New York Day 2

I took a few pictures while out and about in New York yesterday.  The first is the shop I will be working in.  It's looking pretty great.  The second is some graffiti I saw in Harlem on my walk home yesterday afternoon.  I was shocked that the graffiti was something so intelligent.  I expect some indiscernible gang sign or something random.  This was great to see.  The last pic I took while waiting for the walk sign on our way to a bar on the lower east side.  Funny. 

New York, New York

After a 2 hour delay, including 1 hour sitting on the plane, I made it to New York.  Walking out onto 7th Ave at 33rd St was exhilarating.  I tried to get a cab but found a big line.  I figured I could take it on myself.  I started walking to 1st Ave to find a cab there.  I walked from 7th Ave to Park Ave and found a cab there but was refused when I said I needed to get to 104th.  LAME.  I found the 6 and had to pull my bags through the turnstile, backwards.  I let 2 trains pass before I got on.  Not so bad.  The car was air conditioned and I got to sit for most of the ride.  So I make it to the 103rd St station and walk the 4 blocks to 1st Ave.  Josh meets me half way and carries half my stuff.  Thankfully, too, because I was sick of it.

Now I am here and it feels weird.  I guess this is my home now but is it?  I don't know where to get groceries or how to read the subway map.  I suppose that is the fun of it but it's a bit depressing in the little moments that feel so alone.  I'm excited to wake up tomorrow with the first full day in front of me.  I'm not really sure what I am going to do but I'm excited for the possibilities and I hope I continue to be excited by those possibilities for a long time ahead.  I know that Chicago was a great basis for a jumping point to New York.  It laid a great foundation for me as far as city life goes.

This is totally ramble-y.  I had more thoughts but apparently forgot them when I decided to type.  I'm good at that.

American Cheese v Cheddar Cheese

Does American Cheese work as a viable substitute for Cheddar Cheese?  Those who frequent Potbelly seem to think so.  About a year ago, Potbelly switched from using American to Cheddar cheese.  When people ask if they can get American Cheese on their sandwich or salad, I deliver the devastating news that we in fact don't have American Cheese.  When I tell them what cheeses we do have, they are almost always content to have Cheddar cheese instead.  I cannot help but ask if there is *anything* that these two cheeses have in common, aside from color.

A quick Wikipedia search concludes that American cheese used to be made of cheddar but now is made from a mixture of a few ingredients like milk, whey, milkfat, milk protein concentrate, whey protein concentrate and sald (Wiki).  Doesn't sound too appealing.  Some people even go so far as to say that American Cheese is not even cheese.  What about cheddar?  The same simple search shows that Cheddar originated in the village of Cheddar in England.  Now this is what I'm talking about!  How can anyone think that these two are even close to the same thing?  A third search led me to a Yahoo! Answers page about the differences between the two.  There are some great responses.  I especially like the response from Michael.  He says, "Some American Cheese 'makers' add so many items to their American Cheeses that they can no longer call it 'cheese'.  In its place we get items like Cheeze Whiz and Velveeta.  These products are sold as 'cheese food', 'cheese spread', or 'cheese product', depending primarily on the amount of cheese, moisture, and milk fat present in the final product".

I interacted with a lady who, upon hearing the news that I didn't have American Cheese, shook her head at me and just left!  What an inspiration!  Thanks to her for not accepting a substitute for a cheese substitute.

Totally Super Uninteresting Post: Young People and Old People

The point I want to get across in this post is that the actions, attitudes, and things we think about are closely related to our age group.  Let me explain.  (It's entirely possible that by the end of this post, I have found some new truth or idea that I had not previously thought about in preparation to do what I am about to do - which is write this post.)  Here we go.

