The Pot Dilemma

May 27, 2010

So my friend Josh brought up the illegality of pot and I thought was a good topic I’ve been meaning to talk about for a while.

I don’t care if people do drugs. Pot, heroin, meth, ecstasy, cocaine, whatever. As long as you are not interfering with the lives of others,

it’s none of my business. Now, I think the same laws should apply as for alcohol, though how you would determine how high someone is would have to be devised. My point is, it’s your life, whatever you need to do to cope is up to you.

Not to take the old adage literally but, for some people it’s religion. And that’s fine, if it gets you through the day and allows you to enjoy your life more.  No one can tell anyone else how they should live their life, finding it out for yourself is one of the most intriguing features of being alive.

Would you rather have someone kill themselves or be a drug addict but alive. It’s an interesting question to ask yourself and the answer might even teach you something about yourself, whether you are happy knowing or not, is another matter.


Campaign Season

May 26, 2010

My wife and I decided to get rid of cable about 2 months ago and have not looked back since. It was a tough decision as I watched quite a lot of tv.

But that is the main reason I wanted it gone. It had become background interference in our lives, always on just for noise or something to stare at and let your eyes go unfocused for a few brief moments of unthinking peace in a long tiring day.

Ever since then, I have honestly felt better in general. I listen to the radio instead of having 24/7 Sports Center filling the in-between show slots.

We still get the core networks in HD through a normal antenna (the irony of being amazed that you can get picture just through the airwaves without any box was not lost on us). So we watch our few choice shows that are still quality in an ever growing sea of garbage.


We were watching I believe a rerun of The Simpsons, when during a commercial break (most of which I mute out of instinct now), the first political ad I have seen this year came on.

It was an anti current governor of Ohio ad, focusing entirely on his inadequacies and more to the point his lack of anything positive to advertise.

So in effect this was an ad, showcasing how little he has done, and how what he has done is actually bad, to the point that his ads supposedly have nothing to say except bad things about his opponent.

Yes, you heard me. The blatant hypocrisy left me slack-jawed.

As I have professed before, there are few things that get me agitated. Hypocrisy, stupidity, and irrationality are a few.

I’m pretty sure I voted for the current governor but that does not mean I would have done so again when up for re-election.

I do not blindly succumb to party lines, although often I do tend to lean one way over the other.

After seeing this ad, not only can I not name the opponent who is running against him, but this may have shored up my vote

for the incumbent, as I would have a hard time voting for someone who is supported by such petty, childish, ignorant methods.

I know that all politicians essentially do this and that’s fine. This instance caught my attention enough to address it.

I always wonder how other people see these commercials. And by that I mean purhaps people who are not as either intelligent or aware as myself. I don’t mean that in a condescending way, just honest.

Do these commercials sway “the average voter”, they must otherwise I find it hard to believe that the highly paid thinktanks that produce such ads would continue to do so. And I suppose that the scarce number of people these methods turn away hardly make an impact on the final election figures. Though I would think a larger percentage of intelligent people end up voting, the population numbers are still probably so far skewed as to make any difference at all.


Candidates should only talk about what they have done or will do if elected. They should not mention the others they are running against at all.

Can you think of any other job where during the interview, you make a case for yourself by bad mouthing the person who currently has the job or the others applying for it? Of course not, no one would want to hire some one so petty.

From where I stand…

May 25, 2010

I started this blog for mainly two reason.

1.) I am bored.

2.) I have a unique view of life, the world, and everything.

I’m a selfish person when it comes down to it, always have been, and I don’t see that changing anytime soon.

So I will not apologize for the content of this blog being self-centered, egotistical, or self aggrandizing.

I in no way believe that I am more important then you or anyone else who has ever lived, so perhaps this

is where we should start. I will attempt to explain myself so that going forward who or what I am will not

be a topic of debate, but rather a launching point for my interpretations of existence.

Let’s get started…

May 25, 2010

I honestly believe I have the seemingly rare ability to look at anything objectively. Regardless of my affection or disdain for the subject, I can put personal feelings aside and evaluate based solely on neutral analysis. You can try to find something that my feelings for will blind my rationality but as to this point, it has not been found.

There are a few things I would like to establish before going forward. You may and probably will disagree with me, and that’s fine.

1.) Nothing is inherently “good” or “bad”. These are labels humans assign based on their relation to whether the subject helps or hurts us.

2.) Nothing is inherently “right” or “wrong”. Again, we label based on interaction to our own subjective existence.

3.) Morals are man made constructs used to establish order out of chaos and make societies in which living is easier.

I will not use the words “good”, “bad”, “right”, “wrong” unless I am talking about something in reference to the relationship it has to my own personal life or existence.  The words “correct” and “incorrect” will be used instead to address the validity or faultiness of rational and logical states.

If you cannot grasp these notions or see the distinction I am making, our conversation will be short and frustrating for both parties.

I believe the only inalienable right a being has is control over themselves.

Other rights or privileges are purely results of the society the person has chosen to live in.

And should a person find themselves in a situation they do not like and cannot find a way out of,

the person always has the right to take themselves out of existence.

I am in no way advocating this, I am simply addressing it as a reasonable option and descision that any

sentient creature can make for themselves, though I sincerely hope never has to.