Wednesday, July 29, 2009

#169 - It's In The Bag

Ever notice when people drink an alcoholic beverage in public, it’s in a paper bag? 100% of the time. Why? To hide the fact it’s an alcoholic beverage, because it’s illegal to drink in public. But by the very fact it’s in a paper bag means it’s an alcoholic beverage. So basically, it’s not fooling anyone. So why does this practice exist?

Nothing zen about this. The purpose of the paper bag isn’t to conceal the beverage while it is being consumed. In reality, the consumption usually takes place when no one is looking, since consumption is also illegal in public, not just possession. The purpose of the bag is to act as a storage unit, to hold at one’s side, hiding the fact it’s an alcoholic beverage.

Yeahhh. As if you’re really fooling anyone.

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

#168 - Flying The Friendly Skies

We’ve all heard about the “mile high club”. You could almost say, it’s on a lot of people’s “to-do” list. LaFevre wonders why no one ever mentions the sub-category of this club. As in, “by yourself”. Awwright, stop smirking. LaFevre has a name for it, as if it comes as no surprise. It’s called – “flying solo”. Now you can smirk.

Friday, July 17, 2009

#167 - Garcon, More Coffee

New word added to the LaFevre Dictionary. “Caffiend”. Yeah, I know the spelling is off. Intentional. “Caffeine” is “ei”, but “fiend” is “ie”, which is exactly why the word is spelled with “ie”. To highlight the second syllable, “fiend”. Duh. I shouldn’t have to be ‘splainin’ this. The word itself is self-explanatory. Allllllrighty then. Thank you very much. See ya. Wouldn’t wanna be ya. Bye-bye now. Hey!!! How ‘bout a refill here…

Monday, July 13, 2009

#166 - Info Anonymous

Here’s another LaFevre rant, for the people, but, at the same time, against the people, and sure to piss off a few. It’s what LaFevre does. It’s called a “shoot”. Nothing personal. But you have to admit, he has a point, whether you agree or not. And don’t bother arguing. It’s just one of those things that’s a waste of time to do so.

“Not authorized to speak, but done so, on condition of anonymity.” Excuse me? WTF! Unfortunately, this happens all too often for this simple reason: we, as the public, have a funny way of thinking we're entitled to know, when we're not. And the media exploits this.

So we have people not authorized to tell us what we want to know, telling people who don't have the right to know, but think they do, because somehow they believe it's their job, and responsibility (the media), passing on information they were not entitled to in this first place, to us, the general public, who think they have a right to know, when they don't, because it's none of their goddamn business.

Tiger Claw says:

The art of air guitar begins with the science. If you don't know the moves, and fail to move the fingers, on both hands, it won't matter how many jumps and somersaults you do. You'll still suck.

#165 - Hunger Strike

Starving artists are the future. Their work is on the cutting edge, embraced by a few, and ignored by the masses. But for all intent and purposes, LaFevre believes you don’t have to starve. The starving part is a result of pride and integrity.

If the difference in putting bread on the table is between stealing a Boudin’s empty soup bread-bowl off an outside table before the busboy gets to it, and choosing something from the fridge cuz you could afford to stock it, thanks to the day job, I’ll take the slice of bread, with mayo, and shredded cheese, folded in half, anyday. Then you can go steal that bread-bowl. Anything done on an empty stomach is just asking for trouble.

#164 - Diner's Club

Consumption. Sounds like the item being consumed, is alcohol. Okay, how about feeding. Uhh, sounds more like what animals do, and vampires. I know. Eating. We all do it. A simple action, really. But some highbrow created a term from the word “dinner”. That would be “dining”, or the root of the word, “to dine”, or “eat” (at dinnertime, obviously).

Technically, if you choose to over-analyze, we “eat” breakfast in the morning, and “eat” lunch midday, but “dine” in the evening. So it’s safe to say, “dine” is the root of “dinner”, and reserved for evening-use-only, since “dinner” is the more-social of the three meals. You could even go so far as to say, “dine” is a term created by the restaurant industry, meaning to “go out” for dinner.

LaFevre agrees. To a certain degree. Me thinks we “eat” at home, but “dine” out. Course, it could also be similar to another comparison: the one about men “sweating”, but women “perspire”. The rich dine, in and out, because they can afford it; but the rest of us “reglar folk” eat in, or eat out. After all, L:aFevre has yet to hear anyone say: “Shall we dine at McDonald’s this evening?”

For health reasons, it is often said that the evening meal, being larger than the other two, is the reason for obesity today. Lafevre shares this little quote on the healthy way to eat, as it pertains to “time of day”, with breakfast being the largest meal, to kickstart the day’s metabolism: eat breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince, and dinner like a pauper. (Food for thought – only one meal allows for dessert. Yup, dinner.)

Thursday, July 2, 2009

#163 - Oops, There It Is

“Oops?” Excuse me? WTF?! Here’s a short-and-sweet standard to go by, when using this euphemism. Be warned, though, while it isn’t a double-standard, per se, it IS a double-edged sword, which is dependent on its use in context. Use it sparingly, and away from LaFevre, for fear that his patience may run out. Or worse, his tolerance. Buckle up.

One time or another, we’ve all heard it; we’ve all said it. It’s not so much specifically why and under what circumstances it is said, but more about which side is saying it.

When something happens, and “oops” is dropped, there are two things that determine its outcome. If you screw up, and someone else says “oops”, you’re off the hook, since the other person considers it no big deal. But if you screw up, and YOU say “oops”, it means YOU think it’s no big deal, but everyone else does, whether it is in reality, or not.

#162 - Time's Up

LaFevre only has a certain amount of patience and tolerance. They act synergistically, yet operate independently. When the patience drops to 50%, depending on the circumstances, the tolerance starts to decrease. Eventually, the patience runs out, at which time, there’s very little tolerance left. By that time, a decision has already been made as to what course of action will be taken, the minute the tolerance runs out.

While it may sound scientific on the surface, and it is, as far as the basic principles for establishing a foundation to assess all possible scenarios are concerned, the actions/reactions developing, are in a constant flux of change, as the circumstances change. The decrease in percentages for the patience and tolerance available, differs with each and every situation.

The only constant that can be considered definite in this whole process: when the patience runs out, and the tolerance is close to running out, you’re only hope of avoiding the wrath of what happens next, is if LaFever decides to walk away before your time runs out.