There's yet another sign on the side of the Main St. bar. It read, "Some say the glass is half full; others say the glass is half empty. I've been wondering who's been drinking my beer."
That's one of the most hilarious signs I've seen. I'm going to enjoy this one as long as it's up.
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Saturday, June 23, 2012
Where Is A Clue-by-Four When You Need One?
There was an article in today's paper about a New Jersey woman who is suing and 11-year-old child of all people after he accidentally hit her with a ball. He was warming up a pitcher and the ball strayed when he threw it, hitting the woman in the face. She needed medical attention. She is now suing the boy for $150,000 in order to pay for her medical expenses. $150,000! The boy doesn't have that much money.
Read this clip:
"The lawsuit filed April 24 alleges that the boy's* errant throw was intentional and reckless, 'assaulted and battered' the woman*, and caused 'severe, painful, and permanent' injuries.
A second count alleges the boy's actions were negligent and careless through 'engaging in inappropriate physical and/or sporting activities' near the woman.
And the woman's husband, in a third count, is suing for the loss of 'services, society, consortium' to his wife. They've demanded a jury trial."
What is this woman thinking? This was an exceedingly rare freak accident, like the batter many years ago who got killed by a fastball. "The throw was intentional and reckless". Of course the throw was intentional; but the boy was aiming to warm up his team pitcher. He was not aiming for the woman. The ball simply strayed. Why should this be reason to sue? Also, the average 11-year-old still doesn't have the best coordination, and so this accusation of the throw being reckless is rather silly.
And what was the woman expecting when she went to a Little League baseball game? Dance? It's a baseball game. There's nothing inappropriate about playing on a school baseball team. Not only are the kids getting exercise, but the kids are learning teamwork. What does this woman have against that?
I'm not even going to try to explain the third set of charges. However, since the woman's husband is helping with this, he's at fault too. Allowing his wife to frivolously sue a fifth or sixth grader? Why doesn't he recognize the lawsuit as undeniably stupid and tell her she's making a mistake. Neither spouse should help the other do something as vile as this. The man is not behaving like a proper husband and letting his wife know she's being foolish by suing a child; not only for something the child did not intend to do, but expecting him to pay an obscene amount.
The lawyer who represents the boy knows that this is appallingly cruel. He told to newspaper, "I think that it's disgusting that you have people suing an 11-year-old for overthrowing his pitcher in the bullpen."
Mike Royko wrote of a similar incident in 1996. The only kind of person who would do this sort of thing is a vengeful, avaricious, and all-around monster. I sincerely hope that this lawsuit gets rejected immediately.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*I have refused to reveal the names of the persons involved.
Read this clip:
"The lawsuit filed April 24 alleges that the boy's* errant throw was intentional and reckless, 'assaulted and battered' the woman*, and caused 'severe, painful, and permanent' injuries.
A second count alleges the boy's actions were negligent and careless through 'engaging in inappropriate physical and/or sporting activities' near the woman.
And the woman's husband, in a third count, is suing for the loss of 'services, society, consortium' to his wife. They've demanded a jury trial."
What is this woman thinking? This was an exceedingly rare freak accident, like the batter many years ago who got killed by a fastball. "The throw was intentional and reckless". Of course the throw was intentional; but the boy was aiming to warm up his team pitcher. He was not aiming for the woman. The ball simply strayed. Why should this be reason to sue? Also, the average 11-year-old still doesn't have the best coordination, and so this accusation of the throw being reckless is rather silly.
And what was the woman expecting when she went to a Little League baseball game? Dance? It's a baseball game. There's nothing inappropriate about playing on a school baseball team. Not only are the kids getting exercise, but the kids are learning teamwork. What does this woman have against that?
I'm not even going to try to explain the third set of charges. However, since the woman's husband is helping with this, he's at fault too. Allowing his wife to frivolously sue a fifth or sixth grader? Why doesn't he recognize the lawsuit as undeniably stupid and tell her she's making a mistake. Neither spouse should help the other do something as vile as this. The man is not behaving like a proper husband and letting his wife know she's being foolish by suing a child; not only for something the child did not intend to do, but expecting him to pay an obscene amount.
The lawyer who represents the boy knows that this is appallingly cruel. He told to newspaper, "I think that it's disgusting that you have people suing an 11-year-old for overthrowing his pitcher in the bullpen."
