|
 |
| |
|
Oscar time. Some guys (okay, and one grrrl) make watching worthwhile.
Papers marked while watching (thus far): 3/4ths of one.
|
|
|
|
|
The perils of Leap Year.
 There was a time when [Leap Year] was much more commonly celebrated. As recently as the early 1900s, there were concerts and balls held throughout the Leap years. And as a special bonus to women of the time, there was the “right” (sanctioned by Queen Victoria) to propose marriage to a man, or at least ask him to dance. If the man declined to marry, there was at least a consolation prize -- he was supposed to provide a silk dress and a kiss on the cheek.
This tradition may trace to the 1200s, when a woman had the law backing her intention to propose during a Leap Year in some parts of Europe. She was required, however, to wear a red petticoat that showed beneath her skirts, "to give men the opportunity to run the other way," says Sharman Robertson, archivist at Hallmark Cards.
Leap Year Day "used to be recognized in everyday things, in advertising and games and books. People were aware of it. Even the Almanacs would mark it, tell people to prepare for the extra day," says Dawn. [from this MSNBC article]
I always thought it would be so neat to have your birthday on a Leap day. Just think, if my birthday was 28 days later, I could tell everyone that I'm not 6 anymore, but also not quite 7 yet. Ah well.
I should be thankful for this extra day in the year -- time for me is going so quickly, I'm not getting everything accomplished that I *should* be. I just need a stopwatch that'll stop or at least slow down time so that I can catch up. I'm running out of breath, and it's only March.
All talk of procrastination aside, does anyone else remember that "30 days hath" poem you learned in elementary school? Here's a site that gives you 33 different versions of it.
My favorite: Thirty days hath September,
All the rest I can't remember.
The calendar hangs on the wall;
Why bother me with this at all?
In case you can't get enough of Leap year facts, trivia, and activities -- Leap Year Day Project can distract (er, inform) you for a couple hours.
|
|
|
|
|
If ever there was a picture screaming for a caption...
It must cost a lot of money to have someone style your hair deliberately to make it look so fake. If only he had the money to hire a decent hair stylist. (sigh)
|
|
|
|
|
Out waaaay too late celebrating Leap Day.
But here are some pictures to show that is wasn't all for naught.
I think I'll only hire Angela from now on to take any and all pictures of me. Is it especially narcissistic to say how much I'm liking my toned arms? Probably.
Good morning.
|
|
|
|
|
I just spent 10 minutes or so taking Match.com's Physical Attraction test (found via pop culture junk mail)
Here's my total results, but here are some of the big surprises:
What Is Your Approach to Judging Which Men Are Handsome or Very Attractive?
Very Picky: It's official: You're "picky." The fact is you are drawn to the most handsome of the handsome. You know what you like in men and are more selective than most women your age. Your tastes seem instinctual. You'd make a great casting agent, because you have a good eye for men who have "star quality." In real life, your high standards may be an obstacle for you. It's hard to find a man with the strong features you like, who's also well-rounded in other ways. Still, you know the importance of a real physical "spark" in a relationship, and aren't willing (or able) to settle for less. The challenge is finding a man who really wows you physically, even if he's not the most handsome man in the room.
Grrrrrreat.
Looks : One of the "looks" that you consistently noticed has been described as "The Boy Next Door." He has an open face, with big eyes, and a big grin. He has a youthful or boyish quality that will follow him throughout his life. Typically this look is associated with light brown hair, a close shave, and blue or hazel eyes. These guys convey a warm, trusting impression, but watch out for that mischievous side! Our studies find that about 1 in 5 women (18%) are especially attracted to this youthful look.
Some may call another of your types "Pretty Boys," but all you know is that they're gorgeous. The combination of classic good looks with small noses, beautiful eyes, and full lips is hard to resist. These guys tend to be clean shaven, have clear skin, and get good hair cuts. They're taking good care of themselves so they can be "pretty" just for you! [Well, you and the 1 in 3 women (33%) that are also after them!]
Here's one thing that made me unique: By your choices, you've shown that you're open to men who wear glasses. Glasses can make a huge difference in a man's appearance. [Hey, it always worked for Clark Kent and Superman!] Maybe those studious-looking horn-rimmed glasses turn you on. Or maybe you just enjoy a man who has a variety of different "looks" and styles.
