I hate people who think entirely too often with their heart. I understand that the heart, the emotive component of the brain, has a lot of say in what we do and think, but some people just let that emotive component have far too much sway with what they do and say.
I’m a man that believes that logic rules. Logic, to my mind, is the idea that you try as hard as you can to view matters objectively. You attempt to view matters not only from your own perspective, but from others’ as well. The latter is difficult to do, because it involves viewing matters from a perspective that is not a part of your conscious and subconscious mind. It involves removing the nature of who you are and viewing it from another’s perspective, then adding the ingredient of who you are back into the equation. I like to think that this is what I do, but it’s tough to do consistently, because you are the one who has to live with the ramifications of your actions regardless what the other minds around you think.
A friend of mine recently inserted a third component into the equation: the gut. Gut instinct, my friend said, introduces a combination of experiences from your conscious and subconscious mind that take into account the emotions of the heart combined with the logic of the mind that has been ingrained into the nature of the person that’s relative to that person’s upbringing, his heritage, and everything else that makes him the man who he is today. Regardless which of the latter arguments is correct, they’re both superior to the man whose thought process is ruled by the heart. The man whose mind is overruled by his heart tends to think anecdotally, and while he may resolve the matter in the short-term for the object of his affection, he does little good in the overall for the long-haul.
I hate the drama. Let’s face it, most of those immersed in the drama chose to be there. Drama does not usually happen by accident. Usually, it’s the people, places and things one chooses to surround himself with that causes the problems and the drama. People have problems, people have situations. I’m not talking about genuine tragedy or genuine problems. I’m talking about the man or woman who sees a relatively simple issue and starts screaming or belittling a loved one. Their reason for being is soon quenched when everyone and the family dog rushes to their side to ease their pain. I know, I know, you’re not one who falls prey to their cries. You’re the one who doesn’t listen when Mary cries. If something goes wrong, however, and the first person you look at is Mary, you in the drama mama. The sad thing is it works, especially if you’re good looking. If you’re not good looking, you had better learn how to scream louder and swear more often. It then becomes everyone’s focus to try and get Mary to stop screaming and swearing, and she achieves her goal of being the only one crying in every room she’s in. She’s officially the drama mama.
I hate book reviewers who say that they’ve read a book in one day. “I just read this book this afternoon. I read it in a day. Yes, it’s that good!” The goal of the reviewer is not to tell you how good he thinks the book is. It’s to tell you how fast they read the book, and how intelligent they must be to have read a book, any book, that fast.
I hate teasing. I don’t care if it’s a radio show, or a TV show, everybody teases. Commercials are teases, of course, but we all know that. I’m talking about the show, or host, who says: “I’ll get into this information after the break.” Or, the TV show that leads you to the revelation of something huge and fades to the commercial of the latest drug that aids in some form of vaginal disorder.
On that note, there’s nothing more disturbing to me than to hear explicit detail on how some particular drug will assist you in curing the most explicit malfunctions of our reproductive organs. I understand that these commercials are hoping to educate the public as to the virtues of their product, but they end the commercials with the words, “Consult your physician to find out if this drug is right for you.” Can’t we consult with our physician with these intimate details of our ailment? If you have a reproductive organ jetting blood, you should probably consult with your physician. I’m quite sure your physician will tell you that it’s not what it’s supposed to do that, and he’ll recommend a drug to cure it. Why do I have to hear about on my TV though? I know that the company is trying to niche its way into the market, because every doctor knows that product A is the perfect cure for the jetting blood, but if the customer is adamant enough about niche product B then the physician will prescribe it. In most cases of this sort, the knowledgeable consumer is not right, but with the perfect ad, showing the perfect model that has the same ailment as you, you can niche your way into the market. I know what they’re trying to do, I’m just sick and tired of the effort.
I hate people who know the answer to a trivia question after the answer has been given. How many of us are Jeopardy! experts? How many of us knew the answer shortly after it was given? There’s probably some psychological name given to this, but I don’t know what it is. I just know that all of us do it. All of us can build backwards to most answers to figure why it’s the right answer, but we just shouldn’t ask for credit for it. Most of us get frustrated when the moment of truth arrives, because we weren’t able to think of the answer quicker. We all knew the answer, we just weren’t able to process it quickly enough, and we express our frustration over that fact. There are others who begin with, “I was going to say…” These ‘I was gonna say’ creatures actually want credit for knowing the answer after it was given. My reply, “Well, you should’ve said something earlier” is the only thing that frustrates them. Some of the times, they are able to draw perfect angles back to the answer, but I still don’t give them credit. “You should’ve said something earlier,” then sits like a kidney stone between us that must pass in a painful manner.
