absolutely no point at all...(but thats not surprising to most because i rarely have a point and this is no exception...just silliness)

there are three kids in my house (not including me the wife would say). but suffice to say there are three children under the age of 8 where we reside. when we had our first child, kiera, i didnt know what to expect. we were in college and trying to manage school, football, and a family was a tad terrifying! ive learned so much about my wife, myself, and of course our children, from that point to now. its really quite beautiful...

but the beautifulness factor is not really my point. i'll save that for one of their birthdays when im trying to write something sentimental in a card or something. one thing in particular that stands out to me about children/life in general is that there are only two age groups where it is deemed acceptable to fart in public, the really young or the really old! what ive noticed about the really young is that it is often funny or cute when they 'break wind' as my grandfather used to say.

so as it stands, our society only accepts the natural passing of gas from children or the elderly. anyone else is an ill mannered, uncouth, or uncivilzed pig. well at least thats a partial list of what the salesclerk at nordstroms called me.

never ever forever never 2.0

while responding to my 5'6" atl based homie, dusty, i ended up getting diarrhea mouth(fingers) and my response got quite lengthy so i decided to go ahead make the second half a new post instead of a long ass reply. w/o further delay...

back on the subject of names in which parents display their narcissism and, not to mention, lack of foresight, what is the deal w/ celebs and the hideous names they come up with? im convinced alot of times it is due to a 'trippy narcotic session' the night before! after one too many tokes, sniffs, etc the thought goes, 'oh i think i'll name my twins galaxy and uranus! that'll show how awesome and creative i am!'



hehe, i said diarrhea fingers!

also, to be honest, it took me at least 15 tries to get the correct spelling of diarrhea!

also, im starting to get a little grossed out by the word and how many times ive said it in a 5 minute span!

never ever forever never

i was at the airport the other day in hot-lanta and got a chuckle. i was ear hustlin' two ladies conversation and during their interaction i heard one of them refer to a third party by name. now i dont know the exact details of their convo, but i do know that absolutely nobody should have the name of this absent third party! it was so crazy sounding that i cant even share it with you! i honestly hope it was nickname or some other silly name they had for them! i was like two seconds from being like, 'excuse me miss, i dont mean to intrude, but was that an actual name you just mentioned or simply your rendering of the phonetics of some ancient hieroglyphic?'

i didnt get the chuckle from the third parties name per se, but from where i mentally went from there. in high school i actually knew someone who's name was the combination of arm&hammer baking soda and kleenex. his name was armenex. his mom said while she was pregnant and thinking of names, she saw the boxes of these two products while sitting in her recliner and well, thats what she came up with. (ftr, it is still a mystery to me as to how, or why, she had baking soda in her living room buuuut okay i guess.) at any rate, i ended up coming up with the top 10 names based on products/foods that parents have no business naming their child with, but in this day of infatuation with the obscene it wouldnt surprise me to see a few of them. so here goes in no particular order:

nabisco
listerine
neutrogena
edamame
jergens
splenda
raisinette
crisco
afrin
and of course...parmesan



also, for those not in the know, the term ear hustlin' simply means to eavesdrop or, better stated, to listen intensely to someone else' convo that you either know or dont most likely while you should be paying attention to your own shizz ; )

questioning paradox

in an earlier post, i briefly mentioned that ive had some retractions concerning christianity. this should not be understood as a retraction from God. again the fact that i see them as separate entities at times would partly explain my distancing. anyhow, ive noticed or perceived several issue's that have raised some 'red flags' for me concerning some of its tenets. honestly, i dont see the skepticism as a bad thing. i mean im an admitted dissenter. but its not just to simply argue or disagree for the sake of arguing and disagreeing, but it really does help to delve deeper into the things i say i believe. or as my bizzle(blog) states, it helps me to-unravel. i had some thoughts on the subject of questioning, dissenting, skepticism, doubting or whatever you want to call it. having said that...

most would offer a casual nod of agreement when concerning questioning. conservative and the not so, typically agree that questioning, thinking, doubting, even skepticism are permitted. i am not totally convinced of this, but i am convinced many would agree. there is a great chasm between verbal assent or affirmation and reality or actually 'experiencing'. by experience here i mean people actually experiencing or feeling what its like to be able to question, doubt, think, etc freely. again, i do not believe that is the case. there are constant strings attached that detract from this supposed freedom.

