Hand Washing the Hard Way

I'm not afraid of germs.

It's quite weird, actually. I'm OCD about a lot of things, but germs are not part of that. Of course, I wash my hands, I scrub down cooking utensils, et cetera. But you're not going to see me opening doors with a hand-towel. I'm not going to refrain form picking up my pets just because they're dirty. When it comes to germs, I figure the amount that are beneficial or at least harmless far outweigh those that can make you sick. I take the approach of "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger."

So this shit makes me nuts- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqchsFwhSNQ&feature=player_embedded.

That's right- a hands-free soap dispenser. I mean, how dumb can you get? On the website for this stupid little tower of plastic, they even have a troubleshooting section.

Troubleshooting.

We're trying to turn our hand-soap into an electronic. This is insane, people. Why do we need to complicate soap? I mean, think about it. The only time we use soap is when we are about to wash our hands. Who cares how dirty the soap pump is; we're about to wash all the germs away, anyway. Not to mention, unless you have an automatic sink, you'll be touching the knobs, anyway, which defeats the purpose.

It's not even water-proof. Why would anyone make an electronic product that sits next to a sink all day and can't even stand up to water?

Not to mention the amount of money you're going to have to spend on this puppy. It requires four AA batteries. You have to replace the soap periodically, and those little refill cartridges aren't cheap, either. This is an investment that generates money long after you've bought the product. It's the reverse of what any rational consumer wants in a recession- instead of paying for itself, it only costs more as it ages.

It's nuts. I can't think of any situation where this would be a wise purchase. One review suggests that perhaps you are trying to re-create the hands-free experience of a public restroom. In that case, does the dispenser come with a decal I can stick to the wall that looks like a stall door? And how about an audio track of people doing there business, so you won't feel alone, just like in a public restroom. I'm just going for authenticity, here.

It has all kinds of things that can go wrong. It's like the new iPhone- if you hold it incorrectly when you pick it up, it malfunctions. If you let soap build up around the nozzle, it will malfunction. If you don't switch it off before moving it, it malfunctions. One review sites one possible use as being for a cook, so you don't have to handle raw meat and then touch the soap dispenser. But you'll still be washing your hands, so it doesn't matter.

The reasons some will buy this is that we, as a collective society, are afraid of germs. Think about it. What is the point of an automatic toilet? You'll just wash your hands, anyway. People carry around hand sanitizer. I mean, people started wearing face masks because they were afraid of the pig sniffles, which don't actually protect you much from germs.

The truth is, our fear of germs makes us willing to invest in false senses of security. It doesn't seem to matter whether or not it's actually reducing the germs, just as long as we feel like we're staying cleaner.

Germs are not bad. A few of them are, but proportionally, they're outweighed. We would not be able to live without the beneficial germs living in our systems.

And seriously? Troubleshooting for a freaking soap dispenser? Give me a break. Soap doesn't need to be complicated. It shouldn't be complicated. Chemistry is complicated. Calculus is complicated. Washing your hands is not complicated.

Leaving High School: A Year Later

Today, I read a blog post about filling out a "Five Years Later" questionnaire for high school. It was highly entertaining, and I felt myself agreeing with most of what the blogger had to say about his high school experience. It got me thinking about my own high school experience.

I've been out of public education for about a year now, and even after slogging through a year of Portland State's errant nonsense, it was still better than high school. I got to take classes that interested me, and I got to ignore ones that didn't. This makes me wonder- why isn't high school more like college?

They claim to be preparing us for college, but I've found that's a load of nonsense. They make us take tests in the eighth grade to tell us what we should do with the rest of our lives. They want us to select some kind of "track" based on said indication. And that is a load of shit. They didn't even offer classes in Anthropology, and look what I'm studying now, fools. Even given this "track," we're all required to take a bunch of classes that mean nothing. I finished Health in one day online. I finished Technical Reading and Writing in not much more time than that. And yet, neither of these classes did me any good except for filling high school requirements.

Why can't requirements be broader- why can't they just say, three years of math, three years of science, four years of English, and then have a wide selection of classes from which we choose? Why can't creative writing fill an English requirement as easily as AP Literature? That's how it works in college. Why can't we take two biology classes instead of one biology and one chemistry? What difference does it make to some district official?

