If it were 1986 and I were 30 and lived in hollywood and did lines and were mentally deficient I would write a sitcom about a combination Handyman/Lawyer. The handyman-ing would be his day job and the lawyer thing he could have quit cause he didn’t like it or got tired of it or whatever.

This Handyman lawyer basically goes around fixing things poorly, but endearing himself to the people for which he performs his duties. I guess his name would be something like Mark John Jeffries Sr., just so when people see the people PC kid in the nineties they’ll say “hey his dad is the guy from that Handyman/Lawyer show!” He carries his tools around in a briefcase and works in a really slick suit but he doesn’t care if he gets stuff all over it. I guess there’d have to be some other main characters like a sidekick of some sort. Maybe he could have hallucintations about Wrenchy, the talking wrench who guides him to make the right decisions. Then there’d be a love interest who’s always calling him over to fix stuff. Anyway here are some catch-phrases for him:

“I’ll sue!”
“Motion denied!”
“Sustained!”

See it would work really well. Also instead of using a hammer for stuff he’d use a gavel. I think it’d also be great if unfrozen cave-man lawyer made a guest appearance. Since its 86 Phil Hartman would still be alive, but unfrozen cave-man lawyer wouldn’t be invented yet, I’d be a pioneer. You’d watch it and love it.

Sunny D!

I have never in my life seen people excited to drink Sunny D. Further still I don’t think anyone buys it, and if they do chances are they’d choose at LEAST OJ over it if not soda. The purple stuff could be any number of things, but I’d still choose it over Sunny D. Sunny D is like having an OJ milkshake. Its so thick and disgusting. I like that now Sunny D also has a Sunny D sport type drink. I can’t imagine anyone coming off the court or sideline at a game somewhere and saying, man I’m so thirsty, where’s the Sunny D? Give me a break. That’d be like saying “Man I could really go for a cold glass of milk” and then drinking motor oil. Sunny D I hate you and all you stand for. May the purple stuff dominate over you for years to come.

I didn’t really give too much thought before typing this but I thought it would be interesting to write about, and I’m bored and putting off reading, a project, and generally killing time.

A question was asked of me recently whether or not love between two people ever existed in the first place if these two people were in a serious relationship and then split.

I think its always important to weigh certain factors in things of this nature – fidelity for one. But lets presume there was no infedelity and two people who had claimed to love each other split.

The hardest part about this question is that love can’t really be defined. Some people say they find their soul mate and being with them is the only thing they can ever picture themself doing – yet this is rare. More typically people define love as a goal between two parties attracted to each other initially by appearance and conversation, or mental attraction if you will.

I feel like love is completely subjective. Everyone probably has their own ideas about it and are expecting it through the course of certain situations. What’s interesting is that poeple say “you just know” when you’re in love a lot. This is an interesting concept because it requires trusting one’s own judgement about their current situation. People can typically convince themselves of anything, I doubt love would be any different.

So say you convince yourself in love, you really “know it” when in fact you aren’t. Obviously in this situation love would not have occurred in the first place…or would it? Humans create things in their minds every day, plans, schemes, plots, music, and these things exist for a certain point in time in an untangible form, floating about in their bits of brain matter. I think its quite possible love can be created – in fact, chances are the person who created this love is not the one who would eventually do the splitting up – it’d be the other person. So here love would exist but not necessarily between both parties.

But what if you constantly doubt yourself? In this particular scenario you’d be doubting ever being in love, not be in the right situation for it or at the right time in your life, and you could entirely be in love but not really realize it until after the tragic split. Here love would have existed in the first place, and it continues to exist most likely for a certain period of time.

Finally there are those people who just fall face down in a puddle of love and never look back. Chances are they won’t split so the question can’t really apply here.

Here are my thoughts on the matter. If you actually do convince yourself you’re in love, then love exists because you’ve created it. Whether the love is shared is another story. If you don’t believe yourself to be in love, then realize it later, obviously the love existed at some point in time. Now in both of these situations it IS possible that both parties do not feel the same way. So a shared love would be non-existent, but love itself may have been fostered by one of the parties and therefore existed, or still exists, to that person.