What’s a quote that perfectly describes your outlook on life?
I would say that the line or quote that I feel likely that I’ve taken to is “not my monkeys not my circus“ not that I’m not a highly opinionated person and more than willing to share my opinion with you, but it’s just that it’s my opinion, and if you want to share your opinion with me too, that’s fine. It’s your opinion. I don’t have to agree with it. I’m not gonna argue with you about it but like I said not, my monkey is not my circus if it’s not gonna directly affect me or someone I love then you do you.
There are songs you hear, and then there are songs that hear you.
Most of the time, music is just background noise. Something to fill the silence on the drive to work or while you’re doing dishes. Then, out of nowhere, a lyric slips past all your defenses and lands somewhere you weren’t prepared to examine.
Sometimes those lyrics are aspirational.
Eminem’s Lose Yourself has done that to me more than once. There are days when that chorus doesn’t just sound like a song—it sounds like a challenge.
“You better lose yourself in the music, the moment…”
That’s not just about rap battles. It’s about life. It’s about the terrifying realization that opportunities don’t always come back around. Sometimes that song makes me want to get off my ass, stop overthinking everything, and actually do something. Stop existing and start living.
Then there are the songs that aren’t aspirational.
They’re prophetic.
Earlier today I heard NF’s Happy. I’d somehow never heard it before, which surprises me because NF has a way of writing that feels less like rap and more like someone reading pages straight out of a journal. His songs don’t pretend life is easy. They wrestle with it.
Then came the line that stopped me cold.
“Who I’d be if I was happy.”
I’ve had lyrics get stuck in my head before.
This one didn’t get stuck in my head.
It got stuck in my soul.
Because that’s exactly how I feel.
I’ve spent so long in this strange, comfortably numb state—not miserable enough to completely fall apart, but not happy enough to really come alive—that I’ve forgotten what happiness would even look like.
Who would I be?
Would I still be sarcastic?
Would I still write the way I write?
Would I still obsess over politics, language, history, and the absurdity of humanity?
Or has this low-grade unhappiness become part of my identity?
As the song unfolds, NF describes feeling more comfortable in his own agony, admitting that after living that way for so long, anything else almost feels foreign. That realization hit me harder than I expected because I understood it immediately. Not because I think unhappiness is noble, but because familiarity has a strange gravity. Even when it hurts, it can feel like home. (Wikipedia)
That’s a disturbing question.
When you’ve lived in the same emotional climate long enough, even if it’s cloudy every day, eventually you stop imagining sunshine. The gray becomes normal. It becomes home. You adapt to it. You decorate it. You convince yourself it’s just who you are.
The song even hints at something else I’ve struggled with—the idea that you can know you need help, know you’re stuck, and still find it almost impossible to reach out. Pride, fear, habit… whatever the reason, they all become bricks in the same wall. NF doesn’t offer easy answers. He just admits the conflict, and somehow that honesty is comforting. (Shazam)
Maybe that’s why music is so powerful.
A four-minute song can accomplish what years of conversations never do. It can bypass your intellect completely and head straight for whatever you’ve been trying not to think about.
I’m probably not the only person this happens to.
I’m guessing everyone has songs that seem to arrive exactly when they’re needed. Songs that motivate us. Songs that comfort us. Songs that call us out. Songs that somehow know us better than we know ourselves.
Some lyrics become mantras.
Others become mirrors.
Today I looked into one of those mirrors, and I didn’t particularly like what I saw.
Not because I realized I wasn’t happy.
I already knew that.
What unsettled me was realizing I honestly don’t know who I would be if I were.
Maybe that’s the next chapter.
Not chasing happiness as some mythical destination, but slowly discovering the person who’s been buried underneath years of surviving instead of living.
Maybe that’s what NF was really asking.
Not, “Are you happy?”
But, “If happiness showed up tomorrow… would you even recognize yourself?”
For a nation that never misses an opportunity to tell the rest of the world how exceptional we are, it is amazing that we’re exceptional in exactly the wrong category.
We remain the only major industrialized nation that still hasn’t figured out how to provide healthcare for all of its citizens.
Every other developed country somehow managed to solve this riddle. Some use single-payer systems. Some use tightly regulated private insurance. Some use hybrid models. None of them are identical, but they all reached the same conclusion: a healthy population is an asset, not a luxury.