ive said before that concerning questioning and the so called allowing for it, that 'what' is being questioned or doubted sometimes seems to determine whether its permitted or not. i see at least three tiers at play. if you question whether drinking is permissable for believers, whether they're allowed to go to dance clubs/bars, or play the lotto then your skating fine even doing pirouettes on the ice. criticism and lectures abound and you are inundated w/ repetitive christian mantra plus you get tossed out the conservative/traditional group, but things are still 'okay'. now if you question other things such as the literal existence of job, adam and eve, jonah, the flood to name a few, if you think differently about the possibility of people being born strictly hetero or abortion, or regular church attendance then you are still okay. well sort of. no more pirouettes, but you're still on the ice just avoiding the cracks beginning to form. criticism and lectures increase significantly, you are now told things like, 'this is just part of your journey.' 'this is just where God has you.' or my favorite, 'you'll come back around'. as for the last tier of questioning, if you question things as to whether or not hell has a zip code, whether Jesus is the son of God, if the bible is inerrant, or if christianity is superior to any and everything out there then you are either a non-believer or heretic. you have fallen through the ice and are absolutely not 'okay'. you are prayed for with a fury both to your face and unbeknownst. mostly unbeknownst because people see you as leaving the fold following wayward trails and want God to bring you back so you become the 'topic' of church or bible study prayer request time.

ive made mention of 'what' is questioned, but concerning non-believers, it made me think of 'who' is doing the questioning. are believers solely granted questioning rights? (by believers i guess i mean those that said 'the prayer' in time acknowledging christianity as the only true alternative to atheism or ____.) well personally it seems that way to me. what 'non-believers' experience and most christians actually do is different from what is taught. assuming a sifting of christian beliefs is allowed, there are most certainly strings attached. its like 'you can sift but you better hurry and make-up your mind.' what i find surprising is that on the surface this mode of thinking sounds relatively feasible and it surely applies to other parts of our lives. choose a job before the window closes, ask her on a date before she picks another fellow, or buy that house before someone else takes it off the market are all types of decisions we must make in a limited time frame. but, personally, this methodology doesnt translate well for me concerning God. honestly speaking, to say that God is asking a hindu or muslim, who has been steeped in their own teachings for God knows how long, to run a sickle through everything they've been taught and hurry up and make a decision is so ridiculous and unbelievable. or to say that God is asking a pimple faced immature teenager (or the 'age of accountability' whatever the hell that is) to not only contemplate schoolwork, the opposite sex attraction, same sex attraction, and what they want to do with their life, He is also telling them to figure out the greatest mystery known to man. btw, tomorrow isnt promised to anyone so good luck w/ that. i suppose a hindu teenager has it twice as rough.

if my wife and i continually plead with our children that they can tell us anything on their minds/hearts and that we will always listen, yet we blow up in their face and absolutely do not listen when they share certain things w/ us; what they 'experience' is far different from what we say. what we verbally say is actually of little value because of what we actually do. the adage, 'actions speak louder than words' comes to mind. so of course most wont say, out loud anyway, that questioning isnt conceivable bc that sounds too rigid, too close-minded, even too pharisaical and no church going person wants those associations.

not a post necessarily

just playing with camera here...

i like taking pics as well. my poor kids, every time they turn around there goes their dad aiming the lens at them! i do shoot adults as well! ive entered one contest to date with another happening in the next few months. my wife, unfortunately for her, will be my first subject older than 8 who's pics i will enter! other than myself that is 

typically when shooting outdoor type stuff, i dont really go for the scenic lakeside pics with the sun nestling in the background. im more likely to focus on the rundown stone bench sitting by the lakeside with the sun nestling in the background.

ah well, thats just me. 