The way public high school works is counter to how a university works. If no one took a class here at the U because it looked uninteresting, then they would stop offering it. In public high school, we had to take certain classes whether we wanted to or not. If given the choice, I would not have taken Health. I doubt anyone would. This would motivate the district to build a better, restructured curriculum, not to stick with the same song and dance that we heard in junior high and elementary school. The body parts don't change; there is no point to beating us over the head with the circulatory system. Sports medicine, for example, should be a suitable substitute. We should've been able to take classes that interested us, not ones that make us hate learning. I'm lucky that my love of learning won out over my hatred of public school, because I know people who refuse to go to college for fear of the same boring beating they had in high school. That makes me sad, because I think this is why people would rather borrow lies and propaganda from talking heads than learn the facts on their own. I think people have been scared away from learning because they're only impression was the one given to them by public school, and that wasn't learning. It was testing, and repetition, and memorization. Public school has nothing to do with learning; it is a three-ring circus.

The aforementioned blogger lamented how useless his high school education was, and that his overall experience was quite poor. My own experience was equally forgettable, redeemed only by the teachers who showed a genuine interest in learning, and students' ability to learn. I don't miss high school in the least; I was told by some that I would, and they're wrong. I don't miss the other students, I don't miss the ridiculous requirements, and I certainly don't miss the stupidity of so much of it. If they wanted to genuinely prepare us for college, and not just fill some legal requirement, they would model the schools after universities. They would stop treating students like children and start treating them like independent young adults. High schoolers are immature little imps, and if they were made slightly more responsible for their own education, they might be able to get to college and not act like idiots.

Mormon Report: Meg Buys a Guide

Today, I went to Barnes and Noble and bought Mormonism For Dummies.

I kid you not, the Dummies series seriously makes a guide to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Thank the Heavenly Father.

I won't lie, I felt a tad awkward standing in line holding the September issue of Automobile and my newfound Mormon guide. The checker nearly died laughing as I quietly explained I last lived in Portland, OR, and this is about as far from the damned hipsters as I could get.

So, after walking the half-mile home in jeans- bad idea- I sat down with a tall glass of water, a Monty Python documentary on the telly, and I cracked my new guide to living successfully in Zion. Part one is titled, "What the Mormon Faith is All About."

First thing is first: apparently, they don't like being called Mormons. They'd rather be called "The Church of Jesus Christ." Unfortunately for them, I think this is the idea behind most all Christian sects. I mean, that is where the term Christian comes from, is it not? The term "Mormon Church" is an outright no-no. According to the book, they're okay with being called the LDS Church, but they don't love it.

The best part of the entire book thus far is this- "Some Mormons joke that LDS really stands for 'Let's Drink Sprite.'" I nearly died. I hope they know this is what LDS stands for in my mind from here on out.

So I knew that Sprite-Drinkers spend a lot of time praying, but in the book's checklist of day-to-day life, it says that they pray by themselves, with their families, read scriptures, and they spend at least three hours on Sundays in classes and meetings at the "Meetinghouse"- the Sprite term for the church. (Note that "temples" are sacred and only used during special occasions; meetinghouses are for all the regular stuff)

There are a lot of rules. Last time, I talked about clothes and the LDS lifestyle. In addition to the whole "immodesty" bit, they don't drink coffee or tea, they don't use harmful drugs, they don't drink, and they don't smoke. Sex is an absolute taboo except between a married man and wife. Some go so far as avoiding cola and R-rated movies. R-rated movies? How can they live without zombies and Quentin Tarantino? Finally, no swearing. I would spontaneously combust if someone took away my expletives.

Sundays are all about church; no work or shopping for most. (Orthodox Judaism comes to mind) Monday nights are all about the family, which has good intentions, but any time someone makes something like that a rule, it's bound to feel a tad too oppressive to some people.

Beyond this, they're about charity and fasting. 10% of their income goes to the Church. If I ever hear an LDS person complain about taxes again, I will smack them. They fast once a month (not a bad idea) for two meals. That time instead goes towards a kind of "spiritual feast," prayer, scripture reading, and church services are just some of the fasting attractions. The money saved from said fasting goes towards helping to feed the needy, according to Dummies.

