It's time to talk a little cell phone etiquette...or lack thereof. :)

Let's face it. Using a cell phone impairs your ability to drive safely. BUT, I would venture to say it impairs some a little more (or much more) than others. Have you ever been out driving around, minding your own business, when you see another driver do something so inexplicably stupid or unsafe that you just have to get a look at the driver? And isn't it the case, 9 times out of 10, that they either have a phone crammed into the side of their face, or they're really old, OR (heaven forbid) both? Fortunately technology anxiety makes that last case virtually impossible...but in time it's conceivable that that will change. But I digress. My point is, just as not everyone is suited for driving in general, not everyone is suited for driving while talking on their phone. I think they should make it part of the driver license test. If you fail the "driving while talking" portion of the test, you get a restriction put on your license, like if you wear glasses, etc. Then if a cop pulls you over for doing something stupid, and you were on your cell phone, you get a big NASTY ticket...and the cop has the option to confiscate and stomp on your phone repeatedly, on-the-spot.

Also...it goes without saying (or should, anyway) that you either turn your cell phone off, or put it in silent mode, when you're at church, or in a movie, etc. I get that sometimes you forget, at least I GOT that sometimes you forget...like 8 years ago. :) But now I think there is no excuse for it. Cell phones and their use are so ubiquitous now that not turning them off in church, or a movie, or where ever is simply unacceptable. It would be like showing up to church and then realizing, "Oops! I forgot my pants!" Nevertheless, almost without exception these days, the poor sacrament prayer is tainted by a low-fi, blippy-sounding rendition of some Eminem song echoing louder than life in the chapel...quickly followed by the sound of some poor schmuck desperately trying to silence it (usually takes about 10 seconds). I think you should get a 6 month temple recommend suspension for that. Or maybe...have to give a talk the next week in church. There must be consequences or people will never learn! :)

Lastly, there is a relatively new cell-phone related phenomenon that has been especially bugging me of late, which also occurs in a movie theater. You're watching an exciting movie on a big screen, the room is dark, you're enveloped, engrossed, and then...a small but annoyingly bright light appears three rows ahead of you and takes you temporarily out of the movie. MAN that is annoying. I mean, wouldn't want a little thing like the MOVIE you paid $8 to see, not to mention everyone else in the theater, get in the way of your important text message. HEY TEENAGE CHICK, YOUR MESSAGE CAN WAIT UNTIL AFTERWARDS!!! :) I'm telling you, if they installed cell phone jamming devices in theaters YESTERDAY it wouldn't be too soon. I think it's inevitable...but only time will tell.

Every year around election time (like right now) someone will inevitably get in my face about "getting out to vote." Try as I might, a few simple reasons explaining why I usually DON'T vote never suffices. This so-called "civic duty", as they often put it, must have been ingrained very deeply and from a very early age, because I can never persuade anyone. Or maybe my arguments just suck. :) I'll let you decide...

First, I would like to clarify that I view the act of voting and the right to vote as different. The right to vote I view as very important. The act of voting, specifically me voting, however, I don't view as nearly important. I have several reasons why I feel this way, but I will only go into my latest one here.

If you're the type of person who carefully considers every candidate, reads all the provided literature, and (heaven forbid) does some independent research on the candidates, then this reason does not apply to you. In fact, you are the type of person I would want to vote. That is to say, an informed voter. But the average citizen, myself included, is a far cry from this ideal...or in other words, an grossly uninformed voter. This fact is not lost on the candidates, of course, whose sole purpose in life come election time is to get into office.

Why do you think the message we get shoved down our throats every couple years is a simple "get out and vote."? Wouldn't it be more productive to send a message something more along the lines of "research the candidates and get informed about the issues."? If someone were to take the time to do that, my guess is the simple act of casting a ballot would follow naturally.

The reason is, when you have so many uninformed voters, winning an election is a simple matter of getting your name out the most. E.g., TV commercials, signs, radio ads, flyers, etc. Who you are and what you stand for are pretty inconsequential. He who spends the most money, and therefore gets the most exposure, wins the election. And that's why I think the message they push is simply "get out and vote". The uninformed voter, or the average voter, is just a sheep susceptible to the proven marketing methods that candidates undoubtedly utilize.

An election that can be bought, which is what it pretty much boils down to, I think naturally leads to corruption. And of course corruption is bad for everyone except the corrupt. So to summarize...I consider myself so grossly uninformed that I feel I would be doing society a disservice by casting my ballot and potentially negating an informed voters ballot. Or put as succinctly as possible, an uninformed vote is worse than a no-vote. And that is why I won't be visiting the polls tomorrow. Well, that and a few other reasons, not the least of which is sheer laziness...but I won't elaborate on that point. :)

Okay, Little Ceasar's Pizza, you make a really crappy pizza and sell it for really cheap. MESSAGE RECEIVED LOUD AND CLEAR!

Clearly you've subsidized the cost of the pizza by cutting the marketing budget dramatically. It would seem you've created exactly 1 (lousy) radio ad and 1 (equally lousy) TV ad in many many months. One part of the marketing budget you haven't scrimped on, however, is the number of times you run your ad. It's a rare day that I don't hear that nausea-inducing radio spot at least 3 times on my way home from work: "Hot 'n' Ready, just 5 bucks!"

The ironic thing is, I would happily dish out $6 or $7 if you would promise to switch your ads up once in awhile. There's a happy medium on the "cost of pizza" vs. "marketing budget" spectrum, but you're a LONG ways from it. Think about it, little toga man. :)

For the LOVE, people. "Loose" does not equal "lose". You don't loose your mind. You don't loose a game of checkers. You LOSE them! LOSE LOSE LOSE. I see this all the time...and someone needs to say something. :)

"Pardon me while I blow my noose." No one seems to have a problem with that. So what is it about loose and lose?

