On the Racist Food

This week, I became the old man yelling at the cloud.   I wrote an email to a podcast complaining about its content.  It was On the Media's episode Is This Food Racist?  The podcast was a logrolling platform for another podcast that shares the WNYC distributor and had two main thrusts -- an interview with Rick Bayless, an Oklahoman who has dedicated his life to Mexican food (real deal stuff, not food truck tacos) and the response to a comment the guest made about Korean staple bibimbap about how to improvement.  A key piece of information is that both Bayless and Dan Pashman, host of Sporkful, are white and not Latin or Korean.  At least, that was key to Brooke Gladstone, host of OTM who interviewed Pashman.

I have gotten irritated by podcasts before -- mostly by stuff like how pretentious David Plotz can be on the Slate Political Gabfest -- but never have I actually written an email to voice that.  Food, though, has a powerful effect on me.  There were a few moments that made this happen.

The first was when Pashman, while interviewing Bayless, confronted him about whether he had advantages in his career with Mexican food because he was white.  He said that he never really thought about it, tried to figure out what they were asking him, and pretty much said Mexican food is good.  Afterwards, Pashman and Gladstone could not believe the gall of him unwilling to concede his white privilege.  At this point, the transmission in my brain ground its gears.  For some reason, the idea that his whole food palate is built on him being an American interpreting Mexican food, so the idea of getting advantages in this context is kind of meaningless.

The next was when Pashman acknowledged that during a discussion on Korean food, he suggested an improvement to bibimbap and got an array of calls, some positive, others not where he and Gladstone wrung their hands over whether it was ok.  The podcast played an interview with an offended Korean American discussing how as a child he was made fun of for his school lunches because there were noodles in them.  He then talked about how it felt like a white guy suggesting an improvement to Korean food was like trying to tell his Korean grandmother how to be hotter.  There are a couple of things about this: everyone gets made fun of for their school lunches.  Another is that these sorts of adjustments are how immigrant foods become assimilated so that when the next generation of Korean kids bring their lunches to school, it looks normal.  Finally, there is not definitive bibimbap, and if there were, this guy who called in would not own it.  He's not Korean Arnold Palmer.

The interview concluded with Gladstone asking Pashman if he would continue to experiment like that.  He said, probably yes, but while being more thoughtful of others.  It seems like a fine sentiment, but it also seems kind of crazy.  The idea that making food a different way is imperialism seems like it requires a lessening of the original in a way that really does not happen.  This is not the first time I have seen this sort of complaint, though.  (In the interest of full disclosure: I eat collard greens.  I cook them often, though never with peanuts.)

More importantly, though, is that this is what interaction is.  Integration like this is part and parcel of what America is, especially with food.  Pizza, General Tso's chicken, the California roll, the Cuban sandwich, everything that comes out of Louisiana, chili and the mission burrito are all results of cultures running into each other.

I also think that this is the kind of thinking that leads to people supporting people like Donald Trump.  It's hard not to see this as an argument that white people can't make foods from non-white people.  While the discussion is clearly more nuanced than that, the implication was clearly that this was somehow bad.  When immigrants arrived here with their recipes and found different ingredients available, they improved without feeling enslaved to an idea of authenticity.  I just can't see how the world isn't a richer place because of decisions like that, and if the offended Korean American's complaints cause others to be hesitant to experiment because they do not belong to the ethnicity, that's really a shame.

I beg to differ

I know that language is evolutionary and usage tends to trump history.  That discourages me for the future, given the pervasiveness of stupid shortening of words induced by email and texting and what not (a friend of mine told me he was "totes jel" over the weekend [totally jealous, I think]; while he was being tongue in cheek, the fact that that is a joke to be made makes me feel like a cranky old man yelling for you to stay off my lawn).  The one that seems to get me at a disproportionately high level compared to everyone else I know is begging the question.

It does not, traditionally, mean the same thing as raising the question.  It is a logical fallacy where an unstated question of dubious validity is assumed to be true as part of the initial premise.  For example, to say that Justin Bieber is better than John Lee Hooker because he has sold more records begs the question that selling records is a valid measure of musical goodness.  And yes, I said records.