When I was young, like 2nd, 3rd, 4th grade, I used to think that the things I was doing were so much cooler than the things the grade below me were doing.  I had 3 younger brothers, so I always knew what those younger kids were up to.  I remember doing those patty cake sort of games in one grade and then as I moved to the next... I was too cool for that so I would do something really rad like play hop scotch.  Here is where I think it gets interesting (finally).  While I had moved on to other, cooler things, I realized that the kids who were in the grade that I had previously been in were doing the exact things I thought were once so cool and now so lame.  It seems to go this way for pretty much all age groups.  Second graders do this thing until they move to third grade where they do this other much cooler thing.  Meanwhile, the second graders who were just previously in first grade are now doing the exact thing I was doing that I now find stupid.  I am amazed to hear from teacher friends about the things these little kids are doing.  They are the exact same thing I was doing at that age.  But I never taught them those little kid things.  And I'm pretty confident no one else did either.  How do they come to learn about these things?  They are somehow passed down but I'm not sure of the channel in which they move.

Now how about old people?  I always hear from my peers about how they will never be like an old person.  You know about that old person smell?  Or the style of clothing that old people wear.  They seem to always wear just about the same thing, no matter who it is or where they come from.  This last week, I was running a store from the center of a show called "Living and Giving."  It took place on the 14h floor of the Merchandise Mart.  It was the type of show that lots of small business owners attend to try and buy the next big thing for their hometown store.  What I discovered durning the course of the 7 day show was that old people do the same things just like children do.  AND I would venture to guess that, even though we tell ourselves that there is no way we're going to dress like old people and act like old people, it is inevitable.  It is simply the way of the world.  Get ready.

The Eternal Anti-Rebel

Is what I am. Let me explain.  All my life, I have been afraid of getting in trouble.When I was in 2nd grade, I got falsely blamed for making fun of JJ Hecei.  He told Mrs. Benne that I was making fun of him.  In order to avoid getting in trouble, she told me I needed to write a letter of apology to JJ for what I had done. If I did not write the note, I would miss recess for the rest of the week.  Well I certainly did not want to lose recess and I really didn't want to get in even more trouble for not apologizing.  (I told my mom that I had not done it but she insisted that it would be best to just apologize and move on)  When I was in 6th grade, I told Joey Beckerle that he was a bitch.  He immediately went and told the teacher, which got me in super deep trouble. (A pretty bitchy move if you ask me)  I was so scared that I was in trouble, I was sure that I never wanted to have that feeling again.  In high school, getting a JUG (like detention) took 5 demerits OR you could get an automatic JUG if you didn't have your demerit card on you.  The one and only time I had to serve JUG was the day I was talking during afternoon announcements and had forgotten my demerit card at home.  Coach Vitello caught me talking to Kevin Inglis and that was it.  Vitello was scary enough without forgetting your card.  I also had a chance to smoke pot on the way to school freshman year.  I was jammed into a green Saturn and while I never actually smoked, I was so nervous about being late to school and smelling like reefer.  Luckily, I was only late.  1 demerit.

A few years after that, I was faced with many opportunities to possibly be in trouble.  I remember when I turned 21, all the talk was about whether or not I would give my younger brother, Tom, my ID.  I always wanted to be that cool older brother who would hook up his younger brothers but I just never had the stones.  He never got my ID.  I remember even before I was 21, trying to get beer was so tough. My best friend Kevin (the one who I was talking to in front of Vitello) was the one who would tap shoulders for someone to buy us some beer.  That never worked but he did manage to get an older co-worker to buy us some Corona.

This brings me to today.  I'm 26.5 years old and still afraid of getting into trouble.  I was at Best Buy buying a dvd when 3 adolescent girls came up to me and asked me if I would buy them 'Call of Duty: Black Ops'.  I told them I felt like I was being set up and that I was sorry but could not help them.  I was devastated for them.  Earlier, while browsing the aisles, I had seen these girls wandering around.  It took them asking me to make said purchases for me to realize why they were wandering.  After saying no, I headed to the checkout.  Halfway down the steps, I paused and looked back upstairs for them.  I was SO close to turning around and telling them that I would do it but then I remembered that I am the eternal anti-rebel.

