Also, they keep saying that it's demon's blood. But demons don't have blood, demons on Supernatural are more or less smokey entities that need a physical body to possess. So realistically speaking, it's not really their blood unless their entire being inherits everything inside of that body and their essences leaks into the bloodstream, otherwise the blood Sam is drinking? Is actually human blood, which makes me think about the poor people who are cut and sliced simply for the benefit of Sam's blood addiction.
Another thing, I've been thinking about Sam and his powers and what the demon blood contributes to it. Now yes, it's meant for him to be revved up Hulk-style, but wasn't it Ruby that told him he didn't need the demon blood anyway with that Dumbo speech? That he had the powers inside of him all along, he just needed to believe that the blood could help him? Of course, we can argue that when the YED was alive Sam's powers were activated through that and when he died he no longer how those abilities and it's demon blood that fueled it. But on the show they make a huge deal about Sam being an abomination and how he's been tainted with demon blood running through his veins and whatnot, even when he was supposedly cleansed of it in the S5 premiere. This has never been fully explained on whether or not Sam is truly tainted or that is just a belief because Azazel chose him and that was his destiny to be Lucifer's vessel and all of that. It's never been clear, and I'm wondering if it's an inconsistency with the writing, mainly because had Sam been an abomination he wouldn't have ended up in Heaven in "Dark Side Of The Moon", so I don't know.
Perhaps this was explained before elsewhere, but it's been bothering me for some time now.
In other news that is not unrelated, I've also been curious about the inconsistencies the show has had especially with unfinished or abandoned storylines and arcs, and the more I looked back the more I realized they never really explained many things they put out there, mostly with things that aren't directly connected with the Winchesters. And that's one example of their major flaws in terms of the writing, never mind the mess the fifth season turned out to be. I think once you step back and realize oh wait, this never happened or this was never explained, or hey they didn't follow through with that piece of the storyline, is when you notice those little things that should have been handled better with the story. And I'm the kind of person that likes stories to feel complete, to not have holes or for there to be continuity errors, or for things to happen unrealistically to a character and what they've been going through. When this happens in a show that I watch, I will nitpick at it and it will make me question and/or not like the writers or the direction of the show in general. Does this make me less of a fan? Of course not. These are legitimate concerns to have and everyone should voice their likes and dislikes about something they love, otherwise how else will people in the higher ups listen and see what the people are responding to?
Apparently it seems I have way too many thoughts today, it's been bubbling up in my head and I needed a little release otherwise I would go insane with it. Heh.