One that came up while listening to the Slate Political Gabfest (motto: 50 minutes of pretension every week!) was about "fixing" the constitution in response to a Texas Law Professor's blog at the New York Times.  The basic assertion is that our government isn't very effective and the Constitution of a big part of why, so let's fix the Constitution so that the government can solve our problems; insisting that making ours more like a Parliamentary system would be preferable.

Now, this begs the question that effective government is a positive outcome.  The solutions that we have gotten (especially recently) are not really evidence in favor of this.  The complaint that the Constitution is difficult to amend is regarded as a weakness, and I think it is a strength, particularly given the animosity we see right now.  This is essentially saying, "Because you disagree with the actions I want to take and the rules let you, we need to fix the rules because I'm smarter than you."  It is ironic, too, that we call the people who believe this "liberals" these days.

Political moments like these are precisely the reason that the Constitution should be hard to amend.  What would the fixes look like?  If it's hard to pass as legislation, why should we want that to be institutionalized more permanently?  Remember prohibition?  It was stupid. 

A lot of the discussion centers on the Senate, which is unrepresentative, by design.  This is the only body I think that does need to be reformed.  My fix: repeal the 17th Amendment.  The direct election of senators has supplanted its whole purpose, which, of course, was to make legislation harder to pass.  Everything that government does takes rights or powers away from somebody else.  The Senate was supposed to serve as a backstop for the State Governments against the Federal Government, and now it doesn't.  Now it's just a weird distortion of the House of Representatives, but with a bigger district.  Also, the House districts are too big.  The initial district size was 1 representative for every 30,000 people.  At current population, there would be 10,000 representatives.  Granted, that seems impractical, but at 435, that's way too small.

The biggest thing that irks me, though, is that those who want to strengthen government are driving the discussion so much better than those who are skeptical.  The fact that publications can ask, "How do we 'fix' the Constitution" when it is function as intended without being utterly laughable is confounding.  That we are discussing the fact that government might not be a never-ending source of benefits is, too. 

The position asserted by Slate and Levinson requires a fundamental and dramatic reorganization of what "America" means and I'm just not sure that there's compelling evidence that's necessary, or even preferable if it were.  In that same podcast, Emily Bazelon in particular has claimed that both parties are getting more extreme, but especially the Republicans.  I don't think I can keep your attention any longer and argue with that, but I'll just say that that assertion, like the larger one about the Constitution earlier, requires using a target for the "center" as moving much faster than the public at large has and try to come back to that in a future post.

So, when we are becoming more divided, legislation is getting harder to pass, and politics is as rancorous as we can remember seems like an odd argument to make it easier to make sweeping changes, rather than harder.  I mean, after all, these people bought more Justin Bieber records than John Lee Hooker records. 
And progressives are suggesting we trust them to rewrite our Constitution?  I beg to differ.

Harry whatter?

I like the news. I like a lot of things. I was listening to a podcast about news analysis (Slate Political Gabfest -- I don't typically agree with them and they are super pretentious but for some reason, I keep coming back) and one of the contributors, Emily Bazelon, made a comment that was pretty insipid that compared the debt ceiling resolution to an event in the Harry Potter series that most folks would call a "spoiler" and then denied responsibility for it.

I have never seen a Harry Potter movie, so while I didn't previously know the outcome of the matter that came up, it didn't really spoil the issue for me, either. The biggest reason is because Harry Potter is a book for children. There is a saying in the Sighted household, mostly said by Dr. Sighted, when things like American Idol, Daniel Radcliffe or flowers appear as a commercial on the ol' television: "You're lucky to have me," because she typically has no interest in any of them and knows I am grateful. Show her a novelty lunch box in the shape of an elephant, though, and her aloof distance from children's tastes vanishes. And she's right, too.

The sadistic inappropriateness of spoiling a big movie series notwithstanding, I notice it is a little strange to have just watched a cultural phenomenon roll by on the outside. I imagine this is how rednecks felt after disco was over. What happens next? Will people finally stop dressing up with lightning bolts on their foreheads? (That is like 85% of what I know about the franchise.)

I occasionally find myself hung up in tv series or something trying to escape, but cannot, because the story is unfinished. (Although, I did try to watch Firefly or Serenity or whatever the show is on Netflix and wanted to force myself to finish it but abandoned ship [get it?] after like 6 episodes. I have a rule: any new show gets 5 episodes, which is why I was the only person in the country to watch the entire series of Teachers.) How liberated do the people caught in JK Rowlings's orbit feel? I do feel a sense of relief after football season is over, even though I love it, because I get to have Saturdays back. What will these Potter fans do with all this found time? (Do Harry Potter fans have a slick nickname like Gleeks or Trekkies?) I'm pretty sure that people who obsess over things are pretty reasonable when it comes to moving on, so it shouldn't be an issue. I'd ask my doctor, but she just doesn't care. (Can my wife be my doctor?)