And apparently I'm more into blonde to light brownish hair, brown eyes, someone 25 or older, button noses, round faces, and fairly stocky.
Hmmm, interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Via the always funny (and a little too applicable) PhD comics.
It's also the shirt I'm wearing right now. :)
|
|
|
|
|
There's nothing like walking around in fresh snow.
I love the way it sounds and feels under your feet. Sorta like walking around on cotton -- soft and muffled.
I also love how fresh snow covers up all the dirty slush.
It's just not that much fun to drive on. Maybe I should walk more.
|
|
|
|
|
Here's something disturbing, yet strangely hilarious... Bud Light's Making Faces. "It's time to stop sending regular email, send a living, breathing, talking character that you can create in just minutes.
Here's the one of me (as a "country grrrl") I received in email a couple days ago. It's a little creepy to receive an ecard where YOU are the one talking!
Anyway, it's a sure-fire procrastination aid for sure! How many embarrassing things can you make YOUR pictures say? Knowing some of you, I'm almost afraid to ask. :)
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Mary.com: A website where you can send letters to Mary Cheney, in response to her dad's (and his pseudo-boss's) newest discrimination campaign.
From website: What do you hope to accomplish?
We hope to convince Mary to do the right thing and publicly urge her father to oppose any proposal to add anti-gay prejudice to the US Constitution. And we hope to publicly shame the vice president into defending his own daughter by publicly opposing this amendment.
Yeah, it's doubtful how effective this will actually be (as most Internet letter-writing campaigns/petitions are pretty much pointless), but at least it's out there.
I'm always amazed to hear about contradictions in politicians. We've got Thomas Jefferson, the author of our Constitution and many of the freedoms we have today (that is, those that are left) -- yet in his private life he owned slaves. There's Andrew Jackson, a man that was known for signing legislation to force Native Americans down the "Trail of Tears" -- all the while having an adopted Native American child. Of course, we won't forget our own Bill Clinton, the president who's now signed the infamous "Defense of Marriage" Act, while -- um, not really protecting or valuing his own spousal arrangement.
And now this, a Vice President who is willing to discriminate against his own daughter for political gain.
P.S.: Well, here's some good news. I've been so busy with schoolwork & life issues that I almost missed Darren's latest project, Flowers for Al & Don. He's set up a PayPal account where you can donate money to send flowers down to the happy couples in San Fran. The AP even picked up on this and wrote an article on it. So far, over $11,000.00 has been donated by people all over the world. This makes me happy.
|
|
|
|
|
(Sleep is SO overrated.)
At one point in Lost in Translation, Charlotte muses that every girl goes through a "photography stage" in her life. I think today was my turn -- I just love it when the world is covered in a white haze.
For more fruits of my digital labors, check out my fotopage.
|
|
|
|
|
A couple other things I wanted to mention, but didn't want to include in the post below...
I met another Saskatoon blogger tonight! It's quite the surreal experience to be sitting in a crowded theatre, and then have someone you've never met call out your name in recognition! It's quite funny, flattering, and neat, actually. Again, I'm reminded of the need of some kind of Saskatoon blogging geek get-together, someday!
While we were talking before the film started, her daughter pointed out another one of my "movie-buddies" in the audience -- none other than the creepy Jeff Rogstad, of the invading-my-personal-space-in-sitting-right-next-to-me fame. Funny, no? According to L, he was looking "very grape-y" in his tie. Me, I was just thankful he was across the theatre!
Also while I was talking to my new fellow blogger kindred spirit, I had a chance to 'splain what a "blog" was to the girl sitting next to me, caught in the crossfire of my conversation. Of course, all of this only convinced me further of the need of investing in some of these. I really am a geek.
Okay, maybe I'll try to sleep some tonight. ttfn!
EDIT (yet again): I forgot I wanted to add this bit from Ebert's review as well:
Note: I said the film is the most violent I have ever seen. It will probably be the most violent you have ever seen. This is not a criticism but an observation; the film is unsuitable for younger viewers, but works powerfully for those who can endure it. The MPAA's R rating is definitive proof that the organization either will never give the NC-17 rating for violence alone, or was intimidated by the subject matter. If it had been anyone other than Jesus up on that cross, I have a feeling that NC-17 would have been automatic.