I hate cheering on sports teams. There’s nothing more frustrating than watching my favorite team go down in flames. I had so much hope watching them this year. I secretely thought this was their year. I heard the experts say that they were lacking in such and such a way, but I ignored it. They always say stuff like that. They’re paid to be negative. I thought these negative comments could be overcome once my team got hot, and all of their pistons started firing. This would be it. They finally had that guy that completed some kind of equation that I had in my mind. Things wouldn’t go down that way this year. Not this year! Then it does, and the goofball, Howdy Doody look alike Eli Manning starts having fun, hopping around in my team’s defense like he’s playing hopscotch, and I realize that my loved ones have been afraid of me for the last couple of minutes, and my dog is shuddering in a corner, and it dawns on me that there’s not a damned thing I could do about any of it. Phil Donahue once said, “With all the heartbreak that is out there with rejection from lovers, economic loss, and career failures, how can you guys invest such emotion in teams, when you can’t do anything about it?” It’s one of the few intelligent things Donahue said in his twenty some odd years of broadcasting, and I think about it every time my team goes down in flames.
I hate it when politicians say they’re going to retire or not run for a seat for any reason other than the truth. I hate it when a Congressman says that he’s not going to run for the Senate, because the job he was sent to do in Congress is not done. It’s a tedious response. I hate it when a former Senator and Governor says that he’s made the decision that is in the best interest of his family. No one I know knows what that means. Does it mean that you don’t want to put your kids through the trauma of the microscope placed on them when you run for a seat? If that’s the case, quit letting your party think that you have some interest in the seat. When a sitting State Senator says he’s not running for the seat because, “I want to be sure kids get the care they need,” the first question all of us are asking is wouldn’t you be able to do that on a wider scale as a federal Senator? When a Governor says that he loves his current job, I’m a little less convinced that he’s lying, but the cynical side of me tells me that he would love the Senate seat too. The cynical side of me says that like our Founding Fathers, most politicians fear appearing ambitious…when they’re told that they’re going to lose. When a sitting Senator tells us that he’s retiring because he wants to spend more time with the family, everyone from his colleagues in the Senate to my five-year-old nephew knows that he’s skirting the issue. It’s all about research and internal polling. Internal polling tells a Congressman, a Governor, a sitting Senator, a former Senator and Governor, and a state Senator that they’re going to lose, and that’s why they are all telling us that they’re not running for Nebraska’s Senate seat that Nebraskans chose to let Ben Nelson occupy for twelve years. I don’t expect them to say this publicly, don’t get me wrong, but it would be nice if they could switch up their lies every once in a while. The current rolodex of excuses is so cliché, it’s an insult to our intelligence.
I hate it when liberals say that conservatives aren’t liberals because they aren’t intelligent enough. Tim Tebow is not a liberal, according to this liberal line of logic (?), because he was home-schooled. The theory being, if Tebow had gone to a school and experienced more gay and lesbians in every day life, he would be more liberal. Rush Limbaugh isn’t more liberal, because he didn’t have enough sex. Sean Hannity isn’t a liberal because he didn’t smoke pot. Just think what a wonderful place this would be if he had. We would all be more relaxed, happier, more liberal, and we could all live in peace and harmony.
Conservatism is not a choice in other words, it’s a sentence inflicted upon those who weren’t reared correctly, or who didn’t know how to live when they had their taste of freedom in college. I know liberals will say that I’m broad brushing a little too much on this note, but I’ve read a lot of liberal literature. I’ve read a lot of liberal blogs, and I’ve watched a lot of liberal shows. I know that they say, and write, this stuff. They believe it. I also know that their great answer to all that plagues man is that there is no answer. They want complex constructs. “There are no simple solutions,” they say, “and there are no absolutes!” Yet, when it comes to their great dilemma, why aren’t more people liberal, they break it down to all of the simple solutions and absolutes listed above. I wasn’t home-schooled though, I’ve worked with and spent time with a variety of people from every walk of life, and I’ve done all the things listed above, so why am I still not a liberal? To paraphrase Former President Ronald Reagan, a liberal is someone who reads liberal literature. A conservative is someone who understands it.
I hate politicians who say I was taken out of context, then we all drop it. We move on. Wait a second here, I want to scream to all the reporters leaving the room with this as their only note, he said it. He shouldn’t get off scot free just saying he was taken out of context. He should be forced to put that quote back into context for us all, so we can know what he truly meant. He should be forced to set the record straight.