Every day I wander further into a madness. I personally don't think I'm mad at all, but it's never up to the insane to psychoanalyze themselves. When people are in good spirits and listen to my tales, they raise a glass, nod slightly, jerk their heads and mumble some unintelligible affirming drivel about how they "totally agree." Sometimes they'll present the other side's point of view, which I actually rather enjoy, in an attempt to either learn more about why I think the way I do, or at least just try to find holes in my reasoning so as to emerge victorious over the self-proclaimed "lover of logic."
     I am never attempting to win some game or be the best at something, that is the frustrating part. People are so convinced of the evils of the rest that any attempt at doing something for the greater good is viewed as an elaborate cover for something devious and vile. I myself have fallen victim to this mindset, and continue to do so. It's hard to see much else when you're always proven "right" by some idiot.
     A person who keeps their frustrations inside, never shows their anger, never interrupts a superficial social gathering with a pain they wish to release is viewed as a doll, a trooper in a world of crazies and madmen. A bitch is someone who really can't stop telling it like it is, at all the wrong times, in all the wrong places. Ironically, that roughly translates into ANYtime, ANYplace, and to ANYone.
     The dramaless are always the origins of the most drama. Those who "hate" drama are the ones who inevitably revolve around it, "doomed" to an eternity of a constant supply of "unbearable" entertainment. I don't think I've ever used so many blatantly sarcastic quotes in one sentence before, but that's fitting for the most ridiculously absurd set of circumstances.
     It's always someone else's fault. Freud missed that one when he enumerated his now-ubiquitous defense mechanisms, but maybe that's because it wasn't en vogue a century ago. It manifests itself nicely in the "fundamental attribution error." Basically, when someone else errs, it is a defect in their personality and their character which accounts for it. When we err, it is due to some external factor outside of our control, or against our will. It's rather pathetic. Ironically, this excuse is used by the most "sane" people we have to offer, the ones who have taken it upon themselves to shoulder the burden of locating and branding those afflicted with madness.
     No one ever says how they feel. Men consider it an annoying burden and too much work, and women make it unnecessarily complicated when they explain it. Most feelings should be able to be explained by a simple "I am _____." construction.
     People need to stop saying things they don't mean, whether they are good or bad. When we say something bad about someone, we act surprised and offended when they react accordingly, as if they are, once again, insane. When we inflate the hopes of a poor unsuspecting dote with candied words of marshmallow-soft kisses, and then they act like we like them more than we do, we get annoyed and irritated, because it's clearly they're fault for reading way too much into what you said. I mean, since when does "You're perfect" accompanied by an explanation imply that you're all that great or that I've put much thought into it? You're clearly nuts.
     There is no effort being put into being better. We should stop pointing fingers and blaming and learn to solve.

     I hate dating. It's this ridiculous convention we've created to mirror our societies, our interpersonal relationships, our jobs. What do they all have in common? Hope and anxiety. We live our lives, struggling to stay sane in the bustle of a maelstrom of lunacy we call civilization, only for the hope that one day, it will all be better, it will all get solved, and we will all be...happy. In our relationships, no matter how boring and shallow they are, no matter how much they hurt us, no matter how fake they appear to be, we hold out hope that one day, they will give us a return on our investment and make us...happy. We get new jobs with the hope of earning vast success and wealth, making a difference, or whatever else we tell ourselves we're working for, so that one day, we will achieve those dreams our jobs afford us and be...happy. In the midst of waiting, we are anxious, riddled with fears that society will collapse and take us with it, or friends and family might perish and sever their ties with us, and that we will be fired, laid off, or spend eternity in some sad excuse for employment, all because one day, these same feisty unpredictable things will make us...happy.
     Enter dating, the ridiculous small-scale social answer to these larger, looming issues. We have hope that someone will make us happy, the only trick is finding the asshole before someone else does. So we proceed to put on the makeup of disguise and be the best we can be, put our best foot forward, all conveniently summed up in one word; lie. So we lie, or dance around, or even being honest, must conform to rules and etiquettes. The whole thing is some weird sadistic game we've invented so nothing can ever be easy, or fun, or real.
     People who screw up their first impression at least have one thing to be thankful for: they know where they stand before they put anything into it. Me, please. First impressions are a breeze for the most part, but maybe that's because all of the energy and savvy I use breaking barriers the first time around has Newtonian consequences the second time around, who knows. What I do know is, once you think you have a chance in an already anxious competition, doing something stupid and screwing that up is a pain so frustrating it makes you want to stop trying. Therein lies the reason why this game is the least fun of all.

