Skip to main content

Drunk people don't whisper

ALWAYS ON DUTY?

Was talking to a friend a few days ago, she mentioned that she saw a cook from a Korean restaurant she has eaten at digging into his nose with his finger as he walked down the street. I'm sure the cook may say he was off-duty, but I think she should tell the people at the restaurant and that the guy should get fired. Of course, he may do such a thing when he is in the kitchen at the restaurant, but he should never let his customers see him do anything strange...

* * *

BASEBALL ANNOUNCER NAPS DURING GAME

I am not a baseball fan. I do love playing softball. But I haven't watched a baseball game in years. I just read about a baseball announcer falling asleep during a baseball game. He's paid to talk about baseball so I guess it should be a problem that he was sleeping on the job.

I haven't been to a baseball game since I was 12 years old. But I may go to a baseball game here in Korea.

1) Korean fans are GREAT at games. Not even dead people can sleep while they are cheering. I've only seen this at basketball games, but apparently the same thing happens at baseball games.

2) There are cheerleaders at baseball games in Korea. So that is a second reason I may go.


(Actually, the cheerleaders are the main reason I'd go to a Korean baseball game.)

* * *

DRUNK PEOPLE DON'T WHISPER

I stayed out all night last weekend, on a retreat. We drank a lot during the night. I finally went to sleep at 5:40 a.m. Actually, I wasn't sleepy, but I thought I should sleep. Several guys STILL didn't want to sleep, and they were talking so loudly.

This seems to be an international phenomenon. Drunk people don't whisper. Mind you, we were in a remote area, not a nightclub. I wonder...is it that drunk people lose their inhibitions, so they speak loudly? Or is it that the beer drowns their ears, so they speak louder so they can hear themselves?

* * *

DATING ADVICE

One of Yahoo's recently featured stories was: "10 Places You're Guaranteed to Meet Men."

The one that should be on the list, but isn't: A good place to meet men is wherever they happen to be standing or sitting.

*

A few years ago a friend of mine asked me where is a good place to meet women.

Here was the conversation:

Friend: I went to a wine-tasting last night but I didn't meet any women.

CJL: Since when did you start drinking wine?

Friend: I'm not a wine-drinker. But I heard that's a good place to meet women.

CJL: So why would you go to a place to meet women doing something you don't enjoy doing?

Friend: Because that's where women go. Women were there.

CJL: With that logic, you may want to open a nail business. Women go there to get their nails done. You do realize that if you meet a woman at a wine-tasting event that she may want to go there again in the future?

Friend: So where do you think I should go to meet women?

CJL: Why don't you meet the women at the places you enjoy going? Open your eyes to the women already around you. That way, you will have something in common with the women you meet.

*
I don't disagree with the title of the article, the author is correct that women can "meet" men at the places she listed. It doesn't mean the women who take her advice will be meeting men they have anything in common with. If the women don't enjoy going to Home Depot then it is a bad idea to meet a guy who enjoys going.

* * *

ANALYSIS VERSUS CONCLUSIONS

Over the years I have noticed that people can agree on analysis and disagree with their conclusions. An example is socialists and capitalists agreeing on problems--then coming to completely different conclusions about what should be done.

I've also noticed the opposite--people completely disagreeing in their analysis but still coming to the same conclusion. That happens on the issue of immigration.

I agree with a lot of what Walter E. Williams writes, but I typically disagree with him on one main issue: Immigration. Here's his latest column on immigration. He argued a few years ago in a TV interview that immigrants should be shot on sight.

He concludes his latest column: "Start strict enforcement of immigration law, as Arizona has begun. Strictly enforce border security. Most importantly, modernize and streamline our cumbersome immigration laws so that people can more easily migrate to our country."

I disagree with his analysis leading up to the conclusion, but strict enforcement of immigration (or any law)? Sure! Either the law should be on the books or it should be taken off the books. Otherwise, the law can be enforced at any time rather than enforced when violated. I also favor strict border security. And I agree with that the immigration laws should make it easier to migrate to America.

CJL

Popular posts from this blog

The Casey Lartigue Show

Guests scheduled for May NOTE: Check here for updates on Memorandum 46! Future Shows Thomas Sowell of the Hoover Institution This is my first attempt at putting together my own promo , it was rejected because of the sound quality May 19 edition of the Casey Lartigue Show We had a great show yesterday, probably the best so far. The topic: Malcolm X. The occasion? Anniversary of his 82nd birthday. Eliot Morgan and I had a great time talking with the callers. Deneen Borelli called in on our special guest line. You can download the file here. We posed the question: What did Malcolm X do? We contrasted the viewpoint and legacies of Malcolm X and Thurgood Marshall. The one mistake I made was not to focus on the question that Marshall asked: What was the one concrete thing that Malcolm X did. In segment 3, callers begin to get personal with us. May 12 edition of the Casey Lartigue Show Featured guest: Don Boudreaux of George Mason University Promo for the May 12 show May 5 edition of the C...

Does a flower turn to the sun?

I tend not to address points raised by people commenting on posts. In the back-and-forth of such discussions, people sometimes say things they don't mean or take extreme positions. In other cases they are just trying to be provocative, especially when they can remain anonymous. But a discussion on Greg Mankiw's blog caught my attention. That's because a couple of the folks suggested that parents don't really have the knowledge to make decisions about the quality of schools. Between 2002-2004 I was actively involved in the fight to get school vouchers for families in DC. I often heard the argument that parents don't know how to choose between good and bad schools and that, anyway, parents had enough choices with the school system's "out-of-boundary" options and charters (that had also been opposed). Without getting too deep into the out-of-boundary program, I'll point out that Woodrow Wilson HS, considered one of the best schools in the city, recei...

Korea Fighting!

Years ago I read an article about a man who kept a detailed diary about his life. I think it was 70 years of diaries. Nothing was too insignificant for him to mention. I remember reading it and wondering, "Yeah, but will anyone ever read those boxes of diaries about him going to the bathroom?" I guess he often wrote about himself writing... These days I'm having the opposite problem... I'm living it up so much that I don't have time to write... Can you really enjoy life and record it all? If I had time I would blog about... * going swing dancing * getting treated at the Kkunnori restaurant in Jamsil by two friends who insist I'm the luckiest man alive because I know them. * then getting treated to an hour or two at the Luxury noraebang near Kkunnori . * the "call" button in Korean restaurants * Koreans ordering too much food whenever they eat together * Meeting with Gong Byeong Ho (공병호) for the first time in 10 years. * how damn energetic Seoul i...

Park Jin welcoming remarks to FSI (and Casey Lartigue)

  National Assembly member Park Jin makes the welcoming remarks at FSI's conference featuring North Korean diplomats. Park Jin | Greeting message to FSI and Casey Lartigue mention - YouTube

Common Sense on North Korea (Korea Times, April 2, 2012)

By Casey Lartigue, Jr. As interesting as Kookmin University professor Andrei Lankov’s writings are, there is nothing quite like attending one of his lectures. He can barely restrain himself behind the podium, often pointing and waving his arms. I also enjoy his unscripted speeches, but his answers in Q&A sessions are like the difference between watching Michael Jordan shoot baskets in warm-ups and an actual game. I have finally discovered the secret behind Lankov’s consistently solid analysis about North Korea: Use common sense. At an Asan Institute conference last summer, he argued that North Korea watchers should try to understand North Korea from its perspective. Don’t most people know that you must understand the mindset of others you are dealing with? Yet, common sense in theory gets ignored politically. From the North Korean perspective, nuclear weapons are the best thing they’ve got going. They will NOT give them up easily, even if President Obama ...