Random

I wonder if it means anything when someone says that they DON'T want something on their sandwich as opposed to people who say what they DO want on their sandwich.  Can those two groups of people be different in other ways besides how they ask for toppings?  I saw this guy on the train knitting.  His look didn't necessary say 'knitter' but that's what you get in this city.  I was in the bathroom at the Merchandise Mart recently and was peering through the stall door at the guy who was washing his hands.  He took forever to wash his hands and when he was finally done, I saw him peer in the mirror through the crack of the stall.  I couldn't believe how rude the employees were in the Mart as I was trying to find the bathroom.  No one is friendly anymore.  I find that as I grow I discover more pet peeves that I own.  It's almost entirely work related.  How can someone be on the phone the entire time they are ordering food?  It's pretty rude if you ask me.  I have plenty more.  Another year means another year of me hating the BCS.  Somehow, this past week, Auburn came from 21 down to barely beat Alabama while Oregon routed Arizona but the two teams flip flopped in the standings.  How is that possible?  I read this article recently that said blaming the 'computers' for the BCS is the wrong way to look at it.  Humans made the formulas that the computer uses.  In the past, when the humans didn't like the numbers the computer generated, they simply changed the formulas the computers used.  I think that's the right way to look at it. It's our fault.  Until the BCS is thrown by the wayside, I cannot be a fan of college football.  I just cheer for the underdogs.  Mostly, that means Boise St.  It's tough to realize that we are entering a long winter.  It's just the beginning now.  I feel like I'm getting strapped in for a long roller coaster ride knowing I won't be able to get off the ride until April. That's harsh.  I'm listening to the newest Kanye West album.  He's legit.  No way around it.  The gap between Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Years is too small.  Why can't we spread these holidays out a bit more?  It's tough to make a change in the world.  I was reading a book while spending some time in the bathroom over Thanksgiving break.  It was about simplifying your life.  One of the chapters was titled "In 100 years, all new people".  The point was that in 100 years, no one living now will still be living.  If you can accept that, I feel like you can live life freely.  Don't regret.  Auto tune really sucks but this album is still really good.  I brought some Boulevard Wheat back from St. Louis.  I've always said it is my favorite beer but I'm starting to think that it's time to move on from it.  I still really love it but enough to consider it my favorite?  Probably not.  The search is on for my new favorite.  College basketball season started and I couldn't be more excited.  It's the best sport out there.  So with this short time in between Thanksgiving and Christmas, there is a lot to do in preparation for the big one.  I had a discussion about God over the break.  It was a good one but I don't think it made any progress in either direction.  It reminded me of this thought I had a few years ago.  It went like this, "Are we smart enough to have a God or are we too smart to have a God."  What I mean by each thought is this...The first half is asking if human beings are special enough for God to have created us.  We have rational thought and make towns and cities and governments and so on.  Are we special enough to have a creator?  The other half is asking the opposite.  It is asking if we, as humans, are so smart, in science and technology, that we have ruled God out.  Are we to the point that we have come to see that God simply cannot exist.  I think it's an interesting thought.    These are random thoughts.

FoxNews

This was at the bottom of the front page of foxnews.com Monday night.  I thought it was some sort of advertisement.  Eek. It's a bit much, don't you think?

How do you live?

Working in the restaurant business, I run into lots of different people.  It's like people watching at work.  It's extra interesting because our shop is right next to Union Station.  But it has its up and downs.  I love hearing about different types of people.  I remember one guy who was about to catch a train to Las Vegas.  He was getting a sandwich on a Tuesday right before his train.  He told us he would make it to Las Vegas on Friday night.  Whoa!  There are also some bitches.  People who are rude and people who seem to think their demands are normal.  I constantly wonder what makes people happy.  But this is not what I want to talk about.

What I wrote on a note to myself last week is the following: "2 sides. Who am I to tell people how to live and what to enjoy? OR Come on do you really need bacon added on this sandwich? Live!  What's more important? Living well? or just living?"  These are my exact words.  I wrote it down after a lady came in who is clearly overweight and could be so dangerously.  She got her usual Ham, Mushroom, Egg and Swiss sandwich.  As I was finishing the sandwich, she asked me to add bacon to the sandwich.  I love bacon just as much as the next guy but I don't find myself needing to add it to every sandwich I get.  Am I missing out?  Am I the one who is refusing to live?  Or am I the one who is living by avoiding excess?

