Edited by author 07-04-2004 06:59 AM
throwing government money away in order to address, without actually solving, social issues; becoming overly involved in foreign affairs; meddling too much in the lives of the public

Way to use non-weighted words, Mike. :-)

The sense I get from libertarians (small-l or big-L) is that they don't see any real difference between an economic social safety net and "faith-based" initiatives; between actions to prevent massive genocide and imperialist conquests of oil reserves; between regulation of vehicle emissions and legislation against sodomy. This is bizarre to me, to compare these actions (that's why I used non-weighted words myself, such as imperialist....)

he's not an imperialist by any stretch of the imagination.

True. But my Patrick Fucking Buchanan comment was more along the lines of "Good grief, I'm agreeing with Pat Buchanan." It's a Hitler was a veggie and a painter, and he went slightly off the rails from that intial starting point moment.

As much as I oppose current conservative beliefs, I think it is a severe disservice to historic conservative thinking to appoint Buchanan as a "textbook case of the social conservative". It's like saying that Stalin is a "textbook case of the socialist". They are not just politicians, they are psychotic motherfuckers, and if the textbooks cite them as prime cases, the textbooks need to be rewritten. (Read the comment above this one.)

That's my big comment. My little comment has to do with the neoconservative/liberal distinction being whether they have been the subject of violence. This is utter horseshit. I tried to think of a more judicious term, but using one would be a lie. Just like "there are no atheists in foxholes" (Do I need a reference for this? How about Paulson's classic essay?), this is a lie spread by one side. The implication of foxholes is that if atheists were to go to war, we would find out that they are all hypocrites. The implication of mugging is that if liberals were actually exposed to the violence in the country rather than living in ivory towers, they would be conservatives.

I guess I should go out and get mugged, to see how being hit over the head would make me pro death penalty, anti abortion, pro war, pro draft, anti privacy, and so on. Pro gun, I could maybe grant. Pro mandatory sentences? I could grant that with a stretch. But the rest? The chapters and verses of neocon dogma attributed to understanding the nature of violence? Nonsense.

Edited by author 07-03-2004 08:45 PM
Re: Pat Buchanan's Comments on Iraq

Whatever else one might say about Buchanan's beliefs (and I could say a lot), the man is a textbook case of the classic conservative. Considering that, I don't think that his comments ought to be viewed as especially surprising. Buchanan's comments stem from isolationism, and the man's track record is certainly rife with that. The Iraq war is largely a neoconservative baby, and Pat has long been critical of the neocon movement. As the joke goes, "a neoconservative is a liberal who's been mugged", and the neocon movement has managed to import several liberal tendencies (throwing government money away in order to address, without actually solving, social issues; becoming overly involved in foreign affairs; meddling too much in the lives of the public) that classic conservatives like Buchanan find intolerable. The man might be a asshat (I was feeling forgiving today, so I added the "might be"), but he's not an imperialist by any stretch of the imagination.

And we could rewrite 4 to be "Daniel, who slept in the hogshead."

Wow...

I also liked "Sherry, whose butt slept in the sherry butt."

fo shizzle my atheizle

I don't care for the term bright. The liberal people of this country have a hard enough time getting the ear of non-formally educated people because of the assumption that we see ourselves as smarter than them. This assumption is made additionally toward the young, college graduate, non-religious person. Starting with a term that lables oneself as part of the "bright" verus "not-bright" camp is not a good foot to start on for dialouge.

That being said, I really do wish that there was a central term for those of us with a non-religious world view. I want the community that Christians have. I'm extremely jealous of it and I don't think it's fair to have that level of community reserved for those who believe in a god. Names are a powerful thing and one of the first steps towards forming a community is claiming an identity with a name. I wish there were something less offensive than "bright" and with a less negative image than atheist, but if there is going to be a comming together of like minded people in this regard a name can really help that happen.

Or, perhaps we should take a cue from the gay community as the "bright" folks suggest. They have taken back Queer as a positive naming for their life style, maybe we should reclaim atheist. We could even learn from the black community and greet each other as "yo my atheist what's up".

Edited by author 06-17-2004 03:00 PM
Thank you, Duncan, for enlightening me. Looks like I was completely taken in by it.

It would be great if there were no pre-interview: having them show up in some hovel with a guy trying to pass off aluminium foil swans from mediocre French restaurants as "continental metal avian sculptures".

(The post under discussion)

RE: Cash in the Attic - it isn't as impressive as you think, the spotting a piece of pottery and knowing everything. It is telly of course, but there is research and planning done in advance before the filming.

Basically, an application to appear on the show is made which includes details of items people believe will be worth money. Those lucky enough will receive a follow up phone call. If the shows producers plan to proceed, a researcher and valuer will visit the family to do an appraisal of what they have and its potential value.

So, although it appears like they are just there on the day rummaging in a house, finding gems as if nobody knew they were there, it isn't so impressive. Understandable that they would make sure it was worth filming beforehand, but a shame as I'd love to see them turn up at someone's house to find it was full of utter crap, worth nothing at all.

I've got six new gmail invites. Nobody wants them? I got zero response last time. Forget "worth their weight in gold" -- compare the weight in electrons to the bottle of whisky I got for one of them, and they're worth orders of magnitude more than antimatter.

i want a smoke and a hat...ok, just a smoke

The infamous "Straw Hat Spam", of course. Watch out for the "Straw Hat Spam" virus. It will turn your PC into a "Straw Hat". And by that I mean "Smoldering Ember".

You have been warned.

ummm...wtf?

What I love is the broadband add at the bottom of the email...

Edited by author 06-10-2004 04:05 AM
(Well, it won't let me post the message because it's the "same as the last message" -- the one that was accidentally posted in (ahem) my wife's name. So, blah blah blah, some text to confuse the diff engine.)

Whoops, forgot to post the updates. mcgees.org is up and running. So are the other sites, except for ScotchFinder, which is coming along and frankly needs a code re-write using newly available perl packages.

Evan, did you note that the BBC site specifically disclaims any involvement in 4-1-9 emails that might link to the story? Must be more than just you who got the email. What if multiple people respond, what are they going to do with all the money? Divide it?

hehe...I just got 419 email...

From: sha_shari09@tiscali.co.uk
Date: 2004/06/09 Wed AM 04:24:06 EDT
To: sha_shari09@tiscali.co.uk
Subject: CONTACT PHONE NUMBER
 
FROM:Abacha`s Family
Lagos,
Nigeria.


ATTN:Sir

I am Mohamed Abacha, the son of the late Gen. Sanni Abacha former Nigerian
Military Head of State who died mysteriously as a result of Cardiac Arrest.
Since after my Father's death, my family is under restriction of movement
and that not withstanding, we are being molested,policed and our Bank Account
both here and abroad are being frozen by the Nigerian Civilian Government.


Furthermore, my mother is in detention by the Nigerian Government for more
interrogation about my fathers assets and some vital document. Following
the recent discovery of my Father's Bank Account by the Nigerian Government
with Swiss Bank in which the huge sum of US$700 Million and Dutch 450 Million
was lodged.

However, there is US$38 Million which my father wisely deposited in my
name in a europe finance and security company which has not been discovered
by the Nigerian governnent.I am therefore appealing to you for your urgent
assistant to move this money into your bank account where I believe it will
be safe since I cannot leave the country due to the restriction of movement
imposed on the members of my family by the Nigerian Government.

However,you can contact for effective completion of this transaction. You
can visit the websites below to confirm the authentication of my letter:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/877113.stm
http://www.usafricaonline.com/chido_cochranabacha.html
http://www.marcosbillions.com/marcos/Dictators%20Abacha.htm
http://www.afrol.com/News2002/nig023_abacha_reactions.htm

Conclusively, we have agreed to set aside 10%of the total sum for settlement
of expenses incured both local and international,30% to you the foreigner,while
60% to be held on trust by you until we can decide on a suitable business
investment in your country subsequent to our free movement by the Nigerian
Government.
If this offer is acceptable to you,then you should immediately upon
the receipt of this mail forward your private phone and fax number
to me to enable us discuss further on the transaction and the
modalities of its execution.
Bye for now and stay blessed.

Best Regards
Mohammed Abacha.





__________________________________________________
Broadband from an unbeatable £15.99!

http://www.tiscali.co.uk/products/broadban...tml?code=SM-NL-11AM

You are supposed to ask for 419 dollars.

Re: post on main page--

Your Apache 2.0 httpd.conf is totally fuczored. Send me thirty dollars and I'll fix it for you right away. I am royalty in Nigeria.

OK, if this message shows up, I have gotten lynx running on the new mcgees.org server. Long installation process, but it's going well.

re: Clear Channel

What? Why would it bother you that they banned certain artists (Dixie Chicks) for speaking out against the war? Why would it bother you that "indecent and obscene" content not be allowed on the air? I don't get it...does it look like censorship to you? Why would a major media conglomerate selectively choosing what you should hear make a difference? Personally I love bands like "Big Brother" and "The 1984 Experience" and "Right-Hand Puppet!" I hate choosing, it's so much easier for someone else to do it for me.

I had never watched Curb Your Enthusiasm before. Having it compared to anything with Ben Stiller in it however makes me want to avoid it at all cost.


I HATE Ben Stiller...so very much.

I'm ganna have to go ahead and sorta disagree with you there David...

This is a kind of humor that I've never found funny. The kind of joke that makes you squirm in your seat and think to yourself, "Nobody is this stupid...and I work tech support."

I call it "embarrassment humor." I classify jokes of the sort where person A does something stupid or something stupid happens to them. Person(s) B notices. Person A has a chance to correct the problem, but for some reason decides (matter of principle, stubborn, just plain stupid) that instead of fixing the problem with a short "I'm sorry," or "Not my fault. Here's what really happened," or "That's untrue," they instead follow it up with something even more stupid.

While more slapstick than Larry David, Ben Stiller is currently at the top of this kind of humor (but he's getting better and moving away from it a bit).

Meet the Parents: Holy crap! How can anybody make it through an entire scene in that movie?
CYE: makes Meet the Parents look like Hamlet.
Seinfeld: had some very funny moments, but more often than not it was the cast, not the writing.

"The kids then told their father that the man in the car behind them was pretending to shoot at them. That's not funny."

I actually disagree. I haven't seen that episode, but I laughed at that description. A literal LOL.

I tend to think that I have a very dry sense of humor. Perhaps I'm fooling myself. I have now read that The Office description 3 times and still have no idea what the fuck the joke is.

Yeah, very different. I watched the HBO special that was the springboard off of which CYE was based (casting Cheryl Hines as his wife and so forth.) Where I decided I loathed it was the episode when Larry was approached by a man who demanded to know if he was Jewish. Larry and Cheryl were incredibly offended. It turned out the man was also Jewish, and was taking Larry to task over playing Wagner. They had a very uncomforable scene. Then later David tracked down a girl who had done something to him, maybe toilet paper his house or something. And it turns out that the girl's the guy's daughter. He accused her, and the father asked her if she did what she was accused of. She denied it, so he turned to Larry and said "She said no", as if that closed the matter.

Then there was the "Like you wear that top so people will look at your shoes" scene.

But the point where I truly wished him a fiery death was the scene where kids in the back seat of a station wagon started playing "shooting" games with Larry out the back window, using their thumbs and forefingers as pistols. Larry playfully joined in, like has been done for hundreds of years. The kids then told their father that the man in the car behind them was pretending to shoot at them.

That's not funny. Fuck Larry David.

But The Office, on the other hand, damn. David Brent hires a management consultant to come and give a lame seminar to his employees about customer relations.

From the BBC website:

The training is underway. Rowan tells the staff that he will be leading the session, under David, and he kicks off with a somewhat dated video. But, as David points out, "a good idea is a good idea forever."

After the video, Rowan and David start "the dreaded role play." Rowan acts the part of a very bad hotel manager, and David is the complaining guest. There is no right or wrong in this scenario, but David manages to faze Rowan [it turns out his complaint is "I think there's been a rape up there!] So they reverse roles. When Rowan complains that his room, 362, is a mess, David replies there is no room 362. [He turns to his employees and explans the moral:] "Sometimes the complaints will be false."

Here we differ. I watched two episodes of The Office and plan on sending both Series 1 & 2 back to Netflix without watching any more episodes. I don't think it's funny at all.

I really enjoyed watching the first season of Curb Your Enthusiasm and am looking forward to season 2 being released.

Hmm...

Edited by author 05-24-2004 02:55 AM
re /m338,

Well, since Fawlty Towers, probably. And then Seinfeld made hundreds of millions of dollars off the same sentiment. But I find The Office infinitely more funny than Curb Your Enthusiasm which I heartily loathe (and I cannot watch The Office for more than ten minutes because it's too uncomfortable. But with Curb Your Enthusiasm, I just end up wishing Larry David would die in a fiery car crash.)

I really liked The Cell — I saw it in the theater as well. I thought it was beautifully realized.

re /m337: I walked out about ten minutes into the film, when the man was hanging himself on meat-hooks. I decided that I didn't want any more pictures like that in my head.

My friend Owen, after watching episodes of Curb Your Enthusiasm and The Office:

"Since when is awkward the new funny?"

Just curious...why and at what point did you walk out of The Cell?

While I didn't dig on the whole movie I found the visual stimulation more then enough to keep me in my seat.

Starship Troopers piss me off too, though I didn't walk out. I wish they had used a different title, that way it would be easier for someone to make a movie that's actually based on the book.

I hate to say, but I fell asleep during Fellowship LOTR...it was the midnight screening...and that movie is long

I actually did walk out of There's Something About Mary for just those same reasons.

Movies I've walked out of:
1. See above.
2. The Cell
3. Gigli
4. If I had seen Death to Smoochy in the theaters, I would have walked out.

I'm sure there are more... I might think of some...

Movies I would have walked out of, but was threatened/convinced to stay (not movies that, in retrospect, I wish I had walked out on but movies that I attempted to leave and was forced/made/begged to stay):
1. Pearl Harbor
2. Hellboy
3. The Shipping News
4. Love, Actually

I'm also very surprised, Josh, that you fell asleep during The Trilogy: Part 1. It's my favorite of the three, and I found it thrilling the whole way through. Interesting.

I've never walked out of a film. The only one I've ever fallen asleep in was Apollo 13 and that's just because I was sick and doped up on flu medicine.

Mostly I think it's because I don't find almost anything really offensive to the point of making me not be comfortable watching it. The only movies I've considered walking out of were Something About Mary because it was one of the most stupid unfunny movies I've seen and Matrix Revolutions because I was afriad that if they tried to cram one more cliche into that movie it might explode and I could get Keanu shrapnel inbedded in my eye.

Movies I've walked out of:
Starship Troopers

Movies I fell asleep during:
Blood Numbers

In general I see far fewer movies than Josh and well than most people my age. I usually only go to movies that I know something about and that I want to see. The only exception to this has been during the summers when I wanted to get away to a cool place. As these movies were in the middle of the afternoon I wasn't sleepy and I was paying for air conditioning so I didn't leave just on account of the movie being crappy. I only left Starship Troopers because I found the violence so offensive, and I never would have gone to see it had the advertising campaign been more clear about just how violent it was going to be. I did, however, find one really great movie one summer when I was going for an escape from the heat, Three Kings. I really enjoyed that film. So I wonder what movies you guys might found and really enjoyed when you weren't goign to the theater for just the movie.

Al Franken is my new hero.

I have a confession: I don't read anymore unless it's online. I'm sorry. I just can't bring myself to do it at home...staring at words all day, just to stare at more when I get home. No, thank you.

I do, on the other hand, love audio books. Unabridged audio (especially from the author) is great. I just started in on Lies and it's got to be one of the best things I've ever heard. I mean, Holy Crap! It's great. Just based on the first hour I already know I'm going to be purchasing every one of his books. He's just as smug as Bill Maher, and even more funny.

Michael Berg responded, "It goes further than Donald Rumsfeld. It's the whole Patriot Act, it's the whole feeling of this country that rights don't matter anymore because there are terrorists about.

"Well, in my opinion 'terrorist' is just another word like 'communist' or 'witch,' and it's a witch hunt, and this whole administration is just representing something that is not America, not the America I grew up in."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05/12/iraq.berg/index.html

...how right he is

I want a friend invite to their ipo

The first and second emails I receive requesting Gmail addresses will receive the two friend invitations I am allotted.

Lois: Shame on you Peter! Scaring the kids with your nuclear holocaust nonsense.
Peter: (laughs) You said nuclear. Its nucular dummy, the S is silent.

Audition is such a messed up movie. I mean, really. That kidikidikidikidikidi noise she made stayed in my brain for months after seeing that. Thank you for reminding me. Very slow to begin with but oh so creepy once you get into it.

re /m317 There was also quite a funny joke in Family Guy (s1e10 DaBoom).

Well, my reference seems rather pedestrian next to m/326

Edited by author 04-22-2004 07:46 PM
Re /m317, Amanda, linguist Geoff Nunberg (a frequent contributor to National Public Radio's "Fresh Air" program) has a book coming out next month called Going Nucular, which is of course an intentional joke. When Terry Gross mentioned the title on the air, she implored "Please do not write in to correct me. That's really the title!"

hmm...this has gotten much more complicated than I anticipated. I also can't believe I mixed up Star Wars movies, I guess that's what happens when you wake up at 5am to drive someone to the airport.

David: next time you're in SD dinner is on me...

I hereby offer to act as a proxy for Bob Mike. Evan: you can buy me dinner.

Don't bother; I no longer require food or sleep.

Fair enough...I owe you dinner.

What I'm arguing is that the studio got involved with Empire, took a certain amount of control away from Lucas, and the film was vastly improved because of it. Many of the Empire's greatest scenes never would have made it into the film if test-screened so much that Lucas couldn't ignore the results. Ewoks didn't show up until Jedi, and they were Lucas, through and through. As Episodes 1 and 2 show, that man shouldn't be given a completely free hand to do what he wants. I feel the same way about Mike Myers and Robin Williams; both talented men who need someone to step in and tell them when they aren't being funny (which is most of the time, these days).

Speaking of not being funny... Josh, I thought that Onion article was hilarious. Definitely in poor taste, but extremely funny (for me, at least).

ewoks or wookies...you're really going to try to argue for ewoks?

Evan,

Four words:

The Empire Strikes Back

Four more words:

You owe me dinner.

re m/314 that's the one. I recently bought it on DVD, having remembered how much I liked the show when Fox was screwing it over...I mean airing it. After having watched it in a more coherent fashion I’m somehow obsessed.

There's a thought process at work in almost every TV executive office that I've been unable to figure out. It somehow involves making 'changes' so that 'more people' will watch the show. It seems to me that every time a network starts to interfere with a show they just screw it up (add a character, make something more 'sexy', etc.). In the case of Firefly it began with them not running the actual pilot episode, choosing instead to run a hastily re-written third episode. Fox proceeded to run almost every episode thereafter out of order.

I have a friend here in San Diego that works at channel 10, an ABC affiliate. He complains of a different problem: that shows are moved. Apparently the ABC brass thinks it a wonderful strategy to take a successful show and move it around, not only in timeslot but day as well, to boost the ratings of other shows. The brass believe somehow that when people tune in for show X and find that it’s not running that night they will stay tuned in for show Y. Personally I would just change the channel to something else. I think that everybody that reads these posts is more than smart enough to figure out why this is a stupid idea (you’ll probably find ones that I hadn’t thought of yet).

Firefly has taken a ‘cult’ following. I’m not sure how much I like being in a cult, but as long as I avoid the punch I should be OK. Fox has since decided to allow Josh Whedon to make a movie from the series (including all of the original cast). While it’s great news for all the fans and cast I can only think of how bad they screwed up Whedon’s first major big screen production (Buffy the Vampire Slayer). I think we remember it and how different it was from the TV series (read here: studio forced changes were made).

