Wednesday, December 29, 2004


Random Posts

Hi again all...sorry for the delay in posting in case anyone was actually worried. I was "with family" whatever that means. I got back yesterday and spent the day doing some write-up and getting a haircut complete with highlights...oh yeah and feeling completely dejected since even with highlights apparently women don't think of me as anything other than a creepy weirdo. I don't know where to go on the woman front...I'm seriously just considering giving up on trying to find a woman entirely, but the thought of giving up is just as depressing as failing repeatedly. People keep telling me that "you will meet someone when you stop looking" but these people clearly don't understand me. If I wasn't looking I wouldn't leave the house. I would never go out to a coffee shop or a club or even a bookstore if I wasn't trying to find a woman. Being out in public alone is terribly depressing (at least for me). Anyway...I'm beginning to wonder how much money I will have to spend when I'm 60 trying to be a sugar daddy to an attractive woman. I'm guessing more than I would have...even at 80-100k a year in today's terms, I'm doubtful that it would be enough to get any truly attractive women and those who would be with a guy for less than 100k probably aren't after money anyway so I'd be out of luck on that front as well. Anyway...just a general depression on all fronts I guess. I will regail ya all with stories of my Holiday at some later time, but for now let me just link to a couple of quick editorials and articles.

On the Nuclear Option for getting Judicial Nominees through. Tech Central links to the story here in an equally interesting piece.

Thanks to Newmark's Door for the link to this essay on what constitutes the most critical question in life.

Over at Idea Shop "three ways Democrats can improve their economic policy—and broaden their moderate appeal—without abandoning core progressive ideals. "

Wednesday, December 22, 2004


My Social Security Reforms

The other day I was speaking with some coworkers about Social Security reform. As everyone would expect, I am for extreme reform and yes I would like to see some privitization. I may lose my Libertarian credentials on some of my other proposed changes though.

Clearly Social Security was designed to be insurance. It kicked in at an age that it just generally wasn't terribly realistic for large numbers of people to save for retirement beyond because they would be dying soon (and if you weren't dying soon it was likely that you didn't need the money because you were probably financially well off anyway). Clearly the retirement age needs to be increased...and I'm not talking one or two years here...I'm talking 70 minimum, maybe 75. I say this knowing full well that it is unlikely that I would ever pull out any money that I contribute (like I will now?). It has been said before by people better than me...but Social Security has become an entitlement program instead of an insurance program and that is a big part of the problem. Part of the reason it is viewed as an entitlement program though is because people pay into Social Security for their entire working life and they expect something back. That is why we at least need to engage in some privitization.

I would go a step further and just be honest. Social Security should be payed for out of the general income tax. Social Security isn't going to be paid for out of the social security tax anyway, so why even bother with it? It is a pay-as-you-go system and it is ridiculous that we try to make it seem different by assigning it to a different tax line. If we aren't going to get rid of the social security tax and admit we always intended for it to be payed out of the general account, then we at least need to get rid of the income cap on the social security tax (this is where I start to lose my libertarian supporters). While I toy with anarcho-capitalism and in many ways support it, realistically it just isn't going to happen and as such I am sometimes forced into arguing mini-capatalistic solutions. In any case, the income cap needs to go.

Finally, I propose even a little bit more meddling in the economy than I am normally willing to do. I would set up different brackets of collection on social security where different groups have different ages that they get to retire at. My biggest distinction would be that if you engage in x number of years of manual labor that is physically draining, you get to retire at a younger age than you do if you fail to spend that number of years in such a profession. Why? Well to begin with, if you engage in labor intensive work your body endures more strain and is likely to break down more quickly than service sector workers and information workers such as myself. As a result, even though I would have an earlier retirement age for them, it is not necessarily true (and one would hope we calculate it well enough that it definitely isn't true) that they would collect any more than workers who qualify at later ages. I think this is also important as a second-best solution. The current system already penalizing those who chose manual labor careers as they have the same retirement age as everyone else. This may artificially drive down the number of people willing to enter manual labor professions and thus increase their wages above a free-market equilibrium. I'm just spit-balling though so stop hitting your computer and telling me I didn't take into account point y. Anyway, ultimately if we are going to have a social security system, it should try to equalize the number of years it is paying out for different groups of individuals.

So ultimately...what is my solution to solve the social security problem?

1. Drastically increase the age that you can start withdrawing benefits.
2. Get rid of the Income cap.
3. Privatize a portion of social security.
4. Create retirement brackets.

