This morning I woke up in a pretty good mood. Over the last few months - mainly the summer months of June and July - work has been stressing me out a little bit. Okay, a lot... the thing is, I don't get stressed too easily. But anyway, this morning I woke up, put on a pair of shorts and a tee-shirt (after my shower of course) and thought for a brief moment - "How cool is it that I can wear this to work?"
Pretty nice to work in a laid back atmosphere where a manager can show up in shorts... so I perked up a bit. Rach deserves a happy me for a few days. Not that I have been unpleasant, but I have not been myself. I decided to not let work bother me anymore.
The End.
Friday, July 29, 2005
Friday, July 22, 2005
Well, then who did?
When I was a young buckaroo, I would do things that I was not supposed to do. When my mom found out - occasionally I would proclaim that I didn't do it. I may blame my brother, I may blame a pet - occasionally I would blame "the other Trent" (when I was little I met another kid with my name, and used him a a scapegoat often).
As I grew older, and more mature - I started to take responsibility for my actions. Sometimes I would try to get out of something or shift blame, but I know when I am caught red-handed.
More and more, it seems that people who own up to their actions are rare. I don't know if it started with OJ using the "I didn't do it" defense in the face of overwhelming evidence and winning, or if it's just that people didn't grow up. Clinton used the "I didn't do it" defense when it came to Monica (though after presented with the evidence he kind of admitted it just barely... well, depending on what you mean by "it.")
Senator Frist made a diagnosis based on video of Terry Schiavo, saying that she was reacting, and looking.' When the autopsy concluded that she was blind and irreversibly brain dead - he said he never made a diagnosis, and never said those things.
Recently, we have Carl Rove who leaked information about a CIA operative, then says he didn't. It doesn't count since a name wasn't in the email... oh sure. But there are some who are saying that it actually "exonerates" him from wrong doing. Uh-huh. Bush says he will "fire anyone who leaked information"... then they find out Rove did, then he says he didn't say he would fire anyone who would leak information, but said that he would "fire anyone who committed a crime." You see, they are not the same thing.
On the TV show "Brat Camp" this girl says she never did cocaine. Then she is presented with the fact that coke was found in her system. She did a good job of looking shocked. She then was "no way. I don't do coke. I did it once a year ago..."
Then there are those on the talk shows who take lie detector tests, and then profess that the lie detector tests are wrong. It's so sad it's funny...
The most disappointing thing to me is that - many times - people get away with it. I don't think people believe them, they just get tired of fighting the point.
Yesterday, someone from work was 'let go.' He was quite angry. He was escorted out of the building by a Supervisor and a Manager. On his way out he punched a wall, leaving a nice-sized dent. He also kicked a set of double-doors leaving them askew. He was then called to let him know he would not be receiving his final paycheck to pay for the damages - to which he responded..."I didn't do it."
What? There were 2 people with you, buddy. People heard you throw a fit when you were leaving... how can anyone think that it was going to fly? I don't know, I guess if you want to get away with something, then just say you didn't do it. It just gets sad when someone holds onto that no matter what.... stick to the story. They look stupid.
Oddly enough, people need to learn that they will get more respect for owning up to their actions, and trying to make amends rather than clinging onto "I didn't do it." This is a lesson I learned when I was, maybe 9... some people never learn.
As I grew older, and more mature - I started to take responsibility for my actions. Sometimes I would try to get out of something or shift blame, but I know when I am caught red-handed.
More and more, it seems that people who own up to their actions are rare. I don't know if it started with OJ using the "I didn't do it" defense in the face of overwhelming evidence and winning, or if it's just that people didn't grow up. Clinton used the "I didn't do it" defense when it came to Monica (though after presented with the evidence he kind of admitted it just barely... well, depending on what you mean by "it.")
Senator Frist made a diagnosis based on video of Terry Schiavo, saying that she was reacting, and looking.' When the autopsy concluded that she was blind and irreversibly brain dead - he said he never made a diagnosis, and never said those things.
Recently, we have Carl Rove who leaked information about a CIA operative, then says he didn't. It doesn't count since a name wasn't in the email... oh sure. But there are some who are saying that it actually "exonerates" him from wrong doing. Uh-huh. Bush says he will "fire anyone who leaked information"... then they find out Rove did, then he says he didn't say he would fire anyone who would leak information, but said that he would "fire anyone who committed a crime." You see, they are not the same thing.
