Friendship

Ok, an additional follow up to the post about the friendship book.  Again, my agent suggested I break my rants up into smaller posts for better readership.   Just kidding - I don't have an agent - anyone know of one? 

Anyhow, in this book, and another book I read a while ago (The Friend that got Away), it outlines that the loss of a friend is one of life's strangely unacknowledged tragedies.  There isn't a whole self-help section designated to it - and think of how many different life experiences DO have entire self-help sections (wetting the bed, anyone??).   Pet death seems to elicit more sympathy from the general population.  

I, too, find this strange - seeing 1) many people have friendships that have lasted longer than their current romantic relationship and 2) there is almost nothing more universally experienced - we all have friends and we all have most likely lost one.  There's nothing strange about mourning the loss of a romantic relationship that lasted six months, but mourning the loss of a friendship of six years seems to go unspoken.  The book goes on to outline reasons why it might be taboo to discuss the loss of a friend (usually your close friends are either mutual friends and don't want to take sides).  

Now, for me personally, I can think of three people off-hand who fall into the 'lost friend' category in my life.  And with that, I'm not talking people I've lost touch with or just grew apart from but if I ran into them it'd all be well and good and maybe I could even go have coffee with them on some odd occasion and even if not, thinking back to my friendship with them makes me smile.  

I'm talking people who, if they were once my boyfriends, a) it was probably a long, drawn out break-up, b) I probably told them to delete my number at some point, and c) if someone were to bring them up now, my reaction would be similar to Ms. Aniston's when being asked about how she feels toward Brangelina.  

Call it stubbornness or self-respect, or maybe a combination, but I would never reach out to these people.  If they wanted to reach out to me and patch things up, I'd hear 2/3 of them out.  But I know that won't happen.  Whatever.  My life has gone on just fine.  I have been no less happy nor successful.  There have been new friends.  Other friends.  Better friends.  I am perhaps better off without "friends" like them in my life.  However, there have been times I have missed them nonetheless.  

Frenemies - Part One

So, as usual, I have been reading a book.  It is book #8 of the year - I am getting back on track to my goal of reading 12 books this year.  Woohoo!

Anyhow, the book is entitled "Friend or Frenemy?" and it reads much like a magazine (which makes sense because one of the writers works for Cosmo), especially with the font variations and layout.  It offers up some hilarious observations about friend relationships.  I am not sure if this book is supposed to offer up some advice or has a thesis of any kind; however, it sure was a pleasure to read.  I do realize that MY readers might not be all that interested in hearing my personal detailed literary critique of every book I pick up, so I will save that for amazon.  :)

Anyhow, there is an interesting point from the book I'd like to touch on.    The authors talk about dealing with the end of a friendship; however, not just drifting apart, losing friends to marriage or geographical distance, or major fallouts, but also actually 'breaking up with a friend'.  They go on to give advice on how to do so (pick a neutral place to do it, not a location you frequented together during the friendship, 'it's not you, it's me', etc.).

Please correct me if I'm wrong - this NEVER happens this way.  I believe that my celebrity crush (if you've been reading this blog carefully, you know who this is) outlined in his early career that this just CAN'T be done.  Friendships can end for many reasons, but it's usually the result of some form of an angry confrontation ("I never want to speak to you again!")  or casual drifting (which can sometimes be an intentional way of ending a friendship with someone whom you no longer want in your life). 

However, the conversation we have to end a failing relationship - "it just isn't working, this isn't what I want right now, we don't have enough in common, it's not you, it's me, etc etc." - is never used to end a friendship, no?  I think mostly because we can break up with people we do genuinely like, just not romantically, and we can use the old 'let's just be friends'.  Cause, in theory, you can only be dating one person, but you can be friends with many.  If you don't want to be friends with someone, it's not that you don't like them enough, it's that you don't like them AT ALL.  

I'll elaborate more in a later post (I'm getting the message that people don't like long rambling posts), but I am just wondering - food for thought (I don't understand that expression either) - has anyone out there ever broken up with a friend? (without it being a major blowout)

Follow Up to a Previous Post, Part Deux

My friend Jeannine's take - I think she said it best:

you would be in the hospital with alcohol poisioning if you were at the dem convention with all those Change signs and your drinking game

Follow Up to a Previous Post

He seems decent.  