Every few years or so, I seem to break down and write something so emotional, so weak, and so petty that it almost disgusts me. I have started a few entries where I talk about something to that effect, but I inevitably do not post it, whether from some sort of personal enlightenment that prevents me, in good conscience, from unleashing it upon the world, or I just feel like it's a waste of time and ultimately does nothing to solve any of the problems which caused me to write it in the first place. It's a fine line between complaining about something constructively, and complaining about something for attention. Although I expect no attention necessarily, I've realized lately that, even in the best intentions of our hearts and minds, we can spew what amounts to manipulative and histrionic ramblings. I don't want to be that person anymore. I'm constantly reminded that I do just that though. Even in my most valiant efforts to change and to scrap such weak character flaws, I cannot seem to escape from the prison that is external interpretation.

     I wrote that a month ago and, maybe not-so-ironically, did not post it. I did save the draft in the anticipation that I would do something constructive with it, though, and that is exactly what I'm doing. I get to show myself that, through some positive outlooking and a little burn, you relieve yourself of unnecessary drama.
     I'm beginning to show people that I'm more than just the coldly logical, rational deity they've come to characterize me as. In the past, despite my best efforts to convince people, I would only have my most recent mistakes thrown in my face as evidence to the incredulity of my assertions. It is still frustrating, because it ends up constituting a paradox. I can either be myself, which is what they want me to be anyway, and is characterized by having feelings and sympathy but employing a more pragmatic and useful approach instead, or I can not be myself, and feign interest in coddling people, basically lying to them to bolster their egos and fluff the beds which they've made and in which they now lie. Problem is, the only way to prove that I am not what they accuse me of is to lie about who I am. If I am myself, which is NOT what they accuse me of, they will continue to accuse. So, there is no way to really win, on my side, except to make pretend like it never happened in the first place.
     What I can say, however, is that it has been improving, for whatever I'm doing seems to be working toward a much better end. I know things, lots of things. I know nothing about a lot more, but of the things I know about, I have not been giving them enough credit. I am incredibly intuitive, read people very well, am very socially cunning, and know that of which people are capable. I plan on listening to those things more now, and less to the acrid defense mechanisms of clearly disturbed persons of unauthority.
     I've been happier lately, despite a metastacizing collection of complications which have come to characterize so much of my life. I have reconnected with someone I care about deeply and have reached out to new people in the process. With their support, I will continue to see the bright side of it all. I will never give up on my ultimate missions, specifically my quest to raise the bar on every person I meet. What I have come to realize, though, and not too easily, is that there is only so much I can do.
     Well, at least in one sitting. -smirk-

     I have been neglecting this traditional medium for thought-writing ever since I've gotten back in to using Facebook and other rapid forms of communication. They have allowed me to, in some minor but important way, reconnect with old acquaintances/friends and plant the seeds which might yield delicious, juicy fruits in the months or years to come. They could also get drowned out from torrential downpours or dry up and turn to dust from drought. Yay for realism.
     I spoke with Abe last week and began talking about his living situation. He is looking to move from his current place to a new place and get a new roommate. His lease expires in December. So does mine. He lives in Boston. I want to live in Boston. I told him I'd think about it. It seems like a nice idea, but at the same time extremely impractical. When I know more I'll feel the situation out more seriously.

