail, bad haircut or smiling for the second time in your life.

My Attempt At Thinking Like Glenn Beck

Okay, I'm going to give it a go. I've never been able to understand how Glenn Beck comes up with the ideas he does. So, I'm going to attempt to become one with Glenn Beck, crawl inside that noggin of his and see what I can come up with. Alright... ::closes eyes, takes deep breaths, listens to Metallica::

For my first connection, I will show you that without any hesitation, we can conclude there's a direct link connecting Hillary Clinton, Sean Penn and Mystic River. There's no mistaking which way Hillary Clinton leans on the political spectrum. She's a left-wing loony, much like actor Sean Penn. If you didn't realize this, Sean Penn starred in the film "Mystic River" and this means only one thing - Hillary Clinton drowned someone in a river! There should be a full investigation into this criminal act and I am going to be the one leading the way to her conviction and life sentence!

How about if I connect four?

Today I'm going to draw a link between: Barack Obama, Michigan, the Qur'an and dinosaurs. It's really very simple when you think about it. Dinosaurs were here a long, long time ago and according to my studies, the Qur'an has been around for a very long time as well. There are a significant number of Muslims whom practice Islam through the Qur'an in parts of Michigan. Barack Obama won the state of Michigan in the 2008 presidential election. Therefore, Barack Obama wants to kill all the infidels! All those whom don't follow the Qur'an, you might be next!

Okay, that was another attempt. Let me try and connect more dots...

I'm going to show you all that there's a direct link between: Bill Clinton, a skunk, a Siberian Husky, Russia and chicken vindaloo. Now, stay with me on this one. These are very scary times, which I'm about to show you. There can be no question about it, Bill Clinton stinks, much like that of a skunk after its sprayed. Now, if you'll notice on a skunk's back is a strip of white sandwiched in between black. Siberian Huskies can be all (or partially) white. There are huskies in evil, communist Russia and some southern parts or Russia aren't too terribly far from northern portions of India. Chicken vindaloo is the the spiciest dish in Northern India and through this, we now know that Bill Clinton has engaged in a number of hot, steamy spicy affairs and should be punished! Be on the look out, guys. Clinton may soon be after your wife! Come prepared! Make sure to buy a gun and if he trespasses, take care of business! No, I'm not advocating violence. I'm not saying to shoot the guy. But, if he criminally trespasses on your property, do it!

Okay, let's see if I can do this by connecting six people, places or things. This could get a little tricky, but I have confidence I'll be able to pull it off.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am about to announce before you the biggest, most valid and most frightening conspiracy in the history of man! Your life will forever be changed by what I'm about to say. I'm about to connect the following: Democrats, Jesus, a blue whale, a lamp, Will Ferrell and gatorade. Actor Will Ferrell's biggest role to date was his starring as Ron Burgundy in "Anchorman". In the movie, Steve Carell's character states, "I love lamp". His character's name is Brick. Like Brick, the blue whale starts with the same letter, "B". Gatorade now has a blue colored and flavored water from which to pick. Like with any kind of water, one can be baptized in this very water to be saved in Jesus Christ's holy name. But, what's lost in this is the fact the Jews killed Jesus and the Jewish demographic almost always votes Democrat. So, ladies and gentlemen, hear me now, hear me loud and clear. Democrats crucified Jesus!

There you have it. I must admit, finding some of these links was very difficult, but Mr. Beck's cognizance of the unprovable, his audacity of the impossible, his conviction for the ludicrous inspired me to no longer think for myself, to no longer listen to actual logic, reason or to any credible source. I can now utilize my imagination to the very fullest to turn truth into fiction and fiction into reality, my reality. So, thank you Mr. Beck, for convincing me that ignorance truly is bliss.

Glenn Beck's Stategery

As I took quite a break from blogging between '08 and '10, I recently realized I had yet to blog about Glenn Beck of Fox News.

Now, I've never been a fan of Fox News, from Sean Hannity to Bill O'Reilly to Brit Hume to the morning crew and beyond (Shepard Smith being the lone exception), but Glenn Beck is another beast entirely. While Hannity and O'Reilly make me shake my head at their angry rhetoric and heavy slant, Beck simultaneously frightens me and makes me laugh.