oz-we-pay (dont worry i"ll eventually explain)

right now, my life involves loads of traveling. traveling in insufferable amounts to be more precise. naturally, the more i fly, the more i experience why it sucks so bad. cancellations and delays seem inevitable and is an easy way to screw up one's night. sometimes i feel like i must have been an ant in a former life and my buddies and i royally f-ed up a picnic outing by treading through the potato salad to damage the chicken marsala but i digress. in a nutshell, flying this much stinks. because of the stench, i tend to look for ways to amuse myself and i must say; the airport has got to be the biggest collection of uncoordinated people ever assembled! i see people running for their gates w/ the lamest form ever! i mean good thing there's no killer after them because they'd be done before they could even start the creepy score!

anyhow, the incessant flying, reincarnated potato salad footprints, or clumsy travelers is not even the reason for this offering. no this is about, well, let me first explain the title. on an older episode of saturday night live, there's the depiction of a package being delivered to kevin nealon's(i think) home. the carrier then says, 'i have a package here for a mr. asswipe'. an annoyed nealon quickly corrects him and tells him the correct pronunciation is pronounced 'mr. oz-we-pay'. i havent seen it in forever, and hardly do it justice, but the skit is absolutely hilarious. so there you have it. this post is about, plainly stated, asswipes. i dont mean asswipe in the general sense either. im talking the airport variety type asswipe. once again, let me explain.

ive noticed over the years that some people do not take kindly to children on planes or airports for that matter. on a recent trip, i witnessed one guy (asswipe that is) that infuriated me! if you werent looking you wouldnt have even noticed it, but i was definitely looking and definitely noticed his asswipedness.(<<--totally not a word but its my post sooo...) this poor lady was by herself and her child was not having a fun day. we were supposed to leave at 8:30pm, but we didnt leave until 1 am! hell i wasnt having a fun day either! about an hour into the flight, her kid is screaming and is moving about quite wildly. well this jerk in front of her was huffing and puffing like some eighth grader who got tricked by his pals on opposite day. he kept glancing over his shoulder with that look that screamed, 'will you shut that kid up already!' his smugness was sickening and i felt for the lady. her hair was a mess, her face was candy apple red, her kid was moving about like he was of tazmanian decent, and to top it off, she had the added pressure of the asswipe in front of her! 

just a few thoughts mr. asswipe if you dont mind. im not sure if you've noticed, but anatomically speaking, children have shorter legs than adults. this may help you in understanding that at times their legs may bump your chair when they reach for something or when they are in their parents lap and are having a rough time processing life and why they are on this friggin plane this late at night. whats that asswipe? why dont parents just make their kids sit still for the duration of the flight you ask? well it sounds easy enough right? well for starters, i know, like jesus, there is no record of your early life. except in your case you somehow managed to bypass all the years where self control is learned and just came into the world all knowing and controlled, but not everyone is so fortunate. shocking huh? imagine the shock i faced when i had kids of my own and saw firsthand that children really are not all that mature nor are they respectful of others space. go figure.

well i do hope my words though sticky with sweet sarcasm awaken pleasantness in you and that you save your asswipedness for: loud cell phone talkers, people who wear their bluetooth or neck pillow around while not in use, and plane farters.

for the record, i met the owner of the word asswipe and we worked out a deal where i get $100 for writing this and $10 for each time i said asswipe.

seriously?

what type of thoughts does this pic elicit? im sure the responses vary from some guy dwarfing some girl (for those not in the know) to 'a cool pic, but kinda odd looking.' im somewhere in the middle in that lebron does dwarf gisele and the pic is pretty cool, but she looks awkward in the pic for some reason. i think its because she looks somewhat 'too computer generated', but i digress. 

cyberspace is now inundated with opinions on the matter, apparently, for some, this photo elicits thoughts of a primate's and barbies rather than top models and athletes. all of which i find rather ironic and amusing due to the fact that the bottom of the damn magazine states this! as for his expression, i mean, you ever been to a game, seen one on tv, or even glanced at a basketball card? im gonna go out on a limb here and say that the photographer was trying to capture the emotion of him in his element and likewise, portray her in her own. that would explain him wearing athletic gear and basketball shoes as opposed to a suit and wing-tips or some other GQ worthy gear. this would also add fodder to the discussion as for her adornment of a silky sexy dress, big smile, and flowing yet scrambled hair. i think i may be on to something here. again just spit-balling, but this also answers why a basketball would be included on, of all things, a vogue magazine cover!