How can studios keep forcing creators/writers to change their work? If anybody can name a show/movie that was improved by such changes I’ll buy them dinner. (You’ll at least have to go hit for hit in a debate)

RE: The word is LOSE

Ok, here's my pet peeve. Since when is nuclear spelled "nucular"? I can't understand why 90% of the people that say that word pronounce it like "NU-CU-LAR".

ARGGGH.

I keep meaning to take my Christmas gift cards to Borders and buy season 3. I introduced David to it last summer (seasons 1 & 2, which I bought) -- he loved it (err -- right, Dave?)

I saw the first episode, and didn't like it. I saw the last episode, and was interested in seeing more. I didn't see anything that happened in between.

By the way, I've just noticed that Season 4 of Homicide has been released on DVD. I, like an idiot, still don't have Season 3. I! Must! Catch! Up!

Quite possibly the best drama in television history. Certainly one of the best casts ever assembled.

This one? No, I hadn't until now. I guess it was a short-lived Joss Whedon series, and that it's available on DVD.

Has anybody else ever heard of the TV series Firefly?

If so, what were your thoughts?

Yeah, I knew they would disappear. It was for the loyal readers; I don't really want that silly thing hanging around for too long, which is why I didn't cache a copy.

I'm going with the "three random faces" algorithm. If the matched faces ever looked anything alike, there might be an argument, but really, the three people you matched?

Transcendent comedy.

It's my face-recognition page. As they only last 48 hours, Josh, your two sessions are gone.

Josh, swearing warps the minds of our children. It's unchristian, is what it is.

David's reference.

When they aired that on TNN, they apparently changed it to "Give me the keys, you fairy godmother!" This is the same airing where they went ahead and showed the brain splatter.

Give me the car.

Uh... I don't know if that will help your financial situation, but, uh... it would help mine. So uh, yeah...

"Give me the keys, you fucking cocksucker! What the fuck?"

Ahh...I was missing some backstory there. My bad.

Thanks for the link. I need to brush up on my ghetto slang.

My old cars, the American ones, were called "pimp mobile", or "the pimp", by my college roommates, and the nicknames stuck. They weren't complete junkers in disrepair, despite my description, they were seventies-era boats that looked like they deserved fuzzy dice hanging from the rearviewmirror. So I guess I've upgraded from a "pimp mobile" to a "pimp ride". This might reflect changing tastes among pimps over the past eight years. :-)

/m304 "...just collision on the pimps."

you mean hoopdi

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hoopdi&f=1

You're right, I forgot insurance cost differences, which are even more pronounced because I have comprehensive insurance on the Audi and just collision on the pimps. Then there's registration fees, which are separated by about a factor of 4.

The hybrid is very tempting. My mother just got one, and it's wonderful.

Re: pimp ride or hoopdi

How the hell are you putting 27,500 miles on your car every year?!? Geez...I didn't realize you were commuting to Seattle every day. Thank god you're not leasing.

You forgot insurance costs as well. I'm betting you didn't have to pay as much for you $1,200 car as you do for your Audi. I'm guessing the insurance on your Audi is something like $1,600/year. About even with mine. Your car is worth more, but you're married and have a kid (btw, why does this matter to insurance companies? Like a ring on one finger is going to ward off the constant flow of, what I can only assume to be, either visually impaired or mentally deficient drivers.) But the insurance on an absolute junker has got to be more like $400-600. So, there's another possible saving in the future.

You could always look at selling your car, paying off the loan and getting a hybrid, especially with the miles you're putting on it.

I am now getting da e-mail updizzles.

"We are delighted that Pecker will be leading the way"

the five minutes I spent laughing at this is proof that no matter how old I get I will laugh at the most juvenile humor

"Rudi Pecker assumes position"

Oh yeah. I signed up for that too. I am also not getting any e-mails.

~Dave

Wait, actually I suppose "I'm not getting e-mails either" is a proper(er) negation. Tech week. Mulligan.

Nope, wasn't notified of the test post

Maybe it's just a problem on my end but I signed up to be notified when your page is updated and I'm not getting any emails or anything(i love using "but","and", and "or" in the same sentence). Anywho, just thought I'd see if anyone else had this problem or if it's just that AOL doesn't want me to see some mail.

you'd be surprised with the number of people like that here at stanford. except with them, they drink, smoke and still eke out the A... amazing.

Oh man, I can't believe you remember Time Trax. I loved that show. It was so very bad, in retrospect, but, as Patton might say, "God help me, I love it so."

I watched that Century City show before you got home when I was visiting Jen, as she may have told you. I thought it was...well...a lawyer drama. It's like executives can just take some show and pitch it as "...of the future" and get away with it. "I got this great idea for a show. It's a lawyer drama. I know what you're thinking, there are already a flood of lawyer dramas, but this one's different. It's a lawyer drama...of the future!" That and if you're going to make an "...of the future" show, it should be far enough into the future so that your tech might match up. I mean, the Lee May character is around, let's say she's 28. That means she was made...2 years ago. We don't have that kind of tech now, let alone 2 years ago. However, even with all my gripes, it was pretty fun to watch. That may just have been because of the confusing relationship of clones.

Re: Bush at Church...

That's funny, because just last night there was a piece on the news about the Bush family's visit to historic Ford's Theatre. The entire time the thing was playing, all I could think was "If only..."

re: /m290 & /m292:

Seriously? I hated it. I almost didn't finish it, but I thought that maybe at the end they would suddenly reveal that it was shitty on purpose, or something.

No dice.

Ick.

I concur. Death to Smoochy was a fabulous film.

re: /287

What is it about brunettes that solve crime? Can they get any hotter?

What is it about savagely beating children’s show hosts? Can it get any more fun?

Absolutely, I've got taste! For instance, I loved, LOVED Death to Smoochy. Thought it was one of the best films of the year.

re: m/287

Me too. I also like Edward Norton, and Death to Smoochy still blows.

I'm not judging. Come on, I like Survivor, I can hardly make fun of anyone else's viewing habits. It just surprised me because normally you have, you know, taste. :)

Enzo, upright should be fine on the bottles.

Well, I like Jill Hennessy.

If I have several bottles of scotch and don't drink them all at once (in other words, I plan to keep them for five years or more), should they be stored on their side, like wine, so the cork stays moist, os standing up? Does it matter?

lucignano@hotmail.com

Josh-- you like Crossing Jordan? For reals, though?

Edited by author 03-05-2004 04:16 AM
As the world's greatest advocate for sex and violence, I think that it's time that I weighed in on the issue. It's late, and I'm tired, so I'll just quickly cover the basics. I might elaborate more later, if anyone is interested...

1.) Fringe elements aside, I can see why people would be bothered by the Janet Jackson episode. Whenever a parents' group comes forward with a complaint about how television markets inappropriate material to children, someone points out that television is not a babysitter, and parents should be responsible for deciding what children watch (and rightly so). In order for anyone to be able to make that sort of decision, however, they have to have a clear idea of what it is that they should expect from a program. If a parent decides that it's fine for a child to view violence, but not sex, that's the parent's choice. No parent allowed their child to watch the Superbowl without expecting violence to be broadcast; the violent elements of the game were announced well in advance. The nudity, on the other hand, was not a part of the advertised product, which took the decision out of the hands of the parents.

2.) This wasn't simply the exposure of a nipple; it was the exposure of a nipple in a sexual context. The "dirty, filthy tittie" reference that Josh makes comes from a David Cross routine (that I'm sure that most of us are familiar with) where Cross points out Ashcroft's mad obsession with covering the breasts on a statue of Justice. The key difference here is that the breast of Justice is presented in a non-sexual manner, Jackson's breast was presented quite differently. On the statue of Justice, the breast is an afterthought. On Jackson, it became the focal point. The use of the Cross routine here misses the entire point of what the comedian was trying to say.

3.) Football isn't violence disguised as sport; football is violence as
sport. It's not as though the NFL is sneaking the physically destructive aspects of the game in through the back door. They not only acknowledge it, they flaunt it. Some people have a problem with that, some people don't. Although football bores me into a coma, I happen to fall into the latter category.

4.) I have no objection to exposing children to limited amounts of controlled violence. In fact, I encourage it. When I was about five, I begged my parents to enroll me in wrestling classes. They did so, and I was treated to both ends of some fairly spectacular ass-whuppin's as a result (being much taller than most children my age, I did very well when wrestling within my age category, but very poorly when wrestling in my weight category, where I regularly faced children several years older than myself). I feel as though the experience taught me some valuable lessons (as my friend Chad puts it, "nothing teaches the worth of humility like being humbled by the fists of another human being"), and I managed to maintain friendly relations with a number of people who regularly attempted to flatten me. The ability to remain competitive without demonizing one's opponent is an important skill. I learned it through wrestling, and I think that football, if closely overseen by an adult, has equal ability to teach it. God knows that the kids that I wrestled with took defeat more gracefully than a lot of role-players/card gamers that I've dealt with. I suspect that this goes back to the whole "being humbled by the fists of another human being" thing that I mentioned, and you might want to keep it in mind the next time you spot some acne-scarred teen screaming and throwing a fit about how his opponent's deck contains more Plague Rats than regulation allows.

5.) As much as I hate the religious right, it doesn't seem fair point to them exclusively in terms of overreaction. The (supposedly) secular media did an impressive job of shoving this "story" down our throats. I usually manage to avoid the PTL networks, but I couldn't turn on the television for weeks after the Superbowl without hearing someone loudly objecting to the halftime stunt. While [sarcasm] Christ's brave soldiers [/sarcasm] certainly provide us with the best blogger material, due to their almost gleeful ignorance of basic spelling and grammar, they're hardly the only ones making a bigger deal out of all of this than there needs to be.

In closing, I'd like to say that I feel that there is a place for violence in our society, and a place for sex, and both deserve to be celebrated. However, just as I object to people being subjected to violent material without their prior consent, I also object to the unannounced presentation of sexual material. In my opinion, people should be free to view whatever they want, but they should also have the freedom not to view things. Surprising people with this sort of thing only gives ammunition to those who want to not only protect us from the things that we don't want to see, but to protect us from the things that we do.

I'm not sure that that last sentence came out correctly, but it's late.

PS - I'm pretty sure that Janet's sun burst nipple shield was a Good Art design. I used to sell those things, and it looked really familiar, but I haven't seen it close up enough to say for sure.

PPS - This all went a lot longer than I expected it to. Good thing I decided to keep it focused on a few key points, huh?

PPPS - Shut up.

I think the problem lies in our obsession with sex. We have, as a nation, a huge madonna/whore complex. We want our women to be pure and virginal, yet carnal and sexy at the same time. Britney Spears' appeal wasn't that she was a great singer, but that she could personify the catholic school girl (innocent yet sexual). Now that she's crossed over into the more purely sexual realm, she's become less popular. So when Janet's boob falls out, she goes too far. It is too far, not because we (collective male we) didn't want to see it, but because we did and feel we shouldn't.

I feel an entire tirade about christianity and morality and what's wrong with people coming on and I haven't even talked about Kill Bill yet, which I wanted to. Essentially what Josh said. Kill Bill is a glorification of violence that tells you straight up "this is a glorification of violence." Where as football hides it's violence behind sport so as to be accessable to anyone and never questioned. Like the commodity fetishism of violence. *sigh* I need to quit reading Marx for class.

OK, I'll be gentle. I'll even have my gentle preface be to say that I don't need to convince anyone. mcgees.org is my bully pulpit, and I have editorial control over it, but no one needs to change his opinion based on what I say.

Let me just address a couple minor points -- if you want to follow up, great; if you want me to tackle some of the major points, I'll consider it; if you want to let the thing drop and agree to disagree, that's fine too. I don't know if I could kick your ass in this debate, but I really don't have a desire to, despite my provocative posts (not my last post, though -- that was mostly supposed to be funny.)

The minor points:

1. I think we disagree on Kill Bill. I think Kill Bill is a celebration of violence, albeit a sophisticated, painfully self-aware celebration. Why this is relevant I suppose should be left to one of the Major Points that are rumored to exist.

2. No one, anywhere, ever, has claimed that Kill Bill is proper fare for children, families, and groups of knitting churchladies. That's where my disdain for the second petitioner I mentioned originates: a gladiatorial spectacle interspersed with advertisements featuring a woman being burnt by ignited horse farts is appropriate, but a dirty, filthy tittie is an abomination.

I have a difficult time attempting to judge form and content separately. How po-mo of me, right?

OK, look. I suppose football can be viewed as a celebration of violence. I understand your argument on this, Josh. Kill Bill can also be viewed as a celebration of violence.

Now I am not chiding you for loving Kill Bill or for rating it a 10 at IMDB-- I loved it, and I also rated it a 10 at IMDB-- but by your own admission of your high expectations for films, that means you think it's one of the best films ever made.

Josh, it is end to end violence.

But it's so much more than that! I agree with you! I also think that football is so much more than that. Sure you can distill it down to being just about violence, but I think you would call anyone who made that argument about Kill Bill ignorant. And you'd be right.

The mastery of cinema exhibited in well orchestrated fight scenes is much like the beauty I see in Bill Belichick's defensive sets. The perfection of the film's movement through space gives me the same thrill I got from watching Bill Walsh's offenses.

And there is beauty in the perfect cinematography-- but there is also almost unbelievable beauty in the physical perfection exhibited when Joe Montana hit Jerry Rice 50 yards down the field, dropping the ball into his outstretched hands.

They are not the same thing, but they are both awesome.

One could say that Kill Bill is a celebration of violence. It is not. Neither, truly, is football.

[P.S. I'm really nervous to post this. I've spent a long time trying to figure out just how you're going to completely immolate and dismantle my argument, and, honestly, it's intimidating. So, umm, anyway, be gentle at least when you kick my ass. :)]

Sure, it's still funny. It just needs explanation now. The post Evan was referencing was a spam post advertising teen porn, or at least seemed like teen porn from the urls (I assumed it was NSFW [= Not Suitable For Work]). It began as Evan's post did, with the words "I agree!"

However, I think Evan's .gov url could be real, judging by the current occupant of the White House.

awww...my last post isn't funny since the porno post was removed

I agree!

My websites are:
www.stupidpeoplethatspamporn.com
www.buckshotadvertising.org
www.onlyidiotswouldclickhere.net
www.peoplearesheepwholiketolookatsexpicturesandarestupidandwholooklikebutts.gov

Oops, sorry. It's on mcgees.org now.

So where is this Pearl Jam deck, anyway? If you don't feel like posting it you can always email me it.

Classic!

I do so love the internet.

Yes! Double reminder to sign me out. I got two e-mails from myself this morning, which was weird.

Yes! By the way, you're signed in as David. I read the question before your sig and thought "I can't believe David remembers that! He was barely born yet!" Makes more sense that it's you.

Would you like to tell the story?

So, Josh - I've been in isolation recently (read no internet) so I'm catching up tonight. I read your explanation about polymers - and my chem is too old - would "long-chain hydrocarbons" be polymers? Susan

I agree about the Hollow Tree. When I revisited the card after finding the notebook last year I had the same thoughts, but decided to publish it as-is. I've made the change you suggested.

I've changed Perimeter Defense to W/U, which I agree is more in flavor.

The concept of the Orangutan was that it was completely incautious. It was strong, and if blockers started to gang up on it it would get pissed (i.e. stronger), but that it had no strategy so that pretty much any three blockers could work together to off it using just a modicum of strategy. I've decided to use a $5 word and call it "Precipitate Orangutan", which may or may not be an improvement.

If you (or anyone) can figure out a way to break Scintillate, I'd love to hear it. Please keep working on it and I'll try myself. I don't know of anything that can bring an instant back repeatedly, so the obvious break (Storm mechanic) doesn't seem to work.

The flavor of Sharkhawk was that it was supposed to be able to eat a Killer Whale. But now there's a Great Whale, too, so to keep fully in flavor it should be able to eat that as well. Accordingly I've dropped it to a 3/4, increased the activation cost, and increased the bonus to make it Great Whale-proof as well as whale-lethal. It still might be too strong (that islandwalk is nasty) so maybe it needs an upkeep cost or something.

I've incorporated your suggestions for Spectral Form.

I found another list of cards (really old) while cleaning my study Sunday. Maybe I'll post them. Warning, though, a couple are pretty bad (maybe I won't post those.)

Cool, I didn't know you would respond to the others. Let me compose a reply.

Good call on the Escape Artist mechanic. Perhaps this is better:

Escape Artist
{2}{U}{U}
Creature -- Wizard
{T}: Return Escape Artist to owner's hand.
{T}: Escape Artist phases out.
{T}: Place Escape Artist on top of owner's library.
If Escape Artist would be put into a graveyard from anywhere, reveal Escape Artist and shuffle it into its owner's library instead.
1/2

It incorporates the Legacy Weapon / Serra Avatar mechanic. It also helps fend against abusing the card in combos that have the card recurrently bouncing back from your graveyard. It makes for an interesting defense against Millstone or its ilk, though. Not only would a milled Escape Artist not count as a milled card, you could tap Escape Artist as a fast effect to put it on top of your library to protect your library.

Hill Wurm is, I agree, difficult to get to work, and I intended it as a niche card and probably a sideboard card. It would be dangerous as a blocker, as you are unlikely to be able to get it out without Forests and Mountains. I hadn't though of it being Flung, Ruptured, or having its Reins Grabbed, all of which are in red.

Sharkhawk is, I think, too cheap by today's standards. Then again, I thought that about Exalted Angel, which they actually made....

Scintillate I really like. I've always wanted a non-permanent that costs 0 mana, and this card seems like it could generate some weird and cool effects.

I'm always amused when I design a card which is then designed by Wizards -- it gives me some reassurance that my cards aren't completely crazy. I like their name (Crystal Quarry) more than mine.

Now for part 2 of the review (accidentally hit submit)

The Hollow Tree is a neat, if outdated, idea. My only complaint would be that as a creature type Treefolk, Hollow Tree sounds too much like he's hiding in a dead creature. Maybe either change he name or turn it into an enchantment that you can pay to use. "Everyone into the trees!"

Llanowar Mystic is another card that would easily fit into most green decks and helps Birds of Paradise more than his elven brothers in terms of effectiveness.

Perimeter defense is a great card. I mean, who doesn't use at least some tapping creatures? I would think about making it White and Blue instead of black due to Blue's inherent love of tapping things and White's love of making things even.

Prismatic Vale apparently already got made so we can see how good that is.

I'm not quite sure why the Orangutan commits suicide if more than two decide to block from a flavor standpoint but it does help to make the card more balanced. I never was a fan of rampage.

I'm not sure how I feel about Scintillate. It seems rather harmless at first but with a 0 casting cost and the right combo, I'm sure it could be broken. Just can't think of how yet.

As for the Sharkhawk, interesting idea with a few tweaks needed. A 4/4 flyer for 5 mana with versatility might be a little much. I'd make it a 3/3 or 3/4. Also, just from a current standpoint, I'd make it creature type bird and lose the legend status.

Spectral Form seems a little excessive in that is has phasing and can tap to phase as well. Perhaps tap and phase target creature and itself. Kind of a "Dead or alive you're coming with me" idea to it.

Oh yeah, and the green blitzer is one of the one's I tweaked. So very fun.

Alright, on to the older cards that you created.

Crystalline Moth is defintely a solid uncommon for green. While small, it can distract an angel or block a djinn and live to tell the tale.

