StandingWater Creations

I could sit here and lie to you, tell you that I believe that television is bad. That watching television erodes the mind and destroys a person’s cognitive sense of self and well-being, and that it destroys lives. I do believe that TV help cause children, who remain unmonitored, to become fat and lazy and I believe that video games and the internet have the ability to add to this phenomenon. However, I find that saying, “TV and Video games lead to uncreative and lazy children,” is like saying, “Guns kill people.” I don’t believe that the gun, itself, is going to go on a murderous rampage, nor do I believe that TV or video games, by themselves, are going to make children fat and lazy. Guns require someone to become weapons of death just like TV and video games require someone to become fat and lazy.

However, you can’t blame the individual nor can you blame the parent if a person is more interested in watching whatever is on or playing video games. That is almost entirely unacceptable in our society. To blame someone for actually doing something or not doing something is insane. I mean, we should blame the weapons manufacturers because people, outside of the influence of the manufacturing and distribution process, illegal buy or sell handguns and then use said handguns to go out and shoot people, possibly killing them. Whoever heard of actually taking accountability for ones actions? I know, I know, it’s a foreign ideal.

Let’s pretend for a moment that Television isn’t bad and that handguns, of themselves, don’t kill people. And, for a moment, let’s focus on television.

The TV in most peoples’ homes wasn’t purchased to be a decorative item. Yes, televisions can add to the décor of a home, but the item itself is used for information and for entertainment. I mean that. Televisions serve a purpose in transferring information or to entertain people. There is no other reason to have one if you don’t intend to be entertained or informed. News channels are entertainment venues unless something of great importance is happening, and then they become channels of information. We all watch and stare at the screen waiting for some kind of update. I remember having my televisions (all of them, there were three at the time) all turned into various news channels when 9/11 happened. All day, it seemed for weeks, if I was in the apartment, they remained on, they remained on the grisly and heart-wrenching pictures and videos of the planes crashing into the towers and the towers coming down. I really I can’t stand watching video of the towers coming down. But at the time, the news channels went from entertaining me with information about what was happening in the world to informing me about what was going on with something that had become personally important.

Do you remember that day, that week? We all appreciated the very distinctive manner in with President G.W. Bush handled the national emergency. Now, I believe, a majority of people would gladly oust the man for the way in which he manipulated public sentiment to get into Iraq. And we can’t just leave Iraq because we’ve created a powderkeg of a problem that we really need to see through... or until the independent governments ask us to leave. I’m good with the latter happening.

We also use television for entertainment. In the past I’ve written a couple of entries on what I am watching on TV these days. Right now, I get to find bit-torrent downloads of the shows I want to watch. Which means, I am currently keeping up with the Stargate shows and am thinking of seeing if I can get copies of Eureka; however, TV offers a lot of different options for people from educational entertainment channels like the Discovery network of channels (Discover, Travel, TLC, etc.) to purely entertainment driven channels like HBO and Showtime. You can turn on the TV at any time of the day or night and find yourself enmeshed in a world unlike anything you’ve ever experienced because television, at its core, is used to entertain people – most of the time. You can go on a sex romp through channels dedicated to pornography, or find yourself on a mid-twentieth century adventure through various classic movie channels. With the right equipment and money, you can do almost anything.

Imagine having this box in your house that was only ever used for transfer of information. You’d probably look for excuses not to have it or find other uses for it. An aquarium comes to mind. The nation has actually moved away from informational sources like newspapers preferring, instead, the sexier and easier accessibility of the internet. However, combine the information capabilities with entertainment, bring the movies into your home, add functionality that allows you to enjoy the experience, and the outcome is that people are going to schedule time to be at home to watch weekly serials (television shows), they’re going to go to news channels, they’re going to watch public and open access channels… the television becomes one element to entertainment.

I know that one roommate and I scheduled one night a week to watch Donald Trump (The Donald) fire one more person on his The Apprentice reality show. I like the show. I think it actually offers good advice for those who want to go into business. The key to the show is learning to work with people for a common objective. The kick in the pants with the show is that it is reality television and reality TV requires people who are only interested in their own objectives and goals. The outcome to this is you have a combination of people who know how to work well together and those who are more than likely going to stab you in the back the first chance you get. It’s entertaining, not informative. And yet, you can delve the depths of that kind of show and get useful information (though not from anything The Donald has written… that’s all useless crap).

Television, like so many other things, is bad if you make it bad. You can become obsessed. You can lose sight of what is important. The TV in your home can become this instrument that is so overwhelmingly in charge of your life that you will consider nothing else but what is on and when and how it affects your life. That is bad. That is the bad part of television watching. It is destructive and potentially dangerous and does lead to “couch potatoes” and overweight adults and children.

I remember my mother talking about soap operas once. She said that she was in a store and realized that one of her “soaps” was on and immediately left the cart she was shopping with, grabbed the child or children she had with her, and went home to watch that program. When she’d realized what she’d done, according to her, she stopped watching those shows altogether. It didn’t take some intervention, merely the realization that she was making her life revolve around the television.

Growing up we weren’t allowed to watch TV during certain parts of the day or, early on, on different days of the week. That meant that we, as children, had to find alternative sources of entertainment in order to fill the long (and often boring) hours between waking up and when we were allowed to watch whatever was on. When we were in school, and (theoretically) as long as our homework was done, we were allowed to watch cartoons in the afternoons and then whatever was on into the evening. In the summer it seemed like memory tells me that we weren’t allowed to watch television until after 5 p.m. That was the rule. We tried to break it. Frequently. But that was the rule.

As a result I learned to find other things to do. Sleep was one. But I’ve always required a bit of sleep. However, there are other things that we could do. Spending a lot of my formative years in Texas meant that I got used to the neighborhood, the creek that ran through the neighborhood, the woods and trees, as well as storm drains, and how to get to various locations. Having a bike was freedom because it meant I could go places and do things and I didn’t have to wait for my parents to get around to maybe being able to take me. It also meant that on cold mornings I got to ride that bike to school or walk. That was never fun, but the freedom of being able to do one thing required that I accept the obligation of doing something else.

Even driving a car, as a teenager, allowed me certain freedoms that were coupled with responsibilities. Most of them associated with shuttling brothers and sister to the various places they needed, or wanted, to be. As long as I did that I had the freedom to drive, to go places, to have a “ride” to work (so long as we had an extra car); and my parents had the freedom to do what they wanted to do with their lives.

TV allows us various freedoms. One of them is to be informed, if we want it, about what is happening in the world around us. We can learn from what is on. Another freedom is that we can be entertained. I’ve said this in the past, and I will probably say it again, but I am an entertainment junkie. Many people will read that, look at me, say something like, “I’ve lived with him… he, uhm…” and then trail off because I don’t always make it clear what is entertaining to me and what is not. I do look for new ways to entertain myself. However, TV is only one means of doing that. Movies are only one element. Exploring is another element. You can ride motorcycles, work on automobiles, go hiking, participate in community projects, there are all sorts of things that you can do that is entertaining and gets you out of the house and away from the television.

The thing that gets me is when people take the whole idea of TV to an extreme. Becoming fat and lazy because you’ve got to watch what is on and have to sit there all the time is an extreme. Not having a box in your home is an extreme. I can’t judge either extreme. I’ve known people who have monitors that are hooked up to DVD or VHS players simply so they can have educational shows on for their children fearing what is on broadcast television. Again, I don’t have what it takes to say anything about that. It’s a choice each individual, and family, has to make for themselves. I’m good with that. But to say that everyone who watches TV is a bad person or that all television is bad for you and holds no value is equally wrong. That is a choice you’ve made for yourself. Congratulations. I applaud your ability to make those kinds of choices.

From a religious context we have not been counciled to not have a television or not to watch television. General Conference, twice a year, is broadcast to millions of homes because there are television stations and people with those evil boxes in their homes. You get to hear God’s word from his prophets and apostles and other leaders because TV makes it possible. Instead of having to wait for a print copy of the addresses or an audio recording or a video recording you get to watch it live. When tragedies happen its broadcast right into your home. Think about that. Really think about it. For purely informational purposes the television is an invaluable tool. AND you don’t have to JUST watch information.

In my case I get to see shows like Grey’s Anatomy and Boston Legal and Stargate SG1 and Stargate Atlantis and others. In the fall I get to experience Aaron Sorkin’s Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip which I am excited about as well as many other shows that are currently in hiatus and will start up, again, sometime between September and May of next year. That is entertainment. Entertainment is putting aside my crappy life and taking up something that distracts me for a period of time. As long as it doesn’t get in the way of what I am trying to do (school, work, other things) then it is not a bad thing. It is merely one means of my filling my time with additional distractions. And I am good with that.