Frivilous Lawsuits!?!

Taken from today's Sun-Times:

A man who drank five margaritas before arriving at a Connecticut train station, boarding the wrong train and then injuring his ankle as he tried to jump off, has sued Amtrak for not taking sufficient steps to prevent a man who had drunk five margaritas from getting on the wrong train and trying to jump off.

Hillary!

How I've missed her!  She's been away for far too long!  

I have a memo for Obama's camp:  there's an old saying that goes "you catch more flies with honey than vinegar".   I have heard multiple statements about 'crazy Hillary Clinton supporters acting stupid and not voting for Obama' from Obama supporters.  

I can only speak for myself, but I know that calling me 'stupid' or 'crazy' does NOT make me want to vote for your guy, Obama.  I am not blind to John McCain - I see him for what he is; his main appeal at the moment is merely that his camp is not directly insulting me personally, which, perhaps, is counting for something.

That, and, also, again, speaking for myself - I am kind of stubborn.  And I think, looking at the Hillary Clinton camp, I might not be ALONE in possessing that quality.  So biting back in the form of a vote for John McCain might be an option, if the Obama camp can't stop taunting us Clinton supporters, sixth grade style.  

Just food for thought for all my Obama-loving friends, and anyone else who reads - seeing that I'm not alone; there are 18 million of me.  :)  

Sidenote:  Yes, I wrote this post before Hill's speech.  However, everything I said still stands as accurate.

First Newly-Invented Drinking Game of the Democratic National Convention

Apparently we are sticking with the word "change".   Somewhere, someone decided this word is a winner!  I cannot give you an exact tally, however, I do believe I've heard it mentioned more often than "Obama" so far tonight.  

First Report From the Democratic National Convention

Who will be more irritating over the next couple days of convention coverage - Keith Olbermann or Chris Matthews?  I'd be inclined to put my money on Olbermann, but Matthews somehow just pulled out in front with an early lead.   

Advance Warning - Mostly For Emily

With the Olympics being over and the Democratic National Convention this week, followed by the Republican National Convention next week - I will be drawing a lot of my blogging inspiration and material from the political scene.  I know some are not that excited by this, but I am.  So, you've been warned.  

Chicago 2016?

I LOVE the Olympics.  And I LOVE Chicago.

However, these two are NOT peanut butter and chocolate.  Much more like sushi and waffles.  Or riesling and Henry.  Or dance moves and my wine glass collection.  Two things I love that should NEVER be mixed.

Am I ALONE in saying I do NOT want the 2016 games in Chicago?!!?!  It sure seems like it!!  

I could understand people from other areas of the country cheering on the Chicago games, but my fellow Chicagoans?!!  Hello!!!  

For one, our city is crowded enough on a regular basis.  We have enough sporting festivities going on, thankyouverymuch.  I do not need any more challenges in finding a parking spot.  Do my fellow Chicagoans realize just how much of an additional crowd these events are going to attract?  This is an international event!! 

That, and maybe this is also just me, but I have a New Yorker's attitude toward tourists.  As I'm going about my daily life trying to cross the street on my way to work, I do not need to go out of my way to walk around someone trying to take a picture - or worse yet, asking for my help in taking said picture (and then asking for a redo because of someone's eyes being closed, etc.) .  Additionally, I do not need said tourists scoffing at me because I walked through their pictures (because they seem to think the city stops to acknowledge their family's vacation).

Also, think about it - the preparation (construction, etc.) that would have to be put into the events would cause many inconveniences to our daily commute and what have you.  And DON'T get me started on the tax dollars - we've had enough useless spending around these joints (see also those Rod Blagojevich signs on the expressway over the open road tolling lane).

Let's all get past the 'omg, wouldn't it be so cool to have the Olympics in Chicago?!!' perspective and let's take a look at the real potential consequences. 

I am not the hostess with the mostess, and neither is my city.  And I would like to keep it that way.  Thank you.

(Editor's note:  Do you think Daley possibly reads my blog?)

Thoughts on Joe Biden?

I am not sure I have an opinion on this man.  This is rare for me!