To conclude the chapter, we review what sets the Sprite enthusiasts apart from the rest of Christianity. While this consists of several pages, I'll just cover what stood out most. For starters, they believe in a concept known as "premortality"- souls exist long before they become bodies, and they continue to exist long after their corporeal form has expired. Interestingly enough, those who commit sins won't go to hell- they'll suffer for what they've done, but they can still seek eternal salvation and all the perks that go with that. In true sci-fi fashion, only those who "know God and still rebel against him" will go to "Outer Darkness." More on "Outer Darkness" in the second chapter, and it sounds interesting enough that I'm not going to flip ahead. They believe, unlike most other Christian sects, that God still sends down scriptures. They also believe that only they know all of God's "eternal truths." Most other sects acknowledge other churches, i.e. Episcopalians accept that Presbyterians have merit, however, in the eyes of the LDS Church, only they hold the keys to the castle, as it were. Finally, unlike most who believe "till death do us part," the Sprite drinkers believe that even after death, you're stuck together. So choose wisely, I suppose.

This concludes Chapter One. I probably won't do a review of each chapter- I don't have the attention span. However, I might check in occasionally with a visit to the Sprite Guide. I'm here for at least the next four years, so I might as well absorb a few things about the reigning religion here in the land of salty lakes.

Isn't learning fun?

Mormon Report: an Outlook on Fashion

Capped sleeves are ugly.

I don't care what anyone says, they are unflattering and they're an obvious mark of a Mormon. I mean, who else would willingly wear them? It's like an anemic tee-shirt. Or a timid tank top.

According to what I've read- and believe it or not, a fair amount of research goes into my posts- LDS women don't show their shoulders because they see it as being immodest.

Certainly, there are plenty of Mormon women who wear tanks. I've read the opinions of a few, who say they wear swimsuits, and wear tanks when they exercise, but when they are out in public, they want to appear "modest."

Since when is a tank top "immodest?" I've never understood this. Shoulders are not sexual organs. Neither are arms. So maybe, as one person on the world wide web put it, tanks show off skin, and showing anything off is being immodest.

So I guess if I squint my brain I can kind of see what they mean. But here is where I depart from their fashion advice- the same person claims that flashy clothes distract people from worshiping God. I'd say that God is running counter to his/her/its teachings if our entire purpose is to worship him/her/it.

By the way, I am basing my retorts off one source in particular- certainly, there are other opinions out there, but as this woman is an LDS fashion consultant, I figured her opinion is most representative of what Mormon women are following. Here's her list on types of immodesty- http://www.jenmagazine.com/living/

Her first item is when people "look rich." I have a massive problem with this particular qualm. According to her words, buying lots of stuff means that you obviously have self esteem issues. In fact, that's a big theme in all her complaints. All I have to say is this- have you seen the Temple? I live two blocks from it. It could give the Buckingham Palace a run for its money, at least form what I've seen on the outside. If that isn't "flashy," I don't know what flashy means. Here we have a group of people preaching austerity, and yet it seems like all the LDS buildings I've seen are palaces.

"Jen's" second example of immodesty is "look! I'm scary!" Yet again, she's judging the people who fall into this proclaimed category as somehow being spiritually lacking and having low self esteem. This group includes (apparently) gangsters, goths, emos, people with tattoos, piercings, etc. In fact, I'm pretty sure this one is a blanket group for everyone who isn't rich or the third one, sexy. I certainly fall into this category. According to her ideals, it is against their teachings to be intimidating. Naturally, I am an intense person. I can't really help it. So I'm screwed. But if it's wrong to look intimidating, what about missionaries? They walk around in suits, knock on people's doors, and carry Bibles. I'm thinking that is more intimidating than someone wearing a ratty tee shirt sitting at a coffee shop.

Our third example is about looking sexy. She brings up the whole idea that "media" has objectified women over the years. However, she turns around and claims that the proper goal of women is to get married and have a family. Isn't that more objectification in the opposite direction? So anyway, she claims that dressing "sexily" will scare away potential husbands, and will only attract men who are interested in sex. Well, what's wrong with sex? I know, I know, it makes everyone turn bright red and edge away, but seriously, why is it such a horrible thing to like sex? Why must your only goal in going out be snagging a husband? Why not snag a casual boyfriend? Why not snag nothing at all, and just be happy with the way you look? When a woman wears a low-cut shirt, why does it have to mean she's looking to attract a mate? Why can't it simply be because she likes the way she looks?

Her final example's pretty weak. It's about looking "cool." Her only real explanation is that it is immodest to show off the fact that you're "cool" or "fashionable." Okay?

