Pride and Prejudice

What a week! Let’s recap some of the major news stories …

- A WNBA star (if there is such a thing) comes out of the closet admitting she’s gay.

- United States Air Force Academy head football coach Fisher DeBerry reveals that he thinks black athletes can run faster than white athletes.

- Mr. Sulu from Star Trek admits he’s gay.

- On the heels of making is groundbreaking Rocky 6 announcement, 59-year old Sylvester Stallone reveals he’s making a Rambo IV.

Good god. This is one of those situations where there are so many jokes to be made that you don’t know where to begin – like when someone trips and falls right in front of you at the mall.

Do I need really need to say anything like:

Is anyone really all that surprised that a professional women’s basketball player is gay? The next thing you know we might actually find out that there are gay women golfers, bowlers and softball players.

I don’t want to play the race card, but can anyone remember the last time a white guy won a marathon, won the slam dunk contest in the NBA, led the NFL in rushing, led the NFL in receiving, or broke the world record in the 100-meter dash? I’m not saying Coach DeBerry is right, but just something to think about …

So a guy who joins an academy (Starfleet), wears a tight jump suit, works on a ship filled with men, is thin and nicely dressed, turns out to be a homosexual -you’ve got to be kidding me?! I’m appalled! Next thing you know, you’ll be telling me there are gays in the US military.

What do you think we’ll see first, a Cliffhanger 2, a Demolition Man II, a Judge Dredd prequel, or Sylvester Stallone pulling a tour of duty on the Surreal Life?

Unfortunately, despite all these great lighthearted news stories, I have to admit I am a little upset about the comments Fisher DeBerry made. Regardless of if he is right or wrong, I am tired of all the discrimination. All the stereotypes. All the bias that exist in this country. In fact, I am so upset that I want to vent about some discrimination that goes mostly unnoticed (or as my boss would say, “flies under the radar”) throughout most of America. And to make this discrimination worse, it is perpetuated in movies, television, and even our art - and yet no one says a word.

What am I talking about, you ask? I am talking about the fact that interstates do not get equal treatment when compared to 2-lane highways.

Let me ask you a few questions:

When was the last time a major interstate was the subject of a painting or an artsy black and white picture?

When was the last time, in a movie, a character had an “A-HA!” moment doing 85 down a turnpike?

When was the last time anyone on television used a highway before a major event or conflict occurred?

Think about it. The answer to all of these questions is: It never happens!

Somewhere down the road (pun intended), artists fell in love with cozy two-lane highways, instead of the sprawling four-lane interstate. Or did they? Maybe they didn’t fall in love. Maybe in reality, they are all just prejudice towards interstates …

Sure interstates don’t have the “lived-in” look because they are re-paved every summer (or at least it seems given the amount of times I get stuck behind 18-wheelers driving 37 MPH through a construction zone) and the hotels that line the interstate are often brand new Comfort, Days, Sleep or Holiday Inns - but just because something is newer, cleaner, fresher, doesn’t mean a jeans model can’t be sexy or a character can’t have an epiphany, sitting in a Holidome. I think the lack of fair treatment towards interstates is obviously a product of ageism – with the old 2-lanes getting all the screen time and attention.

I can’t remember the last time anyone I know stayed at an unknown, rundown motel a few miles outside of town - yet Hollywood (especially location scouts) continues to show us characters doing it. Why? I think the only logical conclusion is that it’s blatant discrimination and preferential treatment. Are you telling me the movie Identity couldn’t have taken place at a Comfort Inn and Suites? Who, in their right mind would choose a seedy, Jack’s All Night Inn over a Holiday Inn Express?

Or maybe “those weirdoes in Hollywood” have something against brand new 30-pump gas stations often found on the side of interstates, because they are anti-Bush and are boycotting all the oil companies - and because of that, they prefer to only film and photograph the stations that offer 4 pumps, and were built in 1963 when Kennedy (a democrat) was president. Is there something more aesthetically pleasing about a pump that has scrolling numbers, like a slot machine, as opposed to a digital readout? I don’t think so. It seems fairly obvious to me that Hollywood is taking its political agenda out on the interstates.

Nicole Ritchie. Paris Hilton. Lindsay Lohan. What do all of these girls have in common? They are all skinny … kinda of like two-lane highways. Filmmakers and artist are taking their obsession and preferences towards the thin, and applying them towards highways. Why else would you not show an interstate? They are wider, faster, safer and often times more direct. Yet they don’t appear on any movie posters. They don’t make the cover of Life Magazine. There aren’t calendars showing the 12 prettiest interstates in America. The Travel Channel doesn’t have specials about the most charming interstates to travel during the Fall. You know why? It’s because they think we prefer to see long and skinny highways, as opposed to the more true-to-life and “fatter” interstates

I have a dream that the one day, I’ll walk into a Prints Plus and buy a poster of a picturesque couple kissing in front Flying J Travel Plaza, as opposed to bland, white Shell station circa 1971. I have a dream that one day I’ll go to a movie starring Tom Hanks, and after being lost at sea for 4 years, he’ll return a FedEx package to someone who lives off of I-70 at exit 254; instead of at some random intersection in the middle of no where, where no one remotely attractive (or under the age of 60) would actually live. I have a dream of watching a TV murder mystery unfold at a newly remodeled Days Inn. I have a dream of sitting in a doctor’s waiting room, staring up a Norman Rockwell-like painting of the Jersey Turnpike. I have a dream that one day interstates will finally receive the fair and equal treatment they deserve.