This is not the only time I have had these sorts of thoughts.  I remember a family of three came in near closing time.  It was a mom, a dad and a daughter, who was not older than 14.  All three looked like a veggie salad could do wonders.  Instead, they all ordered BIGs Meatball, Italian, and Wreck.  Quite possibly the worst three things to order on the menu.  At that time, I couldn't help but ask myself why parents set such poor examples for their children.  The dad even made sure that his daughter wanted a BIG sandwich!  I laughed on the inside but felt seriously conflicted about whether or not to say something.

Once again I am forced to ask myself what is important in life.  Is life about enjoying and living as happily as possible at every individual moment? or is it about knowing that life does not last and that is it the most precious thing we have and that it must be protected at all costs?

I am reminded of our campfire song "Fight Test".  While the song might be about subject material completely unrelated, I am still inspired by the lyrics: "I don't know how a man decides what's right for his own life. It's all a mystery."  In the final analysis, I fall on the side of living with the knowledge that this will not last forever.

My eyes won't enjoy looking at the blue skies, and the blue lakes, and the lovely people forever; and my ears won't hear laughing and music and fast cars and conversation forever; and my hands won't touch the Stanley Cup and guitar pic and grass and the steering wheel and the grip of the golf club or baseball bat forever; and my nose won't smell freshly cut grass and tasty food and red wine and cold beer forever; and my mouth won't get to taste french fries and sushi and ice cream and steak forever.  So let's enjoy what we have while we have it but while always being mindful of the fact that no one has forever.

I believe in love
But think nothing about it when you're not around
I believe in love
I think you're just fine
On this sweet up and down.

Cooking the slowplay

I had a day off from work and decided to play some poker online.  I had my usual 5 table action going.  After playing for about 30 minutes, I realized that I had not eaten at all.  Multitasking while playing online poker has become an art form for many people, I'm sure.  My laptop sat on my counter while I started to boil some water.  While waiting for my noodles to finish cooking and while I was stirring occasionally, I was dealt AA.  I made a standard raise to 3x the big blind or in my case 30 cents.  I got one caller and took a flop of A5J.  Recently, I have had some issues getting action from monster hands like this one so I decided to slowplay.  I checked the flop and got a check behind.  The turn was a blank and it went check check again.  River came and I finally bet out .50 cents.  Ahhhh no action!  It's so tough to get action sometimes.  Anyway, I was pretty excited to see my multitasking skills at their prime.  I could not help but think how much greater it would be to have the same scenario at a casino where multitasking is not even a thought....I think I'll make that happen very soon ;)

I'm not sure I have mentioned this before about what is going on with me and my quest for online poker domination.  Back in October or November I got an email from UB.com.  It said that they missed me.  And that in order to see me more often, they were going to give me $25 to come back to them.  It was a nice gesture but these things usually have plenty of strings attached.  Most of the time it involves a bonus after making a deposit or something along these lines.  Basically they usually suck and are not worth it.  After reading through the email I could not find any of those sorts of strings.  So after getting the UB app for Mac, I was quickly on my account and saw that I had $25.59 in my account.  I had apparently left .59 in my account from a few years ago.  So I decided to give it a shot.  I played two tables of .05/.1.  I had $20 of my $25 at the tables.  Obviously this is not optimal but at this point, what else can you do?  Play .01/.02?  Pshhh!  No chance.  Let's fast forward to May of 2010.  It's now been about 6 months and lots of up and downs.  I have played 29,000 hands since I got this $25.  My account now stands at $294.  I'm not finished yet, of course.  I would love to turn it into $10k.  That will be extremely difficult as I have not even moved up a level yet.  Ahhhh!  It could be a while before I even move up to the .1/.25 game.  Hopefully I'll keep building and I'll have more to talk about in a few months.  Good luck out there!

Long missing, I'm back with 4 topics

I have not written for a long time.  I have been super busy with whatever.  In this edition of the Sweet Up and Down I want to discuss 4 topics.  On the plate today, we have Duke basketball, a stupid rule in basketball, Tiger Woods, and Major League Baseball.