Does anyone care about my proposal? No. Still, I throw it out there to give my friends on the left and the right something to yell at me for next time we speak.

Tuesday, December 21, 2004


I'm finding lots of stories recently.

The Economist has this interesting article on President Bush and his religiousity.

"Mr Bush is in fact in the mainstream of recent presidents. As Michael Cromartie of the Ethics and Public Policy Centre points out, Jimmy Carter taught Sunday school while president. Bill Clinton talked about Jesus more often than Mr Bush and has spoken in more churches than Mr Bush has had rubber-chicken dinners. "

I recommend reading the entire article, but this excerpt was something I hadn't heard before:

On his trip to Africa in 2003, Mr Bush visited a slave-trading post at Goree Island, in Senegal. “Christian men and women,” he said, “became blind to the clearest commands of their faith...Enslaved Africans discovered a suffering Saviour, and found he was more like themselves than their masters.”

Wow!...I'm not a religious man, but the eloquence of that statement alone deserves it worthy of mention no matter who said it and regardless of whether or not Bush came up with it himself.

Okay...on to a few other stories which should be more controversial, but will probably be considered less controversial than the above article.

Mom sues Wal-Mart over daughter's suicide.

"The suggestion that Wal-Mart should have checked prescription records infuriates Erich Pratt, a spokesman for the Virginia-based group Gun Owners of America. "Does that mean mental illness prevents everyone on Prozac from owning a gun? Or women with PMS?" he said. "

I have to wonder if his wife was holding a gun when he got home after the PMS comment?

A list of "notables" who died in 2004. I had to think twice about posting the list because I'm not sure how much I like the term "notables" but I figure my readers can take it or leave it as they there you go. I'm also suprised by the number of entertainers included on the list, though I suppose I shouldn't be considering how much of a pop-culture-whore I am.

Board Game Lets Players Run Marijuanna Farm.

I so support Yahoo! on this case of refusing to release e-mail of dead soldier to relatives. Would you want your relatives reading your emails after you die?

Alright...that's probably it for today.


Attention! New Blog Link on the left.

You may notice there is now a new link over on the left to A New York Escorts Confessions. I'm sure many of you will think that this link is the result of my intense research on how to get a woman to go out with me, but actually she saw my blog and emailed me. This marks the first occassion of a woman hearing what I have to say and actually chosing to speak to me without using profanities. Anyway, her blog is lots of fun so show her the love and check out her blog.

Hopefully I will have a chance to link to a few of my favorite entries this weekend while I am ON VACATION. Okay, maybe it isn't really a is 3 days with my relatives for the Holidays. If there is no hot blonde in a bikini I refuse to think of it as a vacation. In any case, I plan to blog again before the holidays, but don't expect it to be too intense after tomorrow as that is when I hit the road for Wisconsin.

Speaking of which, can I just say that Jay is the coolest guy on the planet? He has actually offered to get up and take me to the train at 6:30 in the morning on his day off and I have to say that is impressive considering most people can't stomach being near me when they are wide awake. Anyway, I feel really lucky to have met Jay and Matt for that matter, who has apparently decided that in the holiday spirit (of Festivus) it might be time to lay a little Smackdown on my ass. (Please don't sue me for trademark infringement Mr. McMahon. If Stephanie would like to come talk the matter over with me and bring Stacy Keibler than we could debate the issue.) So anyway, I just thought that I should say that in the Holiday spirit and all.


Monday, December 20, 2004


News Roundup

The Salmon Effect? Economists and demographers come up with some pretty cool names don't we? Thanks to Newmark's Door for the link.

"Migrants who come into a country generally fare better than the natives in terms of health. The reason is that in order to be a migrant, you have to be in pretty good health, so it is a select group of people."

Can I say no duh? It reminds of when people were scratching their heads trying to figure out how stricter border enforcement was leading to greater numbers of illegal aliens at any given time. The answer was that the illegal immigrants couldn't risk moving back and forth over the border so they just stayed here. I'll dig up the articles later and post a bit on it.

The images that this article brings up are just too interesting...makes me want to go to Texas and see topless dancers.

"Topless dancers in San Antonio will have a little more to wear after the city council on Friday ordered them to carry permits while performing. "

Facial acupuncture is gaining ground.