Escape Artist, both mechanic and flavor wise, is my favorite of this batch, I would either make the cost to return from graveyard more expensive or make him reshuffle into the deck for the same reason green flyers have to be expensive. You're dipping into another colors territory and so it should be costly or slightly different.

Hill Wurm is a definite pain in the ass to make work. While cheap, it's main use will most likely be blocker unless you find a nice combo like Arena or (I can't remember the name) the one that lets you sack a creature and deal it's power in damage to player or creature.

Jon, thanks so much for the feedback. It was very helpful. I've incorporated most of your changes. Food Web is now green/black. I was hoping it would have some synergy with another green/black card, and I found a one possibility: Death Mutation from Apocalypse, which destroys a nonblack creature and puts a number of Saprolings into play equal to its casting cost. You could then go feed the Saprolings to your Food Web if you wanted, to upgrade them from chump blocker status or make your Altar of Dementia, Carrion, Diamond Valley, etc. more efficient.

I've changed Hamsterwheel to just be a removed-from-game effect, but the wording is by necessity somewhat clumsy in order to match the replacement effect wording that now pervades Oracle. I've also changed the mana-adding mechanic slightly.

Lemming Cloak now works if you have any land card. True, this will be the case 99.9% of the time, but it helps to retain a bit of the flavor I intended.

Rajah's Trunk was originally designed in 1994 as an Arabian Nights-era Flying Carpet / Sandals of Abdallah artifact. Equipment is a much better paradigm for this card, however. I can't decide which I like more, Rajah's Trunk or Wizards' own Loxodon Warhammer, which I suppose is a good sign. And it was of course designed to take more advantage of Elephant Graveyard, one of my favorite Magic cards of all time. In fact, I think you've seen my elephant deck, which can kick major ass when you drop a first-turn Rogue Elephant.

The Reforestation / Foratog combo is great, and one I hadn't seen. Powerful but not too powerful, I believe.

I wonder what you think of my older cards: http://tinyurl.com/2he5m. Let me know if you have time.

I'll post the Pearl Jam decklist when I get home. It uses a combo that I discovered myself while researching the deck, but it turns out it's a known combo (most are.)

I'm looking forward to playing with you, too, especially if you've further tweaked that great green blitz deck (I have an extra Living Hive if you want to trade for it.) I have nine decks assembled right now, and four or five in the works. Maybe I'll be able to assemble a couple of the four or five before then.

I am definitely interested in the deck list for the Pearl Jam deck.
As for the new cards. I especially enjoy Fair Play and think that could be real card.

Food Web seems like it should be green/black instead of blue, due to the sacrificing and all. Plus, the wording seems a bit off. Do you have to sacrifice creatures with exactly X power or greater than/equal to X?

Hamsterwheel definitely amuses me and is a good card but I think merely removing the creature from game would be better. Imprint usually means that the card itself will have some effect on the imprinting artifact. Maybe if it produced 3 mana of one color the removed creature had. ex: 3 blue if you remove a Prodigal Sorcerer.

Lemming cloak is cool but I'm not sure why only if you have a mountain. I mean, lemmings can jump off cliffs into the ocean so why not islands.

Rajah's Trunk is defintely good and it helps out any would be elephant decks and makes Elephant Graveyard get more play.

Reforestation would be an awesome rare card. Get a couple Reforestations and a Foratog out and it's time to kick ass.

All in all, neat ideas and good times. I look forward to playing you with a couple of my tweaked decks when I come down for spring break.

Evan, perfect -- I haven't thought about the polymers story in years. Fifteen is about the right age for that story, too. Thanks for the reminder.

Everyone else, here's that story: a salesman at the Del Mar Fair in San Diego, California was peddling this magic car wax that supposedly protects your car against pretty much everything. Thing is, he was going on and on about the "Polymers. This stuff is full of polymers. Polymer's ... we got five of 'em." Completely pointless statement: lots of things are polymers. It's simply a description of the properties of a compound, to wit, that the compound is made of a chain of identical simple pieces called monomers. Polyester is a polymer. So are polyethylene, polystyrene, polyurethane, polypropylene, and pretty much everything else whose name begins with "poly". Also, nylon, rayon, Kevlar, cellulose, and proteins. There's nothing inherently magical about polymers. A liberal coating of equal parts paper pulp and hemoglobin is not going to protect the finish of your car. So I asked him what polymers his product contained. He got a very patronizing tone and said "Polymers. Look them up on your periodic table." That would be the periodic table of the elements, mind you.

Fucking idiots. Makes for a great story, though. I'm sure the car wax guy knew all about absinthe too.

I found a great site on polymers, if anyone is interested: http://www.psrc.usm.edu/macrog/index.htm

And here's a FAQ on absinthe, in case you're a radio DJ: http://www.feeverte.net/faq.html

Hey Josh, regarding your last post on your blog. “I'm having trouble guessing what she thinks she had to prove to me. I don't think anyone has tried to do this to me since I was 15.” Are your referring to the “Polymers…we got five of ‘em” incident (Del Mar Fair, I think)? Great story either way!

Oh yeah, as an off topic comment, if you haven't seen it, I have a webpage now. This is it

Edited by author 01-28-2004 09:42 PM
I'll start out saying that I am not a sports fan in any sense. I don't follow any sport much less a team. I didn't even realize until yesterday that the SuperBowl was this weekend. That said, I can enjoy a random sporting event. Not as much as some but to a degree.

What I find the best about it is exactly what you, Josh, were talking about with your Dad and David. It's an excuse to have something to be excited about and it creates a social gathering with some interest. Not to say that you couldn't have a group of people over for any other reason, it just seems that sports are a relatively safe thing to center around. If you're into sports, then you can enjoy the game. If you aren't, like some of us, you can enjoy being with others and, for me, I get enthusiastic about other enthusiasm. It may sound odd but I get excited when others are excited. Not many things are as universally accepted as sports. If I were to, say, make a party based on RPGs, not many people are into that and if you aren't, it's hard to jump right in.

As for the message we are sending to children, I'll ask you this. You compared the ticket for a football game to a ticket for a movie. The obvious comparison being the idea that movies would corrupt our youths as well. I know that movies are fake and football is actual people running into eachother but that doesn't lessen the idea that someone is being paid millions to at least pretend to hurt (more than likely kill) others. It is no less a spectacle than any major blockbuster. I know that the Final Destination movies are favorites of yours. Aren't they just excuses to see people die in interesting ways (more so than many other horror films, in my opinion).

Now, the actual starting point of price. I doubt you'd find a lot of people who would say that they would spend upwards of $5000 on a football ticket. Even some diehard fans I know would have a hard time shelling out $800. However, more than anything, it's paying to have that experience. To say, "I was there." I would say, more than comparing it to buying a bottle of scotch, a good comparison is being in the development team for a set in Magic. How much would you pay to be in creative control of one of your favorite games. It's not just having something material. It's gaining an experience that most people will never have. It's being a part of something that you care about.

I could go on but I think that about covers my main thoughts.

Would that be "There is no argument about wheels"?

It might be useful also to keep "Illegitimi non carborundum" at hand. Je suis le illegitimus, and I've been feeling like it since I wrote the post. Mea culpa.

It's not my place to criticize others' hobbies. Have fun, football fans, and I wish you the best. There's no one twisting my arm, making me watch the game, and I'll probably end up watching it anyway. But the reason I'll end up watching it is the same reason I always end up watching it, which is that I feel excluded if I don't. In my family, to be a party to social interaction and a participant in conversations for the duration of the game and a long while thereafter, I have to be able to talk about the game because "IT'S WHAT'S DONE". It's always been that way, since I was a kid, when I couldn't stand the bloody event, or else I'd be shut out of family life. And all the complaints I mentioned about football, the tribalism especially, were part and parcel with my father watching sports when I was growing up. My first sporting memories were of living in Japan, with my dad trying to get me interested in American baseball. Did he try to get me interested in his favorite team so that we could band together, rooting for the same team? No, he tried to get me interested in his favorite team's arch-enemy, so that we could be rooting against each other. This, I guess, is fun for him, this completely vicarious, completely arbitrary contention. Dave, you and Dad still seem to enjoy doing this. Whatever particular method of thought he tried to instill in me, he either succeeded with you or you were born with it.

Dave, you've talked about sports being a relationship-building force with our father, and I can totally see that. But sports, and the role they play in our family, make me resentful. If I want to spend time with both of you simultaneously, when you're in town, it is pretty much mandatory for me to watch a sporting event and deal with all the shouting. That's when I even get invited. And I know that when I'm not invited, it's probably because you expect I wouldn't be interested, not because you expressly do not want my company. But that leaves me in the position of having to petition for admittance to a ritual I don't even enjoy in order to spend time with family members. And you and Dad have this special relationship with all sorts of shibboleths that I can't even pretend to participate in, that in order for me to participate would require me to spend -- what -- 200 hours per year watching sports on television? 400? Some mind-boggling number. And it's just never been worth it to me to submit to this (although I've sure tried at various times,) and so I've worked to find other shared interests with you and our father. And now, as an adult and completely unexpectedly, my wife has turned into a football fan. Maybe she's doing it for relationship-building reasons -- that sort of self-sacrifice is one of her sterling traits -- and maybe she just really enjoys the sport. I don't know.

So yes, I'm bitter. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't enjoy the damn thing, and more power to you. More power to anybody willing to pay the price of a car for a ticket to watch burly men slam into each other for three hours.

Evan, sure, good points. Teamwork, self-sacrifice, common-goal mentality: all laudable, and all overlooked by me. The need to beat people up? Not cool with me. I suppose it's better than assault in a parking lot, but then again a lot of things are. What are we teaching young boys when we show them agressive, angry, violent men making seven-figure salaries?

So sorry for being a bastard. Enjoy the game. All of you. And I'd still like to hear your arguments, if you are interested to make them.

De rotis nil disputandum.

...man, you had me worried, for a second I thought it was David Chalmers (Dave, Chalmers looks too similar)! Back to correct all of my mis-guided arguments from his phil of mind class and to tell me that my senior independent study paper had been passed to him and that I was "wrong, wrong, bloody F@c#ing wrong..."

Thank god it's only about football. so here's my 2 cents:

What about the teamwork and comradery that's promoted by sports such as football, hockey, rugby, and soccer. Team sports that require synchronized movement, observation and anticipation promote working together, self-sacrifice, and a common-goal mentality.

As for the violence: it's fun. Sometime you just need to hit things. Never have I been more calm and relaxed in everyday life as when I was playing rugby. It's quite possible I have a slight masochistic tendency and just need to get beat up every now and then to stay focused, but that's more of a personal thing. But I would much rather somebody have it out on the pitch then have it out on my face in a bar fight. When I watch a game there is a sense of being back in it. I have to settle for this sensation due to the fact that I can no longer play

Price: there are people with too much money, just look at cocaine.

Edited by author 01-27-2004 07:18 AM
OK, Dave, Chalmers:

First of all, I need to apologize. I've already apologized to you, Dave, on the telephone, but let me do it publicly and for the record. The post was bait. I had a longer post planned, but I decided to post the condescending one as a sort of perverse experiment to see who would respond and whether they'd bring up the issues I expected. I guessed a 70% likelihood that it would be Dave and a 30% likelihood that it would be Bob Mike. I don't, as a general rule, troll, but this was undeniably a troll, and I apologize for that. So let me present what I should have in the first place, a more reasoned argument.

Dave, you presented the two issues I expected would be raised, namely, the "It's a hobby" point and the "You buy scotch" point. And it's true: I have an expensive hobby. I have several, actually: along with the scotch, the list includes books, music, and gaming, the latter consisting predominantly of Magic: The Gathering. But in our culture scotch is the easier target, so I expected that would be the one brought up. I didn't actually expect you to go out and find a bottle of scotch as an example. That was cool. I wonder if you used ScotchFinder. And it's a good example: a very nice, very rare, very old bottle, even if RMW is always overpriced. You can get it for just (using that ironically) $1400 at LFW. But part of my aghastness was predicting how much higher the price would be driven. And it happened as I expected: the auction closed at $4,550, still not meeting the reserve price, which puts you into the price range of buying the Glenury Royal 50 that you found and the holy grail of malts enthusiasts, Black Bowmore. But as I find $800 per ticket absurd enough on its own, let's stick with that number for the discussion.

Here are my main objections.

1) The event is televised live, with better views of the game, for free, at least in terms of direct out-of-pocket expenses. It's even advertising free if you have a TiVo, which also gives you instant replay functionality, though I usually find the advertisements at least as engaging as the game. Dave, we talked about this on the telephone, and your position was, if I'm quoting you accurately, "There is no comparison for how it feels to be live at a sports game." For me that's not the case, but it's impossible to argue the point as it is entirely based on personal experience. It's a bit akin to the "stained glass" argument used as ammunition against nonreligious people: "It's like observing a stained glass window," the argument goes, on the topic of religion. "You think you see it from the outside, but you don't really see it until you're on the inside." So it's a trump against the unititiated, and that's fine, you can have that point, if for you there is indeed nothing that even compares with live attendence at a sporting event. I suppose one could make that argument for orgasm or, I presume, drug use, as things for which there is no parallel. I am a bit confused, then, at another of your claims, made in response to my disagreement with you that scotch appreciation was the closest example you could draw. You said something along the lines of "I completely disagree. I think they are as close as two disparate things could possibly be." Maybe your point was that there is nothing that even compares with tasting a rare scotch, a point you presumably would be making on my behalf, as you are not a scotch drinker. But I wouldn't make that claim: while I think the sensory experience of, say, a 1966 Balvenie or a 25 year old Springbank is certainly worthwhile, it is not without comparison. You can taste a Balvenie 12 or a Springbank 12 and fairly accurately imagine what the big brother will taste like, especially if you have the advantage of someone else's tasting notes. That's a comparison and an interpolation, something I would have thought possible while watching a football game live on a wide-screen TV, even with the added discomfort of eight hundred dollars stuffed into your pockets. Which brings me back around to my second point, which is

2) I don't think scotch appreciation is the best comparison you can draw. I think it's better mapped to my love of cinema. While there is indeed a mystique and an immediacy to viewing a film in a theater, I cannot possibly imagine spending $800 on a movie ticket, especially when I could watch it a few months later for less than $5, at home, in the comfort of my own living room, with an arguably better sound system, without people talking around me. All those points carry over to live sporting events, in my opinion, except that sports fans get to watch their events live, not months-delayed, and your average theatergoer does not have to worry about the drunken asshole behind you pouring a $12.50 Miller Lite down the back of your sweatshirt.

3) And then there's point 3, which I didn't even broach on the phone. It's a sensitive subject, and I am sincerely worried about hurting your feelings, so I'll try to tread delicately. I think that professional American football glorifies much that is objectionable in our society. An American football game is a glorification of, a sheer genuflective reverence of, tribalism, agression, violence, arrogance, anger, cut-throat competition, and crass commercialism. I feel this about many sports, but perhaps American football more than any other save hockey and prize fighting. I think you can see this reflected in the sporting events I do choose to watch: skateboard vert, women's billiards, and Olympic diving (I'll also watch much of the Olympic Games and the X Games over the few days per annum [or four anna] they are broadcast.) Scotch appreciation, on the other hand, I find a more -- a more something pursuit -- promoting a love of history, geography, respect for craftsmanship, sensory exploration, and connoisseurship. You may disagree. And a lot of people would agree with you. You might see football as glorifying, say, strategic reasoning, sheer visceral excitement, and statistics education. And you might see single malts consumptions as promoting substance abuse and elitism. I really don't know. (As for Magic, books, and music -- I especially don't know what would be found objectionable, which is part of my reason for expecting scotch to be the target of any counterargument.) The crass commercialism especially rears its ugly head during the Super Bowl, something that you brought up yourself, discussing $25+ parking, $6.75 hot dogs, and $2M commercials. The fact that this obscene price-gouging can itself be taken to justify spending $800 on a ticket seems perverse. If $6.75 for a hot dog is hard to imagine, shouldn't a reserve price of over $4,550 for a pair of tickets be even harder?

As my final point, until I hear your counterargument (until my riposte in my re-post, if you will), let me address Chalmer's question. If I had two Super Bowl tickets, wouldn't I sell them? You bet I would. I would take the $4,550 dollars, too, not claim that that's not enough money. My complaint isn't with the auction seller, it's with the culture that supports it. And thanks for joining in the discussion; I didn't even know you were a reader of mcgees.org. It's always nice to have even more exceptional readers. :-) (For the people out there who aren't Chalmers, Chalmers is a very talented student whom I supervised at Rockwell Scientific when he was a high school senior.)

Hey, just dropping a note.

True, it is a football game, but remember this is America. The land of freedom, plenty, and football. I, personally, am appalled at this utter nonsense; I'd rather just watch the game on TV. Actually, I wouldn't care much at all if I missed the game, which I most likely will. But think of it from another perspective. If you had tickets, wouldn't you sell them and watch the game at home, comfortably sitting on your couch? Ok. So maybe you would; maybe you wouldn't. But I've possibly rambled too much as it is. Gotta get back to writing my paper.

PS personally, I would never spend that much $$$ on a football game.
PPS I believe the US Open (tennis) does give the Super Bowl a run for its money; maybe not in gross revenue, but definitely in attendance.

You sound quite surprised about the cost of those tickets. Why is it so surprising? It's the biggest sports event in the United States. Tickets to regular season football games average over $50 a piece (with Arizona not surprisingly bringing the average way down). It's no surprise to me that a ticket to the Super Bowl would easily sell for $800 or more. 30 second commercials during the telecast cost more than 2 million dollars. A hot dog probably costs $6.75. Parking is going to be $25 at least. It's definitely a luxury, but it doesn't seem extreme to me.

In a few years, when the Colts play the 49ers in the Super Bowl I'm there, regardless of ticket price.* For some, it's a hobby that they're willing to spend money on. I don't see how it's any more or less ridiculous than any other hobby.

Like this particular bottle of scotch. While I'm not presuming that you personally would go buy this, what, $1700 bottle for yourself, I'm wondering: if you had the disposable income, mightn't you like to have a bottle this rare, this nice? I wouldn't see that as a ridiculous expenditure; it's something you enjoy, it's not everyday, so why not?

The Super Bowl is arguably the biggest annual event in sports anywhere (only because the World Cup is played every four years.) I hope to be able to attend one in my lifetime, and I'd be willing to spend the money to do so. This cost doesn't surprise me at all.


*this is assuming that at some point in my life I make an income

Thanks, Amanda, that was great.

Things are going well down here. I know I haven't updated in a while. Shame on me.

The weather is gorgeous, but we're getting to the windy season. Lawn furniture was blowing around last night.

Hello Josh!

Something you (and fellow users of the blog) might find interesting:

The results of the 2nd British blog awards-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/weblogs/s...024,1108883,00.html

Hope all is well with you and Jenn and Niall. Please tell me you are enjoying the sunshine..."You mean it RAINS in Seattle?"

-Amanda Skellenger

So here's a question for you: If a law pertains to everybody, but only affects a minority, is it wrong?

http://education.guardian.co.uk/schoolswor...062,1108962,00.html

Knee-jerk reactionary legislation really pisses me off, you know...

The Math Song - Darkest of the Hillside Thickets

Y=(X/5)...
5^Psi
Psi is the square root of 3
3 is the number for me

I said...
(x[tan n]) - (pi/10) = -9
-9 is so fine.

You got a brain and nobody really needs another love song
You got a brain and nobody really needs another love song
You got a brain and nobody really needs another love song
You got a brain and nobody really needs another love song

N=(V[cos3])^3 + 44
and not an integer more
baby

V = 101+(83/5)-1

What is the value of Y?