Happy Halloween and have a safe weekend!

Career Goal Tending

“We don't have a lot of time on this earth. We weren't meant to spend it this way. Human beings weren't meant to sit in little cubicles, starring at computer screens all day, filling out useless forms and listening to eight different bosses drone on about mission statements.”

- Peter Gibbons, Office Space

Not to sound vain, but I feel that I have accomplished a lot in my career considering I haven’t even turned 30 yet. And while I have worked hard to earn those achievements, I can’t help but feel lucky and humble for what I have. I see so many people stumble and bumble around in their career, never earning more that 32k a year and never striving for anything better, that it just makes me feel so grateful that my parents instilled me with a strong work ethic and provided me with their intelligence genes. I have been blessed with so much, and worked very hard to get the rest, that I can’t help but feel guilty when I feel dissatisfied about my career situation.

Not to sound like Sarah Jessica Parker typing on her laptop in Sex in the City, “but does anyone still dream of their dream job?”

I’m not complaining, really I’m not. I like my job, the company I work for, and most of the people I work with. I am very thankful for having a job that gives me enough income to support my lifestyle; and that it provides me with health insurance and retirement benefits, all the other perks that come along with working for a medium-sized corporation. But I don’t jump out to bed, rub my hands together, smile at myself in the bathroom mirror and say, “I can’t wait to go to work today.”

If you need a visual of what I am talking about, envision Annette Bening in American Beauty while she’s getting ready to show a home she just put up for sale - “I will sell this house today. I will SELL THIS HOUSE TODAY. I WILL SELL THIS HOUSE TODAY!!!”

Fairly regularly I find myself wondering how many people actually love their job. Is it a fairy tale notion to expect total and complete job happiness? Does the fact that you are at one place, doing a certain job 40+ hours a week, 52 weeks a year, year upon year until you retire, make it a logistical impossibility to suggest you’ll be happy most of the time you are doing that job?

Getting back to American Beauty for a second; one of the reasons that movie is so freaking, ridiculously, damn good, is because Lester makes a cathartic (and entertaining) journey from being a sedated, unhappy, corporate drone, to an inspired, reenergized drive-thru window employee at Mr. Smiley’s. When we first meet Lester, he painfully has to will himself out of bed. And while the movie never shows Lester in the morning after he takes the Mr. Smiley’s job, I can’t help but think Lester enjoys going to that job much more than he enjoyed heading down Media Monthly Magazine, where he had spent the previous 14 years of his life. Lester’s $65,000 a year job, his benefit package, his impressive job title at a formidable publication, did not bring him happiness. It was a job at a Hardee’s-look-a-like that finally brought him that. Well, that and a high school cheerleader … but I digress. (The true meaning of Angela’s and Lester’s relationship is a posting for another time)

So does that mean I should quit my job and apply at Sonic to find my “dream job”? Probably not. But it does make me wonder if I’d take $10,000 or $15,000 less to work at a job that I genuinely look forward to everyday. I’ve often made fun of those ski bums who surround their whole life in snow – they teach ski school, work the chairlifts, hang out in lodges, ski the back bowls, subscribe to Powder Magazine, etc. But maybe instead of poking fun at their perceived slacker attitude, I should be envious that they have found something they truly enjoy doing and can make a living (albeit a modest one) at.

The problem in doing what Lester Burnham did, and what Peter Gibbons did, and what ski bums do, is that there isn’t a future at Mr. Smiley’s, working construction, or giving private ski lessons to Texan tourists. You can’t provide for your family working fast-food. You can’t work on a construction site until you’re 65 and expect to be reasonably healthy. You can’t save money for retirement, or for your kids’ education, or get health insurance, working winters at Vail.

So I struggle. Where is the line between career success and having a future for you and your family, and finding a job/career that will bring you happiness the rest of your life? Do you trade one for the other? How realistic is it to have both? Are those people who are often envied: movie starts, athletes, persons in the media, politicians, CEOs, novelists, etc., happy with their careers everyday? Or do they have the same complaints and frustrations as I do? Does a quarterback look at a football field the same way I look over a sea of gray cubicles at my office?

In The Soprano’s, a one-legged Russian immigrant tells Tony that Americans are spoiled and that they think they deserve happiness; while the rest of the world expects to be unhappy. Maybe that’s true. Maybe I am just another spoiled American who can’t appreciate what I have, when so many people in the world are starving, or working in sweat-shops, or are unemployed, or work in factories. Maybe I should just shut-up and be happy with my white collar job, even though I don’t jump out of bed every morning with overflowing enthusiasm.

Perhaps dream jobs are like dream cars, dream dates, dream houses – perfect in your imagination, but ultimately much different in reality. But America was built on dreams. And maybe the reason America continues to prosper is because while we might expect to be happy, we also work very hard to obtain it. We don’t settle. We don’t leave well enough alone. We aren’t satisfied with the status-quo. We aren’t complacent. We strive to find something better.