I laugh at the man and his show because the majority of what he says is so outlandish and ridiculous, his words and actions come across to me as over-the-top comedy more than anything. However, the fact that so many people listen to this guy and take his words seriously, that frightens me a bit.

Beck is quite a fan of the chalkboard and using the chalkboard to connect the dots of people and events to form a conspiracy. He's drawn links between different Democrats and the likes of Adolf Hitler, Stalin, etc. There are times when there are so many different lines drawn on the chalkboard, connecting one person and event to another, it really appears to be the final product of a child whom just connected the dots in a book. I don't even know how he does it. I have a theory of my own on the matter, though.

Every morning, Glenn Beck picks out anywhere from 3 to 6 things to connect from a random set of pieces of paper in a bowl. After he picks out these 3 to 6 names, places, events, political parties, ideologies, etc., he then gets to work. It doesn't matter if he draws: Stalin, Obama and Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer or cornfields, Harry Reid and thunderstorms or even Nancy Pelosi, a firetruck and gravity. He will find a way to connect those dots and convince his audience that the Democrats are out to get them!

This is why most or all of conspiracy theories don't work to a T. There may be components of some theories that may hold some potential validity, but for a full conspiracy to work, every event, every connection made within the conspiracy has to be valid in order for the theory to work. This is nearly impossible. Mathematically speaking, it may not be impossible, but more than likely, next to impossible. So, when Beck tries to link three to six (or so) different people and events to one another, he may have a point with regard to one link, but for him to draw multiple links as he tends to do results in an utterly ridiculous theory. This is why I have to laugh at his rhetoric sometimes. His theories are so off-the-wall preposterous, my immediate reaction is that of laughter. Unfortunately, there are many whom don't laugh when Beck speaks and actually believe his every word. How anyone could believe this man's every word is beyond me. Perhaps he has a history of distributing spiked kool-aid to people and through this, is able to brainwash his supporters. In any case, I really hope people stop believing this clown and he winds up being just a phase. Even for how slanted Fox News is to begin with, Glenn Beck brings them to a whole new level partisanship and ridiculousness.

Slanted Stories Following Break-Ups

I'm sure this is quite ubiquitous. When a couple breaks up or even if they have yet to break up, but are going through some problems, both parties slant their stories to make them appear as the victim and paint their partner as guilty.

It'd be quite something for an outsider to listen to both sides of the story and believe he was hearing the same story. He/She may be wondering if he/she spoke to two people whom even knew one another, let alone dated. Why is there that need to paint oneself as the one without fault in a relationship and portray the other as the guilty party? As is rather common knowledge, in the vast majority of such relationships, both sides are responsible for the relationship's demise. One party may be a bit more responsible than the other and in rare scenarios, one party may be fully (or close to it) responsible, but in most cases, about 50% of guilt can be bestowed upon both parties.

I just learned in the past week that a woman I wasn't even dating, but one whom was interested in dating me and I not in her, told her story to friends that I was the sole reason things didn't work out between she and I. I didn't tell any stories, because we never dated. I didn't feel the need to tell people about a relationship in which I was never interested to begin with. Perhaps she just wanted to convince herself that she was not responsible in any sense of the word for what occurred (or didn't occur) between the two of us and she was able to do this (or at least try) by slanting the story.

Another problem may be the fact that while some people have a strong ability to be empathetic, it's virtually impossible to know exactly what another person is thinking or feeling. We're only genuinely in tune with ourselves. So, when telling a story about a fallen relationship, perhaps it has more to do with only being able to see things from our perspective and not the other, or putting blinders on and refusing to look at things from the other person's perspective.

A friend of this lady, whom wanted to date me, contacted me a few weeks ago, has sprung some information upon me in the last week or two and even though she heard the slanted stories by my former friend, she said she always believed I wasn't to blame for things not working. Why? Because she knew this woman was lying to me on a pretty regular basis and repeating what I told her in private to her friends. She was also quite promiscuous and consistently displayed contradictions in how she claimed to have felt for me with her actions which suggested otherwise.