You got a brain and nobody really needs another love song
You got a brain and nobody really needs another love song
You got a brain and nobody really needs another love song
You got a brain and nobody really needs another love song

da da da da da DA! da da da da da DA! no mo re so ft mo NEY! no mo re so ft mo NEY!

ok, you two have a wierd thing about sentence structure and modifiers...it must be a brother thing

Or a magazine, the name of which we're expected to understand, while we're asleep. Sort of like saying "the paper" when you mean the Times of London (or the NYT or the LA Times or....)

Edited by author 12-10-2003 04:26 AM
Re: /m57--

Did he mean that we could find him in issues 17 and 19 of a magazine entitled "While You Were Sleeping," or did he mean that we can find him in a publication called "The Magazine," but only while we're asleep?

Also, I think that when he said "hillarious" he was making fun of your middle name.

I did not startle myself at all by garnering a score of 1 out of 10, getting the response "Did you even know the Commonwealth existed?" to which my candid reply was "Actually, no..."

I hadn't even heard of either of these -- Man of the Hour and Lost Dogs -- until just now. I'm so glad they released a rarities album instead of a lame "Best of". How I can be so far out of the loop is beyond me, so thanks for the pointer. I cannot wait to hear these both, especially all the unreleased stuff on Lost Dogs, but I've promised Jenn I won't buy any media for myself before Christmas. So Jenn, if you're reading....

(I'm glad that the song Wash will be getting more exposure: in my opinion, one of the most under-rated Pearl Jam songs ever. There are some major omissions on the disc -- Leatherman comes to mind -- but I suppose they had to make it fit on two discs.)

Edited by author 11-30-2003 01:08 PM
Man of the Hour is the song that was recorded for Big Fish. iTunes was advertising it as an exclusive track on their site, so it might not have been released anywhere else yet. It's good; I'm curious to see how it meshes with the movie.

I did see the preview, and I'm looking forward to it. As is often the case, it featured a pair of songs that aren't actually going to be in the movie (Danny Elfman's scores for Black Beauty and Edward Scissorhands), which always annoys me. I'm a soundtrack nut, though, so it might not make such a big difference to anyone else. Angriest movie moment of 2003: Hearing the Requim for a Dream score in the ad for Lord of the Rings. GAAARRRGGGHHHH!

In regards to Lost Dogs, I have only one thing to say: Dirty Frank Dahmer, he's a gourmet cook, yeah!

I also purchased the bootleg for the concert I went to... July 8th, Madison Square Garden. Yes-- it definitely holds up. Three discs, baby. They played for three hours straight. It was incredible.

I haven't heard Man of the Hour yet, but:

1) I did purchase Pearl Jam's new 2-disc set "Lost Dogs" featuring 30ish b-sides and rarities. It's got some stuff that I had never heard before, and I'm enjoying it immensely.

2) I saw the theatrical preview for "Big Fish" and thought it had the potential to be incredible. The footage from the film is hauntingly beautiful. Then I heard that Pearl Jam had recorded an original song for it, and I was sold. The preview does show more than I wish it had, so avoid it if you're touchy about that stuff.

By the way, this is probably a foolish question, but have you heard Man of the Hour yet? Yipes, it's good.

You are correct, sir. I shortened the time period so that I wouldn't feel quite so old.

Mike, it was more than a few years ago. I think it was about seven years ago that it happened, if I remember.

My only gripe with 06/03/03 is that there was one last performance that didn't make it onto the CD. The final song of the night was Rockin' in the Free World, with Jack Irons taking the drums from Matt, who moved to guitar, and it was as sweet as music has ever been. Matt is wasted on the drums. He's a great drummer, but he absolutely tore that guitar up. I would have loved to have gotten that on CD, but it wasn't included for some reason.

Don't feel so bad about the word thing. A few years ago, I spent about thirty seconds trying to figure out what I was looking at during one of my walks. It seemed familiar, and I knew that I should recognize it. Eventually, it dawned on me that I was staring at a leaf.

Yes, I did. Thanks. I think I got both Irvine concerts, the San Diego concert, the Mansfield concert with the acoustic set, and the March 3 Tokyo show. I also noticed, now that you brought it up, that I have listed none of these on my CD collection page. I'll fix that.

(You ever suddenly forget an English word? I typed the word 'brought' and it looked so funny to me, I had to look it up to make sure I spelled it correctly. It's a word that I, of course, have been using since early childhood.)

Sometimes, after seeing a concert, I wonder if the music was really as amazing as I thought it was, or if it was just the effect of being there with so many excited people that made it sound so good. After downloading 06/03/03: North America - #42 - Irvine off of Apple Music, I can now safely say that Pearl Jam's live work holds up to repeated listening. I don't know if you've gotten your hands on the concert that you went to, but I suggest that you do, if you haven't.

Filthy WoTC and their Type II. We hates it. We hates the wizardses. They took the type I from us. Dirty, filthy, tricksy wizardses.

(I have lost my mind)

Yeah, I heard about this. Somebody posted it to my scotch discussion page, actually. The reason is quite simple: the Japanese make some very good whisky. They have been trying intensively for 70 years. Japanese companies also own several whisky interests in Scotland, including the Morrison-Bowmore company, a further source for Scottish whisky expertise.

By the way, the guy on MetaFilter who "blame[d] the scots for switching to continuous distillation methods" is an idiot. It's not true, and the fact that an uniformed person is all too keen to jump into the fray with misinformation is one of the main reasons I've stopped reading MetaFilter. I have, however, set the record straight (read my message on the page posted at 1:34 AM on November 26.)

Josh,

I figured that if anyone would know the answer to this, it would be you: How did this happen?

Edited by author 11-05-2003 03:22 PM
OK, http://www.mcgees.org/img/babypictures/. So there.

I don't want to nag, but....
You still have more pictures of Mika on your website than of Niall.

Hello all!

Josh,

The new e-mail address is askellen@earthlink.net.

Yes, we are happy up here but getting settled takes what seems to be forever. Of course all we want to do is explore, which doesn't leave much time for unpacking.

Give my best to Jenn -- Aidan too was a fast birth but was dehydrated upon coming home as well. A case of jaundice developed and peaked in his first week of life, so the first few weeks were all about trying to get the poor bugger to eat because he was so lethargic.

I'll send a quick picture on over to your e-mail address. Keep in touch.

-Amanda

Amanda, great to hear from you. It has been a long time!

Yes, we did see the Crib Notes (for "outsiders", that's the birth announcements section of our alumni magazine.) I had misplaced your email address, though, so couldn't write to wish you well.

Great name you chose. We were actually thinking about Aidan ourselves.

Hope you and Scott are happy in the Northewest.

- Josh

HELLO! I think a congratulations to you and Jenn is in order! I haven't visited your site in a long time so I was so surprised to see a birth announcement!!!! What a beautiful boy.

Welcome to the club...I don't know if you saw the Crib Notes in the Summer '03 issue of CLU Magazine but my son was born Sept. 13th of last year. He is now 13+ months old, and the sucking and farting hasn't stopped. If anything that gets more vigorous. hee hee. His name is Aidan Miles. Picked an Irish name way ahead of time, and he came out with red hair and blue eyes (and the tenacity to match). Of course since Scott and I both have dark brown hair, that was a bit of a shock.

Anyway, I could go on and on, but if I remember correctly I could hardly see straight in the first few weeks of being a new parent so I will spare your eyes the strain. Unfortunately we relocated to the Seattle area last month (Bainbridge Island, specifically) otherwise little Aidan and Niall could meet. Best wishes!!! And Happy 1st Halloween to Niall.

- Amanda (Eaves) Skellenger
  CLU Class of '99

Edited by author 10-27-2003 04:55 PM
I caught the "sitting on her right" bit, too. That's just a mistake. I wonder if the film was flipped for some reason.

While we're on mistakes, Uma has a Japanese accent that too my ear is quite good in her discussions with Hattori Hanzo. I assume she had a great dialect coach. But in her voiceovers, which presumably did not have the advantage of a coach, she mispronounces Nippon and Tokyo.

Also, why haven't I seen Julie Dreyfus before? I do expect to see her henceforth. Maybe she'll get a chance to play
Kristen Davis's sister (perhaps with Monica Bellucci as a third.) By the way, did you notice that she was also credited as the Tokyo casting agent?

Josh-

I also loved Kill Bill. In the same manner as you, I absolutely loved it. I can't remember the last time a movie excited me so much. I went back and watched it again. At full price. Which around here is £10. Which is like $16. A little ridiculous it may seem, but I actually am having to restrain myself from going back.

Now I will discuss two errors in the movie. I know this is e-mailed to people who may not have seen it, so don't keep reading.

The two errors that bothered me: Uma says she is trying to "will her muscles out of entropy." She means "atrophy." She's supposed to be magnificently brilliant badass, surely this is just an error, not QT being clever.

The other is that Uma says "the girl sitting on her right" when the girl is, indeed, sitting on her left. (not that smart people can't confuse directions, he added, remembering who reads these posts!)

Adam, "Is she presenting these alphabetically?" Sean Davis, "Apparently not." Andrew, "But Sean Davis is the exception, at least in these first few." Anthony, "Totally agreed." Emmanuel, "It's possible that they are alphabetical by last name." Sean Yang, "I think that my inclusion this early in the list sort of limits that possibility." Matthew "Perhaps there is no organizing principle." Elizabeth, "That seems likely." Alyssa, "As the outcast from the "A-Team", I move to suggest "no organizing principle"." Viviana, "I second that motion." Yesenia, "But at least they are bookended correctly."

Adam, "How is he doing? Is he a crybaby?" Sean Davis, "Does the baby love to drink milk?" Andrew, "Your baby grandson went to bed in the crib and you gave him a bottle." Anthony, "The baby is really cute." Emmanuel, "Dear Baby, Are you going to be mean to your parents?" Sean Yang, "Dear Niall, You're cute and I want to meet you. Joshua and Jennifer, I hope you come to visit us at Emperor School." Matthew "I hope the baby has a very good week. My Grandmother has made a baby blanket for him. I hope you like it." Elizabeth, "The baby is cute." Alyssa, "Niall is a very good baby and when he grows up I hope he will be a father." Viviana, "He can have a dream when he's growing up, playing basketball." Yesenia, "It's a cute little baby. I like his name."

Baby! Very cute. Congratulations to you both, and to the extended family.

His favorite activities at present are sucking and farting

As they say in one of my favorite Twilight Zone episodes, people really are the same all over.

::smoking cigar:: GOOD JOB!!!

So... is somebody eventually going to get around to getting me a nephew? Or what? Stop dilly-dallying and get on with it. Sheesh.

I thought it had to be, so I clicked through a couple levels, expecting at a certain point to be told something like "See, this is how they took advantage of you the first time around. Don't be so gullible." But that didn't happen. Instead there is a PayPal link to send them 20 bucks.

Re: The Rip-Off Revenge

Are you sure it's not a joke? It really must be a joke. Right?

Nope, that was me, not Jenn. Somebody forgot to sign out of QT.... :-)

Not to mention Riefenstahl, but that was Monday....

I was shocked about Lindh: the initial police report had said that her wounds were "serious but not life-threatening."

Did you see the whole obituaries page today? Not just Teller, but Johnny Cash, John Ritter, Charles Bronson, Marie Foster (civil rights activist) and Sweden's foreign minister.

Egads.

No, Josh, you weren't being too harsh when you said that Teller died 60 years too late. If only, if only. I believe that this man will ultimately be responsible for more deaths than Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot combined.

This man was responsible for the weapon that, unless we are very very careful and lucky, will destroy human life on this planet.

At least most of the guys that worked on Manhattan wished they hadn't done it, afterward. Too little too late, yes. But something, anyway. Some shred of recognition that what they had done was terrible.

And to tell you the truth, I find it no surprise that President Bush recently awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Birds of a feather, I guess.

I'll pay the $36. Skip Boston and come visit me, dweeb.

It's a little late but I find it amazing that I've seen 30 of IMDB's bottom 100 movies.

Combining the two most recent entries on your site. This makes everything more fun.

π4*2Ẫ4B̉-C̃4 (Ċ3+Χ2) D̃-G̉4 (±Ğ2) H̀4 (–H́2.3,=*2)

There ya go!

What field of study?

Portuguese Literature.

I'll send an e-mail with my mailing address to collect my $5.

I found a Random TinyURL prize: http://tinyurl.com/b9ph -- note particularly the groups in which he chose to post.

Oh, yeah - 16 of the worst 100. If you live long enough you will see many, too. Some of them can be accounted for by admitting that I spent several summers watching old black and white movies on tv while I was being paid to babysit.

I have seen 8 of the top 10, 60 of the top 100, 161 of the top 250. This does not count those I slept through, the ones I saw so long ago that I have forgotten them, or the ones I walked out on. This is fun.

Number of IMDB Top 10 films I've seen: 7 (It would be nine but I can't say I paid all that much attention when I saw the Godfather I and in true Jenn fashion I fell asleep during part II).

Number of Top 100 films: 52
Number of Top 250 films: 94

Number of Bottom 100 films: 6 as whole movies and 2 on MST.

The number of IMDB Top 10 Films I have seen: 6 (60%)
The number of IMDB Top 100 Films I have seen: 29 (29%)
The number of IMDB Top 250 Films I have seen: 63 (25%)


Bottom 100: 6 (6%)

I'm not a big movie watcher, but I do fall victim to whatever is on cable while I'm doing housework!

Amal

The number of IMDB Top 10 Films I have seen: 8 (80%)
The number of IMDB Top 100 Films I have seen: 49 (49%)
The number of IMDB Top 250 Films I have seen: 100 (40%)


Bottom 100: 15 (15%)

In response to your August 18 post:

The number of IMDB Top 10 Films I have seen: 0 (0%)
The number of IMDB Top 100 Films I have seen: 7 (7%)
The number of IMDB Top 250 Films I have seen: 20 (8%)

The number of IMDB Bottom 100 Films I have seen: 9 (9%)

-Jordon Kalilich
http://www.theworldofstuff.com

Speaking of good band names, Anonymous Wiki Contributor?

Not among them.

Good grief! Most of those insults would make excellent band names. I have a hard time even picking a favorite. "flouting milksops" is good. "scoffing braggarts" is also awesome. Maybe, just maybe, "woodcock slangams" is my favorite. But they're all good.

Josh: You need to read "Fast Food Nation" by Eric Schlosser. I know it's been on your "read soon list" but it's time to kick it up to the front of the queue.

Weird list, man.

The "star and shoes" thing... I would guess it's referencing Luigi's Mansion on the GameCube. A kids' game. Which would also account for the syntax and diction.

Lame like Feldon, dude.

Pearl Jam has just left Sony Music. From now on, their plan is to release all of their new music on the internet.

oh..and josh, first line goes "The PowellsBooks newsletter has a bizarre and addictive "

Hey David...I'm ganna be in NYC at the end of the month, drop me your info and we could do lunch or something...

evangoepfert@cox.net

Hey David...I'm ganna be in NYC at the end of the month, drop me your info and we could do lunch or something...

OK, Josh. It's time for you to post again.

My first line: "The PowellsBooks newsletter has a bizarre and addictive feature called, and I'm"

The pictures are fine with me now... the page loaded really quickly. Perhaps the delays that I assumed were from the Magic Card images were from that recursive mail loop?

When you ride alone, you ride with bin laden by bill maher...i highly recommend it. funny with some great ideas. one of those "i may not agree with everything in it, but i am a better person for being exposed to the idea" kinda books

The Matrix Reloaded, to quote Bob Mike, "rules my jewels."

Cryptonomicon is one of my favorite novels ever. I cannot recommend it too highly. There's also Zodiac to add to your Stephenson list if you haven't read it yet: not his best, but quite good nonetheless.

I've only tried reading one Gibson book: Virtual Light, I think, and that was some years ago. I couldn't really get into it at that point. I should try to pick it up again.

I've only recently started to get back into cyberpunk. Snow Crash, Diamond Age...hell, if Neil Stephenson writes it, I'll read it (in the middle of Cryptonomicon). My reading time is pretty cut by other hobbies, so the progress is not fast as I'd like. I'll have to remember Altered Carbon and I would pay double the normal movie price to see a good movie version of Snow Crash (I wouldn't be surprised or disappointed if it was animated).

Edited by author 05-15-2003 10:35 PM
Evan,

I can't wait to see Matrix Reloaded. I'm really looking forward to it.

I just got the Powells.com newsletter in which they recommend the cyberpunk novel Altered Carbon by Richard K. Morgan: "This debut novel effortlessly blends the techno-fetish of William Gibson, the hardboiled detective narrative of Dashiell Hammett and the rapid-fire heroic bloodshed of the films of John Woo. If you enjoy such cyberpunk classics as Snow Crash and Neuromancer, Altered Carbon deserves a space on your reading list."

Have you read it?

(Regarding the "too deep" comment: Here's hoping for a great, authentic film of Snow Crash. Any takers?)

holy crap on a crap-cracker: matrix reloaded rocked my world last night!!!

Cyberpunk as a genre just flat-out kicks butt, and the matrix shows what sticking to cyberpunk can pull off. By not making everything typically hollywood action the W bros have taken cyberpunk in the movies to a completely new level with no sign of slowing down.

I will grant that the matrix doesn't fit every aspect of the genre...but hey, what really does? And i think it gives producers a reason to look at some other cyberpunk scripts that they might previously have thought to be "too deep" for a major production.

Matrix=too much metal for one hand!!!!

Dad-

It's possible that I misquoted you, I'm sorry if I did.

I wrote a long post and deleted it. I don't want to be offensive, and it was really coming off snarky.

I'll just say "Yeah, what Josh said" and leave it at that.

Edited by author 05-14-2003 04:21 PM

More than one tribe [of Native Americans] has creation legends which describe people as vegetarian, living in a kind of Garden of Eden. A Cherokee legend describes humans, plants, and animals as having lived in the beginning in "equality and mutual helpfulness". The needs of all were met without killing one another. When man became aggressive and ate some of the animals, the animals invented diseases to keep human population in check. The plants remained friendly, however, and offered themselves not only as food to man, but also as medicine, to combat the new diseases.

                    - Rita Laws, Ph.D., Native Americans and Vegetarianism

Edited by author 05-14-2003 04:02 PM
There's a scene in Hedwig and the Angry Inch where Hedwig and Tommy are rocking out to a song that they'd written together, and then Hedwig realizes that Tommy got the lyrics wrong. Hedwig flies off the handle, exclaiming that the song that they'd written together had been perfect, but then Tommy fucked it up. I imagine that Jesus must feel that way whenever he reads anything that Paul wrote.

In any religion that values meekness and turning the other cheek, one wonders why anyone would accuse someone of weakness based on their choice of diet. I find it doubtful that, as he allowed himself to be lead away painfully executed for the sins of others, Jesus hoped that his followers would have the strength of conviction to set aside their vegetable-based diets and consume the flesh of factory-farmed animals. He probably had bigger things on his mind at the time. On the other hand, I wasn't there, so who knows?

Paul, in my view, was a bully who enjoyed picking on those that he perceived as weaker than himself. Let's not forget how the man started his career: Persecuting Christians. After God knocked him off his ass (literally), he realized that there was something bigger and stronger than him, and so he quickly fell into line (as bullies tend to do). Turns out, though, that he was still able to get his kicks by taking shots at gays and (apparently) vegetarians. This could be why, in non-Christian groups, Paul has a reputation for being the most hateful and backward of the apostles.

Of course, all of this assumes that the Bible is completely on the level. I'm Christian, and I consider a good 75% of the things in the book to be either irrelevant or bullshit. I also eat meat, so it's not as though I'm attempting to debunk Paul in an attempt to get anyone over to my camp. I've just never liked the guy. Much like half of my high school science class, he could hang out with the teacher all day without learning a damn thing.