On the TV show "Brat Camp" this girl says she never did cocaine. Then she is presented with the fact that coke was found in her system. She did a good job of looking shocked. She then was "no way. I don't do coke. I did it once a year ago..."
Then there are those on the talk shows who take lie detector tests, and then profess that the lie detector tests are wrong. It's so sad it's funny...
The most disappointing thing to me is that - many times - people get away with it. I don't think people believe them, they just get tired of fighting the point.
Yesterday, someone from work was 'let go.' He was quite angry. He was escorted out of the building by a Supervisor and a Manager. On his way out he punched a wall, leaving a nice-sized dent. He also kicked a set of double-doors leaving them askew. He was then called to let him know he would not be receiving his final paycheck to pay for the damages - to which he responded..."I didn't do it."
What? There were 2 people with you, buddy. People heard you throw a fit when you were leaving... how can anyone think that it was going to fly? I don't know, I guess if you want to get away with something, then just say you didn't do it. It just gets sad when someone holds onto that no matter what.... stick to the story. They look stupid.
Oddly enough, people need to learn that they will get more respect for owning up to their actions, and trying to make amends rather than clinging onto "I didn't do it." This is a lesson I learned when I was, maybe 9... some people never learn.
Monday, July 18, 2005
Batman Begins
My first word was 'Batman.' So you can imagine the connection I have... thanks to my older brother.
Comic books. Funny thing - comic books. They are fantastical stories about fantastical people living in the 'real world.' The imagination and art can place these people, semi-believably, in this world. The odd thing is that when they started to translate to the big screen in the late 80's, film makers wanted to incorporate the over-exaggeration that works in the art because technology was letting them. They were focusing on the characters and their costumes. When the thing that is most compelling about the superheros - the thing that keeps people reading, is the stories. The 'people' part.
Then along came the X-Men. Marvel brought this team to life and started to try to make these characters believable in this world. They started to tell the story of the people. And they were close, save for the ending battle being held on top of the Statue of Liberty. But this started the swing back. Spiderman came out and between it and Spiderman 2, these movies were about the person. What makes the character who he is and the real struggles he faces.
"Batman Begins" is at least on par with the Spiderman movies, and possibly better than the first Spiderman movie. It tells a great story. It gets to the heart of a character, what feeds it, what motivates... It's like my wife said, "This movie answered all my Batman questions." And why shouldn't it? These movies should appeal to the everyday movie goer as much, if not more than the 'comic book fan.' My wife loved this movie. The story of Batman is interesting and compelling, and Tim Burton's Batman did okay (though the story was inaccurate - the Joker did not kill Bruce Wayne's parents) but there wasn't enough of the 'why's' and 'how's' that the movie "Batman Begins" does it better. One role that was inserted was Morgan Freeman's who plays - to some extent - what "Q" is to James Bond. He explains the gadgets, and how they work, and therefore you are not asked to believe it to make the story work.
There is simply much more going on here than a guy in a bat suit beating up bad guys.
Comic books. Funny thing - comic books. They are fantastical stories about fantastical people living in the 'real world.' The imagination and art can place these people, semi-believably, in this world. The odd thing is that when they started to translate to the big screen in the late 80's, film makers wanted to incorporate the over-exaggeration that works in the art because technology was letting them. They were focusing on the characters and their costumes. When the thing that is most compelling about the superheros - the thing that keeps people reading, is the stories. The 'people' part.
Then along came the X-Men. Marvel brought this team to life and started to try to make these characters believable in this world. They started to tell the story of the people. And they were close, save for the ending battle being held on top of the Statue of Liberty. But this started the swing back. Spiderman came out and between it and Spiderman 2, these movies were about the person. What makes the character who he is and the real struggles he faces.
"Batman Begins" is at least on par with the Spiderman movies, and possibly better than the first Spiderman movie. It tells a great story. It gets to the heart of a character, what feeds it, what motivates... It's like my wife said, "This movie answered all my Batman questions." And why shouldn't it? These movies should appeal to the everyday movie goer as much, if not more than the 'comic book fan.' My wife loved this movie. The story of Batman is interesting and compelling, and Tim Burton's Batman did okay (though the story was inaccurate - the Joker did not kill Bruce Wayne's parents) but there wasn't enough of the 'why's' and 'how's' that the movie "Batman Begins" does it better. One role that was inserted was Morgan Freeman's who plays - to some extent - what "Q" is to James Bond. He explains the gadgets, and how they work, and therefore you are not asked to believe it to make the story work.