And finally, in the news of "I can't believe he said that" this article on the Social Security Administration refusing to acknowledge heterosexual marraiges in a specific county during a period when gay and lesbian marriages were being person had this complaint:

"They're delving into every aspect of our lives, including marriage," he said. "I'm appalled."

The person saying it was referring to the heterosexual marriages, not the gay and lesbian marriages. Maybe the article is misleading and the person was really saying it about all marriages, in which case I agree...but it seems more likely this statement is of the nature that "It's okay when they do it to group long as they don't do it to me...that is appalling." And yes, if that is the meaning of the statement then I too am appalled...

Here is the story.

Saturday, December 18, 2004


I have errands to run and work to why am I sitting here?

An update...apparently the ACLU is engaged in a privacy scandal...isn't it ironic? Don't you think?

"The issue has attracted the attention of the New York attorney general, who is looking into whether the group violated its promises to protect the privacy of its donors and members.
"It is part of the A.C.L.U.'s mandate, part of its mission, to protect consumer privacy," said Wendy Kaminer, a writer and A.C.L.U. board member. "It goes against A.C.L.U. values to engage in data-mining on people without informing them. It's not illegal, but it is a violation of our values. It is hypocrisy."

This article from "In praise of shoddy products" is pretty good.

I'm sure my more left-wing friends will shake their heads in disgust at this posting over at Cafe Hayek, but I also find it interesting that some of the most self-interested actions like excersizing are considered good, while other self-interested actions that actually cause greater societal good and require you to consider others demand functions such as trying to maximize profits at a business are considered "greedy" and bad. If anyone isn't reading Cafe Hayek regularly they are missing out in my humble opinion.

Finally, I should point all my stat obsessed readers to the Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 which is now available online. Newmark's Door has the link.


Steve Martin Quotes and a Fischer story

Iceland wants Fischer? These people are freaking nuts. I don't even know what the point of it is unless Fischer is somehow able to convice Japan to let him go without sending him to the U.S. to stand trial.

Why in the hell would you offer a mentally disturbed Neo-Nazi asylum because he played a famous chess match in your country decades ago? I don't understand this at all.

On the lighter side...some Steve Martin Quotes:

I believe entertainment can aspire to be art, and can become art, but if you set out to make art you're an idiot.

I believe that sex is one of the most beautiful, natural, wholesome things that money can buy.

Talking about music is like dancing about architecture.

You know what your problem is, it's that you haven't seen enough movies - all of life's riddles are answered in the movies.

Chaos in the midst of chaos isn't funny, but chaos in the midst of order is.

Friday, December 17, 2004


Product differentiation

So today I stopped into the corner bookstore (B&N) to get what I thought was my one remaining Christmas Present (I completely forgot that there were two other books I was supposed to pick up for the twins...arghhh) and I wrote a check. Only I wrote the check for Borders instead of Barnes and Nobel. So this got me to thinking. I had no idea which of these stores I was in so do Barnes and Nobel or Borders have any product differentiation to speak of? Yes, I know they each have their own little discount cards and promotions...but fundamentally I am wondering about whether or not they can hope to engender "brand loyalty." If not, why do they invest in donating to charities or for that matter allowing vagrants like myself to sit there reading stuff I have no intention of buying? The vagrancy has multiple explanations really, but I felt I should cop to my vagrancy. The investment in it's "image" through charitable contributions is harder to explain.

I have one theory involving lawsuits. They want to be able to present themselves well if they get sued for something...aka the Phillip Morris marketing strategy. I'm sure there are competing explanations, but I can't justify the economic theory of "warm glow altruism" in this instance precisely because of the size of these companies.

As a side question though...since B&N and Borders are virtually indistinguishable, does anyone see a merger occurring in an attempt to concentrate market share creating greater market power and possibly benefiting from economies of scale on an even larger scope than they currently have? If not, why not? Would a merger cause the two companies to fall into the sights of the Antitrust department? Are there any economies of scale to be exploited or are they at the point of diseconomies of scale setting in? Granted as a consumer I probably benefit from the existence of two separate companies, but I'm just spitballing here.

Okay...a bunch of other questions are also flying through my mind about the product differentation angle. Is one of the companies piggybacking off of the other? Could brand loyalty be cultivated in a book store at all? If so, how? Is any advertising done by the establishments a waste?

Now for why I am really posting all of point out how sad it is that the bulk of my night will be spent obsessing over these questions in between rejections at the local clubs from blondes.