     I entered the New Yorker caption contest two weeks week featuring a cartoon of two ancient soldiers holding a blueprint with the Parthenon on it overlooking workers building what was obviously a Stonehenge-esque monument. My caption read "Athena is going to be so pissed."
     When I navigated over there this morning to check the three finalists, I wasn't one of them. I didn't mind until I scrolled down to number three which read "Dude, Athena is going to be pissed." I'm not exactly sure what to feel about that.
     I started writing what can be called a book. So far I'm happy with parts of it and can't think of how to improve others, but know that I want something different. I have a feeling it will take a while to really get it going. I'm bad with getting the ball rolling, but tend to be exceptional at making sure it doesn't stop. I'm like inertia, I guess.

     I've stumbled across many good thought points today in my online perusals, some of which I'd like to mention here so that I do not forget them. One was motivational, one laden with symptoms of guilt.
     Motivationally, I came across a profile online of a black man who had some of the usual things to say in talking about himself and introducing himself to the strangers and visitors to his page. What caught my eye was the last line, however, which said,

"My life mission is to try and love a Neo-Nazi like a brother."
Something about that speaks volumes in so few words.
     I also looked up an old article on White Privilege I had read long ago, and in the abstract was a position I never really thought about or noticed, which is exactly the point the author was making. Concerning the education of whites, she says,

"As a white person, I realized I had been taught about racism as something that puts others at a disadvantage, but had been taught not to see one of its corollary aspects, white privilege, which puts me at an advantage."
It's funny how it isn't even considered thinking outside the box; it's more about thinking inside someone else's.

     I'm getting increasingly unsettled about a large part of the population being idiots, having the ability to reproduce, doing so, spawning more idiots, and then voting and holding positions of power. Today's good news stories include evolution's perpetual defensive stand and this now-famous story of the 100-0 win of a high school basketball team in Texas.
     Concerning evolution, every major scientist in the world believes in the theory and continues to add to it, expand it, accommodating new information. Do I believe all should capitulate to a theory and its proponents without asking questions? Absolutely not. I would never in my life say one should not ask questions in every situation, at any time. Even intelligent design says yes, life is complex and scientifically explained, but it can only go so far. It is so complex that it seems disingenuous not to attribute it to something of a higher order of being. Even that I can live with as it isn't really stepping on too many toes, although it is sort of giving up on the ultimate pursuit of truth. But people who believe the Earth is a few thousand years old? Are you kidding me, are you seriously f@#&ing kidding me? These people disgust me.
     Additionally, about this silly basketball crap, there was no cheating involved, no bullying, no power extortion, no harassment. Nothing. Just a game. And one team won 100-0. The other might have had a bad day, a bad season, a bad life, who knows, who cares. It's a game played like every other game before it and like every other will be played henceforth. However, the school issued an apology citing this quote, "It is shameful and an embarrassment that this happened. This clearly does not reflect a Christlike and honorable approach to competition." Again, are you serious? Yes, Basketball 21:14 "Thou shalt let thy brother's team score at least once lest a damnation eternal you wish upon your house." Get a life. The coach dissented, disagreeing with the apology, and the school fired him. Fired him, for having a reason. Typical drone reaction. Thou shalt not question the authority of thy hypocritical master.

     In unrelated news, I've been watching one of the blu-rays I received for Christmas, the first season of The Universe. I really like it. I not only miss informational shows, but also intellectually stimulating ones about my childhood hobbies.

     Lately I've been thinking I should have majored in Philosophy. I have been learning a bit about the subject's roots, requisite classes in the major, as well as exposing myself to some of the terminology and methods, and it seems really interesting. It was one of those disciplines which I couldn't imagine a use for, and I still can't. I suppose, however, that it would have at least been more interesting than my current degree has turned out.
     I took a test today on cultural diversity and unity, and achieved this result:

You're the Liberal Philosopher!

     Perhaps a bit bleeding heart at times, and maybe a little too nice for your own good, you nevertheless bring a strong sense of individualism and unity to those around you. Liberating the minds of the traditionalists from their stodgy conformity, you seek to spread the good will of peace, understanding, and diversity.
     You likely find little value in the traditions of old, and instead see them as myopic and intolerant. You are very progressive in your ideas towards race and heritage, and are probably pretty much colour blind. Which is good for you, because there's no better way to lead than by example.
     You are probably more sensitive to the ideas of other cultures, sometimes even at the expense of your own! But you see this as a good thing, because after all, how can diversity prosper if we cling to our own ways more tightly than to those others? It's a big, beautiful world out there, and you just can't wait to share it with everyone.