Even taking all that into consideration, I'm not going to stand here (sit, I suppose) and claim that I was perfect. I made some mistakes, just like anyone. When I look back at things, there are a couple moments I wish I had handled differently. But, I'm also not going to sit around and be made to feel entirely guilty due to this woman's slanted picture of me that she's painted to others. Just as I had some fault during our friendship/relationship, so did she and as her once close friend said to me, "It was mainly her fault. Nothing you said or did was the primary reason things didn't work." I'll take her friend's word over this former friend of mine, especially since she gabbed to her friend quite repeatedly that I was fully to blame.

The Ex-Is-With-Douche Complex

So, has an ex of yours started dating again? Have you met him or her? Do you know much about them outside of what you've heard from your friends? What do you conclude about the guy or gal? According to a non-scientific study conducted inside my noggin, there's a 71.2% chance that you concluded, "They're a douche."

Now, it's perfectly understandable to not be an immediate fan of a person whom is dating your ex, especially if you and this ex of yours dated for an extended period of time and got pretty serious. It's also quite understandable if your ex started dating again very soon after the break-up and he/she hasn't given you much time to get over the demise of the relationship. However, if you and this ex of yours have been far removed from the relationship you once shared with one another, then what's the problem?

I have exes just like the next person and while it'd hurt quite a bit if I found out one of them started dating and getting serious with another guy directly following the break-up, after a certain duration of time, I could really care less about whom they go out with, bring home to mommy and daddy or for whom they spread their legs. We're no longer dating, so that's their decision.

But, I've noticed quite frequently that the philosophy I shared above doesn't hold true for many people. Someone very close to me dated a gal for about four and a half years, off and on. They got pretty close and contemplated marriage at one point. They broke up around four to four and a half years ago. This buddy of mine has since gotten married, having been either dating or married to this women for about two and a half years. His ex just announced that she's getting married in the next year or so. What does this friend of mine have to say about the guy she's marrying? "Yeah, he's a douche."

He'd continue, "He's loaded in money. That's probably why she likes him, but he's a douche. Even all his friends think he's a douche." I believe this friend of mine has met this other guy very briefly on one occasion and has heard such commentary about this fellow's douchiness from friends of his own, whom I'm sure aren't slanting their stories any to appease my friend. So, based on very little research and knowledge, he has adamantly concluded that the man his ex is marrying is a douche.

This sign of bitterness, jealousy and hostility makes me want to ask one question, "Are you sure you're over her yet?" Because, why would he or someone else in his position care whom his ex marries? He's married now, has been with someone for two and a half years, comments on how she's everything his ex wasn't (that makes me wonder as well...), etc. So, why's it really matter? Who cares that she's getting married? Doesn't he want to see her happy. Break-ups almost never end well, but I don't wish any ill upon my exes. Obviously things didn't work out between they and myself, but hey, that happens. I hope they find someone they can be happy with for the long-term.

All this makes me wonder just how ubiquitous this is and if it can be applied to almost everyone on at least one occasion. I wonder if an ex of mine hears that I'm dating or engaged to someone, if they find out from an unreliable source, "Yeah, I heard she's a douche."

So, yeah, if that rings true, I guess I can only conclude one thing: Each and every one of us is a douche to at least one person. I don't know about you, but that makes me feel warm and toasty inside. This is a fellow douche signing out.

Sunday, January 23, 2011

I see that I'm not the only one whom thinks Jay Cutler is a wimp...

So, I see that my very short blog (the shortest of my life) regarding Chicago Bears quarterback, Jay Cutler, being a wimp has generated some traffic.

Seriously, though... Now, let it be known that I had nothing against any of the four teams whom played today: Pittsburgh, NY Jets, Chicago or Green Bay. I think I may have preferred Chicago to face New York in the Super Bowl, but the only reason for that is Pittsburgh has now been to three Super Bowls in the past six years and Green Bay won the title 14 years ago, I believe. Meanwhile, Chicago hasn't won in around 25 years (approximately) and the Jets haven't won it since 1969. I don't feel like doing research right now, so I'll stick by those approximates. They're close enough.

For all those that watched the early game today between Green Bay and Chicago know, Jay Cutler was taken to the locker room just after he had thrown an interception to basically end the half. Green Bay took a knee on the following play and that was it for the first thirty minutes of action.

