Monday, October 31, 2005

"Without courage, all virtue loses meaning" - Winston Churchill

The truth of this quote seems to strike me even more evidently than before. The lack of courage to act upon your beliefs, do the right thing, and stand up is contradictory to not "cring[ing] before power." Yet incontrovertible evidence is that the boys who are responsible as my accusers are nothing but cowards. And I am pissed off. I have discovered one of my accusers. The younger is only a snot-nosed punk of a kid who doesn't know any better. Fresh out of his momma's womb, the boy seeks guidance and acceptance more than anything else, and has a difficult, if not impossible with his surroundings, time upholding what he everyday says through his lips. His innocence is evident in his inability to look me in the eye, and his nervous glances as he quietly goes about his business hoping to be unnoticed. But his absence and lack of direct contact with me, which is unusual, directly points to him. No one but the accused, the accuser and the prosecution know the deal, so everyone else is innocent in their looks, completely bewildered by my unusual silence and change in demeanor. Moreover, it is the look. The eyes are the windows to the soul the yiddish proverb states. His eyes are guilty. Behind them is a throbbing want to express himself to me to either explain himself or apologize. But I fear it is the latter for him. For him, I believe that the matter is beyond him now. And in his immaturity, he knows not what he has done. I wont be held responsible.

It seems to me the larger forces that be within the organization has a paranoia about me. They are all waiting for me to explode in rage and anger. They are all quiet whenever I am around and I feel that the reason is myself. I acknowledge that it is my demeanor that causes this, but is it justified? Whispers by the head of the witchhunt, meetings that I have mistakenly walked into lead me to see the look of question in their eyes, "How long has he been here? What did he hear?" Ridiculous. A prisoner in my own house of daggers.

Now for the older one. I've had this thought of supposedly justified idealism that has been crumbling since the rebirth of the revolution so to speak. It's become a wailing wall of sorts, once great and reflecting the glory of what is good and positive. Now, all that remains is a poor south end wall that stands by itself, bearing witness to the lamenting and cries of a disillusioned and persecuted widow, mourning the loss of something so great and something so attainable. He is the last gust of wind that pushes the wall over. Nothing left in the modern world of politics and envy that wants to support the archaic notions of an ideal gone past. Victor Hugo said that nothing is so powerful as an idea whose time has come. What he forgot to mention is nothing is so ephemeral as an idea whose time is past.

"I believe in the brotherhood of all men, but I don't believe in wasting brotherhood on anyone who doesn't want to practice it with me. Brotherhood is a two-way street" Malcolm X

I never thought that I would be quoting from Malcolm X. Good lord. But he's got it right on this one. Why do I want to give and give when they don't give back. The personal afflictions of individuals seem to unduly influence someone who is supposedly my "brother." In fact, it almost seems as if calling someone my brother is a downgrade from friend. My friends are ones who do not let me down, who do not persecute me, and who are loyal. To me, because I have been colored by experiences that have tested my friendships in ways that most friendships will never be tested, I demand unyielding loyalty to be my friend. The polarizing forces in my history that have taken place has led me to believe that only this can prove to me friendship. To put it simply, when the going gets tough, and I mean really tough, who can you rely on? Because I reciprocate and then some. And still, not once but TWICE, by the brethren am I unjustly accused, am I unjustly targeted. And for what?

We pledged after the first accusation and subsequent review to personally handle any problems aside, man to man, face to face, and not hide behind the blanket of anonymity. My accuser stands behind the mask of committee and due process as opposed to what should be, with brothers, a reform (if necessary) through the bonds of brotherhood. This is the same actions that are being taken by those jealous of us and do they recognize this? No. The cowardice exemplified in these actions leads me to question my love and committment to something that is so essential to me, yet so lip-serviced by them. How can my brother be a coward? I have no such brother.

Monday, October 24, 2005

"An inordinate passion for pleasure is the secret of remaining young" Oscar Wilde

The man is right. It seems to me a stupid thing that we go back to the same well that seems to give us nothing but bitter water to swallow. All the warnings and words of others and none can't seem to hold us back from that which we have a desire for. In modern terms the chase.