Now there's an interesting point to consider. Yikes, it's almost 2 and I have a morning appointment tomorrow. Ugh. |
|
|
|
|
How can I vocalize a reaction after being speechless?
I walked into the theatre tonight -- well, not expecting all that much, really. Sure, I was curious about the hype surrounding the picture. Maybe I was halfheartedly dragged by her, rather than spending the night at home working on my paper proposal (granted it doesn't take much to derail plans to work on schoolwork). And I was for sure going to go to the film after standing outside in line for 45 minutes to get the tickets, along with half of Saskatoon.
Before getting to the actual theatre, I stopped and read his review. I know that I'm always singing Ebert's praises, but I truly think this is one of his best reviews. I'd encourage anyone that wants or is even curious about the film to go read what he says about it. For one, it semi-prepares you for what is to come.
You know I have to quote some excerpts of it:
This is not a Passion like any other ever filmed. Perhaps that is the best reason for it. I grew up on those pious Hollywood biblical epics of the 1950s, which looked like holy cards brought to life.
[...] If it does nothing else, Gibson's film will break the tradition of turning Jesus and his disciples into neat, clean, well-barbered middle-class businessmen. They were poor men in a poor land.
[...]"The Passion of the Christ," more than any other film I can recall, depends upon theological considerations. Gibson has not made a movie that anyone would call "commercial," and if it grosses millions, that will not be because anyone was entertained. It is a personal message movie of the most radical kind, attempting to re-create events of personal urgency to Gibson. The filmmaker has put his artistry and fortune at the service of his conviction and belief, and that doesn't happen often.
Is the film "good" or "great?" I imagine each person's reaction (visceral, theological, artistic) will differ. I was moved by the depth of feeling, by the skill of the actors and technicians, by their desire to see this project through no matter what. To discuss individual performances, such as James Caviezel's heroic depiction of the ordeal, is almost beside the point. This isn't a movie about performances, although it has powerful ones, or about technique, although it is awesome, or about cinematography (although Caleb Deschanel paints with an artist's eye), or music (although John Debney supports the content without distracting from it).
And this is the clincher for me: It is a film about an idea. An idea that it is necessary to fully comprehend the Passion if Christianity is to make any sense. Gibson has communicated his idea with a singleminded urgency. Many will disagree. Some will agree, but be horrified by the graphic treatment. I myself am no longer religious in the sense that a long-ago altar boy thought he should be, but I can respond to the power of belief whether I agree or not, and when I find it in a film, I must respect it.
As the credits started to roll, I felt a sense of this that is hard to put into words.
I literally had to sit still in my seat and listen to the closing credits music until the house lights came up, before I could leave the theatre.
I don't know if I can position myself solely in the "Christian" realm of spirituality anymore, but I know that as I watched this film I was genuinely moved by the sacrifice it graphically presented before me.
Initially I was wary of going to see this on its opening night, particularly because of the religious significance of the day. But you know -- I'm really glad I did. I was surrounded by earnest people who truly wanted to experience this film for all of its spiritual implications. It wouldn't have been the same if I had gone on a Saturday afternoon, only to leave the theatre and continue on with the rest of my day.
And there's something to be said about experiencing the film in Aramaic and Greek. I read somewhere that Gibson originally wanted the film to be without subtitles -- and you know, I think it could have been just as powerful, watching it and filling in its blanks.
This was an experience that was at once something that I never want to have to go through again -- in terms of experiencing its brutality ... but then again, I never want to forget it, either.
EDIT: Even after watching this tonight, there's still a part of me that wants to react negatively to the hype that has surrounded this film. You know, the churches who bought thousands of tickets ahead of time, the relentless media coverage, the spotlighting of Mel Gibson, yadda yadda. But I think that sometimes you have to put your cynicism aside and allow yourself to be moved. Notice I didn't say manipulated -- I said, moved. Tonight I was. I'm not afraid to admit that, but I hate that even now a bit of me wants to be cynical about what I've just been a part of.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, so L convinced me to brave the crazy masses at the theatre to get tickets to the Passion of the Christ.