On the other hand, we live in a country where we invoke the name of Jesus before we drop millions of tons of bombs on another nation, so maybe I've been approaching this whole Christianity thing from the wrong direction. Way to turn the other cheek, America! Christianity is in desperate need of a tune-up.

Thanks for joining the discussion. It's valuable to have such a diametrically opposed opinion in the debate.

Your points:

1) That meat consumption has positive socio-economic effects: True. There are many jobs that derive from the meat consumption industry. But this statement is misleading in some ways. If people stopped eating meat, they wouldn't start eating nothing. They would still eat vegetables, fruits, legumes, processed foods, etc., all of which would need to be grown, transported, packaged, and sold. So just because we would have no job for meat packers any longer, there is no reason why they couldn't work at, say, a tofu factory.

Second, you are aware that this is the exact same argument leveled by supporters of human slavery two centuries ago, right? Just because something costs more doesn't mean its wrong. In fact, frequently the things that cost more are the things that are more ethically sound (think shoes and clothes made in non-sweatshop conditions, organic produce, hybrid cars.) So even if elimination of meat consumption would have a ripple effect through the economy, it might still be worthwhile.

2) The Bible stuff: Here are the references for the verses you threw out:

[H]ave dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth., Gen 1:28

For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs., Rom 14:2

There is also Acts 10:9-13, which overturns kosher laws:

Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour: And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance, And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

A vegetarian arguing from theological grounds might quote Gen 1:29, arguing that later laws were corruptions of the original command for vegetarianism:

And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

But it is really just intellectual masturbation for me to parry your Bible verses with more Bible verses. The fact is that I think the entire basis is unsound. With another nod to David Cross, that's the worst, slash worst, slash worst again part about a theological basis for ethics: it encourages intellectual laziness. No need to actually wrestle with the tough moral issues, just see if it's adressed in The Book. And when you are dealing with a religious framework as convoluted and self-contradictory as that of Judeo-Christianity, you can pretty much prove anything you set out to do.

I don't agree with PETA extremists either (is PITA perhaps "People for the Irrational Treatment of Animals"? Or is it just a confusion with their preferred bread for hummus? ;-) But one doesn't have to agree that animals are equal to believe that animals are deserving of compassion. And one wonders exactly how much stewardship of creation is going on when you pull a veal calf from its mother immediately upon birth and place it in a crate so small that it cannot turn around. That doesn't sound like stewardship. That sounds like exploitation.

A very slight bit of ad hominem argument: if we have "not honored and cared for animals for which we are responsible", as you say, then it is specifically a reality of your sinfullness if you do not exclusively choose organic, free-range, kosher-slaughtered beef. If you turn a blind eye to this aspect, you are not only turning a blind eye to what I advocate against, you're turning a blind eye to what you advocate against.

Back to you.

P.S. What did you mean by "Consumption" being the operative word. Can "consumption" be separated from "process"?

(My father responded to that statement with something like "The cells of your steak weren't conscious." I have no idea what that argument is supposed to mean, and I told him so.)

Dave;

Thanks for attributing the above quote to me, but I didn't say it and have no idea what it would mean either. Now I wonder what I did say.

I have no problem believing that we disagree on the topic of meat consumption. "Consumption" being the operative word. Can "consumption" be separated from "process"?

I do not advocate for the substandard treatment of animals. (Can one say "inhumane" if they're not human?) I am also aware of the conditions of slaughter houses. But I do have a couple of rationale (other that the conscious level of the meat) when I eat meat:

1) Socio-economics. The process of raising meat producing animals, growing feed, transportation, packaging, sales, etc provide jobs for thousands of people in our society. If we all stopped eating meat it would be a terrible blow to our economy.

2) Theological. (This one should be more fun!) I believe that God placed non-human animals on the earth to serve humanity. (No puns about being "served" to humanity) I don't believe that humans and other animals are equal, unlike some fanatics from PITA. Humanity is called to be "stewards" of all Creation which include the "lesser" animals.

Have we fulfilled that function? No. In many ways we have polluted the air, soil and water. We have not honored and cared for animals for which we are responsible. That is a reality of our sinfullness.

Still, that is our calling. We still have free will to choose to do better in our own lives and encourage others to do the same.

But, when it comes to eating meat, I believe that is ordained by God.

An interesting note: In the New Testament there were those who thought they should be vegetarian for religious reasons. Paul refered to them as the "weak".

This is long enough.

Peace

Yes, very good! I especially like the link to Dr. Strangelove.

Not to gloat (much), but this showed up on mcgees.org on February 26th ;-). I found it through Metafilter, but I didn't credit Metafilter at the time, so, Metafilter, consider yourself credited. :-p

http://www.coxar.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

it's so good i just had to share! Just make sure you're paying attention.

Edited by author 05-08-2003 02:24 AM
"why are fish always the exception to vegetarian diets?"

well, here's my personal answer, which is the best i can give you:

my vegetarianism is not based on "meat is murder" so much as "really, people, there is no reason to cause intense suffering to these animals over their entire lifetimes so that we can eat meat at every meal". frankly, it is the high levels of consumption of meat in america that lead to the factory farming principles that i find most abhorrent. because of the way animals are treated through out their lives, yes, but also because of their environmental effects and their unjustifiable, to myself at least, consumption of resources. (i can go into detail on that if anyone cares to ask.)

fish don't have a lot of these disadvantages. they are killed to be consumed, yes. do i see that as a negative thing? yes. do i see it as negative as lifetime suffering? no. do i think degrees matter greatly in morality? yes. do i expect everyone to agree with me on this? no.

the environmental arguement here is also one of degrees. yes, overfishing is a problem, as is fish farming, which i don't support, and i try not to eat fish on specific lists of endagered/overfished species.

yet, why eat fish at all? you know, truth be told, i can't really justify it, and i've been trying to phase it out of my life except in special occasion situations, because eaten that way it's impact is very minimal. and i mostly have. but, damn, i really love seafood. almost as much as i loved peppersteak...sigh...

it's all about what you can give up in the end i suppose. i don't believe in the programs a lot of my taxes are going to and think i could do better by just donating the money to charities and public maintenainc funds that i belive in. will i do this? no. i don't want to go to jail. i'm selfish like that. are there things morally that i have qualms about with eating fish? yes. but i still want to eat it a couple times a year. i'm selfish like that too. and i guess i'm ok with that...which, incidentally, is why i would never tell someone they should be vegan/vegetarian/not eat red meat. just that they should ask themselves the questions and make sure they are ok with their answers.

Edited by author 05-07-2003 06:14 PM
1) The Onion is as funny as a room full of midgets and monkeys squardancing: and it never gets old!

2) Why are fish always the exception to vegatarian diets? Is being pulled from your habitat by a hook through your mouth any more humane than the wonderous "thud" of a sledge on your temple?

3) Bill Gates is under no moral obligation to give his money to anyone: welcome to capitalism. He's taxed (ostensibly) just like everyone else for the government services and protection provided. Many of which he doesn't use. It's nice if he chooses to donate money, many people would benefit and appreciate it. It's a polite thing to do.

The teen-ager who doesn't give up his seat is certainly a brat, but the physical proximity to a situation doesn't make it anything more thant a nice/polite thing to do.

Giving money to a begger is a nice thing to do, but it's in no way manditory. They cleary require the money more than I do, but it's still my money. I worked for it; the fruit of my labor is mine to dispense how I will. I give to certain causes, I could afford to give even more. But I don't. I don't think anybody looks down on me for it, nor would I look down on anybody else.

Now, I'm all about the government funding programs: welfare, medical care, social security, job traiing, scholarship, loans, etc. So tax me for it. I'm fine with that, I gain a benefit of being a citizen. I already get nice roads, police, fire, public schools, and the additional benefit of everybody else being at a higher standard of living, thus making my life easier to live. I jump up and down screaming at the TV every time there's a proposed tax cut (esp during an expensive war). So please, tax my ass, for what I gain it's so little to pay.

As for meat: you're all nicer than I am. Cows, chickens, pigs, and other misc beasts appreaciate what you do. On the other hand, fish find you all hypocrites and believe you should all be ashamed. I don't eat fish at all: they love me. So I guess I'm about as much of a vegitarian as you all are.

David, thanks for the take on NYC. I'm probably going to be making a visit out there in a few months, I'll try to get in touch w/ you before i head out, maybe we can get to gether for dinner or something.

From the same issue of The Onion:

8-Year-Old Forced To Eat Organic Macaroni And Cheese
SAUSALITO, CA—In spite of his distaste for Annie's Homegrown Mac & Cheese, area 8-year-old Josh Remmert was forced by his mother to eat an entire plate of the organic pasta for lunch Tuesday. "I like Kraft Mac & Cheese a lot better, but Mom says it's all processed and got artificial stuff in it," Remmert said. "At least it's the right color. The cheese in this stuff isn't even orange." To help wash down the all-natural pasta, Remmert was given a choice between carrot juice and vanilla-flavored Rice Dream.

Why does The Onion time everything so perfectly?

Most of my friends are vegetarian. My girlfriend only eats fish. I'm in favor of people eating whatever the Hell they feel like, but I seldom feel like eating red meat.

I agree that animals should be treated humanely before they're slaughtered. Generally speaking, if the food you get is kosher, you don't have much to worry about in this regard (and kosher chicken is delicious).

Hey Becca--

No you're really Josh's sister-in-law; you're kinda-not-really my sister-in-law.

Welcome to the board!

~Dave

hiya everybody.

Well, for those of you who don't know me, I'm Josh's sister-in-law, kinda, and I've been a mostly vegetarian (with lapses to be discussed later) for three years.

First, I second Josh's suggestion that anyone interested in this topic and looking to challenge the way our society generally views and thinks about the consumption of animal flesh should read Eric Marcus's excerpt and also John Robbins' <i>The Food Revolution<i>. They present very compelling arguements for a plant based diet. (Robbins' book also discusses the commercial usage of genetically modified organisms and that whatever their promise to help mankind might be, they are currently used mainly to sell toxic weedkillers, and how their effects upon release into the environment cannot truly be forseen, but that's a whole other issue...)

As for the whole situationally relevant morality of eating meat, I completely agree with Josh here. I think it is exactly because we live lives of comparitive luxury (to be able to choose which foods we will eat instead of surviving off what we must) that we should be compeled to examine what impact those choices have on the world and the animals we are eating. I personally would never tell someone they should starve rather than eat a steak or drink cow's milk.

But why would you contribute to an industry which damages the enviornment if you don't have to? Why would you choose to eat animals who have been tortured their whole lives and then often inhumanely slaughtered? Why would you sacrifice your own personal health, as links to colon cancer and heart disease in flesh based diets are fairly solid?

I think these are questions that everyone that has a choice of what they can eat has a responsibility to ask themselves. Ultimately, I couldn't come up with answers good enough to justify continuing to eat meat in the way that we do.

Now, here are my exceptions. For a period of five months in Nepal, I was not vegetarian. Meat there is eaten ceremoniously (monthly) at best, for most families cannot afford it regularly. It is from pasture raised animals whose dung is often used as fertilizer or fuel. Here animals raised for food contributed to a healthy environment, as far as I could see, and did not suffer. Then, there is my fish exception. For reasons I may get to later but this post is too long, I occasionally eat fish and other seafood. In someways it comes down to a rarity issue and a lower environmental impact issue, in someways it's for ease and in someways it's for personal enjoyment, and not all of these are things i'm proud of.

anyway, i guess my moral here: i don't think eating animal flesh is wrong in and of itself for sustenance, but the industry as it exists (in america especially) is damaging and increases unneccessary suffering, and as members of a consumerist society where what we buy can have almost as much power as who we vote for, i can't justify voting in support of the meat industry.

~becca

I'm glad that last argument was raised... when I was explaining my poor usage of "moral" I was going to add that I don't think it's wrong for anyone to use animal products, using our African farmer (or something very similar) as an example. I left him out, yet here he is.

Whew.

Evan,

Regarding the starving student life in New York City--

Some things you should know.

It is very expensive to live here. A good rule is to take whatever you pay for anything, and add 50%. This will add up to you always feeling as if you are being ripped off.

Rent prices blow. I'm paying $675 a month to share a room. It can get cheaper the longer your commute. You can get a great place in Brooklyn for less, but it's all about the opportunity cost. I love living in Manhattan.

Dude, you can get anything delivered. I got a chocolate sundae delivered once, for real. With walnuts.

The weather is... interesting. It's not so much of a hassle. It gets cold and shitty and hot, muggy and shitty. But really, we're spoiled living in Southern California, and it can only build character.

Or give us something fun to complain about.

I love it here, man. This place rocks.

Mike,

It's OK, it doesn't cost me anything to get the DVDs from Netflix (other than the monthly service charge.) Thanks for the offer, though. Netflix says that the publisher is planning to release season three in the future.

Evan,

If Bill Gates said "The substinence farmer in Africa shouldn't have to donate money to charity, so I don't see why I should," would you find the argument as valid? Or how about the physically fit high schooler who said "My grandmother doesn't have to give up her seat on the subway to people on crutches, so I don't see why I should have to"?

I don't grant your implicit assumption that all ethical rules need to be the same for everyone. It is precisely because it "easy for us to talk about the rights of animals" that we should talk about the rights of animals. The advantaged have the ability to reduce the suffering in the world with relatively little sacrifice. It would be a shame if they passed up that chance.

I still have yet to find any argument on the suffering of animals compelling, but then I haven't really sought one out. Nor do I plan to. It’s easy for us to talk about the rights of animals when all of us can choose what we eat. But I’m not about to tell a subsistence farmer in Africa that he needs to stop drinking his cows’ milk because it’s morally wrong to do so. Nor will I tell him that the milk he drinks isn’t good for him because it wasn’t meant for him. The fact is cows and other animals turn things we can’t eat (grass, weeds, etc.) into things we can (milk, and well themselves…meat).

While I accept that the farmer and I are under completely different circumstances I cannot accept that anything is more right for him than it is for me. Should this farmer feel some sort of guilt for what he’s doing to this poor cow, even if it is out of necessity?

Josh,

I could have loaned you the DVD set. It contains seasons one and two, which is unfortunate, because the best stuff in the series comes after that.

Mike,

Yes, David played SUYFB for me over the Christmas holiday, and I loved it, so I went out and purchased it for myself. I enjoyed the short portions of Mr. Show that I saw. I didn't know they were available on DVD: I've added them to my Netflix queue.

In other news, thank God that we weren't able to stop Bush's war on Iraq. Things could have gotten ugly.

Josh,

I didn't know that you had heard Shut Up You Fucking Baby (which is where I assume you got the David Cross quote). Are you a Mr. Show fan, as well? I have the first two seasons on DVD, if you haven't seen them yet.

David,

Then an old man, a keeper of an inn, said, "Speak to us of Eating and Drinking."
And he said:
Would that you could live on the fragerance of the earth, and like an air plant be sustained by the light.
But since you must kill to eat, and rob the young of its mother's milk to quench your thirst, let it then be an act of worship,
And let your board stand an altar on which the pure and the innocent of forest and plain are sacrificed for that which is purer and still more innocent in many.
When you kill a beast say to him in your heart,
"By the same power that slays you, I to am slain; and I too shall be consumed.
For the law that delivered you into my hand shall deliver me into a mightier hand.
Your blood and my blood is naught but the sap that feeds the tree of heaven."
And when you crush an apple with your teeth, say to it in your heart,
"Your seeds shall live in my body,
And the buds of your tomorrow shall blossom in my heart,
And your fragrance shall be my breath,
And together we shall rejoice through all the seasons."
And in the autumn, when you gather the grapes of your vineyard for the winepress, say in you heart,
"I to am a vinyard, and my fruit shall be gathered for the winepress,
And like new wine I shall be kept in eternal vessels."
And in winter, when you draw the wine, let there be in your heart a song for each cup;
And let there be in the song a remembrance for the autumn days, and for the vineyard, and for the winepress.
- Khalil Gibran, Book of the Prophet

Dave,

If you want to rationalize your decision post hoc, you could read Eric Marcus's Vegan: The New Ethics of Eating. It's a published book, but can be downloaded for free from his website. It's a book in three acts, respectively entitled "To Your Health", "The Truth About Food Animals", and "Beyond the Dinner Table", the latter dealing with the ecological impact of raising livestock, and "The Truth About Food Animals" dealing with the conditions under which the animals are kept and slaughtered.

I find the second act most compelling. He writes:

It is hard to deny that animals deserve some measure of compassion, and the technology for raising and slaughtering farm animals has grown increasingly inhumane over the past two decades. Modern "factory farming" methods mean that many of today's food animals never see sunlight or soil. They live under conditions of intense crowding in a world of cages, conveyor belts, and artificial light. I have been particularly careful not to exaggerate any of the facts presented in this book, especially those relating to animal production. The plain truth is enough to appeal to most people's sense of ethics. The stories and photos in this section are intended to help you make the mental link between the miserable lives and deaths of animals raised for your consumption, and what you eat for dinner.

Note that he properly takes animal rights as an axiom rather than a theorem: if you disagree with the opinion that animals have rights, the opinion that animals deserve compassion, the argument of the second section ceases to hold. With a nod to David Cross, that's the "best, slash worst, slash best again" part of ethics outside a religious framework: the axioms are up for grabs.

Jeremy Bentham wrote of animals: "The question is not, Can they reason? nor Can they talk? but Can they suffer?" And yet I have very strong humanist leanings, which hard-core animal rights activists would probably criticize as speciesism in fancy clothes. The fact is, I do value human life more than animal life. The whole argument hinges on one's definition of necessity: while I can justify the necessary suffering of animals for the sake of human welfare, I cannot grant the necessity of meat consumption. Well-supervised, metered animal experimentation for pharmaceuticals, on the other hand, I do see as necessary.

Chris De Rose of Last Chance for Animals writes: "If the death of one rat cured all diseases, it wouldn't make any difference to me." And Michael Fox of the Humane Society writes: "The life of an ant and that of my child should be granted equal consideration." I have intense antipathy at these statements. They strike me as absurd for humanist reasons (and the former for utilitarian reasons as well.) But yet I am a vegan. Why? Because I feel that eating meat, eggs, and dairy strictly increase the suffering in the world.

There is a good page on animal welfare at the British Humanist Association website.

Great topic. Let's keep discussing this.

Is there really anything morally wrong with shredding 100 billion copies of the Encyclopedia Britannica?

OK, so it's a shitty analogy. And it sure does apply to plants too. It was a cheap way for him to make his point. But it hit me at the right time.

That word "moral" is also shitty. And it's not really what I meant at all.

Hmmmmm...

I can't really pin down the problem I have with it, and claiming "morality" is a really easy way out. Something about it unsettles me, therefore it is "morally wrong." Great way to make an argument, Dave.

Yeah, you caught me. So what is the problem with it? Perhaps it's the subconscious memory of what I've read about conditions in slaughterhouses.

If we ever find out that plants are conscious, I might just break down and cry.

Arguments here? It's not about my health, even as a vegetarian, I'm still eating really poorly. That's a different story.

Ugh.

Evan,

If you need 45k a year, then I suggest that you get into the time machine business, and build something that can take you back to six years ago. I'm just about the last person on Earth who should be giving someone financial advice, though, because I make enough to cover my bills, and that's about it. On the other hand, I am my own boss, and I'm the partial owner of a business that I've been secretly dreaming of owning since high school, so I really can't complain.

Dave,

Jew Coke is the only thing containing caffeine that I've had to drink in the last three years. I hear in Europe, it's the only sort of Coca-Cola that's sold. Moving across the pond would most certainly be the death of me.

