This was just stupid, so I wrote about it.

Article: "Should boyfriend be your bestfriend?"

http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/personal/01/19/tf.boyfriend.is.best.friend/index.html

Preface:
The general point of this article is that the author is trying to determine whether it is; (a) healthy (b) necessary and (c) rational practice to unify the “Departments of Friendship” & “Department of Partner”. The rationale given for this debate is that she hasn’t many close friends for a variety of reasons and she wonders what the risks are in putting all of those chips into one pot. As is to be expected, I find this logic to be broken and delinquent of rational thought.

I:
Her initial questions appears to be; asking herself whether or not it is healthy to have her boyfriend also share the role of best friend. She presents a handful of points that I felt lacked common sense, but then really showed her intellectual ineptitude by quoting "Secret Diary of a Call Girl" by saying “My boyfriend is a friend to whom I want to do things I don't want to do to my other friends”. Honestly, I have never read any such book, but if this is an indication as to the book’s theme, I am glad that I have not. That is absolutely nonsensical to me.

Perhaps I am wrong here, but I was under the assumption that part of the reason your bond with your significant other was supposed to be so strong (so strong as to wed them) was because you shared both an intimate mental AND physical connection. Is this not correct any longer? Also, are we now taking advice from street hookers? If so, things are beginning to make much more sense to me. The idea that being best friend/confidant to your partner actually now detracts from your attraction to them is so irrational to me that I cannot even adequately formulate my words here.

Your entire purpose during your pursuit to find a life partner is in fact to find a “best friend” whom you find attractive and form a loyal and honest union. If you are looking for both a cocksman and a good listener, perhaps you aren’t really “marriage material”. So to answer the question of whether or not the practice of unifying best friend with boyfriend is healthy or not? Um, it was actually supposed to be the whole reason you commenced the “life partner” search to begin with. You’re an idiot and I feel horrible for the mess your boyfriend has walked into.

II:
Is it necessary to have your boyfriend also be your best friend? Um, let’s put it this way; it is more so necessary to have that, than to have additional friends. Is it nice to have a change of scenery? Certainly it is, healthy too. Do they need to be your best friend in order to go out & about with them? No. Can you only get sushi with your most committed friends? No. Sushi is pretty tolerant with regards to those that it allows to eat it.

To be completely honest; if I were your boyfriend and I knew you were leaving with friends to discuss the issues or conversations that took place within our relationship, I would probably find you bordering on disloyal and likely already be planning my escape route. This notion that it is OK to call your girly friends or gay-boy friend or God forbid “my guy friends” to discuss things pertaining to me and my feelings towards you is so ridiculously unacceptable that I find it difficult to pallet. I don’t leave the house with my boys to talk about how I feel about you, I talk about sports and the ass on the waitress (and yes, I just said that, because I’m honest about it. I assume you check out meatheads). We don’t talk about my relationship because it’s none of their fucking business. Additionally, just because I pound beers with the guy or go to games with the guy doesn’t mean I give a shit about him. Do I like him? Sure, he is entertaining enough. Do I trust him? Not particularly. Do I give a shit what he thinks? Not at all.

Of course I have friends that I do semi trust or care about, but would that outweigh those similar feelings and loyalty to my partner, not a chance and I would only expect the same in return. If my friends feel slighted by it, tough shit. Feel free to find a replacement friend. Another thing, you don’t have to have JUST ONE trusted friend, you can choose to make friends with multiple people who are likeminded. My natural advice to you is be careful with how much of yourself you put out there, but that’s your choice.

To me it makes perfect sense that you have a handful of “good friends” (meaning: sure they aren’t perfect, but they bring some entertaining value to the table and on occasion they are insightful or well intentioned. Naturally, I tell them only what I want them to know about me and about my problems in order to obtain a general consensus on what they think is best for me, and they do so without actually having damaging info about me, also, this allows me to take into account whether I even value their opinion to begin with) then have my partner, my wife, the person with whom I have screened and exchanged enough damaging information to feel secure in knowing it will be kept confidential because if either one of us squeaks we are both royally fucked, also there is that inherent trust once you have seen the other person naked, sort of a security deposit of sorts.