So I am left with muddled conclusions. How do I measure my career success, progress, satisfaction? Do I evaluate it based on my job title? By the number of people I manage? By my annual salary? By my happiness with my job? By the size of my house? By the car I drive? By the contributions and differences I make within my profession? Are Lester Burnham, Peter Gibbons and all those ski bums in Summit County, successes or failures? Are the old sayings, “you have to do something for love before you can do it for money.” and “if you do something you love, the money will follow,” accurate commentary about life, or just wishful thinking?

State-ing My Case

It’s time to tackle a classic debate.

It’s right up there with evolution verses creationism, Coke verses Pepsi, Seinfeld verses Cheers, The Godfather verses The Godfather, Part II, Lennon verses McCartney and are there any circumstances that you would let a good friend date Tara Reid.

The debate is: What constitutes visiting a state?

Sounds like a pretty white bread topic right? Nope. Many hours have been spent debating the exact terms and conditions that apply when evaluating whether you have actually “been” or visited a certain place. So today, I hope to lay-out some strict criteria that will once and for all end this discussion - so we can move on to debate other topics like; whose career has been more of a success, Colin Ferrell or Freddie Prinze, Jr.?


#1 – An airport layover or connection does not count.

I have been to Atlanta’s Hartsfield Airport about a half-dozen times but I have never been to Georgia. Why? Because walking or taking an airport train from Gate C45 to Gate A19, hitting the restroom, grabbing McDonalds, succumbing to Cinnabon, nabbing this weeks People Magazine, and dodging Southern belles along the way, does not mean you just got a taste of life in Atlanta.

(You have to be brought to tears from the humidity, hear the phrase “ya’all” or “ya’awls” 23 times, fear for you life at least once, go to a poorly attended sporting event and wonder aloud if certain Georgians still believe the Civil War is going on, to qualify for that.)

At the bare minimum you have to leave the confines of the airport to even enter into the discussion that you’ve been somewhere … and staying at the airport Hilton doesn’t count either.

#2 – If you are driving, you must cross-section the state.

There’s no real reason to go to Nebraska unless 1) you have family living there 2) have an affinity towards the University of Nebraska 3) plan on being a farmer someday 4) want to see where they filmed Election 5) driving through to get some place much more desirable. Other than that, there are no logical or emotional reasons to step foot in that state.

Now Nebraska is a large state, so it takes several hours to get to the next place, regardless of what direction you are pointed. And believe me, the time it will take you to drive through Nebraska is more than enough time to get a feel for the state and its people. Besides, asking someone to spend the night and sightsee in Nebraska is like asking someone to watch a Golden Girls marathon - so I’m not going to demand anyone do that unless they really want to. For the rest of us, driving entirely through a state qualifies as visiting a state.

By the way, the reason I say you must cross-section the state is because otherwise people would be driving 10 minutes into North Dakota, turning around and saying, “%uck this, I’m going home.” Sorry, you need to spend some time in the state - and driving through a state is usually is enough time to have that experience, regardless of its size.

Without the cross-section rule, no one would ever claim to have visited: Nebraska, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Iowa, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, West Virginia, Delaware or Rhode Island.

#3 – If you are not driving through a state, you must spend the night.

If you are spending the night somewhere, more than likely you are eating a meal, traveling at least a little bit around the city/state, and verifying that their Best Buys, Chili’s and Old Navy’s look exactly the same as yours back home - so I think that counts as a visit.

On a side note, don’t you hate it when you are sleeping in a hotel room and around 5 a.m. housekeeping comes banging on your door because you forgot to hang the “do not disturb” sign on the door handle. You hope that if try to sleep through the incessant pounding that hopefully they’ll just move on and let you keep sleeping. Of course they don’t, and they open the door and at which time you either hear a large crash from the quasi chain lock preventing their entry, or you angrily scream at them that you’re “still in here!”

I also hate it when I can hear housekeeping knocking on doors and saying “housekeeping,” a couple of rooms down from mine, and I know I didn’t hang the “do not disturb” on the door, yet I am too lazy to get up and put it on the handle before they arrive at my door – that’s a weird feeling of impending doom.

#4 – If you don’t spend the night or cross-section the state, you must spend the day there and see some of the local sites.

Here are some examples of what I mean:

If you are visiting or live in Kansas, and drive to Missouri to spend the day in Kansas City shopping, eating barbeque, going to a Chiefs’ game, dropping $150 at the blackjack tables at Harrah’s, and arguing with someone about why Kemper Arena doesn’t allow alcohol - then you can add the Show-Me State to your list of states visited.

If your family forces you to drive 30 miles into Wisconsin to spend 5 hours with your 3rd Aunt, twice removed, whom you have never met before; and you spend the day watching back-to-back-to-back episodes of Matlock on a brown suede couch, staring at a hunting rifle that was mounted behind the TV, while the rest of my family sat in the kitchen reminiscing about the weather - then that doesn’t count as a visiting Wisconsin.

And finally, if you drive to Maine to spend the day eating as much lobster as you can, while taking pictures of lighthouses, and squeezing in as many Shawshank Redemption jokes and references as possible, within an 8 hour timeframe - then you can say you have been to Maine. I mean really, besides those three things what else there to do in Maine?