There will always be people who become too obsessed with something. And for those people I don’t know if there is a way to suggest or get help. Maybe they have to entirely remove the obsessive element from their lives. Little children don’t have the ability to determine, on their own, how much is too much. They need to be monitored. I am not an advocate of TV as babysitter, nor do I like the idea of the television being the only source of entertainment for children; nor the internet; nor video games. Children need to be pushed out the door and, if necessary, made to find alternative means of entertainment. Books are one source that I’ve enjoyed my entire life. Riding a bike is another one (which reminds me… anyone want to donate to the John Needs a Bike Fund?). Just because someone wants something doesn’t mean they need it or should have it. Just because you may want to watch TV doesn’t mean you should.

Posted by smokingpen at 11:41 AM | Permalink

I was thinking the other night that I needed to write something about love. I’ve talked about loving my family as opposed to liking my friends; but in a discussion on love I wonder if I really understand that word and emotion.

Stephen Covey in his Seven Habits of Highly Effective People defined love through the action tense of the word. Not sex. But, more specifically, that love required acts in order for it to not only survive but to build and thrive. You have to do things for the people you claim you love. I’ve found that notion very interesting, since I read the book about ten, eleven… okay thirteen years ago. And as a result of my having identified with that notion of love I think it has helped define that attitude I have been looking for my adult life.

I am reminded of (and I apologize for using this again and again) what a girl once said to me, “You know you love me.” It was a statement and it directly led me to review what it was I felt, how I felt, what I would apply to her, and then our breaking up. We’ve stayed distant friends, acquaintances really, over the years… I keep thinking I need to see if she’s had a kid yet, but the outcome is still there. She thought, regardless of subsequent statements made, that we’d reached a point in our relationship where that should be true and I was there because I found her explosively hot.

One of the things that remains, in my mind, prevalent when dealing a member of the opposite sex, who is not related to you, is whether or not you are a) going to like her, and b) whether or not you are going to like her family. You see, I am not under the misapprehension that dating and eventually marriage is merely about two people. No. Not at all. In fact, it is about two families. Can I tolerate hers? Can she tolerate mine? Many relationships have started and moved forward without both parties ever finding out if that is true. You don’t marry an individual, you marry a family.

The outcome of love, if you are extending this through a dating perspective, is marriage and children. Whether or not you agree with me on that is inconsequential, to me, because the outcome of real love is marriage and children. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Children should be a product of that marriage and that love – where possible. Before you can get to the point, and notion, of marriage you have to go through love.

Continue reading "On Love" »

Posted by smokingpen at 4:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

They say that it is the United States responsibility to police the world. They say that it’s been our responsibility since after World War II.

They say that we are living in the greatest period in the history of the world.

They say that Mt. Saint Helens is growing again. Four feet a day. Pretty soon, once the eruptions stop that form the mountain, the peak will be where it was before it erupted more than 20 years ago.

They say that if you get an education you will be better off financially than if you don’t get an education. The key to being better off, though, is deciding that when the day is done it is time to move to a location where what you got a degree is in need of your services. Staying in the same place you went to school, unless it is a major world city, is stupid.

They say that all of the land masses on the planet were once a large body called Pangaea. They say it took millions of years for North and South American and Australia to push away from the Europe and Africa and Asia and that Antartica was once a garden paradise.

If your religious they say that Adam and Eve were the first man and woman.

They also say that man is descended from apes. Yet, there is no substantive evidence that connects man to apes. In the whole course of recorded human history there have been no significant genetic anomalies, no changes in appearance, nothing that would suggest that in thousands of years man is not evolving into another iteration.

They say that they’ve found elements of the missing link. They also say that they’ve found a race of hobbit like creatures living in some remote part of the world. They also say that those hobbit like creatures was really one creature and it was one man who suffered from a disease that is around today and was merely just short. No hobbits.

They say that movies and television and music are good for the soul.

They say that movies and television and music are bad for the soul.

They say that the sun shines. It rises in the east and sets in the west. They say that the light from the sun, not the visible light from the sun, causes cancer. They say that tomatoes cause cancer. They say that tobacco causes cancer. They say that eggs cause cancer. They say that marijuana does not have a direct connection to cancer – which was kind of surprising since the inhalation of smoke into the lungs breaks down the lining of the esophogal passages and the bronchial chambers which allows for a mutation in one cell which spreads to another cell which, in turn, eventually kills you because the cancer has then spread far enough that radiation won’t kill it.

They say that radiation will kill you.

They say that radiation can cure you, but that the cure is almost as bad as the disease. It’s kind of funny that cancer is considered a disease when, in truth, it is probably closer to the mutation that changed apes into mans.

They say that if we look hard enough that we will find the missing link between man and apes.

They say that the world was created in seven days. They also say that seven days means seven creative periods. They say that God’s time is not man’s time. They say that we are children of God. Children of Adam and Eve. Children of Noah and his crew, brood, clan, the remaining survivors when God determined the Earth was full of wickedness and decided to cause a flood.

They say the flood was a baptism.

They say that the flood was probably a regionalized event because people, at that time, lived in a very small area and that it was possible for God to send down rain for forty days and nights and kill everyone, sans eight people, because there was nowhere to go.

They say that entire herds of mastodons died simply because they became mired in the mud. Hard to become mired in mud when the instinct of many herds, regardless of where the herd is located or what kind of animals, is the protection of the herd. One mastodon gets stuck you might as well assume that the rest turn and leave. It’s the law of the wild.

They say that Adam lived in what is currently Missouri. They say it if you’re LDS or affiliate with that religion. They say that Noah floated in his ark for almost a year. They say that the ark looked like a modern ship. They also say that the ark was probably a large rectangular box. They say that he had two of every kind of animal, unless the animal was used as cattle and then he had seven. They say that he spent time after the flood in the ark. They say that the ark is now located on Mt. Ararat.

They say that it takes millions of years to build a mountain, let alone a mountain range.

They say that the last time there was major movement in the Wasatch range the mountains leaped in the air about 17 feet – plus or minus 3. They say that Utah is about 400 to 500 years overdue for another earthquake.

They say that Yellowstone National Park is sitting on top of one of the largest volcanoes in the world. They say that when it blows it will take most of the western United States with it.

They say that thirty minutes of sun in the morning is good for you. Conversely, they say that thirty minutes of sun in the evening ain’t so good for you.

They say that they’ve traced back all of human lineage back to a single woman in Africa. They say that they have what they believe to be an artist’s rendition of what she would’ve looked like. She doesn’t look all that good. Kind of ugly. Rather disgusting, not what I would’ve imagined my ancient ancestor to be. They say that’s where we all come from. That’s our Eve. Maybe it’s Noah’s wife… what’s her name? It doesn’t matter. They say it’s what we should be learning.

They say that evolution is the answer to so many things.

They say that war does little to curb the growth in humanity. They say that the 8.5 million Jews, the 20+ million Russians, and the lives lost with all of the fighting forces around the world didn’t even put a dent on the overall population of the world.

They say that the black plague destroyed a large percentage of the population. Disease kills more than people kill.

They say that we start wars when the population of young men exceeds a certain percentage. They say that the old send the young to war. They say that women run the world better than men. They say that peace is possible. They say that all religions ultimately want peace. They forget to say that some religions only want peace when all other religions are dead or converted. Forget that we have a right to decide.

They say that the world is not enough.

They say that we’re going to the moon.

They say that we are going to mars.

They say that 20 billions dollars is a reasonable cost for almost anything: space exploration, reclamation of river delta that people insist upon living in even though it lies beneath sea level and anything made by man is made to fail. They say that it is the federal government’s responsibility to come in and fix what was damaged or destroyed. They say that the President failed, congress failed, the system failed even though every hurricane has brought damage and destruction it is suddenly the nations problem when one small area, which should be uninhabitable, is proved to be uninhabitable.

They say party likes it’s 1999. I was there in 1999. Nothing happened. The lights stayed on. My computer booted up the next day. My credit cards still worked. There was no looting, no riots, no nothing to stop the peace and tranquility of the world at large.

They say that the Y2K problem had to do with the difference between 99 and 1999, 00 and 2000. They say that no one thought about it when computers were in their infancy, in the 80’s. In our homes.

They say a lot of things: the sky is blue; grass is green; roses are red; can’t you sing.

They say that poetry is one of the earliest forms of writing in any language. They say that I should like poetry.

They say a lot of things… and today, I say there will be more as more comes.

Posted by smokingpen at 11:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I was at work the other day. We have a girl, there, that is getting married. She is getting married in June and the closer it gets to the day the more I can hear myself screaming, “Get it over with already.”

As I am trying, hard, not to swear I find that I am not adding colorful metaphors into the frustration that is young adults getting married. But really, come on girl, get it over with already. I can see why engaged couples, in this church, are encouraged to have long courtships and short engagements. The long courtship is to verify whether or not you actually like each other; the short courtship is to spare friends and family the pain of dealing with wedding preparations and uncertainty.

Truth told, I just want to rant about all sorts of things. Today, though, we’re going to stick to the topic of that girl and marriage.

