Is is just me?

I've been left stranded on a little island I like to call "confusion", and it's all thanks to a handful of friends that I have.

First, let's start with friend "A":

Always delivering kind support, I've noticed a change in her. She's become very self-focused (I can't blame her, I'm the same way), and very self-indulgent. Where this becomes problematic, is within the fact that it sharply contrasts the friend "A" I used to know. And well, considering this was my favorite trait of friend "A", I keep wondering if it's worth saving the friendship.

Friend "A" really pissed me off today, and here's how:

Friend "A" is lucky enough to have the next few days off, and while I too have enjoyed some downtime, friend "A" is always whining about not getting hours. That simple fact, along with the fact that she is one of my best friends had me convinced that she would be the perfect person to cover my 4 hour shift tomorrow evening so I don't have to come in after having Toby put down.

I was so wrong. She said no, and what's worse is she had to think about it and 'call me back'.

She has "plans". Plans to eat dinner with the bf and his parents (keep in mind she's met them before, and will have plenty of opportunities to see them again -- hell she has 3 days off right!?). That's pretty early in the evening anyway isn't it?

She asked if I was mad, and naturally I pulled a gemini and put the happy face on. Yes I was mad! If you had to ask, then maybe you already know the answer!?

I mean, it's not like I planned on putting him down. It's something that I have to do, because he can't walk. It's something that will undoubtedly ruin my week, as I'll never be able to replace this cat who lived COMPLETELY 100% indoors with me for the past 14 and a half years.

I'm going to be a mess, and well, considering friend A has THREE DAYS OFF IN A ROW, I figured she wouldn't mind covering a 4 hour shift for me in my time of mourning. Am I wrong, or was that a pretty unfriendish thing for her to do?

Friends B and C, well, what they're doing isn't really worth getting all mad over, but please let me know if you think it's weird, as I do.

Despite my break up with Zach, and the fact that I'm not "worth" the 40 minute drive to be friends, he IS willing to be friends with friends B and C.

Where this gets hairy is in the fact that in the cases of friends B and C, they contacted him first via MySpace and basically commented to him that "Just because you and Michael aren't together doesn't mean we can't be friends."

This doesn't make me mad so much as it freaks me out. Are they trying to piss me off? I mean...friends B and C met Zach one time, and one of them was drunk when she met him, so it's not like they have enough information or background history with him to continue a friendship?

Is this out of spite?

With friend B, I'm not so close to this person, so she can do what she wants. I think her obsession stems more from getting a weed connection than anything else.

Friend C's case is more acceptable, because she was under the impression that I was still friends with Zach, and still going to be friends with him.

Well, I suppose I should tell friend C that this isn't the case, and then see the result.

If you ask me, that whole situation is a bit weird considering how little any of them know each other.

Again, Zach and I are on neutral ground I'd say...but again, the situation is weird.

Friend A fits into this equation as well...she promises that Zach will not be welcome at her house with friend B (as they're both friends too) just because she doesn't know him, and knows my feelings on the topic.

Out of sight, out of mind, right?

Is it okay that I feel a little mad, and/or weirded out by this crap?