I'm not sure I'm looking forward to seeing it, for a host of reasons -- but I'll post my thoughts on it later tonight.
|
|
|
|
|
Kenneth Burke on Identification, from "The Rhetorical Situation"
Let's get at the matter by a kind of parable. Some time ago I wrote an article entitled "Uneasy Thoughts on Automotive Man." It was based on an observation of this sort: to walk faster, or run faster, one works harder. Similarly, to drive faster on a bicycle, one works harder. But when I learned to drive a car, I suddenly found myself confronting a quite different realm of motives. For I needed but press down the gas pedal the slightest bit more, and the car could pick up terrific speed, with no more work at all on my part.
Here was a fantastic coefficient of power. And surely, I thought, here is a fundamental moral problem. It seemed to me that we, as individuals, are easily tempted to mistake these mechanical powers for our very own. Give a man a few dollars to spend in a supermarket, and he might spontaneously feel superior to some primitive tribesman who could make a living in a wilderness, whereas under such primitive conditions this self-adulating idiot would purely and simply starve to death.
Such thoughts concern man's identification with his machines in ways whereby he mistakes their powers for his, and loves himself accordingly.
|
|
|
|
|
From this week's Harper's Review
More than 60 prominent scientists, including 20 Nobel prize
winners and 19 winners of the National Medal of Science,
denounced the Bush Administration for its systematic
distortion of scientific facts for political gain; John H.
Marburger III, the administration's head of science and
technology policy, dismissed the report and said that it was
politically motivated. President Bush's Council of Economic
Advisors decided to move the official start date of the last
recession from the generally accepted March 2001 to the
fourth quarter of 2000, when Bill Clinton was still
president. Health and Human Services officials admitted that
a report on racial and ethnic disparities in health care was
altered to make it seem more upbeat. "There was a mistake
made," said Secretary Tommy Thompson. The Bush
Administration began to back away from its predictions that
the national economy, which has lost 2.5 million jobs since
Bush took office, would add 2.6 million jobs this year. It
was noted, not for the first time, that George W. Bush could
be the first president since Herbert Hoover to end a term
with fewer American jobs than when he started, and the
president's chief economic advisor suggested that fast-food
jobs might need to be reclassified. "When a fast-food
restaurant sells a hamburger, for example, is it providing a
'service' or is it combining inputs to 'manufacture' a
product?" Scientists found that people are more likely to
tell lies when using the telephone. Colin Powell said that
the conquest of Iraq was justified because Saddam Hussein
would have used weapons of mass destruction if only he had
had some.
|
|
|
|
|
Studies show that wearing hair in braids reduces your age in half.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, you.
Go check out Rilla's Commonplace Book. It's very nifty and chock-full of poetry goodness. Mmmm, John Donne.
[/shameless plug for fellow starving grad student]
|
|
|
|
|
Found in last month's Fitness magazine as part of the 7 Things You Should Never Regret:
Two of them were especially applicable:
1. Devouring Dessert. Rather than obsess over a few (hundred) empty calories -- and possible diet towel for the day -- focus on the positive. Indulging in sweets when the urge hits can short-circuit a binge later. Sure, scarfing down a pint of ice cream may be overkill, but having a scoop or two? That's just good (and cheap!) therapy.
Mmm, so maybe now I won't feel so guilty over my creme brulee I had after sushi tonight.
and 2. Cutting Someone Loose. Breaking up with a commitment-phobic boyfriend, narcissistic or cowardly pals, or got-their-degree-by-mail shrinks is about self-protection, not selfishness. Free yourself of that negativity. Acknowledging that you deserve better opens your mind to new experiences and opportunities.
Check.
Other happy note: our apartment population has decreased by half this month. Two roomies are housesitting for a month, leaving just me and her the run of the place. Nice!
|
|
|
|
|
Now that all that ranting is out of my system, I recently (ie., two seconds ago) discovered Haloscan now offers Trackbacks. I'm just getting so technological these days, it's scary.
|
|
|
|
|
Reason #1,450 to despise the Miserable Failure currently in office:
For all these reasons, the Defense of Marriage requires a constitutional amendment. An amendment to the Constitution is never to be undertaken lightly. The amendment process has addressed many serious matters of national concern. And the preservation of marriage rises to this level of national importance. The union of a man and woman is the most enduring human institution, honoring -- honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith. Ages of experience have taught humanity that the commitment of a husband and wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society.
