I insulted Jim Breuer. Apparently Lennon thinks that that is a crime against all things comedic – I think I would love to hear Breuer tell a joke that didn’t involve goat noises or a stupid facial expression. Pardon me for thinking that perhaps he could have stopped doing his character from “Half Baked.”

Anyway, Lennon, who now considers himself an expert on comedy decided to inform me that my weblog is “going downhill,” and no wonder, since I watch Letterman, and don’t think Breuer is a genius. Being the good friend that he is, he decided to give me some pointers on being funny. I will summarize those for you here:

1) Apparently a short (albeit disturbing) quip of sorts regarding my chest and its lack of man-boobs is not funny.

2) In order to make it funny, I should “expand” the topic. Instead of feeling my chest, I should be looking in the mirror and flexing.

3) Although it wasn’t expressly stated by Lennon, It seems that it is vital to the joke that it ramble on endlessly, never once coming within the vicinity of a conclusion

4) Finally, based on Lennon’s example, I am now aware that a punch line is no longer an integral part of a joke. Apparently a joke can be so funny that everyone forgets to laugh.

So, I would really like to thank Lennon for his coaching, no wonder I don’t get the horribly complex humor of such “comediologists” as Jim Breuer (a.k.a. “Goat-boy”).

After begging Lennon to stop, I managed to convince him to briefly sum up his point, a rare event – Lennon is capable of turning a two word response to a question into a 3 hour lecture on topics mildly related to that question. Like when I asked him a question about a chemistry formula and got three semesters worth in response. Regardless... apparently I am supposed to be less like Garfield and more like Far Side. The fact that both of those examples are cartoons (that I don't read), something that I am in no way associated with, didn’t seem to bother him.

---

One of the things I rarely talk about is religion. The problem with religion is that there are far too many of them, how is one to pick a religion, when there are dozens of sects in Christianity alone? I’m currently shopping around for one – but what criteria can you really apply to that search? Its not like going to the supermarket and squeezing all of the melons and various fruit and vegetable products until finding the ones that meet your minimal firmness requirement, nobody will think you are crazy if you like your bananas extra-ripe.

How does a young man of my stature find himself without a religion? Well, it’s a long story… I was raised Catholic by my Protestant Dad… For some reason, I don’t think you need the rest of that story to get the picture…

What I’m looking for is a religion with minimal restrictions on various vices, and of course there should be little or no financial commitment involved (that eliminates Catholicism, Scientology, and Pat Robertson’s church). There should be no requirements to grow or cut my hair in any fashion, although I might not mind a pair of those Hassidic curly sideburn-thingies – they look pretty cool, then again, I’m not so sure I am willing to commit to them.

If a religion would provide me with an opportunity for guilt-free satire (that everyone would still get), which would certainly be a plus (this brings Catholicism back into the fold I guess – priest jokes are golden). Hinduism, Buddhism and Confucianism lose points on that one – nobody knows what they hell they are about, and there are only so many jokes you can make about an eight-armed elephant god.

Islam is of course in vogue in many parts of the world, but it too has its drawbacks. These include increased scrutiny at airports, praying five times per day, and the inevitable call to “jihad.” The problem with Jihads is that inevitably, someone is going to ask you to do what the Japanese refer to as “kamikaze” – which reminds me, I should also rule out Shinto on those grounds. Although 70 virgins sounds like a hell of a reward, I think I’d rather die of old age and get one non-virgin, I’ll probably need celestial Viagra by that point anyway.

One of my main concerns with Christianity is the whole “hell” deal. I mean, it sounds pretty harsh, and from what I understand, it doesn’t take too much to get a free ticket to hell. Conversely, Christian heaven provides the faithful with no virgins whatsoever, in fact, they don’t promise any sex at all. From what I understand, it involves a lot of praying and harp playing – I’m not too into the harp. Perhaps if there were some promise of sexy angels, or even Charlie’s Angels, maybe then it might be a more tempting offer.

So, I will have to continue to label myself “agnostic” as I search for a religious group that will fit my criteria. I will continue squeezing the theological melons in this universe’s supermarket.

---The Random Stuff:---

Why does it feel so dirty to check out the “angels” while watching re-runs of Charlie’s Angels on cable? Its the same effect as reading old Playboys -- they might look like they are your age, but somewhere in the back of your head, you know that they probably look just like the women your grandma plays canasta with on a Wednesday night at the retirement home.

Keeping with the theme of religion: The Dalai Lama recently mentioned in an interview that the thing he misses most is sex, and that he is driven to shooting at hawks with his rifle out of his sexual frustration. Upon hearing this, the Pope called him up and offered a better solution: “altar boys.”

#|