There is simply much more going on here than a guy in a bat suit beating up bad guys.
Saturday, July 16, 2005
Just in time...
Whew...
This week imagine our shock and surprise as we were laying around one evening and the 11:00 news came on (That part's not shocking). We were watching how a Bridal Shop was closing (their supplier is filing for bankruptcy) and women who not only ordered bridal gowns, but also brides maids dresses were not getting their dresses, and - oh yeah - they were not getting their money back. This was the very same bridal shop that Rach got her dress, her brides maids dresses and we rented our tuxes.
Martin's Bridal (or rather DBS) seemingly just handed some women any ol' dress they had. If a woman placed an order they were sent a 'comparable' dress - and did nothing about the bridesmaids dresses. Funny, you'd think that being in the bridal business, that they would know that to a woman - another dress is not 'comparable.' But, they are going bankrupt so maybe it's not that surprising.
I felt sorry for these poor women who got screwed over (read more about it in these links:
http://www.thewbalchannel.com/news/4717691/detail.html
http://www.thewbalchannel.com/money/4715005/detail.html
http://www.thewbalchannel.com/money/4720099/detail.html
At the same time, I felt fortunate that this wasn't happening to us, when it could have.
Rach was just talking about how she was going to go down there with pictures to show the woman who helped he most with the dress, I guess she won't be making that trip now.
I guess this is just more proof that timing is everything.
This week imagine our shock and surprise as we were laying around one evening and the 11:00 news came on (That part's not shocking). We were watching how a Bridal Shop was closing (their supplier is filing for bankruptcy) and women who not only ordered bridal gowns, but also brides maids dresses were not getting their dresses, and - oh yeah - they were not getting their money back. This was the very same bridal shop that Rach got her dress, her brides maids dresses and we rented our tuxes.
Martin's Bridal (or rather DBS) seemingly just handed some women any ol' dress they had. If a woman placed an order they were sent a 'comparable' dress - and did nothing about the bridesmaids dresses. Funny, you'd think that being in the bridal business, that they would know that to a woman - another dress is not 'comparable.' But, they are going bankrupt so maybe it's not that surprising.
I felt sorry for these poor women who got screwed over (read more about it in these links:
http://www.thewbalchannel.com/news/4717691/detail.html
http://www.thewbalchannel.com/money/4715005/detail.html
http://www.thewbalchannel.com/money/4720099/detail.html
At the same time, I felt fortunate that this wasn't happening to us, when it could have.
Rach was just talking about how she was going to go down there with pictures to show the woman who helped he most with the dress, I guess she won't be making that trip now.
I guess this is just more proof that timing is everything.
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
12 items or less...
Over the weekend, I had the distinct pleasure of going to Wal-Mart, and I bought 1 item. So I made my way to the Express Lane - 12 or less.
For some reason, I think the definition of "item" needs to be posted. I always get a person in front of me with about 20 things, though they think that if they get multiples of the same item, it constitutes as being one item. "Uh, yeah I have 32 bottles of Windex... Oh, and I also have 5 snickers bars, 7 bottles of detergent, and 18 toothbrushes, that's only a total of FOUR." It apparantly needs to be explained that if it doesn't come in one container (like a 12 pack of soda) then it is multiple items. I think that the people behind this person in line should each get to punch this person in the face.
What I hate mostly, is that the Express Line bandit never gets reprimanded or exposed (though you know everyone has counted the number of items). I think there needs to be consequences, otherwise there is no deterrent for hopping in that line if you have more that the limit.
I suggest public humiliation. Have either the cashier come out and yell at the person; ask them if they can count. Hold up each item and count for them "ONE, TWO, THREEEE...." Then once their finished ask, "Ok. Here you have 18 items. The sign says that 12 is the limit. Is 18 more than 12?" Then they could ask why they were in the express line, just here them weakly say "I don't know." Then, if they still want to purchase the stuff, they have to go to the back of another line - or better yet - a line marked "Moron Line" where they have the brand new trainees working and are perpetually behind a person who bought 55 items and wants a price check on 1 sock, because it rang up $.05 more than they thought it was, and - damn it - they want their nickle.
