I can't believe it's not vodka!

My Photo

About

Get Notified!


  • Join my subscriber list and get an email whenever I update my site!
    Your E-mail:
    Powered by NotifyList.com

Recent Posts

  • Everything You Need to Know About Joe the Plumber, and How to Help Him
  • Somehow, it feels like so much more...
  • Read this if you are a democrat
  • Scientist believes CO2 in atmosphere blocks prayers from reaching heaven
  • Strange Digg Error
  • Garry Kasparov checkmates opponent with russet baking potato
  • Me, a celebrity blogger
  • Proof that God doesn't exist?
  • Don't take your car to Jiffy Lube - VIDEO
  • What's in a name?

Categories

  • Chronicle
  • Observational
  • Philosophical
  • Satirical

Links

  • Failure
  • Hashing in Maxim - 1 May 1999

Archives

  • October 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • June 2007
  • December 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006

More...

Subscribe to this blog's feed
Add me to your TypePad People list
Blog powered by TypePad

Photo Albums

  • Prom Picture 4
    Bull Durhash
  • Dscf01477
    Livin' Like Kings and Queens

The Blind Cashier

58896654085 As I placed my breakfast on the counter at the newsstand just outside of Federal Triangle Metro, I was going over some ideas in my head, as usual.  The clerk broke my spell by asking “What do you have?”  I looked up to find that the cashier seated before me was a blind man, and there was a sign behind him that read “On 15 minute break, will return shortly.”  I replied “I have a Snickers bar, a Payday, a Baby Ruth, and a 16 oz. Coffee.”  He replied “That’s the large right?” To which I said “yes,” spellbound.  He punched some buttons on the register and said “$3.69, no wait, yeah $3.69.”  I handed him $4 and said “That’s 4 one dollar bills.”  He reached into the drawer and grabbed my change, all with one movement, and handed it to me.  I watched him as he did this, lifting a quarter with one finger, a nickel with a second, and a penny with a third finger.  I walked out in disbelief.  So many questions were churning in my mind, I couldn’t put this experience down.  After finding out that I was at my job site an hour too early I decided to back and have a conversation with “The blind cashier.”  It was obvious to me that this person was worth a second look.

“I publish an on-line journal, and would love if you would answer a few questions for me, I am fascinated by your set-up here,” I said in my best friendly journalist-of-human-interest-story voice.  “Well if you have a minute, I would love to tell you about the whole program," Charlie replied.  He asked Shirley, a woman seated near him reading a paper to cover the register.  “You see it all started in 1936 with a senator from West Virginia named Jennings Randolph.  He was responsible for the congressional mandate.  It was called the Randolph-Sheppard Act, but Randolph was the main player in the legislation.  This mandate set aside jobs in government buildings for the blind.  Every state appoints an administrator.  It is ironic that these programs are meant to foster independence, yet I have to be administrated all the time!” He laughed.  I asked him if Shirley was his administrator, and he replied that she was his assistant. 

“You see, if you give a man a chance to do so, he will expand his livelihood," Charlie explained.  "That is what happened here.  You might notice there is a sign here that says “Newsstand.”  That was our main line of business until a newsstand opened up nearby that was more popular, now we sell a lot of different things.”  I asked him if he decided which items to sell.  “The government puts a limit on what I can sell; the final decision goes through them.  That might explain why I have an empty freezer back there.  I think the government had originally thought I would sell frozen foods, but they changed their mind.” 

I realized as I was talking to Charlie that I kept eye contact with him and used hand gestures. I knew this was a little absurd, but I couldn’t stop.