Even though it sounds rather wasteful in the analogy, is there really anything morally wrong with shredding 100 billion copies of the Encyclopedia Britannica? I mean, it would be better if the paper was recycled (which I think might be a more fitting analogy), but that doesn't make destroying the EB an unethical act. Also when you mention "the information storage capacity of a single cell of a living organism", does that include plants?

I've considered both vegetarian and vegan lifestyles in the past, and I've reached the conclusion that I don't think that either would work for me. I don't really eat much red meat, anymore (with about three exceptions a year), but I just don't have the will to give up poultry and fish.

In other news, artichokes are fucking delicious.

Well David, you're still a smart cat...you'll probably always be a poor one, but hey...I got my degree in philosophy, so there's hope for every humanities major. At least doing something you love.

That reminds me, how does NYC treat the starving student? I'm looking at law schools pretty hard now and a change to the East Coast is looking more that possible.

Hey kids.

It's nice to be back on. With the semester winding down, and the NBA Playoffs heating up, I rarely have time to be on the computer anymore. What's a fellow to do?

Here are some things worth mentioning:

1) I'm reading Richard Dawkins' book "The Blind Watchmaker." He discusses, at one point, the information storage capacity of a single cell of a living organism (he always compares this storage capacity to copies of the Encyclopaedia Britannica). He ends the first chapter of the book with "When you eat a steak, you are shredding the equivalent of more than 100 billion copies of the Encyclopaedia Britannica."

I read this the day after I first saw your veganblog, Josh.

"Fine, OK, enough already!." I thought to myself.

I've been struggling with the issue of vegetarianism for quite some time. The way I've dealt with it is basically by ignoring it. I don't acknoweledge the problem, which is that I can't find moral justification for eating that which was once conscious.

(My father responded to that statement with something like "The cells of your steak weren't conscious." I have no idea what that argument is supposed to mean, and I told him so.)

I realize that some people can justify eating meat (or don't care) but I can't (and do).

So I'm taking a run at being a vegetarian. It has now been a week for me as well, and I really have no complaints yet. Though I would say that the ultimate morally justifiable goal would be vegan, I rely too much on pre-made food at this point in my life to make that really worth the effort. So, indeed, the sacrifices continue.

I have also added the stipulation that I will occasionally allow myself to consume sushi. I can't justify that either. I also don't care. Some things are too scrumptious to be destroyed by morals. :)

2) Evan. Dude. Your job. I am a theatre major. I don't think you should be asking for my career advice, if your career choices involved getting paid ever. Ever.

Have you looked into the career opportunities in the field of flight attending? You could travel around the world, and use your troubleshooting skills to help solve spatial arrangements of articles in the overhead compartments!

Seriously, my ignorance when it comes to the world of business is staggering. I sure do wish I could help, but you throw around CCNA like I throw around hot female theatre majors. Frequently, and with ease.

3) Hi Mike! Didn’t want you to feel left out! If it’s not “Jew Coke” it’s not worth the caffeine, eh?

4) I got nothing for the Vegan Blog, man. That’s rough. Damn that intellectual property. :)

whenever i get a free couple of days to study I'll have a CCNA, and I'm looking at going further with the cisco certs...but my tech tallents aren't really what I'm looking to push at the moment. I'd like to do some sort of project managment, or roving troubleshooter...anything outside of tech industry?

Well, this is the first time I've ever been asked for career advice. Thanks for the vote of confidence.

Have you considered becoming a traveling tech support person? Get hired to a multinational with satellite offices in far-flung corners of the globe, then get paid to travel from location to location ironing out technical glitches. You could start by getting Microsoft or Linux certification of one sort or another, if you don't already have them, or becoming a networking expert, for instance.

You could teach computer classes. My Linux course instructor was based in Portland, Oregon but was sent to locations around the country to teach one-week courses. Again, you would start by getting appropriate certification of one sort or another.

Dave, Mike, others, any ideas?

To the brothers McGee, all their friends, and any random internet people that happen upon this post:

I need advice. I want a new job. In fact, a new career would be nice (I’m bored) but playing the starving student while I go to law school isn’t appealing at the moment (but soon, I hope). I’m doing tech support right now, I got my degree in Philosophy, and I really want to travel for work, but don’t want to be on the road 100%. As Josh and pretty much everybody I associate with him are the smartest cats I know I was wondering if somebody could help bring my attention to a type of job I might not have thought of. And btw, I need at least 45k a year.

Mike,

Thanks for the note, and for the offer of Chelsea's discount. I'll research the grapeseed oil issue: right now I use grapeseed oil vegenaise, but that's the only grapeseed oil in my diet.

Thanks also for the warning about the mate. I'm actually supposed to be avoiding caffeine as well: it interacts poorly with some medication I'm taking. So why try the mate? Good question, and one that I'm not sure I have an answer to. (Jennifer is going to be displeased when she reads about this caffeine consumption, I'm sure.)

Curious that the mate post is the second mcgees.org post about a stimulant (the first being the Modafinil post) in 12 months. It surely has something to do with the pervasive fatigue I've been experiencing over the past year. But I've had an increase in energy of late, well-correlated with my switch to veganism. I'm not sure of the direction of causation, if there is one: is the diet energizing, did I bother to go vegan once I had the energy to do so, or is the correlation coincidental? I'm unsure. If the energy holds up, maybe the caffeine will turn out to be unnecessary after all.

Josh,

I just checked out your vegan blog, and while it's not something that I would do myself, I congratulate you on going the vegan route. Chelsea works at a GNC, so if you're interested in using her discount on things like flax seed oil, give us a call. Additionally, you might want to consider using grape seed oil. It has a major advantage in cooking hot dishes, because it doesn't create carcinogens when heated. At least, that's what Chelsea tells me.

The primary and secondary effects of Mate sound suspiciously similar to my experiences with amphetamines. I'd be careful with that stuff, if I were you. On the other hand, I don't drink anything containing caffeine, so my advice on this stuff might be a little bit biased.

Thanks for the kind words. Yes, please use the stamp album pages. That's what they are there for!

As far as producing the Magic cards I designed: no, I'm not planning on doing so. I'm actually violating copyright right now by using the Magic card layout, name, mana symbols, etc. I don't think WotC will care if I just post the pictures, but if I start to commercially produce the cards I'm sure that they will start caring. If your son likes them, though, and wants to play with them in casual Magic games (after he makes sure that the other player is OK with his using pretend cards) he can print out the images from my website and paste them onto worthless cards. They should print at exactly the right size.

I'll send you this message in an email as well.

Dear Joshua,
     Just thought I would take a moment and thank you for your wonderful stamp photo catalogue. I have been building some great stamp pages for my catalogue (using your graphic pages) hope you don't mind.
     Was wondering if you have your magic cards produced. My son is a collector of cards of all game types. I know he would be interested in them if you have them. Otherwise, think about publishing them...you should be making money instead of Wizards of the Coast. They are rich...now it is your turn?
     Let me know at stampsbyti@aol.com about the cards, if you have the time.

Thank you,
Ti
Stamp Collector and Mom of 3

Mmm. Stuft Pizza. Two years ago. If sitting in the right section. Yum.

brothers are funny

Yup.

Good stuff.

Hmmm. Is it working yet?

I can't get it to load here, man.

My "other site", ScotchFinder, is back online. Enjoy!

As did I. I would have responded earlier, but I was out doing better research.

Fine, whatever.

I thought it was funny.

:P

Edited by author 04-14-2003 10:57 PM
Once again, you have failed in giving proper credit. Regarding your post on 28 Feb. 2003, it was not Ari Fleischer who made those comments in a press conference. It was me.

And he changed several bits too. For example:

Q And didn't Lyndon Johnson get in trouble for the same sort of thinking during Vietnam, in wanting to maintain his fiscal program while funding the Vietnam War?

MR. MCGEE: Whether or not the President decides to authorize the use of force, it is vital for out country that the economy grow. Lyndon Johnson's wife's name was fucking Ladybird where President Bush's wife has a much more regular sounding name. You tell me who we should listen to on this one.

I'm certain you would not suggest that if we go to war, seniors somehow don't deserve prescription drugs. And Lyndon Johnson is currently deceased, my friend. Are you suggesting that the deceased should still be covered by Medicare? And actually, that's not a bad idea considering our current economic track record. Thanks, I hope you don't mind if I take credit for that one.

Please do better research next time.

I watched Red Dragon for the first time last night. Over all, I'd say that it was very good. There were a couple of things that didn't make a whole lot of sense to me (why wasn't Edward Norton ever given a partner or police escort while he was investigating, especially after they found out that the killer was obsessed with him?), but I liked the product, over all. My biggest complaint was that they cut out the shot where Ralph jumps out of bed naked and you get to see his wang. Apparently, its size scared test audiences, and they had to cut the shot. Too bad; you shouldn't blame the wang.

The movie was good, but its cast was really its saving grace. If it hadn't had so many great actors giving top-notch performances, I probably wouldn't have been impressed with it.

I also really enjoyed "Red Dragon." I thought the screenplay was above average, and the acting was top notch. What a great cast. Superb acting with good words to say.

The directing, however, sort of annoyed me. I got so sick of the "EVERY SCENE WILL END WITH A DRAMATIC MUSICAL STING OVER AN IMPORTANT LINE" convention he established.

Good grief, we got it the first six times somebody lowered their voice and the X-Files "something's wrong" sound came on again just before a scene change.

But you know what? It's rare that there's that little to complain about after watching a movie.

Oh, and Mary-Louise Parker is a babe!

That model is awesome. How terribly cool.

Crystalline Moth?

Oh, you... you... Rear Admiral*!



*(how's that for Inside Joke of the Year?)

Ok, here's what you need to do...take up smoking really fast, all the tar in your lungs w/ produce asthma-like symptoms...then bam...no draft

but you do have to worry about that whole cancer thing...ohh..i got it...you could suck on the tailpipe of a '66 Chevy...that would do it too!

Oh man! I wish I had asthma!

I guess that I'll just have to amputate my own hand... or maybe just see what rent is like in Vancouver or Zurich.

Today I'm happy that I have asthma...otherwise I'd be worried about getting my ass drafted!

I say "milk" and "pillow". Try me some day.

Ha...I'll one up you and just be single, thank you very much!

Edited by author 02-14-2003 05:00 PM
See's Candy, Hershey's, and Nestlé buy cocoa beans from Ivory Coast, where slave boys as young as 9 years old are used to harvest beans.

Victoria's Secret employs sweatshop workers earning 71 cents an hour and U.S. prison workers earning 30 to 95 cents an hour.

The biggest and most beautiful red roses at florists' shops come from Ecuador, where impoverished farm workers are sprayed with pesticides, leading to headaches, rashes, and miscarriages.

Some of the diamonds at jewelers' shops come from Angola, Sierra Leone, and Congo, where warlords and terror groups employ slave labor to mine diamonds.  The proceeds go to finance wars.

Happy Valentine's day.

This year, show your loved one that you love her and the rest of mankind.  Buy your chocolate from companies purchasing Fair Trade cocoa, such as Scharffen Berger and Ithaca Fine Chocolates; buy domestic roses, preferably organic ones, from companies such as FlowerBud.com; buy reputable lingerie such as that from Margaret Ann, hand-made in the United Kingdom; and find out from your jeweler where they source their diamonds.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

Dave,

I have been trying to pronounce this word the way I normally do, but I'm not sure I'm succeeding. I might be over-enunciating because I'm thinking too hard. I'll have to listen to myself to see what I do normally. My mouth does not immediately reject "comfterble" so it's possible I say this in hurried speech, but even in enunciated speech I replace the or with the ur from hurt.

It would be useful to write the word and have our parents each pronounce it. We might put it into a sentence so that they don't know what word we're checking: "Are you comfortable in the chaise longue" would be sneaky but effective, because if they suspect we're doing a dialect survey they will probably guess we are testing chaise longue.

Frankly, I would love to see the results of our parents' Harvard Dialect Survey. I could have sworn that both our parents say "melk" and "pellow" for "milk" and "pillow", but Mom is sure she does not. Maybe we need a pair of sentences: "Are you comfortable in the chaise longue? I could bring you a glass of milk or a pillow." (And then, to thank them for being good sports and taking a dialect survey, we could get them some milk and a pillow.)

Josh I was hoping you might post about the wines you selected for dinner on Saturday night. I greatly enjoyed them, but I do not remember their names. I thought others might want to pick some up at their local Trader Joes too!

Certain word pronounciations mystify me. The one I've been thinking about a lot, most recently, is the word "comfortable." When I read it, it looks like there's a fort in there. And then an a. That looks to me like a four syllable word.

However, it seems most of us (including me, for most of my life) say this word "comfterble." How did this happen? And can we fix it?

~Dave

"Hey Josh! Let's build a fter in your bedroom with couch cushions!"

Edited by author 11-04-2002 08:48 PM
interesting post script... http://www.demochoice.org

Edited by author 11-04-2002 06:38 PM
I've been posting a local message board devoted mostly to electronic music and the scene here in SD, but also has areas for more serious posts. The majority of the time the posts are psuedo-intellectual philosobabble that makes me want to drag people into a classroom, chain them to a desk and at least force them to go through the motions of thinking...but sometimes you can find some gems. There is a current thread on California elections that has caused my head to bang upon the desk while screaming, "Read, think, then talk!"

There is a person whose entire line of reasoning is that Davis is for sale, and anybody else would do a better job. It gets better. In order to make this happen he suggests voting for the Green party candidate (Peter Camejo), but not so that the Green party will get more votes...but rather to take votes away from Davis so Simon will win.

"vote green....it will take more votes away from davis...

hopefully it'll take more from davis than simon...tho its not looking good"

WHAT?!?

He can't possibly be serious??? After replying I find out that he is. I pointed out that asking a liberal to vote more liberal in order for a conservative to win was a quite stupid thing to suggest

"Do you realize how stupid that sounds? 'Vote for a liberal so a conservative will win! If you can't have what you want you might as well get completely screwed!'"

...at which point he called me stupid right back

"uhhh do you realize how stupid YOU sound buddy?

lets take is slow here....2 liberal candidates...one might win, one has no chance....sooooo if a bunch of liberals vote for the guy that CANT win it takes votes AWAY from the one who can...and hopefully the conservative will keep the votes he already will get...cause peter kamayo wont take that many votes from him...giving him a better chance to win....

honestly the green candidate OR simon is better than davis...liberals and conservatives alike can see his track record SUCKS.....

but believe what you want" (sp left uncorrected)

Read, think, then talk!

This person treats me as if I'm slow. I pointed out a contradiction and I'm the slow one? Granted, I didn't reply in the most polite way...but still. I don't like to toot my own horn (ok, well...maybe a little), but I'm far from slow. This person doesn't quite get that they just quoted me right back to me, agreed with it, and called my objection stupid. Read, think, then talk!

What really hurts is that he's going to vote with this rational. I understand that the right to vote must be protected, and that everybody's voice should be heard. It is an individual choice...but my brain hurts every time somebody who has the capacity to think wusses out and hides behind the "anybody else" curtain.

It's the afternoon of Nov 4th, and I still haven't decided who I'm going to vote for in the California gubernatorial. I am sure that I'm voting for a liberal candidate, and that if I cast my vote for them it means one thing: I want my support for my cadidate and thier values to show.

Party politics in the United States is in desperate need of reform. Voting and representation of values are no longer tied. I think we need to move away from a two party system. It's screwing conservatives and liberals alike. If somebody wants to vote for a Reform party candidate [shudder] shouldn't thier idealogical vote be shown as well?

As I understand it the UK and others have a multiple party system where if your candidate doesn't win they can cast your vote for another candidate. This makes sense. We're voting for people to make our government decisions, if we can't get what we want shouldn't we at least get the next closest thing (or what our candidate believes to be the next best thing)?

I don't want to vote more liberal and end up with a conservative because of it...at the same time I want to encourage more liberal politics. At the moment I don't see how I can have both...but the openness of the California ballot is temping...maybe it's time for me to read, think...

I've been spending some time helping my clients to fill out their absente ballots over the past couple of days. Of the 21 who have ballots about 8 know about the canidates, party systems, and have a general idea about the propositions. Despite the many hours I've spent explaining different parties to the others, the other 13 or so are generally voting for the person whose name they like the best. The thing is I am so much happier with this than the other situation that happens around voting times. Some of the parents of the clients think they can just use their adult child's ballot as a second chance to vote. I had one mother yell at me because I let her son fill out his own ballot this year, which is probably the first time this 53 year old has gotten to independenlty make choices about his voting.

Even if a choice is nothing more than picking a name that they like, at least its their choice.

~Jenn

Here's an article that the Onion published during the last presidential election. Somehow, it seems relevant to the topic.

By the way, I hope to continue the religious discussion when I have a bit more time. Unfortunately, we just got GTA: Vice City, so time's at a premium rught now.

Peace. You are loved.

- BMH

We don't need people to monitor our elections! Look, see in the end the right person won! Plus, we like invented democracy so who is Russia to be telling us how we should do our voting! I mean... we invented voting, right? It's all part of the American Dream, and I'll be damned if some Albanian tells us how to do it!

Like Albania is a real country anyway. I bet we could bomb the hell out of them if we wanted to.

GO USA!

Edited by author 10-30-2002 10:58 PM
Evan, regarding /m116:

Sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you on this. I really like it, especially the second half. Specifically:

• The beat at 23:20
• The "For some reason I've been given a second chance" sample
• The high-pitched synth after 36:20
• The Spanish guitar and piano after 41:00, then your cool blend of the guitar until 43:00
  

It seems like it took a lot of work. I'm looking forward to hearing more, and to listening to this repeatedly.

Edited by author 12-08-2002 06:26 PM
Bob Mike,

I really appreciate that you get into these religious discussions with me. I find them highly rewarding.

On to the topic. I think your "Tolkien is overrated" analogy fails in several places. First, Tolkien apologists do not claim, as many Christians do, that they have a unique claim on morality and charity. Many (most?) Christians are fond of confusing "Christians should be kind and charitable" with "only Christians are kind and charitable". These are called "Christian virtues", and when a culture moves away from Christianity is it considered to have been morally corrupted. So it is quite reasonable to point out when non-Christians behave reasonably and Christians do not.

Second, you are completely correct that the Bible is contradictory, composed of many books, written by fallible people, and at least partially wrong. You will find no argument from me. But it is important to note a couple of points. Paul, perhaps the strongest voice in the Christian New Testament, writes that "All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness" (2 Tim 3:16, my emphasis.) "Yes," you might say, "but Paul was wrong." But that's exactly my point. Paul was wrong. Despite the internal claims of the universal correctness of Scripture, and despite the surrounding cultural claims of the universal correctness of Scripture, it just isn't.

You write that "Assuming that all of it is wrong because some of it is, in my opinion, is as dangerous as assuming that all of it is correct because some of it is true." But that's not what I'm doing. It is certainly possible to compile a "Good Parts version" of the Bible. You can do that with The Communist Manifesto too, or Nietzche, or any of Ayn Rand's writings, maybe even with Mein Kampf. That's fine. There is truth in Homer even if none of the battles and voyages ever actually took place, and there is certainly truth in Tolkien, overrated or not, even though the entire setting is fictional. But the problem is using Biblical inclusion as some sort of sign of ultimate truthfulness. Whether the Christian apologist claims that the entire Bible is true, contradictions and all, or that simply the "truthful to them" portions are, the problem is the same: no more credence should be allotted to the claims because they came from Scripture.