III:
By now the question of whether or not this is a rational practice should have been made pretty clear. It is utterly IRRATIONAL to NOT unify the titles. The simple fact is, you should have been searching amongst your friends equally as you searched for a partner. I mean, not to sound too shallow, but who purposely forges friendships with ugly people to begin with. I mean, obviously a few slip through the cracks because of commonalities, but typically speaking, I wouldn’t walk up to some warpo and be like; “hey, wanna watch the ballgame?” or court some absolute disaster of a girl around long enough to become good friends. Would I purposefully befriend ugly people? Unlikely. Is it shallow? Completely.

What I would do, is meet people that I thought looked, dressed and acted similar to me, if they are men, I tend to bond with them as sports fans or people that also hate Ed Hardy shirt wearers. If they are female, once I have determined I am attracted to them, I tip toe around them for a little while and try to gather some intelligence on her and her past, then I begin to formulate a friendship with her (in the hopes it grows into something more). If I am lucky, I will get my shot at the title and I will seize it. End result being, that I just became romantically involved with a friend who will become my best friend, thus allowing me to withdraw slightly from the inner circle and consolidate my efforts.

Going out with people that are not “friends” or similar to friends is exactly how you became the girl that says “I have such bad luck with men”. That is because you clearly haven’t figured yourself out nor come to terms with your limitations. Therefore, you continue to ignore the likeminded people in your life and opt for a prick that you “lust for” because he is so “what you perceive yourself to be” which is in actuality, incorrect. Naturally, he has shit for brains and the worst of intentions for you, thus forcing you to look elsewhere for companionship and or true friendship.

Decision making grade: F

Epilogue:
All things considered, at any age above about 17 to be asking this question or not understanding fully what it is you are supposed to be searching for is rather pathetic and if I were you, I’d be pretty self conscious about it. The bottom line here is that your partner and your best friend are supposed to be one and the same, and if you want any chance at a successful relationship it would be ideal that the best friend part comes first.

The last part of this article that I have yet to touch upon is her concern for what should happen if they broke up or he “were to be (God forbid) hit by a Walmart 18-wheeler” because she would be isolated. Yes that would suck, for him, and momentarily for you as well. All that you really have to do is become a grown up, you simply clean up and initiate conversations with people you otherwise don’t interact with when you frequent your regular stops (e.g. Library, church, gym, bar, work, etc.). Actually, come to think of it, he doesn’t have to die in order for you to learn to be a functioning grown up. Because your friends are no longer close by, doesn’t mean you can’t pick up some new ones, there are a LOT of people roaming around (most of which are lonely and very self-conscious). It should be relatively easy to re-fill the roster. If your boyfriend is still a living member of Earth, than it’s really simple because all you need are similar people to befriend so you have a place to go on a Thursday night after work. If however, your boyfriend is deceased, then you are just going for broke, also pretty simple stuff. You just approach the people at your regular hangouts (if you have no hangouts, get some) and now you EVEN have one hell of an “ice-breaker” story (My boyfriend got ran over by an 18-wheeler…).

Are parents teaching their children anything at all in regards to human interaction and their societal responsibilities?

This is really not difficult stuff and yet somehow, people STILL cannot figure out what the fuck it is they are supposed to be doing with themselves.

Harry Reid: The Racist?

Preface:
Reid (D-Nev.) should vacate his office after acknowledging that he had described then-Sen. Obama as "light-skinned" and possessing "no Negro dialect" in a private conversation with two reporters. Says Republican Steele

I:
I categorize myself as neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I think the two-party system is outdated and I think those that formulate their opinions or swing their votes in accordance to their party specifically, are foolish and outdated as well. If I had to categorize myself politically, I would say; I am conservative fiscally and environmentally, moderate on values and liberal on people having the right to do whatever the fuck it is they want to do, just as long as they earn a paycheck that will cover it.