Continue reading "Stupid Comments and Conversations" »

Posted by smokingpen at 3:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I’ve gotta say, I often don’t care a whole lot how a movie does come Oscar time. Most movies that receive Oscars don’t really deserve them for any merit that I can see and, therefore, don’t deserve my notice. For the most part, movies in general, and Hollywood specifically, have fallen so far from what they purport to be that I can’t understand the personal need to have industries that exist solely for the making, augmentation, and distribution of movies. Music, to a large extent, suffers from the same problems that movies do.

With some of my feelings out in the open, it is important to state that Oscar’s are movie professionals voting for movies they think have some merit. These are people rewarding their own. It’s not like the public gets a say in what is deemed “Best Picture” or “Best Male Actor” or any other category. And yet, we as a viewing, consumer public are made to believe that the “Best” designation is true.

The Oscars are tantamount to buying off a baseball game. The studio with the most money and the most influence in a given year is going to win. Upsets are rare and very few. Oscar sweethearts can maintain that status so long as the paychecks and gifts keep flowing.

Continue reading "Naive Rants" »

Posted by smokingpen at 3:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Today has proven to be a very interesting day. Not that anything in particular has happened. More that I have had a series of events where the sum total has come out to be different, interesting.

My roommate told me, about a week ago, about this girl who is a BYU student who is volunteering, at his work. Last week he said she was dressed in an outfit with her initials emblazoned on then; this week she was wearing clothing that expressed not only her hair color, but also her sexuality. I found the sight of her very interesting. She is a very attractive girl with a lot, in the looks department, going for her. However, speaking to her was entirely different.

Normally, when I stand next to someone, talk to them, I get a sense of who the person is and what they are trying to get out of life. I know, I know, that seems a little far fetched, but I get some sense of the person and maybe not what makes them special, but definitely that there is someone standing there. I didn’t get that from this girl. The roommate tried to explain this to me last week and then suggested I come down to his school to experience her for myself.

Continue reading "Feel Good Answers" »

Posted by smokingpen at 9:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I spent the night, last night, in serious contemplation about my life, where I am going, what I plan on doing, and the money issues that seem to surround my, almost, every move. For example, as a young adult I was offered a credit card. That card meant freedom; it also meant a level of responsibility that I, at the time, was not ready for. As a result of the lack of personal preparedness I found myself very much in debt and growing deeper and deeper in debt as I struggled to dig my way out of the issues I faced. The struggle has taken almost ten years. Lots of things in my life seem to surround the number ten.

It took ten years to get into BYU or a church sponsored school. It took ten years for me to come to terms with parts of my mission and my life. It took ten years before I’ve really started to feel as though I could settle down somewhere (though Utah is not that somewhere).

Ten years is a long time to wait for things to happen; and yet, wait I have because there has been little or no choice.

Part of the reason I was up so much during the night was because of a phone call I received yesterday afternoon. It was the owner of the debt I’ve been trying to eradicate. Three or four years ago the company sent me letters that would’ve allowed me to exonerate the debt at a rate of 20% of what I owed. To date I have paid between 79 and 81% of the total. Still, as I sat and went through the short conversation with the individual on the other end of the line I received the impression that he didn’t care one whit about whether or not I could afford to make the level of payments I have, historically, been making in the past. .

Continue reading "Charge Off/Charge Back/Secondary Credit Agencies" »

Posted by smokingpen at 1:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Yesterday as I was working a coworker (loosely put) asked me to write a haiku. I’ve heard of haiku’s and really had no intent to actually sit down and put pen to paper, or fingers to keys, and write something like that. There are two reasons for this: first, I didn’t know what a haiku is/was; and second, I really don’t enjoy the simple process of writing poetry. This does not mean that I do not have the ability; it does mean that I do not enjoy the act.

With that said, I went to Google and googled “haiku”. What I discovered I already knew, in that a haiku is a highly structured form of Japanese poetry. The first two links, though, appeared to respond like they were dead, and the third was a wikipedia (or wiki) entry at wikipedia.org. (Note: wiki is generally referring to a accumulation and distribution, often to a specific group, of information in the form of encyclopedic knowledge.)

Wikipedia.org then proceeded to offer a history of the haiku (you can review that here) which is interesting but not that interesting, to me.

Continue reading "On Poetry" »

Posted by smokingpen at 6:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

There are some things that will always be exciting to me, and at the same time those same things will pretty much always be depressing to me as well.

For example, I am interested in the fermentation process. Alcohols, of all forms, are fermented and the distilled product can be used as a fuel or a fuel additive that helps make emissions much cleaner and easier to remove from the air. Beyond that there is something about the brewing and distilling processes that is interesting to me and as such reading and watching documentaries on the process can hold my attention for quite some time.

This does not mean I am interested in imbibing. Quite the contrary. Ive seen far too many people take in alcohol and mess up their lives. The process, though, is still interesting. Theresalmost a science to creating wines and alcohols of various degrees and percentages per volume.

Continue reading "The Science of Wine Making???" »

Posted by smokingpen at 1:04 PM | Permalink

When my alarm went off this morning I grabbed my phone (which is what I use for an alarm) and hit snooze. I kept hitting snooze for about an hour because I was deciding whether or not it was worth it (to me) to get up and actually go to work. To many this wouldnt be an issue, but I wake up tired, go to bed tired, and live my life in a state of fatigue. Going to bed, last night, I was so tired I was actually amazed that I made it home from dinner with the parents and some of my siblings. It happens. I seem to live my life tired.

At some point I found myself standing, naked, in the shower with the hot water running over my body. While standing there I was wondering how I got into the shower and why I was awake. Moreover, I was thinking about how I got to this point in my life where work mattered enough that I was forcing myself to get out of bed and actually go. There was a time, it seems not so long ago, when I wouldve just rolled over and gone back to sleep. Granted, Ive done that once or twice since landing back in Utah and at this job, but I have only done it around periods where I am already sick. I dont, necessarily, feel sick at present.

Since I was running late, this morning, I drove up to 100^th south where TRAX either starts or ends (you decide) and waited for the train to show up. As I was standing there, a woman walked up in a light blue parka, the light blue was kind of a funky color, and I didnt stare, or really spend a lot of time checked her out, but as I thought about it I realized that I didnt really know whether it was a man or a woman. My preconceived ideas about people dictate that the look and character of the person suggests woman, but as I thought about it I realized that even though she was tall and was wearing a parka that suggested a woman (the hood was up and cinched tight) I couldnt really tell what gender the individual was.

Continue reading "Beauty As Opposed to my Beast" »

Posted by smokingpen at 10:03 PM | Permalink

I was looking at the BYU website, I do that occasionally as I will be attending there, and came across a study that is receiving some attention done by a professor at BYU. Basically, the study takes the ideas from "Queen Bees and Wannabe's," to a new level. That of the preschool child. Apparently the studies that support "Queen Bees" was conducted on girls starting at about age eight and illustrated how they interacted with people around them. The socially manipulative tactics used by teenage girls, perfected, it would appear, over a lifetime actually begin at a much earlier age than previously thought.

The reason I am talking about this is because I find it interesting that the very nature of interpersonal relationships between people, between girls, starts at such a young age. According to the BYU study ages four and five. And that these techniques are rather highly developed in these little girls.

Some indicators of little girls showing tendencies toward being a Queen Bee are:

• Not allowing specific children to play in a group.
• Demanding other children not play with a specific child.
• Threatening to not play with a child unless certain needs/demands are met.
• Refusing to listen to someone they are mad at (the aggressive child may even cover their ears).

If you are really interested this information can be found here through BYU's website.

Continue reading "Little Girl Queen Bees" »

Posted by smokingpen at 2:35 PM | Permalink

I think one of the biggest issues I have with production houses like Disney is that they keep trying to rewrite classic tales in a non-threatening way. Lately I've come across information hinting that Disney is planning on releasing a newly re-imagined Winnie the Pooh series where Christopher Robin will be replaced by a girl. Christopher Robin, mind, is what the Winnie the Pooh stories are centered around. Christopher Robin is the reason Winnie the Pooh exists. It seems really stupid to me to continually rewrite works of fiction to suit some absurd need to make all genders and all nationalities a part of every story.

Disney recently acquired the Muppets from the Henson Co. and in doing so wrote and produced a re-imagining of "The Wizard of Oz." The movie was good in the sense that I like the idea behind the "Wizard of Oz" and L. Frank Baum wrote a lot of books in that series; however, you took a Caucasian farm girl and replaced her with a group of black performers and instead of making Dorothy want to just get out of Kansas (which is totally understandable as there is NOTHING in Kansas - stupid flat barren ugly state) she had a goal and wanted to be a performer. I liked this, but it flopped upon reception on ABC (where it was broadcast) and failed in whatever it is that Disney is trying to accomplish.

What is Disney trying to accomplish?

Continue reading "When Reworking Someone Else be Creative" »

Posted by smokingpen at 10:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

It's Monday morning a little after 7 a.m. and I am at work. Oh joy! This is not what I signed up for, this is not what I wanted for my Monday mornings, or for that matter any mornings ever. Think about it, I live about an hour away, I take about forty minutes to get ready in the morning, I have to get up pretty stinking early to drive and even earlier to ride a bus. I drove this morning.