     I thought that was nice.
     I have a couple more favorite terms to add to my growing list of favorite words. I have always said that pamplemousse was a nice French term I liked, and it is, but I've decided to replace it with folie à deux. Not only do I like the way it flows, I also like it's meaning. I also like the word synecdoche, but hate the way it's pronounced.

     Living in a world where what you see might or might not be real and the people with whom you talk might or might not be who they say they are or mean what they say is not a world in which I should be living. I'm not sure if it counts as me being too weak or unready to best such a challenge or if it's so entirely below me that I just haven't had to drudge through it before. I suppose a savage beast man could jump from the bushes with a machete and try to hack me to death, and upon nearly succeeding try to tell me that I'm just not ready to live because I can't use my natural abilities to fend off such an attack. Someone else might ask why one should have to be able, that maybe that man is so weak of character and reason that he is the one unready to live in OUR world.
     The philosophical ramifications of eating and breathing are starting to weigh heavily on my mind and in many cases my heart. It has become something of a chore lately, more than I want to do and yet something I don't seem to be able to escape doing. I guess in that way it's less of a chore and more some type of mind slavery. I wish it were just a puzzle or some clever riddle with which I were fumbling, but it involves my heart and my gut as well, two delicate areas of my body not easily consoled and far more difficult to give up.
     As if the straining ties I've tried mending back together weren't enough, the dwindling funds and feeling of stagnation didn't add enough on top of that. Now I have a general feeling of hopelessness mixed in, a recipe cooked up only in the darkest imaginations of what could only be a human creature with very little else to keep him or her occupied. People have this uncanny ability to be just...trash. Trash in its lightest and in its darkest forms, its most benign to its most malignant. Mix in complications such as trust and betrayal, loyalty, commiseration, and sympathy and you've got a colloidal solution of emotions trapped in a solvent of incredibly corrosive apathy and maleficence.
     People can also always be counted upon to tarnish the whitest of gowns simply out of an atavistic need for chaos and carnage dressed up to play the parts of experience and its close cousin wisdom. From whence did these galavanters come? Who knows, but we're told from some bastardized youth, where mommy and daddy didn't give me enough, or tied me up in the basement, or fed me bird poo, or spanked me in front of the whole town, or made me play with their friends' naughty places. Or maybe it was from all those people we knew who stained our once hopeful view of personkind, taking our dreams of honesty and compassion and love and turning them into nothing more than deceit, treachery, and Schadenfreude lovers. Or maybe it was something else I can blame, point my fingers at?
     Even confronted with the idea of such possibilities, people will inevitably deny anything and everything and have nothing but riddles and circles and logic puzzles to fill the void. A calm hand and a wispy voice will add to the effect, that ever serene and tranquil eternal fire burning within and transferred wholly unnoticed to all the hapless unsuspecting victims foolish enough to be drawn into your palace of suffering. Yours is the lesser known tenth circle where even Lucifer himself is above being. At least he is fallen grace embodied, the devourer of traitors, the lord of the sullen, hopeless, and malicious. Yet even he is above your sanctuary, where there be no flapping winds of icy torment, not screams of suffering, no disgraced angels to herald your damnation. Yours is only a ditch of darkness, devoid of sound whatsoever, anything to remind you of passing time, life, warmth, lament. It is a dirge of happiness, a melodic whisper of torture, an altar where there is no sacrifice, rather the promise of one, yet absolution cannot even trespass in your home.
     Yet somehow, amidst all of downward spirals plummeting to the heart of madness, it all ends up being my fault. Such is the song of the siren, to which we have no excuse but failure itself.

     Isn't it weird how the plural of words like passer-by, mother-in-law, and attorney general are passers-by, mothers-in-law, and attorneys general, but the plural of fuck-up isn't fucks-up, it's fuck-ups.