A lot of Obamaniacs are excited about him - but Obama already has their vote.   He does no harm, but I don't know that he does any good.  Hmm.  I guess there are few who do no harm.  Maybe it was a good choice? 

Dating Double Standards

So, there was an article in the, ahem, other paper - it was an excellent piece entitled something like "Why Can't Carrie Think Big?"   In short, it addressed that fact that many people comment on Carrie Bradshaw (SJP) dating a man (Chris Noth) who might be 'out of her league' per societal standards.  

I've heard criticisms of the Carrie/Big relationship from women moreso than men (most likely because more women are familiar with SATC).  Here's my beef though - we VERY often see and seem to accept the beautiful girl paired with the average joe guy - Katherine Heigl and Seth Rogen in Knocked Up, Heather Graham and Mike Myers in Austin Powers, Christie Brinkley and Billy Joel in real life, etc.   However, we RARELY see the reverse.  I honestly can't even think of another example other than Carrie and Big.

Why is that?

Whenever there's the latter mismatch, there's always the whole 'oh, he's really funny' (Sidenote:  funny is ALWAYS the first quality society seems to think women want in their man - if this is true, why aren't we all dating clowns or stand-up comedians??!).    Or, if not funny, it's assumed that the man has some other attractive quality, such as intelligence, successfulness, or kindness.  

However, Carrie Bradshaw is witty and independently successful - she should get the same absolution less than perfect looking men get, no?  Why is it assumed that men will pick their romantic partners solely on superficial qualities, yet women are expected to look at the big picture?

On a similar note, I remember, a couple years ago, one of the networks had a dating reality show called "Average Joe", in which a bunch of moderately-attractive-at-best men were vying for the hand of an attractive woman.   I didn't watch this show, but from the few commercials I saw, it didn't appear as though this leading lady was going to win Miss Congeniality any time soon.  So, what was their reason for pursuing her (aside from the fact that it was a reality show and there was probably some financial prize they were pursuing as well)??   

I find the whole situation ironic - it was fine for these men to apply superficial standards when picking a mate, but this woman was urged to look beneath the surface.  On the same note, I do not remember there ever being an 'Average Jane' counterpart to this show.  Why is it that a woman dating a less than perfect man is widely embraced, but a man with a less than perfect woman is generally non-existent - at least in Hollywood?

It seems as though the double-standard is alive in well in the eyes and minds of both men and women.   Do we still see a woman's primary role in a relationship to be 'sitting pretty'?  Why can't we accept the idea of a man being attracted to wit, ambition, or a kind soul over appearance?  Are looks really THAT important to men?

I honestly don't know if I think men are more superficial than women on the whole - a faithful part of me wants to think they are not.   However, why do we struggle with the idea of the hot guy with an average girl, but the pairing of the hot girl and average guy is a duo of heroes?  

Would Anyone Like To Go To Hawaii?

I have always wanted to go there.  I need a travel buddy.  Inquire within.

Celebrity?

Headline:

The RNC sends out an update about Obama seeing 'The Dark Knight' and eating popcorn. 

It appears as though the presidential election is now the world's biggest celebrity vs. the paparazzi that are stalking him.  I leave you with the question - of the two, who would you rather have leading?  

Something I Don't Understand....

Breaking up with someone and continuing to sleep with him/her.  

I have MANY friends who have engaged in said activity (I will provide anonymity to protect the guilty).  I know many coworkers, acquaintances, etc., who have done this as well.  It seems to be SURGING in popularity lately.  

WHY?

Ok, I get the two obvious reasons:  1)  horniness and 2)  familiarity along with a promise of some knowledge of this individual's sexual past.  

HOWEVER.  

You broke up with this person (or he or she dumped you) for a REASON.  Although being friends with, not having hard feelings toward, or still talking to this person are all acceptable and even respectable, how is still sleeping with him or her helping either of you move forward? 

My feelings on the matter have always been well summed up by this quote:  having sex with an ex is like getting fired from a job and going back to work for free (or, I suppose, firing an employee but still paying him).  

And don't even get me started on those who then go on to say 'well, we're still talking, we're trying to work it out....'  Umm, you're broken up.  Both of you wouldn't have gone through the break-up if one of you wasn't sure there was a good enough reason to do so.  