Yet here in America, we continue to debate whether someone who gets cancer deserves to go bankrupt first.
Apparently this is the impossible puzzle.
What’s even more fascinating is that Americans love to insist that universal healthcare “can’t work” despite the overwhelming evidence that it already does—in countries with thriving economies, advanced medical technology, and life expectancies that often exceed ours. Somehow Canada, Japan, Germany, France, Australia, the United Kingdom, and dozens of others all solved a problem that the richest nation on Earth insists is beyond human comprehension.
Really? They’re all wrong?
Or maybe we’re asking the wrong question.
I’ve come to think the real obstacle isn’t economics. It isn’t logistics. It isn’t government efficiency.
It’s philosophy.
Too many people with the most resources simply don’t believe they should have to help anyone with less.
That’s the real debate.
If you’ve accumulated tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, why should one penny of it help the family whose child has leukemia? Why should your taxes help the diabetic working two jobs? Why should your success contribute to the cancer patient who happened to lose the genetic lottery?
Because that’s socialism!
Or, depending on what day of the week it is, that’s Christianity.
America proudly proclaims itself a nation built on Christian values. Politicians can’t finish a speech without invoking God. Campaign ads practically require a cross somewhere in the background. Every public appearance ends with “God bless America.”
Then Sunday rolls around, people file into church, and hear Jesus say things like, “Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.”
Funny how that verse suddenly becomes optional.
The same people who insist America is a Christian nation often become remarkably uncomfortable when Christ starts talking about feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, welcoming the stranger, or reminding the wealthy that accumulating treasure on Earth isn’t exactly the point.
Apparently those passages have been reclassified as “woke.”
It’s almost as if Jesus’ teachings are wonderful—as long as they don’t affect anyone’s tax bracket.
No one is suggesting that successful people should be punished for succeeding. There’s nothing wrong with building a business, creating wealth, or living comfortably. But somewhere along the way, we’ve confused compassion with confiscation, generosity with weakness, and community with communism.
The irony is almost painful.
We celebrate firefighters who save homes they’ll never live in.
We celebrate soldiers who defend people they’ll never meet.
We celebrate teachers who educate children that aren’t their own.
We celebrate police officers, paramedics, and countless public servants whose entire careers revolve around helping strangers.
But suggest that everyone should contribute enough so that nobody has to choose between chemotherapy and bankruptcy, and suddenly half the country clutches its pearls and screams that civilization itself is under attack.
Perhaps the measure of a great nation isn’t how many billionaires it produces.
Perhaps it’s how few citizens have to decide whether they can afford to stay alive.
Every other industrialized democracy on Earth seems to understand that.
As a divorced adult, that’s not in a relationship it’s hard to say where I would want to travel. I lived up in a lot of states I’ve lived in other countries so I’ve been places, but as an adult with some health issues and mobility issues, the thought of going to Machu Picchu or going to the great pyramids or seeing Angel Falls in Nigeria or other places, just seems like pipe dream cost wise and just a thought of trying to do these things by myself so we can all dream it’s a big world, but there’s also National Geographic. I don’t think you can do from the comfort of your own living room.
At this point, Mitch McConnell has become the Senate’s version of Schrödinger’s Cat. Unless you happen to live in Kentucky or have access to his medical records, who knows? Is he healthy? Is he sick? Is he working? Is he retired in everything but name? Is he even capable of performing the job? Until someone opens the box, he’s apparently all of the above.
What drives me crazy isn’t his age. It isn’t even his health. Everyone gets old, and everyone deserves privacy when it comes to medical issues.
What drives me crazy is accountability.
Imagine disappearing from your job for six or seven weeks without explanation. No meetings. No work. No measurable output. No showing up. No public updates beyond the occasional carefully staged “proof of life” photograph. Then imagine your employer saying, “No problem. Here’s your paycheck.”
How many Americans could pull that off?
The answer is essentially none.
Most people miss a week of work unexpectedly, and HR starts calling. Miss two weeks, and your job may no longer exist. Vanish for nearly two months while collecting roughly $174,000 a year plus some of the best healthcare available in the country, and most Americans would be laughed out of the unemployment office if they expected to keep getting paid.
Yet somehow that’s acceptable for a United States senator.
