ikeepitreal

I love me some Costco. Not only do they have a bunch of fun random stuff, the $1.50 cafe, and cheap gas -- they are also like the liberal Wal-Mart. Where Wal-Mart donated to Bush, Costco donated to Kerry. Where Wal-Mart pays poorly and has a misogynistic hiring/promotion history, Costco has a spotless hiring record and pays well. Check out this post. On top of all this, Costco is local, so I can further feel like I'm plugging the local economy.

But mostly, I love the free food samples. Today we popped in for lunch at the $1.50 cafe and ended up with a veritable smorgasbord of goodness *. Where else would you eat such a variety of food (and in such a strange order)? A stomachache quickly followed, but it was well worth it.

My Costco roster for 6/30/05:

1) Polish Sausage & Diet Coke (cafe)
2) Passion Fruit Smoothie
3) Granola Nibbles
4) Cheesecake
5) Pomegranete Juice
6) Wheat Bread
7) Teriakyi Beef Jerky
8) Swirl FroYo (cafe)

* Have you ever seen the word "veritable" not followed by "smorgasbord" or "cornucopia"? Anyone...?

Posted by Mike at 08:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

I like how this kid riding the NASCAR excersaucer has a baby mullet. That is keeping it real.

Posted by Mike at 10:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

As part of our Trip to Idaho, we drove thru Craters of the Moon National Monument. It was incredibly cool. I hope to go back soon when we have time to actually hike and check things out. This is a picture of a tree inside "Devil's Orchard".

Posted by Mike at 08:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Is there anything more emasculating than buying puffy paint?

"(ring) Hi Honey. Do you mind stopping by Michael's to get some puffy paint?"

"Um, what?"

"Puffy paint. You know, the stuff you decorate cheezy tee-shirts with."

"No, I know what it is. You want me to buy it?!?"

"Yeah"

"(resigned to his neutered fate) Ok. What colors do you want?"

Posted by Mike at 10:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

I get really tired of developer communities giving away collateral (esp. T-Shirts) that is geared for big dudes. ALL DEVELOPERS AREN'T EXTRA LARGE!

Posted by Mike at 05:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

I've gotten back into reading a bit more lately. We would like to keep Sam away from the TV for a while, so that means more music and books for me for the time being.

One author I've really gotten into is Sarah Vowell. I've never been a huge This American Life fan (I'll probably give it a chance now), so my only exposure to her has been as a recurring guest on Conan O'Brien. You might know her as the voice of Violet in The Incredibles too. Yeah, her voice really is that high and squeaky.

I've heard before that it doesn't matter what you write about, what matters is how you write. Vowell is a perfect example of this. Because I've never been much of a history buff, I was suprised that Assassination Vacation put such a big hook into me. The book is a travelogue detailing her tour of historical sites related to our first 3 presidential assassinations. Doesn't sound like a likely bestseller subject, eh? But the book is teriffic. Before I finished it, I had already ordered her other 2 books, The Partly Cloudy Patriot and Take the Cannoli.

There are several reasons I like her:

1) Her prose is articulate, funny, sarcastic, and hopeful all at the same time. This is a tricky line to walk, but she pulls it off.

2) No pretension. She is clearly an urban sophisticate, but also not afraid to write that The O.C. is her favorite TV show.

3) A shared background. Vowell realizes that her stories are as much about her as the subject at hand, and the stories of her childhood feel very much like my own. Turns out we have a lot in common. She grew up in Billings, MT, went to a Penecostal church 3 times a week, and dedicated herself to music (specifically marching band). One of her essays relates a story of running across the middle of the football field to play a solo on the next song -- and getting heckled -- that brings back so many memories, I think she channeled my Senior year at Boise High School.

Since I've devoured Vowell's catalog in about 3 weeks, I'm trying to read everything else I can get my hands on by her. Turns out she used to be a columnist on Salon.com, so those archives come in handy. (And her cartoon looks like it was done by somebody named Eggers -- wouldn't Sarah Vowell and Dave Eggers have, like, the cutest, most depressingly optimistic run-on babies in the world?) I'll probably pick up some TAL CDs as well.