#5 – You must be 18 or older at time of visit.

What did we know about anything before were 18?

Just like ex-girlfriends/boyfriends don’t count before 18, neither does visiting a state. Now that I think about it, a lot of the same philosophies and reasons for pre-18 ex’s not counting, are the same for visiting a state before you turn 18 …You know, I could describe what I am talking about, but I would rather you use your imagination.


Anyway, that’s it. Those are the 5 criterion that need to be considered when analyzing whether or not you have visited a certain place. So how many states have you visited?
In closing, I want to suggest a related and interesting conversation topic that I have had with my friends on a few occasions:

(EARMUFFS for any minors and/or adults who fear they cannot handle adult subject matter)

How many states have you had sex in?

Great conversation. One word of advice though, don’t have the conversation in the presence of a current girlfriend, boyfriend or spouse that has hard time hearing about stuff like that. They may start to work the numbers in their head, and the conversation might end very badly for you. Just a warning.

Click here for a map of the U.S. so it's easier for you to count - and please post a comment with your final number. (If you are worried, you can post anonymously)

Chatting with Bill Self

Not to sound like the creepy phone voice from The Ring, but 27 days. 27 days. 27 days until the start of the University of Kansas basketball season. Granted on November 9th it’s an exhibition game against Ft. Hays State – a school in a town known more for its reasonably priced and conveniently located hotels, clean restrooms, vast fast-food choices, and a mall that is cleverly called “The Mall” (seriously, that is what they call their mall in Hays), than college basketball, but nonetheless – it marks the start of another season of exciting Jayhawk basketball.

(Quick side note: it bugs the hell out of me that Jayhawk isn’t in the Microsoft Word dictionary and comes-up as a misspelled word every time I type it. I’ve added it like 14 times to the dictionary and it still pops as being incorrectly spelled! Argh!

Strangely, Wildcat, Gamecock, Buckeye, Aggie and Orangemen are in the dictionary, but Tarheel is not.)

Anyway, KU coach Bill Self hosted an online chat yesterday and my question was answered by the coach. Pretty cool. Below is the transcript of our brief Q/A session. If you are interested in reading the rest of the chat, click here.

Bill, Denver, Colo.: When you're recruiting, is there any difficulty getting over perceptions about Kansas, i.e -- it's flat, it's boring, it's in the middle of nowhere, etc., when talking to players who have never seen the campus or been to Lawrence? Or does the program sell itself because of the history, the coaches and players, and the success?

Bill Self: I think recruiting is difficult wherever you're at. Tulsa had its own unique obstacles, Oral Roberts had its own unique obstacles, Illinois had its own unique obstacles. Kansas has its obstacles as well, but the positive is we can be in the top-five or top-10 of most recruits list. But the negative is we have to go in to someone else's back yard to get them. I've heard the stigma that Kansas is flat, and I've even made the joke that guys ride their horses to class. But the truth is Kansas is hilly, there are trees, water, beautiful landscape. The city is great, and you're 35 minutes away from Kansas City. Kansas is just about the best of the sells.

Beggars and Choosers

Not long ago, I got the sudden urge to purchase Aliens, and headed to my local Wal-Mart to satisfy my strange, randomly placed, science fiction craving. Afterwards, as my friend and I made our way through the parking lot towards my car, we were approached by a gentleman who looked like a vagabond. As I was in the midst of explaining to my friend how Aliens is one of the best sequels ever made, and how Paul Reiser inexplicably plays an effective villain, and how I wasn’t a total sci-fi dork for purchasing the film, the vagabond-looking gentleman asked us for some money.

He explained that he had run out of gas (though I didn’t see his car) and that he and his son just needed five dollars to get their car back to their house - his young son was slowly and meticulously walking about twenty feet behind him. It was a chilly night, he had a child with him, and given the recent gas prices, I was more than sympathetic to help him out so he and his son could get home safely.

But then the doubts started to creep-in and a thousand questions started racing through my mind…

Does he really need the money for gas or does he just need to buy a six-pack of beer?
Should I go to his car and make sure he uses the money for gas?
Is that really his son or just a kid he was using to draw up compassion?
Is this a scam?
Do I want to look like a sucker?
Is he too lazy to get a job or does he really need help?
Does this story sound fishy or is it just me being cynical?

I had just bought a special edition DVD and a pack of Sour Patch Kids, so I could obviously afford to give this guy a helping hand - and I really wanted to. But as my mind was processing all those questions and doubts, I started to think about those countless news reports and articles, talking about how many homeless/beggars/vagabonds don’t actually need the money and have regular income streams, or how they choose the easier path of just being lazy.

Then I started to think about my friend Nicole - who spends many Thursday nights in the shady parts of downtown Denver, talking and spending time with the homeless – and how she tells me that so many of those people have addictions and beg for money just to feed those addictions.

So after quick deliberations, I told the vagabond-looking gentleman, “sorry, I don’t have $5.”

Thirty seconds later, I tossed a white plastic Wal-Mart bag into the back of my car, filled with a James Cameron classic and a bag of my favorite candy.

I lied. I had $5 (in cash, mind you) to give him – but I didn’t.