This particular consultant claims that all of her listed types of immodesty are examples of ways people try to boost their self esteem and gain attention. But isn't it just as bad to judge the way others look? Isn't that drawing attention to yourself, too? When an older woman glares at me at the store because I'm wearing a tank top, the only one drawing attention to herself is the one narrowing her eyes and wrinkling her nose. I don't care how I look to other people. I don't get dressed in the morning thinking, "I need to intimidate someone," or "I want people to think I'm sexy." Yes, I show a fair amount of cleavage (have you seen my boobs? I have to wear a turtleneck to hide those) and yes, I wear tank tops. The only person I'm doing any of this for, though, is me. This is why the Mormon philosophy is flawed- it is passing judgement on people with the assumption that person got dressed only to be a spectacle. Of course, there are plenty of people who dress to impress; don't try and tell me that those missionaries buy those suits to be comfy while they work. Modesty isn't about clothes. My sister wears shorts and low-cut shirts, and she also has a pretty prudent attitude about sexuality. A person can wear turtlenecks and slacks and still be promiscuous. A lot of judgement goes into the LDS belief system, and a WHOLE lot of judgement goes into their attitude about clothes.

Clothes are just clothes. Hopefully, you cover the basics, but bearing shoulders does not an immodest woman make. Beyond that, let your character define your amount of modesty. And don't let people assume you dressed that way for them.

Oh, and Mormons? The Victorian Era called, they want their capped sleeves back.

The Mormon Report: Volume One

So, at some point, I promised some friends of mine I would occasionally talk about my experiences with the LDS Church down here in Salt Lake. Because I am crude and I have no class, I've decided to call these the Mormon Reports.

A Disclaimer: if you are Mormon, you are reading this, and your blood pressure is steadily rising, please take note- I'm not trying to be disrespectful, I'm simply expressing my point of view, albeit with a potty mouth.

I'm not mormon, never have been, and I have no desire to be one. Yes, I moved to Utah, this is true. I moved here from Idaho, which has its own fair share of mormons. I am vaguely familiar with the nuances of their culture.

But never before have I experienced a Mormon Holiday. Today was what is known as Pioneer Day- they're celebrating the LDS exodus from the eastern US to the Great Salt Lake.

My day started when a fighter jet flew low over my apartment, immediately giving me the impression that we were under attack. But no, it was simply the beginning of the parade. After which, we observed a string of floats with various LDS undertones as they wound through downtown Salt Lake.

Thankfully, the route turned one block from my apartment, sparing us any direct noise. This in itself was somewhat of a miracle, because I only live two blocks from the Temple. There were people camping out along the route starting last night. Apparently, the parade's a big deal.

And then there were the floats themselves. They were culturally stereotypical and politically incorrect. Part of me wanted to watch as an observing anthropologist, and accept that this was a part of their culture. A bigger part of me was outraged by their apparent lack of factuality.

After the parade, my mom and I had breakfast, got dressed, and went out to go see the U's campus. For the record, I love that campus. It's how a proper school should look- enormous buildings, sweeping grounds, giant trees, and wide bike and walking paths. It's a great place.

After this, we had a most enjoyable lunch, and then decided to go have a look at the capitol building. This is probably the most majestic-looking state capitol I've ever seen. However, more mormon hijinks were to be had.

First of all, I was wearing a tank top. According to Mormon creed, shoulders are immodest. Knees are equally immodest, at least in the eyes of some. I've had old ladies glare at me before- I mean, I wear sweatshirts and swear like a sailor- but I've never experienced anything like this. Whole families were avoiding me. As we walked down the hall in the capitol, looking at exhibits, even the children regarded me as an alien and flocked away towards the stairs. It was bizarre.

Finally, the silver lining on this bizarre cloud. As I sit writing this, fireworks of all colors, shapes, and sizes are crackling across the valley. It's quite spectacular. For as weird as today has been, this view is certainly impressive.

I have plans for my Mormon Reports. Not, as I've said, to be offensive, but to simply explore the LDS church from my own viewpoint. Like any other culture, they deserve respect, even if I disagree with them. Their views on some things are trivial and downright offensive in some ways. This said, it's hardly fair to criticize a group of people without attempting to understand them.

Patriotism

I am a passionate person. I'm not lying; I am. I'm passionate about politics, about anthropology, about science. I work hard to do my own "fact finding," rather than let some network tell me what I should know.