Take our friend Doyle F. Sew. He is always in a bind from one to the next. Out of a five hour car ride into 2 second rollercoasters. He straps himself in, holding on until the ride inevitably flings him off effortlessly, as if he hadn't had a chance to begin with. All he ends up with is no prize, no cigar, and noone but a bruised ego. It's not like he's a bad driver, he's taken lessons from the best. Still the crash is inevitable, because it isn't that the driver is bad, it's that the car wasn't ready. The blustering ball of a boat ride seemed nothing but a good time in theory, but in practice proved to be bruise battering 8 rounds of boxing. He comes out golden, holding on to his seat belt only when he can but this is rare to even have a chance. A glimmer of light from tilted windows only under the brightest chances doesn't mean that there's air there.

And next old man Matthew B. Krumb. This poor guy's got no idea. He's blind as a bat under a heat lamp. Still his drive tells him that he's gotta keep walking as if something is chasing him down. Unfortunate. Driven blind by a freak accident involving his own chivalrous actions to save a sinking boat of friends on a stormy trip through the Bermuda, his own life did he almost forsake. Yet he survived, but as cruel fate would have it, now knows no other than the other. He can't see himself nor the walls and bricks in his way. He stumbles and he falls, walks up when he should be walking down, and turns left when the road goes right. He has no cane, no dog, no friend to help him because noone is left to help. The realities of life have hit him hard and he is just now learning to cope. But the obstacles don't keep him down, he keeps trucking. He doesn't know anyother way.

And then there's Kevin C. Shithead. Why Shithead as a moniker? because he is. What else do you call a doucherocket who keeps sticking his hand over the stove? He can feel, he can see, he can hear, he can learn. Still, shithead thinks that maybe this time he wont get burned. So douchebag, like a skipping CD decides to try it over and over again, mystified as to what the sensation is. Is he doing it wrong? Is there a certain way to hold your hand over the fire? How fast, how slow? No, he ALREADY knows how, he just doesn't see why it happens. But he does know why he does it. It's so that he'll stay warm. Shithead keeps burning himself because the room he stands in is cold as hell, and he wants to stay warm. And that is the pleasure that he pursues. That is the unending struggle for gratification, an almost obscene and incontinent drive for warmth.

OK, I'm done now. You probably don't know what any of that meant, but stream of consciousness, character projection, and blah was necessary for me to work a problem out in my head. Really, it's actually pretty thinly veiled if you know me.

Monday, July 11, 2005

It's been a few days since I've posted but work has been hectic but productive. I come to you today to talk about the number one person that I am "dissatisfied" with. The jerk's name is Guy Cherwonuk. A quick googling of his name will produce his website


And this is what they have to say about him.

Guy Cherwonuk, President of Vinings Building Group, graduated from the Georgia Institute of Technology in 1987. After graduation he moved to New York to work in the real estate workout department of the Chase Manhattan Bank, followed by a position as a Commercial Loan Officer. After working in Manhattan, he served as a Lieutenant in the United States Army. Following his military duty, he returned to Atlanta, where he started a renovation and building company.

Since establishing Vinings Building Group in 1996, Guy Cherwonuk has credited the Company’s success to his philosophy of “hard work and exceeding his clients’ expectations.” This philosophy is realized by partnering with top builders, developers and leaders in the business. He develops great working relationships with his partners and clients before, during and after the construction process.

And this is what I have to say about him: SlumLord. I have heard of some horror stories of landlord-tennant relationships being bad but seriously, this is ridiculous. I live in one of his run down converted shacks that he has promised to be a faithful and dutiful landlord of but the man is such a crook. His company owns shady real estate that he markets as perfect little cottages. The pictures on his website are ridiculous; they must've been taken in the 70's when the house was first renovated:

Those pictures are complete BS. The floors have holes, there is no insulation, and the bathrooms are covered in mold. There are cracks in walls and ceilings, which by the way, were painted over to make them look legit until midway through the semester. And the kicker is this: I live in a room that is constantly filling with water. It never fails. I have 3 individual leaks which all endanger my computer and bed and i'm not talking about drips, but flooding on the Noah scale. I put a 5 gallon cooler underneath one of the "drips" and by morning, literally 5 hours later, it was 4/5 full. This is ridiculous.