Not to sounds like one of those ridiculous holier-than-thou news pundits, but what does that say about the world, that I doubt the sincerity of someone asking for help? What does it say that every night I drive home from work; I stare at a guy begging for money on the highway off-ramp, and don’t give him any cash, because I doubt his true intentions?

I have worked hard to achieve the job and the income-level I enjoy; and I feel with those accomplishments comes a duty to help those who aren’t as fortunate as I am. For all the money I spend on trips to Las Vegas, beers while watching KU basketball games, movies I re-buy because I want them in DVD as opposed to VHS, certainly I can spare some of my income to those who don’t know where their next meal is coming from. I want to help – I truly do. But tragically, I don’t because a few bad apples have ruined the entire barrel.

Because of the immeasurable substance abuse addicts – I don’t give to the “average” street person. Because of countless scams – I don’t give to the vagabond who says he and his son need some gas money to get home. Because of laziness – I don’t give to the guy who asks “if I can spare a few bucks for a meal,” when he can get a job and food discounts working at McDonalds.

In so many cities they outlaw panhandling because it detracts from the quality of life. I can’t help but wonder if we’d still outlaw begging if the beggars actually needed our help. I don’t think we would. I doubt we would say it’s illegal to ask for aid if the person asking was sincere and genuine. It makes me sad that because of all of those people who have taken advantage of our generosity, that those who really need our help have a harder time receiving it.

Maybe it’s not my responsibility to monitor how a beggar chooses to spend my hard-earned money. Maybe I should have taken an extra five minutes to follow the vagabond to his alleged car and watch him put $5 worth of gas into his vehicle. Maybe I should let the homeless person’s conscience deal with the implications of a scamming me for a few bucks. And I know what a lot of you will say is: “if you really wanted to help, you’d find ways” i.e. shelters, soup kitchens, certain charitable organizations, etc. But helping shouldn’t be hard. I shouldn’t need to write checks, verify someone’s non-profit status or walk to someone’s car and physically watch them put gas in their tank, to know it’s legitimate. I should be able to reach into my pocket or roll-down my window, and give directly to those who are asking for my assistance. I should be able to give to a fellow human in need, without doubting their motives.

And it really bothers me that I can’t do that.

People I Don't Feel Sorry For

People who drive SUVs and 1) complain about the price of gas 2) can’t fit into parking normal sized parking spaces and subsequently get dings all over their vehicles 3) get in a car accident by driving too fast for the conditions – thinking their four-wheel drives are incapable of actually sliding in the snow or rain.

People who sue McDonalds for being overweight.

Yankee fans. There is nothing sympathetic about a team that spends $200 million in payroll when most of teams can’t spend half that much.

Skateboarders who hurt themselves showing-off.


Movie studios that lose millions of dollars producing pointless remakes like the Dukes of Hazard, Bewitched and The Longest Yard or ridiculous films like Just Like Heaven - while truly original movies like Napoleon Dynamite struggle to get made, end up making $40 million in theatres, $100 million in DVD sales, $20 million in “Vote For Pedro” t-shirt sales and take a seat at the head of the pop-culture table.



Democrats who nominated John Kerry for president while there were clearly much stronger (albeit less “safe” candidates) to choose from.

Anyone who blindly and unilaterally defends the Bush administration after they do something moronic.

People who can’t find a place to stuff their oversized carry-on bag on an airplane.

Anyone on reality TV who claims they are being “disrespected.”

Girls who get their chest constantly stared at while wearing a cleavage shirt.

Any guy dumb enough to get engaged or married to either Paris or Nikki Hilton.

Any athlete dumb enough to test positive for steroids.

People who get fired for downloading porn while at work.

Television networks that complain about low ratings at the same time HBO gives us The Sopranos, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Entourage and Real Time with Bill Maher. Can’t imagine why I would choose those shows over the Life According to Jim … baffling.

People who pay $4.50 for a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

People who wait until the last possible moment before merging into traffic and then get frustrated that no one will let them in.

Pessimists when something bad happens.

Lottery winners who make bad financial decisions and the money eventually ends up ruining their life.

Any guy wearing a primarily pink shirt.

People who start fights at bars.

News reporters who get sent out in the freezing cold and snow/rain/wind to report on a storm while standing next to the highway, commenting on the traffic and current weather conditions.

Cranky people working the drive-thru window. Heck, anyone in the service industry who has a bad attitude and then gets 1) gets attitude back from me 2) a bad tip or 3) both. In fact, lets add on airlines, restaurants, bars and stores, that give you crappy service or overcharges you, and then eventually go out of business or bankrupt.

Guys who DTR (define the relationship) too fast - and as a result, freaks the girl out.

Kansas State, Missouri, Syracuse and North Carolina fans … just because.

Road-ragers who get their ass kicked because they messed with the wrong driver.

Procrastinators who end-up with bad seats, bad tickets, bad selection, bad flight times, bad hotel arrangements, bad locations, getting screwed on the cost, getting stuck in traffic, being tired, waiting in line or getting yelled at.

People who get a sliver in their tongue eating with chopsticks.

People who run onto the field during a sporting event and consequently get violently tackled and/or beat-up by one of the athletes.