     In my neverending quest for full disclosure I find myself many times my own worst enemy, the cause of my sorrow and disappointment, the bane of my existence. As dramatic as that sounds, taking the widescreen picture of the situation resembles something along the lines of Guernica, no offense to the victims of the Spanish Civil War, of course. One thing I've noticed more recently, in light of recent financial woes and economic "turmoil", is the ubiquitous mantra "I have no money."
     Not having something is many times stretched to describe something you have but have very little of, and we are all fine with that. It is apparent in common phrases such as, "I have no free time!" You do, just not as much as you want or as much as other people. People who say that generally don't have much, but imagine for a moment you meet someone who says that, implying they're very very busy or important, and then watch as they manage to [regularly] set aside time to do various leisure activities, relax, sleep, or any of many other free time perks. You either gossip about them, or assuming you're someone who can't stand not opening your mouth, like I, you say something to them about how full of shit they are. You'll inevitably get some ridiculous excuse about how you're wrong and they really don't have any, but you know you're right and sometimes, that's all for which one can ask.
     The problem with that concept is when it comes to money. When you say I have no money, like I have been saying lately, you're either not supposed to have any, like if you say no to the question "do you have a quarter?" No, dear sir, I do not have a quarter and therefore will answer no, I do not have a quarter. However, I do not have ANY money? Well, I have fifty-four dollars in my checking account. That is some money, but as that is going toward a bill and I really don't have the budget to get rid of it, I can safely and effectively say I have no money. What is irritating is people who say it and have savings accounts full of it. You have a positive income flow every month, manage to set money aside for some worthwhile investment or indulgence you want at a later time, which is absolutely responsible of you. You have an emergency cash fund just in case, which is also responsible of you. You even have the freedom to shop still, picking up a pair of pants here or a shirt there, maybe even a coat if the price is right, or maybe just a little wrong. THAT, dear sir, is having money. Not having money in that slangy way, like being loaded. But you still have it. So don't tell people you can't buy gifts, or lend any assistance when needed, because you can. You just don't want to, and there is nothing wrong with that...legally. It would be nice to just hear the honest truth from your lips though. "I have a little extra but I really don't feel comfortable giving it away." Will that inspire a smile? Probably not. But you'll still have your character and integrity!
     That's pretty ironic actually, seeing as how character and integrity are two things people NEVER say they don't have, when so many people, well, just don't.

     Another example of persuasive propaganda is the tumultuous sea of advertising. I was shopping around for a rug steamer today online, pricing and finding rental locations, when I came across the FAQs, ironically pronounced FACTS. I came across this question and answer:

Can I use products other than Rug Doctor in the carpet cleaning machine?

Products that are not made specifically for water extraction method cleaning of carpets should NEVER be used. Damage can occur. Carpets need a specific pH range of cleaning that is effective and won't damage fibers. As well, products that are not made for the kind of simple rinsing and extraction provided by the machine will leave residues that attract dirt. We do not recommend the use of any cleaners other than Rug Doctor solutions in the Rug Doctor machines. Through extensive testing we have found no products that compare to Rug Doctor in terms of the 3 critical elements carpet cleaning: effective deep-cleaning, pH balanced for safe cleaning and clean rinsing ability.

     Fair enough, until I read this question and answer a few lines down:

Can you use Rug Doctor solutions with other carpet cleaning machines?

YES! In fact, the superior formulation of Rug Doctor products could improve your results. When using Steam Cleaner especially you will likely notice the carpet you clean stays clean longer that's because other brands of carpet cleaners leave residues behind that attract dirt. Rug Doctor rinses away leaving only fresh, clean carpets.

     Something tells me someone has an ego.
     Finally, a pun to make it all go away. I came across it yesterday and it has immediately become one of my all time favorites.
     Atheism is a non-prophet institution.