Nobody uses pill in its slang form anymore.

There is a commercial that irritates me to no end that I haven't publicly skewered on my blog yet. I am going to do that now. It's Nexium, the "Little Purple Pill" that solves every sort of problem related to acid reflux disease. You know, you don't just feel better after taking it, you are better. So next time you're standing around talking about all the charity work you do with your friends, the guy who volunteers at the soup kitchen has nothing on the guy who takes Nexium. Because he is better.

That's not even the part that bothers me so. It's the one with the father (presumably) of a family whom everyone in said family refers to as "The Finisher." Which is a load of hogwash because the examples he cites, "Finish your homework! Finish Your Vegetables!" involves asking other people to finish things without actually doing any finishing himself. Then, to tie it together, he says, "There was something I thought I [the Finisher!] was finished with." See how that comes full circle on itself? No? That's because there has never existed a more contrived plot device ever. Not even the history professor in Monty Python in the Holy Grail, which was contrived on purpose, can exceed it. I hate this commercial. I would prefer to suffer with acid reflux disease than take this drug on principle.

I know that writing an ad for a drug would be hard. There's not a lot to work with, and there's usually a lot of jargon. But I can't really say I think that advertising drugs to the public is a good idea in the first place, but if they're going to do it, do it better than this. There are Geico commercials or ads with fast cars or explosions whose spot you're taking with this nonsense. The kicker to writing these ads being hard, though, is that the people who write them are professionals. In order to get paid for your work, typically you need to be kind of good at it. If not, well, I'd be making money doing second rate work writing ads for gullible pharmaceutical companies. In case there are any gullible pharmaceutical execs reading this, here's my suggestion. If you like it, leave a comment and I'll tell you where you can mail the check.

[Fade from purple]
Explosion, rocket car flies across screen. Cut inside of car, where man in World War I aviator style clothing is seated next to a smokin' hot woman wearing something sexy. She says, "That was close!" He clutches his chest. "Oh no, not your acid reflux disease!" Another explosion, then goats with machine guns parachute on screen. The man says, "I need something better! This, this purple pill might be just ticket! Fortunately, I had a prescription written and filled for Nexium before this battle began!" He takes the Nexium. He sits upright, shoots the goats with the lasers and missiles from his rocket car. The girl says, "The Nexium worked! And you saved humanity! My hero!" She hugs his arm and rests her head on his shoulder. He smiles, turns to the camera and says, "With only headache, diarrhea, and stomach pain as side effects for Nexium, there is no question. Nexium is the balls. Talk to your doctor right away."

It can even be a cartoon, like Erin E-sruance. That'd be ok, but they better finish it soon.

Slang is so clever

You can probably tell that I am picky about language. There are words and grammar I try to stay away from, like on-lineisms and ending a sentence with a preposition, because I am educated. There are, however, slang words that some people used that irritate me to no end. I think it's a function of overuse, but really, I don't think I need a reason for things to irritate me. Like Rachel Ray, for example. She's comparatively nice looking, I'm sure her food is delicious, but she's just too much. Too much what I can't say.

The word I recently heard that set me off was the slang word "rock" for diamond. I wish I could tell you why this is unsettling to me, but I really have nothing to say about it. Maybe it has something to do with rock being slang for like anything -- diamond, football, testicle -- but in the context of diamonds, just say diamond. Another one is "do you want to come with?" when they really mean "do you want to come with me/us?" English isn't Spanish; pronouns aren't optional, particularly object pronouns. "Shrooms" is almost on this level. It suffers from overuse. Sure, the drug angle was kind of funny the first time you hear it referring to a portabella or shiitakes because it's a little incongruous. It's not funny enough to ever hear it again, though.

I'm sure there are others; there always are. There are some ok ones, too, but at the moment I can't think of any. That's the problem with this sort of outlet. I need a little tablet to keep in my back pocket so that I can track of these things and when the list gets long enough. Until that time, stop using "rock" in place of diamond.