I drove this morning because I get to work until 6 p.m. One of the things that constantly seems to amaze me is the idea that an employer can just force you to work overtime with little in the way of recourse. They say you work and the Hollywood answer is that the employee, me, comes in to work on the schedule forced upon the person. Granted, I am sure this happens all the time, and I can see it happening all around me right now, but I never thought I would be somewhere where the "boss" subjectively says, "Come in to work a couple hours early. Oh, and we're going to have to ask you to stay a couple of hours late as well. I'm sure you understand." No.

This seems insane. People don't have lives, in my experience, where they can alter everything about their lives and come in early, or stay late, whenever the boss says so. Most employers learn that there is often a high level of turnover in the lower ranks when this happens and suggests a lack of ability and skill for managers when they insist upon it. Those managers probably don't last very long and don't have a future at that company. And yet, with Fidelity, that very trait seems to be an attribute. I don't know that I am, now or ever, comfortable with that.

Part of my problem is service levels and training. Before I came to work here there were X number of employees between two sites taking, more or less, the same calls with an average service level in excess of 90%. This is pretty good as Fidelity's Employer Services Company sells themselves on certain service levels. However, because of attrition the company is constantly hiring new employees. When you hire you have to train because there is a very small base of people who are already investment potentials. As a result, training, I would think, would be a priority so that you had more people with all of the skills necessary to answer all of the questions.

In New Hampshire training was the highest priority. Same company, different division, different priority. There, training was protected; here, training is subjective. Basically, service levels are based off the speed calls are answered and not the ability to assist a customer. Therefore, to increase service levels the priority is to throw as many people on the phones as possible because the mere act of having bodies on the phone is enough - regardless of the frustration people may encounter as a result of not getting to someone who can actually help them. Sounds backwards.

The outcome is that this division had X number of employees and hired Y more for a total of X+Y meaning that they had more employees now than they did previously and that the service levels should improve. Right? Wrong. Basically, people wait until a new class is coming on and then, before the class is ready, bail ship to other divisions. People quit because Fidelity requires more time and effort than they want to put into the job, and people demand off phone activity before the forthcoming group is ready. On top of that, they only train employees so far before throwing them on the phone. Give them the absolute basics and then watch as they flounder so that, during future trainings, they can be pulled out of training to go back on the phones because the MOST IMPORTANT thing is answering the phone and not actually helping the customer.

I guess what gets me is that I am working for a group that appears to be very short sighted. They don't look at long term needs because the group is very reactionary rather than proactive. The various sights don't seem to talk to each other enough that they know what is going on and who is supposed to be in training and as a result the entire division of the company seems to be faltering around looking for footing. It's no wonder that this place seems out of sync with the other divisions I've dealt with.

Posted by smokingpen at 6:47 AM | Permalink

I've come to a very pointed decision today. This isn't going to shatter any notions or ideas, it's not going to shake the foundation of life for most people, but, after several weeks on the phones with a division of Fidelity that specializes in investments for tax-exempt companies, I've decided that people, in general, who work for non-profits are not comfortable with taking control of their lives. The majority of people I come across want to be told what and how things should be done and, in being told this, they also want someone else to run their lives for them.

We get a lot of calls from participants' parents or spouses. The participant isn't interested in making the phone call and, often, cannot be bothered to actually come to the phone to go through the process of setting up their plan, managing it, or even worrying about rolling the money somewhere else when, invariably, the participant changes employers to work for another not-for-profit company. This is interesting not in that it happens, but rather that many of these people are in their late thirties and early forties and are still not taking control of their lives. They certainly aren't going to make a fortune working for a company whose sole purpose is to NOT make a profit, but to break even. Instead, many of these individuals will merely eke by for the bulks of their lives.

I'm not suggesting that money is king and that everyone need work for a hefty salary. That's impractical and would suggest that everyone has the same priorities. Money is important, even I have to admit that, but insane salaries and lots of money isn't my thing – though I wouldn't complain if someone wanted to pay me more than I may think I am currently worth. Won't make that mistake a second time. However, what this does suggest, to me, is that some people never want to take control of their lives. Is it possible that some people work for who they do because they are comfortable only barely making it or because they are married to someone who will support them (or because they're still being awarded an allowance by their parents)?

It doesn't matter where the person works. Harvard University seems to be about the same, to me, as The Red Cross, which is the same as any other not-for-profit institution. Teacher, administrator, tailor, spy, if you work for one of these places one of the ideals is that you will be taken care of. Maybe it's because you are helping to take care of someone else, or a lot of someone else's as a result of the position; the outcome is standard, people can't be bothered. They don't want to be. It must be enough that they are altruistic; the individual shouldn't be required to do more than that. Often they are not.

What is interesting to me is that parents call for someone who is in their middle years. Think about it, someone lives until they are about 76.5 years old, on average, and that person, around 37, has their parents call in to set up the plan, invest the money, and manage the assets; seems like there are apron strings still attached, somewhere.

One of the major differences I've come across, in divisions, between who I worked for in New Hampshire and where I am at now is that 403b's and 457's allow for a LOT of alternate contacts on a plan. You can, literally, set up a limited power of attorney for your parents, husband, wife, children, uncle, guy down the street, or bum on the corner and they can do a lot of things on your account. Granted, not everything can be done, but in the case of some of these people, some damage can be inflicted. I'm convinced this is an extension of the type of customer that is drawn to civic service: They want to help but they don't want to be in control.

There is a special kind of person who not only wants to help but is comfortable being in control. Personally, I want to help, I am reluctant to be in charge, but man don't you dare tell me I can't handle it. Don't tell me what I can't do because you are telling me what I am going to be doing. I want to know what my investments are doing. I want to know whether or not I am making money or losing my shirt. I want to be in some measure of control over my life. Civic minded people don't. Bureaucracies dictate that you trust an entity and not an individual and in order to succeed in a bureaucracies you have to extend a level of personal control over to someone else. This is probably why most bureaucrats don't make good politicians. A politician wants to be in charge and wants to be involved. Someone who doesn't want to be in control doesn't care what happens until after it happens and then it is someone else's fault.

The issue at hand is that there are people out there who look as though they are in control of their lives and are not. There are people out there who get up, go to work, and appear to be in charge of their destinies, and they are not. These people, though not dangerous, pose a threat to themselves in not being bothered by their own futures. At some point in the future parents die, marriages crumble, spouses die, and things will change – not necessarily for the better. As long as these people are determined to remain oblivious they will be dangerous and will leach off of the system later on. These are the people who feel that something is owed to them; these are the ones who feel that someone else should do it; these are the ones who can't handle reality and live in a world of their own making; and ultimately, these are the ones who appear to contribute and don't.

Posted by smokingpen at 1:03 PM | Permalink

There are a few reasons to run a blog. One of them is to get your ideas and opinions out there. The word ?there? being an ambiguous term to denote the internet and the space of public approval, review. That is one reason to run a blog. There are still others.

In other areas you could, say, write book reviews, film reviews, music reviews, city reviews, live reviews, or whatever you wanted. You could merely get online and write about specific interest, say strip joints, Irish pubs, fermentation, or distillation. You can do whatever you want with your blog, if ya got one, to include add pictures, create links, update with news, events, history, or just non-sequiters that really, and ultimately, mean nothing to the lay individual.

Still, the blog can be a place where you go to just complain about everyday life. Work. Coworkers. Church. Dating. Kissing. School. The lack of? alternative enjoyment. Being single. Or whatever. In this case, let?s focus on work.

Work sucks. Not all work sucks. Just my job. My job that takes forever to get to (because I moved closer to where I will be going to school), they don?t treat their employees like assets, in my opinion, and the ?voluntary? overtime is never voluntary. Let me see if I can expand on that to make the world understand. When they tell their employees they never have to work overtime, and then schedule them for overtime without asking, and then get upset when working overtime is called into question ?strongly? encouraging the employee that some ambiguous entity will become displeased if they don?t work the overtime and that, somehow, it will negatively affect any future possibilities you have with the company, there are problems.

When your only goal is to become an employee of said company, you don?t really look at what is happening. Some places require their employees to be overly dedicated to the job, to give up family and social lives, to make themselves available at all times, and not to complain when, at times, they are required to reschedule their lives on a whim simply because some ambiguous entity changes the schedule and expects them to kowtow to the new world order. This isn?t right and doesn?t breed, in up-and-coming crops of employees, a sense of camaraderie and in the end only breeds contempt and ill-will when it comes to the expected, or desired, outcomes. The expected, and desired, outcomes are highly trained and certified representatives who will happily stay with the company for a long period of time.

