You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Writing.

Learning music.

Working on house, still. A little.

All while distracted by the arrival of my dish network DVR and a 57 inch TV.

Ahem.

Sitting at a coffeeshop in El Dorado to pay some bills on a more reliable connection, and while driving I like to listen to talk radio. It quickens the blood, and I think it's good to know your enemy. The hate and invective used one a lot of those soapboz jockeys would be entertaining, comical even, if you didn't know that there are people that take what these people say as gospel. It's a sad commentary... literally. I bring that up because one particularly ignorant caller was calling for someone to be "censored" on the floor of the house. He meant "censured" but was never corrected.

Those are two different words. One of them is distinctly un-American. I think it's funny, but vaguely related to an overall pet peeve of mine, totally unpolitical in nature.

I know I'm not alone in this. I am tired of having to decipher what people mean on signs, in letters, whereever, because if you read if flat out it makes no sense. So, a handy guide for the record:

When referring to something that belongs to someone, such as a hat, it is "your hat."
When referring to their state of being, as in being an idiot, "you're an idiot."
Never again should that be mixed up. Offenders will be shot.

When you get a letter and you take it, you ACCEPT the letter. You do not EXCEPT the letter. Maybe you take everything in your mail but don't take that letter, then you take everything except the letter. I never again want to see a handwritten sign on a cash register that says "Sorry We Do Not Except Checks."

I always want to put in a comma after "not" and change the spelling of "checks" to "Czachs" and turn it into a vague ethnic slur. Then people would wonder... they do not WHAT except to/for Czechs?

Anyway. You get my point.

As a closer, I think it would be awfully convenient if I could subscribe to the views of rabid right wing talk radio. I would like to be able to blame my ills on a convenient, large, always visible subgroup, like they do with the vaugely defined "liberals." I'll have to think who I will blame. I think it might be "whitey."

This relates to a theory I had some time ago. I believe that the world would be simpler if we all, every one of us, had an arch-enemy. This would of course mean we were all someone's arch-enemy, in turn. That way, you would always have someone to blame when random bad things happened because it may well be someone's fault. I shared this with an old roommate of mine, Doug Rosenheim, and we tried it for a summer. We would purposefully do little irritating things to one another, and when anything bad would happen I would shake my fist at the sky and cry "ROSENHEIM!"

Hit every red light? Could be Rosenheim. Flat tire with no trace of a hole? Rosenheim! Someone ate my leftover pizza? DEFINITELY Rosenheim. Arch-enemies might eliminate the need for war, because everyone would be too worried about their own, personal arch-enemy.

This relates to an upcoming entry, one that I'll put up around Christmas, wherein I reveal my strategy for personal amusement when participating in Secret Santa at your workplace or school.

My train of thought runs on a jagged track when I'm supervised, heaven help you all when I am not. I miss V!

One question before I go, and seriously, email me this answer: I have yet to watch a movie on my gigantic screen. I am trying to decide which movie deserves the treatment, would benefit most from it. Send suggestions!