P.S. One of the books I looked at in the bookstore was on how to get dates. It was for both men and women. The number of Rules for a guy to get a woman? 10. The number for a woman to get a man? 2. The saddest part is that I think they were stretching it with two on should have just been one.

The book also perpetuated the myth that attractive women are sitting home lonely and wishing they had a guy on a Friday/Saturday night. I can state emphatically that this is a myth. The idea that men don't approach attractive women "out of their league" is a total lie. I do it daily. Daily I get told they are seeing someone/married/lesbian/leaving the country/not really there and I'm imagining them. If an attractive woman is home alone and doesn't want to be it isn't because guys weren't approaching is because she said no to all of them. I wish people would stop with that ridiculous lie as it is so blatantly foolish.


Wednesday, December 15, 2004


Quote of the Day

Milton Friedman: Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.

Tuesday, December 14, 2004


Two things that interested me

Alex over at Marginal Revolution had this post today citing a letter from a prisoner in a Tennessee jail.

Also I would like to point to this AP story as an example of how idiots sometimes do get what they deserve. Headline? Taxi Driver Shoots Man in Bin Laden Mask.

Monday, December 13, 2004


P J O'Rourke

With the holiday season approaching I got to thinking about one of P J O'Rourke's books, Parliament of Whores. In the introduction to that book Mr. O'Rourke pontificates on Why God is a Republican and Santa Clause is a Democrat. Bearing in mind that I am not a Republican, I would still like to share it for the Holidays.

"I have only one firm belief about the American political system, and that is this: God is a Republican and Santa Claus is a Democrat. God is an elderly or, at any rate, middle aged male, a stern fellow, patriarchal rather than paternal and a great believer in rules and regulations. He holds men accountable for their actions. He has little apparent concern for the material well being of the disadvantaged. He is politically connected, socially powerful and holds the mortgage on literally everything in the world. God is difficult. God is unsentimental. It is very hard to get into God's heavenly country club.

Santa Claus is another matter. He's cute. He's nonthreatening. He's always cheerful. And he loves animals. He may know who's been naughty and who's been nice, but he never does anything about it. He gives everyone everything they want without the thought of quid pro quo. He works hard for charities, and he's famously generous to the poor. Santa Claus is preferable to God in every way but one: There is no such thing as Santa Claus."

For those are a few more P.J. quotes:

Always read something that will make you look good if you die in the middle of it.

America wasn't founded so that we could all be better. America was founded so we could all be anything we damned well pleased.

Every government is a parliament of whores. The trouble is, in a democracy, the whores are us.

I like to think of my behavior in the sixties as a "learning experience." Then again, I like to think of anything stupid I've done as a "learning experience." It makes me feel less stupid.

And now for my personal favorite:

There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences.


Judge for Sale on Ebay

AP news story...Judge for Sale on Ebay.

In other news, a man chooses to keep his ring over keeping his finger? Okay, that's just f'd the hell does that "honor" the wife? It's not like the wife left him and it is all he has left to remember her he actually has the wife...anyway read the story here and shake your head in wonder.



A ruling on the Hooters case via How Appealing. I think the limited supply of attractive women provides the relevant scarcity to provide premium returns for any establishment that can attract them. Let's be honest. If the girls who worked at Hooters were fat and had acne the trademark dress would not salvage the business. Basically they were attempting to get rid of a marketing tool for exploiting the attractiveness of the waitresses at competing restaurants. Since marketing is a form of presenting information and information allows for more informed choices, I might even venture that we should have an Antitrust law that requires waitresses to dress like that to keep customers well informed. Okay...maybe that is overkill, but clearly Hooters is feeling the pinch of competition and that is a good thing, but if they can find a way to attract better looking women than their competitors it would mean that it wouldn't even matter if they had the exact same outfits at competing establishments.

My two cents for the night

Saturday, December 11, 2004


A couple of articles from the Economist

From an article in the Dec. 4th issue of the Economist:

"It turns out that neither cash rich, low growth firms nor firms with weak governance shower their executives with unusually generous perks."

A paper by the IMF's cheif economist Raghuram Rajan and Julie Wulf found two explanations for perks that the general public often looks on with disdain.

1. "Firms in the sample with more hierarchical oranisations lavished more perks on their executives than firms with flatter structures. Why? Perks are a cheap way to demonstrate status. Just as the armed forcces ration medals, firms ration the distribution of conspicuous symbols of corporate status.