To me, saying one is dating someone isn't like being engaged - it's really not that big of a title/label.  If whatever two people have isn't strong enough to handle the 'boyfriend/girlfriend' status - it must be pretty weak and not going anywhere.  If two people really are 'working things out' - can't they do that and get back together first?  I think this is just a weak copout when two people know they aren't meant to be but haven't found a new sexual partner yet.

I know a lot of people are going to say I'm just being cynical or I'm over-simplifying things, relationships are complicated, blah blah.  However, as I see it, nothing complicates things like sleeping with someone.  If two people are really crazy about each other and meant to get back together - they will with or without the sex.  

Also, not to be all philosophical, but we all probably want to be in a successful relationship with someone we really like who is really great (etc. etc.).  How is backsliding to someone who wasn't good enough (or worse yet, thought YOU weren't good enough) helping advance that cause?  

Anyhow, I guess my point is this - when two exes continue to sleep together, although it might seem like a good idea at the time, it really isn't benefiting anyone in the long run and someone is most likely just getting used.  I think most backsliders are better off ripping the bandaid and buying a vibrator.  Just my thoughts.  

Sorry, I realize this post was 'judgy'.   Please be advised I am not judging others for being weak - I am only trying to call a spade a spade.  

On A Gymnastics Roll....

When I look at these pictures of Shannon Miller  (some from her teens, some current) and when I think about the fact that she is now a spokeswoman for allergy medication  - I can't help but think one thing:  deviated septum, right?

Did You See?

It was incredible, wasn't it?  

Guestless in Chicago

So, over the past couple years, I've gotten invited to weddings without (what I thought was) the requisite "and guest".  I've got one of said weddings coming up in two weeks.  

It's a family wedding, so I wouldn't bring a guest anyway, unless I was in a relationship - it's not like I won't know anyone there, and it'd be a bit intense to bring a casual date to sit with my parents, aunts, uncles, and cousins.  

Now, don't get me wrong - I get that weddings are uber-expensive.  I get that this is a 'cost cutting' measure.

However, I have to wave a flag here - the flag of 'singles discrimination'.  It's very rare that married couples, or people in long-term relationships, get the guest snub when getting invited to weddings.  Even if the bride and groom have both never met a friend's spouse, he or she automatically gets an invite extended - however, someone like me can't bring a 'stranger'?!

I kind of think it's crap - namely, because, in my mind, the purpose of the guest is so that the attendees will have someone to talk if he or she doesn't know many people who are going to be at the wedding.   I have some friends who purposely didn't go to a wedding because they wouldn't know anyone there.  I am not sure I'm feeling this new 'no guest' movement.

However, very recently, I was informed that I am on the a-list for a VERY a-list event.  I got mail!  Namely, I got an invite to MEG RYAN's wedding!  

Of course, someone like Meg Ryan definitely extended me a guest.  And you know what?  I am going to show her my appreciation for that by NOT bringing one.  :)  

Pet Peeves

Ok, random thing that annoys me - when people get a kick out of stealing shit from restaurants (or similar places).  I'm talking forks, knives, glasses, drink menus, etc.  

What's the point?

I've had many friends who have engaged in such activities.  In fact, almost everyone I know in my age bracket has done it at some point?  Again, I must ask.

What's the f*&$ing point?

Let me tell you, first off, this is an uber-low risk activity - I was a server for several years.  I noticed, at many points, people seeming to be doing this activity at my tables.  Did I care?  No.  I cared about my tip.  I could have gone over and said something to them and had them get pissed off and stiff me, or I could have turned a blind eye and watch their guilty consciences give me upwards of 20% for their lifting .o5 cents of company property - which do you think I chose?  (I hope my fellow chiliheads don't read this blog, although I'm sure they're agreeing with me if they do.)

Is it just for the thrill?  It HAS to be - is there really much joy in owning a TGIFridays fork?  I feel like I'm constantly throwing out chachkies much more exciting than hot restaurant utensils for the sake of space in my apartment and life.  It CAN'T be for the need to have the actual product.  

Since almost EVERYONE I know has been involved in this activity at some point - please clue me in.  What's the draw?  

Are We Better Off With Modern Medicine?

