Friday, February 17, 2006

Kay rocks! And thoughts of the future

First off, I would like to say that Kay is totally awesome. "Why?" you ask. "Is it because she has rock hard abs, or because you both share a major?"

And the answer, of course, is yes, but that isn't the reason I say so this time.

Today I feel that Kay rocks because she is the only person to leave any comments about my story so far. This could mean that she's the only one reading it, which would make me sad. Especially considering the fact that we have a number of prolific readers on this board.

So meh to all you non-readers. Though, if you thought about reading my story earlier, but haven't gotten around to it, I would suggest starting with the most recent two chapters. You won't know why things are happening, but you may enjoy the action and suspense.

Also, Kay, feel free to take a bow in the comments section. If you are sufficiently mean-spirited and haughty, I might post your words on the main board, making you instantly famous for at least 4 people.

Also, everyone should check out the Flogging Molly's 2000 Album Swagger. It's good stuff. I recommend it. It's irish rock, so it may take a song or two to get used to, but it gets good once you do. I especially recommend the worst day since yesterday and far away boys.

Um. Anything else worth mentioning?

Here's a thought I had today. I sometimes wonder who I'm going to end up marrying. Is it someone I already know? Is it someone I've not yet met? Could it be a passing aquaintance? The weird thing is, I rarely worry that I will never marry.

I say that is weird, because factors don't seem to have fallen in my favor over recent years. I've only had one girlfriend ever and have never done a single face to face romantic thing. I don't know how to pick up on women at social events. I don't know how to pick up on women at work. I don't know what the difference IS between a conversation in which a guy and a girl are clicking like future lovers and a conversation where a guy and a girl are clicking like future good friends. And I don't have any kind of courage.

Nevertheless, I remain certain that I will one day marry. Sure, I spend an awful lot of days worrying about that middle stuff, but no days worrying about the ultimate conclusion.

Maybe I should consider starting to worry at some point.

Maybe not. I just don't know.

Edit: One other thing. Here is an article I really like. I think it fairly accurately describes the background of the more heated political arguments to be found on Kristi's blog. It is an article that suggests that part of the reason we disagree in modern America is because different groups start off, not just with different beliefs, but with different facts.

Interesting stuff. Makes a lot of sense. And believe me, I NEVER say that.

8 comments:

KU Mommy said...

Oddly enough, Nate... I was sitting in the same place as you only 14 months ago. Wondering.. do I know my future husband... will I meet him soon... will I ever get married? And then two months later... there came Andrew.

And everyone always told me "you just know" when it's different. And believe me, you do. At least I did. It's like this magnificent peace comes over you and you know your destiny for a split second. And then you go through all the crap that all relationships have to go through as they grow.

It's neat.

Anonymous said...

Hmm, I am almost compelled to read that article..or join in debating if I knew where to find the debate... Hey just think your thought could be scary though...look at me who would have seen that one coming? Definately not me...still wonder how it happened. Welp have a good day Fe.
ps grammer and punctuation badness I know but whatcha going to do? it just doesn't stick for me.

Anonymous said...

Well, I will say this. Marriage is good for some people - as long as it's the right person. I think I speak from bitter experience here that you can make a totally huge mistake on the person..and therefore don't rush into marriage. Okay, now that I'm done lecturing. Felix, I HAVE read your story but I didn't know you could post comments...maybe I just missed that in all the incredible interestingness of your story.

Nathan said...

This is neat. 3 Replies. Three different topics.

I'm Nathan, and I approve this post.

Joel said...

I read story you posted. I didn't really care for it.

First, why didn't hetry and figure out what exactly happened with her lead story? I mean, there has to be some way to find out. "The facts can't be found," we're told.

Oh, they can't? Did all the rest of the people that were there die? Or are they just being held by the FBI? Did the cops forget to file a police report? Crap. Did this idiot even TRY?????

Second. I'm fine with his point. It's a nice point, but he's still displaying a "look at these poor conservative idiots" rhetoric, and I don't like that. Where do I draw that from, you ask? From his story in the first place. He never admits that he might be wrong, only pointing out that there's no evidence to back up the other side. He could be just as wrong and apparently has even less evidence to prove his point.

Here is his thoughts, in order.