Furthermore, the slumlord is unreachable. One time, about a different issue with the house from hell, we called him and we got his "secretary." The man has a distinctive voice and an even more distinctive way of talking and it was obviously him answering his phone, but he forwarded us to "his boss's" voicemail. Absolute BS, but under the annonimity of the phone shield he hides. Moreover, I've told him about this leak 5 individual times. He has come to look at it 0 times. So finally, today, I've looked up the Georgia-landlord tennant law, refused to pay rent, and left him a voicemail. This is the legalistic email I sent him:

Guy Cherwonuk and whomever else this concerns:

My name is **** and I am reporting for the 5th
separate instance about a leak in the roof of my room, the room on the
front right of the house on the bottom floor with a door to the
outside. My ceiling is now leaking in 3 separate places and I have
repeatedly called, come into contact with you over 8 times during the
course of my lease. Each time, I was assured that someone would be
out to fix my roof. Due to class and work schedules, I was not able
to visually verify that the problem had been addressed (I didn't
personally see a person come to fix the roof); however, since you the
landlord assured me that a person had come by, I assumed it had been
taken care of.

As to the extent of the leak, last night I placed a 5 gallon water
cooler underneath the leaks to prevent the water from getting to my
computer and this morning it was filled half-way. Each time you
acknowledged the problem, and said you were going to fix it and it
hasn't been fixed. One of the leaks is near the large window closest
to the parking lot above my bed. The other two are directly over my
desk and computer. I cannot sleep in the room. The smell and
conditions of the room (including water puddles everywhere) make the
room uninhabitable. I have taken every possible measure in order to
communicate and provide you with accurate information to help you
locate the problem, and you continue to ignore my requests.

Therefore, I am witholding rent this month until you as the landlord
physically come out to fix the roof (or send someone in your stead),
provide proof that you've fixed the roof, and received a signed
agreement that it was satisfactorily repaired. Additionally, I do not
expect this to affect my security deposit towards the house as this
was a problem caused by normal wear and tear. Furthermore, if you the
landlord continue to ignore the problem further action will be taken
as. A non-response to emails and phonecalls will be taken as a sign
of non-compliance.

I hope that we can work this out so that we are both satisfied.

Additionally, check this out. He assumed that I wouldn't go through the hassle of consulting lawyers and real estate agents but I've consulted two lawyers (one fraternity related and real estate specialist, one in the family and a contract specialist), a real estate agent, and some other people of more experience and intelligence. And this is what the law says:

44-7-20 G
*** CODE SECTION *** 12/03/01


When the owner of real property, either directly or through an
agent, seeks to lease or rent that property for residential
occupancy, prior to entering a written agreement for the leasehold
of that property, the owner shall, either directly or through an
agent, notify the prospective tenant in writing of the property's
propensity of flooding if flooding has damaged any portion of the
living space covered by the lease or attachments thereto to which
the tenant or the tenant's resident relative has sole and exclusive
use under the written agreement at least three times during the
five-year period immediately preceding the date of the lease. An
owner failing to give such notice shall be liable in tort to the
tenant and the tenant's family residing on the leased premises for
damages to the personal property of the lessee or a resident
relative of the lessee which is proximately caused by flooding which
occurs during the term of the lease. For purposes of this Code
section, flooding is defined as the inundation of a portion of the
living space covered by the lease which was caused by an increased
water level in an established water source such as a river, stream,
or drainage ditch or as a ponding of water at or near the point
where heavy or excessive rain fell. This Code section shall apply
only to leaseholds entered into on or after July 1, 1995.

So hopefully, because my room, our laundry room, my bathroom and one of the two kitchens is constantly under a half inch of water from improper drainage of our land, etc. that qualifies our house to be classified as flooded. In addition to that, we worry that the slumlord Guy Cherwonuk will try and steal our security deposits, when in reality, the house is in better shape than we got it in on a technicality:

44-7-33 G
*** CODE SECTION *** 12/03/01


(a) Prior to tendering a security deposit, the tenant shall be
presented with a comprehensive list of any existing damage to the
premises, which list shall be for the tenant's permanent retention.
The tenant shall have the right to inspect the premises to ascertain
the accuracy of the list prior to taking occupancy. The landlord and
the tenant shall sign the list and this shall be conclusive evidence
of the accuracy of the list but shall not be conclusive as to latent
defects. If the tenant refuses to sign the list, the tenant shall
state specifically in writing the items on the list to which he
dissents and shall sign such statement of dissent.


