M&Ms (Or When I Can't Think of Anything Original to Write About)

It's been a while since I posted anything on here, though I've gone much longer in between posts before. Even so, I'm sure y'all are upset at the lack of new content on Rowrbazzle. I'm sure by now most of you have reread my previous posts so many times you could recite them from memory. Unfortunately, this post probably won't really do much to assuage your Rowrbazzle withdrawals, as yours truly is serving only as a conduit of content.

Here's a absurdly funny (I hope that description doesn't get your hopes up too high) anecdote about M&Ms.

Whenever I get a package of plain M&Ms, I make it my duty to continue the strength and robustness of the candy as a species. To this end, I hold M&M duels...

Continued at RogerEbert.com

Enjoy.

Too Much Baseball? Perish the Thought!

So I was reading a baseball chat over at espn.com and noticed this little bit of information

...the Tigers are nine under -- and only one team in the wild-card era has been more than seven under heading into June and made it to the postseason...

~ Jason Stark

I thought for about 2 seconds and decided that the team he was referring to was the Houston Astros of 2005. I did a little fact checking and sure enough, it was the 2005 Astros. Now, I am not an Astros fan. I am a Cubs fan. So why did I know that bit of inconsequential baseball trivia?

The Cubs and Astros are in the same division, but the Cubs were decidedly mediocre in 2005 (big surprise, I know) so it's not like the Astros kept the Cubs out of the postseason or anything. I am a Texan (Dear Lord, thank you for the blessing You have bestowed upon me), but again, not an Astros fan. I have attended many Astros games in my lifetime and have proudly rooted against them in every game. I went to a Phillies game in Philadelphia where they happened to be playing the Astros. I rooted for the Phillies. That was a pretty cool game actually. It featured an around the horn triple play, performed by the Astros, with help from an incredibly slow catcher for the Phillies. That's not as rare as an unassisted triple play, but it's not exactly common either.

Speaking of unassisted triple plays and the Phillies, Mickey Morandini once pulled off the feat while playing for the Phillies. Morandini also played for the Cubs for a couple seasons and even finished 24th in MVP voting in 1998. And, no, I did not actually know about Morandini's MVP finish, I just happened to see it on baseballreference.com (great website). The Astros actually won that game in Philadelphia, despite being down big. The Phillies had a pretty bad bullpen. But seriously, who gave Morandini an MVP vote? He was a serviceable 2nd baseman, but I'm pretty sure there were more than 23 players who were more valuable to their teams' success than Mickey.

No, there was no good reason for me to know this factoid about the Astros coming back from an abysmal start to make the postseason. There is no reason for me to know that Mickey Morandini performed an unassisted triple play. I'm wondering if maybe I have too much baseball in my life. I know, I know. That's lunacy. It can't be true. After all, I did have to look up the information about how Morandini finished in the MVP voting in '98. If I had too much baseball in my life, then I would've known that bit of information without needing baseball reference. Hmmm. Sounds like I need more baseball in my life.

Be Advised.

I will be posting on this thing again. Content and frequency are as yet determined, but rest assured it's going to be brilliant.

You may begin anticipating a real post..............now!

Pondering the Imponderables

What is the opposite of sandwich?

About a year ago I was approached by an acquaintance and asked a simple question. Actually that's not true. The structure of the question was simple, however the question itself was anything but. I was told it was a question that was meant to make them think and basically stump them. So after thinking about the question for a bit I gave my response. I then inquired as to whether or not my answer was correct.

I was informed that the questioner, in fact, did not know the answer to the question. As I said, the purpose of the question was to stump people and make them think. Although the lack of certainty in the question and its missing answer initially frustrated me, I soon grew to embrace it. I had an answer to the question and I was pretty confident in its correctness. At least, I thought it was clever and about as correct as anyone was going to get. The fact that my inquiring cohort could not tell me whether or not I was actually correct did not matter anymore.

What is self-esteem squared?

Now, just two days ago, I encountered a similar question. This question was not posed to stump its audience, but was posed to make a point. Regardless, it got me thinking. The bottom line was simple. If one is going to raise questions, analyze data (of whatever kind) and draw conclusions, one must be clear in what is actually being studied. If we measure something we must base our conclusions on what we've measured. This was a topic-specific idea, but I think the underlying thesis is applicable to our everyday experiences as well.

