Mixed Nuts

I want you to take a good, long look at this container. Look past the elegantly simple black-on-blue & white color scheme. Pay no mind to the beautiful pop of the contrasting nut color. Ignore the dirty joke that just entered your perverted mind.

Look closer.

Notice it doesn’t simply say “Mixed Nuts.” No, no – that would be an understatement. It says “Deluxe Mixed Nuts.” And not only does it say that, if you look closer as previously instructed, you’ll notice that the word “Deluxe” is in bold. In case you had any grievous misconceptions about the product you were considering, you’ve just been shocked into reality.

And why shouldn’t it be deluxe? Look at those vivid pictures! Or simply look at the list on the side. Cashews. Bam! Who doesn’t LOVE cashews? Nobody, that’s who. Pure, sweet energy in those. Almonds. Boom! Everyone’s favorite non-meat source of protein. Pecans. Whoo! Be honest – you didn’t even know you could get pecans outside of a pie, did you? Well, the word’s out – you can.

But wait – there’s more!

Brazil nuts. Kap… – wait, what the hell are those? Who knows? They’re in there, though. That’s what it says. I’m not exactly sure why Brazil gets its own nuts, but it’s written right on the Deluxe container there, so they must be real. They’re big. Like Brazilian butts? And do Brazilians simply call them “nuts”? To be honest, I’m not convinced they belong among the Deluxe group. Not to be racist, but I don’t think they’re all that special. They’re weirdly shaped, weirdly colored, and weird tasting. To be clear, I’m talking about the nuts.

Anyway, there’s one last nut. Wait for it… Pistachio. Nuts. Mother. Humper. Pistachios! No fingernail ruining shells. No shirt ruining red dye. Just those delicious little nuggets of nut joy. The mere presence of pistachios, in my humble opinion, makes this a masterful motley of mixed nuts. One might even call this mixture…deluxe.

So there we have it. Cashews, almonds, pecans, Brazil nuts, pistachios. Five-nut draw, indeed. They call it “Deluxe” – and why shouldn’t they? Have you seen the ingredients? With the exception of those weird Brazil nuts, it has all the best nuts. And you’d better believe it come with a deluxe price tag, worthy of the mixture. Why, it costs almost as much as the one with that terrifying, anthropomorphic, bespectacled, aristocratic peanut on the label.

So here’s the point. I bought this deluxe, ridiculously expensive mixture in order to have daily access to a reasonably healthy snack. Cashews – energy, almonds – protein, pecans – improved digestion, Brazil nuts – who knows, pistachios – antioxidants. All along with healthy fats and high fiber content. Perfect snacks for healthy people and old folks. Oh – another thing I like is there are no peanuts. When I was a kid, all mixed nuts contained peanuts. And it was more like a can of peanuts with a couple of broken pieces of other nuts sprinkled in. So, no peanuts means a more proportionate mix. One would think.

As you may have surmised by the last three words of the previous paragraph, the mixture isn’t quite balanced. But, you know what? It’s not the end of the world. It’s not like I expected an equal amount of each nut – that’s crazy. I didn’t open the container looking for a utopian society of nut equipoise. It was only after snacking from this container that I noticed something. And it wasn’t a visual discovery, but one of taste. Texture. Consistency. Crunch. Brazil nuts are tossed of course, because – well, they’re stupid. But cashews, almonds, pecans, and pistachios all have their own distinct texture. Pecans, being the most individual. It’s more of a “soft crunch,” if you will. They require less jaw pressure, less tooth strength. So as you’re unconsciously tossing back small handfuls of these deluxe mixed nuts, you tend to notice, more often than with the others, when you have caught the rare pecan. That difference provides a respite of sorts from the hard work your mouth must put in to crunch the cashews, almonds, and pistachios.

Rare. That’s the word I have chosen. Because this is what pecans are in this can of so-called mixed nuts. As I noticed fewer and fewer respites, I began to pay closer attention to the innards of the container. It was almost all cashews and almonds. Now, what with cashews and almonds being the kings of the nuts, this wouldn’t usually be a thing worthy of complaint. But I was promised a “Five-Nut Draw,” not a “Two-Nut and the Odd Other-Nut Draw.” There were also far fewer Brazil nuts, but those are loser nuts anyway, so good riddance. But where the hell are the pecans? There’s pretty much one pecan for every ten or twelve cashews and almonds. Excessively disproportionate, I think. At this price? Unacceptable.