An interesting point from today's Quick Takes Column in the good old CST:

Bitter pill

Kevin Perez, a Chicago reader, writes:

''While watching Michael Phelps seek the eight Olympic gold medals, the story of how he became a champion swimmer kept coming to mind. His mother said he was an energetic boy to the point where it was hard to keep him still, and he was finally given Ritalin. But he talked her and the doctor out of it after a while, and the energy went into swimming. I wonder. How many potential champions have the pharmaceutical companies sabotaged? When will our country start teaching to the child's potential instead of to arbitrary standards?''

Milestones

Today is a milestone - it is the one year anniversary of my return to the Chicago Sun-Times.  Happy day.  I have, collectively, worked at the Sun-Times, a total of something around 2 years and 7 months over three separate tours of duty.  

In between the last two times of working here (the first stint was an internship, the other two were full-time positions), I worked at, ahem, another company.  

Working at this other company has helped me grow as a person - it introduced me to some good people and a good friend.  It also gave me some important knowledge - that despite the fact that there may be days that are frustrating and stressful at the CST (like any other job), there are MUCH MUCH worse places to to work out there.  

Trust me, I worked at one of those places.  But not any more.  :)  

Twenty-Six

So something thrilling has happened to me.  I was in Michigan on Monday.   When I arrived back in Chicago - I  checked my blog.  It had 26 visits throughout the day.  

I had not checked it once.  More importantly, my mother knew I was out of town and would not be updating, so she most likely didn't check it either.  

Twenty-six people (not including my mother or myself) checked my blog in one day!!  Or, four or five people compulsively checked my blog.  Either way - truly exciting!

Thanks all.  I'll try to produce some good material this week.  There's always downtime during the Olympics (namely, between gymnastics segments).  

Only Children

So, there was an article in, ahem, the other newspaper this past weekend about successful only children.  Although it was an interesting article, there was something funny to me about the premise - as if there is something noteworthy about an only child succeeding.  

Now, although I half-jokingly write this post - there is a definite widely accepted negative stereotype about only children that is almost starting to irritate me.  

A woman I work with was describing another coworker with a difficult personality - "She's a total only child," she said.  Funny because the woman she was describing is in her 30s with children of her own.   I once had a college acquaintance who remarked to me that she'd "never think I was an only child" - she meant it as a compliment.  (I DIDN'T say thank you - that probably made her re-think the statement.)

I have many times overheard the negative statements about only children - sometimes from individuals with no idea of my only-ness, other times from close friends (maybe I should rethink considering them that).    

I've overheard notions such as 'I want either two or three, but I'd rather not have any than have an only'.  I've often heard 'I'd never date an only child'.  I once had someone sincerely ask me that, since I don't have a sibling, would I understand that someone would be upset if his or her sibling were to die?  

SERIOUSLY PEOPLE.

Now, let me be the first to say - I agree that there are certain personality traits associated with birth order standing.  Perhaps the oldest child is used to taking charge, the youngest is the spoiled baby, and the middle child is the quiet appeaser to his or her bossy older and bratty younger siblings.  

However, I've never heard 'typical middle' or 'typical oldest child'.  I've maybe heard 'typical youngest child' a handful of times.   "Typical only child" is definitely much more pervasive.

Although, as I said earlier, there are typical personality traits associated with certain birth orders - but it's not a foolproof guarantee that someone in a certain position will most definitely have a certain trait - or that someone with a certain trait will most definitely sit in a certain position in his or her family.

I guess what I find most irritating and idiotic - there's a notion that only children are spoiled brats who ALWAYS must have their way and can never fully assimilate into society for this reason.  First off, I know plenty of "brats" who are oldest, youngest, and even middle children. 

However, more realistically - let's say, for arguments' sake, that even if all only childrens' parents are completely permissive of their 'diva-like' behavior - would their peers, teachers, friends, bosses, significant others, and coworkers be as accepting of it?  It's not as though parents are the only people who have an influence on our lives and the kind of people we become.  It's not as though our personality traits don't continue to evolve as we grow into new roles in our lives.

On that note - let's say there's an only child with an unfavorable characteristic - is it really their "only childness" that caused this trait?  Maybe it's the result of a failed friendship or romantic relationship - or something else entirely.  