1.  Duke won the title in 2010.  Whoop de do.  Has there ever, in the history of the tournament, been a less-deserving champ?  Over the course of the 3 week tournament, Duke beat the likes of Arkansas Pine-Bluff, Cal, Purdue, Baylor, West Virginia, and Butler.  On the other hand, Butler, this year's runner-up beat the likes of UTEP, Murray St, Syracuse, Kansas St, Michigan St, and then lost in the final by 2 to Duke.  I think it is safe to say Butler deserved the title and would have had it had they gotten a call or two go their way.  Specifically, Jon Scheyer drew a charge midway through the second half.  It was easily the worst call I have ever seen and had it been called the right way, Butler would have gotten an 'and 1' from the play.  Boom, 2 points, tie game.

2.  A stupid rule in basketball.  This rule works in both college and the NBA.  Let's picture a late game scenario.  Let's say you are LeBron James.  You are down by 3 points late in the game.  You have one last chance to hit a shot to possibly tie the game.  As you take the ball down the court, you are fouled before you get the chance to take a shot.  The other team is not letting you get the chance to tie the game.  Instead of playing defense, they foul.  Is that good for the game?  Is it good for the fans?  No and No.  I can understand when you are losing at the end of a game, the need to foul.  A team that is trailing needs possessions.  In this situation, a foul is justified as a way to try to steal.  BUT when you are winning the game and you foul someone so blatantly, how is that justified?  I think this is the single dumbest rule in the game and it should be changed.  A foul at the end of a game that is intentional in nature by the team that is winning should be called intentional.  The best way to fix it.

3.  Tiger Woods is presently playing his first round at Augusta.  Yesterday, the Chairman of the Masters, Billy Payne, decided to read a statement about Tiger Woods.  He basically said things like Tiger has let us down and that he is sincerity is what we must now look to.  And on and on.  I can only think that is just not the place or the time or even the person to be saying these sorts of things.  Who the F cares what Billy Payne, Chairman of the Masters, thinks we need to feel about Tiger?  Who is he to judge?  I thought his comments were wholly inappropriate and at best misguided.

4.  MLB.  I just read the quotes from Jerry West about the length of the Yankees-Red Sox games.  What the hell is going on here?  Their games last for nearly 4 hours?  Last night Angel Hernandez had to deny 4 (yes, 4) timeout requests.  Why does everyone need a damn timeout after every pitch?  I saw a few days ago that there was some research done in this and they went and looked at a game from 1957, I believe, and in that game they found that not one batter ever stepped out of the box once they had stepped in.  No one batter, not one time during an entire game.  Nowadays, people step out of the box after every pitch for every at-bat for an entire career, much less a season and even more lesser, a game.  This isn't just a Yanks Sox problem.  It's league wide and needs to stop.  Now, please.

The Curse of the Era

The 'steroids era' lasted roughly from 1989 to 2003.  During this time, more players hit more homeruns more frequently.  This is a statistic that can be proven.  Hundreds of players were using either steroids, HGH or some other PED.  Big name players have either come out or gotten caught using.  Players like Alex Rodriguez, Manny Ramirez, Roger Clemens, Mark McGwire, David Ortiz, Rafael Palmero, and others that are suspected like Barry Bonds and Sammy Sosa.  Are these players all bad people?  Were they chosen to play in this era and use drugs?  No and No.  I am sick and tired of hearing from other older players who ridicule the steroid users.  As if the players not playing in the era are somehow morally superior.  I heard Matt Holliday who plays now, after the era, talk about how he does not approve of McGwire using.  Of course you don't approve.  If he had played in the era, he could have easily been a user.  I can say the same for Hank Aaron, Jack Clark and whoever else.  Babe Ruth?  This guy was an alcoholic, womanizer.  If there were steroids, would he have used?  How can we give moral superiority to those who were lucky enough to play outside of the era?  It is unfair and I can't stand it anymore.  The point is this:  No one outside of the era can possibly understand what it was like to play in the era.  So judging those within the era is wrong and needs to stop.

This is this...

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4779279

Re: The Heisman

I reply to my Heisman article found here, I have an article from espn.com about Suh being named AP Player of the year.  Where do these opinions come from and why are they so varied?  Everyone gets a vote and everyone thinks differently?  Let's start to get some real consensus.  It's like the BCS but with awards.