What can I do about it? Return it for lack of pecans? It doesn’t explicitly say how many of each nut the container should contain. The very name “Five-Nut Draw” is a play on Five-Card Draw, which is a version of poker. It’s a gamble. You may get 50 pecans, you may get 15. That’s the chance you take, I suppose. I bought another can, and even bought the more expensive Planters version of this same mixture. It was all the same! A conspiracy on the part of the powerful nut cartels? Are they keeping the pecans to themselves? Is there some pestilence affecting the pecan crops around the world? What could possibly be the excuse? Cans of just cashews and just almonds are almost as expensive as this deluxe mix, so it can’t be that they’re filling the can with cheaper nuts, as was done during the great peanut despair of the 80’s.

You may ask “If you love pecans so much, why not just buy a small bag of pecans”? I would respond by saying it’s a matter of principle. It’s not that I’m infatuated with pecans. In fact, I could take them or leave them. But they’re supposed to be in the mix. And I like the consistency when pecans are mixed with cashews, almonds, pistachios, and the nut that shall not be named. I paid for a deluxe mix, and dammit, that’s what I want.

Rate this:

I looked outside

I saw the sun

I saw a cloud

I saw many clouds

Only one sun

Then there were no clouds

But still one sun

I saw people going up stairs

But none going down

Then empty stairs

And still one sun

I saw leaves moving

I felt no wind

Shadows in place

A yellow taxi

Or was it orange?

Like the sun

Tall buildings

Blocking the sky

Or portions of it

But not the sun

Heat on the window

Warmth on my hand

Touching it

A car horn blew

Angry or confused?

A black bench

Absorbing the sun

The only sun

Still it shined

Quiet noise

A fence

A wall

A crane

A woman wearing shades

The sun

The people and cars were gone

But still the sun

I heard a whistling man

Or a man whistled

Why did he do that?

A train announcement

Ever repeating

Changing words

But not the voice

A pink shirt

A backpack

A goatee

A woman

A man

The sun

It shines

Unstopped

Unnoticed

Broken cement

From heat or age

From pressure?

The sun moved

Shifted

Shined as ever it had

I couldn’t feel it

But I saw it

There it was

How?

Why?

It simply was

And is.

 

 

Happiness or the lack thereof

Why is it so difficult for many of us to find happiness? Just a sliver of joy at times feels like the most difficult thing in the world to obtain. It’s certainly no great feat to stumble upon a basket full of sadness and depression; it requires no herculean effort to break down into a puddle of tears. Everywhere I look in this world, there is a disproportionately large number of people who, on a fairly regular basis, can find very little in their lives about which to smile. That makes me sad; which in turn only exacerbates the very problem that made me sad to begin with. Vicious circle, indeed.

Aren’t we, as human beings, supposed to be inherently happy and optimistic? That’s what I thought for a long time, but it has increasingly gotten more and more difficult to hold on to that idea. How can I? It’s a futile enterprise. I look for genuine happiness; yet, outside of babies and puppies, it’s nowhere to be found. Even those that do seem happy, when examined under the surface, very often you find that they really aren’t that happy at all. It’s a facade. A masquerade. And most of us take part in it on a daily basis. We walk around with fake smiles, belch out disingenuous laughs and move on with our day, not only wanting to fool others into believing that we have our own shit together, but also wanting to believe the lie that everyone else has theirs together as well.

The truth is – nobody really has it all together. We’re all just hanging on by a thread. Grasping for whatever small amount of satisfaction and joy, either true or fictitious, we can on a nearly constant, moment-by-moment basis. If the time ever comes, God forbid, that everything is pulled out from under us and ripped apart, will we still be truly happy? Satisfied and content? Can you live without the people and things with which you’ve surrounded yourself? Those things in which you find your comfort? If not, then you’re not truly happy. Your so-called happiness is totally dependent on external factors. And if that’s true, if you need those material, concrete substances, be they plastic, metal or flesh and bone, then where is your true abstract yet real joy? It’s nowhere. Because it doesn’t exist.