The notion that only children might almost be fundamentally different as people from their sibling-ed counterparts is, in my book, utterly ridiculous.  Thoughts?  

A Rose by any Other Name....

Matt changed his blog's name from "Call Me Matt" to "Musings From Matt".

Ana changed hers from "Items of Interest" to "Nothing In Particular".

Now, I'm not one to jump on a bandwagon with a trendy new movement, however....I've been thinking.  I don't really like the name "Daily Ramblings" all that much.  

It makes me feel obligated to blog daily.  I don't want that kind of pressure.  Also, not all of these posts are 'ramblings'.  Some are brief quips, some are thoroughly researched in-depth statements, some are quite concise and well-organized (or so I'd like to think).  

So, I'm leaving it up to you to leave suggestions for a new name in the comments section.  

Back From Michigan

There will be more soon.  I'm sorry for this lame post.  I'm just too tired to write....

Moral Objection

So, as you know, I love having ads on my blog and I love, love, love it when my readers click them.  The ads come off the content from my posts.

Well, I posted about Henry (my Honda, the man in my life) and all of these ads came up like 'injured in an auto accident - you deserve cash!'   I DO NOT endorse these ads (or the idea that every time in life something bad happens to us there's a cash value reward we deserve - but that's a story for another day).  

I have a huge moral objection to these ambulance chasers - do NOT give them business.  Unless, of course, you are using one to sue another ambulance chaser directly - that kind of fighting fire with fire would be acceptable in my book.  

Advanced Warning

Just to let you know, I will be out of town the next couple days for a long weekend at my roommate's cabin in Michigan.  I do not believe I will be using the WWW up there, for I will need to enjoy Michigan to the full extent Tim Allen would want us all to. 

I apologize to my blog's fanatics - maybe this would be a good time to catch up on commenting on my other posts (nudge nudge wink wink).  Hopefully I'll return with some good material all revved up and ready to go.

Countdown to the Olympics

Two days!!!   Don't expect to see me in any social context over the 16 day period.  Just sayin'.

Have You Ever Googled Yourself?

Now, I ask this because almost EVERYONE in my generation googles people. Especially before going on a date - laugh all you want, boys, I do not know a girl who DOESN'T do this. There's also a notion out there that potential employers will google job candidates.

People with overly common names have a luxury of being able to hide. I am NOT one of those people. If you google my first name and last name in quotation marks, you get me. All me. There are some people with my last name and a spelling variation of my first name. So people who can't spell my first name (and believe me, they are plentiful) who google me may think I am currently working as a computer science professor at Notre Dame.

So, about a year and a half ago, I was on the job interviewing circuit (I was with a different employer, where 75% of the company was on the job interviewing circuit). I had a job interview lined up at the behemoth itself (again, not my current company).

I figured at this company, getting Googled pre-interview was standard. Since my past is not speckled, I wasn't too concerned. However, the night before my second interview, I decided to check things out, just in case.

It was all me. I made the honor roll in high school; I went to dance camp. But WAIT.

Down at the bottom of the first (and pretty much only) page of results, there was a slightly, ahem, less than favorable listing about yours truly.

It was a guestbook entry on "Princess Sarah's Dreambook" (I do not know Princess Sarah personally). It said my name, spelled correctly. It said my screenname (yes, MY screenname, created over a decade ago on AOL - this was about ME). That was the extent of accurate information.

I will not go into full detail, however, to clarify - I do not now, nor have I ever, lived in Afghanistan. I do not operate the website http://www.dirtywh*re.com/ (replace the asterisk). AND, I would not say that my favorite movie is "Naughty Night Nurses 2 - it was so much better than the first" - I have not ever seen either movie so I could not fairly make such an assertion (maybe some of my readers could - no judgment).

(Editor's sidenote: Yes, I do know exactly who posted this. However, I do not wish to bestow any time, attention or energy on said individual/situation at this time.)

Do you know how much time and energy it takes to get something bad about you out of cyberspace??! First I had to email Ms. Sarah herself, only she hadn't logged into the site in about 8 years and her email didn't work. Then I had to contact the site operator and have them take this entry down. THEN I was told there was nothing I could do until Google updated it cache, which was periodic. Nevermind the fact that this existed out there for about 8 years - I am wondering how many dates/acquaintances/employers googled me and saw this and I'm wondering if of the above were ever influenced by this.