44-7-35 G
*** CODE SECTION *** 12/03/01


(b) The failure of a landlord to provide each of the written
statements within the time periods specified in Code Sections
44-7-33 and 44-7-34 shall work a forfeiture of all his rights to
withhold any portion of the security deposit or to bring an action
against the tenant for damages to the premises.

Our slumlord has a lease that is about as leaky as my ceiling. If me, the lowly student at Georgia Tech can figure out the holes in it. The man was an idiot. According to georgia law, HE, the Landlord must provide the proper documentation and list of damages not us, the tennants. Instead, he forced and insisted upon us doing it, thereby trying to put the liability on us. Therefore, according the 44-7-35 (b), he forfeits ALL of his rights to witholding any portion of the security deposit or to bring an action against us for any KIND of damage. So barring us intentionally burning our house down, I think that we are GOOD. I hate to toot my own horn, but I'm going to be a damn good lawyer.

Wednesday, July 06, 2005

"I guess. I don't like this new precedent of voting against everything before we even know what it is. The "Republicrats" just bother me (They blend together now into the 'Annoying Party'. I would like to see the libertarians knock the republicans out of the picture. Personally, I feel they stand for what I consider the "old" conservative views of small government and individual rights and freedoms. Unfortunately, the republicans have drifted from their traditional values as have the democrats, which make it increasingly more difficult for me to stand with either party). The new party policies are "whatever the other guys do, we will stand against it." When was the last time both parties came to a productive agreement without mudslinging afterwards? When was the last time we heard "for the good of the country (I am referring to domestic issues specifically in this case)?" Kennedy? Definitely not, but it sure seems like it was that long ago. If they are a qualified
candidate, they can review them and then make their case against them. I swear- a daycare of screaming children is more civilized than the idiots in congress. In fact, Congress is a daycare and the babysitters are the party leaders trying to please everyone. I too am concerned about the possibility of the nominated judge's position on civil liberties issues, but there is a civilized manner to voice a disagreement. I would love to be in the position one day where both parties hate me because I won't consistently stand with one or the other. My only consistency would be to do what is best for the country and stand for what I believe is the right thing to do. Too idealistic? Maybe, but I can dream..."

From My Man,, the Legendary, the Hand, the G-Man, Smiley... etc today in an email about this story:

I agree with 98.3% of what he's saying. And I wish that it would be a little bit more like that with all leadership positions, including my fraternity.

On an update from the "Boss A" front, she's still hot, but she is being freaking ANNOYING, as if I was dating her or something. Good Lord, the tension in both of our voices is ridiculous in terms of one of us wanting to LASH out and kill each other.

Wednesday, June 29, 2005

"If it's natural to kill, how come men have to go into training to learn how?" - Joan Baez

This fucking hippie. A little bit about this love child: The daughter of a Mexican PK (pastor's kid) and a English-Scottish PK it seems as if the trend of PK's being retarded or insanely misbehaved continues a generation even further. This mongrel of a child aparantly formed her theories of what is natural human behavior as a child:

"My devotion to non-violence and social change formed long before I picked up a ukulele and will go on until I fall into the grave."

If it is natural not to kill but rather to be non-violent, then why does it require "devotion" to stick to? It seems to me that something that requires as much effort and concentration as to become devoted to something seems extremely unnatural, like learning how to use the bathroom and not just piss where you stand. Moreover, she picked up the ukulele at age 11. So you're telling me that you had Kant beat to the punch where it came to social theory before the age of 11? She knew in her heart, almost implying that it is innate, something that she was born with, that non-violence was the true state of human nature. Not that I agree with Kant, it's just that I've never heard of this genius of social theory. And to think, all Kant had to do was to be born with parents who dropped some acid while they were with child because they were lashing out at their pastor father who hadn't shown them the attention and love they desired as children.

Or did it have nothing to do with her parents? Could it simply be a case of hippie-style parenting coupled with a childhood full of people discriminating against her and hurling racial slurs her way? She could just be speaking out against the hurtful words and violence that had harmed her self-esteem as a child. Whatever it is, I'm always going to stick to my guns on 99% of retard celebrities like her, particularly the ones from the 60's and 70's; they should never open their pretty little mouths about politics. Case in point, Hanoi Jane.