1. "Oh, I wrote this."
2. "They told me I was wrong."
3. "They can't be proven right."
4. "People suck with facts these days."

To me it added an even more liberal lens to a writer who already aligned himself on that side of things.

Again, I do agree with the overall point though. People watch, read and listen to stuff and take what they want out of it. One-sided reporters watch and report and see things through the lens of their life and beliefs, no matter what. Like it or not, it probably happened 40 years ago too.

Joel said...

That comment actually reminds me of another story that really worked me up the other day.

Anyone else read about the monument at the University of Washington? There was some resolution in the student senate about putting up a statue to Pappy Boington, the fighter ace who commanded the Black Sheep Squadren during WW2, and whom the show Baa Baa Black Sheep is named after.

On the show, he's sort of a misfit commander with misfit soldiers and, of course, they kick Jap ass. In real life, he just kicked jap ass (I don't think he was as crazy as the tv show made him out to be, basically).

Anyway, he won a ton of awards, was in the Flying Tigers before the war, was one of like 3,100 men ever to win the Medal of Honor, bla bla. SO he graduated from UW before the war, and now a bunch of student senators didn't want to put up a monument for him. Not because it would cost to much or look ugly, but because "there's already enough monuments to rich white men" and "Should we really strive to look up to a murder?"

The best part is that he was dirt ass poor most of his life and part Sioux, so neither rich nor white.. The second best part is ... are there really any hippys out there that consider shooting down Japanese planes in WW2 murder?

I went to the school newspaper's website and looked around and it appears those involved have been getting a ton of hate mail and all sorts of stuff, so I felt no need to explain to them my thoughts on the subject.

But I'd love to tell you.

Really, how friggen stupid ass politically correct could we possible be? I mean, at least they didn't NOT do it because it might offend the Japanese students. I don't know what or who exactly made those statments, the "white, rich" or the "murder" one, but I can just see some stupid ass white girl, perhaps the murder one being from a soroity, the "white, rich" being half lesbian, half ogre. For craps freaking sake, the guy's maybe the most famous guy to ever graduate from that school and he is recognized from coast to coast as a freaking war hero. Not just a solider or a guy that did good stuff in WW2, but a top-of-the-heap war hero, the guy the make freaking movies about, and the movies might not even do justice.

How can the "murder" and "white, rich" people not just deserve to be slapped fucking stupid? I really dislike most hard-core conservatives, but I'd love to hear was ol' G.Gorden Liddy or Rush had to say about this. I bet it was fairly funny. I don't listen to them and I don't really like them or support their views (at least not as radically as they do) but on issues like this, I agree 100 percent.

Joel said...

Hmm ... all times I use the word "murder" I think I meant "murderer"

It was 4 a.m. Give me a break.

Nathan said...

I don't have much to say about your second comment, but plenty to say about the first. Bear with me, I'm crazily sick. Also, I would say that I hate to contradict you, but we've been doing that to each other since 1997, so I imagine it probably wouldn't be true.

First off, the reason he didn't tell us exactly what happened with Shehan was because that wasn't the purpose of the editorial. The shehan story was meant to demonstrate how the two different sides had totally different versions of the story. He never said the "facts can't be found." He said that he'd gotten several versions of the story. At least in this case, it's entirely possible that he didn't care what the facts were. It was some other journalists job to find out the actual story.

Concerning your second point... you have no idea how much this irritates me. It's become a conservative party line. "Those bastard democrats are all so condescending!" If you read this freaking story again, you might notice that there is nothing for him to be right about. That was only the point of the story if your goal was to read it like it was a fluff piece on the idiocy of the right. He made it quite clear that both the radical left and the radical right are both idiots who hate anyone that contradicts their own world view.

The ultimate point of the article, it seems to me, is that because there are so many news outlets now, people can finally live a world where NONE of their opinions are challenged, and that is a first. Finally we can all live in our happy bubbles, watching Fox News or reading liberal newspapers, totally ignoring the centrist news organizations that at least TRY not to put some kind of spin on our daily information.

However, as you say, it was 4am, so I'll give you a break. Maybe when you aren't tired and ready to jump to the first conclusion that strikes your fancy, you can re-read the article and get a more pragmatic look at what the hell the guy is saying.