anyhow, hopefully my attempt at sarcasm was noted, and as for all those who see this as a racist depiction, you, plainly stated, suck. excuse my candor, but one has to seek extremely hard to come up w/ this type of sordid attitude. a premeditated approach if you will. one would have to almost always see the black/white interaction of male and female as something to bitch about. i mean how would the outlook change if she was a black woman? does he all of a sudden stop looking like a gorilla because the skin color of the model is changed? wow, im reeling right now at the thought of how someone would answer that question. any takers? he either looks like a monkey or he doesn't. her skin color is irrelevant. people saw the pic as an interracial one and then started to come up w/ lame and shallow comments as opposed to seeing the picture and simply not liking it for its artistic value. for me to see it otherwise, the following would HAVE to be included: the empire state building for starters, a hairy lebron, a less attractive female, a banana or two, a couple helicopters circling the area...possibly firing at him, or maybe even jack black.

rant over

hide OR seek

to live up to the name 'random sammy' as handed to me by my bud amy, im switching gears from my two previous 'serious' posts.

whats the topic behind this dramatic gear switching you ask? (drum roll please)...its cleavage!!thats right, cleavage. better yet, my confusion w/ it thus the title of this entry. dont worry i'll explain my, well, randomness...if a womens chest is not to be stared at, then it should be at least hidden. if 'they' are out, one can only assume the women doesnt mind if people look. i mean, if i were to, for some ridiculous reason, wear a half shirt, there are some jeans i own that would show the tops of my boxers. if i wasnt comfortable w/ that, i would simply wear the jeans that dont show my underwear. personally, it sounds silly of me to wear my baggier jeans and be like, 'why are you looking at my underwear ya perv!'

so when they are made visible, what would be the reason for it? fashion? possibly. seeking something? possibly. i guess thats the basis for this post. you (speaking to those whom this shoe fits) cannot expect a guy, or some girls i reckon, to try and decide who is of the 'cleavage is simply fashion' crowd and who is of the 'cleavage is a date getting elixir' crowd.

so ladies, which is it, hide OR seek?...

upon me hitting the 'publish post' button, please disregard this post and consider it pure nonsense!! ; )

hammock chronicles: a post in retrospect

posters note--i actually wrote this, or something similar to it, at least a year ago. ive been going through notebooks of old and decided to post a few of the things i had written with some changes.

its often stated that in this life we will always have to deal with adversity. we seem to move from one bombshell to the next no matter how many books we read or prayers we offer. alas, adversity is indeed inevitable. so no surprise to me, or others as well i suppose, that when i survey my life, that 'glow' ensues when things are going even moderately well. you know when relationships are budding, the kids are growing into pleasant human beings (well except for the boy...kidding) career is progressing well, the dog made his business outside, you either had a good hair day or you lost less than the previous weeks, you returned your movie rental having actually watched the movie and it was on time, or whatever causes that 'glow' from you.  but then like steam from a hot shower, fear consumes the arena. the glow quickly fades and instead of savoring the moment, the onset of pessimism causes me to simply sit and embrace for the next blast. the more i think about it, the shrapnel from the last attack still lingers and aches my body.  i often find myself just waiting for the next one. expecting them. again this is no fault on me really. as i stated, tragedy can strike at any moment. despair preys on peace and anguish lies in wait of joy. while i lay on my hammock, i get a picture of this and why i should hold the pessimism at bay. as i recline and the warm sunlight lazily rests on my cheek, the breeze gently sways my hammock i must know that at some point the sun will be overpowered by storm clouds soaking everything under heaven forcing me to comply and head indoors. BUT, for the time being, it is foolish of me to not enjoy the present. i suffer a great loss to not take pleasure in watching the wind chase and tickle the grass, all the peaceful sounds emanating from outdoors, or seeing the birds that neither sow nor reap yet are fed by my yard. how can i not enjoy now because of what may happen down the road? again, its a safe estimation to say that something contrary to what we desire will happen, but we dont know the when.  in my example, it would seem all the more beneficial to cling to and relish the climate as i now experience it, because im certain the downpour looms. what 'downpour' do you fear?