Charlie was born blind, which he explained was easier for him because “He never had any sight to lose.”  I asked Charlie if anyone, in his 30 years as a blind cashier, had ever tried to take advantage of him.  He told me that one day someone tried to go into the register and take money, but Charlie got a hold of his hand, took his own money and some of the thief’s.  The thief yelled “You took some of my money!” Charlie replied “You go get security, and tell them why I did it, and I will give you your money back.”  Another time a man gave Charlie a ten dollar bill and told him it was a twenty.  The man escaped with the ten dollars, but made the mistake of trying again a short time later.  Somehow Charlie recognized him, and held up the bill to others in line and asked “Is this a twenty?” To which the line replied “No.”  The man said “Oh hold on, here it is,” and produced a twenty.  Charlie kept the money and didn’t give the man his change.  The would-be thief had the nerve to go and get a security guard, explaining that Charlie had taken his twenty.  I guess Charlie was the more credible witness, because he ended up winning the argument.  That’s character.

Another time, Charlie told me, he was walking down the street and bumped into another man.  He apologized, and the man told Charlie that he was blind, and needed help crossing the street.  Charlie told him that he was blind too, but he knew how to get across.  So Charlie walked the blind man across the street, laughing to himself that “the blind was leading the blind.”

After I explained to him about my journal and told him that I had quit drinking he replied “Quit drinking, you ain’t been around long enough to really START drinking!”  We talked a little about his philosophies on life.  He commented that “people think God must exist because all of this must have come from somewhere, but when they get to saying that this is the something that came from nothing, that’s a paradox.”  When I told him about Frankl’s gorilla metaphor he replied dryly “That’s a psychological boost!”

Charlie is very capable.  He has High Speed Internet access at home, and is trying to figure out all of the keyboard shortcuts for programs like RealPlayer and Windows Media Player. He has a lot of old records that he would like to make digital copies of, and thinks he could make some money doing this for others. He is concerned that people in DC don’t know how to dispose of batteries properly, and are harming the environment by throwing them in the trash.  Charlie is a very remarkable character, and I was glad that I had the chance to talk with him.  Being a cashier allows him to serve people, but being a blind cashier affords him a special opportunity to serve humanity. 

Posted by NotVodka on February 26, 2005 at 04:51 PM in Chronicle, Philosophical | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)

Is it wrong?

I think it is time for me to separate out some emotion.  Some of you might call me politically incorrect, insensitive, but if you read carefully, you will realize that I am walking a tight line here. 

Is it wrong to be angry when the two clerks at the convenience store are talking back and forth in another language, and ignoring me?  Is it wrong that my date has to feel embarrassed because our waiter's accent is so thick that she has to ask him to repeat himself 3 times before we are able to discern what he is saying?  This country is most certainly a melting pot, especially the more urban areas.  I don't mind when someone in the service industry has trouble with their English.  I had a nice conversation with the waitress at the Thai place near where I work today.  We talked about the tsunami, King Rama the 5th, how long she had been working here, living here, etc.  She was very polite.  I felt bad after each of these experiences, and have only had this moment to figure out why.  I feel that in order to be fair to people nowadays, you have to question your negative emotion that stems from interactions with others.  There are a lot of emotions that one has to comb through to come to the right conclusions about people.  I purposefully started at one extreme and worked to another here.  Here are my conclusions.

A)  I have every right to get angry when clerks, at the middle of the morning coffee rush, are talking back and forth with each other in a foreign language, it is not that they are foreign that bothers me, it is that they are rude.

B) I can only hate on the waiter if he gets upset with us because we can't understand him.  He should realize that it is not our problem that his accent is so thick.

C) I am certainly not upset about having to struggle a little bit to make a friend from Thailand.  The only reason I felt bad about this exchange is because I had used a term ("learning the ropes" is the term I used) that I realized is a colloquialism, and she had trouble understanding me, which probably made her feel isolated.

So now we have achieved: TA DA!  Processed anxiety!

My point is, there are a lot of different dialects to learn.  Since I cannot go out of my house prepared to meet so many people from so many different countries without learning at least 5 languages, we must all agree on a common language.  In this country that language is English.  If tomorrow the balance shifted and Latinos comprised 50% of the population, and the official language became Spanish, I would get to studying. 

I guess it is okay if you don't speak English, just be grateful when people make the effort to understand you and don't expect it to come easy to them.  If I went to France and walked around expecting people to speak English, I could get glass shards in my ice cream cone.  I have heard that in some French speaking areas where most people also speak English, they won't speak to you in English unless you first struggle to speak to them in French.  They just want to see you make the effort.