Just stop it!

Is there anything more pointless than asking, "Can I ask you a question?" Man that bugs me. :) And people do it too. I just heard someone ask it, prompting this entry.

Hey retarded time-wasting pointless question askers...just ask your real question! Has anyone in the history of time ever EVER responded to the question "Can I ask you a question?" with "No."? NO!

I'm as unhappy as the next guy about Utah gas stations' apparent gouging of the consumer (my car gets a not-so-Geo-Metroish 17 mpg). I'm not sure what the solution to the problem is, but I can tell you what's NOT the solution. Watching the news tonight, I see that someone has proposed the infamous, if not completely futile, gas boycott.

"If everyone just doesn't buy any gas for one day, we'll flex our collective consumer spending muscles and FORCE them to lower prices." Ahhh, this is so mind-numbingly stupid an idea that I can hardly stand it. :) Let's break it down...

First, not everyone puts gas in their car everyday. Not every OTHER day either. So what that means, is on a given day, most people are not putting gas in their car ANYWAY. And the people who are putting gas in their car on a given day are not doing so just so they'll have extra gas ready just in case they want to go on a long, trivial drive somewhere. No, it's so they'll have gas to get where they need to go. Like to work, for example.

Let's pretend for a moment that everyone is stupid and they go along with this idea. Most won't need to put any gas in anyway, like we've discussed. Those who are close to empty will most likely put some gas in the day before. So that leaves those who will run OUT on the boycott day, and I'm guessing the vast majority of those people, rather than get stranded on the side of the road somewhere, will just say "screw this idea" and go and get some gas anyway.

I guess what I'm saying is, with the extra gas bought the day before, and the day after, it would just all even out anyway and the net effect is that it would do ZERO damage to the oil companies.

Here's what we would need to do. If it were possible for everyone to participate in the following, I believe it WOULD have an effect on the oil companies. Rather than have a "don't buy any gas" day, we should have a "no one drive their car" day, or better yet a week, or a month. If it were possible for everyone to walk or ride their bike or even use mass transit, this is gas that would never be used, and consequently concrete revenue that the oil companies would never see.

But alas...organizing and executing something of this magnitude is a near impossibility...

Looks like my gas light is on, I guess I'm off to the Chevron. Ooh, ooh, $2.79...a steal! :)

Here's a gripe for ya. On Friday morning, Sep. 8th, some a-hole, probably on their cell phone, wasn't paying attention and hit and killed my poor cat, Wudang, on Main St. just in front of my house. I found her on the road that morning as I was pulling out to go to work. I gathered her body and then buried her Sat. morning in Provo Canyon.

Wudang was probably my favorite cat, and I've had a few. She was 2 1/2 years old, and I had her since she was an 8 week old kitten, fragile and small enough to fit entirely in the palm of one hand. Here is a picture of her very soon after I brought her home for the first time...



She was a beautiful Siamese breed with pretty blue eyes. I get bummed still when I think of what happened and how I found her, so I will leave it at this. R.I.P. Wudang. Maybe they'll feed you better than the plain ol' dry cat food on the other side. :)

Head On: Apply Directly to the Forehead
Head On: Apply Directly to the Forehead
Head On: Apply Directly to the Forehead

Ahhh!!!

If I see that commercial one more time, I am going to apply my foot directly to the television screen. :)

Have you ever been at like...a family reunion or somewhere where there's lots of old-timers, bless their hearts, that sit around and reminisce about the "good old days"? And inevitably the subject of what things "used to cost" will come up...

"Why, I remember back when gas cost a nickle a gallon...a NICKLE!"

"I paid $13,000 for my first house."

"I bought my first car, brand new, for $500...and that's a fact."

I remember thinking...man, what the heck happened to the world?? Life used to be so EASY and CHEAP. Then I learned about a little phenomenon called inflation.

So now all I can think about when I hear these types of conversations is how they are conveniently omitting one small little detail...how much their WAGES were back then. Why do we never hear this conversation?

"Why, I remember back when I worked myself ragged everyday for a measly 15 cents an hour. Boy those sure were the bad old days..."

My next gripe is aimed squarely at Subway Sandwiches. Seems like I've had a lot of fast-food related gripes lately...don't take this to be indicative of my eating habits. Okay, take it to be indicative. I have a problem, I know. But that is beside the point...back to Subway.

Subway, eat fresh, make it your way, blah blah, all good and fine. Subway sandwiches are good, no question...but I think they've become a little bit TOO flexible in their sandwich-building process. I mean, you look up at the board and they have all these named sandwiches, tons of 'em. And that's great. But what you don't realize is that, with the exception of one item, the meat, you can turn any sandwich into any OTHER sandwich.

For example. Let's say you want the Tuscan Chicken Sandwich. Sounds pretty good, right? It did to me too. The picture looked scrumptious, in fact. Then comes the onslaught of options. "What kind of bread?" "What kind of cheese?" "Toasted?" "What vegetables?" On and on.

Through all this it occurs to me...what exactly makes this sandwich a Tuscan Chicken one anyway? So far it's just just a chicken sub sandwich with whatever the hell I want on it. So I ask...

"What exactly GOES on this so-called Tuscan Chicken sandwich anyway?"

"Oh, did you want the special Tuscan sauce?"

Um, yeah. Why on earth would they just assume that you know how to make their sandwiches? I asked for the Tuscan Chicken Sandwich, just freaking make me a TUSCAN CHICKEN SANDWICH!! :)

You know what Subway needs? They need to just have defaults on all their sandwiches, but express to you at the beginning that you can substitute anything you want. Not only would this make things easier, but it would speed up the line a little bit too, 'cause let's face it...Subway ain't exactly Wendy's. Maybe I'll fire this gripe off to their HQ as an email...