And I am an angry person. I'm infuriated by a lot of things- bad drivers, ignorance, old people.

But you know what makes me angrier than anything else?

Being told I'm not American.

This just blows me away. How can anyone tell me I'm not American? I have the birth certificate, driver's license, and passport to prove it. My ancestors got here on the damned Mayflower, people. I'm about as American as they get.

But no, because I have certain political beliefs, I hear that I'm not American. I worked for the ACLU for years. Somehow, that makes me un-American. I believe in taxes. That makes me un-American, too. I think we should make it easier for people to become citizens, rather than having to sneak into the country. That makes me un-American, too.

Who are the people who are making these designations, exactly? Sarah Palin? John Boehner? Mitch McConnell? Rush Limbaugh?

Who the hell died and crowned them oligarchs of America? Who the hell made them the people that decide what patriotism is?

Patriotism is love for and devotion to one's country; it is not the blind following of those who are backed by multi-million dollar campaign funds. In my mind, the highest act of patriotism in our country is to work for the benefit and protection of the people. Funny how easily they forget that whole "of the people, for the people, by the people" thing. How dare they be against public health care? What, are they against the health of the American people?

And what about taxes? How can they call themselves "patriots," and then give tax cuts to the top twenty percent of incomes? Or did they not realize that taxes are how we pay for public programs, like Butch Otter's transportation bill he wanted last year?

Or how about them criticizing Obama for vacationing in Maine, instead of the Gulf area? Isn't that valuing one state over another? Isn't it good that they spent money in the US, in general?

And last time I checked, these people were pretty quick to throw the Katrina refugees under the bus, even though we're still talking about the same area of the country.

No, these "champions of patriotism" are doing a pretty spectacular job of working against Americans. It sickens me that they have run, unchecked, for such a long time. Republicans and Democrats are not looking out for the good of the people; they're looking out for the good of the party. We're so caught up in party politics that we sometimes forget that we all have one thing in common- this is just as much the Democrats' country as it is the Republicans'.

No party has dibs over patriotism.

My best friend in the entire world is a Christian, and a Republican. He and I disagree on a wide range of things, and we are close enough that we can discuss those differences. This is the problem with politics today- we address one another on a group basis, not an individual one. If we stripped away the money, the affiliations, the parties, and just made representatives talk to each other, we would see better results. I make fun of Mormons, Christians, Republicans, et cetera, but it's a lot harder to do so when you know them on a personal basis. I met a woman who was a devout Mormon, and she was also intelligent, considerate, and fairly open-minded. She was not the brainless automaton that I expected to find, even if she was my age and married. I related to her on a personal level, and my biases faded away. She became an individual with a face and a name.

If we all took a little more time to get to know our opposing viewpoints from a personal stance, we could discuss real issues and leave the misinformation and name-calling out of the discussion. In the end, as I've said, we are all still Americans. We all felt pain on 9/11. We all celebrate the Fourth of July. We all share some aspects of life in common, regardless of our party affiliation, our denomination, or our education. We all share about 99.9% of the same DNA. When we get down to it, there is a way to be civil and have real discussions. Everyone simply needs to be willing to reach that point- and I mean everyone. The conservatives, the liberals, the moderates, the Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, the rich, the poor, and everyone in between. No more bullshit. No more trying to designate who is patriotic and who isn't.

Hopefully our collective blood pressure can hold out till then.

Three Cheers for the 208

There are officially twelve days between me and departure from the puddle capital of the world. To say that I am excited would be an understatement.

I am ecstatic. I'm am jubilant. I can hardly contain myself every time I remember I have a little less than two weeks.

Portland's been nice, but I cannot wait to get back to Idaho.

After ridiculing my home state for years, I am fiercely proud to call the Gem State my home. Yes, Idaho has some severe flaws- namely, the state government- but it's home for me. After living in a city, a real one that has few, if any, connections to what "rural" really is, I feel like the people who do not think cattle on the highway is an unusual sight are in short supply. I've been told over the years that us hicks know nothing of the world around us. After experiencing people who cannot think much farther beyond their immediate settings, I've got to say, close-minded people can be found everywhere. They're like cockroaches. It doesn't matter whether you're in Hong Kong or Peru, you're going to find a few of the little suckers.

