Great Ideas

Shows that have animals will ocasionaly put a disclaimer at the end saying, "no animals were harmed in the making of this show".
Good idea: cooking shows with meat in them should be required by law to have the following statement at the end, "animals were harmed in the making of this show", or something to that effect.

There are too many cooking shows that add no value to my life.
Good idea: a new show called "will it blend". You go around the country and blend up any and all famous meals into a paste and then go out on the street and pay people to drink it and decide if it is good. That way when americans become too lazy to chew food, we will have a head start on good tasting pastes.

Car Dealerships

So sit back and enjoy the most recent thorn in my side (with updates to come if they keep sending me emails):

You are incompetent,

After you last email I sent the following:
    To whom it may concern,
    Your dealership excels in not communicating and in not tying events together.
    I asked for a quote on a trade in for the 2002 Buick in question.
    Two different people contacted me (a little annoying). I was called and talked to a salesmen about a test drive that day or the next, when I     called the next day he did not know who I was! The following day I got another call left on my answering machine saying the car was still     available, as if that was not clear the day before when I test drove it and was told you would not trade for my car with what is left on the     loan.
    Your on-line quote  for my car was $1500 more than I was told in person (that was the lower end of that quote it was 3000 at least on the     higher end). Your on-line price for your car was 500 over blue book from a dealer, if in "very good" shape. I admit your photographer is     skilled, they managed to hide the body damage to the rear of the car on the driver side, the stains in the carpet, all the worn out buttons,     and (not so surprising) the bad smell of the car. All of which should have lowered the price more.
    So, see if you can get this one right:
    Stop calling me, stop emailing me.
    I talked in person to a sales person and there is no deal to be reached between you and I.
    When I sent the request for more information, it was just that. I wanted more information, not calls from every salesmen who gets bored,     or who knows how to send an email.
    So, please, STOP all communications, I am not interested.

    Sincerely,

    Levi Lunt

After a blunt response like that what is left to say?
I am left with no option, other than this:

Do I have a deal for you! If you act now I will sell you the car of your worst nightmare, a *CHEVY Uplander (ominous music in the background). It is worth $4,000.00, so I will sell it to you for the low price of **$8,000.00! I know, how generous am I? That is $1,500.00 below the price of $9,500.00! Think of all the gas that $1,500.00 will buy. You could take a cruise on me, because of my generous offer. Remember to act now, because this offer will not last. We will not be selling this car at auction anytime soon, but if you do not buy it another incompetent sales person might! So act fast. If you Call within the next 24hours I will throw in ALL 4 tires and most of the brakes for **$2,000.00. That is an additional savings of $2,000.00 of the regular price of $4,000.00, for a grand total of $3,500.00 off of my normally insanely low prices. If we keep saving money like this you will be rolling with bill gates soon. I don't know how we do it!

Please contact me at ###-###-#### ONLY if you are pre-approved for a cash offer by your bank, as we do not finance any car less than $1000,000.00.

Thank you,

Your sincerely annoyed, almost customer,
Levi Lunt

 

*The Chevy Uplander in the above offer is real. You may purchase it at a total price of $13,500.00 with the final price of $10,000.00 after mail in rebates. All Mail in rebates are subject to my approval and shall not be paid sooner than six months or one year after purchase, whichever is second, and no later than 23 months after purchase.

**Price is after applicable mail in rebates.

From: #### ####### at ############### <########@dealer###### >
To###########
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:26 AM
Subject: Please Contact Me at ###################

Dear Levi, Recently you sent me a request for information on a Buick LeSabre. I appreciate the opportunity to earn your business and want to make sure you have all the necessary information about this vehicle.  I have tried to contact you via the phone to go over the information and answer any questions you may have. If I called at inconvenient times, please accept my apology.  Unfortunately, I have been unsuccessful in reaching you and need your help.    Please call or e-mail me at your earliest convenience with the best time and number to reach you.  My contact number is ###-###-####,  (or my direct number below), please feel free to call at any time.  If I do not hear from you in the next few days, I will try you again at the number that you provided. Thanks for your help and I look forward to hearing from you soon! Best regards, #### ####### ########################### ########@######### (###) ###-#### (###) ###-####

 

inanimate objects, whose to blame?

I have been watching Agatha Christie’s Poirot on Netflix. It’s a show about a private detective and his partner solving mysteries and crimes. I like it.

 So, picture a detective coming up on a crime scene. There is one dead body lying on the ground with 10 to 12 stab wounds, and a knife still protruding from its face. Next to it covered in blood is a person alive and well. Now picture this happened in a room with only the two people in it. The room was locked inside and out, with no way in or out, with a ventilation system filtering to 5 microns, which is too small for a third person to pass through (just in case that was not obvious).