What I thought was odd, and am now realizing is a part of this division?s culture, is how the groups tend to talk when it comes to training groups. They complain about the numbers of people who quit part way through the training process; they talk about employees having to decide which is more important, school or work, and when put to the test, choosing school; they moan about how much money is lost on training; and then they continue to do exactly what they were doing, to begin with, by undermining their own hiring strategies and expectations by NOT encouraging their employees to have a job, finish school ? if that?s important ? and more openly working around the employees schedule rather than requiring a Waterloo moment in their employees.

The problem I have come across, again and again, is the expectation that the employee will do whatever it takes to maintain their job, regardless of what that may mean in the long run. Less time with wife and children. Get over it. Less time with boyfriend/girlfriend. Get over it. Less time for a personal life. Get over it. Less time to improve oneself outside of the work environment. Get over it.

I have some experience with this employer, now. Enough that I can see interesting differences between divisions under the same company umbrella. Where one rewards, and its clear there is a reward; the differences between another division and the various employees rising through the ranks makes the ambiguity of the longevity of the job a bit more frustrating. There are no real long-term objectives that can be met in this division and it?s a wonder, and no wonder, that some people have YEARS of experience here when they can find more success with less effort in another division of the company.

The outcome, for me, is to look for something else, another job, another opportunity, elsewhere, something that doesn?t require me to work insane hours. I keep wondering, now that I can wonder about it, why I thought that the division I came to was better than anything else I could do with this company. This is a good company, but they are trying to grow and adapt a business model to a new way of thinking. The new way of thinking is important, but to be a part of the mistakes that are being made, to know that the mistakes were being made long before I decided to come here, make the whole experience that much more difficult. Unfortunately, I don?t know of any way to get out of what I am doing now. That is sad.

Posted by smokingpen at 11:09 AM | Permalink

As a young child, and probably not so young, I had a few directions I wanted to go in my life. Admittedly, these directions were not well founded in reality as being an adventurer or locator of antiquities didn?t seem to fall in line with degree pursuits or international law. Indiana Jones is not the paragon of virtue and excitement his movies would make him out to be. Many countries, most countries, feel it a grievous act for someone like Indiana Jones to enter their country and take their cultural heritage. Cultural heritage has, almost, become the bedrock upon which many societies have replaced religion.

Growing up in Central Texas you, as a student, become indoctrinated with Texas history. Not having grown up in other states, I am not privy to whether or not places like New York state, Delaware, California, or Ohio require their students to take rather intensive courses in state history; regardless, in Texas you learn about the history of the state. One element of that history is the history of the Spanish and gold. The Spanish wanted gold and gold was mined out of the ground. Cherokees, who had a pretty significant presence in Texas, at the time, and no interest in gold. Gold is only valuable if you, as an individual, or a society makes it worth something. We ascribe value to rare and desirable gems and minerals. Gold is a mineral. Diamonds are gems. As a result of the Spanish desire for gold they would mine it and then transport the gold south to Spanish controlled ports in today?s Mexico.

The Cherokee nation had no need for gold. As far as they were concerned gold was useless and held little or no value. I would imagine, or I do imagine today, that all they saw was gold dust, dirt, and didn?t realize that the gold had any value whatsoever. At least, they didn?t understand why the Spanish were transporting dirt from one part of their nation to another. Cherokee?s were interested in the horses that helped transport the gold and after attacking and killing the Spanish would discard the gold into rivers. In many cases they discarded smelted gold in bricks into the rivers. Gold held no value to them.

What makes this interesting, and important, is that I am almost constantly in need of some kind of stimulation. My attention span is nearly non-existent. What looks like me paying a great deal of attention and appearing to be calm, amidst the storms around me, is long practiced patience and sitting still when I want to be outside running or moving about. It feels unnatural for me to be cooped up in a building or sitting still. Imagine sitting at church for three hours and what that does to me. Church, though important, is very difficult in the sense that I have to sit still and listen. There is nothing to do but sit and listen.

As a child, though, I wanted to find some of that Spanish gold. I wanted to wander along the Lampasas River and discover an undiscovered cash of gold. Barring the Lampasas, wandering along the creek, and in it, that ran down the hill from the house I grew up in, I wanted to locate caverns, buried treasure, antiquities ? those items of cultural importance that cannot leave the country of origin legally, and make a name for myself by having stumbled across treasure. I wanted to be Indiana Jones and Alan Quartermaine all rolled together. I wanted to be James Bond and every other action star turned big screen hero because that was what, in my mind, I was destined to do. But more than anything else, more than life and breath ? almost, I wanted to find Spanish gold and barring that, I wanted to find Brigham?s Bees. I?ve never found either.

Growing up with these fantasies was not easy. My younger siblings would get dragged along behind me as I wandered, without sharing, through storm drains and up and down creek bottoms looking for something. I?m not sure I ever really understood what was special or important about what I was looking for. I don?t believe I understood the significance of finding Spanish gold or even in looking along the creek bottoms for turtles and frogs and crawfish (I don?t recall seeing any of them). For that matter, I was impressed when I came across iron pyrite (fools gold). These adventures merely took me on trips out of the ordinary and out of the day-to-day doldrums and into the realms of fantasy and illusion. Though the scrapes and bruises, the muddy shoes and wet trousers were all real, the reasons for the adventures were false and lacked reality. My entire life I wanted real and all I could do was play act.

As I grew older I wanted to create something lasting and exciting; something that resembled, barely, Indiana Jones with a hint of Luke Skywalker and Han Solo, and smacking of James Bond. In my mind I wanted to be the main character and anything I wrote or created would be based off of me but would be as exciting as all of those characters and their escapades combined. I wanted my life to be exciting and what I got was something decidedly less so. I?ve never left the North American Continent. I never pursued a desire, or dream, to travel to space. I?m just now working hard to complete my degree, and I am looking at a few more years of famine before I can expect to sit down to the feast. My life is not what I wanted it to be by the time I turned 25, 30, or soon, 32. I look at those numbers and all I see is a bottom line that grows larger with nothing to show as a return on investment. My life?s work has produced nothing of substance and I wonder how much longer I must go before I finally produce something.

About six months ago, while working for Borders Books, Movies, and Music in Concord, NH I was standing around talking to some coworkers. These are people I might?ve made friends with outside of work, but had gotten to know as a result of that place. I worked hard and hated that job. I don?t know that I hated the job so much as I hated the fact that I made an agreement to stay for a period of time, which stopped me from looking for anything else, and by the time I could start looking for something else, nothing was available to me until I took a job with Fidelity in Merrimack, NH. The job with Fidelity Investments was important in that it helped me redirect myself back toward Utah, education, and refocus on what I wanted to accomplish in my life, but it is a job and one that, like so many others, smacks of no future because I haven?t the background to be successful. That seems so true of so many job that I often wonder what I am expected to accomplish, or to have accomplished, up until this point. Why do I wake up in the morning if today is going to be exactly like yesterday?

There are answers to all of these questions. There are answers to the doldrums our lives, my life, seem to take on. We go through the repetition of life in order to provide, to live and pay rent or the mortgage, to gain confidence, to gain experience, to become better tomorrow than we were yesterday, to be someone. Being someone does not denote being famous or well known for our cooking or house wares, for the ability to act or sing or play an instrument, or because we have achieved notoriety as a result of a video we made while drunk and stupid and thinking we were in love. Being someone does suggest that our ducks are in a row and our priorities are straight and you have an idea of where you are going. Not the lack of knowing.

At Borders we were standing around, sitting around, walking around, and talking. We were discussing things and suddenly an idea struck. Out of the blue I had this notion of what needed to be done and how it could/should come about. I had an idea for a story that could combine a lot of the elements that I tried to incorporate into my life and never really succeeded. I?d stumbled upon an idea that would allow me to adventure, but do it through the eyes of a central character, once removed.

Yet, therein lays the woes and the problems I?ve encountered for almost a decade. I keep thinking I can do something that history and perseverance dictate I may never be able to do. Am I capable of following a dream or is it time to drop what I want and just move forward? Can I write effectively or is this all just a pipe dream. The successes have been too few and too far between to allow me to, forever, keep the illusion alive that I can find success at the one thing I?ve wanted my entire life. I look at 32 and all I see is a large number with nothing behind it. I have nothing to show for 32 years of life. There are no successes I can hold up to the flame of scrutiny. There is nothing that sets me apart from my peers.

I spent the other night meditating on the future. I sat there thinking about how I would take care of rent and other bills come January when I plan to start attending school full time. My schedule, I hope, will have me in classes every day of the week, but most of the day on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. How can I afford to go to school when I look at my financial situation and continue to see a mess? I would imagine that you don?t afford to go to school just like you don?t afford to have children, but the question of money and paying for things still looms large in my mind. How can I afford to do the things I want (and need) to do?

As I consider this I am reminded of J. M. Barrie?s Peter Pan and Mr. Darling. When Mrs. Darling became pregnant with Wendy Mr. Darling went into his study and studiously began going through the books looking to see if they could afford to have Wendy. What he discovered was, with a little scrimping, they might be able to afford it. If they couldn?t Wendy would have to be sent to the orphanage. Mrs. Darling was excited to learn that they could keep Wendy, then John, and finally Michael (and eventually the Lost Boys). At each stage in the process, though, Mr. Darling had to go and work through the finances to make sure it was possible to keep each child, otherwise, the child would have to be sent to the orphanage.