Fox v CNN

On my bookmarks toolbar, I have FoxNews and CNN right next to each other.  They are in between facebook and weather.com.  I like to compare the headlines.  Each site has their own agenda and from time to time, it becomes extremely obvious.  Here are the two right now...

The article about spending is spun very differently for each agenda and the recession article is a bit pessimistic.

The Heisman

I was reading this article on espn.com about the greatness of the Heisman trophy.  The article talks about how there is only one Heisman given out each year.  There are many Academy Awards, many Grammy's, and so on.  There is only one Heisman.  It is given annually to the best college football player.  Last year the winner was Sam Bradford.  He was an obvious pick.  Past winners from this decade are Chris Weinke, Eric Crouch, Carson Palmer, Jason White, Matt Leinart, Reggie Bush, Troy Smith, Tim Tebow and Sam Bradford.  Here is the problem I have with the award.  This might just be the nature of the award and hence, can never be changed.  But fight on, I will.  Out of the players who have gone into the NFL, (Weinke, Crouch, Palmer, White, Leinart, Bush, and Smith) only 2 have had success.  Why is that?  The 2 of those 7 that have done anything are Palmer and Bush.  The Heisman voters have this obsession with giving the award to a quarterback.  Only 1, Bush, is not.  There is no rule that says it must go to a quarterback.  Let's start giving the award to the actual best player in the game, not the one who is popular and gets the credit.  For this year, my vote is going to Ndamukong Suh.  This guy will be a force in the NFL.  I know it is hard to predict but I think it's much easier to say that Suh will dominate in the NFL than it is to say Colt McCoy will dominate in the NFL.  He is the best player and has the brightest future.  Give it to Suh.

Rose Bowl Ad

Just saw a Rose Bowl ad describing the game as "all eyes will be on Pasadena" and "the grand daddy of them all."  Let's see here....no and no.

!!! (UPDATE) College Football is the BEST!!! Weee (UPDATE) !!!

Great read here from Yahoo! Sports writer Dan Wetzel.
It goes well with this article.

Check out this sweet graph (plus commentary) that helps us figure out why teams are ranked in their position.



I thought we could compare this chart to some other sports and see how the BCS really is superior.

For instance, in the 2009 NCAA Tournament (pictured below) the team that wound up being the champion was the one won one the tournament.  I know it seems amateur, but the people over in basketball think it's wise to have a team win on the court !!! in a tournament !!!  I'm seriously laughing out loud at how stupid this idea is.  I mean when you think about it, it really is stupid to play the games on the court.  Just think how much better College Basketball would be if there was no tournament.  Oh man, I can't wait for the day when this tournament no longer exists and we can have a basketball BCS.  That will really be a good day for the sports world.

 Here is another one that I think you might find ridiculous....



Let's be honest.  The BCS clearly has the best system.  A system based on playing games on the field is laughable.  The computers know best.  They definitely can predict who the best teams are, even if they have never played each other.  Putting those teams against each other would be a mistake because that way, we wouldn't need the computers!!! And we all know that computers are very important in life.  So, based on this logic, the actual game of football is not the best way to figure it out.  One of the best things in college football is the bowl games.  You cannot forfeit those in order to have a champion.  It would be much too big of a sacrifice to drop the bowl games in order to have a real champion! HA!  Removing bowl games in order to have a champion!  That would be really stupid.  So, no one complain about this system.  After all, it is based on the computers!!! OOOooooo

Deserving Sports Fans

I read a blog on Yahoo! about Green Bay Packers fans and how they didn't deserve to lose to Brett Favre twice.  The post goes into really no detail about why they did or did not deserve to lose to Favre twice.  He does say, though, some things....

"Most of us will never see our hero, arguably the best player in the history of our franchise, come back in the colors of our arch-rival and then destroy us, cementing the fact that his new football team is now clearly better than his old one."

This might be true.  But what other things will most of us never see?  Let's see.  The Detroit Lions, from 2007-09 lost 19 games in a row.  Not many cities get this privilege.  The Pittsburgh Pirates currently hold the record for most consecutive losing seasons at 17.  This record is ongoing and I don't see an end in sight.  Most fans won't see this happen, either.  So, who really cares what most of us will ever see.  In sports, anything can happen.