Mike Royko wrote of a similar incident in 1996. The only kind of person who would do this sort of thing is a vengeful, avaricious, and all-around monster. I sincerely hope that this lawsuit gets rejected immediately.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*I have refused to reveal the names of the persons involved.
Monday, June 18, 2012
"Happiness: The Real Medicine and How It Works" By Blair Lewis
This is my very first book review online.
I had to do a project for Psychology class where I had to read a self-help book and review it. I chose this one mostly because of the title because it sounded good.
This book is a mostly Buddhist/Hindu guide to being "happy" (that word, unfortunately has lost its meaning). Mr. Lewis sets out to show us the pathway to "happiness". But given the heavy Buddhist/Hindu influence, he tends to go off into a lot of mystic gobbledegook.
Mr. Lewis is right in three places:
1) Cultivating a quiet mind. This is very hard to do, and for someone like me who has Berserk Buttons aplenty, this is important. Working keeping your mind calm--keeping YOURSELF calm--helps one think more clearly. And it also helps in dealing with other people. If you're calm, you're more likely to be able to handle idiots well. I know because I've seen what happens when I blow up.
2) Self-Restraint. Seriously, we need more of this in our culture today. Keeping yourself under control helps deal with annoyances, and it helps keep one from falling into temptation.
3) Yoga. Yoga has been scientifically proven to be beneficial to one's health. Regular stretching and breathing exercises help keep your body in shape. And it helps you calm down.
Mr. Lewis fails, however, to use clear words, fails to address one specific problem, and goes off into Buddhist mystic psychobabble. He also fails to document many of his claims.
1) Rejuvenation Herbs. These sound nice and some are useful in medicine. But, well, read this:
I had to do a project for Psychology class where I had to read a self-help book and review it. I chose this one mostly because of the title because it sounded good.
This book is a mostly Buddhist/Hindu guide to being "happy" (that word, unfortunately has lost its meaning). Mr. Lewis sets out to show us the pathway to "happiness". But given the heavy Buddhist/Hindu influence, he tends to go off into a lot of mystic gobbledegook.
Mr. Lewis is right in three places:
1) Cultivating a quiet mind. This is very hard to do, and for someone like me who has Berserk Buttons aplenty, this is important. Working keeping your mind calm--keeping YOURSELF calm--helps one think more clearly. And it also helps in dealing with other people. If you're calm, you're more likely to be able to handle idiots well. I know because I've seen what happens when I blow up.
2) Self-Restraint. Seriously, we need more of this in our culture today. Keeping yourself under control helps deal with annoyances, and it helps keep one from falling into temptation.
3) Yoga. Yoga has been scientifically proven to be beneficial to one's health. Regular stretching and breathing exercises help keep your body in shape. And it helps you calm down.
Mr. Lewis fails, however, to use clear words, fails to address one specific problem, and goes off into Buddhist mystic psychobabble. He also fails to document many of his claims.
1) Rejuvenation Herbs. These sound nice and some are useful in medicine. But, well, read this:
"The main ingredients in Bacopa monnieria* are saponin fractions, known Bacosides A and B. there are also alkaloids, brahmine, and herpestine. A clinical study conducted in India indicates that Brahmi* will improve memory, thinking, and reasoning."
Notice that Mr. Lewis doesn't actually document which study India he's talking about. The lack of documentation means he probably doesn't known as much about the plant as he thinks he does. He later goes on to say that this particular plant "is the magic elixir for putting your thoughts into action. It helps you overcome the fears and anxieties paralyzing your good intentions". In regards to that last sentence, doesn't Mr. Lewis know what the road to Hell is often paved with?
Also, I have heard of people who have improved their memory, thinking, and reasoning skills without the help of plants. All it takes is hard work in order to do so.
2) One of the things Mr. Lewis says that happy people possess is "freedom from conflicts and distractions". He seems to be talking about this in relation to our troubles with technology. However, "freedom from conflicts and distractions" has to do with a lot more than just technology. I get distracted, for example, by talking too much. I am also a daydreamer. Does this have anything to do with technology? On one hand yes, because I get easily distracted by the computer or the console. On the other hand no, because distractions have been a constant problem for me since my early childhood. I would recommend that Mr. Lewis go back and look at other things that cause distractions in our lives.