PS.  I spelled colloquialism correctly without spell check.  GIMME SOME LOVE.

Posted by NotVodka on February 24, 2005 at 07:30 PM in Philosophical | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Adventures in Sobriety - 3 Month Chip

For those of you unfamiliar with the theme of this site, it is an attempt by it's author to create an alcohol substitute.  I wanted to create an outlet, and also a drill to tap into that mysterious place within and emerge with something that is capable of sustaining me, and hopefully others.  "Blogging," to quote Boozie, "is good therapy."  I attended a meeting on Saturday, in my true style, just to get my chip.  I have 3 months of sobriety now, and I hope I will return to a meeting before it is time to pick up my six month.  Meetings are fascinating, and always give me something to reflect upon.

The reason I don't attend meetings regularly is that I find that there is often a "misery loves company" feel to meetings.  I sometimes think that everyone is there to suffer together, and if you aren't suffering, then you aren't part of the group.  I often feel pressure to complain while I am there. Granted, there are people in meetings who have had real difficulties in life, and have every right to vent.  However, I would rather choose to celebrate my sobriety, after all, I have found my way out of a lifestyle that was potentially destructive for me. 

My approach to quitting alcohol has been to step outside myself to process my anxiety.  I don't ask "Why can't I drink?" I ask "Why can't alcoholics drink?"  Humans have a tendency to personalize their pain, and I think that is a habit to be avoided.  Pain happens, it doesn't mean you deserve it.  Learn from it.  Others in the meeting rely less on "processing anxiety" but on some vision of a personal God.  They believe that the only thing they can do is pray.  I find this impractical.  I prefer to take a more head-on approach to my problems, I try to solve them on my own. If God exists I am sure He has a full enough plate, and appreciates me for handling His light work.  Socrates said that frustration leads to wisdom, and I look for the lesson in all of my problems, so that I may overcome.  I don't wait for someone or something to show me, I am not that patient.  I think that imploring celestial aid is less practical than seeking earthly aid.

A lesson on perspective, from an attendee:  "I got drunk and ended up in a pretty bad barfight one time, and had to go to jail.  It was the worst jail, bad food, no air conditioning, bad cells.  I hated it there.  It wasn't long after I was finally released that I got a phone call saying I had to go back to serve time for some unprocessed charges.  I dreaded going back for weeks, but when I finally got there, they had built a whole new jail!  So you see, it's all a matter of perspective."  I love it.

The theme of the meeting seemed to be courage.  There are some very courageous intelligent people in meetings.  My contribution on the theme was that I haven't let myself get too hung up on the final end-all-be-all of some personal God, but have instead looked for signs that I am on the right path.  I don't think it matters if we follow a religion or which religion we follow, as long as we have the ability to find little guideposts in life that help us to know that we are headed in the right direction. These little moments are encouraging, and if God does exist, these moments are certainly from God.  I believe that the more alcoholism is viewed as a practical problem with practical solutions, the more the right path for alcoholics will make itself clear.

Posted by NotVodka on February 21, 2005 at 02:47 PM in Chronicle, Observational, Philosophical | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

The unknown purpose

I have had this entry in draft form just marinating since 1/24.  I wasn't going to post it, but a demand for more humanistic entries has appeared, gotta love my go hard readers.  Also, Boozie has thrown down the "you don't post enough" gauntlet, and if I am going to post often, I can't be that selective.  At bottom, this post will be food for thought, and some of you might even find it inspiring.  Here is a mental exercise by psychologist and holocaust survivor Victor Frankl:

Imagine there is a gorilla who is the subject of medical testing to find a cure for some disease that is responsible for millions of deaths a year.  Each day this primate gets stuck with painful injections, he is suffering.  There is no way for you, as it's keeper, to tell this gorilla why it suffers, no amount of explanation will suffice, you simply don't speak it's language. 