I think that even though I am in a hurry and in the express line, I wouldn't mind waiting a few more moments to see that.
For some reason, I think the definition of "item" needs to be posted. I always get a person in front of me with about 20 things, though they think that if they get multiples of the same item, it constitutes as being one item. "Uh, yeah I have 32 bottles of Windex... Oh, and I also have 5 snickers bars, 7 bottles of detergent, and 18 toothbrushes, that's only a total of FOUR." It apparantly needs to be explained that if it doesn't come in one container (like a 12 pack of soda) then it is multiple items. I think that the people behind this person in line should each get to punch this person in the face.
What I hate mostly, is that the Express Line bandit never gets reprimanded or exposed (though you know everyone has counted the number of items). I think there needs to be consequences, otherwise there is no deterrent for hopping in that line if you have more that the limit.
I suggest public humiliation. Have either the cashier come out and yell at the person; ask them if they can count. Hold up each item and count for them "ONE, TWO, THREEEE...." Then once their finished ask, "Ok. Here you have 18 items. The sign says that 12 is the limit. Is 18 more than 12?" Then they could ask why they were in the express line, just here them weakly say "I don't know." Then, if they still want to purchase the stuff, they have to go to the back of another line - or better yet - a line marked "Moron Line" where they have the brand new trainees working and are perpetually behind a person who bought 55 items and wants a price check on 1 sock, because it rang up $.05 more than they thought it was, and - damn it - they want their nickle.
I think that even though I am in a hurry and in the express line, I wouldn't mind waiting a few more moments to see that.
Friday, July 08, 2005
Irritablility and Movie seats
No matter how hard I try.... there are days when small things just irk me. Well, maybe not so much irk. They actually make me angry. And I know I am waaaay overreacting, but I hear a murmur of some people who think they are almighty and knowledgeable talking about something as small as a video game or movie or something, and all I can think about is punching that person in the face. I think it's because of the aura of superiority that they think they have. That I wold like nothing more that just hurting them. Interesting, huh?
I don't know why I have some days that I am flat-out irritable. I know I am very unpleasant when this happens. But on some level - I don't care.
Today is one of those. But it started out bad, and didn't get worse... so I think that's actually pretty good. I mean, usually by the time I get home I am wound sooo tightlly that I want to put my head through a wall. But today, since it didn't get worse (yet), I will probably be okay.
For some reason, today I was thinking about the proper etiquette when 2 (straight) guys go to a movie theater. I mean, in the Men's Room - it is customary to leave an open stall in between you and another guy... especially if there are no dividers. If 2 guys go to a restaurant, generally you sit diagonally from each other (if at a table). You don't sit directly across from each other if you can avoid it, and by no means do you sit beside each other - I hate it when couples even do that.
So the movie theater thing isn't something I have run into very much anyway. I don't think I have seen a movie with just one other male in over 5 years and even then it was probably with my younger brother. Anyway, I imagine that if 2 guys go to a movie, that you may leave a seat in between. But if a group goes, then you can't do that because you would take up too much of the row. But at the same time, with the arm rests and everything, I can't see it being entirely wrong if there is not a seat left in between.
I don't know why I thought about that.
I don't know why I have some days that I am flat-out irritable. I know I am very unpleasant when this happens. But on some level - I don't care.
Today is one of those. But it started out bad, and didn't get worse... so I think that's actually pretty good. I mean, usually by the time I get home I am wound sooo tightlly that I want to put my head through a wall. But today, since it didn't get worse (yet), I will probably be okay.
For some reason, today I was thinking about the proper etiquette when 2 (straight) guys go to a movie theater. I mean, in the Men's Room - it is customary to leave an open stall in between you and another guy... especially if there are no dividers. If 2 guys go to a restaurant, generally you sit diagonally from each other (if at a table). You don't sit directly across from each other if you can avoid it, and by no means do you sit beside each other - I hate it when couples even do that.
So the movie theater thing isn't something I have run into very much anyway. I don't think I have seen a movie with just one other male in over 5 years and even then it was probably with my younger brother. Anyway, I imagine that if 2 guys go to a movie, that you may leave a seat in between. But if a group goes, then you can't do that because you would take up too much of the row. But at the same time, with the arm rests and everything, I can't see it being entirely wrong if there is not a seat left in between.
I don't know why I thought about that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