Happiness isn’t real. It, like love, hate, disgust, understanding, envy, lust, greed, respect, appreciation and so-on are figments of our imaginations. We choose to feel these things. And if you can choose to feel something, then how can it be real. Real things are things that exist, whether by your choice or not. Sure it feels real. So does the Transformers movie. But that doesn’t change the fact that it isn’t real. And that it sucks. We force ourselves to feel these things – especially happiness. We’ve evolved to the point where we are expected to be happy. Not only by others, but by ourselves. If we aren’t happy, at least most of the time, then something is wrong with your life. There’s shame attached to feeling anything that doesn’t at least closely resemble happiness.

Aren’t we allowed to feel genuine sadness? Of course we are. But, just like happiness, it isn’t real. It’s something we choose to feel at any given time. We set aside times to feel a certain way. Usually, just as with our happiness, there are external factors which ignite our feelings. Why then do we allow this to happen? Why allow other people or things to dictate our emotions? Why in the world would you willingly give someone else the incredible power of affecting our own moods and emotions? It seems absolutely insane. Perhaps we are all just a bit insane, then. After all, we all do this insane thing. We choose to allow someone to manipulate us into feeling one way or another. And it all ties together. If you give someone the permission to push your “happy button“, then it follows that you’ve also given them unmitigated access to your “sad button“, your “anger button” and so on. Now you aren’t even the boss of yourself. You’re essentially a puppet – with several puppet masters. I don’t know if you’ve ever seen a puppet show, but it’s an incredibly complex thing, to properly manipulate a puppet. Yet it’s something that, if it is to be done properly and with any measure of success, must be done by one person alone. You try giving three, four, five people control over one puppet at the same time, and the results are bound to be disastrous. Each master has his own plans, his own designs, his own attitude as to how the puppet should move. And so the puppet is pulled in all different directions, all at once, and looks less like a carefully controlled being and more like some thing from parts unknown, which is in the process of having several convulsions. Not pretty. You, along with all the other people to whom you have granted access to your emotions, are all fighting for control. A tempest.

And so what? Keep to yourself and say to hell with the whole bloody world? Allow only yourself to decide where and when and why to choose to feel happy? Or sad? Or afraid? Why not? It must be easier. One puppet, in control of his own strings. What about God? Is He the ultimate puppet master? Or Satan? I don’t believe that’s the case. I think more likely we are given the free will to do as we please, and live with our own decisions and their consequences. Problem is, mankind as a whole isn’t the brightest species on the planet. We like to think we are. But we’re the ones who willingly invite pain and sadness into our lives – freely and without a fight. Sounds pretty simple and stupid to me. How about we just shutoff our emotions altogether? I mean if they’re not real, then that must be an option. Yet, this is what science calls a psychopath – and nobody wants to be called a psychopath. Sure, it could be fun at parties; but it’s probably a detriment when it comes to finding a job or a potential mate.

I guess choosing to not be a psychopath, if that is indeed something which can be chosen, leaves us with only one option: to continue on the same way we’ve been going since the beginning. I mean, I don’t know. I’m human too. At least, I think I am. Therefore. Or something like that. How difficult is it to choose to be happy most of the time? Rather than choosing to be worried, sad, angry or whatever else most of the time. We love to be stressed, disappointed and clenched-fisted so often simply because those are strong emotions. They manifest themselves physically far easier than the soft, wimpy emotions such as happiness and love and contentment. And so those feelings of negativity are always hiding just under the surface, ready to boil over – given the opportunity…or justification. Scary thought. Pessimistic, this is. Well, is pretend happiness better than real anger? Keep them in check. See a therapist. Drink a Coke.

Lemme learn ya somethin’

Learning new things. Scary sometimes. Almost always difficult. Many of us have been conditioned to think that the way we learn things is by listening to someone else explain how to do it. And by the same token, we are also conditioned to think that the best way to teach someone something is to explain it to them. Think about it. Think all the way back, centuries ago, when you were in school and you were surrounded by those miserable meatbags each and every day, for hours on end. You know them. Your teachers. Many of them, standing in front of you and spouting gibberish for an hour, expecting you to remember it. Many of them standing in front of you writing gibberish for an hour, expecting you to remember it. How much of it do you remember? How much of what you actually know and apply each day was learned from these people? How much of it did you learn from some other source? I’d wager most of it didn’t come from people talking at you or writing things down for you to copy. You learned from actual practice; usage.