Those idiots who can’t solve the puzzle on Wheel of Fortune when boards reads, “Lu_e S_ywal_er and Darth Vader.”

People who constantly use phrases and words like, “think outside the box”, “high level”, “ducks in a row”, “team player”, “people person”, “touch base”, “talking points”, “in the loop”, “multi-task”, “detailed oriented” and “hot buttons”.

Smokers who have to stand-out in the cold and/or inclement weather.

Rock stars who get hooked on drugs, lose all their money, trash their career and as a result alienate their family and most of their friends. We’ll call this phenomenon the “Every Episode of VH1’s Behind the Music” phenomenon.
(The good news is that they all eventually sober-up, sometimes find God, gain some new perspective on life, have their hot daughters achieve fame, make the cover of People magazine, have an introspective comeback album, followed by a world-wide farewell tour that ends-up making them $50 million dollars.)

Breaking My Chopsticks

Today I had planned on writing a post about “people I don’t feel sorry for.” However, this freakin’ chopstick debate has escalated quickly, so I feel compelled to respond. From the comments on Beth’s blog, you would think I was the head of FEMA or something. I had a nightmare last night that a bunch of hungry Asians broke into my room and somehow bludgeoned me with chopsticks. Terrifying. So today I’ve been walking around with my head on swivel, which, according to Ron Burgundy, is what you have to do when you find yourself in a vicious cockfight.

Anyway, back to the chopstick debate. Judging by the strong feelings people seem to have about these pointless, wooden sticks, don’t be surprised if in 08’, you see Giuliani and Hillary Clinton debating this subject.

Here are Beth’s comments …

What is your definition of efficient, Bill? Being able to consume the largest amount of food as fast as you can? That's not very healthy, if you ask me. Doesn't your body digest food better when it's consuming smaller portions in slow increments? Wouldn't that be more efficient?

When you use chopsticks you carry smaller portions of food and prolongs the duration of the meal. Sure, chopsticks are not for the yuppies-on-the-go, what with all of the fancy schmancy McDonalds in every corner to tempt you with french fries to go with your SuperSized indigestion.

My definition of efficient is pretty much the same as the dictionary’s, which is: acting or producing effectively with a minimum of waste, expense, or unnecessary effort. Exhibiting a high ratio of output to input.

It is true that eating slowly is healthier because it allows time for your brain to process “being full”, which tends to make a person eat less. However, is it the duty of your eating utensils to monitor your food consumption? I don’t think that is in their job description. If drinking through a straw meant you drank less alcohol, would you stick a straw in your beer glass, or would you take responsibility for how much you drank? If you were someone who is constantly early to appointments, would you argue that you should take a horse because it takes more time to get where you are going than a car? Or would adjust your own personal habits to fix the problem?

It would be nice if people would take ownership of how much they are eating, instead of relying on a fork, spoon, knife or chopstick to do it for them. Where’s the discipline? Maybe the problem isn’t the fork and spoon being vastly more efficient than a chopstick; maybe the problem is undisciplined eating habits. It’s sad that there are people who turn to a wooden stick to keep them healthy, instead of monitoring their own meal portions.

Bottom line, don’t blame the superior fork and spoon for your own eating shortcomings.

Well, if we took your attitude of dismissing our past simply because we've created something far more superior, then we should be able to go ahead and destroy the Coliseum and replace it with something like your Mile High Stadium. While you're at it let's just go to some of our oldest museums and trash every priceless piece of artwork you can get your hands on. Why keep those ratty old things when we can make better pictures with our digital cameras! Hell, we can bring people back to life and have them dance with vacuum cleaners because of computers!

Actually the Coliseum would be a terrible venue to hold an event at compared to Mile High Stadium. The Coliseum would offer less leg room and space (since people are generally taller and larger than they were during the Roman Empire), no concession stands, no seatbacks, limited bathroom facilities, no scoreboards, no instant replay, no cupholders and no luxury boxes – just to name a few of its shortcomings. However, we shouldn’t destroy the Coliseum because it’s nice to look at and it’s part of history. We shouldn’t hold a football game there because it’s vastly inferior compared to the stadiums of today and would be a horrible place to watch a game. So how does this tie-in to chopsticks? Just like the Coliseum was great in its day, so were chopsticks. But those days are over. Spoons and forks give us more options, are more efficient, and are more advanced – just like Mile High Stadium when comparing it to the Colisuem … in fact someday, someone we'll be having this same debate about how archaic spoons and forks are compared to the eating utensils of the future.

Oh, and you don’t measure art based on efficiency; you evaluate it on historical importance, aesthetics, subject matter, emotional reaction, etc … so that argument doesn’t even make sense.

This technology of which you hold so much stock in, isn't all that great, Bill. True, I've benefited from technology, and I'm not about to live without it, but even you must admit not everything technology offers is always better.

I’d agree, but I would also say more times than not, better technology is an improvement, not a step back. More importantly, usually when there is a problem stemming from technology, it’s the users of the technology’s problem, not the fault of the technology itself. More on this later.

And what is so wrong with having a romantic attachment to something that was indicative of simpler times....something that is tied to aeons of culture and history that no amount of technological advancement can ever replace?