"Karma failed us. After everything that's happened, all the breathless media reports, all the spin, all the lies, all the hurt feelings ... Brett Favre gets to come out on top, both times? This time, in your own front yard? That is not right. That is not just."

Karma does not care about Packers fans or Vikings fans or Yankees fans.  Justice and karma and 'things working out right' don't exist, especially not in sports.  There is no justice in sports.  There is just sports.  Karma doesn't help out a franchise.  Things just happen.

"I guess "deserve" is a concept that doesn't apply here, though. Things happened the way they did because Minnesota has a better football team. They have a better defense and a better running attack. In this case, that means they win. It sucks, but that's how it works."

This last quote negates the entire article.  If only the author would have come to this realization at the beginning of the article, he could have stopped writing.  He finally understands.  The Red Sox were never cursed.  They had inferior teams.  The Cubs are not cursed.  They might be a bit unlucky.  But overall, they have not had the best team.  In sports, justice, fairness, karma, 'getting what's yours' and whatever else do not exist.  The best team usually wins, no matter the colors on the uniform.

Nightmarish Happenings

I played for 30 minutes today and went set under set for my stack.  In three sessions, about 5 hours, I had a net gain of $206.

Another daydream...

I didn't quite win 265 like last time but I'll take 141 any day of the week. 

SportsNation sucks bad

You know what sucks at television?  ESPN show SportsNation.  Could they talk about anything less-relevant?  I think it's nearly impossible.  Here is some great programming ideas.....  Let's ask "SportsNation" how many people they think don't know the NFL overtime rules.  Then, ( and this is the genius part of the show) we can have two unknown, idiot hosts, talk about the question and (more genius) guess what they think "SportsNation" thinks about the subject.  Seriously?  This is the show.  I'm not exaggerating, either.  They ask people a question and then the hosts guess what they think the people think.  Worst. Show. Ever.

Re: The New Cursed

A little while back, I wrote an article (here) detailing why I think the New York Yankees are the new cursed team.  I went on and on about how the Boston Red Sox destroyed their curse by coming back from a 3-0 deficit to beat the Yankees in the 2004 ALCS.  Well, the time has come.  With a win in Game 6 of the 2009 ALCS, NY has made it to the World Series for the first time since losing to Josh Beckett and the Florida Marlins in 2003.  We finally find out if the curse has been placed on the Yankees.  I have held this theory since the loss in 2004.  There has been evidence to support my theory.  The loss in 2004 was the start.  05, 06, 07, and 08 helped support it.  Can 2009 add more to the curse?  Is there a curse?  The World Series is next...

I'm a daydream believer

I had a dream.  On Friday, at about 1pm, I took my paycheck from Joel Waraday and drove to the casino to play poker.  In this dream, I got to the casino and sat down in a 1/2 game.  On my second hand, I had QQ and doubled up my $150.  I only played for two hours and in that span, I had a set of 7's, a set of Aces, queens twice, and got paid off with two pair when I held AJ.  After two hours, I got up after turning $185 into $450.  I checked my wallet later and found 4 one hundred dollar bills ;)

Re: Pros and Cons of Legalizing Marijuana

Here we go...

Marijuana is originally from Asia. It has been used there since at least 3000 BC. It eventually made its way to the Greeks. It has also been found in regions of China dating back 2,500 years. The coolest part of the history of Cannabis is its connection to Shakespeare. "Pipes dug up from the garden of Shakespeare's home in Stratford upon Avon contain traces of cannabis." They decided to research his estate after it was hypothesized that 'noted weed' from Sonnet 76 and 'journey in my head' from Sonnet 72 are references to pot. Even though pot has a long history of use, it became illegal in the United States in 1937.

Theories abound as to why Marijuana eventually became illegal. One is that the paper and chemical companies did their best lobbying to make it illegal for fear that they would be run out of business by the affects of marijuana and the benefits of hemp. Another theory criticizes the theories about economics for not taking into account the social aspect. This theory states that it became illegal because of a deep seeded racist attitude toward African Americans and Mexicans.