     Just a brief entry right now, as I am a little worn out from my journey. This was probably the best of the three trips I've had to Virginia, probably because I'm a more seasoned traveler, and also because my boss came with us this time. Although nothing particularly exciting happened, there were a few occurrences I would like to mention.
     First of all, what is with all of the Nazi hookers in D.C.? It seemed like on every other corner we passed, there were young gals decked out in high leather boots, miniskirts, overalls, hats, stoic expressions, and their right hands pointed into the air. Some might call it "hailing a cab" but it seemed rather Third Reichish to me.
     Second, I tried anchovies for the first time, both the normal ones and white ones. I had heard they were salty, but oh, they are salty. They basically tasted like salty not-as-chewy clams. If I had to eat them in order to survive or at gunpoint, I wouldn't be all that upset. I just would never choose them of my own volition. The white anchovies were "milder" I was told. I found out that only applied to the saltiness. They weere more acidic, vinegar-y, lemony I guess you could say. Same disclaimer as before.
     And finally for this brief exposé, I will combine a reminder observation from driving through D.C. with one of my "Popular Opinion" editions. Today's opinion: there should be no left turns allowed during rush hour. We all know that you want to get home, as does everyone else, but do you have to take a left turn on a two lane (alternating traffic) road which is heavily traveled and has no left signal? Everyone behind you hates you, and the people on whom you're slowly encroaching hate you. Everyone kind of just hates you. You can try to justify your problem but it really isn't necessary. My suggestion is to have left-turn-only lanes or lft arrow signals at specific times of day. If your street doesn't have one, keep moving. You're costing us money, time, and patience.

     That's all for now, I'll update at a later time with more. I took tomorrow off and am going to sleep (because I don't sleep very well away from home) and then go shopping for some stuff B needs for our apartment.

     While talking to Darryl, I realized the triangle of intimate despair, that is, the triangle of love where you can only have two out of three corners at any given time. The triangle I realized among the pool I have from which to choose consists of attractiveness, sanity, and fidelity. I'm gonna have to settle. I know it.
     You can have someone sane and attractive, but they'll cheat on you.
     You can have attractive and faithful, but they're insane.
     Or you can have sane and faithful, but they're not attractive.
     Blah.

     I don't think I should eat candy canes at work. I don't bite into them, so I end up looking like a slut giving head.
     I want to start a segment much like Bill Maher's "New Rules" without the copyright infringement. Maybe "Recent Statutes" or "Popular Demand." I will introduce something I think should change.
     My first post whenever that gets settled will be:

     Unless it's about independence, breaking from a totalitarian regime, or the low cost of something, songs should not be allowed to rhyme anything with "free." Too many pop, dance, and techno songs rhyme their long Es with the word free, usually preceded by "I wanna be" or "You set me." You aren't in jail, an indentured servant, or a caged bird. Even if you were a caged bird, what you do is hardly singing, it's the type of repetitive garbage that lands caged birds in garages with blankets draped over them. The best we have so far is slapping a discount sticker on your jewel case and throwing it in the bin in no particular order with the rest. Happy hunting.

     Maybe it's a way of categorizing information more easily, a heuristic for grouping ideas more quickly than conventional neural methods, but the tendency for people to exaggerate, to understand, describe, and rely on information that is blown out of proportion one way or the other is irritating to people who take the time to precisely generate thoughts which convey exactly what they mean.
     One of the consequences of this way of thinking is the humorous rating system we have when it comes to reviews in online forums. The typical consumer will search for an item they wish to either purchase or know more about, and confront what is usually a rating on a scale of five stars. Although certainly not a formal system, a rating of one or five most people understand is to be used sparingly. At least people should know that. Not a five does not mean a bad product. A one is truly an abysmal product, either consistently breaking, not being what it is described to be, not doing what it is intended to do, etc.
     Too often, people decide to write one-star reviews with the most asinine reasons. If your product was delivered late, that isn't the product's fault. You don't badly rate a product because the delivery was late. If you go to someone's house to have sex with them, you don't say the sex was bad because traffic held you up. Yet I see, over and over again, reviews where the product was given one star and the review says something ridiculous such as "They tried delivering this...when I was at work!" GASP! They should have waited at your door for you to arrive. "I can't play this Playstation 2 game because I don't have a Playstation 2! This game sucks!" Are you serious?
     This really just adds to my master list a new set of potential targets. When the second enlightenment comes along, these will be the artists' sources of inspiration.