Snippets and pieces

Tonight, I wrote a bit. (Yes, I write in other contexts besides this blog. Sometimes it's even meaningful!) The problem is, all that came out was just snippets and pieces, nothing that I would call "anything," really. It's kind of a letdown, like when you have what you can tell is a really great sneeze coming, and after a few of those rearing-ups that precede the best, you can't force anything out. That's kind of how I feel about it.

I also have concerns about when it comes out as something that I don't want other people to read. I know there are folks out there who write for themselves and that's nice and all, but I don't get it. I can't really get on board if I don't think that somebody, at some point, will see what I pen in some way. Like in college, I wrote some movie shorts mostly because a friend of mine wanted to make movies and didn't have any movies to make. If wanted to make billboards (or comics, ahem), I would've done that too, just so people would get a chance to see my skillz.

I have a lot of stuff in my notebooks and hard drives and what not that will never see the light of day, because it's crap. That's ok, especially if it's something that I would call finished. There's closure there, I never have to worry about it again and can never have to worry about it again, much like the turd that gets flushed away. But if it sucks and I give up mid stream, then, well, I'm going to have to use another analogy because the toilet one just won't do anymore. Abandoning a kitten? Well, a kitten who sucks, so abandoning a puppy.

Even Hall and Oates?

If you ask ten people or so what kind of music they listen to, I would wager than about five of them will say, "Oh, I like all kinds of music." You know what I think? I think they're liars, that's what. Nobody listens to all kinds of music. There is something out there that makes you say, "I swear to God, if I have to hear another Boston song, I will commit an act of arson." Or, bagpipes. Lots of people hate bagpipes. Not me though; if I could figure out a way, I'd have bagpipes play (in this order) Auld Lang Syne, You Might Think by the Cars and Happy Birthday every year on my birthday. (My birthday is on New Year's Day, which explains Auld Lang Syne.)

But more than Boston, I think I am tired of the Eagles. I honestly can say that if I hear Take it Easy on the radio one more time I am going to burn down a gas station. Or library. But then again, this isn't about me, because I definitely do not listen to all kinds of music. I'm actually a little ashamed that my near encyclopaedic (I chose the British spelling to be extra pretentious) of classic rock music has not translated into an interest in current music. I'm working on it, though, I promise.

People who say they like all kinds of music probably don't really care that much about music as an art form. That's my conclusion. If you are equally at home listening to, say, Ashlee Simpson as you are Miles Davis or Eric Clapton or Juice Newton or Parliament or Ricky Martin, really, can your opinions on music be trusted? Can your opinions on anything be trusted? This has been a pretty italics heavy post so far.

Here's what I have to say about this whole ordeal: just man up and commit to music. The crazy thing is you don't have to be monogamous or anything! Why is this so hard? Are you worried that when you run for Congress, somebody's going to be offended you forgot to mention you like reggae? I am offering two possible actions that I think are reasonable the next time somebody says that they like all music: simply walk away, mid-sentence, or punch them in the side. I have a Peaceful Easy Feeling that this will work out great.

Whatever happened to that one with the chick gyrating to Foghat

I make fun of commercials and ad campaigns that are retarded pretty often. Taco Bell frequently comes to mind, as does Capital One. I just learned that as does is an awkward series of words. I do feel like I owe, every now and again, that I should credit to the commercials that do a good job, too. Geico had been the best of the bunch for a while. I haven't seen a new one in a while, though, so I can't speak of its current quality. The one with Mini-me kind of sucked, actually.

I like what the Hardee's ad people are doing. Granted, it's not making me laugh or being particularly memorable, but whenever I see a Hardee's commercial, I have an absolute understanding of who they are and for what they stand. They want to put as much stuff on top of a burger and to hell with all those whiny hippies who think stuff should be even moderately healthy. You're not going to see any McSalads at this place. You're going to see a pair of hamburger patties surrounded by mayonnaise, ketchup, mustard, cheese and bacon. But there sure won't be any lettuce on that beast because that would just take the place of more bacon.

The commercial I saw most recently unveiled a new topping for this manliest of sandwiches: chili. Brilliant. What else could they add to make this sandwich more self-destructive? A chicken breast? We can only hope. I will be both simultaneously proud and pissed if that happens.