Here is the point:  Most of us are like this gorilla.  We egotistically assume we know everything, and when we don't see why we suffer, we assume we suffer for no reason.  It takes a leap of faith to say "I suffer for a great reason that I cannot comprehend."  It also takes a leap of faith to say "I suffer for no reason."  If you have to choose, which way do you go? 

It has been awhile since I have read Frankl, but I believe he goes on to say that this exercise is enough to prove that we should have an unconditional faith that even transcends religious dogma.  Although I do believe that this metaphor demonstrates the possibility that unconditional faith could be warranted, we cannot rule out another possibility, that the gorilla is kidnapped and IS tortured needlessly.  What is demonstrated however is that we should not abandon the hope that our suffering has meaning just because that meaning is not immediately apparent.

To keep your faith unconditional, you must not pin your belief on whether or not you are getting what you want out of life.  If you are suffering, that alone is no reason to abandon your sense that life has meaning, that it is ultimately good.  It is allowing that there could be something higher, but purposefully not constraining it to some manageable concept.  You learn to trust and open to the world around you, rather than building up some artificial pep talk in your imagination.  Even suffering can have meaning, and the fact that we suffer does not mean that we aren't important or deserving of a better life.  I don't pretend to have mastered this outlook, but I think it is definitely a concept worthy of serious attention.

Here is an example of the failings of conditional faith.  Imagine you are a devout Christian, and you have just learned that Jesus called Syrophoenicians lying dogs.  This sits okay with you until you realize that the Syrophoenicians are a race of people.  Then you see that Jesus, according to the bible, was a racist.  You don't like that.  Maybe your great (*50) grandfather was a Syrophoenician, or you, living WAY in the past, still call yourself a Syrophoenician.  Your faith is now toppled, and you must rebuild.  Having unconditional faith means you have an independent faith.  It is the belief that the only reason you aren't at peace is because you can't see, and will never see the big plan, but you trust that it is there, if only because you have no reason not to.  In a very mystical, metaphysical way, independent (or unconditional) faith is a way of taking the Nestea plunge into ALL THAT IS.  Imagine stripping away all of your inner resistance while maintaining your outer resistance.  It is an act of ultimate courage. 

Posted by NotVodka on February 17, 2005 at 10:47 PM in Philosophical | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Fabric of the Universe

I had a girlfriend of two years up until this summer when we formally broke things off.  She is the most mystical person that I have ever met, most certainly that I have ever dated.  If I came home from the doctor and had been diagnosed with high blood pressure, she might claim it was because my furniture was out of alignment with the universe, or something similiar.  That is just the type of person she was.  When we first started dating she gave me three bamboo stalks in a single pot.  She said that one represented her, the other me, and the third represented our love.  After we broke up this summer we decided to remain friends, which wasn't easy, but I thought it was the lesser of two evils.  I still had (and have) very strong feelings for her and her daughter, and my attachment to her daughter made parting completely near impossible.  Anyway, we had been hanging on (trying to stay good friends) for the last 8 months, and it was not working, there was just too much emotion.  On Thursday we talked, and I had decided that we shouldn't talk for at least three months.  I thought the emotional distance would be good for us, give us space to breathe, get some distance from all the pain.  When the conversation ended she said "I will talk to you in the spring."  Thursday night I came home to this:

Bamboo_002 You might notice that ONE OF THE STALKS IS YELLOW.  This happened OVERNIGHT.  I am still in disbelief.  I don't know what to think about it.  If you take what my ex said literally, it means that either I, her, or our love is dying.  Kind of puts me into a catch 22 where I have to hope it is our love that is dying.  At first I thought that there was something that I could do to the plant to save our respect and regard for each other.  Now I am thinking that I must do something in the relationship to save the plant.  Then when I look at that stalk with honest eyes, I don't think anything can save it, it looks like a goner to me.