Moral of the story - maybe we can't judge a person by his or her google results, although I don't see the trend of googling pre-meetup to end any time soon.

Telephone!

Let me let you in on something - I HATE talking on the telephone. I feel like there's something wrong with me, as a girl, because girls are supposed to, like, talk for hours on the telephone to all of our bffs. However, most of my female friends seem to feel the same way I do (with a few exceptions).

I am fine with speaking on the phone if there's something that needs to be discussed - or if it's catching up with a friend I haven't talked to in a while, but the notion of having a three hour phone conversation with someone I see semi-regularly is, in my mind, waterboarding.

What are your feelings on the telephone?

Dianetics Update

So, I've mentioned a couple times that it seems like the Chicago Dianetics Center is not only trying to recruit me but also seems to be spying on me and my actions by targeting me personally based on referring to events going on in my life or opinions I already hold.  Today, I got yet another e-mail from them.  I will present it without comment:

The Problems of Work seminar

Hi,

 

We will be delivering a free seminar on Monday August 11th at 7:30 pm.  This seminar is called The Problems of Work.

 

In this seminar you will learn:

• The number one cause of interrelation problems in the work place.
• The rock bottom cause of exhaustion in the work place.
• The "Secret" of efficiency.
• How to turn "bad control" to good.
• The 3 most fundamental elements of relations.

You are invited!  Please confirm your attendance by phone or email. 

 

*Please note the word in quotation marks.  Please note some previous blog posts.  Case closed.

Keeping With a Theme....

So I have a Snoopy calendar - I get one every year for Christmas (shh, don't let my mom know I'm on to her...).  Here is the month of August's image:

Ok, that might be some bad resolution.  Try clicking to enlarge.   

Anyhow, it says:  Love is committing yourself in writing.   I thought it went well with the theme of a couple of my past posts - Appreciation & If You Are Easily Offended.  I would like to commit to my readers in writing.  It's down on paper (err, I mean, html?).  I love you all and I'm not afraid to say so!   For as long as this blog shall go on, I am dedicated to you!!

In Search of....

A friend with a boat.  It doesn't have to be this big...just big enough to take around lake Michigan....

It's Not What You Said....

Ok, so I've had a couple 'feminist' moments on this blog.  However, one of the best things about male friends, relatives, boyfriends, etc. - the men in one's life, if you will....

A guy isn't going to get pissed about stupid stuff.  A man's never going to say to you 'it's not what you said, it's how you said it' - that is a woman's moment.  A man isn't going to get mad at you for being 5 minutes late.  A guy isn't going to be mad at you for saying something in a weird tone.  Or, at least, in my mind, he shouldn't.  There'll be a few exceptions.  But still.  Overall.  

That's what I love about (most) men.  Men don't get mad about stupid shit (sorry mother).  Men don't act like children when they're mad at you (again, most men).  

Man, I need more guy friends.  Haha.  

If You Are Easily Offended....

It's been brought to my attention that my blog and the strong opinions on it and can be potentially offensive to some of my readers - perhaps, to anyone who has any thoughts or feelings about politics or relationships.

I do realize this. However, I kind of think that's a part of my blog's allure (IF it has one). So, I'll be watering the blog down around the same time Jay Mariotti, Howard Stern and Ann Coulter decide to water it down.

I certainly don't want to offend my readers, ever. I love my readers. I love my readers more than you have any idea.

So, I'm sorry to those I've offended (maybe). Well, I'm sorry if people felt offended. I realize anyone who believes in living together before marriage or anyone who likes Obama or McCain or Bush or anyone who's a lawyer will probably be offended at some point. But I don't know that I'm actually sorry I said what I said. And I don't know that I won't say it again in the future.

Someone got offended about an Obama joke. Someone got offended about Kleenex. My mom thinks I offended Ana by making fun of her for using quotation marks.

I'm sorry. Sorta. But doesn't it just make you wanna come back for more?

Please feel free to disagree with me in the comments section with the same volume with which I opine. I eagerly await some strong words.