Utah, Wyoming, Nebraska

Well, yesterday we (myself, my parents, my brother) began the long trek from Sparks, Nevada to my sister's place in Winterset, Iowa. Last night we stayed in Coalville, Utah. It's a charming little town where there were exactly two options for places to eat: "Denise's Home Plate" and "Rodriguez Polar King".  "Denise's" was closed, so we went the Polar King place. They served Mexican and American food. It was nothing impressive. But, not bad.

Today, we are staying in North Platte, Nebraska. Nebraska is the second-most-boring state I have ever driven through (the first-most-boring honor goes to the Reno-to-Vegas Nevada drive). We stopped in Laramie, Wyoming for lunch. All I can say about that town is that I'm glad I never even considered the University of Wyoming for college (undergraduate or graduate).

Tomorrow we arrive in Winterset. This will be the first time we've been to Iowa. Will probably be just as enthralling as the rest of the midwest has been thus far.

Burger King's "Steakhouse XT"

Yes, unfortunately there is not much to be said for the presentation of this burger, as mine looked equally as appetizing:


I had this for dinner. The meat was hot and tasted fresh and Burger King burgers, due to the flame broiling, have the potential to taste like they come off of the backyard barbecue (which hardly ever is the case with the average Burger King burger).

This burger (with several slices of cheese, lettuce, a sauce which combines A1 and mayo, and onion crisps) rivals a Red Robbin burger. It is large, cooked to perfection, and filling. All for a reasonable price when compared to other "gourmet" burgers.

Well done, Mr. King.

Yes, it is overpriced for fast food ($5.50 for a single burger). Yes, it could have used real onions instead of a few fried onion crisps. Yes, the lettuce and bun were somewhat soggy when I finally opened my wrapper and bit into this hearty treat, and yes, the sodium and cholesterol will kill me early, but the idea of a fast food chain which typically make dry burgers with a charcoal aftertaste making an "extra thick" patty that is large, moist, and fully-cooked is revolutionary in the fast food industry. Well done indeed. In a town of McDonalds, Wendys, and Burger King, the Steakhouse XT wins. For now.

Nutrition Facts
Serving Size 1 burger
Calories 950

Total Fat 61.0g - 94%

Saturated Fat 23.0g - 115%

Trans Fat 1.0g

Cholesterol 135.0mg -45%

Sodium 1,930.0mg - 81%

Total Carbohydrates 55.0g - 19%

Dietary Fiber 4.0g - 16%

Protein 42.0 g - 84%

*All percentages based on a 2,000 calorie diet*

UPDATE 5/15 6:40am: Yep. My jeans are definitely tighter this morning following a delicious Steakhouse XT + a large fries.

Space Invaders

I fulfill at least three stupid fashion trends.

It seems that the latest "in" thing for females is to look like aliens who have to walk through the snow and have only one size of pants available (no matter what the size of their legs/butt).

Of course, I'm talking about stupid trends in women's "fashion."

Stupid Trend #1: bug-eye sunglasses. What is the deal with these? I see females all over the UNR campus wearing these things (which doesn't necessarily mean that they're still "in" in the rest of the U.S., as Reno tends to be a few years behind on the latest trends).  It's not necessarily a "bad" look.  Just a dumb look. These glasses say, "I have no clue how closely these make me resemble an alien from the X-Files." And finally, because this fashion was simply taken from the 60's, it's not like anyone is even being "original" by taking part in it.

OK, when I do this with my lips, NOW do I look like the aliens that took Mulder's sister?

Stupid Trend #2: thick wooly boots, commonly known as "Uggs." In some ways, this trend is even more stupid than Stupid Trend #1. At least with #1, there seems to be a practical purpose to the sunglasses. Wearing thick wooly boots like "Uggs" seems to have no practical purpose unless you live in Alaska or Minnesota. Wearing boots like this says, "My feet are really sweaty and I have no awareness of the weather."

Our feet are really sweaty and we have no awareness of the weather.

Stupid Trend #3: tight jeans. This, of course, seems to be a fairly long-running trend, but lately it's gotten a little out of hand. Certain people look good in tight jeans. Certain people, as in, about 1% of all the people who actually wear them. Wearing tight jeans says, "Maybe if I emphasize how fat my legs and butt are, they'll actually look BETTER."

For the reader's sake, this picture has been uploaded in size SMALL.

And lest you should think I'm being unfair, there are also stupid trends in "men's" (really, "douchebags") fashion. Of course, these have been discussed elsewhere for a long time now, so there's no point in going into most of them (way-too-baggy-pants, huge t-shirts, etc.). However, one stands out as being incredibly, almost-unfathomably stupid:

Stupid Trend #4: New Era 59fifty hats. Everytime I see a kid wearing one of these I want to punch him in the face. It's not that the caps (which are pretty much just standard baseball caps with "urban" designs) are really all that terrible. It's the particular trend that goes along with wearing these caps: keeping the "59fifty" gold sticker on the caps. That's right, the era of removing stickers and tags from our clothes is almost over! Let the tyranny of tagless clothing end! Why, WHY, is it "in" to leave that DUMB gold sticker on these things. I know that the PURPOSE is probably, "Hey, check it out: I've got a 59fifty cap," but the actual message sent is, "Hey, check it out: I forgot/am-too-stupid to take the sticker off my hat after I bought it." Next time I buy a $3 baseball cap from Walgreen's I think I'll just leave the Walgreen's sticker on it. I will be so cool!

Yes, people actually leave these stickers on their caps. And yes, they are huge douchebags.

