So there is a problem. It's happening on the Food Network. Now I love the Food Network. I love cooking, eating, and trying out new recipes. But there is one show. One show that will bring about disappointment when I see it on the TV listing. Diners, Drive-ins and Dives. The show concept is actually great. See little nitch eateries and crazy food must haves. So what's the problem? The host Guy Fieri. Is it his sunglasses on the back of his neck look? No, but this does induce sarcastic commentary. Is it his use of the word "Rockin" or other "hip" phrases intermittently throughout the show? No, but I do feel my inner-self rolling its eyes. Is it the way he comments about the juice of a burger or messy food dripping down his hand next to what he calls his "bling"? No,but again inner-self eye roll.

I was in a grocery store this afternoon and nonintentionally heard a lady talking in the aisles. Where ever I was, she was close by. Talking..Talking. As she got closer and in my aisles I learned many things from her conversation. She likes to craft, she likes Pace Picante Sauce without the chunky tomatoes, she has a boyfriend, they are fighting, he thinks she needs to not have her craft stuff everywhere, he also thinks she needs to remember they share a space, they have a roommate, she thinks the roommate doesn't care, she thinks everyone in the house needs to remember its her space too. Annoyed yet?

Anytime people are on their cellphones in the grocery store, I hear way too much info. The worst? When it's the checkout line. Seeing someone on the phone in the checkout line while checking out is almost as bad as seeing them whip out their checkbook and start writing AFTER their order is scanned, not during, AFTER. I understand the "I gotta take this call" that comes in, the conversation that just can't wait. I also accept we are in a technology age. The era of instant communication with people and information at the press of a button. But I think with this technology comes the loss of other valuable parts of society, manners and respect. People forget their are others around them. The social norm is no longer, pardon me or excuse me. The social norm is a phone in one ear and an index finger with the whisper of "one second" being uttered.

Moments like today just remind me of the "don't be an ahole" stance I try to abide too. It can be applied to so many things in life.

OK, so I am not a Bieber fan. Not a hater, but not a fan no matter how hard Bieber fever hits my house *face slap, face-slap*. But I do have to say I think he said the right thing when asked about abortion in a recent Rolling Stone article (WHICH BY THE WAY, I don't even know how this topic is relevant for him to have to answer). What did he say exactly? “Well, I think that’s really sad, but everything happens for a reason. I guess I haven’t been in that position, so I wouldn’t be able to judge that.” Pretty non committed answer, pretty safe. I'm trying to recall if I had an opinion at 16 years old on this topic that wasn't being forced on me by the religious preferences of my household. I did. It went against what I was told. It went against forcing my beliefs on others. I went with the side that others should have the right to decide if abortion was right for them under their circumstances and not based on my beliefs. But me aside, there was controversy with Bieber's answer. An abortion stance of being for or against would have received the same response really. I get that he influences young impressionable minds but I kinda feel like abortion isn't the biggest issue Rolling Stone could tackle in an interview. Its almost a throw-away question. I'm not even sure what the controversy is with his answer. Is it that he didn't really make a decision one way or another? He wasn't harshly opposed? He didn't give a firm response on a woman's right to choose?

Damn that Bieber. We look to him for guidance in these critical times.

Link: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/41632581/ns/today-entertainment/

I just read an article on How the Kardashians made $65M last year. I know, I know, as if there needs to be an article written and as if I need to admit reading it..*cough* allthewaythrough *cough*. But, there is something about articles like this. People who are famous for seemingly looking like they do a lot in the media because of the coverage. But when broken down, its all face value, literally.In my opinion, the merit given to any of what they got paid for only reinforces my belief that beauty and brains are,more often than not, rivals. Society loves a pretty face. And don't get me wrong, I can enjoy beauty just like anyone. The Kardashian girls are beautiful. No question. What bothers me is we live in a society where those who educate future generations make about 4% per year of what the Kardashians made from selling their face and name over a show about nothing. There isnt a balance of wealth for for those who are truly in the trenches everyday trying to make the world a better place.

But they give back you say? They join in on the various celebrity stands such as "I will not tweet until this charity makes X amount of money" pretentious BS. Can you just imagine if your local school down the street said they wouldn't tweet until they got a raise? Theirs no uprising, no funds being allocated, no big media blitzkrieg. Those local educators do a strike and then they are replaced if they don't give in and that's that. The gratification of a few more children who graduate because of a teacher that saved them from failing is far less than seeing the new Kim Kardashian super bowl ad for shoes and a shot of an over-exposed backside. Our values are skewed by pretty opportunists.

Weak needs that falter to batting eyelashes.

Article: How the Kardashians made $65M Last Year

When 8 hours on a computer doing work for someone else isn't enough, I experiment with mashups. This is Eminem's song Lose Yourself versus Charles Trees song Mahjongg. Now you may be asking yourself, who is Eminem? (Just kidding) Who is Charles Trees?
Just listen...

Click here to listen to Eminem vs Charles Trees