Learning something, anything, takes practice. You have to try it and possibly fail many times before you can truly say that you know it. Think about a baby who is just learning to walk. If the baby was surrounded by people who never walked, but only crawled around, would the baby make any attempt to walk? What if those odd people in her life did only crawl around, but they sat the child down and explained to her the intricacies of walking on two legs, but never showed her and never propped her up on her feet to make her try it. Would that kid ever walk?How should I know? I’m not a doctor. But my feeling is that no, the kid probably wouldn’t walk. Most of us can ride bicycles. Do you think that before you ever got on a bicycle, if your parents had explained to you how to ride one, and then gave you one, you would be able to ride it perfectly? No, you have to get on the bike, fall down and scrape your knees several dozen times whilst being laughed at by the neighbor kids before you can successfully and confidently maneuver a bicycle. Riding a bicycle can’t be learned by reading about it, or hearing about it. You have to get on a bike and make it happen. This same principle applies to learning any other skill.

Reading, writing, dancing, biting, jumping, skipping, swimming, flipping. Can’t do it perfectly the first time. Can’t know how to do it simply by hearing someone explain it to you. The theory is fine. Learning how to play an instrument or learning how to drive a car. Theory comes into place, of course. But true learning takes place in practice. If you want to learn a new language, you will never speak it properly by simply buying a dictionary or phrase book. How would you ever know if you are speaking properly? You have to communicate with someone who speaks that language! Yes, studying from a book is almost necessary to perfect it, but speaking and using the language is the only way to truly learn it.

When I was in culinary school, we would have 2 types of classes: in the classroom, and in the kitchen. In the classroom, we would discuss recipes and ingredients and what made certain things work. In the kitchen, we would put it into practice. What I noticed was that no matter how much I studied a written recipe, it was always difficult to remember it. But once I actually worked with the recipe and made it, I could always remember the recipe. Your mind isn’t the only thing with a memory, as I’m sure you know. Every part of you has memory. And when it all works together to remember something, you’ll never forget. That’s why once you learn how to ride a bicycle, you’ll never forget how to do it, even if you go 30 years without riding one. It’s not just your head remembering how to control a bicycle; it’s your head, your arms, your hands, your legs, and your feet. Everything is used to work the bicycle, so it’s one big memory. One memory triggers another, which triggers another.

When’s the last time you read or heard a word that was new to you? Your reaction was probably along the lines of “Hmmm I did not know that”. But then a week later if someone asked you about that word, would you remember it? Probably not. You didn’t practice it. This applies to learning a new language just the same as learning a new word. Once you learn it, you have to put it to use. Say it out loud, put it into a sentence. Use that word every day for a few days and BAM. You have added another word to your vocabulary. We learn from practice, not simply from listening or reading. We teach by enabling our student to engage in the activity, not by talking at them.  Learning something new can be daunting at first. You start to doubt whether or not you could ever learn how to do that. But of course, you can. Just takes practice. Every habit you have, good or bad, you earned from constant practice. You want to write? You want to know how you can become a writer? Just write. You want to be able to cook? Just cook. Sure you may be terrible at first and send a few loved ones to the latrines, but eventually, if you keep at it, you will improve. Or maybe go to jail. But a skill is a skill. Keep cooking whilst incarcerated – it’ll help pass the time.

2014 Academy Awards Super Spectacular Hooray Blowout Blog Post

Sunday, March 2nd will be the 86th annual Academy Awards – a show where rich people get together to congratulate themselves for being awesome and rich. But, it is entertainment. I tend to consider myself a bit of a film connoisseur, or a movie buff (whichever term you understand). I usually don’t agree with most of the awards that are given at this ceremony, mostly because it’s usually more about politics than actual film. So when I write a post like this where I intend to make predictions on which film or actor will win their respective award, I have to divide my thoughts into two categories: those that I think will win, and those that I think should win – because so often those are different. Now in the case where those two categories are indeed different, it doesn’t necessarily mean that I think that the film/person that will win doesn’t deserve to win. Sometimes it does, though.

The problem is, very often (especially in the Best Picture category) the award is given to the film/person that seems “important”. Important because of some social issue, or political stance, or what have you. Now usually these are still quality films/performances, but the statement that is made does not mean that it is the best of the year. Too often films are made and performances are given as “Oscar bait” – meaning the purpose of making the film, or of an actor taking a role, was simply an attempt to win an Academy Award. There was no intrinsic artistic thought put into the process; those are usually the films that make a true statement – the ones that keep the integrity intact. But I’m rambling…to make a point…relevant to this year’s awards. You’ll see.