At times it is cumbersome, if not impossible, to analyze and draw conclusions from a certain set of observations. In order to counter this, we've developed accepted ways of twisting and transforming our observations to allow for easier analysis. We banish the abstrusity, allowing ourselves to reach some measure of closure. But at this point, after we've twisted and transformed our experiences, how much substance can we actually draw from them? I don't have the answer. I don't think there is an exact answer. I guess that's what makes it an imponderable.

Inside the Confessional

I'd like to take a few moments and share something personal. That comes as a shock to some of you, I'm sure. However, I just can't keep this information to myself. It's something that has been a great benefit to my life and I think it might benefit other lives as well. I realize that some of you have already learned this information, but I know others are still unaware. I want to share a personal triumph. It's one that I hope, nay, I know, will be inspirational to whomever may read it.

I want to talk to you about Herpes. I'm not talking about the cold sore variety. I'm talking about good ole fashioned Genital Herpes. Until recently living with genital herpes was, to say the least, a big pain. My nads constantly itched and it really hurt when I would pee. (Not to mention the abnormal urethral discharge, which was quite unbecoming.) But now those days are a thing of the past. Eventhough there's no cure for genital herpes, there is Valtrex and that's good enough for me. With Valtrex I've been outbreak free for nearly a year. Those painful, itchy blisters on my dong and scrote are now just a distant memory. I'm living my life again on my own terms. Best of all, with Valtrex the ladies never know what I might be giving them when I'm giving it to them.

I hope my personal story of triumph has touched you in some way. I hope you can be comforted knowing that even if you do contract genital herpes you can still live a fun-filled life. I hope you can sleep easier knowing that the pharmaceutical industry is working hard for you. They're working hard to ensure that we can all live our lives however we choose, knowing that most negative consequences can be managed with a pill. More than anything, I hope you realize that the fool you just screwed could've very well had herpes. If he/she did, then you'll find out soon enough. You might be upset, but once you get past that and feel like living your life again, you'll be glad you read this. And you'll be saying the same thing I'm saying; "Thank you, Valtrex."

Echt Ben.

So this girl I know has been sharing tidbits of information with me about another girl. Girl #2 is described as "really Christian" and a "good girl" who's choosing to remain a virgin (until marriage, one assumes). A couple pictures reveal that she is actually quite attractive so the virginity thing is most likely a choice. I'm pleased to discover that there really do seem to be attractive, good girls left in the world, even though most evidence tends to point to the contrary. A few weeks later Girl #1 shares with me new pictures of Girl #2, which are most unlike what I would expect from a person who has been described as above. Instead of the big smiles and intriguing beauty from earlier shots, we now have short skirts, no shirt, and sultry poses. Surely anyone I went to school with has witnessed a similar kind of dichotomous behavior in girls, most likely between Saturday night and Sunday morning.

Still, I don't actually know this person. I don't know her intentions. It's possible she's just trying to have a little fun with the camera and mess with guys' heads (as girls are prone to do). Then again, it's possible she's turned the corner and has abandoned the good-girl persona. Which conclusion are we to draw? I can't say. Still, I'm reminded of Dave Chappelle's comments on girls who dress like hos and how they get upset if you assume they actually are hos. He says, "You may not be a whore, but you're certainly wearing their uniform." So while the cross ring on her finger is straight out of the James Avery catalog her shirt isn't. Oh wait, what shirt? Well, I'm sure the bra didn't come from there either. Given the angle of one of the shots, the bra provides an excellent view of some fabulous cleavage. Still, it does cover the "off-limits areas" so the pictures are still modest enough for Maxim.

Now, it's not that this girl is committing some egregious crime against humanity or anything of the sort. It's simply that I'm detecting a pattern. As I said, I'm sure anyone I went to school with is all too familiar with these sort of contrasting behaviors existing in good girls. I still believe that there are girls who aren't freak-hos at heart and really do mean what they say, but the evidence is really starting to pile up in opposition to that belief. I have met a few girls who do seem to be who they purport to be; but how long before I'm proven wrong about them too? Is it just a matter of time and/or opportunity? That remains to be seen.