Meanwhile, the taxpayers continue paying the salary. The office continues operating. Kentucky continues having a senator who, by all appearances, hasn’t been participating in the legislative process. No votes. No floor speeches. No committee work. Just… silence.
The irony becomes even richer when you remember who we’re talking about.
This is the same Mitch McConnell who, in 2016, refused to even allow a hearing for Merrick Garland after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. The justification? It was an election year, and “the people should decide.”
Then, in 2020, after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died just weeks before Election Day—while millions of Americans were already casting ballots—McConnell rushed Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation through the Senate at record speed.
Apparently “let the people decide” came with an expiration date.
Whether you agreed with those decisions or not, they demonstrated one thing beyond question: when Mitch McConnell wanted the Senate to move quickly, the Senate moved quickly.
Now, however, we’re told not to ask questions about a senator who has effectively disappeared for nearly two months while remaining on the public payroll.
This isn’t really about Mitch McConnell as a person. If any senator—Republican, Democrat, or Independent—vanished from public view for weeks while continuing to collect taxpayer-funded pay and benefits, the public would have every right to ask a simple question:
Who’s doing the job?
Public office isn’t a lifetime membership at an exclusive country club. It’s employment funded by taxpayers. Every member of Congress works for the American people. If any employee stops performing their job for an extended period, there should be transparency about whether they are capable of continuing to serve.
Instead, we get vague statements, carefully selected photographs, and an expectation that everyone should simply stop asking.
It’s a bizarre inversion of accountability.
The people paying the salary are apparently the only people not entitled to know whether the employee is actually showing up for work.
Welcome to modern American politics, where ordinary workers are expected to justify every sick day, but elected officials can seemingly vanish into a quantum state of employment—simultaneously serving and not serving—while the paychecks continue arriving right on schedule.
I actually have two favorite quotes. One is a John Lennon lines that I use often is life‘s. What happens when you’re busy making plans unfortunately 59 years old life is way too often and no plans have been made and my other most poignant quote is from Ferris Bueller‘s Day off when it says life happens fast. If you don’t take time to look around, you might miss it unfortunately as a middle-aged man, I feel like I haven’t upheld either one of those quotes that I so dearly love.
One of the strangest developments in modern American politics is watching people who proudly proclaim themselves to be followers of Christ dismiss Christ’s own words as though they were the ramblings of some naïve college freshman with an overpriced sociology degree.
Imagine introducing some of the teachings of Jesus today without mentioning who said them.
“Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.”
The response might be, “That’s loser talk. Winners don’t inherit anything—they take it.”
“Love your enemies.”
“What kind of weak, woke nonsense is that?”
“Turn the other cheek.”
“Absolutely not. Hit them harder.”
“Blessed are the peacemakers.”
“Sounds soft.”
“Judge not, that ye be not judged.”
“So we’re just supposed to let people do whatever they want? Typical woke garbage.”
“Whatever you did for the least of these, you did for me.”
“That’s socialism.”
“Sell what you have and give to the poor.”
“Sounds like wealth redistribution.”
And then comes perhaps the most uncomfortable verse of all:
“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”
Today that statement would probably be met with a thousand YouTube videos explaining why Jesus didn’t really mean what He plainly said. There would be podcasts, influencers, and television preachers twisting themselves into theological pretzels to explain that immense wealth is actually proof of God’s favor, despite Christ repeatedly warning about the spiritual dangers that accompany riches.
The irony is almost too thick to ignore.
If someone walked into many churches today quoting the Sermon on the Mount without identifying the speaker, there’s a fair chance they’d be accused of spreading liberal propaganda before anyone realized they were quoting the New Testament.
Somewhere along the way, parts of American Christianity seem to have undergone a remarkable transformation. Instead of asking, “What did Jesus teach?” the question has become, “Can we reinterpret what Jesus taught so it aligns with our politics?”
The Gospel has become less about challenging ourselves and more about confirming our existing beliefs.
Jesus spent His ministry among fishermen, tax collectors, lepers, widows, prostitutes, foreigners, and the poor. He consistently warned against pride, greed, and hypocrisy. He criticized religious leaders more often than sinners. He overturned the tables of those exploiting faith for profit. He preached forgiveness over vengeance, humility over arrogance, mercy over condemnation.