On with the show. I will cover just the categories that I consider to be the “major” categories, which are:

Best Picture

Best Director

Best Actor/Actress

Best Supporting Actor/Actress

Best Original Screenplay

Best Adapted Screenplay

My qualifications for analysis on these categories are that I have seen each film represented in each category, with the exception of “Before MIdnight”, in the best adapted screenplay category.

So, let’s go from the bottom up:

 

Best Adapted Screenplay

Nominees:

Before Midnight

Captain Phillips

Philomena

12 Years a Slave

The Wolf of Wall Street

Will win: 12 Years a Slave

Should win: Captain Phillips

For me, Captain Phillips took what could have been a one-sided good vs evil story and turned it into a thought provoking, intelligent story that makes you question where you draw the line in the proverbial sand. 12 Years a Slave will win though, for reasons I will explain later.

 

Best Original Screenplay

Nominees:

American Hustle

Blue Jasmine

Dallas Buyers Club

her

Nebraska

Will win: her

Should win: her

There is no question on this one. This is one of the most original, beautiful pieces of work ever put to film, and if the Academy doesn’t recognise it, there is a very good chance I will stop paying any attention to this show from now on. This must win.

 

Best Supporting Actress

Nominees:

Sally Hawkins – Blue Jasmine

Jennifer Lawrence – American Hustle

Lupita Nyong’o – 12 Years a Slave

Julia Roberts – August Osage County

June Squibb – Nebraska

Will win: Lupita Nyong’o – 12 Years a Slave

Should win: June Squibb – Nebraska

This is a toss up for me between June Squibb and Sally Hawkins. I think they both deserve their nomination and could easily win, but if I have to pick one over the other, I give the edge to Squibb because her performance is a light among some less than acceptable performances in Nebraska. However, this is the year of the slave, so the award will go to Lupita Nyong’o. Her performance is wonderful, and she does deserve her nomination. I just think she was outdone by the two previously mentioned actresses. Also, I find it shameful that Scarlett Johansson was not nominated for her brilliant, unseen performance in her. She could have easily replaced Jennifer Lawrence in this category.

 

Best Supporting Actor

Nominees:

Barkhad Abdi – Captain Phillips

Bradley Cooper – American Hustle

Michael Fassbender – 12 Years a Slave

Jonah Hill – The Wolf of Wall Street

Jared Leto – Dallas Buyers Club

Will win: Jared Leto – Dallas Buyers Club

Should win: Barkhad Abdi – Captain Phillips

Abdi’s performance in Captain Phillips was a little shocking to me, and he won me over as the film wore on. I felt more emotion for him than I did even for Mr. Hanks. But, I don’t think he has a chance against Leto. I honestly was not all that impressed with Leto’s performance, but a trans-gender AIDS junkie is the stuff of Oscar legend. He has it in the bag.

 

Best Actress

Nominees:

Amy Adams – American Hustle

Cate Blanchett – Blue Jasmine

Sandra Bullock – Gravity

Dame Judi Dench – Philomena

Meryl Streep – August Osage County

Will win: Cate Blanchett – Blue Jasmine

Should win: Amy Adams – American Hustle

The Academy does love them some Woody Allen – scandal and all. Cate Blanchett does a terrific job in Blue Jasmine, and I don’t see any way she won’t win…UNLESS – dun dun duuuuuuuuunnnn….. There is some guilt over American Hustle. For a film to be nominated for screenplay, directing, all four acting categories and best picture and not win anything – that’s a shame. For me, if American Hustle has any chance at taking home an award, it’s in this category. Possible upset?? Doubt it. But Amy Adams does deserve it as much as Blanchett. Good lord if Streep wins I may have a breakdown. I like her and all, but at what point does it become just plain old fashioned nepotism?

