![]() |
![]() |
| home | email gus | email sarah | email valerie | photos | flickr photos |
|
2.28.2005
old towne
az blue skies
val, working
tom brokaw at the mcaa convention, scottsdale, az
2.24.2005
you're such a freaking ashcroft
hahahahahahahahahahahahaha:
"...some airline passengers watching the oscar-nominated film "sideways" on foreign flights are, in fact, hearing "ashcroft" as a substitute for a certain seven-letter epithet commonly used to denote a human orifice.more from today's reliable source column in the washington post. 2.23.2005
an elegant weapon of a more civilized age
oh, wow. here's a step-by-step tutorial on how to rotoscope lightsaber effects into your own home movies -- i.e., make your own jedi swordfight.
![]() ![]() ...you have no idea how badly i want to try this. 2.22.2005
my moral dilemma
![]() so when i heard a dukes of hazzard movie was coming out i called gus to ask why he hadn't told me (because he didn't know - yes for once, i scooped him!) and then i immediately called valerie (t.o.o.) to talk to the only other person in the world who would actually be excited with me. (we were both avid viewers in our youth and during the days of the crazy valeries) then while following another link i found this bit of bad news courtesy of moviehole.com: schneider loathes dukes of hazzard redonow what am i supposed to do? who wants a blonde daisy? but willie nelson as uncle jesse? how can you pass that up. and burt, burt reynolds as boss hog. good gravy! so do i listen to the love of my life (tv life, dahlberg) and shun the film or do i go and bask in the glory of a gigantic general lee??? ![]() 2.21.2005
blood in the water
now, this made me laugh (this all comes via josh marshall, who has his own dog and viewpoint in the social security hunt, but never mind that now, what we're focusing on is the keystone cops-ishness of this small portion of the fight):
here's an ad currently being featured on the website of the very conservative american spectator (i've saved a copy straight from there and am now hosting it here in all of its unglory): ![]() very classy, yes? which links to these folks here -- who, as they are apparently cheerfully acknowledging, are the second incarnation of the swiftvets (and, some might say, their "slimy" tactics.) but it's not even that part that kills me. it's this: aarp="liberal"? what planet are these people on, anyway? apart from this particular social security issue, aren't these guys generally on the same side? and isn't that side a rather more conservative one? dad's right -- it's mutally assured destruction in politics, anymore -- demonize and dehumanize your opponent without regard to later consequences for the sake of your goal. sheesh. don't be a do-badder
2.18.2005
blogsblogsblogsandmoreblogs
the daily show's jon stewart and stephen colbert on blogs, journalism, and the intertwining/navel-gazing of the two:
jon: ted, you're sort of 'old media,' you're an old media reporter. what are your thoughts on, in your mind, the role of these new media figures? [via waxy] maher gets real
i've never been a huge fan of bill maher's. once he started moving away from comedy and closer to politics, he seemed to annoy me much more frequently than he made me laugh. but in this op-ed in today's la times, his politics are hard to disagree with. a man after my own heart, he lashes out at the teens who were part of the recent survey that showed a shameful lack of understanding of the first amendment. sez bill:
"and what's so frightening is that we're seeing the beginnings of the first post-9/11 generation � the kids who first became aware of the news under an "americans need to watch what they say" administration, the kids who've been told that dissent is un-american and therefore justifiably punished by a fine, imprisonment � or the loss of your show on abc."lame jokes aside (and i admit there are several in this article) i agree with the man. 2.17.2005
all hell's 'a comin'
softball
frank rich in the new york times with a quieter take on "jeff gannon" and fake news:
on "countdown," a nightly news hour on msnbc, the anchor, keith olbermann, led off with a classic "daily show"-style bit: a rapid-fire montage of sharply edited video bites illustrating the apparent idiocy of those in washington. in this case, the eight clips stretched over a year in the white house briefing room - from february 2004 to late last month - and all featured a reporter named "jeff." in most of them, the white house press secretary, scott mcclellan, says "go ahead, jeff," and "jeff" responds with a softball question intended not to elicit information but to boost president bush and smear his political opponents. in the last clip, "jeff" is quizzing the president himself, in his first post-inaugural press conference of jan. 26. referring to harry reid and hillary clinton, "jeff" asks, "how are you going to work with people who seem to have divorced themselves from reality?" [more] (registration required; use bugmenot) 2.16.2005
things that aren't really paintings or sculptures
peej sent me this:
new york (cnn/money) - two "dogs playing poker" paintings cleaned house at doyle new york's annual dogs in art auction, fetching a staggering $590,400, the auction house said. it was estimated that the two rare paintings from cassius marcellus coolidge's 1903 series of dogs playing poker would fetch $30,000-$50,000, doyle said in a statement after tuesday's sale. the auction house said that, after intense bidding, "a bold bluff" and "waterloo: two" sold to a private collector from new york city. "the (paintings') sequential narrative follows the same 'players' in the course of a hand of poker," said an auction note from doyle. "in the first, our main character, the st. bernard, holds a weak hand as the rest of the crew maintains their best poker faces. in the following scene, we see the st. bernard raking in the large pot, much to the very obvious dismay of his fellow players." [more] 2.15.2005
lukens
2.14.2005
my funny valentine
2.12.2005
ready for a walk
![]() gus, carl and i took advantage of a beautiful saturday to get out a little and explore our high street business district on foot, but he was so cute, we just needed a quick photo session first. 2.11.2005
we love swedish furniture
now, i like ikea as much as anybody else, but rioting to get your hands on a cheap sofa? i guess it was just too hard for london shoppers to turn down the promises of lower than usual prices at the new store opening:
"video footage showed shoppers fighting over furniture - one man was pinned against a wall by a burly customer as they argued over a sofa - while others were stretchered into ambulances.and i thought holiday shopping was bad. wow. 2.07.2005
osu an outstanding example?