After the teams exited their locker rooms to play the second half, word came out that Jay Cutler had injured his knee and was questionable to return. I'm sorry, but watching him jog off the field to the locker room like he did made me think the injury may have dealt with his bloody elbow. I, in no way, thought he had injured his knee.

He never returned to the game. Chicago brought in Todd Collins and then Caleb Haine to replace Cutler. All throughout the second half, Jay Cutler was standing on the sideline. If his knee were really banged up, why in Buddha's ganja was he standing on the sideline, putting pressure on his knees? Why did he not just sit on the bench and rest it? That makes absolutely no sense to me. If the guy can stand up for thirty minutes of play in the second half, why in the world can't he take the snaps behind center? As I said in the other blog, the only answer I can come up with is that he's a wimp and unless I hear some news tomorrow about him having torn an ACL or something along those lines, I will stand by that statement.

Cutler played better this year than he has in the past couple, but I still don't believe the guy has it upstairs yet to become a premiere quarterback in this league. The guy has all the physical tools, but something is missing mentally. The guy was a good game manager this year, as he didn't force nearly as many balls as he did last season and played within Mike Martz's gameplan. But, that's all he was - a game manager. He was a slight upgrade from Trent Dilfer when he played with Baltimore and their great defense. Chicago had one of the best defenses in the league this year and one of the best special teams, to which Devin Hester can attest. But, Cutler, more times than not, played not to lose the game and to be a great quarterback in this league, you can't play like that. You've got to play to win. You've got to want the ball in your hands when you're down four late in the game. Today, Chicago trailed by 14 going into halftime. The game was not over by any stretch of the imagination. Heck, third year quarterback, Caleb Haine, almost brought the Bears back at game's end. Jay Cutler can't be standing on the sidelines. He has to want to play in the NFC Championship Game, at home, against his division rival for a chance to play in the Super Bowl. If he can't do that, then maybe the guy just isn't cut out for the NFL. Hopefully, for Cutler and Bears fans alike, that's not the case. But, to this point in his career, he has yet to prove that to me and has a long ways to go before he does.

My Life Is a Shadow of My Horoscope

That's right. Each and every day, I read my horoscope and that's how I plan my day. I also have a lifetime supply of fortune cookies, where I will follow their advice on a daily basis. In addition to that, I see palm readers, fortune tellers and tarot card readers to tell me what my future will be like and what I need to do on a daily basis to attain what is my fate.

Okay, so none of that is true. I really wish I had come up with the idea of writing horoscopes. How easy would that be? Just give an extremely vague and general form of advice, with no clear direction whatsoever and ask people to read and believe in its wisdom.

It reminds me of comedian George Carlin's old bit about the Hippy Dippy Weatherman.

He said something along the lines of, "Tonight - dark. Light in the morning, with chance of precipitation and the temperatures will change off and on for a very long period of time." After that forecast, he could retire.

A horoscope is vague much like that, where it may read, "There may be problems adjusting to your current situation. Do something to take charge. Tonight - go out. Tomorrow - stay in."

Yeah... I really wish these horoscopes would become more specific. I think there would be a much greater opportunity for laughter if they specified on our futures. While, yes, it's true that these horoscopes would not be applicable to as wide an audience as they currently are in their vague format, for the people to whom they did apply, they would seem much more genuine than what they are currently.

For example, how about this horoscope for Aquarius:

"Christina isn't worth the trouble. Dump her tonight and get laid on the rebound with a woman by the name of Jessica at the bar across the street from your house. She'll be wearing a very showy outfit and will be drinking a Bloody Mary at the end of the bar. Tell her you're vulnerable and that you need to get laid. She will smile, immediately pay her tab and go to your place. It will be a wonderful night, but she will get pregnant, the two of you will get married and name your child Jonathan Jacob."

For a Pisces, it could read:

"Yeah, your day is going to royally suck. First, you're going to lose your job at Ace Hardware. Upon hearing the news, your girlfriend, Shawniqua, will dump your sorry a**, only to go out with your brother, Hezekiah, that very night. Yes, the two of them will embrace one another all night long. Meanwhile, you're going to get drunk on O'Douls, continually listen to you and Shawniqua's song, Nine Inch Nails' 'Closer' and watch your movie, 'Kickboxer'. Tomorrow, you will be hung over for the day's duration and Shawniqua will call you, moaning at the top of her lungs and yelling Hezekiah's name. This will set you off and you will wind up in a loony bin. But, don't worry, things go uphill from there. Good luck."