"Elves exist because Tolkien wrote about them" is an absurd statement. So, for that matter, is "Mountains exist because Tolkien wrote about them." The moment we deal with a human author, the moment we deal with stories, the moment we consult a fallible or metaphorical document, we have lost any claim to exclusive truth. I believe in Mountains because I have seen them, have studied them, have climbed them, and have a consistent world-view that allows, even implies, their existence. I disbelieve in Elves because I have not seen them, I have not seen any studies of them, I have never met them, and my world-view is just fine, probably even better, if I do not postulate a race of slim, sylvan, language-using humanoids with a fondness for hiding.

Some treat the Bible as a bare philosophy. It suggests ways to behave, provides reasons that resonate with the reader, and instills the person with a feeling of meaningfulness. That person is fully capable of discarding all of the mythological nonsense (literal non-sense) surrounding this philosophy. That's fine: that person can follow the ethic of Jesus, another person can follow Tolkien's dwarven ethic, and I can follow Thoreau's and Kant's, or what have you. But few people stop there. They say Christianity is correct because the Bible proclaims so and they say the Bible is correct because God, the über-trump card, inspired it.

And this is what I meant by "put down your Bibles". I meant, "Don't appeal to Scripture for evidence of truth." Go ahead and make your truth claims, if you wish, but do not do so by appealing to a book, or set of books, the prevalent errors of which are established.

Christianity, at its best, advises admirable actions: concern and care for others, self-sacrifice, charity, compassion, and love. At its worst it suggests despicable actions. And frequently, in my opinion, it does so for the wrong reason. I disagree that we should be self-sacrificial so that we may be "first" in heaven. I disagree that we should love others because we are loved by God. But the fact that we can even get to this point in the discussion is heartwarming. Too frequently conversations are hijacked by threats of damnation or murder, name-calling, or disparaging remarks about one's character. In my opinion, the revolution you hope for, the revolution we hope for, will not come through the graces of a deity. It will come through the hearts and the consciences of man. Those who consider the Bible an inspiration to charity and compassion, and not a tome of ultimate truth and a source of hate, have my blessing.

"A revolution is not the overturning of a cart, a reshuffling in the cards of state. It is a process, a swelling, a new growth in the race. If it is real, not simply a trauma, it is another ring in the tree of history, layer upon layer of invisible tissue composing the evidence of a circle." - Kate Millet

Unload your shotguns. It's time for revolution.

- Josh

Re: Subject For 10/29/02

I don't know why I keep getting myself into these religious topics, but here I am, once again.

So, a group lobbied something that upset some people, and they got a lot of angry, poorly thought out mail. In other news: scientists have just announced that the sky is blue. There's no story here. I could generate an equal if not greater amount of angry, hate-filled email by announcing that Tolkien is overrated, Ghandi had some serious personal flaws in regards to his treatment of his family, or that I didn't vote for Gore during the last presidential election. People have always had their sacred cows, and they always will. I'm for a degree of gun control, I support women's rights, and I believe in tighter regulations regarding the behavior of big business. Still, there are people who believe in the same things that I do that I would be ashamed to be associated with. I feel the same way about Christianity.

There are a lot of people, on both sides of the religious debate, that say that you can't take some parts of the Bible, and leave others. The problem with this theory, though, is that, while the Bible is a book, it is more accurately many books. It's a collection of writings from a lot of people, written over a lot of years. Since it contradicts itself in several places, you have to assume that at least some of it is wrong. That's where the split happens. Some people are going to follow whatever part of the Bible suits their agenda, some people are going to follow whatever section seems most truthful to them, and some people are going to get fed up and throw the entire thing out. I've been in all three of the above-mentioned camps at one point or another; at the moment, I'm firmly in the second. Assuming that all of it is wrong because some of it is, in my opinion, is as dangerous as assuming that all of it is correct because some of it is true. Judging one statement in the Bible based on the statements that surround it (often made by different writers, during entirely different eras) would be like judging something that Ralph Nader said based on something that Bush said, because they'd both run for the same political office. There's no connection, except for the one that people have created by lumping them all together, and that's a mistake that's as foolish for the Bible's critics as it is for it's followers.

The Bible shows a remarkable amount of social change and growth from the beginning to the end. In my mind, the greatest tragedy of the Christian faith was that everyone seems to believe that that change is finished. Jesus was the all-time king of social revolutionaries, but the revolution got hijacked. Same as it ever was. Somehow, I doubt that the United States of today much resembles the one that Jefferson dreamed of, and although I don't agree with Marx, I feel can't help but feel pity for the man whose dream was so perverted by others.

"There's one hole in every revolution, large or small. And it's one word long -- people. No matter how big the idea is they all stand under, people are small and weak and cheap and frightened. It's people that kill every revolution." - Warren Ellis, Transmetropolitan

Christianity had the chance to make the world a better place. If it can get over itself, it still does.

-Bob Mike Hitler

ok folks, I was getting my photoshop on today and made these gems.
http://64.49.221.207/pix/grnegsnspm/Ben.jpg
http://64.49.221.207/pix/grnegsnspm/Scout.jpg

Enjoy. I know I did.

Kitty Wampus!!!!

No, I do not.

Took the dialect quiz, Josh. I was very confused by the section involving the word "anymore." Do you know where the hell they sat shit like that?

Strangely enough, The Amazing Spider-Man issue released directly after September 11th 2001 is the most moving, emotionally real, and truly cathartic response to that day of any that I've read.

One can find truth in the most interesting places, it seems.

hehe...um...yeah, server...right. Cox caps uploads (they suck), but it's not like i'm going to post that file forever.

Cool! I'm looking forward to hearing it. It looks like it is 83 MB with a somewhat slow server connection, so I might be downloading for a while....

- Josh

Health care for everybody...do we really want more people living comfortably? I think not. After all, why should people live well? Sucks to them, I have a good job with health care, why don't they? So what if a sinking economy is forcing lay-offs, I say if they're not in a job by the next day then they don't want to work.

On a different note, I've finally created a demo. Josh and Jennifer know that (and probably nobody else) I've been practicing my DJ skills with aspirations of somebody annoying old people with my very loud music pumping from every car. What they don't know is that I finally created a demo that I'm pretty happy with (not completely...i got a bit goofy at the end...but hey...who cares?)
Anyway, if you want to listen to it you can pull it from ftp://68.8.10.66 with an anon login...it's a pretty big mp3.

Aetna sent us a letter last week listing medications that our insurance plan was no longer going to fully cover. When I looked over the list I was amazed to see how many of the medications on that list are medications that my clients with Cerebral Palsy take on a daily basis.
Many of the medications are for spasticity or they are psychotropic medications, both of which allow people with some form of a disablity to function and have more rewarding lives.
Aside from incresing rates for people who need a medication to treat a disability, here is what really gets me: Now lets say a person with mild CP can no longer afford the Dantrium he/she take 3 times a day since the price has doubled. The person looses fine motor skills that result in the loss of employment. The person is now without employment and he/she decides to apply for Medical. Medical fully covers Dantrium, the person regains fine motor skills, and goes back to work. They get $2000 to their name, they loose all Medical coverage........
I think that the state should provide health care for its citizens. The idea that a state could do that without discouraging its citizens from returning to gainful employment and being contributing members to society, is a great one. The state provides care to keep its members healthy and fit for working, playing, and learning, and in return the members provide their state, cities, and communities with their services and a small financial contribution.
Seems like a good idea to me, but then I'm the one who choose the Onieda community over Mormonism as a more ideal life style in sociology class.

Jenn

Digging the guide to the apostrophe. Where the fuck did they learn that? Do they not read? Do they only read what other innorint peopl'e right?

Can we add in here that I'm in a really excellent college and still know people who write shit like "haveing" and "makeing."

What the hell?

~Dave

JWI -

Thanks! I updated the post.

- Josh

In response to the mcgees.org question:

didie -- diaper

From All the King's Men (Robert Penn Warren, 1946), "Man is conceived in sin and born in corruption and he passeth from the stink of the didie to the stench of the shroud." (p. 46)

Hey...

Two Pearl Jam related items.

1) I told you this already Josh, just posting it up for the rest of the mcgees.org posse. When you're discussing new Pearl Jam songs, and you say that they write songs that sound like yours, I would contend that you have cause and effect just slightly backward. :)

2) I've been humming a song for a while, I realised it sounded like Pearl Jam, I deduced that I didn't write it, so I started singing it just now. Turns out it was "Thin Air" from Binaural. Shit. Maybe I'll listen to Binaural today.

~Dave

Josh-- listening to a radio interview with Pearl Jam (yeah, all of them!) on 92.3 WXRQ (which they call K-Rock, for some reason).

Don't worry, I taped it. :)

This is a running commentary...

Mike (I think it was Mike... maybe Stone) and Ed just said that this is their best album. Umm... good!

I Am Mine... I don't even know what to say... what an INCREDIBLE song! Just... downright... just... wow... in terms of album placement (like we tend to do) it sounds like "No Code"... but only if they recorded "No Code" after "Yield." If that makes sense. Which it does. :)

Throwing in here that Matt Cameron ROCKS.

Just played "Save You." OK... it rocks. I have to listen to it more because I had trouble understanding the lyrics, but musically it's excellent.

Have to go to rehearsal now... second half at a later date.

~Dave

I just realized...

If I were to take the lyrics to any on a number of Tenacious D songs, and replace the phrase "K.G." with "McGee", I'd have a pretty nifty little song about us. For example (from Dio)...

Old Version:
You must give your cape and scepter to me!
And a smaller one for K.G.!

New Version:
You must give your cape and scepter to me!
And a smaller one for McGee!

See how it works? It's this sort of keen insight into the musical mind that makes me one of the recording industry's most beloved superstars.

-BMH

Josh,

Thanks for the info. I'll look it up. I don't think that I've mentioned my LJ before, which may be a good thing, as quite a bit of it is in fairly poor taste. I'm not sure if all of my older entries are in there. I moved a lot of them over from http://whelp.diaryland.com. If you can access those, they're some of my best stuff. My latest Livejournal stuff is more of a report about my life than a comedy column, although it does have its moments.

Also, you shouldn't let any of the stuff that I've written about Chelsea color your perceptions of her. I tend to portray her on LJ in a fairly unflattering (but light-hearted) light.

-BMH

Edited by author 09-18-2002 02:31 PM
I looked them up on AMG. It looks like the Eddie is "Eddie Spaghetti", AKA "Eddie Supersucker". Gotta love the AMG summation:

Though those under-appreciative of the Supersuckers' Satan, Wild West, booze, and heroin imagery may rely on the grunge moniker to pinpoint the group's sound, the Supersuckers are a true power-chord driven punk band, albeit with a penchant for heavy metal posturing.

Mike: have you mentioned your LiveJournal before? I don't remember you ever mentioning it. A year and a half worth of posts to read!

- Josh

By the way, does anyone know anything in regards to Eddie and the Supersuckers? For a while after the Supersuckers changed their name to E&tSS, it was rumored that the "Eddie" in question was Mr. Vedder. I heard one of their singles, and it sure as Hell sounded like him. Does anyone know the scoop?

-BMH

Edited by author 09-17-2002 11:43 PM
I know, I agree about the production quality on "Binaural", as we have discussed before. I expect this one will be more produced than "Binaural", now that they have dropped Tchad Blake. The mixing will be done by Pearl Jam regular O'Brien, but the producer will be Adam Kasper. This suggests that the production might be fairly raw on this album: Kasper produced Soundgarden's "Down on the Upside", Cold's "Thirteen Ways to Bleed on Stage [sic]", and (notably) was assistant engineer on Nirvana's "In Utero" and PJ's "Vitalogy". All of these albums are fairly raw- and exciting-sounding, but (maybe excepting the spare Cold album) sonically quite full.

In anticipation of the single's release tomorrow I have been listening to the Bridge School Benefit performance of "I Am Mine" for much of the day on continuous loop (Dave - you have this?) What a great song. It contains some prize PJ lyrics:

I know that I was born and I know that I’ll die.
The in-between is mine. I am mine.

and

The sorrow grows bigger when the sorrow's denied.

I decided I'd learn how to play it tonight. I thought, listening to the song, that the intro is played with a sliding D shape, like the beginning of Candlebox's "He Calls Home". Turns out I am almost right; it's a modified sliding D shape. I always fool around with sliding D chord. There is also what sounds like a hammered-on D to Dsus transition, although this is not notated in the tablature I found; this is also very Josh. Plus, in the acoustic Bridge School version, there is an emphasized strumming technique employed in and after the bridge. These three elements make the song sound kind of like one that, you know, I would write. Except, you know, better.

Dave, regarding your website: are you getting the emails I send you? I sent you one a few days ago that probably fixes your problem. If not, give me a call.

Ack!

Pre-Pearl Jam album time... examining the titles... trying to figure out what they'll sound like... hoping against hope that maybe they'll, oh, I don't know... PRODUCE THIS ONE!!! At all!

I don't like the garage rock sound... I tend to think "Oh, that's nice, I can't wait for the album." The sample-track sound of Binaural was really off-putting to me. Not just in the quality (or lack thereof) of production, but even in the way the album was assembled... it sounds like shit that wouldn't fit into an album, so they just copied it all onto a disc. Ugh. I know there was some good on it... I just didn't care for it.

Just by the way, I still can't figure out why Blogger won't post to davidjmcgee.com. Until you come here, and hopefully I can coax you into taking a look at it, I've been posting elsewhere.

www.livejournal.com/users/davidjmcgee

Take a look there... I've actually been posting. As soon as I can, I'd love to move back over to the one I'm actually paying for. Check me out there for some stuff.

Hey, Jenni, Y- The Last Man 3 comes out tomorrow!!! :)

~Dave

Edited by author 09-13-2002 01:38 AM
Yes as Dave knows I am a lover of the 100 Bullets (sorry I did have to go out and get issue 38 on my own, it is Cole after all). It is gritty, sexy, complex, and demands your attention. It has false redemption, pure vengence, and no good guys only slightly less bad ones. They introduce characters for one story, that although they are never mentioned again, are always there in the back of your mind while reading the current issues. I've greatly enjoyed all but one story line and I think that the women in this series, both major players and minor side characters, are a fascinating bunch.

I also enjoy the Y the last man. I am interested to see how violence plays out in this story since it would almost entirely be done to women by other women. And I wouldn't rule out the miscarriage thing Dave, I think that pregnancy is going to play an important role in the story. If it continues to be written well miscarriage should be a part of some preganancies especially experimental ones.

As for Smith's Green Arrow stuff, which I think I read all of, I really liked the introduction of the "bad guy" who fights with a gun at the very end of his run with the series. I found him to be a truly frightening character. Now I have no history of Green Arrow and I've only read the issues that Smith wrote, but I do find it compelling, as Dave pointed out to me, to have Smith introduce a character with such a deep degree of evil, and then leave the story for another author to resolve.

~Jenn

Jenn,

Thanks...but uh...dont call me son.

Also, Dave was REALLY drunk the other night....you should have seen it...HILARIOUS....just kidding, but itd be funny. think about it.

Well, the link worked for a while. Not long enough, though.

Edited by author 09-12-2002 04:36 PM
Jenn,

Getting together? Sounds like a plan. Actually, it sounds exactly like the plan that Josh and I come up with every couple of months, but never follow through with. Maybe, without the constant distraction that is a Y chromosome getting in your way, you'll be able to come up with a better plan than we have.

Dave,

I'm throwing my $2.25 in here...

A fool and his money are soon parted.

100 Bullets: Is. The. Bomb. I know Jenni's got my back on this one. Brian Azzarello is the only person in the world who knows what's going on, but it still kicks ass.

There's a cute girl who works at Hi-De-Ho Comics in Santa Monica. Naturally, I buy everything that she suggests. I have all of the TPBs for 100 Bullets, and I haven't been disappointed with any of them. I wasn't so sure when it first started, but by the time I got to "Split Second Chance", I was fiending pretty badly. Since you're enjoying the series, I suggest that you pick up "Jonny Double", which is also by Azzarello. It's good stuff. His run at the helm of Hellblazer isn't anything to sneeze at, either.

Y- The Last Man: Is only two issues deep, but has incredible potential. Issue 1 was mind-blowingly good. And also has (literally) a world-full of powerful female characters. Don't think miscarriages are going to be much of an issue here.

I saw the ad for it, and I was curious. Since you're enjoying it, I'll probably pick up the TPB when it comes out.

Paul Pope's 100%: Three issues out of five complete. It's one of those situations... well, honestly, it just might suck. But it might rock as well. Anybody looked at this one?

I haven't seen it.

Daredevil: currently being written by Brian "I've written every comic ever written ever" Bendis is finally sort of figuring itself out. It was bizarre between Kevin Smith's run and Bendis' beginning. The character Daredevil has barely been in it since Bendis took over, he's focusing on the Kingpin and various shit happening to him which is fine by me. I'm a sucker for the gangster epic.

Plus, having David Mack around certainly didn't hurt the series.

Bob Mike, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen Vol. 1 just had a Trade Paperback released. I know you recommended Alan Moore... should I go for it?

I just picked this up last night, and I'm thoroughly enjoying it. It's not for everyone, though. Although I think that it's worth the read, I still vastly prefer Top 10.

As for other comics that I'm currently enjoying, you can't go wrong with Transmetropolitan, The Ultimates (which is probably the only Avengers related title that I'll ever admit to reading), or X-Statix (I'm a big Mike Alred freak).

By the way, Dave, since you read Smith's run on DD, did you read his Green Arrow stuff as well? I found it sort of disappointing, and some of it simply didn't make any sense. If you have any thoughts on the matter, I'd like to hear them.

Next on my list, I have to read You Are Here. Cute comic store chick has a weekly graphic novel book club, and that's on the plate for this week.

Later!

-BMH

Yeah! A Jenni!

I'm throwing my $2.25 in here to let you know a couple comics series that are curently rocking.

100 Bullets: Is. The. Bomb. I know Jenni's got my back on this one. Brian Azzarello is the only person in the world who knows what's going on, but it still kicks ass.

Y- The Last Man: Is only two issues deep, but has incredible potential. Issue 1 was mind-blowingly good. And also has (literally) a world-full of powerful female characters. Don't think miscarriages are going to be much of an issue here.

Paul Pope's 100%: Three issues out of five complete. It's one of those situations... well, honestly, it just might suck. But it might rock as well. Anybody looked at this one?

and to fill it out with the mandatory costumed crime-fighter comic

Daredevil: currently being written by Brian "I've written every comic ever written ever" Bendis is finally sort of figuring itself out. It was bizarre between Kevin Smith's run and Bendis' beginning. The character Daredevil has barely been in it since Bendis took over, he's focusing on the Kingpin and various shit happening to him which is fine by me. I'm a sucker for the gangster epic.

Bob Mike, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen Vol. 1 just had a Trade Paperback released. I know you recommended Alan Moore... should I go for it?

~Dave

Hello Boys,
I finally decided to sign onto the board. And yes this is me not Josh stuck under my name.

Dave, I'm glad to hear that you enjoyed Alias, as a side note if my very pregnant co-worker has a girl she will name the baby Sydney.
Bob Mike, I hope that life is finding you well. We should get together for dinner or a Pearl Jam concert soon.
Jason, welcome to the family son.
Josh, I promise to sign off this time so you don't get stuck posting as me.
I look forward to adding my girlie touch to the discussions.
~Jenn

just wanted to say "hey, whattup?"


so...yeah, dig it...

I watched the first two episodes of Alias.

Josh, there's absolutely no reason for this show not to SUCK. In capital letters.

But it just doesn't!

The only thing cooler than cool stuff is cool stuff that really shouldn't be... you know... cool. And stuff.

Anyway, the point is that it rocks. Word.

Thanks Mike, for this. I will look for those titles.