II: Harry Reid
Saying in public or saying in private a man's true feelings regarding another man's run for a public office is something that shouldn't demand an apology. Just because the man is biracial or just one race that is considered a minority, doesn't necessarily mean you have to guard everything you say. If you believe (and I do agree) that President Obama played his white cards to the white powers that be and put his metaphorical Lugz on when he visited his primarily black neighborhoods, then by all means say so.

It was an unfortunate time in our nation’s history when blacks were referred to and treated as "Negro's" but it is in fact our history. When making reference to something be it conversation or a point of fact, using the term "negro dialect" is no more or less meaningful than "black dialect", "Afro-American dialect", "Jive" or whatever else you want to call it. It is what it is, nothing more, nothing less.

As for his lighter skin having a positive influence on his status, is this really even debatable? No. It isn't. Because no matter how ugly the point is, no matter how hard it is to hear it, from a rich white politician no less, it is a historical and sociological fact that people respond favorably to lighter skin tones. Even black people of both 1st generation American origin or African origin have struggles within their own community because of how dark their skin tone is. So, you are going to try and pretend that this wasn't helpful for a person who was vying to be the FIRST black President of the United States? Are you in denial? It was a HUGE benefit (I would not say that had he been darker he wouldn't have been elected at all, that is an unanswerable question). It is without any doubt whatsoever that I believe his skin tone was a benefit in his historical campaign.

To then oust a man because he said two things (while socially not the most acceptable) that are almost undisputedly true, is just complete lunacy. We cry for transparency and honesty among our political figures and other public figures, then we formulate ridiculously delusional public norms and irrational political correctness for them to follow (which in order to "follow" they must lie to and deceive you).

Certainly, there must be a line that is followed as it isn't acceptable to say inflammatory things to people especially regarding race or other "hot topics" and I believe no matter how ridiculous, the Office of President should be respected enough as to not be insulted (note: different than constructive criticism) openly – Note: President Obama wasn't President when these statements were said.

III: President Barack Obama
Barack Obama is in my opinion a typical Chicago Politician. I think he is learning on the job, and while mightily intelligent, his debts and personal agenda far outweigh his "Presidential goals". It is pretty clear that I didn't vote for President Obama; not because of race, ethnicity nor party, but because I viewed him as a highly (questionably) decorated carpetbagger. I wasn't buying his magic elixir then and I still am not. I will admit his speeches fired me up, his energy was intoxicating and his message (while completely unrealistic and utopian) was a welcomed change after 8 years of relatively primal behavior.

However, you have to look further than just the well packaged message being sold by President Obama. You have the obligation to look at his upbringing, his family, his wife and her views and past behavior (naturally taking it with a grain of salt because we all have made statements or decisions in our past that are probably less than savory). I have to look at those religious, political or simply criminal characters President Obama has dealt with and often still deals with.

You add the simple fact that his background was in drumming up voters (no matter how cracked out, old or uneducated they are). It isn't a surprise he would be able to utilize this well honed skill-set along with his charisma and the natural propensity for idiot collegians and Liberal-minded (fancy terminology for foolish dreamers) youth to lean Democratically. He catered to the right crowd. He said all the right things to the right people at the right times. Was there a better time for a Democratic "We Want Change" slogan than after 8 years of Bush and an arrogant Republican Administration? Seeing as the entire Government is Democrat today, I would venture to say, no. There wasn't a better time. President Obama said all the right things to the right people in the right tone of voice. That is what a great pitchman does. He caters to the crowd that is listening. Honestly, who can contest with a Columbia & Harvard educated, biracial, charismatic speaker whom white America can so easily relate to, who also just happens to enjoy throwing on a Tar Heel jersey and firing up a heater? He is from a marketing perspective, the political arena's Michael Jordan, only he never did win any of the legitimizing rings...


If President Obama, becomes all he claims to be and comes through on many of his promises, I will be the first to stand up and applaud him. I will do so not with embarrassment but with pride. That said, just imagine how many “Shamwow’s" President Obama could have sold.