Amateur Top 5, that's what

So apparently, the jokers at some little crappy website no one has ever heard of (msnbc.com, or something like that) have decided that they have the wisdom, knowledge, and ability to name the "Top 5" villains in Star Trek history. (Link here) That's right: in ALL of Star Trek history. This is not an impossible task, but they didn't do the best job.

So, in the rich and extensive history of Star Trek, who did they pick as the top 5 villains?

Khan Noonien Singh (better known as "Khan"), The Borg, Kevin Uxbridge, Weyoun, and The Vidiians.

One of their choices was definitely correct, one was possibly correct, and the other three were simply INcorrect.  Here are the REAL "Top 5" villains of Star Trek:

1. The Borg. There's nothing more intimidating than a giant cube that will immediately adapt to any attacks you throw its way, with the ultimate goal of stealing your individuality and bringing you into the Hive.

2. The Romulans. Although in later series the Romulans played a less-significant role, they continue to be amongst the best villains in the Star Trek universe. Who can resist the bad side of Vulcans that the Romulans represent?

3. The Clown. If you don't remember The Clown (aka Fear) from the episode "The Thaw" of Star Trek: Voyager, then you didn't see the episode. The world of fear and torment created by The Clown made for one of the most (if not THE most) unforgettable Voyager episodes.

4. Q. How does Q not get included on ANYBODY's list of the Top 5 villains of Star Trek? Sure, he was certainly one of the less "threatening" (he usually didn't do TOO much harm) villains, but nonetheless, the omnipotent Q was always a force for Picard (and later Sisko and Janeway) to reckon with.

5. Khan. Simply because he's a classic, but perhaps more because of the terrifying ceti eels he employed.

(Dis)Honorable Mention: Captain Jonathan Archer / Scott Bakula: for successfully (almost) killing one of the longest-running franchises in television history.

The man who almost killed Star Trek.

Psssh that dream was totally unrealistic

I don't have dreams very often, and when I do I typically have absolutely no recollection of the dream's content. However, the following dream (which I had last night), I can remember perfectly, and I have to say: it is completely unrealistic.

First, I'm standing around looking through the medicine aisle in Wal-Mart. Why? I don't know. I somehow come across a box of expired medicine (as in, 5 years expired) and decide that they should have to give it to me for free since it's expired. Sure enough, the pharmacist gives the go-ahead.  

For some reason, I decide to take the individual medicines out of their outer boxes and only take the inner containers with me. I walk to the entrance, where the "greeter", an attractive (attractive in a "regular person who's not ugly" sort of way) girl, says "Have a good night!", to which I reply, "You too!" 

Then, she quickly rushes to the door just as I'm about to leave and says, "Um, so what's going down in the 'hood tonight?"  She seems uneasy. 

"Oh, the pharmacist said I could take this for free because it's expired," I replied, indicating the medicines I was carrying. She looks relieved.

"Do you mind if I check?" she says.

"Sure, go ahead," I said. Then we found that the inner containers did not have the expiration dates on them. "Well, you wanna go back inside and check the outer boxes?" I said.

"Yes, let's go."  So we headed back into the store towards the boxes. At this point the dream abruptly ended.

There are so very many unrealistic elements to this dream:

1) Even Wal-Mart would not still have medicine on its shelves that was 5 years out of date.

2) If they did, they certainly wouldn't give it away (or sell it) to an individual who pointed out that it was expired.

3) Why would I want expired medicine?

4) I have never seen a Wal-Mart greeter who was slightly attractive (not to say that they're all "ugly", necessarily... more that I've just never, ever seen one who I would consider "attractive.")

5) Wal-Mart greeters would no doubt not give a crap if you were walking out with apparently "stolen" product. Except for the hyper-vigilant ones who take their job as a greeter/loss-prevention-specialist extremely seriously.

6) Medicines all have the expiration on the outer AND inner packages.

Perhaps the most disturbing part of this dream, however, was that I dreamed I was in Wal-Mart. What kind of a sick mind spends their dreaming hours being in Wal-Mart, of all places? It's a dream! Why couldn't I have been in a classier place? It's not like money is an object in the dream world. Sheesh. I want my dream-time back.

$207,000,000

This is what $207,000,000 (that's 207 MILLION dollars) in cash looks like.

This is why you shouldn't become a chemical supplier for meth-makers, kids. You could have all that lovely green taken away from you.

Wash it Down (it's all sweet)

The new thing in colas is "real sugar."  Pepsi, after attempting this with a small-scale distribution of "Pepsi Natural" (which doesn't taste good), has now come out "Pepsi Throwback." With "Throwback" they've given up on the "all-natural" thing, and instead are jumping on the "real sugar" bandwagon. 

The word has gotten out: high-fructose corn syrup = "bad." Real sugar = "good." This, actually, is the extent of the majority of the general public's knowledge of the real sugar vs. corn syrup debate. "I try to avoid high-fructose corn syrup and just stick with good ol' sugar,"

"Why?"

"Because high fructose corn syrup is bad for you."

Here's a news flash: real sugar is just as happy to make you fat as high-fructose corn syrup. However, I will admit: it does taste better and doesn't "coat" your mouth like HFCS does.

So here's the basic "evidence" behind the horribleness of HFCS:

1. It not a "natural" product (it's made by a chemical process)

2. It is the most common sweetener/preservative in most food today.

3. Americans, who consume tons of HFCS, are fat.

It'll be funny to see when Americans switch their calories from HFCS to sugar and find that they are still fat.

Here's a good article on the topic:

NY Times article "A Sweetener With a Bad Rap"