Liberals can be just as close-minded as conservatives. In my opinion, close-minded liberals are worse. A close-minded neo-con might be racist and might think Christianity is the only belief out there worth mentioning, but close-minded liberals will dump paint on people who wear leather or fur. They're both bad. I grew up with a fair amount of conservatives. My best friend is conservative, and he says things that make me want to clock him.

But I don't. I'm polite. I've been raised to accept the existence of countering view points. Some of the people I've encountered in Idaho are not quite so accepting. I was once told I was going to hell because I don't live like "good Christians." (Speaking of which, what the hell happened to the whole, "love thy neighbor" shit?) Luckily, I don't believe in hell, so I'm not too worried.

Here in Portland, I've also been verbally assaulted by people whoa re shocked to find out that I disagree with them. I don't think capitalism is bad. I think corrupt capitalism is bad. Corrupt anything is bad. I don't think we should all go live on farms. I've been on real farms. They smell horrible. I'd much rather go be an anthropologist than milk cows. Sorry, but it's the truth. I enjoy our stratified labor system. I'm okay with buying food at a store. Honestly, I have more important things in my life than making sure I am entirely self-sustained.

But, as is often the case, I digress.

I cannot wait to get back to Idaho. I can't wait to see my friends and family. I cannot wait to see my lizard, and my dogs, and my cat. I can't wait to go up to my cabin and get a good breath of fresh mountain air.

Fun fact- Portland has a worse air quality than Los Angeles. Good job.

I also cannot wait to be more than 50 feet above sea level. I swear to god, the low altitude has been causing a huge percentage of my migraines. I like living around mountains. The ocean is nice, but nothing beats those craggy peaks and twisting roads.

I've been staying connected to the City of Trees via the Boise Weekly online. It's great- I can stay connected to the restaurant and music scenes from five hundred miles away.

The other day, well, okay, a few weeks ago, they interviewed NPR's Renee Montagne. I personally love her, and I was sad that she was in Boise while I was not.

Someone commented on the article that they hoped the author taught her how to properly pronounce "Boise." According to this commenter, it's pronounced with a soft S, rather than a Z.

I disagree. I say it both ways, and I am from Boizeee.

The commenter's clever moniker was "The Native Idahoan." After reading this, I cam to two conclusions:

1. I am willing to bet this person is incredibly arrogant and I would most likely throttle "Native" until he/she could not breathe.

2. He/She is probably from California.

I mean, how rude is it, after reading how this person got to interview one of the most widely-known radio people in our age to say, "I hope you taught her how to say 'Boise.'" He/She/It claims that only people who moved to town pronounce it with a Z.

Well, then.

BOIZEE BOIZEE BOIZEE.

Alright, I got that out of my system.

Reading some other comments on various articles, I realized that not very many of the commenters have lives beyond the internet.

One of the most heavily-commented sections is Bill Cope's corner of the BW universe. Admittedly, he has said things in the past that have made me roll my eyes. This said, I admire the fact that he puts himself out there and writes what he feels. You don't see any of the cute neo-con commenters using their real names. One of the most frequent ones is some human by the name of Patience Dogood.

I'm sorry, but unless you are Zombie Ben Franklin, fresh from the grave, you have no right to use that moniker. It is taken. Please go read some Shakespeare and gain some creativity.

The next thing I wonder about these people is why are they wasting their time reading a clearly-liberal editorial writer? Don't they have a tea party to attend?

So, yes, Idaho has some decidedly-backwards people. We have some progressive people, too. We have the hippies in the North End of Boise, we have celebrities up at Sun Valley, we have Mormons in the south, and neo-Nazis in the north. Idaho is the state where weirdos go to find some space.

And that's okay. I'm a weirdo, too.

Being from Idaho keeps things in perspective. The mayor of Portland is under fire for having an affair with a coworker. Yes, this is naughty, but the governor of Idaho would happily do away with public education. One of our governor hopefuls wanted Fish and Game to issue Obama hunting tags. Those are politicians with issues. Affairs are naughty, but who the hell cares? I'd rather have a guy who gets around than a guy with the IQ of his tight-fitting jeans.

It seems incredible to me, but I prefer living with conservatives to living with liberals.

Don't get me wrong, I still think ATVs are ridiculous. I will never think that fridges belong on the porch. I hope country "music" dies a horrible, fiery death. This said, I'd rather live around someone who can drive a tractor than someone who thinks owning a chicken makes you a farmer.