3) He also talks about how "happy" people are not "interested in worldly charms". He doesn't specify what that means. And it's that lack of specification that causes confusion.
4) Mr. Lewis fails to address one specific problem. If this were a book on combating depression, I think I could (with some difficulty) figure out how this book might be helpful. But there isn't one specific problem that is addressed. That is a problem. If the reader doesn't know precisely how this book could give them any idea on how to improve their life, then the author has failed in his goal.
The worst part is when Mr. Lewis begin talking about the "koshas" or "sheaths that cover the soul" and the "kleshas" or "obstacles to happiness". It is here that he really goes off into Neverland. I don't want to hear about the layers of the soul and all that stuff. Not only is it something that I don't believe in, it also isn't very informative. What all do kleshas and koshas have to do with being happy? Nothing.
In conclusion, I will say this: Mr. Lewis does offer some good advice on how to restrain yourself, cultivate a quiet mind, and use breathing and stretching exercises to help keep your body in shape. But I'm afraid that this is outweighed by all the talk of rejuvenation herbs and all the other Buddhist/Hindu stuff.
My advice: Skip the book. It's a waste of time and it's not very informative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*These are both Indian named for the coastal water hyssop plant.
Saturday, June 16, 2012
Buzzwords That Should Stop Being Used
I have heard some really ridiculous sounding words and phrases that really should fall out of usage. These are words and phrases that don't have real meaning. They are meant to abuse and opponent or to make something sound good. Here are the ones that I find the most appalling:
Modern Woman
I remember reading a review of the '09 Disney film The Princess and the Frog. The heroine was described as a "modern woman".
I'll admit that there were all sorts of myths about happiness coming from a handsome prince and whatnot floating around back in the Victorian era. These myths would not have been so popular, however, if the marriage customs had been different. People married for more for money than for love back then, and they married whoever Mom and Dad picked out for them. So you were lucky if the person your parents selected actually cared about you.
But just because a woman knows that happiness comes from hard work and good character does not make her a "modern woman". King Solomon wrote of such a woman in his Proverbs: The Wife of Noble Character. This is the ideal woman. She puts her family before her and works hard to take care of them. This is nothing new. Why should it be considered a "modern" thing? It isn't. And when you think about it, "modern woman" doesn't really mean anything. Therefore, it should not be used.
Homophobic
A popular term of abuse among a lot people today. It's supposed to mean someone who hates homosexuals. It sounds more like "same fear", however, and that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. What's more, by saying that the person who disagrees with you has a irrational fear of you, you're being abusive to them. God says that homosexuality is wrong. Does that mean He God has a irrational fear of homosexuals? No, it does not. Therefore "homophobic" should fall out of usage because it is a term of abuse.
Bashing
This is supposed to mean insulting people of one particular group, but it's really a synonym for breaking or smashing. As a word for insulting, "bashing" should not be used.
There are plenty more buzzwords that I hate, but I can't think of them right now.
Modern Woman
I remember reading a review of the '09 Disney film The Princess and the Frog. The heroine was described as a "modern woman".
"She knows that happiness does not come from a handsome prince or a fairy godmother, but through hard work and good character"
(That's not the exact quote, but that is the basic gist.)
But just because a woman knows that happiness comes from hard work and good character does not make her a "modern woman". King Solomon wrote of such a woman in his Proverbs: The Wife of Noble Character. This is the ideal woman. She puts her family before her and works hard to take care of them. This is nothing new. Why should it be considered a "modern" thing? It isn't. And when you think about it, "modern woman" doesn't really mean anything. Therefore, it should not be used.
Homophobic
A popular term of abuse among a lot people today. It's supposed to mean someone who hates homosexuals. It sounds more like "same fear", however, and that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. What's more, by saying that the person who disagrees with you has a irrational fear of you, you're being abusive to them. God says that homosexuality is wrong. Does that mean He God has a irrational fear of homosexuals? No, it does not. Therefore "homophobic" should fall out of usage because it is a term of abuse.
Bashing
This is supposed to mean insulting people of one particular group, but it's really a synonym for breaking or smashing. As a word for insulting, "bashing" should not be used.
There are plenty more buzzwords that I hate, but I can't think of them right now.