Let me help you understand what human nature is. Human nature is desparation, that which obviously you have never experienced. To quote Batman Begins, which is by the way, an amazing movie, "You've never tasted desperate." And if you've never tasted being poor, I don't respect your take on things like human nature, the way it is in the real world, or pretty much any issue that really matters. You can tell me what a woman feels, but don't try and tell me about human nature when you've never been poor, desparate, and hungry. Why does the man who mugs people mug them? Because he can't flip burgers? Or because robbing someone and breaking the law is easier? You're telling me, that without laws, penalties, and enforcement that you would work rather than rob? Bullshit. If there were no laws, as there were in the original natural state which she is referencing, there would literally be chaos. It's the bigger man wins against the smaller man. I aint sticking a flower in the hair of some cro-magnon bastard and expect him to understand and not eat my ears for lunch.

Now let me tell you why we train people to fight. To be efficient killers. Sure, I could kill you in 20 stabs of a knife, but why do that when I can kill you in 1? Additionally, I concede that modern warfare is unnatural. It was not in the nature of man to look down metal sights at an object 1000 yds away and pull a trigger which in your mind, you know a bullet will kill the target, but in reality, you wont really know until you've seen it up close. Furthermore, modern warfare creates chaos at an unnatural rate. Things are exploding around you, there are machines tanks and mines. Most of the training that occurs is to ready your mind to overcome the psychological obstacles to killing efficiently, whether that be the socially created concept of guilt, or facing a 10 ton tank with just a rocket launcher.

Screw these idealistic pussies and their concepts of natural man being that of cooperation and peace towards a greater goal. Bullshit. I have no doubt in my mind that the first form of cooperation only occured to kill something that someone could not do by themselves, whether that is a wooly mammoth or to wage war. War is a natural occurance and cannot EVER be eliminated. Sure, education and social norms can shape a person into conforming, but all that really amounts to is coersion through guilt. People periodically breakthrough those shackles with all of their pent up anger and fury, usually with catastrophic results. Point: genocide in Rwanda, Holocaust, any largescale War. Your natural instinct is self-preservation and retribution for some perceived notion of pride and self-worth. I'd like to see Joan Baez in all her hippie glory after she gets mugged or gangbanged in Compton.

This is why these idealist bastards can't make anything stick. The treaties that are based on concepts of a twisted reality where people and countries will be accountable for themselves are ridiculous. You're telling me this belligerent bastard named Germany with Nationalistic and Imperialist ambitions is going to walk home with their tail between their legs, admit their guilt as the aggressor, and pay you back an indemnity that is 1000 times their GDP? Why cause they recognize their guilt and want to be a better nation? So you think that this Red bastard is going to stop building nukes all on his own accord and squash his own ambitions and visions of grandeur because he cares that his citizens put Calista Flockhart to shame? Get real. In everything, there always is a winner and always a loser. In your precious nature, someone dies, and someone eats. Your prey isn't going, "Oh, I'm so glad I could provide my ass to you so you could live," or "I'm so glad to be going back to Mother Earth to contribute to the greater world." No they're saying, "Oh Fuck!" Goddamn hippies.

Tuesday, June 28, 2005

So my boss is hot. And I don't mean just like a lukewarm beer hot I mean a smoldering burning bush hot. And she's in her early to mid thirties and single. It's really amazing. The thing is, it seems as if she's only recently grown into this because I've seen her past pictures from college, and she used to be a neon blonde with curly hair, but now it's a pleasant mild blonde with some brown highlights.

Needless to say, it makes my job a little bit easier and harder. Easier in the sense that when I wake up, I sort of look forward to our morning meeting. Harder in the sense that this blonde little number didn't get to where she is now because she's hot but rather because she works like a fiend. I mean she hits the ground running, no coffee, and just ready to go full of energy (God, lot's of energy...). She is literally bouncing around on her desk getting stuff done left and right multi-tasking to the finest detail. Unfortunately, in her career, she has definitely developed her own workstyle and sense of organization that works for her, but not necessarily for me. She references things that we haven't talked about for a day or two in the middle of my thought processes or tasks and expects me to remember what the hell she's talking about when I'm ankle deep in USB cords and drowning under a storm of design ideas. Not only that, she'll throw about 20 things at me at once, and being the kind of guy that I am, I don't ask what she specifically wants of them but rather try and be intuitive. It ends up she has a clear cut idea of what she wanted, without any REAL input from me, even if she asks for it.