Mr. Carpetbagger: "This is it... one dollar a bottle. It works wonders on wounds. Works wonders on just about anything!"

Epilogue:
From reading this it is pretty evident where I stand on this situation and on our President (at this stage of his Presidential term). In actuality, this situation and subsequent coverage touched a nerve with me for two reasons, none of which related to President Obama nor Harry Reid.

First, the fact that Republicans are jumping all over this as though this is their time to shine and get some favorable coverage just feels cheap. It's sort of like starting a fight when you're out to dinner with your girlfriend/date because if you don't do something, you fear she won't believe you're a man (something, I regrettably fall prey to often). It is stupid, unbecoming and makes you appear small. I am however a mere mortal, I am no political powerhouse, so it makes sense for me to fall victim to such primal instincts, but the entire Republican party? It is just pathetic and sad. The behavior that should be shown is very similar to Walter Payton's reaction to scoring touchdowns in the NFL, he simply handed the ball to the Ref and acted like he had been there before. This is much more intimidating behavior than all the hysterics you see guys do now. Same exact thing in the political arena. Just because an opportunity arises where you can make a stink, take sides, and try to nab some TV time with that stuttering alter kacker Larry King doesn't exactly mean you should.

Act like you've been there before.

The second, and more infuriating piece to this socio-political puzzle is our stance in America on political correctness - more specifically, race relations & public figures' private behavior.

Obviously completely off topic; the recent Tiger Woods fallout (as the headlines have it dubbed). Fallout? Who fell? I didn't fall. Did you? Possibly. Tiger Woods, likes sex, a lot. A whole lot. He isn't even real choosy with his picks-to-click. Interesting to know, unfortunate for his children and wife, but not really my business, nor my interest. I like Tiger and buy products he endorsed on occasion because I think he is a hell of a competitor. I like that when he wins he shows his emotions and that I can relate to. Not because I thought; "Tiger is faithful to his family, ergo, I want his Tigerade". The exact same can be sad for political figures. Sure if they run on family values, then turn out to be sleeping with everyone but their wife, I might change my vote, not because the guy likes to fuck, but because he is a liar. If he doesn't run a "family first" campaign, then like every other person of great wealth, power, and access; I assume he has a affinity for strange and likely obliges himself often. Again, not my business, nor my concern. Can you lead or govern effectively, that is my sole concern.

This dumps off into the world of P.C. where the natural responses are "what about my kids"? I raise my kids, not Milorad Blagojevich. So I am not terribly concerned with what he does and what they see of him. Political correctness has taken our society by storm, we guard every fucking word that comes out of our mouths, we judge and label every single thing a person says on a public forum then hold it to this ridiculous code that behind closed doors almost NOBODY follows. People act like a celeb who cheated is the devil, yet they cheat on their own spouse. They act like politicians of a different religious faith are blasphemous then go out and degrade people and cut them off in the church parking lot. People are so flawed and pathetic that the only way for them to feel in control is to watch and provide commentary on the behavior of those in the public forum. Only to allow them to re-enter once they have shown some humility in order to make ourselves feel righteous and powerful.

Act like you've been there before.

Saving the most pertinent for last, "Race Relations". What does it say about us that we have a term for dealing with people of another race today? This goes both ways too, the fact that if a white man says ANYTHING that can be construed as positive or negative regarding a man of African American decent based on racial motivation, it becomes an over-the-top issue of discussion for Al Sharpton or Rev. Jesse Jackson (who are incredible hypocrites and men of little to no loyalty and moral fortitude -- by the way). To me that is just completely pathetic and becoming annoying to the point of exhaustion. Likewise, for those white people running around saying minorities get all the advantages, tax money or college tuition grants and whatever else. You want to go to college? you want to get in? Don't be a dipshit, do your homework and you will go wherever your mental aptitude will permit. Simple as that.

Act like you've been there before.