I would take those horoscopes much more seriously, I think. I'd know this specific horoscope may not apply to me, but someone out there, perhaps just one person, will read that and start crying, saying, "How did they know? Oh my God! How did they know?" Exactly. Hmm... Perhaps I will start writing horoscopes, just in my more specific form. I'll have to ask my Magic 8 Ball if it's in my future. Hmm.. Two out of three. Three out of five. Eh, whatever.

Is it just me or are the Coors and Miller Light commercials not that funny?

I admit, when I first saw the Coors Light football commercials, I thought it was a good idea and was optimistic I'd find the commercial funny. However, I think the execution of the commercials have been mediocre at best.

Head coaches can give a lot of what is known as "coach speak," which basically means they talk in cliches and you can predict what they're going to say before they say it. However, there are also those rare instances when a head coach gives a memorable quote and it'll be replayed for years on ESPN. There are even top ten lists devoted to such quotes. One such quote was said by former head coach, Jim Mora Sr. His club had been struggling and a reporter asked him about the playoffs and if he felt they'd make it to the post-season. Mora replied with something like, "Playoffs? Playoffs? We can't even win a d**n game and you're asking me about playoffs?" It was quite humorous at the time and even years after Mora said that, it's been replayed online and on television, with laughter being the typical response.

So, going into the commercial, I was optimistic it'd be humorous, as we'd get to hear some memorable quotes by the coaches in response to questions asked by fake members of the press. However, this wasn't the case. All we get in these commercials are fake reporters asking questions where there can only be a handful of fitting responses and the coaches give one or two word answers, like "Yeah, that's right" or "What?", along with the occasional stutter or noise which results in no words being spoken. The commercials just seem to lack the creativity and execution to be very funny. A funnier version of one of these commercials would be a fake reporter asking Jim Mora, Sr. something like, "Coach, your team has struggled recently. What if you guaranteed buying all your players a case of Coors Light if they make the playoffs?" Mora could then respond with his now famous quote about the playoffs, "Playoffs? Playoffs? We can't even win a d**n game! Playoffs?" That's a very memorable quote from a NFL head coach and would make for a much more humorous commercial than what we've been given thus far. I hope they improve the humor of these commercials, because I see potential in them. Unfortunately, I haven't been very impressed with the final products thus far.

This is strange for me, because I typically like beer commercials. On Super Bowl Sunday, most of the time (not always), the most memorable commercials are affiliated with one beer or another. But, like with the Coors Light commercials, I haven't been all too impressed with the Miller Light commercials. Again, I see promise, potential, but I haven't been impressed with the creativity (or lack there of) and execution thus far.

In these commercials, the bartender asks a customer if he/she wants a Miller Light or some other light beer. The customer always orders something else, to which the bar tender responds by making an observation on the customer's clothing, saying, "Well as soon as you (fill-in-the-blank), perhaps you'll order a Miller Light." These commercials include: A dragon outfit, tight pants, European swim trunks, etc. Then at the tail-end of the commercial, the customer order a Miller Light and his/her friends then make a comment about his/her attire. The one-liners aren't very funny. They just state matter of factly what is obvious. If someone were dressed in drag, the bartender would say, "Well, as soon as you stop dressing like a woman, perhaps you'll be man enough to order a Miller Light." There's nothing creative about that. It wouldn't be funny if I were at a barbecue and someone with a gaudy ring came up to me, asked me for a beer, to which I asked what he/she would like; they responded with "something else" and I came back with something like, "Well, when you don't feel the need to show off your ring, then maybe you'll drink a Miller Light." Now, if I were to say, "Well, as soon as you stop feeling the need to compensate for something else with that big ring of yours, maybe you'll be big enough to order a Miller Light," that, to me, would be more humorous. Of course, I'm not sure that could be aired, but, it's a start, I suppose.

So, Coors and Miller Light, please improve upon these poorly executed commercials. They have plenty of potential. Let's actually garner a few more laughs with these, especially with the Super Bowl just two weeks away.