Marriage cannot be severed from its cultural, religious and natural roots without weakening the good influence of society. Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all. Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife. (from official press release)
This makes me feel literally sick. Now my government is going to tarnish the document it was founded upon, in order to forward the political and religious aims of the current Administration.
"Defense of Marriage?" Perhaps we should stop quibbling over who has the right to marry, and focus on why 1 of 2 marriages end in divorce.
It's news like this that makes me wonder if I'll ever marry -- especially if the government and fundamentalist church get to dictate who qualifies. I don't need my relationship to be validated by some slip of paper that is only available to me because I was born heterosexual.
I can think of several relationships of people I know, whose commitment to each other is strong -- regardless of their sexual orientation. Doesn't anyone else find it ironic that the politicians who signed this "Defense of Marriage" act are the very ones who have affairs with interns and have several marriages in their history?
And now Kerry is saying that he "supports civil unions" while opposing gay marriage.
Matter. of. semantics.
Ugh, politics.
|
|
|
|
|
Remember the controversy surrounding David and Goliath teeshirts that said, "Boys are stupid, throw rocks at them?"
Well, now you can play the flash game and take out all your boy angst online. It's way addicting and charmingly politically incorrect.
Of course, I beat the game. I've got a killer aim and a couple targets in mind.
Oooh, and while you're there, check out their desktops. Here's the one I picked for my laptop.
|
|
|
|
|
 "Your left hand says 'we,' your right hand says 'me.'"
Okay, so I'm a little behind in the times, but have you noticed the new DeBeers right-hand ring ad campaign?! According to the ad copy, "The diamond Right Hand Ring signifies the strength, success and independence of women of the twenty-first century."
Yuck. Nothing like taking the fight for women's equality, merging it with the evils of consumerism, and then trying to pass it off as liberation.
"Only in a truly twised universe can spending thousands of dollars on a sparkly trinket from an industry with one of the worst human rights records around be considered a political statement." (bitch magazine)
It is more than a little ironic that people like Katie Couric and other celebrities can tout their rings as signs of empowerment and achieving independence -- when really they're only victims of a slick advertising campaign. (NY Times article, username/password grrrlmeets)
The whole sheep mentality when supposedly achieving originality reminds me of my favorite Adbusters spoof.
I'm an independent woman, and I don't need a ring on my right hand to signify that -- thankyouverymuch.
|
|
|
|
|
Oooh, I get to teach me some William Blake in class today. Here's one of my favorites of his, I wonder if my students will grasp some of its darker meanings?
The Sick Rose
William Blake
O rose, thou art sick.
The invisible worm
That flies in the night
In the howling storm
Has found out thy bed
Of crimson joy,
And his dark secret love
Does thy life destroy.
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, I only have a couple minutes before I need to immerse myself in schoolwork I've long procrastinated upon.
I went to Broadway and watched 11''09'01. It is a film that I wish was distributed more widely than it was. I doubt many people back home watched it, which is tragic because it's the type of film that needs to be seen, with its points considered.
Out of the 11 vignettes, there were a couple that really stood out for me. My favorite one was by the Mexican director Alejandro González Iñárritu. For most of its 10 minutes, the screen is black and the dialogue is made up of mobile phone calls from victims and observers of the tragedy. A few times, the screen flashes the image of someone freefalling from the towers -- and by the end of short, the black screen gradually become brighter, until a line in Arabic flashes across the screen, with its English translation showing beneath it: Does God's light guide or blind us? It was a powerful moment -- I liked the simplicity of it all, and how it simultaneously remembers the dead while reminding us of our present responsibilities.
Claude Lelouch's France segment was also powerful in its cinematography, floating us in between the world of the deaf and the hearing. The Indian director Mira Nair showed the raw emotions surrounding those falsely accused of terrorist/anti-American activities in her short, "From Terrorist to Hero." The Iranian segment, "God, Construction and Destruction" showed an aspect of the Middle Eastern world that we in the West too often ignore. Watching the futility of people furiously scattering about making mud bricks, in order to build better bomb shelters to avoid the wrath of vengeance -- it puts a different face on who is wounded the most during our touted "Shock and Awe" campaigns.