We have gotten so touchy about race now that simply implying that a decision or thought is racially motivated becomes a HUGE ordeal involving officials and apologies and contrite behavior all the while, a good portion of those people will go home and laugh at a race joke or are closet racists. I no longer concern myself with what people think about race (black, white or indigo). I have no problems with any particular skin color. I hate everyone equally. I think some races have stupid, irrational cultural tendencies just as I think many of my own cultural customs are utterly nonsensical. People need to get over themselves and realize their mortality. Idiots need to start recognizing they are stupid. People need to start tending to their own affairs and use just a little common sense when it comes to who you vote for. I would settle on even the slightest amount of accountability being shown & everybody needs to understand that accumulating a mass of wealth is not likely the most important thing in your life, you cannot keep it when you die, you do know that, right?

Act like you've been there before.

Ridculousness

Preface:
The following is an excerpt from a cnn.com posted article. I regrettably read the entire piece but will subject you to only the first portion.

"Get outta my head, lady! That is totally my dating dilemma -- being forced to choose between bad and worse. Being experienced enough to know that there are no guarantees, it only makes it easier for me to choose the path of least resistance ... go with the moment and throw away the future. But in the end, the moment passes and the empty future lurks ahead.

Cary does offer an alternative option, and I'm not so sure it sounds very fun to me -- say goodbye to your single life. Cary writes:

"How do you become ready to move from one stage of life to the next? It helps to openly admit that it's going to be sad to leave this stage of life you've enjoyed so much ... Give away what you have been withholding and withhold what you've been giving away. It means get real. Tell him you want a man to fall in love with and stay with, and if that's a problem for him then OK there are plenty of chicks ... because if you want a lifetime relationship it will be full of honesty and vulnerability and pain."

I:
Somewhat unrelated to this article; I am often entertained when I listen to people stutter on about their lives, however unhappy or confused they claim to be. I can sit and listen to people go on about their troubles for hours, in a not-so-nice way, I find it comical.

I especially find talks about relationships or life stages to be the most rewarding (in a comedic sense). This article was no different, while slightly frustrating for me as a single guy to know this is what I have to choose from, I still managed to extract some much needed laughter from it. The real bonus of this article was the mixture of life stages AND "finding love".

II:
I've broken this article up into three (3) parts, I find once it's in manageable pieces (of shit) it is even more fun to laugh at. The first theme mentioned here is the idea of a "single life" vs. "relationship life" which by its nature would lead you to believe the two are different existences entirely. This struck me as a glaring example of why people fail at both relationships and life. That reason is; stupidity and lack of common sense. "Mourn your single life first" is what the author says. Really? mourn it? What in the hell good does this do? Answer: none.

This is completely nonsensical in both behavior and theory. Reasoning here is simple, people can't and don't change. They don't, trust me. All they can do is displace or suppress. Both of which are short term answers and will eventually manifest themselves again (most likely at the worst possible time). To act one way under the heading "single life" then to figure, when I meet "the one", I will just adjust my behavior and norms to conform to a more organized lifestyle is so ridiculous and irrational that it begs questioning your sanity and intelligence.

I will never understand those who set a time frame for marriage or those who must "explore" before settling down. What the hell is there to explore? You want to see some places, good deal. Book a flight. You want to get laid in an airplane, buy a trick and go fly around the city.

"I really need to experience seeing other people before I settle down"

This is utterly stupid too. So you want to add to the already certain drama and complexity of merging lives with another human? Here is the deal, If I want all of these things before I meet "the one" I can do it in no less than 15 days. It takes 10 days to train travel across Europe, so I book a Monday flight and I go from hostel to hostel meeting all sorts of people, to be sure I have missed nothing, I take photographs of the notable folks. On my way back to the states I rent a hooker and satisfy my very weird airplane fetish (which by the way, is strange. Fetishes in general are warped and pathetic to me). Once I have touched down in the USA I have five (5) days to review my photos and write down memories I want to acknowledge. Okay, now it's time to find "the one", right?

Yes, it really is this simple and easy to satisfy needs.