Nothing is wrong with that at all. But admit it’s a romantic attachment and not a logical argument. I don’t have a problem if you long for-the-way-it-was, but call it that, don’t try to reason your way through the discussion.

Did you know that the great scholar, Confucius, who was a vegetarian, helped develop chopsticks? He believed that knives would remind the people of animals being killed in slaughterhouses, and thought they were too violent to be used at the table. They had to find another way to serve their food, and I'm guessing small pieces of wood were all they had.

Yes, there is something definitely very wrong in that indeed. Shame on Confucius for wanting to promote non-violence!

C’mon Beth … I doubt if many, if not any, people think of the slaughtering process while eating a delicious steak using a fork and knife. Plus, vegetarians are not the only one who use chopsticks, and eating with them certainly does not prevent animal cruelty. There is no correlation between vegetarianism and chopsticks. This point is a stretch.

Look, I'm not saying I'd drop my spoon and fork and eat with chopsticks for the rest of my life. I'll be damned, though, if I let you disrespect an entire culture's eating habits, especially one so closely tied to my own.

But the point I'd like to drive home is that NO ONE is forcing you to use chopsticks, Bill.

I never said anyone was forcing me to use them. I was just saying I think they don’t serve much purpose nowadays, especially in America. If I was in an Asian country, I would fully expect to eat with chopsticks. Just like I fully expect to see a lot of people riding bikes and using rigshaws as a form of public transportation. If I said taxis, subways and buses are better, that wouldn’t mean I was disrespecting the culture – it just means there are better and more efficient ways of doing things.

Now, here is a comment from one of Beth’s loyal readers …

Using chopsticks is the most efficient way to eat noodles. That's why I use them. If they had chopsticks in Italian restaurants I would use them to eat my spaghetti too.
On modern amenities: just because something makes some tasks easier and quicker does not mean it delivers a better quality of life.

Take e-mail for instance. I can think of so many angry e-mails I've typed up in anger only to make things worse. Anger that could have been diffused in the older days, when I would have had to look for a piece of paper and a pen, an envelope and a stamp. And since it took so much effort to write an angry letter I would've thought about the whole thing again and I would've decided that it was too petty after all and just let it go.

Going back to chopsticks, it's not like anyone is being forced to use them even in Chinese restaurants. I wouldn't pick on anyone because they use forks on food that's meant to be eaten with chopsticks. Why pick on those that use them?

- Leese

I want to respond to this because it goes back to what I was saying earlier about how when a problem with technology arises, it’s often not technology’s problem, but rather the person using the technology. Don’t blame email for your tendency to respond to people without taking time to compose your thoughts and “cool down.” Take responsibility for your actions and anger, don’t lay them off on email.

If someone over-eats, don’t blame the silverware, blame the eater. If someone kills someone with a gun, don’t blame the gun, blame the shooter. If someone dies of lung cancer from smoking for 50 years, don’t blame the cigarettes, blame the smoker. If you have a temper problem and use email as a quick way to improperly vent your anger, don’t blame email, blame yourself.

It’d be nice if more people were responsible and accountable for their actions, instead of blaming everything else for their problems. As Warden Norton once said, “salvation lies within.”

I know that rant was a little off-topic, but it’s an important topic that is obviously bigger than our monumental chopstick debate.

And just in case this was missed, I can use chopsticks properly! My argument is not a result of chopstick envy or secretly longing to use them. Just like when I say cars are better than horses, it’s not because I want to ride a horse to work, I just choose not to.

My Triumphant Return

“Creativity comes from kindness.”

- George Clooney

(Are you sure, George? Granted I’m no Shakespeare, but I’m pretty sure that isn’t where it comes from - I know a lot of creative and original assholes.)

Anyway, in the immortal words of Eminem, “guess who’s back? Back again?” That’s right, like Michael Corleone after he visits Sicily in The Godfather - I’m back.

Over the last few weeks I’ve had to study and take the NASD’s Series 6 examination, took a 24-hour trip to Chicago - and subsequently make a really big life decision - and organize and participate in a very successful Hurricane Katrina fundraiser. So I’ve been really busy. But now I am reenergized, ready to do some heavy lifting, anxious to write again and get back to posting on a regular basis. Thanks for your patience and I promise it will be worth your time.

First thing first, the Katrina Drink-a-thon was a big success. Assuming everyone collects what everyone said they were going to pledge, we raised over $9,000! Very exciting! And we are very proud and thankful to everyone who helped out – from the drinkers, to the sober spotters, to those who gave money – THANK YOU! Please visit the official Katrina Drink-a-thon Web site for a bunch of pictures and information about the night, media links and other stuff.

I was planning on keeping a running journal of the evening like I did for Bryn’s birthday and when I watched Forrest Gump, but unfortunately my drunk ass wasn’t able to stay focused enough to write anything anyone would fine interesting in reading. In fact, these are my only coherent notes from the night …

- Our official Katrina Drink-a-thon t-shirts that read, “drunk.” and “sober.” are big hits. We should figure a way to raise or make money selling them. Another good idea for a t-shirt would be one that reads, “Yes, I’ll have another.”

- The funny thing about fundraising is that when you ask people to donate money and they say no, everyone has a story to tell you on why they can’t ...