further and further

i recently had a conversation w/ a friend i hadnt talked to in some time. when i say 'talked to' i should probably preface that by saying we differ on many levels concerning spirituality or religion. so when i say we hadnt talked in a while, its more on this subject, because we had spoken before but not on this level. as you probably already correctly assume, this conversation followed suit of our previous disagreements. although i must say that this convo had a different feel to it. ive had many similar talks before with others and disagreements have obviously come up, but this one left me feeling upset, which was new, and to be quite frank, it helped continue my path to leaving christianity by the wayside. i should also say here that i dont mean leaving God, just christendom. i do see them as separate entities at times and i guess is why i feel like tossing it in the rubbish bin. or maybe the recycle container would be more appropriate and something better would surface. ive only spoke to a few people about the matter and the issue thus far has been solely doctrinal. meaning i disagree with certain aspects one seemingly has to fall in line with to be included in christendom. these issues range from the literalism of the creation story or job,  to name two, to whether people are actually born gay, all the way to if christians are the only ones granted entrance to heaven. also, i should say that complete and utter disagreement hasnt arrived, but it is visible and seems to be quickly approaching. 

anyway, i received an awkward message from him that he heard from 'someone' that leslie and i were into some 'sensual practices'?? whatever the hell that means. so after i racked my brain for the rest of the day trying to figure out just what the hell this unsettling message was about, i finally spoke to him the following day. he then proceeded to tell me that he 'got the story wrong'. how thats possible is beyond me. if someone were to tell me some so called 'disturbing news', as he put it, about a friend,  i assure you i would get the whole story before i went to him/her. at any rate, he told me that it wasnt necessarily about me, but that my wife had some 'soft core pornography' pics on the internet. okay so my wife does model and i guess he disagrees with christians modeling in a sexy manner, but soft core porn?? a bit extreme in my mind, but in his mind, christians should not pose in victoria's secret ads or the lingerie section of jc penny i suppose. his reasoning went something like this, because i wouldnt want leslie walking around the house in lingerie if we had company over, the same goes with posing in a pic. if its wrong in one context, its wrong in all contexts. i cannot even begin to say how limited a view of the world this is. my response was that i also wouldnt answer the door or walk around in swimming trunks with no shirt at my house either but thats because im not at cabo or south beach...im at my house. so as the context changes, so does my attire. its not because its wrong or sinful to wear a two-piece (gasp! a two-piece?? another issue all together i guess), but from what i can tell, the context plays a major factor in whats deemed appropriate. 

well we went back and forth in our 'discussion'. i quoted discussion because situations as these arent true dyads. typically one person isnt really looking to change their views or even gather info on the other viewpoint. being or remaining right in their mind is the true focus. allegiance to the search for truth is an afterthought because they already possess the all encompassing truth. [notice i didnt say who the person is ; )]before we even spoke, there were a million things i thought of. not that i even found the accusation remotely feasible or possible, but that this fellow is ultra conservative. he's a good guy but just maintains a traditional right wing view of things. i mean when someone tells me that spongebob is gay, there's no telling the angles he could approach me with. so as it stands, it was his foundation that had me backtracking to see where i could have went wrong in his sight and the possibilities seemed endless. conservatism in itself is fine i suppose. but as with anything, when one's viewpoint is seen as the 'right' or only one for that matter, and is spoken of so matter of factly, people tend to withdraw from the arrogance. earlier i said when i have discussions about my somewhat retraction from christianism they are soley based on doctrinal differences. another aid in this withdrawal that appears to be emerging is sort of surprising to me. there are numerous things about the church/christians i find awfully disheartening. i would have to say that its not necessarily the people themselves, but the arrogant attitude thats either on display or needs to be unearthed. when opposing views clash in a peppering of questions, and someone says 'they'll pray you', its usually done in a condescending or patronizing manner. what they really mean is that they hope you come around to their point of view, the right one. i am simply a voracious questioner and apparently questioning or doubting is not allowed, among other things, in the faith. although many would and do say questioning is infact permitted. but it seems what your questioning determines whether your inquiries are valid.