III: "Finding Love"
This portion of the article was really just sort of like watching an old cat trying to capture a quick mouse, she just never really had a chance. That said, The definition of "Love" sort of baffles me anyways, I mean, great admiration or lust, that I can figure, but love? Not so much. I will admit I am weird in the fact I truly believe that "blood is thicker than water" and therefore would say the closest thing to love is that shared bond of blood. But, anything else is just a matter of high levels of admiration or fixation on another, fully replicable. So naturally, the notion of "finding love" or adapting yourself to be "ready" for love is just comical to me. Finding love makes it seem like you were just digging through your garbage bin and found some love in there and by adapting for it, do you just mean temporarily concealing your massive insecurities and shortcomings? I'll take your silence to mean, yes.

This is the part I really struggle with, the mentioning of "leaving a life I so enjoyed to find love". If you so enjoyed whoring around and boozing without consequence, why are you leaving it? Your leaving it to find love has accomplished nothing aside from likely beginning the demise of an otherwise innocent and unknowing person. Obviously, you are a self indulgent person to begin with so why abandon your natural instincts? The only outcome for leaving and thus Mourning your single life" is that you will meet someone who actually has good intentions and fooling them into believing you are a well organized person with little to no baggage, only to find out that you actually are a liar with numerous insecurities and more baggage then a Japanese tourist. Subsequently, this person realizes their mistakes (probably too late) and their life at least in the short term is completely ruined. Please spare me of your "finding love".

IV: "Life Stages"
This possibly manifested itself during the education process, for every accomplishment we received a star or some sort of medal then when we moved onto a new level we received a piece of paper signed by someone we couldn't pick out of a lineup. Well, in actuality, there are no stages in life. That isn't entirely true, there are two; birth and death. The rest is just the process.

I understand it sounds like I take the fun out of life but really I am not, I am merely trying to simplify things. I just cannot stand listening to people drone on any longer about their "next stage in life" because it is completely fictitious. The next stage will be the same as the last stage just with a different cast of idiots, it's as simple as that. You start school as a child in the hopes of being systematically educated in order to become a productive member of society. For some it takes, others it doesn't. The education process tends to break into tiers after high school, those who have found their relative roles follow the appropriate path, those who don't float around for a while. Now at any point here you can choose to "find love" or remain single, my only advice would be, don't take the final when you have only read the first few chapters. Meaning, if you are 20 and have met very few people or spent time with just one other person it is probably not in your best interest to marry the first one out the gate. However, if you have been around and experienced a good variety of people and their accompanying stupidity then perhaps you are educated enough to make a good selection. (Note: Nowhere here do I say love. I said a good selection. Meaning, somebody that will help balance your life and whom you can provide balance for as well. It is assumed that you already are attracted to this person physically or mentally, or both - or they are independently wealthy)

Epilogue:
I honestly feel that by creating stages you just add to the pressure in life. By creating fictitious deadlines and goals you are setting yourself up for failure and its subsequent period of depression. Spend the first part of your education learning what you are capable of and what is out there, the next phase of education building yourself or fortifying yourself - depending on how far along you are. Then get out of school and begin to try and dig a nice foothold in your world. Shortly after this you are probably ready to start scanning others for compatibility. If in fact a family is what you desire in life. If you don't know or don't care to have a committed family and eternal obligations, then just go around doing whatever you want. You're entitled to that much for your efforts.

I mean for me it is pretty simple stuff. Sometimes not so simple to carry out, but in theory, it is relatively simple math. I decided what I will and wont stand for with regards to people and treatment. I concluded that I can live my life as if it were going along a slide rule. "If this occurs, my reaction will be..." or "should a person do or say this to me, my level of tolerance will be...etc." and then win or lose, I follow it. I am a person who desires a traditional family lifestyle and so when I see or meet a person I think has a specific skillset or offering who I find attractive I go for broke. I don't sit back and wait on it. Does it work all the time? No, it surely doesn't. In fact, it hasn't worked yet.