an op-ed in saturday's post caught my attention--it focused on how a culture of drinking is damaging sports, both professional and collegiate.
toward the end of the article, the author explains what he thinks is one solution: "a few basic reforms could help end the devastating consequences of combining sports and intoxication. professional sports leagues, teams, stadiums, colleges and vendors need to review and reform their alcohol policies. limiting tailgate parties, prohibiting open containers, restricting the amount of alcohol sold to a single customer, training staff to recognize signs of intoxication, and monitoring staff and customer behavior are among the reforms needed. some colleges ban alcohol altogether at sporting events. why should college football be saturated with beer advertising and drunken behavior? ohio state provides a sensible approach to the problem."i wasn't sure about this, so i thought i'd throw it back to the ohio posse. does ohio state no longer sell beer at games? certainly they don't have limits on tailgate parties--having been an attendee myself at some over the years, i didn't see any kind of enforcement or limitations. and hasn't ohio state had some problem with unruly behavior by students after games that has been associated with heavy drinking? a rebuttal
i know i've been off on a rampage about the teaching of "intelligent design." but here's a piece from the new york times that explains more about the theory and argues that it isn't a religion-motivated theory:
"intelligent design proponents do question whether random mutation and natural selection completely explain the deep structure of life. but they do not doubt that evolution occurred. and intelligent design itself says nothing about the religious concept of a creator."it's nice to see this theory laid out with a bit more detail, and i am cheered to see that it is something that is being discussed by the scientific community. but it still alarms me that we're hesitating to teach children evolution and that some religious zealots are using this theory as a way to alter school curriculum. and scientific theory or no, i'm still putting it in quotes. so there. 2.04.2005
choco-aficionado report - "it tastes better sweet"
i love chocolate, dark, milk, white, hot, cold, frozen, chocolate. everyone knows it. my son can say a dozen words. one of them is cocoa. so i had to try starbucks new "sipping chocolate" to see if it was up to all the hype. it is. it totally is. it is like drinking brownie batter. it is the perfect blend of dark chocolate bite with the right amount of sweet. mine was the perfect temperature for hot chocolate and the perfect consistency. best chocolate experience since my first taste of godiva in high school. deeeeelicious another state
putting this one up because of my occupational interest:
ny's same-sex marriage ban struck down a manhattan judge declared friday that the section of state law that forbids same-sex marriage is unconstitutional -- the first ruling of its kind in new york and one that if upheld on appeal would allow gay couples to wed. [more] i should note that this is a decision from new york city's trial court level, and that there's the state court of appeals and the new york state supreme court ahead of the case, obviously. but interesting, nonetheless. 80 percent? heaven forbid!
(as mail2blogger appears to not want to post my email from monday morning, i guess i'll have to do it the old fashioned way:)
legislation that would restrict what university professors could say in their classrooms was introduced yesterday in ohio. judging from reactions in other states where similar bills have been considered, controversy won�t be far behind. marion sen. larry a. mumper�s "academic bill of rights for higher education" would prohibit instructors at public or private universities from "persistently" discussing controversial issues in class or from using their classes to push political, ideological, religious or anti-religious views. senate bill 24 also would prohibit professors from discriminating against students based on their beliefs and keep universities from hiring, firing, promoting or giving tenure to instructors based on their beliefs. mumper, a republican, said many professors undermine the values of their students because "80 percent or so of them (professors) are democrats, liberals or socialists or card-carrying communists" who attempt to indoctrinate students. "these are young minds that haven�t had a chance to form their own opinions," mumper said. "our colleges and universities are still filled with some of the �60s and �70s profs that were the anti-american group. they�ve gotten control of how to give people tenure and so the colleges continue to move in this direction." ### - [full story from the dispatch] posted because i find this... well, hilarious wouldn't be that far wrong. do i think it's remotely likely to pass? nope. do i think it's representative of the republican party in general? nope. but am i shocked that that's where it's coming from? nope. [via people have the power] 2.02.2005
standing o
i just wanna know... who decides when the dems stand and clap during the state of the union? is there someone in the front row giving signals?
she'll make point five past lightspeed
someone took their xbox and built it into a model of the millennium falcon:
and they're selling it on ebay.co.uk. 2.01.2005
what are we teaching them?!
two disturbing stories on education today.
the first, continuing a theme that royally chaps my ass, on how evolution is under assault in the classroom. in this piece, the assault is not from our "intelligent design" friends, but from teachers themselves who have been intimidated into not disucssing evolution in the classroom. a disturbing quote: dr. eugenie scott, executive director of the national center for science education, said she heard "all the time" from teachers who did not teach evolution "because it's just too much trouble."the second, and equally anxiety-inducing, deals with how students today view the first amendment. according to ap's ben feller, students just don't give our constitution the same kind of respect it has always inspired: ...when told of the exact text of the first amendment, more than one in three high school students said it goes "too far" in the rights it guarantees. only half of the students said newspapers should be allowed to publish freely without government approval of stories.what?!? what in high heaven are we teaching our students? that we can't and don't trust science and research? that the constitution of the united states and the freedoms it guarantees are bunk? that the government has a right to tell people what to do, say, and think? i don't know about you, but i'm frightened. in 30 years, these are the people that will be running the country. and if this country turns out like 1984, i think i might have to relocate to the moon. donald
|
|
|
||