     I have lectured before on the consequences of groups and their inherent mentalities. Among the most pervasive of these were my arguments on ingroups and outgroups and their respective members' persuasiveness with regards to certain points of view.
     Generally, the ingroup I reference is the majority of society in the United States, c'est-à-dire Caucasian heterosexual English speakers. The outgroup can be any one of the minority groups which exist among the ingroup, be it blacks, gays, etc. (For the purposes of this discussion, women are not considered a minority due to a shared identity with members of outgroups which share features with other members of their group only.) However, more generally, the ingroup is really whatever the group you're focusing on is, the outgroup being its opposite.
     I've taken the position before that, when it comes to praise for a particular group, that praise is much better received, regarded, or taken seriously when it is from a member of the outgroup. For example, taking a defensive stand in favor of African Americans, blacks, whatever term you use is more poignant a position when it is taken by a Caucasian. Otherwise, to the less passionately involved of bystanders, it seems like a group just rationalizing its own behavior. Taking an extreme example, say that blacks can't read, a black man (or woman) saying blacks can read would probably be viewed as an admirable defense, but nothing more. A white person saying it would probably be more shocking and therefore more effective.
     The opposite is true as well. When it comes to criticisms, they are more effective when from a member of the ingroup as opposed to the outgroup. When a poor man says the rich are selfish, everyone laughs and writes it off to jealousy or laziness. When a rich man says the rich need to do something to help the poor, people listen, if not with skepticism, but they still listen.
     Brian messaged me earlier with an article lending credence to my point. Keith Olbermann gave [what I assume and read was] an emotional speech on his show last night about California's Proposition 8 and his stand against it. This is an article with a transcript about it.

To Do:

• Wash coffee mug - Pending


• Clean room - Pending


• Buy razor refills - Later


• Elect first black president - Check

     Greetings, Mr. President.
     Not really sure what else there is to say about it. The only thing I was thinking about was how vice presidents usually run after their boss does his run, and Biden is another white man. I've been spoiled by Obama.
     There were those circulating rumors that Sarah Palin was thinking of running on the ticket in 2012 for the Republican Nomination. That would most likely put her up against Obama. It's interesting that we will enter 2012 with a black president and potentially end up with a woman right afterward. What I find humorous is how, according to the Mayans, 2012 is also the year that the world is supposed to end. So either Obama does something extremely stupid, or God decides he wants to cast a vote against Sarah Palin, making his vote count by destroying Earth. I guess that's one way to go about things.
     Or maybe we will have an even more humorous candidate by then, and by humorous, I mean deserving of the apocalypse.

     It's interesting to see the priorities of the online news sources such as Yahoo! based on their headlines. It flips between something related to the election and something asinine and trite, like dinner ideas or online degrees. I attributed this to the prevalence of online news and its dynamic changing focus throughout the day. What is interesting, though, is how prevalent and consistent coverage of the election is in other countries.
     For example, in the United States you have, by default, a little application for following election results, and the occasional news story about something election-related. On Yahoo! France, however, you not only have the application, you have two news stories of the top four about the U.S. election as well as one of the common news stories, and a news story about something in the French government which relates news from the U.S. election. "L'Amérique pourrait élire son premier président noir. La même chose est-elle possible en France?" says one teaser about our first black president. "Sur le marché des paris en ligne, Obama a une bien meilleure cote que son rival républicain John McCain." says another about Obama's edge. "USA, Obama e McCain al giudizio degli elettori" from the Italians about our candidates facing the judgment of voters. "Rekord-Wahlbeteiligung bei historischer US-Präsidentenwahl" tells of our record turnout of voters this year in the election from Germany. "Abren las urnas para que los norteamericanos decidan entre Obama y McCain" philosophize our Spanish cousins.
     Merely as a point, these countries have our election news at the forefront of their pages, sometimes in a permanent spot on the homepage. It is comforting to know, yet at the same time, I feel like I'm being admired for something I don't deserve. Nonetheless, I'm anxious about today and hope for the best.