I think that Hardee's has a few things it can do to really go the distance and become the place to go where you want to kill yourself with food, like include a milkshake that is made entirely of egg and butter. Or offer a peanut butter dipping sauce for the french fries and chicken nuggets. Actually, I'm not sure that Hardee's offers chicken nuggets; chicken is too lean for a place like this. I also think that to really complete the picture, Hardee's needs to serve some sort of alcoholic beverage, but not just any. Beer isn't strong enough, vodka is too clean, bourbon is too refined. Moonshine. A perfect meal at would be like two 1/3 pound patties with six strips of bacon, a healthy slathering of mayo and three slices of cheese. Forget the tomato and pickles, they're too natural. Top it off with a side of fried breading (forget the potato part of the fries), dipped in deep fried ketchup, with a half a pint of moonshine. I could go for that right now.

I started reading about Borat and ended up at Dr. Katz, Professional Therapist

I hope this happens to other people. Sometimes I start thinking about something, go look it up, and somehow end up at IMDB or Wikipedia and one thing leads to another and I don't know how I got there. Sometimes it starts with Napoleon and ends up at the Farsi language; others I start looking up what the deal with the free kick after a safety is all about and find myself reading about Paul of Tarsus. You might want to know what the intermediate steps of that chain would be, and honestly, so do I.

Usually, when this happens, I don't even remember why I wanted to know about the thing that sent me on this snipe hunt in the first place. Like tonight, for example, I was sitting on my bed watching the football game, started to check out a video with Sacha Baron Cohen appearing with Martha Stewart on Leno and next thing I know I'm thinking to myself, "You know, if Sarah Silverman were consistently funny instead of annoying, she'd be the perfect woman," and watching Desperate Housewives. But then again, if Silverman's with Jimmy Kimmel these days, then there are deficiencies with her decision making of which I want no part.

In these bizarre series of discovery, you never know what you'll find out. Like that Dr. Katz was on for six seasons. Remember that impossibly irritating program that had wiggly people in it? It was one of the very early Comedy Central shows, back when it had stuff on it that wasn't MadTV. I watched a lot of Dr. Katz in the mornings when I was home from school during the summers. You might also find out things that will be helpful in Jeopardy, like for example, the word prose comes from the Latin word prosa, meaning straightforward. Unless Wikipedia is lying, which it very well might be. I didn't get that far in my Latin class to know for sure. I do remember that "rex parvorum virorum sum" means "I am the king of the small men." Beautiful language, that Latin.

I can think of something you probably don't care about

Every once in a while, I'll notice that my profile is next to empty, and say, "You know, I should add stuff to it, because the whole thing about Capricorn seems to give the wrong impression of me." Even though it does it automatically, being a Capricorn isn't all that important to me. I don't really even know what it means to be a Capricorn, but it is kind of a funny idea to make a goat that's also a fish.

So looking at the things to add to my profile are a bunch of things that I really can't imagine the average visitor caring about. I try to entertain you for a few minutes with these delightful blogs, and the best that Google can offer for the profile is the generic list of movie, music, etc. They try to be cute with their random questions, but they always suck. They try to be off the wall, and it's obvious that they're trying too hard and it comes off weak. At least that's how I see it. For example, the current one it's asking me is: " When your science teacher smashed a frozen rose with a hammer, did you warm the petals to bring them back to life?" I can only assume they're talking about the liquid nitrogen demonstrations where you can freeze the water in stuff to make it really rigid in this case, and the best part is the liquid nitrogen, which they don't even mention. Also, the use of the hammer takes away from the demonstration; it's great because you stick a flower or a whatever into the nitrogen and slam it on the table and pieces go everywhere and nobody in the seventh grade is expecting it. Also, when you pluck the flower, it's already dead.

But really, most people who write these blogs are so self-centered that they're writing about themselves anyway and will probably talk about movies and music they like in the text of the writing itself. Many of those self-centered people aren't interesting enough to write about other stuff too, so by taking away the music and movies they like, what are you leaving them, Google? You're not going to force us to read about what people ate for lunch, are you?

I guess the idea is that people can read the profiles and see "Oh, this person is interested in politics and cats and loved Hitch. I think I'll read this blog." The about me is also a puzzler. I'm either completely anonymous or you already knew me. If I'm anonymous, why do you want to know if I prefer Coke to Pepsi or like sour cream and onion potato chips? If you already know me, then you already know me. Maybe this irritation is one of the personality traits that a goat would have if it were also a fish.