 

Best Actor

Nominees:

Christian Bale – American Hustle

Bruce Dern – Nebraska

Leonardo DiCaprio – The Wolf of Wall Street

Chiwitel Ejiofor – 12 Years a Slave

Matthew McConaughey – Dallas Buyers Club

Will win: Matthew McConaughey – Dallas Buyers Club

Should win: Joaquin Phoenix – her (not nominated)

Travesty is the most fitting word for this. Phoenix wasn’t nominated, so for me that discounts the entire category. No disrespect to the fine performances by those that were nominated, but Joaquin Phoenix should have been nominated and should win. Bitterness aside, McConaughey did an amazing job here, pulling a Christian Bale and transforming himself physically for a role. That usually means an Oscar win. Both DiCaprio and Ejiofor are possible upsets, but I just don’t see it happening.

 

Best Director

Nominees:

Alfonso Cuaron – Gravity

Steve McQueen – 12 Years a Slave

Alexander Payne – Nebraska

David O. Russell – American Hustle

Martin Scorsese – The Wolf of Wall Street

Will win: Alfonso Cuaron – Gravity

Should win: Spike Jonz – her (not nominated)

Another case where I feel the Academy overlooked her. Spike Jonz has crafted an amazing, memorable film with few flaws, but he isn’t exactly a prolific director so the Academy doesn’t give him much credit in this field. Alfonso Cuaron has also crafted an amazing, memorable film with few flaws, and I do believe that he will be rewarded for his effort here. Gravity is one of those once in a lifetime experiences, and it could have easily been mishandled by a less competent director. He does deserve the win, since Jonz wasn’t nominated. I also like David O. Russell here, because I think that he did an expert job at creating a kinetically paced comedy/drama/crime film that could have been cheesy, but wasn’t.

 

Best Picture

Nominees:

American Hustle

Captain Phillips

Dallas Buyers Club

Gravity

her

Nebraska

Philomena

12 Years a Slave

The Wolf of Wall Street

Will win: 12 Years a Slave

Should win: her

You shouldn’t be surprised at either of my choices here. As I said before, this is the year of the slave. I don’t mean that in a derogatory way at all, I am just referencing the domination of the film 12 Years a Slave. And because I feel that it will win Best Picture, I see no way that it wouldn’t also win for Best Adapted Screenplay. I mean if it’s the best picture, how is that same film not the best screenplay? Seems logical. This is straight up Hollywood here. As good a film as 12 Years is (and it is), at least 3 of the nominees for Best Picture are better. But 12 Years is one of those aforementioned “important” films, so it must win. Gravity has a shot, but I think Cuaron winning for Best Director is the only love it will get (other than special effects, obviously). All this aside, I cannot say enough about the film her. This is in my mind by far the best film of 2013. I don’t want to give any type of synopsis on it for fear of selling it short. Everyone should watch it, as it is a film which redefines film as art, in my humble opinion.

That about covers it. If you have anything to say about my choices – agree or disagree – feel free to leave a comment below.

Ode to a Meatball Sandwich

O meatball sandwich

How happy you make me!

Your sauce so tangy

Your bread so fluffy

 

Little spheres of beef

Glistening with tomato

Baked with garlic

Seasoned with oregano

 

Such delights you offer!

Accoutrements galore

Is there melted cheese?

More, more, more!

 

Provolone, mozzarella, romano

Parmesan adds some zest

A meatball sandwich without these?

No! Surely you jest!

 

Will there be onions?

Yes, it must be!

Piled high, both red and white

A bite in every taste,

And a taste in every bite

 

Banana peppers – yes

I’m afraid I must insist

Sweet, tangy and pickled

Reminiscent of a meatball kiss

 

Even now, sliced tomato

So crisp, so ripe

Fresh tomato with tomato sauce

Sounds like just my type

 

The heavenly aroma of basil

Permeating the air

Throw on some jalapeños

Make it spicy – if you dare

 

I love a sweetened onion sauce

Just the compliment

Maybe even – dare I say?

Lovely, lovely mayo!

The final accoutrement!

 

On toasted bread or soft

Seasoned bread or white

The perfect meatball sandwich

Every day and every night

 

O meatball sandwich

What a sight to behold!

I shall look but for a moment

Can’t allow you to get cold

 

Too tempting not to touch

I will have you presently

The greatest gift of all –

A meatball sandwich, just for me

Where’s the cat?