If someone described that résumé today without attaching Jesus’ name to it, many of the loudest voices claiming to defend Christianity might dismiss Him as another “woke loser” who didn’t understand how the real world works.
That’s the uncomfortable question.
Have some Christians become followers of Christ—or followers of a political ideology that simply borrows Christian vocabulary?
Christianity has always been demanding. Jesus never promised that following Him would be easy. In fact, He promised exactly the opposite. He challenged the powerful, comforted the powerless, and repeatedly instructed His followers to care for the hungry, the stranger, the sick, and the imprisoned.
Those teachings weren’t popular in first-century Judea.
They aren’t particularly popular in twenty-first-century America either.
Perhaps that’s because the Gospel was never intended to make us comfortable. It was intended to make us better.
The real measure of faith isn’t how loudly someone says they’re Christian. It’s how willing they are to wrestle with the difficult teachings of Christ—even when those teachings challenge their politics, their prejudices, or their personal ambitions.
If the words written in red are dismissed as weak, “woke,” or the language of losers, then perhaps the problem isn’t with the words.
Perhaps we’ve simply become more devoted to our politics than to the One who spoke them.
If you had to give one life-changing tip, what would it be?
I know it sounds really cliché, but every journey begins with one stepand there are really no bad choices just what you decide to do with them after the choice has been made.
What’s a skill you consider basic, that most people don’t actually know how to do?
One very basic thing that everybody should be able to do, but everyone seems to have lost the ability to do. It’s just basic reasoning and basic understanding and not being offended by the littlest most inane comment I guess being a Gen X or and raised with the military father sarcasm is a first language, but oh my God so many people don’t understand that you’re kidding, but wanna get their panties all in a bunch because they perceived that you were just being mean to them.
One unexpected benefit of America’s seemingly endless ability to stumble into new international conflicts is that it finally gets people to dust off something they haven’t looked at since eighth-grade social studies: a world map.
Who knew the greatest investment in geographic literacy would be military action?
Every time a new country dominates the headlines, millions of Americans collectively ask the same question: “Wait…where is that?” Suddenly Google Maps becomes the most patriotic app on their phone. People who couldn’t find Ukraine, Iran, Yemen, or Taiwan on a globe a week ago are now passionately debating military strategy over coffee.
It’s educational.
Before the crisis, half the country couldn’t tell you whether a nation was in Europe, Asia, Africa, or if it was just another county in Texas. But once American bombs, sanctions, aircraft carriers, or troops enter the conversation, everyone becomes an armchair geopolitical expert. “Well, if you look at the Strait of Hormuz…” says the guy who thought Hormuz was a brand of hummus last Tuesday.
That’s progress.
President Trump seems determined to provide a continuing education course in world geography. Every new confrontation is another chapter in “Countries You Didn’t Know Existed Until They Started Trending.”
Maybe next we’ll get flash cards.
“Class, today we’re learning where the Caucasus are.”
“No, not those caucuses. Different spelling.”
Of course, geography is only the beginning. Soon people discover that countries have histories stretching back thousands of years, complicated ethnic divisions, religious tensions, colonial legacies, border disputes, and alliances that don’t fit neatly into a thirty-second cable news segment. Imagine that. The world isn’t just a collection of blank spaces waiting for America to arrive and explain democracy.
Who could have guessed?
It’s amazing how often Americans ask, “Why do they hate us?” while never asking, “What happened there over the last hundred years?” Context is apparently optional until it starts affecting gas prices.
And that’s usually when the map comes back out.
The irony is that learning geography is genuinely valuable. Understanding where nations are, who their neighbors are, what resources they possess, what trade routes they control, and why regional conflicts matter creates informed citizens. That’s something schools have tried to accomplish for generations.
Apparently, they were using the wrong incentive.
Forget textbooks. Forget globes. Forget National Geographic. Just announce another international crisis, and suddenly millions of people can point to places they couldn’t pronounce the day before.
It’s an expensive educational program, admittedly. The tuition is measured in billions of taxpayer dollars, countless lives disrupted or lost, veterans carrying lifelong scars, refugees fleeing their homes, and decades of geopolitical consequences. But look on the bright side—someone finally learned the difference between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Mexico.
Esoteric Meandering Shouting Into the Void 
You must be logged in to post a comment.