Dear Alma Mater Be Our Guide / Reveal to Us the Way

I have gone to three schools that have an Alma Mater, and I still don't know why the songs are called that. I understand a little bit as to why the schools themselves are called that, since there is a bit of "nourishing" of a person through education. For all you ignoramuses out there (and yes, that is the plural, it's not ignorami), alma mater is Latin for nourishing mother. So, the school itself sort of makes sense, but the naming of the song doesn't.

Mr. Wagner, one of those teachers you'll remember forever (if you had him) made all of us new freshman in his class memorize the Spruce Creek High School Alma Mater. The totality of what I remember from that exercise is visible in the title bar above, so it made quite an impact on me. We also had to memorize the fight song, the Gettysberg Address, the Constitution, and the 1st and 4th verses of the national anthem. There were probably other things he had us memorize, but I can't remember what they were.

Rose-Hulman had an Alma Mater, too, I'm pretty sure. I must say that after three and a quarter years there if the Rose pep band played it in my living room, I wouldn't be able to identify it. Then again, they could be playing Pinball Wizard and I wouldn't recognize it (that actually happened - not in my living room). They weren't very good, but the point is I don't know the Alma Mater for my alma mater. I think the fight song is called "Dear Old Rose", but I don't know the words. I understand the football team sang it after wins, which I didn't know until halfway through the senior season. The probably did a lot of stuff that they didn't publicize very well. I blame the newspaper.

There is no mistake about Clemson's Alma Mater. They sing it all the time. Before games, after games, before class, when the president goes to the bathroom, etc. It's a fine song, with one glaringly monumental flaw. The first two lines are "Where the Blue Ridge yawns its greatness / Where the Tigers play." So far, so good; Blue Ridge Moutains are right up the street and yawning greatness is a pretty good image of effortlessly being awesome. We are all Tigers, and play is better than work, so I'm ok with this part. The next lines are "Here the sons of dear old Clemson / Reign supreme alway." I hate the missing s in always. It turns out, though, that it is an acceptable archaic or poetic form of the word, but it doesn't make it easier for me. The word looks naked. If it were a sexy, feminine word like curvacious or bassoon, then nobody would be complaining about the word being a little immodest. But with a stubby misshapen word like always, it needs the s to pull off its look.

A tad ridiculous

Under the recommendation of a friend of mine, I made my homepage the customized Google one. I chose some modules that clicked well with the sort of person I am: various newses, the weather, daily quotes, etc. I was going to say word of the day, but I think that's a default setting. I did not choose the calendar, which was really the thing my friend raved about, but I hate scheduling things. So she didn't convert me completely.

The quote I got earlier today is what caught my attention. I got "Not all treasure is gold or silver" by Jack Sparrow. First, I must say that I am tired of Johnny Depp. But this quote wasn't by Johnny Depp; it was by Jack Sparrow, who, if I recall correctly, was a character in a movie based on a ride in which he didn't appear. Although Keira Knightly was a nice addition, and should be in the ride in the future. It also got me thinking about how there are also a few Will Smith quotes, which are from movies like Men in Black, which is surprising, because Jay or Kay of whoever the hell he was didn't get credited. I guess it's a little better, since Will Smith is actually a person, but somehow I doubt he actually wrote that line. Some anonymous scriptwriter got gypped out of his credit.

The problem is that the source of these quotes is the website quotes4all.net, which is apparently open source. Anybody can just send in a quotation. There are a few by Sir Winston Churchill, who is a personal hero of mine, which is wrong. "If you are not liberal by the time you are 25, you have no heart. If you are not conservative by the time you are 35, you have no brains." and "Don't talk to me about naval tradition. It's nothing but rum, sodomy and the lash." Not only did he not say either of those things, but the second quote isn't even the correct incorrect quotation. Click here if you care enough to see why this is the case.

This is also the same principle as to why I don't know how much I can trust wikipedia, since a good majority of people who use the internet are retards. But not any of you guys, you're all brilliant. Except that guy who used to post about his financial blog, I still kind of hate him for falsely raising my hopes of getting new and meaningful comments.