Honestly, I don’t particularly care for cats. I don’t hate them, I’m just completely apathetic towards them. They don’t do anything, other than eat and poop and sleep. They contribute nothing to society. They can’t protect you. They don’t do interesting tricks. They don’t even love you. They have absolutely no loyalty whatsoever to anything other than the idea of their next meal. They lounge around the house all moody and disagreeable. Maybe they will give you the honor of petting them. Maybe not. Maybe stay 5 feet away from it or it will scratch you whilst making some hideous sound. And yes, it will leave hair about. Here. And there. And over there. Oh, and some over here too.

At least a dog cares about its owner. You would have to be an absolute horror of a human being for your dog to stop treating you like you are the president of the universe. A cat on the other hand considers itself the master of the house. You are the pet in this relationship. Feed it, and in return you may bask in its presence for a moment. Forget to feed your dog, and it will lie around feeling sad. Forget to feed your cat, and you are now being hunted. I just don’t understand the appeal of having a cat, other than just the desire to have another living animal in your presence. They don’t play with you! They’re not loveable. They don’t run to the door when you come home, they don’t get sad when you leave. They just don’t care one iota about anything. Except when they’re hungry, or when they have an itch on the back. Then they know you. Then they will give you the pleasure of their company. And you don’t dare move until they are ready to move. Otherwise, your legs will be turned a lovely shade of red.

There was this cat at the school in Honduras that would get pregnant 2 or 3 times a year. Yet if you look around the school, you only see a total of about 4 cats. You know why? You know what the cat would do to its tiny, cute baby kittens? Let’s just say it was theorized that the cat would only get pregnant when it was hungry…

 

This is how the average housecat looks. And what you see there is the extent of exercise it gets in a normal day.  I know it sounds like I hate cats, but I really don’t. I don’t mind them, I just don’t see what purpose they serve. A dog can serve a purpose – as a friend, a protector, a guide, a detective, a playpal for kids. A cat doesn’t do any of that. A cat is about as functional a pet as is a goldfish. Look at it this way: if you are alone in the house with your dog, and you get hurt or die, the dog will bark and yell and howl all day and night until someone hears and comes to check. If it can, it will break through a screen or a door and not run away, but go and bring someone back. You know what a cat will do if something terrible happens to its owner? Wait for you to die, and then eat you. Traitorous monsters is what they are.  

A dog can have an unconditional love for its owner. A cat can have an unconditional love for itself. I really didn’t mean for this to be a comparison of cats and dogs, but that’s the natural progression of the discussion, I think. If someone is in a depressed state and they need some motivation to get out of bed each day, then sure a cat can fulfill that need adequately. Because it will not let you sleep until it has been fed. But if you want a companion, then to me a dog is a better choice. A dog looks at you and thinks “Oh master! You are my best friend and I love you! I want to play with you and kiss you and be with you forever!” A cat looks at you and thinks “Feed me or I shall feed on you.” Seriously, who invented cats? I’m kind of afraid of them, honestly.

Jesus

I saw a clip on the internets recently with two intellectual blowhards having an argument about government and religion. One guy was some leading proponent of atheism, and the other was an iron-faced douchebag who I won’t name. Let’s just call him William Of House Reilly. At one point in their argument, William argued that Christianity was not a religion at all, but was in fact a philosophy. After thinking about it for a while, I started to believe it. Christianity is a philosophy. At first that just seems like crazy talk. Take a look at the world in which we live: the churches, the laws, the religious doctrine. It all points to a conclusion that yes, Christianity is indeed a religion. Of course it is. There is an organized church split into approximately 40,000 different denominations, all with their own peculiar ideas and rules and definitions of what it means to be a Christian, and their own very specific understanding of the Christian Holy Bible.  This group believes this, while the other group believes that. One group says that you should do this, but the other group says that no, you should do something else instead. It can be very confusing.

Should you dance, or shouldn’t you? Should you speak in some unintelligible language, or should you just speak whichever tongue you understand? Should you pray in a loud and boisterous voice, or should you pray in a low whisper? Should women be allowed to speak in church, or keep quiet until they are in the house? Should you drink wine or grape juice for Communion? Should you even have Communion? Should you ask for tithes and offerings, or should you leave it up to each individual to decide if they want to give? Is every single word of the Bible a fact, or is some of it just a story written to make a point? How many commandments are there, truly? Lots of contradictions, lots of questions, lots of confusion. And each sect of Christianity can point to their very own favorite verses of the Bible to defend their beliefs and explain why they are right and others are wrong. Each church has its own set of laws and bylaws and rules and regulations which must be followed to the letter, otherwise the church itself would rip at the seams, and no longer be the peaceful, loving, caring organization it is today. After all, rules are important aren’t they? Isn’t that what Jesus taught? To follow the rules?