Now back to her being hot. I'm getting the "hot for teacher thing" because of the things we talk about offhand (we have a very informal casual relationship because that's how we like to roll). Seriously, I came into it knowing she was hot and I like to keep a very professional atmosphere where I work especially since my mealticket comes out of there. Just to describe the Hot Boss and what makes her tick, I recently found out that she has a psychology degree. A woman with a psychology degree... that's pure evil. Not only was she born intuitive and hot, she studied that shit in college for four years and is a certified expert in headshrinking and manipulation. Not fair. Whenever she makes certain comments seeming ever so harmless such as "You know I don't think that dating between [management and employees] isn't allowed really. There's no written rule," it makes me cringe because I just have no clue what the hell she means. Additionally, it doesn't help that I've met her ex-boyfriends and they are literally, mirror images of me.

But at the end of the day, no matter how pissed off I am at her, and no matter how much she's frustrating me with the communication breakdowns, I just watch her shimmy on down to my office or watch her pick a pen up off of the floor; then, I am content again.

Monday, June 27, 2005

A fraternity brother of mine traveled up to the good town of Roswell, which according to a recent assessment by a major newsmagazine is the 14th most habitable town in the nation, and visited the parents of one of his friend's friends. There they have a good time and relax, or as some idiots like to say "chillax", under the hospitality of pleasant Roswellians. However, it is during this time of relaxation they meet Lolita A, the youngest daughter of the hosts they are staying with. At the ripe old age of 14 years, Lolita A is straight out of some cheap Amsterdam porn flick. The girl who would have interested Roman Polanski rather than Harold from Harold and Maude, turns out to be this GIGANTIC slut in training. The little hobag is whispering things into my buddy's ear and showing her commanding grasp of the sexual wordbank. Begging him not to leave, she promises him that it will be "worth his while" and informs him how spooge looks in her hair. She also finds the time to talk about the boy down the street who is in love with this Lolita as she once gave him the reacharound on the bus. GOOD GOD! 14! Of course the fraternity brother says, that he obviously couldn't have done her, but God, she had a banging body and those braces... well.

Needless to say, I couldn't help but think about my sister (17) and the sisters of my friends. And I ask myself, "Self, what is this younger generation coming to?" But then I realize something: I was the bastard getting the girls to do that at 14. 13 was the ripe old age where I got my first humdinger and the girl couldn't have been older than I was. So in reality, I was transforming this girl into another Lolita A. So am I a bastard? Hell no. That shit felt great. Additionally, it was consensual between 2 minors and it's not like she turned out to be some slutbag later on in life because of our experience... I hope. I just hope my sister, who is as honest with me as I think a sister can be to her brother isn't a slutbag. Word on the high school street is that she's a sweet girl who hasn't even smoked a cigarette in her life. Thank God.

Herbert Warren Wind: "In the opinion of many people, of all the great athletes, [Bobby]Jones came the closest to being what we call a great man."

The master of the "fine delicatessen" shots and the man who, after a comment on his honesty and modesty, retorted, "You might as well praise me for not breaking into banks. There is only one way to play this game." Good lord what a gentleman.

The man who greatest exemplified the game for what it truly is was more than remarkable. This is a guy whose life may as well have been biblical. Hence, the Seven Lean Years and his Seven Fat Years. At the age of 6 he swung his first club and by 12 he won his first club tournament at East Lake. By 14, he was playing in the U. S. Open, only to lose to his own inner demons. It would be seven years before he would emerge on the top of his game.

"At a missed shot, his sunny smile could turn more suddenly into a black storm cloud than the Nazis can grab a country."

Reminds me of me.

The man was the first to win the "impregnable quadrilateral" and led for 40 years in the number of majors he won (13). But more importantly, he won with grace, something that is absent from every sport now, even golf. I don't expect you to not get excited, I just don't expect you to pull down your imaginary pants on national TV (Randy Moss). The man was above all, a True Gentleman.
(p. s. being a alumnus of Georgia Tech which was known as the Georgia School of Technology doesn't hurt either)