2. "Parks are a cheap way to boost executive productivity."

Of course the general public doesn't look at these perks as cheap. What the general public often fails to comprehend though is how much executives can be worth to a company. It may have suprised Ben and Jerry that they couldn't get a quality CEO only paying 7 times the average salary of the company's employees, but it is good evidence that people who think that you can get quality executives for less than these "outrageous salaries" that executives can currently get are simply wrong.

The headline of another article in the same issue says it all:

America's one-party state: If you loathe political debate, join the faculty of an American university.

"Academia is simultaneously both the part of America that is most obsessed with diversity, and the least diverse part of the country. On the one hand, colleges bend over backwards to hire minority professors and recruit minority students, aided by an ever-burgeoning bureaucracy of "diversity officers". Yet when it comes to politics, they are not just indifferent to diversity, but downright allergic to it."

"...The current situation makes a mockery of the very legal opinion that underpins the diversity fad. In 1978, Justice Lewis Powell argued that diversity is vital to a university's educational mission, to promote the atmosphere of 'speculation, experiment and creation" that is essential to their identities. The more diverse the body, the more the more robust the exchange of ideas."

Later I hope to be able to finish my review of "The World in 2005" which provides some predictions about the year to come.

Friday, December 10, 2004


Emo Phillips Quotes

For some reason the number of posts on my dashboard won't change from is's like I'm stuck in one place, which is kinda like my progress today. I couldn't get ahold of anyone. It is hindering my productivity something fierce. I have some quotes for ya all.

Emo Philips:

Women: You can't live with them, and you can't get them to dress up in a skimpy little Nazi costume and beat you with a warm squash or something...

You don't appreciate a lot of stuff in school until you get older. Little things like being spanked every day by a middle-aged woman: Stuff you pay good money for in later life.

My girlfiend said to me in bed last night' 'you're a pervert' I said, 'that's a big word for a girl of nine'.

Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps.

The way I understand it, the Russians are sort of a combination of evil and incompetence... sort of like the Post Office with tanks.

When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me.

Probably the toughest time in anyone's life is when you have to murder a loved one because they're the devil.

Wednesday, December 08, 2004


Hi again

Groucho: I'm sick of these conventional marriages. One woman and one man was good enough for your grandmother, but who wants to marry your grandmother? Nobody, not even your grandfather.

Glen over at Agorophilia has this interesting post on the wineries case going before the supreme court.

Thanks to Mahalanobis for this link about how making roads more "dangerous" may actually make them safer.

"Riding in his green Saab, we glide into Drachten, a 17th-century village that has grown into a bustling town of more than 40,000. We pass by the performing arts center, and suddenly, there it is: the Intersection. It's the confluence of two busy two-lane roads that handle 20,000 cars a day, plus thousands of bicyclists and pedestrians. Several years ago, Monderman ripped out all the traditional instruments used by traffic engineers to influence driver behavior - traffic lights, road markings, and some pedestrian crossings - and in their place created a roundabout, or traffic circle. The circle is remarkable for what it doesn't contain: signs or signals telling drivers how fast to go, who has the right-of-way, or how to behave. There are no lane markers or curbs separating street and sidewalk, so it's unclear exactly where the car zone ends and the pedestrian zone begins. To an approaching driver, the intersection is utterly ambiguous - and that's the point. "

It reminds me of Landsburg's (I think) suggestion that to make driving safer we put a spear in the steering column pointed at the driver's chest of all cars on the road so that if there is an accident the driver will be killed. The point? That driver will sure as hell drive more carefully.

Via geekpress, left handers flourish in violent society.

Finally, my own addition to the blogosphere for the day...Dr. Death's parole was denied here in my new state of residence. (Story here) I'm going to take a second to mourn the death of reason.

I obviously need to curl up with a few Marx Brothers movies and get lost in the absurd. Incidentally, Duck Soup is now available on DVD (finally).


Tuesday, December 07, 2004


Kinison Remembrance

With the XM radio I have been getting the chance to hear some old Kinison routines (as if anything he did could be considered routine) and I'm reminded of his brilliance. The irony of his life can't be overstated. He was an Pentecostal (sorry Jason, I checked and I had the wrong type of preacher) preacher doing tent shows and hell fire and brimstone before he became a standup. He was an avid drug user. Despite alcohol abuse, it was he who got killed by a drunk driver. God I miss him. I read somewhere recently that he was "the original south park republican." I think it is more accurate to say he was the original south park libertarian, but anyway.