The problem with this whole thing is that I am a scientific person.  I don't believe that something as abstract as two people's affection for one another could be linked to the life essence of a plant, but the coincidence is so powerful as to demand my attention.  The more attention that I give it, the more confused I become about the nature of things.  I feel as though I may have to alter my entire worldview to accomodate this event, should I decide that this plant's life essence is linked to the health of our friendship.  What is even freakier, is that if her statement is literally true, then if another stalk dies, one of US is the goner.  WHAT IS THE LIFE EXPECTANCY OF BAMBOO?  GIVE IT TO ME STRAIGHT, HOW MUCH LONGER DO WE HAVE?  Obviously, this type of thinking is absurd, so if this type of thinking is absurd, so is the premise that the yellow bamboo represents anything at all, BUT THEN THERE IS THE POWER OF THE COINCIDENCE.  I have been going in circles like this all weekend.

One aspect that frustrates me is that if it is a sign, aren't signs supposed to be there to tell you to do something?  If I am supposed to do something, what would it be?  It is not clear what action this event is calling for, except for me to go over it in my mind and try to figure it out.  Isn't it amazing how something as mundane as yellow bamboo can give birth to such high human drama? 

UPDATE 2/15/05:  I am cool now, I GOT THE METAPHOR.  Good gardening demanded that I snip the dead stalk, in order to protect the health of the other two.  It means that our attachment was unhealthy, and that letting go of it is going to be better for the both of us.  That stalk was the last loose end.  Thanks universe!

Posted by NotVodka on February 13, 2005 at 10:44 PM in Chronicle, Philosophical | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

It all begins here...for some.

Step One.  Step one in the A.A. Tradition is "We admitted that we were powerless over alcohol-that our lives had become unmanageable."  This is what it meant in the beginning of Alcoholics Anonymous.  AA was originally an organization for alcoholics in the final stages of alcoholism.  These late stage alcoholics had lost everything, and were ready to admit defeat.  As time passed, and the members of A.A. sought to prevent this final collapse in others, they "raised the bottom."  Now, hitting bottom does not mean complete bankuptcy, but realizing that you are playing a game that you can't ultimately win.  That is how I interpret it.  I recognize that I could go on drinking the way that I did if nothing changed, yet I know that something will change.  I learned this when I realized that I no longer drank like my friends drank.  If the books I read on the subject are any predictor, if I continue to drink I will inevitably hit the real bottom.  I cannot win that game, but I can certainly get up from the table.  This is my approach to alcohol.  I didn't quit because I had a problem, I quit to avoid having a problem, a problem that I have read that certain people have a physical predisposition for developing.  I believe that I am among that number of predisposed individuals, and am taking the appropriate measures now to protect the ones I love, my career, my future, my character.

So, even though I am not completely sold on the idea that going to A.A. meetings is the right choice for me, I have definitely taken step one.  Here is my own personal insight:

"If I am to prevent the urge to drink, I must take better care of my emotional self.  I must insulate myself from influences in my life that are emotionally damaging, and expose myself to influences in my life that are encouraging, uplifting, inspiring.  Problems urge me to drink, and I must learn to treat any feelings of hopelessness or despair in a constructive manner."

Let the journey begin.

Posted by NotVodka on January 26, 2005 at 09:56 PM in Philosophical | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

It's not vodka, but I still go to parties

Tn_vodka I realized last year that I can't set limits when it comes to drinking.  I wasn't THAT bad, but alcoholism has reared it's ugly head in my family before, and since I realize now that I have to choose whether to drink or not to drink, it is easy to see that the latter will offer me a better life. 
Quitting drinking has presented me with a few problems.  Learning how to be social without it (thus this blog) and learning how to deal with problems constructively when they come along.  Socrates believed that frustration leads to wisdom.  This notion means that by using alcohol to avoid frustration I have to be stunting my emotional growth.  So I find myself now, when confronted with problems, facing them head on, challenging them philosophically.  I seek to replace alcohol with something special from within.  This something will be called "I can't believe it's not vodka."  THAT'S my product.  It is still in the R and D phase, but I know I already have some of you salivating.  For those of you with a caviar problem, unfortunately, you will have to wait.

Posted by NotVodka on January 07, 2005 at 04:11 PM in Chronicle, Philosophical | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)