Seems to me that for pretty much every Bible verse you can find to support your reason for believing a certain thing, you can almost certainly find another verse somewhere else that completely contradicts it. It also seems to me that if you are going to pick and choose certain laws and rules to follow simply because they are written somewhere in the Bible, then you should follow all of them. How can you take one verse from the book of Deuteronomy and use it in your church laws, but ignore the others? How can you take Paul’s advice on one aspect of worship and church behavior, and still choose to ignore him in other matters? It’s contradictory. But this is not the purpose of my writing. I will leave that to you, the reader, to do as you will.

What I wish to argue here is that at its heart, cut through all the rules and laws and church nonsense, Christianity is indeed a philosophy. Or it would be if the church wasn’t around. Jesus was a teacher, not a preacher. He was a poor traveler, not a rich church leader. And at the heart of everything that he said and did, he had a philosophy. Love God and love your neighbor. That’s it.

The words of Jesus: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. The second most important is similar: Love your neighbor as much as you love yourself. All the other commandments and all the demands of the prophets stem from these two laws and are fulfilled if you obey them. Keep only these and you will find that you are obeying all the others.” – Matthew 22: 37-40

Jesus was a simple man who loved everyone and wanted everyone to love one another. That doesn’t sound too much like the church that exists today. It also doesn’t really sound like “an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god.” To me, it sounds more like “a set of ideas about how to do something or how to live.” Love God. Seek His forgiveness. Love one another. Forgive one another and seek the forgiveness of others. This, in a nutshell, is how you follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. Not by setting up laws and regulations designed to exclude certain people and punish certain people for not following some law that was randomly selected from the book of Leviticus. In this, I believe, we can say that Christianity – true Christianity – the belief and following of the teachings of Christ, is a philosophy. I don’t subscribe to religion. I don’t consider myself religious. I consider myself a follower and (trying to be) a practitioner of Christ’s teachings. His philosophy.

I don’t follow the teachings of Abraham. Or Moses. Or David. Or King Solomon. Christianity isn’t named for them – it’s named for Christ. I don’t think that Christ intended for his followers to be divided and fighting one another over laws. He didn’t lay down a set of laws to be followed – he provided a philosophy. Love God, love one another. Fighting others because they don’t believe what you believe isn’t Christ like at all.  Ostracizing people for living a certain way isn’t Christ like. Saying that someone is wrong because they don’t worship in the same very specific manner you worship isn’t Christ like.  We are to trust in God, not in man. Follow his teachings, his guidance, his advice. If we aren’t careful we allow our religion to get in the way of a true relationship and understanding of Christ. I haven’t quoted any other Bible scriptures because that’s not what this is about. Feel free to go and read for yourself. The one bit of scripture that I referenced says it all. It sums up what Christ was about.  Any teachings you receive from any man – any man, should be cross referenced and checked to see if it is in accordance to what Christ said and did. He is the leader of the church, the religion, the philosophy, whatever you wish to call it. I believe in God. I believe in Christ, and I believe in his teachings. I love God, I love others. I ask God’s forgiveness and I forgive others. It’s not easy. But it’s the best way to live life.

Endless Night

There once was a night

So black and so cold

It seemed to know no end

A darkness that knew not when

Its time had come to go

 

Time passed so slowly

A generation without light

Children born without sight

What was wrong became what was right

All color took flight

In this endless night

 

Fear was sown and grew

An orchard planted by the dark

All forgot what once was true

Lost that which they knew

No struggle to fall apart

 

There came a fire which did not burn

A heart that could not, would not break

A burning quenched not by tears

And fed not by fear

It grew and burned for love’s sake

 

The night, swallowed up by heat

Clawed and screamed as it died

Pulled off its unwelcomed seat

Its work not near complete

Washed out by love’s riptide

 

There was an endless night

There is a burning light

There is a constant fight

The struggle never ends

What was may come again

Never cease to defend

To the death, love and life

Game of Thrones Season 4: Ice and Fire: A Foreshadowing – YouTube

Game of Thrones Season 4: Ice and Fire: A Foreshadowing – YouTube.