School is a lot like that. How can I afford it and at what economic threshold will I be forced to send my dreams to the orphanage? I can see, clearly, what kind of money I may be able to make and I know what it takes to pay my bills every month. I can adjust some of those bills, but the outcome is that I have bills that have to be paid and if I am going to be in school full time how do I make the money necessary to pay those bills?

So, as I sat there meditating on my future and money and bills my mind has a tendency to grasp at straws, play through a scenario, and then discard what doesn?t seem logical or practical. It has that tendency with most areas of my life except for writing. When it comes to writing, for some strange and weird reason, it grasps at that straw and holds it up a banner and an answer. Four, five years ago that would?ve been something I could mentally hold onto and decry the naysayers who chanted I would fail. Will I fail?

Does it matter?

The point is that several years ago, before things got really bad; I could grab that straw because, regardless of what happened, I would always land on my feet. That and I have a tendency to jump jobs and sooner or later I would find one that met my needs, at the time, and allow me to work hard and earn what I needed to make the ledger add up at the end of the month. Money is not important, paying bills is. Gold is not valuable, what it represents is. To the Spanish, it was wealth, to the Cherokees, it was horses.

For me the gold at the end of the rainbow, the bottom line of the ledger, the horse is writing; and I keep wondering if it?s worth the effort. Is it worth holding that dream and goal or is it time to follow the advice of my father and let it go? He?s never told me to let it go, but he has shared with me his own dream and goal and what caused him to start working away from what he considered facile to what had to be realistic. Is writing, to me, facile?

Posted by smokingpen at 12:39 PM | Permalink

Yesterday was Halloween. All Hallows Eve. You know, the most holy night in the pagan calendar. Dead virgins, animal sacrifices, little children running around in costumes demanding swag from individuals they don?t know and shouldn?t trust. Old people acting the idiot as they dress in ridiculous costumes and parade about as though they were still young and naﶥ enough to get away with it.

Work is good because Fidelity realizes that people are idiots and doesn?t allow them to dress to the urge once a year. Yet, people kept chanting that, ?it?s a holiday,? and everyone should be out of work before the real enjoyment got going: holiday, holy day, a day where you recognize and honor holy things. Man has the world really denigrated itself to make the common individual believe that the observance of corporate America?s way of wheedling into your pocketbook as an actual holiday. I have problems with real holidays, but to throw in the ones where there is no real reason and? grrr.

My roommate asked me to be at home handing out candy. I told him it would be a, ?Cold day in hell,? before I made myself available for that. I told him I planned on sequestering myself to my room, closing the door, and not answering if anyone knocked. He looked at me and said he would be there. One of his friends wanted him to go to Lagoon to whatever Lagoon was doing for the day. The roommate didn?t want to do that and ended up spending the evening with someone else he doesn?t want to be associating with ? at least, verbally, he doesn?t want to be associating with her.

I did wander over to the church for the singles FHE. I?ve not done an FHE in what seems like a very long time. So going was an act of self-will, especially since the plan was for the group to watch a Halloween movie with the option to dress up. Dressing up isn?t my bag and so I didn?t, but that doesn?t mean that people are like me. From my observations it appeared that the majority of people came in some form of costume. I was disturbed.

Have I mentioned that I don?t like Halloween? I don?t like holidays. Holidays are just wrong. Who needs a day to give gifts or a season to do nice things for other people? Who has to take out a second mortgage on their home in order to afford gifts for family? Why do we spend so much money on things that don?t really matter? And what?s with that fat old man who allegedly climbs down chimneys and leaves toys and gifts for the people in the house? And why does he only go to people who have money?

I know the answers to these questions. I discovered Santa Claus at age four, or so, when I woke up and watched mom and dad wrap the presents late at night by the Christmas tree. Granted, I played the dutiful child who wanted presents, but that doesn?t mean I wasn?t aware of what was going on. Growing up, I always found the Christmas presents. Some years I was caught, others I wasn?t. There came a time when it just stopped mattering, and now I am a little taken back when people expect me to want to celebrate with them. I?m called a scrooge when I don?t feel like a scrooge, I feel left out of things by the mere fact that I cannot fathom participation in what seems to me entirely unholy.

Scrooge was much maligned for his beliefs. He was made to be this heinous villain. I am not entirely convinced that we should look at Ebenezer Scrooge as a villain. Antagonist, sure, but villain not.

Someday I am going to write a rebuttal to Charles Dickens and that book. Granted, the book is good, but the spirit of the book denotes openness to spending money even if you do not feel you cannot afford it. Scrooge, regardless of his ability, did not feel he had it and, as a result, did not celebrate the holiday. There were many other reasons, but I would imagine a man who ?splurged? on heating coal would not be completely heartless when it came to spending ? in general.

Keep in mind that this book was written during a time when people worked the day before, the day of, and the day after Christmas. You took only a meager portion of your day off. Dickens was a harbinger of change to where we are now. We don?t work on Christmas that would be absurd.

So, I don?t celebrate Halloween, All Hallows Eve; I don?t celebrate Christmas; I don?t celebrate Thanksgiving; I don?t celebrate most holidays and the one word that comes to mouth is, ?Scrooge.? A much maligned Scrooge. Scrooge, as portrayed by Charles Dickens, had no spirit of the season about him at all. I don?t qualify under that either. Certainly, I don?t have the ?spirit? of Halloween, but then, I don?t believe anyone should have the spirit of that day. When it comes to Christmas, though, I believe I probably possess a stronger and more realistic spirit of the season than most ? even if the giving and receiving of gifts doesn?t sit well with me.

The idea of a holiday, again, is a holy day. Christmas, the word, derives from two parts. Christ and the suffix mas. Mas is a derivative of Mass, or a religious celebration. Christmas is literally the religious celebration of Christ. Christ is the Greek form of the Hebrew Messiah which means the Anointed One. At Christmas time, though a celebration of the birth of Jesus of Nazareth, is also a celebration of the Anointed One or the Son of God sent to redeem mankind. How do presents play into that celebration? Christmas trees? Ornaments? Lights? Candy canes?

I guess I just don?t get the season. I don?t get holidays. They seem so distant from what I see as the intent of the season, the holiday, the holy days. What is holy about Santa Claus? What is holy about Rudolph? What is holy about dead turkeys? Pumpkins? Children dressing up? What is holy about our modern holiday?

Posted by smokingpen at 3:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

On my drive into work this morning I fell in behind a semi traveling on the interstate at about 50 miles per hour. This may seem unimportant, at it probably is, especially since I have a car that will pull around and drive considerably faster than a semi is apt to go. So, I waited until it was safe to pull into a passing lane, accelerated, and flew past the semi with a spray of water and several very colorful words at the back of my mind. As I did this, I remembered something that hasn?t resurfaced in a few years: truck drivers swear at four wheels because of their stupid moves.

I drove semis a few years ago. Most people that know me know that. It?s nothing I?ve hidden, and at times, something I make sure most people hear. That is one fact that seems to put people at odds with their beliefs or preconceived notions about me.

However, when driving semis you live in a world of diesel and grease and the people you encounter aren?t always the most ? illuminated in the world. They are not exactly intelligent people and do what they do because they could pass the tests and because someone, somewhere, was going to offer them a job. If you are to believe the TV and radio ads, billboards, word of mouth, signs on the back of semi trailers, truck drivers in general, and the federal government, there is a severe shortage of truck drivers on the road.

While driving semis I heard, a lot, about four wheels (if you drive a car you are a four wheel) and how poorly they drove. There is a lot of truth to this because most people don?t take into consideration the stopping distance for a fully loaded semi. It?s a lot farther than for a car. People don?t pay attention to where they are in conjunction to the semi and get mad when a driver doesn?t pay attention to them.

There is this built in antagonism between truck drivers and your every day, run of the mill, automobile driver. They don?t get along and they aren?t supposed to. The responsibilities are radically different. And yet, truck drivers always get mad at four wheels for the stupid antics that they play when driving around semis.

As I was driving to the bus stop this morning this occurred to me. I fell in behind the semi because the exit was coming up. What I didn?t realize was how slow the driver was going and when I decided that driving 50 MPH was not what I wanted to be doing, I pulled around him. The way I did it, very quickly and relatively close, suggested to me that he was probably swearing up a storm to embarrass a sailor in a brothel in Singapore, because of what I did. Technically, I didn?t do anything wrong. The truck driver isn?t going to see it that way.

The notion that truck drivers are better drivers than everyone else is rather fallacious. It?s not true. Yes, they have more training. But, that training is designed to function in an environment where they have a pivot point on their vehicle and to allow them to safely slow or stop it in inclement weather. Anyone can learn the same techniques of a truck driver. They?re not hard.