The detective interviews the suspect, who says the knife caused the death and that they were lucky the police arrived when they did or it could have killed him next.

Chief detective quickly seizes the moment before someone else takes the credit, and he outlaws knives everywhere, so we can sleep safe. He also tracks lesser knives hiding under the title of butter knives.

Now, would you want to watch the sequel?

No, you would be wondering some obvious things:

First, were they even asleep when the knife attacked, and if not, does it affect you at all when you sleep?

Second, knowing when and where a butter knife came from, does that help a victim? Because I am sure they would be thinking, "at least I am being stabbed by a tracked knife, I would just die if I did not know where it had been." That way the government can get in on this violent action. They can track where the knife came from and ruin the life of someone else because they did not control the ultimate outcome of another person and their decisions (which if they tried to control them they would have also been in trouble for kidnaping or tying them to a robot to control their movement... or some nonsenses like that). As if one person is responsible for the decisions of another… which if that is not true, then why is the government not at fault for the crime?

Third: Who is going to make sure all the illegal knives will be properly disposed of? The same people who prevent the knives from falling into their hands in the first place… because they suck at it. This will leave any person who uses knives for their intended purpose without them, and anyone who wants to misuse one with no reason to fear the other guy. Oh, my bad... I mean, "The people who let the knife use itself in the proper manner", because we already came to the brilliant conclusion that people do not control the knives.... or did we?

Really! You would not wonder any of this (unless you are president of something, because they see things we only dream of.... in nightmares maybe). Let’s not be stupid. I believe John Wayne said "life is hard, it’s harder if you’re stupid". My life is hard enough. Blaming inanimate objects is stupid, a knife cannot kill someone any more than a car, or bus, or airplane, or rock, or pen, or paper clip, or sandwich, or carpet, or this computer (that I am writing this on) can. -Aren't you glad the before mentioned, and completely made up, detective was not president of the United States of America when the twin towers were struck? He would have outlawed air planes, and asked us to examine our conscience if we questioned him. He would have begun tracking all airplane tires and jet engines, blah, blah, blah.-

Any one being killed by a knife is a tragedy. But it is foolish to blame the knife. It is the person behind the knife that is the problem. And if you must stretch it further, it is the society who does not do all in its power to persuade its people to live in accordance with its laws. It is the people who interact with the aggressors, who had a chance to change them for the better, but did not. It is the society who puts a larger emphasis on money than life. It is a society who cares more about oneself than for your neighbor. It is the government who cares more for power and money than for the people, more for the businesses than for the people. But most of all it lies with the aggressor. Even if nothing was ever done to help them change, it still does not matter. They chose that path and they are solely responsible for the consequences. Even in an ideal society where the government, community, neighbors, friends, and family do everything possible to help them there will still be people who act up and will misuse anything in reach to cause pain. All tools we use have benefits and when misused can have horrible consequences.  It is odd that the knife the detective wants to outlaw may have been the one that granted his freedom to choose so foolishly, or the one that stands guard around him at all hours.

I do not believe the solution to removing violence from a society lies in removing anything that can be used to take a life, nor does it lie in teaching everyone how to take a life to defend it, nor does it lie in restricting everyone in society so it cannot happen.  I believe it lies in teaching people to love life and their neighbors in spite of their flaws, and allowing everyone to enjoy their freedom, even when they want ten knives and when they want none. Because it is that freedom that knives were used to take in the first place and it is that freedom that many lives have been laid down to protect. It is not right for one man to decide that it is his responsibility to remove those rights.

2012 Mizuno JPX 800 Pro Vs. 1976 Ben Hogan Apex

There are a lot of reviews out there for the JPX Pro and all of them seem to compare one other club. So that is what I will do. They all seem to use just one of the irons (usually a 7 or 6 iron) and each gets hit three times and then a "well thought out and through" review is given. Based on this, my review is ridiculously over thought out. Instead of driving around the block to take a test drive, I drove around the state. I hit all the clubs!



The Ben Hogan Apex Iron set is 2 - Equalizer (PW).

The Mizuno JPX Pro set is 4(JPX 800 Fli Hi), 5-GW.



One might ask, is this a fair comparison? Yep. Does anyone feel bad when Tom Watson gets his butt handed to him by some twenty year old? No. Does anyone rush out to dry the tears of the twenty something’s when Tom gives them an old school lesson in golf? No. Winning is what matters, not age.



More than once in a round I will catch a shot fat, so how the club handles this is very important. The Ben Hogan clubs win here. I will blame Mizuno's triple cut sole. I do not care how many times it is cut as long as it works. The Ben Hogan’s cut through the ground better (I have made some massive divots with them), where the Mizuno has a more noticeable hang up (still gets though, just not as easy, which means the ball is "just in the water", instead of "almost to the other side of the water").