i do apologize in advance for the rushed and clumsy presentation in this blog and im sure there several things wrong with my sentence structure. i didnt really have the time to go back through it and correct a million things, plus i wasnt expecting this to be 100 pages long! anyhow, hopefully this makes some sense. to sum the previous 99 pages, i basically feel that christianity, at times, obstructs God more than it points to Him.

is camelot near dallas,texas???

yesterday i was in the mall w/ the kiddos and my son was driving me crazy w/ his great listening skills. it was later in the afternoon and i was about 30 mins past 'drained status', so to snag a breather, i made a pit-stop at the starbucks and ordered a tall soy chai latte. after we got our drinks, we looked for a place to sit and recuperate. there werent many places to choose from and the tables they had were either full or not enough seats to accommodate my brood. so my next option was to sit at a a table and ask one of the other patrons if i could steal a chair they werent using. i found an open table w/ three available chairs, which suited my kids, and ventured into coffeedom for another. all the seemingly available chairs would soon be taken by friends, parents, or both according to those at the tables...until i reached this one fellow. taken back by his awesome hairstyle, i stumbled and stammered the words, 'is your, i mean this table...or seat taken? or are you using it?' he told me it was technically taken but that him and his wife would be leaving as soon as she got there so i could take it. or at least that is what i think he said as i was still in awe of this guy's do! no kidding, all i could see was inigio montoya from princess bride w/ straightened/gel slicked hair! pretty cool, i suppose, if it was for a movie circa 1980 or if he resided near camelot, but hideous if he was at the mall in say dallas drinking coffee at say starbucks! but i must say he did give me his seat w/o telling me to prepare to die!

fast forward to earlier this morning and i swear i see the starbucks hair guy's arch rival or counterpart. not to be out done, he has the same gel slicked hair but his 'style' is somewhat different. i guess you could label this hair-do a 'bob' and im relatively glad i didnt have a convo w/ the guy bc i am almost certain the words 'sire' or 'signet' would have somehow slipped out. i mean come on, this guys locks would have forced me into a bad governing of words!!

a handful of contrition

so its 1:50 am at my home in texas and it's pouring rain outside. the rain is slamming against our windows at a ridiculous rate. i love the rain. i love the smell in the air, the way it gracefully trickles down the window as it empties into a small puddle. i love being immersed in nostalgia from the days of my youth. even the thunder and lightning play match maker as my wife and i inch closer and closer until my neck feels the warmth of hers and hers and her rose petal legs become intertwined with mine to combine our warm energies. nice!

only one thing wrong here. IT is not happening at the moment save the rain, lightning, and thunderstorms! thats right, the best part! its not happening because i cannot sleep (big surprise) and im 'typing this thing out'. (i do not like the term 'blog' and this sinister term was a large part of me steering clear of this site. it sounds like: either an object one leaves in the toilet, or some time type of engineering device, or something having to do w/ pimples.)...wow that was some tangent.

thus comes the self-serving of contrition. i do love to write and i guess i can find another word or just try hard to abstain from saying/typing it... ever! much thanks goes to my main squeeze leslie for pushing and pushing and pushing basically tying me down to start one. also props to my homie amy for informing me of the site, minus the pushing, and including my kids in her blog (shudder) to really motivate me!

so as my initiation into 'writing sometimes random thoughts for cyber space' nears its conclusion, i would just like to add, that i for some strange reason do not like capital letters and i rarely use them. i also should forewarn all readers that i can be very erratic, random, arbitrary, or fill in the adjective of choice. fortunately, sometimes it leads to amusing or imaginative stories real or not. and of course there are times when you will leave saying, 'W...T...F...' and probably laugh at me instead of with me! ; )

*random alert*-- so as i was typing this last paragraph out, i was teetering between using 'warn' or 'forewarn' and obviously chose the latter. i then thought what the hell is the difference? so i went into my office and grabbed a dictionary. here's what it said, 'forewarn v. warn in advance'. uhh really? and as opposed to??? how is that different from 'warn'? anyway i think i just gave this small issue a big shadow and im headed to bed!!

out