But this 1937 Act did not make the possession or use of marijuana illegal. All it did was levy a tax on anyone who dealt with it. This act, though, was the first step toward illegalization. The second step was the 1964 Convention on Narcotics. And the third step was the 1970 Controlled Substances Act. The 1964 Convention basically was a treaty of countries to regulate and stop drug abuse. The 1970 act was the United States implementing that treaty.

The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 created five Schedules or classifications of the various drugs. The DEA and FDA were in charge of placing each drug into the appropriate schedule. Schedule 1 drugs are drugs that "have a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision." Marijuana falls into this schedule. As you go down each schedule, you get drugs that are less and less controlled. By the time you get to IV and V, you are dealing with drugs like cough suppressants, Xanax, Valium, and Ambien. This is the first joke of all. Drugs that are highly addictive and regularly abused are at the very bottom of the list. And, to make matters worse, alcohol, tobacco, and caffeine are NOT ON THE LIST ANYWHERE.  The chart below shows some startling facts...

In 1968, Nixon was preparing to start enforcing the Convention of 1964. He hired the National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse to study the affects of marijuana.

After the study, It's chairman, Raymond Shafer, said "The criminal law is too harsh a tool to apply to personal possession even in the effort to discourage use. It implies an overwhelming indictment of the behavior which we believe is not appropriate. The actual and potential harm of use of the drug is not great enough to justify intrusion by the criminal law into private behavior, a step which our society takes only 'with the greatest reluctance'". President Nixon signed the Controlled Substances Act anyway.

Since then, the violence on the borders of US and Mexico has been deadly. There are hundreds of people killed each year in the drug trafficking scene. There is so much money at stake, it has to be kept tight by the drug lords. They have semi-automatic weapons and they have millions of dollars. When there is a drug user, there is a drug dealer. The United States government has spent billions of dollars trying to stop something that simply cannot be stopped. How is this rational? Does it make sense to let the money being made off of marijuana go to Mexico and Mexican drug dealers instead of the United States government? A few days ago, President Barack Obama eased regulations of medical marijuana stores. He has told federal authorities not to target medical marijuana suppliers or users. This is the first step toward legalization. The public opinion on pot has gone from 25% in favor of legalization in the 1970s to 44% today.

Pros versus Cons. The pros of the drug are obvious. It can prevent nausea and vomiting, stimulate hunger for chemotherapy, lower intraocular pressure in the treatment of glaucoma. It has also been shown to stop schizophrenia, help with multiple sclerosis and depression.

Putting money in the hands of the taxpayer and not in the hands of drug cartels is a pro. Ending violence on the border is a pro. Not wasting money trying to stop the cultivation and distribution is a pro.

The cons are not so obvious. The most obvious, though, is the effect it can have on the respiratory system. It is smoke going into your lungs, just like tobacco smoke from a cigarette. With the drug being illegal, adulterants are bound to happen. With the legalization of marijuana, this would not happen.

What about the Gateway drug theory? This is a major con. Or is it? According to a 2005 study in the "Drug and Alcohol Review", "pre-existing traits may predispose users to addiction in general... the availability of multiple drugs in a given setting." The study says that there are many other factors, aside from the actual cannabis that contributes to the use of other harder drugs.

It seems that rational minds can conclude that the pros heavily outweigh the cons. It would be a good thing to let patients who need marijuana have easy access. It would a good thing to stop Mexican drug cartels. It would be a good thing to tax marijuana and make money. It would be a good thing to stop wasting taxpayer money in an effort to stop a drug that is not harmful. The DEA would be better utilized stopping the trafficking of many other drugs.  It would be a good thing for marijuana to become legal in the United States.

Sources:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all?content=10.1080/09595230500126698
http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/77339/?page=entire
http://www.world-mysteries.com/marijuana1.htm
http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/UK/03/01/shakespeare.cannabis/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/1195939.stm
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200612/23/eng20061223_335258.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana
http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/20/govt%E2%80%99s-latest-action-on-medical-marijuana-first-step-in-legalizing-pot/
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673607604644/fulltext
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Removal_of_cannabis_from_Schedule_I_of_the_Controlled_Substances_Act