One ?trick? of the trade is how you watch the road. Instead of driving defensively, the truck driver will watch the road as far ahead as he can and will, mostly subconsciously, adjust the speed and driving to account for the conditions and traffic. You don?t get into accidents when you have slowed down considerably before you ever hit congestion. If you are watching at least a half mile down the road, or as far as you can see, and not the road directly in front of your vehicle, you do drive better.

Most people don?t learn this, ever. A small car functions differently than a big semi. You can correct the swerving and driving mistakes far more efficiently. This leaves the regular driver with the impression that he is actually a good driver. There are very few good drivers. Truck drivers included.

It is my opinion that most people are just really lucky. They don?t get into accidents because they were the cause of the devastation behind them, because the God?s are shining down upon them, because they didn?t have to drive defensively, because they were lucky, that time. Everyone has driven with someone who has never been in an accident and never had a ticket and you wonder, ?Why the hell not?? That person is absolutely horrible when it comes to driving and the road. You can almost hear the destruction of vehicles, the crunch of metal, and breaking glass behind them. Many drivers really suck at driving.

There are actually many rules that, when watching people drive, are never followed. This is kind of sad. You get complacent and then things happen. However, as I drove to the bus stop this morning, and pretty much knew the truck driver was swearing at me for the speed, the way, I drove, I couldn?t help but laugh and wonder what kind of a driver he really is. Granted, the weather was slightly inclement. It was raining this morning and had been most of the night, but the weather wasn?t sufficient to justify the speed and the driver didn?t leave the interstate at the next exit.

People are going to drive however they feel they want to or should. Many are going to live under the misapprehension that they are good drivers. Most are probably wrong. Truck drivers are not excluded from this.

Posted by smokingpen at 10:47 AM | Permalink

I did something I thought was nearly impossible today. I got a bureaucracy to change something on my account without having to throw a fit or pitch a tantrum. There were a dozen calls made between various departments, but I got something changed and, as a result, was able to register for classes at SNHU for the next term. Having classes under my belt is important as I head west, toward BYU. The mere act of taking classes, right now, is important to the process of moving and reorienting my life.

So, my big accomplishment today was registering for classes and ordering books (on Amazon.com) for cheaper than I could get them at the school or through my previous used book vendor. Because of an experience with the previous vendor (it?s taken them several months and a lot of hassle to finally refund money on a purchase I never received) I am not experimenting with other impulse purchase vendors for used books and movies. Amazon.com, right now, is my current preferred site. After I get to Dolores, CO, and have a chance to check out how things were delivered and in what condition, I may have to update the world on how things are going.

Truth told, Alibris.com is actually a pretty good site for books, but their shipping charges are pretty high and that makes purchasing from them a little difficult. I was going to purchase the entire Fletch series of books, used, through Alibris until I got to the shipping portion and then I canceled the order because shipping ended up being thrice what I was paying for the books. I still haven?t purchased the Fletch series of books.

Andy actually turned me onto Amazon.com. When I finally did get the refund (this week) from the other source I repurchased the Band of Brothers DVD?s through Amazon.com for a four dollar savings over the price I paid at the other place. Like I said, this is an experiment that will determine future purchases and loyalty. Some of the titles are going to Dolores, CO and other titles are coming here. I?ve selected a variety of shipping options, and in the end, hope that everything works well. If not, well, I have school books I will be shy of for longer than is comfortable to me.

Posted by smokingpen at 5:51 PM | Permalink

It feels like I have a thousand times a thousand things I want to share, to talk about, to say, and yet, I sit here looking at my monitor. The monitor is not something that is really exciting. Sure, sure, I have other things I can be working on. They?re pushing some online classes for call reps, levels one and two, but I don?t feel any urgency to get those done in lieu of leaving here and not knowing what?s coming next, Utah, school, and stuff.

I did transfer some writing from my longhand scratch an scrawl to a word processor today. I?ve even thought about sitting here and doing something with the initial rewrite/expansive writing that needs to take place. The story is a bit far fetched, but I am hoping I am keeping the whole thing just plausible enough to be a little scary, for those who fear 1984 and similar books.

In the process of conversations I also used an Ayn Rand analogy in describing my life to someone. Basically, Atlas Shrugged is about the intelligent, working people of the world leaving the world behind and allowing society to crumble in upon itself. Writers, artisans, engineers, corporate executives, etc., everyone leaves and eventually the weight of the stupidity the world places on inane and unreal things causes everything to implode. Not plausible, but not far fetched either. Sooner or later the economy?s of the world, based off of social reform, will fall in on themselves.

Anyway, Ayn Rand, in Atlas Shrugged, describes an idiot train engineer who agrees to drive a coal steam locomotive up a mountain and through a long tunnel. Coal requires air and without proper air the fire will, eventually, die out and the train will stop. Now, apply that to my life. I am a coal train attempting to go into a tunnel that is not designed for coal trains and midway through the tunnel my fire is going to go out. What do I do? What does the engineer do?

In the story, the engineer doesn?t walk back to warn the other train and in the story a catastrophe takes place as a much larger and faster diesel train collides into the back of the coal train killing everyone and collapsing the tunnel.

Yet, the story is not my life. My life is more about what happens when the fire goes out and whether or not I am walking back to warn others, other trains, to slow down and stop. Do I walk back and warn others, do I protect the people around me, or do I merely sit in the engine and wait for some other train to come along and collide with me? Does disaster have to strike before the message gets across.

I don?t really assume my life is a train wreck. Admittedly, I was using the analogy as an object lesson for people to realize that I am moving across the country and not as a means for people to assume that my life is in ruins ? or will be in ruins. That would be irresponsible of me. However, somedays I do feel as though my life is like a train stuck in a tunnel and the most I can muster to do is walk back several miles to warn other trains of the impending danger ahead. Let me close my door and ignore the peals and pleadings of the people around me as I try to rekindle the fire in the engine.

The fire may not be easy to relight. It takes hours, at best, to get a good fire going in an old coal engine, but the fire can light and we can start the engine moving again. Sometimes this is about how I feel about my health. If my health isn?t all that well then I have to take care of that because physical well-being is directly related to emotional and spiritual well-being. They go hand-in-hand. If you are not physically well you cannot expect to, spiritually, be revived (writing this causes me to theorize on some other areas of my life, though those theories don?t belong here).

The point is that we all have struggles we need to go through. That?s a part of living and that?s a part of life. Our trains come to a stop and right now I feel as though mine is coming to a slow burn and eventually a stop. Those feelings are, more than not, related to my leaving New Hampshire. I?ve become more attached to the people and the place than I felt I would, or had. I?m leaving someplace that I sincerely like and people who sincerely like me. Everyone is sad ? or at least they are playing at sad for my benefit.

My fire seems to be burning low, but give me some time and a few days driving and everything will find itself right again. That?s the future. The intelligent and the workers, the real leaders, will disappear for a while and when everything implodes, slowly, they will return and help rebuild from the ashes. I can rebuild myself better than I was/am or can expect to be.

Posted by smokingpen at 8:18 PM | Permalink

NASA recently announced that it will be basing the next generation of orbital flight and return vehicles (e.g. the space shuttle fleet) on the current space shuttle fleet. This, I feel, is a completely stupid and unwise move on the part of NASA and its current administrators.

Part of the problem with space flight, and reentry, is the heat that is generated as an orbiter returns to the atmosphere. This heat is so intense that being off the approach vector (angle) by only a few degrees can cause cataclysmic damage. They call this total or the crew on the shuttle dies.

In 2003 the problem with the shuttle was that a tile was impacted by foam that had come loose from the primary booster rocket, impacted the ceramic heat shield, and caused enough damage to the heat shield that upon reentry the shuttle literally burned up. All of the astronauts were killed.

So, NASA is planning its next generation of space vehicles and they are being built off of the current flight model. Meaning, when they start to design and develop the next shuttle they are basing it, primarily, on a failed design. That does not mean that the shuttle fleet hasn?t worked very well, but when you look at a common description of the shuttle, ?flying brick with wings? you get the idea that the maneuverability and ability for the space shuttle to do anything outside of go up and come down is pretty limited. Moreover, the exposed heat surfaces are made of a material that is easily broken. Therefore, a broken tile due to flying debris means total destruction upon reentry.

NASA?s grand plan is to mount future launch and return vehicles on top of the main fuel tank. That way, they say, debris doesn?t matter. At present the space shuttle is mounted next to the main fuel tank, and debris falls off, gets caught in the updraft, whipped around, or whatever, the shuttle is likely to be hit and damaged. Now, NASA wants to put that same fleet of vehicles on top of some very explosive materials built by the lowest bidder.