Thursday, June 7, 2012
"Harry Potter" Minor Characters
I hate Viktor Krum.
Seriously, I hate Viktor Krum. At seventeen, he's already the seeker for the Bulgarian Quidditch team (and the best seeker in the world to boot), and is clearly a favorite with young girls. He has no flaws at all (he only commits evil under the Imperius Curse), and it's him, the urplest character in the entire Harry Potter series who gets to be Hermione Granger's first date.
Krum can get kissed by a Dementor. He may be a minor character in Potterverse, but he's urple and he's too good to be a believable person.
Some of the other minor characters are way more interesting. Cedric Diggory for example, is one such character. He is brave, and honest. He is also very talented. He does have his flaws though. He is a very believable character and very sympathetic too. In fact, his death at the hands of the evil Lord Voldemort's servant in Goblet of Fire is considered one of the saddest moments in the entire series.
Dobby is a very well done minor character too. When we first meet him, he is an obnoxious and annoying little twirp who's doing his wicked masters bidding. When we see him again later, however, he is loyal and bold to the point where he sacrifices himself to save Harry. His death atthe hands of Bellatirx Lestrange in Deathly Hallows is also considered to be one of the saddest moments of the series.
And how about Fred and George Weasley? The most enjoyable pranksters in the world. They never hesitate to give someone, especially one of the less amiable characters, a hard time. They made the sadistic Dolores Umbridge a rough year before leaving Hogwarts. They both love their family and are willing to risk their lives to help Harry. Unfortunately, George loses his ear in a skirmish with the Death Eaters and Fred dies at the battle of Hogwarts. But they're still fun.
That is not to say that my favorite Potterverse minor characters are ones who die or suffer tragic injuries. Another one, Neville Longbottom starts out as a normal pushed-around kid, but then gets a larger role Order of the Phoenix and a bigger, more awesome part in Deathly Hallows. Peeves doesn't appear in the movies, but he's incredibly funny (he's a poltergeist).
So the minor characters in Harry Potter are mostly very well drawn or otherwise just plain enjoyable characters. But Krum? Let a lithofold get him. Or better yet, a basilisk. Just something to get rid of that urple wizard.
Seriously, I hate Viktor Krum. At seventeen, he's already the seeker for the Bulgarian Quidditch team (and the best seeker in the world to boot), and is clearly a favorite with young girls. He has no flaws at all (he only commits evil under the Imperius Curse), and it's him, the urplest character in the entire Harry Potter series who gets to be Hermione Granger's first date.
Krum can get kissed by a Dementor. He may be a minor character in Potterverse, but he's urple and he's too good to be a believable person.
Some of the other minor characters are way more interesting. Cedric Diggory for example, is one such character. He is brave, and honest. He is also very talented. He does have his flaws though. He is a very believable character and very sympathetic too. In fact, his death at the hands of the evil Lord Voldemort's servant in Goblet of Fire is considered one of the saddest moments in the entire series.
Dobby is a very well done minor character too. When we first meet him, he is an obnoxious and annoying little twirp who's doing his wicked masters bidding. When we see him again later, however, he is loyal and bold to the point where he sacrifices himself to save Harry. His death atthe hands of Bellatirx Lestrange in Deathly Hallows is also considered to be one of the saddest moments of the series.
And how about Fred and George Weasley? The most enjoyable pranksters in the world. They never hesitate to give someone, especially one of the less amiable characters, a hard time. They made the sadistic Dolores Umbridge a rough year before leaving Hogwarts. They both love their family and are willing to risk their lives to help Harry. Unfortunately, George loses his ear in a skirmish with the Death Eaters and Fred dies at the battle of Hogwarts. But they're still fun.
That is not to say that my favorite Potterverse minor characters are ones who die or suffer tragic injuries. Another one, Neville Longbottom starts out as a normal pushed-around kid, but then gets a larger role Order of the Phoenix and a bigger, more awesome part in Deathly Hallows. Peeves doesn't appear in the movies, but he's incredibly funny (he's a poltergeist).
So the minor characters in Harry Potter are mostly very well drawn or otherwise just plain enjoyable characters. But Krum? Let a lithofold get him. Or better yet, a basilisk. Just something to get rid of that urple wizard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)