FWIW, I think her oldest book, Take the Cannoli is the strongest. If you haven't already (and I gather most of you have, I appear to be late to the game on this one), check Sarah Vowell's books out.

Posted by Mike at 04:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

Wouldn't you like to know how *we* feel...

Posted by Mike at 11:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

One of my biggest pet peeves is when writers (mostly sportswriters) selectively use stats to prove their point. Listen up -- I know you guys have deadlines, but next time just trot out the latest story on some "character guy" in the clubhouse or something. Don't pretend to be a sabermetician.

Peter Gammons' ESPN.com column used to be a pretty good read. That was before he turned into a complete Red Sox shill and got lazy with anything involving the rest of the league. I think he is struggling to find an identity between the boring beat writers and the geeky stats guys. His latest article is a good example of that. From the article:

While the leadoff hitter is the leadoff hitter only once a game, the leadoff position is vitally important.

Nice debating technique. Concede your argument's most obvious logical weakness.

Fair enough though. Interesting hypothesis, Gammons -- now convince me.

Going into Saturday, the top three run-scoring teams were Boston, Texas and Baltimore, who had, respectively, .400, .350 (.427 with David Dellucci in the one hole) and .439 on-base percentages in the leadoff spot.

Ok, so you are telling me that 2 of the top 3 teams essentially, have good OBP in the leadoff spot. This stuff about Texas/Dellucci is just garbage. A .350 OBP would be good for 73rd in MLB. I have a hard time believing that a .350 OBP in the leadoff spot is much better than about league average.

Coincidentally, those 3 teams play in the 3 most hitter-friendly parks in the league. I'm just saying.

And this is what really gets me:

Milwaukee, Arizona, Seattle and the White Sox have been offensive surprises, partly thanks to, again respectively, Brady Clark (.403), Craig Counsell (.429), Ichiro Suzuki and Tadahito Iguchi (.380) getting on base at the top of the order.

Um -- Yeah. Let me use runs scored and OPS as a measure of offense:

Milwakee had jumped up about 10 spots since last year in each of those. I'll buy it. I can understand *maybe* calling Arizona a suprise as they were worst offense in the league last year. But Chicago has dropped 10+ spots in both of those ranks since last year. And the Mariners? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? You are calling the 2005 M's offense a (positive) suprise? They are one of the 5 worst teams in the league and they signed 2 big sluggers to $$$ contracts in the offseason. I just don't see how this argument holds any water.

Bottom line -- OBP is important throughout the order. But that doesn't make for a sexy story. That doesn't get you 6 paragraphs about Red Sox Johnny Damon and Wade Boggs.

Gammons -- I understand you may have found a good angle on Brandon Inge and probably just wanted to propose marriage (again) to Johnny Damon. But please, don't twist the stats to make your case. You just come off as a lazy writer.

Posted by Mike at 02:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Put anything you want on it. And 33 MPG. Yeah Boyeeee.

Posted by Mike at 07:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

My college friends and I play a game on the first day of each month. If you say "rabbit" to someone before they get a chance to say it to you, you win. It's that simple.

I think it's a bastardized version of this. At some point it got turned into a competition. Although the competitive fire has recently died down between us, here are some funny ways we have got each other in the past:

* 12:00 AM (alarm goes off)
* One roommate - "What is going on?!?"
* Other roommate - "RABBIT!"

Or the living apart version:

* "Ring Ring"
* "Hello?"
* "RABBIT!"

And the variation:

* "Ring Ring"
* (with glorious victory) -- "RABBIT!"
* Outsider hands the phone to interested competitor -- "RABBIT!"
* "NOOOOOOOOO"

At first Becky thought this game was stupid (as you are probably thinking). But after some persistence (and several dozen defeats), she came around. In fact, 2 nights ago we had this exchange when Sam woke us up at 2AM:

* Becky - "ooh, ooh... RABBIT"
* Mike - "It's the 31st :)"

Anyway, fun game. All of which is to say...

RABBIT!

Posted by Mike at 05:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)