I feel like James Garner

A situation has arisen that I have not yet figured out. To be fair, there are actually numerous of those in my life right now, including my Master's project and properly frying an egg. There is one, however that is on my mind, and that's the situation I meant at the beginning. My right knee is sore, and I have no idea why that would be so. I haven't done anything particularly exerting with it (my left knee is where I put all my knee-related exertion -- I am left handed and left kneed) and I don't remember banging it on anything. So how did this happen?

There isn't any bruising or contusions suggesting what's wrong. (I just wanted to use the word 'contusion.') There are times when I find scratches and things on my hands, and don't remember where they came from, but my hands are my hands; they're in the middle of the action. I do pretty much everything with my hands. In fact, right now, I have a few cuts, but they're not from anything awesome like getting cut by a falcon as I was teaching it to fetch me whiskey. I cut them removing the plastic string-thing that holds the price tag on my new flip-flops. But my knees, even though they are my go-to joints for walking, don't get in nearly as much hijinx as my hands. I like to think of myself as a pretty experienced walker, and this has never come up before. This is a little startling, because I'm not really old enough to have my body start fighting with me yet. I'm not even old enough to have decided if I want to grow a full beard yet.

So what can I do? I don't think it's really worth going to the health center on campus, since I don't really know how to explain the problem. "My knee hurts." What are they going to do? I don't think it's bad enough to ask for pain killers (although I hear they're fun) and I don't know what a brace would do. Even if it would help, I think I'd refuse to wear it simply on principle. I may not have a developed sense of style, but I know that would look absurd. At least that's what I think when I see other people. A cane, on the other hand, would be awesome. I would have no problem walking on a cane; although it would mean I need a new wardrobe, composed entirely of 1920's era suits with top hats and monocles.

OMG!!!11

When I type in e-mail, AIM and blogs, I try my best to use proper grammar. I also try my best to be delightful. As a result, laughter ensues. Trouble arises, though, because conveying laughter in the typewritten media is a tricky proposition. I myself prefer to shy away from the AIMspeak of LOL or ROFL or LMAO. It's a personal choice. For example, I prefer Coke to Pepsi and attractive women to ugly ones. So, when I try to demonstrate to someone with whom I converse that I found his or her comment amusing, I elect to go with some number of "ha"s. And, if you choose to employ AIMspeak for this, please don't think I'm trying to be offensive by comparing LOL vs. ha to Pepsi vs. Coke. I'm comparing ha vs. LOL with hot vs. gnarly.

For reasons I can't explain, mostly lingual purity and not wanting to sound like a 13 year old girl, I can't stand those abbreviations. I don't use any of them, unless I'm trying to go for an attention grabbing title for a blog entry on the subject. But then it's a literary device. I have a hierarchy of "ha"s. It's hard to say what separates one ha from two, or two from three and so on. But there's a difference, oh is there ever.

I also don't like the use of smileys. I don't know why that is either. I think no straight man should ever use an emoticon in any context. Girls get a pass, they can smiley all they want. But I will say this: chances are, you're not getting many "ha"s if you use an emoticon in a message to me. Is that clear? :P

This abuse of a preposition shall not stand

You may not know this about me, but I speak Spanish. Actually, most of you who read this have met me, so you probably did already know that. To give you an idea of how well I speak, I will say this: My accent is better than the President's but not as good as Salma Hayek's. I am also an amateur writer, but I take it seriously enough that I usually leave of the adjective and just say "writer," but I didn't want to mislead anybody. I haven't gotten paid yet, so I haven't turned pro. I can still compete in the NCAAs of writing. Which, I guess, is just regular college. I will write as if you have no knowledge of the Spanish language, so if this offends you, no me importa.

All of us have probably enjoyed (or at least eaten) chili con queso or carne con queso. Those translate to "chili with cheese" or "meat with cheese." (Chili is the same.) However, I have recently seen in two different places, the use of "con queso" without a noun with which the cheese is. Moe's Southwest Grill uses in their ads that are read repeatedly during Clemson baseball games the expression "the best con queso dip..." there is something at the end of that, but Moe's is a fast food restaurant, so whatever follows is probably a lie. Jason Whitlock, a writer for espn.com, also made a reference to con queso dip. (If you really want, I can try to figure out where, but after two weeks, you need to be an espn insider to read it, and I'm pretty sure it's been two weeks.) You can't have con queso dip. You have to have something con queso. If not, it's just queso. ¡Díos mio! How hard is that?