The other short I really liked in this film was the English segment, directed by Ken Loach. This segment featured a Chilean man recounting the brutality of his own September 11th experience -- September 11, 1973, when General Pinochet took over his country from its democratically elected leader, with the aid of CIA and US financial support of 10 million dollars. Over 30,000 people died in this takeover and rule of the dictator -- at the end of the short, the man states "We will remember your losses on your September 11, will you remember ours?"
Hmm, I only intended to spend a few minutes writing about this, and now it's been almost a half an hour.
If you can, see or rent this movie. Even if you don't necessarily agree with everything that is said, it's important that we always have our perspectives open to ones outside our own borders.
|
|
|
|
|
I've had my very first purple M&M today. I can't remember if I voted for that color or for the turquoise.
I can remember the day when there were only yellow, green, and brown M&Ms, with no red or blue.
|
|
|
|
|
Ooooh, look what I found: NASCAR has a Lap by Lap analysis of every race. So I can read and catch up on whatever I miss. Yay.
|
|
|
|
|
Two observations:
1. Looks like Ralph Nader is throwing his hat into the ring. I'm not sure how I feel about that, at this point. I need to investigate his platforms further, and keep fighting the urge to say he's going to steal away Democratic votes.
2. According to this Yankee or Dixie dialect quiz, I'm 89% (Dixie). Did you have any Confederate ancestors? The quiz ranges from 0% (pure Yankee) to 100% (pure Dixie). Seeing my score was a little reassuring, since someone told me on the phone the other day I'm starting to sound more Canadian!
|
|
|
|
|
Of little importances.
Sometimes the littlest things make your day. For instance, when things aren't being stolen out of my car and/or yard, I love living where I do. I love that just now I threw on a bunny hug, walked down my street 3 blocks (whilst jumping huge puddles of slush), and rented two movies plus got a cappucino to go.
I also love that in the midst of all this, I watched the sun set over the train yard. Saskatchewan definitely has the world's best sunsets.
I love that I just checked my account back home and saw my tax refund waiting there nicely for me.
I love that tonight I'll be staying home and watching a couple movies and eating some ordered Chinese food.
Tonight's menu: Monty Python's The Life of Brian (classic, plus I figure will put me in the mood for the upcoming Passion of Christ movie), Brendan Fraiser's The Queit American (it's misspelled on the video case, I just noticed -- but I doubt that will distract me from the Fraiser-qualities of it), and some fried wontons and lemon chicken. Yum.
I think a bath and an earlier bedtime is also in order for tonight.
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm. I'm finding that late night (early morning?) outings make Becky one tired grrrl, and consequently throw her to-do list out the window.
But sometimes it's just worth it.
Now to find the motivation to get up, fold laundry, clean up living space to make habitable again, and get some reading down.
Yeah, that's a fairly long list. I think right now I'll just focus on accomplishing the first item.
|
|
|
|
|
New movie at Broadway I wanna catch this weekend: 11'09''01.
Broadway's description: A reaction piece to the United States terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, this controversial film calls upon eleven directors from various countries each to contribute 11-minute 9-second films about the event. Variously political, violent, disturbing, abstract, opinionated, angered, and forgiving, each film is drastically different from the next. Starting the set is Iranian director Samira Makhmalbaf's touching short, which focuses on school-children being taught about the incident. The clearest message the children receive is that they will need to build bomb shelters for fear the US will attack them in retaliation. Perhaps the most emotional and compassionate contributions come from Bosnia's Danis Tanovic and England's Ken Loach, and there are also shorts by Mexican filmmaker Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu (Amores Perros) and American director Sean Penn. Rounding out the omnibus is a bizarrely appropriate anti-war film by Japanese director Shohei Imamura (The Eel), in which a traumatized WWII veteran reacts to the atrocities he's seen by rejecting humanity and behaving like a snake. Official Selection – Venice Film Festival. "An often brilliant, always revelatory, deeply interesting omnibus film."-- Michael Wilmington, Chicago Tribune.
Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 79%.