As far as looks, the Mizuno's win hands down, or up or sideways, it does not matter how you hold it the Mizuno looks better to me. That has nothing to do with golf. If you could hit a club as ugly as medusa, it would not matter if it produced the desired results, and the same for sound and feel.



"WAIT", you say. "What about a thin shot, you covered a fat shot, now you can’t skip a thin shot!" Well you are in luck, it just so happens that I got some thin shots at the driving range. Regardless of which club, it feels and looks horrible, with no good results. There are no winners here, just losers, so the loser is you for hitting that kind of disgusting shot.



When I hit the ball solid the Mizuno’s win. Not because they "feel" good. (Who makes a club that gives bad feedback for a good shot?) Because, the ball did what I wanted easier. I can draw, fade, or hit it straight with both sets, but the Mizuno's are less work for me.



Another note on other reviews, regardless of what is said they always say something like "I prefer brand x over brand y, but it is preference", I mean strap on a pair. The Mizuno’s win this showdown because I think they are better. If you chose to play 1976 Ben Hogan Apex Irons against my 2012 Mizuno JPX 800 Pro Irons, you will lose (if we have the same skill level and if you lose). If you want to win you need the best in your bag, and now (in my opnion) I do have the best with the JPX 800 Pro Irons. That leaves only one question left for you, do you play the best Irons?

Offence happens! (I got the cool image from Chad’s blog, beauty eh.) When I drive I am constantly annoyed, because everyone is not driving the way I think they should. But after thinking about it I have discovered a problem with this wide spread disposition.

Kids are awesome because they show you who you are not what you think you are. Laura read me a cool quote about how we learn more from our own kids than from our parents. I admit my kids have not shown me how to play baseball, ride a motorcycle, or how to eat; however, when they say something I say, or do something I did not realize that I did, it is then that I agree with Laura’s quote. We do not learn more from them in “how to do”, but in the “what not to do” areas of life. A parent calling a child to repentance is annoying to the kid, who will always ask “why”, which will always tax a parent’s ability to explain without sounding silly. Then there are times when you see someone else say or do something and you can see why that might not be wise (it has always been easier to see in others). And when that other person is your kid and you know they learned it from you, makes you realize the mistake much more clearly than any other method, in my opinion.

Any who… if I were to force my thinking on everyone else when they drove, would it really be better? Or would it make me want to hide in a cave? I still think it would be better, but perhaps I am less hopeful of that day and a little less annoyed by other parents’ mistakes!

"To be, or not to be", is that the question? No.
This is pure silliness. You will "be", consider this: "I think
therefore I am"; so, it is more appropriately stated thus: “to become one
or to become something else?” Yes this is the question, “What are you becoming?”
Everything is changing. So if you refuse to do anything you
will only ever appear to do so from your point of view. As every other point of
view will have a changing bias, you will digress. So if you chose to remain,
you will become less. So you must become more of something to remain. And if
you must become to remain, than what must you do to excel?
Aristotle said, “We are what we repeatedly do. Therefore, excellence
is not just an act, but a habit.” (Or something very close to it.)
This would appear to solve at least three unknown paradoxes.
First: is a brick house singular or plural. It is obviously plural.
A brick house should be stated: a bricks house. A bricks house is made of many bricks
not one. One may be the “key stone” but without the others the key stone would
fall. Also all the bricks appear to conform, there are many of the same. They all
differ a little though. So it is with us. if we are excellent, then we must do
so all the time, some less noticeable and some in front of everyone, for who
herd of a bricks house when all you see is wood siding or stucco.
Second: is there a difference in remaining or exceling? As stated
above both must become; so, both are building houses of character one brick at
a time. The difference is in the materials, how, when, why. A house made from
clay in one part and steel in another and wood in another will not stand. If it
appears so then they have attached large paintings of other materials onto their
walls or bought cheap vinyl siding. If you want to see what the structure of
your house is made of look where no one sees, in between the walls. Is it
steel? Is it wood? Is it bricks? So if you want to find out if your friends are
excellent, hire a private detective to follow them around when they think no
one is looking. That is what I would do if I could afford it.
Third, “which came first: the chicken or the duck”. A
chicken has a habit of being a chicken. A duck has a habit of being a duck. Therefore
I will tell you something: ”I do not know”. I admit I have a habit of not
knowing, therefore I am not knowing which came first.

Just like New

"Time heals all wounds", unless you are an exception listed in the fine print. It is nice that the scar follows the nail line. So now when I am told to be more flexible I can show my "nail" and be like, what, how flexible is your thumb nail?