His message (one of them anyway) was simple...stop feeling guilty for what you have.

As he put it in a bit about the homeless: I have a house...hell I bought two just to piss em off.

Or his solution to world hunger? Stop sending food to the desert...send them u-hauls so that they can move to were the food is.

I think it is something that I hear alot. People feel guilty about having things when there are people out there who don't have them (food, shelter, etc.). The reason this is ridiculous is because the fact that person A has food or shelter or you name it is not the reason that person B doesn't have that thing. If person A were to get rid of his house and move onto the street, person B wouldn't get the house. Too often we view the world as a zero sum game. The fact that some CEO is making 10 million dollars a year is not the reason someone else is making minimum wage (or doesn't have a job) and it is dangerous to make those kind of connections because it leads to a view of the world that is counterproductive. This is the view that causes politicians to favor wealth redistribution programs rather than pro-growth policies.

I digress, the point was...Kinison was a brilliant comic.

Sunday, December 05, 2004


Becker and Posner Co-Blogging

Since nothing in economics or the world in general has any credibility until I endorse it, I feel the need to point my few readers to the new blog featuring Gary Becker and Richard Posner. Some days you have to wonder if you have died and gone to nerd heaven.

Friday, December 03, 2004


Strange Quote

My paycheck has a space where a message or quote goes. This was the most recent quote:

"Tanks can threaten and massacre us, but they will never be able to force us to work." -- Lech Walesa

Am I the only one who thinks that this message is just a little ridiculous on a freaking paycheck? I'm sure there is a context to the quote, but whatever with that...I just shake my head.

I'm not being forced to work, but I'm still in the office. I'm very concious of how many schedules I still have out and am desperately trying to pull together the paperwork to make Monday super productive. Sadly almost half of my outstanding workload is at home, so I should be going soon as I'm almost done here for the night. I don't think I'll be clubbing today. Anyway...Night


Late Night Hypothetical

Okay, so let me present this hypothetical so I can find out if I am theoretically completely off base...This guy, who I will call me, goes into a bar for dinner at about 11:30 at night lets say tonight. As he is finishing up his dinner 3 people enter the bar. One guy and two girls. The guy is not particularly well dressed and is not particularly good looking. One of the girls is also not very good looking. The other girl is actually very good looking. They go and sit down at a table with the guy sitting between the two girls. Now this hypothetical me after paying for his food gets up and approaches the attractive blonde and asks her if she is there "with" the guy. She looks quizzically at me and the guy looks at me like I'm nuts and tells me that yes, she is there with him and also looks pretty pissed off. Me says to the guy, just checking and leaves. Now in this scenerio I fail to see how the guy has any right to be pissed off. He came in with two girls, one of whom obviously shouldn't even be with him and he definitely isn't rich enough to have two women so the odds are at worst 50/50 that she is with him and probably closer to 90/10 that she is not attached to him specifically. How could I not go up and make an attempt? It was the odds damnit...Of course this is entirely hypothetical...I've decided to ignore the fact that it actually happened because I increasingly find myself not only failing to care if a woman tells me she is in a relationship, but also failing to care if the guy is even standing right there and while the former isn't too problematic, the later definitely could affect my dental plan.



Thursday, December 02, 2004


California Angel

The Derailers playing California Angel is on right now. I just got my new XM radio with boombox. It is really cool and will make my evenings in the office much more entertaining. Not that doing company research and write-up isn't entertaining. Anyway, the song made me think of Sarah. I wonder if she ever thinks of me and if she does, does she ever do it without spitting?

She was just too unbearably cute and sexy...not exactly Emily, but since Emily hates my guts I tried to get Sarah to go out with me for years to no avail. Two of my favorite compliments I gave her that resulted in the rolling of eyes were as follows:

1. After getting a tatoo of angel wings between her shoulder blades and showing me she asked me what I thought. My response: They are very fitting. (Because she is an angel, in case you didn't get that).

2. She had glitter on her eyelids one day and when I crossed the store to talk to her I told her that at first I just thought it was the normal sparkle of her eyes.

How is it that she didn't fall for me after four years of effort? Hard to tell...could be she has standards. Anyway...

I don't have much to say (do I ever?), so I will just leave you with this much work anxiety must you be having if you have a dream that your boss calls you an alcoholic when you don't drink?

Night all.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?