This should be an interesting film to watch, especially compared with Moore's book I'm in the midst of.
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Loyal Reader,
Let me propose a question to you: If you were to see a cute grrrl like myself, in a school parking lot with the hood of her car raised, struggling to get her coolant cap off, would you:
A. Pull over and proceed to help her for 1.5 minutes in taking off the bitch-of-a-cap so she can put more coolant in her car.
OR would you
B. Proceed to see her, get in your car with a friend of yours, then drive across the parking lot, hoping that she didn't see you slide by.
Hmmm, I'm thinking most of you would choose the first option, even though you may or may not know me or recognize my car.
But apparently there are some "friends" in my life who choose the latter. Ah well.
|
|
|
|
|
Best and Worst of today:
Best supper: Pasta, Salad with goldfish croutons, homemade buns with garlic butter (mmmm), and strawberries with chocolate.
Worst appearance issue: bad (and rather big) hair day all day
Best Bjork line: "thought that I could organise freedom / how scandinavian of me" (from the song Hunter)
Worst gut feeling: Not knowing what to say to cheer up a good friend of mine having a difficult time right now
Best regular Thursday night date: Survivor with L
Worst feeling: The encroachment of school deadlines
Best surprise: The birthday box sent from my parents, over a month ago, finally arriving to my door
Worst part of best surprise: realizing that the cookies inside said box are over 3 weeks old and therefore inedible now
Best car wash: One tooney = clean car whose locks won't freeze the moment you drive outside
Worst realization: Driving outside on muddy streets = dirty car once more
Best weekend possibility: Getting some major schoolwork accomplished before everything starts hitting the fan.
Worst missed opportunity: Having to back outta going to the country with Ang. :(
Okay, this is getting a bit tedious. Even for me.
EDIT: Ooooh, just thought of some more:
Best sports news: NASCAR now on FOX with my favorite announcers.
Worst part about that: I don't get FOX network, and have no real access to friends with cable for me to harass every week to watch my races.
Best part of episode 18, Season II of Queer as Folk: This guy -- both cute and artistic
Superficial other best part: Thanks to some late-night searching by the curious, he's also not gay AND Canadian!
Best part of having my own car: It's paid off and gives me freedom around town.
Worst part: When your Low Coolant light flashes off and on and you don't have guy friends (in the province or country) handy enough to check it out for you.
Best part of making my cranberry-banana-nut bread: My apartment smelling amazing!
Worst part: Making sure it's cooked all the way through with no surprise doughy-parts in the middle.
|
|
|
|
|
From Michael Moore's Dude, Where's My Country?
Excerpts from Chapter 4, The United States of BOO!
They [the Bush administration] call it a war on "terror." How exactly do you conduct a war on a noun? Wars are fought against countries, religions, and peoples. They are not fought against nouns or problems, and any time it has been attempted -- the "war on drugs," the "war on poverty" -- it fails.
Our leaders would have us believe this is a guerrilla war, fought by thousands of foreign terrorist-soldiers hidden on our soil. But this is not what is taking place, and it is time to do a reality check. Americans are rarely targets of international terrorism, and almost never on U.S. soil.
In the year 2000, your chance as an American of being killed in a terrorist attack in the United States was exactly zero. In 2002, you chance of dying in a terrorist incident was, again, ZERO. And in 2003, as of this writing, the total number of people to die in the United States from acts of terror? Zero. Even in the tragic year of 2001, your chance as an American dying in the act of terrorism in this country was 1 in 100,000.
[...]
Fear, the rational kind, is a critical part of our ability to survive. Sensing real danger and acting appropriately is an instinct that has served our species well throughout the millennia.
But irrational fear is a killer. It throws off our survival compass. It makes us reach for a gun when we hear a noise in the middle of the night (and you end up shooting your wife who was just on her way to the bathroom). It makes us not want to live near someone of another race. And it allows us to willingly give up the civil liberties we have enjoyed for more than 200 years, simply because our "leader" tells us there is a "terrorist threat."
Fear is so basic and yet so easy to manipulate that it has become both our best friend and our worst enemy. And when it is used as a weapon against us, it has the ability to destroy much of what we have come to love about life in the United States of America.
Nail. on. the. head.
|
|
|
|
| | | |