What I do know is that we're all hypocrites. We all do things that contradict our intentions and past proclamations. It happens. But I remember what my good friend CB used to tell our pledges during induction. "Be real," he would say. Again and again he would stress it. He couldn't have been more right. The only way to truly connect with others is to be open with them. We all have our faults and our vices. We aren't perfect and we're not the same as everyone else. If you are ashamed of or have regrets about things you've done, then admit it and work to change. Pretending to be something you're not serves only to alienate those who know otherwise. True, some will alienate you for your imperfections, but such is life. If you want to take seductive pictures to share over the internet, then feel free to do so. If you want to go to church on Sundays instead of sleeping in, then feel free to do so. This is America. But, please, let's be honest with each other. If you're good, then just be good. If you're a freak-ho at heart, then stop hiding it. Save us all the disappointment of an untimely revelation. Or, at least, just save me.

Le Horla

Whence come those mysterious influences which change our happiness into discouragement, and our self-confidence into diffidence? One might almost say that the air, the invisible air, is full of unknowable Forces, whose mysterious presence we have to endure. I wake up in the best of spirits, with an inclination to sing. Why? I go down by the edge of the water, and suddenly, after walking a short distance, I return home wretched, as if some misfortune were awaiting me there. Why? Is it a cold shiver which, passing over my skin, has upset my nerves and given me low spirits? Is it the form of the clouds, or the tints of the sky, or the colors of the surrounding objects which are so changeable, that has troubled my thoughts as they passed before my eyes? Who can tell? Everything that surrounds us, everything that we see without looking at it, everything that we touch without knowing it, everything that we handle without feeling it, everything that we meet without clearly distinguishing it, has a rapid, surprising, and inexplicable effect upon us and upon our senses, and, through them, on our ideas and on our being itself.

How profound that mystery of the Invisible…

~Guy de Maupassant

Do you know what a duvet is?

I'm not sure where this term "shout-out" came from, but I wish it would go away. In perusing various boards devoted to television shows, I come across this word far too frequently. For instance, if a character who acts in a way contrary to how most characters on that show typically act, then it must be a "shout-out" to the fans who've commented on the typical character actions. What causes these people to draw this delusional conclusion? It's probably the same thing that causes people to make blogs and start their own websites; an over-inflated sense of self-importance. (I'm fully aware of the irony in my characterization of bloggers et al. in a blog of my own.). This is also why people inform you on bulletin boards of their reasoning for editing something they've said. It's wholly unimportant, but they think people care. The reality is that most people don't. Then again, some people do.

This leads, invariably, to Fight Club:
We're by-products of a lifestyle obsession. Murder, crime, poverty -- these things don't concern me. What concerns me is celebrity magazines, television with five hundred channels, some guy's name on my underwear. Rogaine, Viagra, Olestra...

Fictional character Tyler Durden is spot on in his assessment. So what drives this sort of behavior? Is it the same over-inflated sense of self-importance that drives the "shout-out" crazed fan or the *whatever*-conscious blogger? No, it's quite the opposite. It's a sense of self-unimportance that leads people to care about the irrelevant. It's what drives them to read Us Weekly and Star Magazine, as if any information found in those pages is going to affect their lives in any meaningful way. It won't. It's a search for fulfillment in things that can never be fulfilling. In your quest for completeness you'll lose weight, grow hair, and get an erection, only to find that now you need to change shirts, cut your hair, and drive a nicer car. The line is always moving and you're never going to cross it.

I say never be complete. I say stop being perfect. I say let's evolve and let the chips fall where they may.

And, yes, I'm further aware of the irony in quoting a movie in my condemnation of America's obsession with popular/celebrity culture. This post is just cholk-full of irony.

That's weird...or is it?

One of my ex-girlfriends used to have a Live Journal. I'd read it occasionally and, from time to time, she would have posts about me. That was weird. And then we broke up. More specifically, I broke up with her. Now, she still had posts about me, only these were different sorts of posts. That was weird. All this to say; posting about people who might actually read what you write is...weird. I know you saw that adjective coming. That's not something I will have to worry about, though, being as I'm not one to make posts about people (the first 7 sentences not withstanding). Of course, since no one is reading this, I could post whatever I want and not worry about the weirdness of them reading it; thus nullifying the weirdness. Still, I've been told a number of times, and as recently as last night, that I'm weird. So I imagine that no matter what I say here, it's likely that I'm going to be perceived as being weird. Then again, maybe not.