A year ago (little more now) Burt Rutan and his company Scaled Composites built a vehicle that could pass the theoretical line between the atmosphere and space. In order to accomplish this without burning up on reentry he built a semi-ingenious reentry device with wings that forced the craft to descend, bottom first, into the atmosphere. This causes two things to happen: First, the heat is dissipated over a larger surface area. And second, the wider area forces the craft to reenter slower than trying to force a brick with wings to vector into the atmosphere. In other words, NASA is trying to fly their vehicles into the atmosphere while Burt Rutan realized that the most efficient use of kinetic energy and gravitational pull was to allow the ship to fall back into the atmosphere and then control the ship once it has reached a safe distance.

Burt Ratan?s answer was to have the wings swing up so that the spaceship dropped straight down. Once it was back in the atmosphere the wings swung back into place and the ship was controllable as a glider (or unpowered airplane) until it landed at it?s designated airfield.

Yet, the success of Burt Rutan?s design and the fact that he successfully tested it over a two week period of time (the space shuttle was originally designed as a quickly reusable vehicle that takes months to disassemble and reassemble) seems lost on the ?smartest people on the planet? over at NASA.

I wonder, sometimes, if they are so smart that they are no longer able capable of viewing anything outside of what they think is right or proper. NASA may be wrong to continue in the vein of creation. Yet, here we go. I remember growing up and watching the space shuttle takes flight. That was one of the few times my parents would wake us up early, gather us in their bedroom, and we would watch the shuttle take off. This was exciting to me. At the same time I remember the Columbia blowing up and that was a tragedy. The nation mourned after that. Yet, the design has been maintained.

The design is being maintained. NASA is trying for Mars and the moon and our current space flight configuration isn?t going to change, significantly, and yet, we deal with problems like foam coming off of the exterior of a fuel tank and pieces of insulation hanging loose between the tiles. My suggestion, for NASA, would be to look carefully at what you are planning and where you are planning to go. Consider other option. At the moment, I don?t think you have. Keeping the current design template does not allow for the possibility of a better design and announcing that a team has determined this to be the best path doesn?t allow for much faith in the ingenuity of corporate America or in the genius of the American people. Right this second NASA is failing.

Posted by smokingpen at 4:22 PM | Permalink

I feel like going on a diatribe.

Housing prices have had an inflation rate of 52% in recent years. That means that if you purchased your house between five and ten years ago you can, theoretically, sell it for significantly more than you bought it for, paying off the original mortgage, and leaving you with plenty of money extra to purchase another home. The problem is that purchasing another home is going to be equally expensive and the money you make off of a home purchase can easily be consumed in purchasing another home leaving you, financially, right where you were originally.

On top of making money off of the sale of a home, the proceeds have to be reinvested in another property within 18 months or there are some pretty hefty taxes taken on the money. It seems, to me, that our entire economy has turned from rabid purchasing of the next great tech stock offering (make it rich, quick) to purchasing homes and driving up real estate prices.

Part of what causes this consternation, within me, is reading an article online yesterday where a couple spent in excess of $1,000,000 on a mobile home near Santa Cruz, CA with an ocean view. They don?t own property, they get to pay rent for letting there home sit there, and they paid one million dollars for something that, quite literally, may have originated as beer and soda cans and ended up as an affordable home for people who need a hand up in life. Not for people who have money to burn.

Can you honestly imagine having a million dollars, let alone the disposable income to spend that kind of money on nothing?

What makes me cringe is that there are investment bubbles. A bubble is a trend where many people begin to see that they can make money quick and easy and then begin to manipulate their finances and financing so that they can afford what they would never, in a realistic world, be able to afford. If you cannot afford the payments on a house now you are not going to be able to afford the payments on a house in three, five, or even ten years.

Yes, I understand that people get raises, they change jobs, they maneuver through the job marketplace and become hot commodities and eventually make more money; but if you can?t afford house payments now, you won?t be able to afford them in the future.

If, in the future, you are making more money, then you can purchase a home. But, right now, here, today, if you can?t afford payments now, you can?t afford them in the future.

Some people call the process overextending; others call this putting all of your eggs in one basket. Consider the job market of the past several years: How many people lost their jobs and had to start over in an entirely new industry? For how many was this a real blessing in disguise? Yet, how many are now making even close to what they were before the bubble burst?

These are important considerations. The problem with housing prices today is two-fold. First, the price of a home is growing beyond the ability of the median income family to comfortable purchase. Second, in order to purchase a home people may take interest only loans or to pay more than they can comfortably afford. The trend is very scary because this means that if the buyer gets sick, the buyers family gets sick, something happens, anything happens, and your financial situation will grow worse.

The problem with an interest only loan is that you are paying the interest, only. You are not paying on the principle of the house. In order to build equity (read ownership) you have to pay toward the principle of your home. If you are not paying toward the principle (read, only toward the interest) then by the time you start paying the principle down (three to five years later) you still don?t own that home.

If you don?t have equity in a home then if anything were to happen you could easily find yourself up the creek without, in this case, a place to call home. You can be forced to declare bankruptcy, you can be subjected to attorney?s fees and law suits, you can have your entire life flipped upside down simply by living the American dream, or by purchasing a home.

How does that feel?

Now consider the rise in housing prices and liken this rise (radical) to other variables that have deflated. The stock market (this is repeated over time) and the housing market during the past twenty years. There have been booms and busts. I recall my parents going through a bust and I am watching my siblings purchase during a boom.

When the cost of housing exceeds the ability of the average (mean) consumer to comfortable buy into a home then there is a serious issue. Housing prices, in New Hampshire, backwater, green, beautiful New Hampshire have gotten out of hand. All over the state. The same is true in almost every other state in the nation. There is a problem and there are also going to be a lot of people who owe more, soon, than their house is worth. Just watch it. The bust is coming.

Posted by smokingpen at 12:47 PM | Permalink

I?ve discovered something about myself today. I have this need for the people around me, when speaking to me, to actually talk to me and not find distractions with everyone that walks up.

I share a cubicle with a guy who is between the ages of 22 and 24. When I got to work this morning he proceeded to begin a conversation with me that included an incident he?d had with a customer this morning. Instead of talking to me after initiating the conversation he kept turning his attention to every person that walked up. Admittedly, this was rude and frustrating because this same individual constantly asks me for help and wants me to be available for him when he is stuck with a problem.

My problem arose after three separate occasions where he kept sparking new conversations with people in the middle of a sentence with me and then, a few minutes later, turning back to me to try and continue (read start all over again) where he left off. After the second time I suggested he finish what he was telling me or I wouldn?t be holding any conversations with him today, and then after the third time I turned back to my computer and emphatically stated, ?We will not be discussing anything today.?

He laughed and said, ?You?ll talk to me later. I understand.? And that was the problem, he didn?t understand. He, like so many other people, didn?t realize that what he was doing by initiating conversations with everyone and their monkey was rude. Very rude.

I don?t personally expect the world to stop for me. In fact, I find it very uncomfortable when people put me first, but conversations, when initiated by an individual, deserve that person attention and I wasn?t receiving any of his attention today.

The feeling I had, as I dealt with this first thing in the morning, seemed akin to what I am told women have when men talk to their breasts and not to them. ?Hey, it?s me, up here, not the pieces of flesh hanging off of my chest.? ?I?m more than my assets you dolt.? Personally, I?ve never had anyone tell me that, but at the same time I?ve dealt with enough male friends who have that the idea isn?t completely foreign to me.

What is foreign to me is someone who feels like they can talk to a body part, or in today?s example, to everyone but the person they claim they are having a conversation with. I will admit that for most people, these days, I am not very loquacious. You can?t get me to do a lot of talking. Church kinda burned that out of me when enough people complained that my comments were taking classes outside of their realms of understanding (and generally my comments are designed to draw people back to the basics of the gospel). However, when you start a conversation with someone it needs to be with that person, not a body part, not people around you, not a computer, not your telephone; you should be talking to the person you started the conversation with.

This is akin to going out on a date with someone (in my case chick) and then spending time talking to the waitress because she?s attractive, talking to the movie attendant, a friend-girl, answering phone calls, or anything else that would suggest that the person you agreed to go on a date with is less important than asking them out or agreeing to go out with them. You just don?t do that.

There is so very little that is more important than what you are doing right now that it amazes me that people don?t quite get that. If you are going to start a conversation, and keep in mind that I don?t initiate many these days, then you need to follow through on what you initiated. My coworker did not do that today. It made me mad. I am still upset that he would sit next to me during the day, in training, etc., and not get it that I stop what I am doing during the length and term of our conversations.

I would no more turn and start talking to someone else when he is trying to tell me something than I would sit and flagrantly rip of my clothes and streak in a public place. That is not appropriate.

I?m just amazed at how rude we?ve all become. How callous and rude our behaviors run. I?m not trying to castigate this coworker. That wouldn?t be fair. However, I didn?t speak to him most of the day and he found that he had to go to other resources to get answers to his questions. As a result of that he found that his call times suffered as a result. I?m no genius, and in truth I am just really good at finding the answers, but in this case, I also find that my tolerance for the behavior I was subjected to today isn?t very high.

Maybe its old age, or older age, but I feel that people should know better and they don?t.

Posted by smokingpen at 7:31 PM | Permalink