“I already gave.”

“I don’t like the Red Cross.”

“I hate George Bush and FEMA.”

“I am into a local mobster for $300 already and he is going to break my thumbs if I don’t make good on my debt this week.”

I don’t care if you don’t give, that’s your decision. It’s okay. Really. Don’t feel guilty to say no, I didn’t/don’t take it personally. If you can afford to give, but already gave, great! That’s what is most important – not that you donated through the Drink-a-thon. If you can’t afford to give, that’s understandable, too. It was really entertaining to hear people give excuses for why they can’t donate money, as if I would get mad or have a bad opinion of them or something.

- Sitting next to our booths was a guy proudly donning a Missouri Tiger t-shirt. At first he was excited that we noticed his allegiance to Mizzou, only to be rendered speechless when we showered him with a steady and heavy stream of “Muck Fizzou”, “Rock Chalk, Jayhawks” and wheat waving. Good times. He had no idea what to say when confronted by a half-dozen cocky, fundraising, Jayhawk fans. I wish I had taken a picture of the expression on his face. Priceless.

- Evidently I had three drinks in me by 9:33 and Lucas hit double-digits at 10:45.

And that’s it. That’s all the notes I took. Totally disappointing. I wish I had more for you, but I don’t. So I apologize. You’re just going to have to trust me that it was a fun night, filled with great fundraising stories and inspirational moments abounding everywhere. It probably was one of the greatest nights in drinking history, but I don’t have any written proof. My bad.

DRAMATIC TOPIC CHANGE

Last week at work I was having a conversation right in front of the restrooms with a lady I rarely, if ever, talk to (in fact, I don’t even know her name). We were having the typical work conversation, standing two feet from the men’s and women’s bathrooms. So as we are talking, one of our co-workers opens the door to the men’s restroom and walks out. Right as he opens the restroom door, the other guy already inside the bathroom, starts to unload really loudly. I mean, this guy is totally crapping his brains out, and it’s so loud that it echoes out into the hallway where I am having this conversation. Talk about awkward. I barely know this women and we are sharing a moment in which we are listening to someone's bowel movements. Obviously we both noticed, but didn’t know each other well enough to comment or laugh. Really funny, but I felt bad for the guy crapping inside. Poor soul is just trying to take care of business, and through no fault of his own, someone opens the bathroom door for the whole 10th floor to hear him shitting.

And finally, my unprovoked attack on chopsticks last month caused a small stir. Evidently, there are some people out there who feel very strongly about eating with those stupid wooden sticks. So I saved an email I received from my Asian friend, Beth, defending them. Now Beth is a fine human being who happens to hail from The Philippines, and feels a cultural attachment to chopsticks. I guess those sentiments are not unlike the countless everyday examples of Texans who still ride horses to work because they feel a similar cultural connection – but I digress. Anyway, here is what Beth had to say:

“Leave the chopsticks alone, will ya? They represent humanity’s first step towards civilization. They used their hands to eat before the chopsticks came along. And maybe if more Americans used chopsticks, obesity wouldn’t be such a problem here. I find myself eating less when I’m using chopsticks. I mean, seriously, how many obese Asian people do you see (apart from the Sumo wrestlers – and they’re revered in their country)? It’s not just a romantic attachment. You just hate it because you can’t use it properly.”

Okay, first: They represent humanity’s first step towards civilization. They used their hands to eat before the chopsticks came along.

I guess that means we shouldn’t use gas, matches and electricity to start fires then. I challenge Beth to start a fire this winter in New Jersey by only rubbing chopsticks together, since that process would represent humanity’s first steps in creating fire. Please rent Cast Away starring Tom Hanks as a training video. Also, if you don’t want to start a fire using chopsticks, I want you to use only wood in your life – no more metal, steel or plastic for you, Beth.

And maybe if more Americans used chopsticks, obesity wouldn’t be such a problem here. I find myself eating less when I’m using chopsticks. I mean, seriously, how many obese Asian people do you see (apart from the Sumo wrestlers – and they’re revered in their country)?

Okay, then I want you to sell your Honda Civic and buy a brand new horse. I mean, cars are harmful to the environment (just like obesity is harmful to the body) and the best way to cut down on poisoning the atmosphere would be to not to drive your car. I bet you would travel a lot less if you had to take a horse to go out with your friends. Plus, I don’t think measuring inefficiency is the best way to evaluate something either. I am sure you do eat less because you are using chopsticks; that shows how inefficient they really are when compared to a fork and a spoon. Sort of like how you would travel less on horseback if comparing that to a car.

It’s not just a romantic attachment. You just hate it because you can’t use it properly.

It is a romantic attachment, otherwise you wouldn’t see chopsticks just in Asian restaurants and Beth wouldn’t be saying things like, “they represent humanity’s first step towards civilization.” Eating with chopsticks is the equivalent of using a bow and arrow, or using a typewriter, or staying at a hotel that doesn’t have a television or indoor plumbing, or buying a corded telephone, heck, even sending a letter in the mail to someone who has email – they are all things in the past that we have emotional attachments to, even though technology offers us better and more efficient solutions.

And for the record, this American can use chopsticks properly.