WRT Karen Page, I guess I didn't read my brother's
Kevin Smith "Daredevil" far enough to find out that
the HIV diagnosis was incorrect/inconclusive. :-)

- Josh


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com

Once upon a time, I was a really big fan of Fabian's. He's certainly done a great deal of work over the years, and most of it has sold very well. Going over some of his stuff, it seems a little bit simplistic now, but his target audience was 13 to 16 year old boys, so I can't truly blame him. As for his response to WIR, it seems as though he's taking the easy way out. I did notice a couple of errors on the list. Some of the individuals listed have returned, and some of the information was incorrect (Karen Page was listed as being infected with HIV, which turned out to be either incorrect or inconclusive, we never got a straight answer on that).

Personally, I don't think that there's a disproportionate amount of female (I'm going to use a large blanket term to cover all of the types of horrors mentioned on the site) distress in comics. If there is, I'd attribute it to the following factors...

1.) Female characters traditionally do not sell as well as their male counterparts. There are, of course, exceptions to this rule, but it generally holds true. With that in mind, most comic book writers are willing to drop a load on someone who isn't a major selling point. This is especially the case in instances where the woman in question isn't the title character.

2.) Female characters share the same unfortunate position as young male sidekicks. The hero may be unassailable, but you can strike at him through those that he cares about. Since most superhero comics revolve around heterosexual men, the vast majority of those targets will be female romantic interests. If you look at superhero comics as the modern equivalent to ancient heroic myth, then there's a certain sort of sense to it. In virtually every culture, romance between mortal and deific beings is a bad idea (especially for the mortal, who very often meets an extremely messy end). The superhero comic extends this logic to its natural, modern conclusion. Hence, girlfriend in the fridge. As comics become more inclusive to the homosexual community (which is, slowly, happening), I think that writers will find plenty of opportunity to inflict similar punishments on male sexual partners. Of course, the "distress" rate for kid sidekicks may be even worse than that of romantic interests. Where's Bucky? Where's Jason Todd (Robin)? What's Speedy shooting into his arm? Kid sidekicks really get the short end of the stick, but bad things will traditionally happen to anyone who gets to close to a being on superhuman power.

3.) A lot of the female characters on that list deserved to be put there. No, not because of anything that they did (I'm not blaming the victim), but because they were poorly thought out and badly written. The original Batgirl was an embarrassment that arose from the "if something succeeds, make a million slightly altered carbon-copies of it" school of thought that gave birth to Krypto the Superdog and Beppo the Supermonkey. As Oracle, she's (barely) more interesting. Going over the list, I couldn't help but feel grateful that a lot of the listed characters were gone. My gratitude wasn't because of their gender, it was because of my low tolerance for lame, one-dimensional characters.

4.) Scarlett Witch, Crimson Fox, Mera and Fury II are all on the list for the loss of loved ones. Oddly enough, they're considered the victims, while, when the same thing occurs to a male superhero, it's that hero's loved one who is considered the victim of the kidnapping/murder/torture/etc. It appears to me as though there's a double standard here, although if there's something that I'm missing, I'd be interested in hearing what it is. It's also not noted on the list that Lyta Hall (Fury II) seems to have regained her sanity after killing off the title character of Sandman (although I doubt that she's any happier for it).

5.) Although I think that the "miscarriage" storyline is just a cheap way of getting quick sympathy for a character, it does make a certain sort of sense. Even under normal circumstances, miscarriages occur. When you add to this the amount of physical punishment that most heroic characters endure, exposure to radiation, and the stresses of interdimensional travel, a fetus seems to have little chance. Again, I think that it's sloppy storytelling, but I don't think that it reflects any sort of agenda against female characters (except, perhaps, the agenda of the natural world to allow only women to become pregnant).

6.) The inclusion of some of the characters on the list doesn't make any sense. Namorita being revealed as a clone and reverting to a more primal state, for instance, was most probably a way to make her character more distinct (and thereby more interesting) from her male counterpart. Threnody had a fatal disease when her character was introduced. In many ways, it was the focal point of her character, and her story wouldn't have made any sense without it. With that in mind, it's no surprise that she's dead.


I can think of a wide range of problems with the portrayals of women in the comics medium, but this "victims list" doesn't really reflect any of them. It would have been interesting to get a reaction to the list from Cerebus writer (and noted misogynist) Dave Sim, although I doubt that he would have responded. Likewise, I doubt that there’s much point in another female writer pointing out that Sim is a jerk, because it would be redundant.

I’ve severely cut down on the number of titles that I’ve read over the years, but I’m still into the medium. I highly recommend all of Alan Moore’s America’s Best Comics titles, especially Promethea and Top Ten. Also, if you get the chance, pick up 300 by Frank Miller, and Hellboy by Mike Mignolia. I can’t recommend them enough.

I don't know if you read through all of the responses at WiR. The respondents were split on the very issue you raised. One group said the same thing you did, i.e., female in comics are no more frequently abused than their male counterparts. The other group, to which the original author belonged, believed that females were disproportionately abused. I am not a scholar (not even an avid fan) of the genre so I have no special knowledge either way, but I was aware that the camp was split on this issue. Read especially Fabian Nicezia's comments to see someone who thinks that the facts are not in yet.

"Women in Refrigerators" was an interesting read, but it took me less than a minute to find some serious flaws in its logic.

1.) Although I have no solid statistics on the matter, I find it hard to believe that a higher percentage on female characters (as opposed to male characters, natch!) have been killed over the course of comics history. Of those who have been killed, such deaths make for little effect one way or another, based upon the extremely temporary nature of death in the superhero genre. Even aside from that genre, death often loses a bit of its sting, as deceased major players often return (see Sandman, Preacher, Hellblazer, etc.). Jean Grey alone should have made the list for death and/or power loss about seven or eight times.

2.) Although power loss does often occur to female characters, I would guess that it occurs to an equal number of male protagonists. It's one of the best-known superhero stories for either gender, and (in my mind) is usually the sign of a lazy writer re-treading a path that's been walked a dozen times before. Virtually any character who's lasted more than a decade has lost his or her powers at least once. Superman seems to do it a couple of times a year. Power loss is the great equalizer. It's hard to get behind the "struggle" of somebody who can move small planets. Power loss is an attempt to humanize a godlike character, and is usually (for males and females alike) only a temporary setback.

3.) It is true that a disproportionate number of rapes occur against women in comics vs. their male counterparts (although Mark Millar's dismal run on The Authority seemed determined to shorten that gap a bit). Unfortunately, this seems to be a reflection on a societal problem. In a world when one out of every four women has been sexually assaulted/abused/harassed, it's unsurprising that comics reflect a gender discrepancy between the amount of sexual violence directed at each gender.

This is not to say that women don't have a ways to go before being fairly portrayed in the comics medium, I'm just saying that WIR presents a pretty weak argument.

As long as we're discussing fictional women, I might as well just say it: "Medea For PTA President!"

Speaking of David J McGee, is David J McGee still out in California for the summer? I'd like the chance to see him (and Josh, as well, but Josh lives out here) before he leaves for New York. What's the story, yo?

Hey Evan, you know who else likes beer?

David J McGee....




thats rigth kids, I've broken out of my cage!

muahahaha!

I'm quite bored at work today, and it's got me thinking about beer. I like beer. That's all I have to say.

-Evan

Very, very funny. Thank you for this.

- Josh

Guys,

I just thought that I'd add something that might be of use, since the place of religion in the modern world has often been discussed here. Here's a short article by my friend Chris.

Peace. You are loved.

-Mike

Josh,

I didn't know if you'd seen this yet. Man, Russia is a scary, scary place.

-Mike

Josh,

I'd known about seanbaby for quite some time before finding your site. I found a link to it at the always entertaining x-entertainment.com.

-Mike

Yes, I did (he's talking about this, by the way.) I look forward to talking with you further about your economic policies..

- Josh

Edited by author 07-03-2002 07:23 PM
Right.

Intriguing, that. Stone submits a song and Ed inserts two words into the lyrics which negate its entire meaning. That then becomes the title of the song.

Bizarre dynamic over Pearl Jam Way...

Oh yeah-- did you take a look at my posting to the political spectrum page?

Edited by author 07-03-2002 07:07 PM
To bring in outside information, Stone did not pen the words "No Way". He submitted the demo the band as

"I'll stop trying to make a difference.
 I'm not trying to make a difference.
 I'll stop trying to make a difference"

So if the "No way" does indeed negate the preceding statements, it is Ed's negation, not Stone's. Presumably he did not title it "No Way" either, although I cannot prove that.

It's interesting that we would have such conflicting opinions on a song we both love.

Your take on the stanza's meaning is sound, but I disagree with your assesment of the song as

"...the story of one who has given up on using his public exposure as a vehicle for positive change, and instead now wants only the close companionship of someone as support."

I think that the words "No Way" in the song (actually, it turns out, it's the title of the song too) negate the previous statement. I read it more like this:

"I'll stop trying to make a difference.
 I'm not trying to make a difference.
 I'll stop trying to make a difference -- No way."

As if the thought as crossed his mind to give up on changing the world, but realising that's an impossibility.

He may say he just wants someone to be there for, and someone to be there for him-- but stop trying to make a difference? No way.

Edited by author 07-03-2002 05:51 PM
My dear wife keeps signing on to QuickTopic on my computer and not signing out. That was the second of my postings that say they are from "Jennifer McGee". I keep being excited that she has joined the discussion, but then I see it is just I.

Regarding /m78: maybe. By "my Attica" he may be referring simply to his personal prison; in the context of this song this would be his fame. Assuming we are understanding all of the words correctly (that is, the words themselves, not even the general meaning) we have:

All the static in my Attica
Shoots down my sciatic nerve
To the ocean of my platitudes
Longitudes, latitudes
It's so absurd

"Static", something shooting down a nerve, and shooting to an ocean all suggest electricity. So maybe he's describing a buildup of something akin to static electricity within his prison of the public eye, something that keeps being added to but will only be relieved with a spark, a flash, a bang. Having this shoot down his sciatic nerve, in particular, might be a clever way of saying that it is literally "a pain in the ass." :-) The ocean that provides the "ground" for the discharge is an ocean of Stone's own statements which he sees as trite or banal but that are seen as significant. I have read interpretations of "longitudes, latitudes" as just a nonsense rhyme to match with platitudes, but I disagree. It is a nonsense rhyme, but it rather exists to demonstrate Stone's perception of his thoughts as inconsequential. This whole stanza meshes well with the song's general message: the story of one who has given up on using his public exposure as a vehicle for positive change, and instead now wants only the close companionship of someone as support.

That's my interpretation, anyway.

I had a roommate in college who would (intentionally) mis-sing the line as "To the ocean of my platypus." He was also the one who sang the line from Red Mosquito as "I was bitten, must have been a chicken, it was just KFC." (For the uninitiated, the line is actually "I was bitten, must have been the Devil, he was just paying me [a little visit]")

Re /m77: Happy 4th! Like most years, I will celebrate this day largely as the day Henry David Thoreau set out own his Walden project (the fact that it was Independence Day was an accident.) Out of curiosity, did you find SeanBaby.com through my site or did you stumble upon it yourself? My guess is the latter. :-)

- Josh

Hey, Bob Mike. Have a great holiday weekend.

Josh, I assume Stone must have heard MOP before they finished Yield-- if even just because somebody was bound to say "Hey, listen to this band that wants to be you." It may have been a little premature to be mocking them, so I'll give you that on the timeline issue.

"My Attica" is specific, but pushed out a layer it's "My Prison." "The static in my prison shoots pain through portions of my body", is a possible reading of this line. So, push another layer and it's easy to justify the misunderstanding. Oh well. :)

~Jenn

Since I probably won't be posting anything tomorrow, I just wanted to wish everyone a happy 4th of July.

Peace. You are loved.

-Mike

I don't get it. Because Creed would have been kneeling in penitence to God?
  
Also, the timeline seems wrong. I remember buying Creed's "My Own Prison" on the same night I purchased "Yield" (2 February 1998, if I remember correctly.) That was the release date for "Yield", and "MOP" was just gaining popularity; only one or two singles had been released. "Yield" must surely have been complete for months (as in, before Creed ever got any airplay.)

Would you help me sort this joke out?

- Josh

Edited by author 07-03-2002 03:13 PM
Pearl Jam's "No Way" (off of Yield) is certainly in my top ten list of favorite songs.

"All this static in my Attica shoots down my sciatic nerve"

OK... I just read somebody's suggestion that this line is a "My Own Prison" reference... this honestly had *never* crossed my mind, but of course now it seems perfectly plausible. Think this is Stone's not-so-subtle bash at Creed?

I didn't think it was possible for me to like this song more. But you know the saying: "Any song that mocks Creed is a friend indeed."

~Dave

I confess the statement was overly simplistic and unprovable. In my experience, if a pharmaceutical compound is active, it will have adverse effects. I have done pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical device research, across all different indications and the only drugs which were without adverse events, were those that had no efficacy, either.

However, given the incredible complexity of all the different kinds of receptors in the human body and the filtering and elimination processes of the liver, kidneys, and related organs, it is hard to imagine any compound that would interact with only one receptor site.

I was also a little too flippant in my reference to the package insert for modafinil. Package inserts (the same information that you find in the Physician's Desk Reference) used to be written for the benefit of prescribing physicians. Now, those documents are written with full legal review. If there is any possibility that someone might sue the manufacturer for an unstated side effect, the possible side effect is included in the document.

Have I argued both sides of the question? Probably.

The reality is that all pharmaceutical therapy is a risk vs. benefit question. I think the Washington Post overstated the benefits without a fair review of the risks. I probably overstated the risks in my reaction. Intelligent people should read the available data and make appropriate choices for their health needs.

JWI,

This is very helpful and useful. The elaboration of side effects is a good reminder that "magic" pills are not on the immediate horizon.

Is your sentence "If a pharmaceutical compound is active, it will have adverse effects" a logical given, or is this the accumulation of experience? With psychoactive drugs, I suppose there is an implicit question here: are brain activities sufficiently segregated that we can precisely isolate a given effect? It seems the answer to the latter question may very well be "no".

I think the Washington Post article ingnored some of the facts about modafinil. It would be nice if it were the magic wakefulness pill, but such drugs are unlikely to exist. If a pharmaceutical compound is active, it will have adverse effects.

http://www.provigil.com/pi.htm#drugabuse indicates that modafinil "produces psychoactive and euphoric effects, alterations in mood, perception, thinking and feelings typical of other CNS stimulants."

And there is this warning from http://www.modafinil.com/

"Prudence, however, should be exercised in drastically curtailing one's sleep. Prolonged sleeplessness weakens immune function. Animals tortured in sleep-deprivation experiments eventually die from massive bacterial infections of the blood..."

I quit caffeine cold turkey after my heart tried to explode one night and I ended up in the ER at St. John's in Santa Monica. Take a bad situation, and make it worse by including the fact that my company medical insurance wasn't available for another two months. The doctor said no more caffeine, so no more caffeine.

Dropping caffeine was easy. After you've beaten crystal meth, Starbucks is a snap (although I do still get the occasional craving for Chai Tea).

Peace. You are loved.

Judge Rules U.S. Death Penalty Violates the Constitution

Who are you, and what have you done with my country? I'm happily stunned, man. I feel like Sigourney Weaver in "Dave".

Stopping caffeine "cold turkey" sounds like a great idea, dude, except that for the few weeks before finals I'd be huddled up in the fetal position in a dark corner somewhere. Not exactly the best way to prepare for end of the year exams.

Boo-hoo-hoo Jason! It's always "you guys didn't love me this" and "shipping me off to camp that." You always were the also-ran of the family, it's time to start dealing with it like a man.

Come to think of it, what with the new rulings, it would be illegal to execute you now! You could begin planning to "exact some measure of revenge."

Yeah, any apartment man. Oh give me a home, far away from the 26th St. Residence Hall...

Aha, the legendary Jason! Thanks for stopping by, son.

I had a clever friend in college who wouls stop caffeine "cold turkey" a few weeks before finals. When finals would roll around, she'd get back on it but would have lost her tolerance.

- Josh

you guys never did love me. That's why mom and dad sent me to that "camp". Anyway, the pill is pretty cool, if it doesnt have any bad side effects. Maybe I could even end my caffeine addiction.

Dont call me son...BTW I found some 4 BR apts around 11th/1st and Union square area...shall I look into them more?

Al

What's up Alowichious. I'm not asking either, I'm saying it.

It would be great if you got this pill too, man. Then I wouldn't have to hear you bitch and moan constantly about the homework I do between one and six in the A.M. Not that I don't love to hear you whining about not being able to sleep, but I don't.

Welcome to the message board son.

~Dave

("Alowichious McGee" is the... umm... "pen-name" of my roommate Jason. He's not the long-lost brother he claims to be. Don't believe his lies.)

I think this is really cool, and I'm excited to be able to stay awake for 2 days without needing sleep. I could get so much more done in that time, and then if I didnt need to sleep it wouldnt bother Dave when he wants to be up past 2-3am and I need to pass out for a good 5 hours....6 if I'm lucky.

Thats right, ya'll know who this is. Just chimeing in to say "What's up." I'm not asking, just saying.

Edited by author 06-28-2002 09:55 PM
Indeed. I used to skip sleep without any trouble. My university had a cool program: some concerned students realized that Thursday nights saw the most students go out, get drunk, and cause trouble, so they started a grassroots coffee shop called "The Need". On Thursday the coffee shop would magically appear in what was normally the Student Union Building. It would have live bands, good coffee, chess boards, etc. The idea was to provide an alternative to brawls at the local. It would run from 10 p.m. to 3 a.m; I used to staff The Need until closing, then go out to Denny's, then go back to the dorm, then attend a morning class.

No way could I do that now.

Dude, if we don't sleep, then our mothers can't come in the middle of the night and reorganise our thoughts. Didn't you read Peter Pan?

Then, when that happens, all the kids with the messed-up, disorganised minds are going to become "mentally retarded," and be enticed to kill us with no fear of repercussions.

I'm also surprised that you're surprised about this substitute for sleep, man. I've known of one for the past two years: It's called the fucking Playwrights Horizons Theatre School of New York University (official sponsor, Jolt-Cola Inc.). Ah, to be young and in college again, eh bro?

Edited by author 06-27-2002 07:06 PM
Stuff like this really makes me think about a third party.

I know where you are coming from. I've been a Green since '98.

I agree with all your points. I, for one, do not consider the stay to be a defeat. I don't think anyone expected Newdow's ruling to stand without challenge. What I am looking forward to is getting this issue to the Supreme Court.

Mike: Very funny :-)

Edited by author 06-27-2002 06:07 PM
I wonder if anybody else is disturbed by the fact that there was a Senate Resolution (S. Res. 292) expressing support for the Pledge. Or simply by the number by which it was affirmed (99-0, only one member obstained Helms,R-NC). What happend to those two Democrats from California??? Stuff like this really makes me think about a third party. I've been a pretty hard line Democrat ever since i can remember, but when nobody in your party will stand up on the Hill for what they know to be right it really makes you think. At least obstain from the vote. It might be political suicide to speak out in favor of this ruling, especially in light of the recent flare up of patriotism, but you can at least not say anything. Grrrrrr....

Michael Newdow has brought upon himself a world of hatred because of his views (which i agree with). He has put out there a view that, while not popular, speaks to our rational senses. He must be so insanely sick of people asking him if he loves America. They are not looking for an answer, they have already made up thier minds. The real question should be "Why don't the 'patriots' love the separation of church and state?" Hasn't that become a fundamental principle in how our country functions? I love what he has started, and love what he makes irrational patriots look like: idiots.