     All I hear lately from anyone following, participating in, or just thinking about the upcoming presidential election is that "nothing will change no matter who wins." When pressed for a pick, they give their reasons either for or against a candidate based on what they'd change. Makes plenty of sense to me. In the unlikely event they are against a candidate based on what they'd keep the same, they don't make the logical jump that the other candidate would change it. I think what they mean to say is nothing ever changes overall despite little changes here and there which give the appearance of a new president elect, when in reality it's one long unending regime.
     Spring cleaning. You decide you're going to clean out your basement. You do a bunch of dirty laundry. Instant gratification, it's done, it's changed, it's purged. People seem to think the political system would work the same way. Once the new president sits in the office, it's time for spring cleaning [the timing is right]. With the wave of a hand, the corrupt atone, the budget balances, the basement cleans itself. Except imagine you're living in a house with 300,000,000 people, where twenty percent of those are children who need to be taken care of and don't contribute to the household chores but contribute to the mess. Another six percent don't work, most relying on you to provide for them. The general culture of your housemates is one of fierce independence and selfishness, refusing to help others who are struggling to clean their share, because after all, it's their mess. On top of that, the deed to your house has not only your signature on it, but also those of 535 other people who have a say in when you clean, what you clean, how you clean, and where you clean. By the time you finished being prepped for that job, you would just say f*ck it.
     The system is a bit more complicated, people. New presidents don't have absolute authority. They are leaders, motivators, not dictators. They are the face of the nation, not the nation itself.
     Things always change with every change in the ruler. They may not be memorable or catastrophic, but they are there. Little changes over time add up to big changes. If you saved a penny a day, you don't really think about it. You might even consider it a waste of time. Given a generation, say twenty-five years, that one penny habit adds up to $91.25. That's assuming you always get one penny, nothing more or less. In politics, those little changes exist amongst larger periodic changes, like 9/11, a war, a depression or economic crisis, or a major social movement à la Civil Rights. That is the equivalent of larger sums of money from time to time. The ship might be gigantic, mighty, and strong, but without coal, it wouldn't do much from day to day.
     That being said, people have this glass-is-half-empty mentality which progressively gets emptier and emptier. What they fail to realize is it sits in the sink underneath the faucet. All you have to do it turn it on. You have the control and the power. But when you complain there is nothing in the glass to drink and then complain that you can't fill it because you can't afford to turn the faucet on, you're only hurting yourself. You can't complain about the problem and the solution unless you're offering to do something else. If you refuse to participate and only complain, then check yourself into a home because no one cares about you. People like you really don't change.

     Recognizing weaknesses in character or social adeptness is much like realizing while sitting on your ass that you need to exercise. Just like exercise, strengthening those deficiencies takes time, training, and repetition, as well as some sacrifice. The sacrifice is the part I never really thought about until now, when it has become apparent just how sacrificial it can feel, and how the line between sacrifice and unnecessary pain is nebulous at best.
     Without the help of an authority on the matter, I struggle to create my own boundaries concerning what I'm willing to accept as purgatory and what I'm not willing to accept that feels just plain cruel. There is a certain amount of backlash one should expect when you try to improve. When you begin to train physically, your muscles ache. When you begin to train mentally and emotionally, sometimes people don't cut you any slack. That is your fault. People get used to how you behave and just because you change it overnight doesn't mean they have to as well. If that were the case, then we wouldn't have any accountability. I realize that and know that there will be a period where things will be a little confusing and edgy. However, after a certain amount of conditioning time, people should stop branding you with your old serial number. If they don't, that is their fault. The problem is knowing at what point that transition takes or should take place.

     Halloween is tomorrow and I'm not going to be doing anything most likely. I haven't really felt into the holiday in a long time, unlike many of the people I know. I don't really get into the idea of dressing up to go dance or go to a bar. I'll do those things separately. If I'm going to dress up, I'd rather have a house party or get-together, not go out. I couldn't think of anything I wanted to be this year anyway, that and I should really save the money.