explosivespam

Here's the rules:
1. Pick 15 of your favorite movies. 2. Go to IMDB and find a quote from each movie. 3. Post them in a note for everyone to guess. 4. Strike it out when someone guesses correctly, and put who guessed it and the movie. 5. NO GOOGLING/using IMDB search functions. That's cheating and it ruins the fun.

1. "I'm just a fucked up girl looking for my own peace of mind. Don't assign me yours." Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind lukalew 
2. "Many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to defend it."
3. "How am I supposed to heal if I can't feel time?"
4. "Some men just want to watch the world burn."
5. "I find that Thibault cancels out Capa Ferro" The Princess Bride jayene 
6. "That song was by a young mister Kurt Cobain - now that kid's got a future!" Hedwig and the Angry Inch pendulous 
7. "It's time to prove to your friends that you're worth a damn. Sometimes that means dying, sometimes it means killing a whole lot of people."
8. "In heaven there wouldn't be dust on everything."
9. "Sucking the marrow out of life doesn't mean choking on the bone." Dead Poets Society lukalew 
10. "You are a god among insects. Never let anyone tell you any different."
11. "The only question is, 'What would you do.'"
12. "I'm always serious."
13. "Here's the Remains of the Day lunchbox. Kids don't like eating at school, but if they have a Remains of the Day lunchbox they're a lot happier."  Waiting for Guffman pendulous 
14. "Right now, I'd gladly trade some growth for a little happiness."
15. "Sooner or later, even a guy who's squeaky clean falls in the mud."

This has been my first time scanning the news channels since the abortion doctor murder. They are all discussing the choice of abortion.

Now is not the time to discuss the merits and issues related to abortion.

Now is the time for every American to loudly and universally denounce murder. ESPECIALLY those who are pro-life.

Not, "This should not have happened, but..."

Simply, "This should not have happened."

Period.

Whenever I'm enjoying a book, I find myself casting the movie.

Movie Title - Stranger: People misunderstand the importance of shortening movie titles. It's not just to make it snazzy. It's so people can say "Hey, you seen Stranger yet?" quickly. Otherwise, everyone twists their tongues talking about your film.
Valentine Michael Smith - Jude Law: Law may be a little too old at this point, but he has the exoticness of a martian but also the large, innocent eyes that Smith would have to have. And he's a good enough actor to pull off playing someone who should seem decidedly foreign in everything he does. Alternate option: James Franco.
Ben Caxton - Ben Affleck: Caxton becomes a background role as soon as Jubal Harshaw shows up, so if you use a known name at all it needs to be B-List and not someone who is going to pull attention away from Smith and Harshaw, who are the real show.
Gillian Boardman - Some Pretty Little Thing: The character is a vapid sap, so it's best if the actress is, too.
Jubal Harshaw - Tommy Lee Jones: I'm very proud of this mental discovery, because it was the casting of Harshaw that got me on this kick in the first place. Harshaw is as much the show as Smith is, and he's the catalyst for virtually every major event in the story. You need someone old and codgy, but ultimately endearing and highly intelligent. TLJ fits that perfectly. Other options I'd considered were Gene Hackman, Harrison Ford, and Billy Dee Williams.

The need for more respectful agreement is becoming a key cause of mine, enough so that I'm not far from getting active about it.

I'm thinking seriously about writing a book: 

Fucktard: How the Culture of Nastiness Among Young Adults is Hurting America

Really people, stop being so ugly to each other, you idiots.

As weeks have passed since the Miss USA debacle, several things have gnawed at me:

1. That Perez Hilton is judging anyone and being taken seriously.
2. That Miss California had to answer a serious question while her opponent go thrown a softball (I don't object to the question; I just think Miss NC should have gotten something just as tough).
3. That this has completely overshadowed the absolutely lame response another contestant had given, far dumber than either of the two leading answers (I can't find a link, but when asked about who is to blame for the current financial crisis she gave a completely canned answer about how both the left and the right should be respected)
4. The first part of Miss California's answer.
5. That Perez Hilton gave her the lowest score, not because of the eloquence or lack thereof of her answer, but for having the Wrong Opinion.

But none of these have bothered me quite as much as the second part of her answer:

"That's just the way I was raised."

This is used as a defense of a position all  the time. How in the hell is this a valid defense for any viewpoint once you're 18? It indicates a complete absence of thought, a lack of and unwillingness toward examining one's positions. Agreeing with the way you were raised makes sense; all of us will agree with our upbringing a little bit. But... I've always kinda assumed that most of us spend our teenage years questioning, challenging, and fighting with our parents precisely so we can eventually differentiate from how we were raised and what we really believe. I always thought the purpose of teenage rebellion was the examine what one wants, thinks, and believes independently from our parents, even if we end up agreeing with them. Ultimately, we should understand WHY we were raised a certain way and be able to articulate that why, or to rebut it. To use your upbringing as your sole basis for your belief indicates as plain as day that that examination and understanding has never taken place.

"It's just the way I was raised" needs the addendum "now excuse me, I have to go eat my peas." 

Slightly edited:

Mark Twain wrote something that struck me right down to my core...something so powerful, so true, that it changed my life. I memorized it so I could repeat it to myself, over and over across the years. He wrote --"In a republic, who is the country?"

Is it the government which is for the moment in the saddle? Why, the government is merely a temporary servant: it cannot be its prerogative to determine what is right and what is wrong, and decide who is a patriot and who isn't. Its function is to obey orders, not originate them.

In a monarchy, the king and his family are the country: In a republic it is the common voice of the people. Each of you, for himself, by himself and on his own responsibility, must speak. It is a solemn and weighty responsibility, and not lightly to be flung aside at the bullying of pulpit, press, government, or the empty catchphrases of politicians.

Each must for himself alone decide what is right and what is wrong, and which course is patriotic and which isn't. You cannot shirk this and be a man.

To decide it against your convictions is to be an unqualified and inexcusable traitor, both to yourself and to your country, let men label you as they may. If you alone of all the nation shall decide one way, and that way be the right way according to your convictions, you have your duty by yourself and by your country. Hold up your head. You have nothing to be ashamed of.

Doesn't matter what the press says. Doesn't matter what the politicians or the mobs say. Doesn't matter if the whole country decides that something wrong is something right. This nation was founded on one principle above all else: The requirement that we stand up for what we believe, no matter the odds or the consequences. When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree besides the river of truth, and tell the whole world "No, you move."

- Captain America

My family and the one conservative friend I have seethe with fury over Obama. And their reasons are sound. His spending is off the charts. He immediately re-commenced funding stem cell research even though there are strong indications of its imminent irrelevancy to science. He went to Europe and kissed so much ass that he gave "first black president" a whole new meaning, and for people who are dedicated to hating the United States no matter what it does or how many people it feeds and protects across the world. The only way he is like Bush is in his shared disregard for the most basic of human rights for Guantanamo Bay detainees and willingness to preserve unchecked wiretapping privileges.

Yet I like him.

It's true. I like the guy. I like his pretty speeches. I like the appearance of absolute confidence, even when he makes mistakes. I like it when he calls for cooperation and seems to mean it. I like it when he tells people in Washington that they're going to have to tighten their belts.

"But Jim, it's just talk! He spent 800 billion dollars then trimmed less than 1% of the budget!"

I'm aware of that. I'm completely aware that Obama is full of rhetoric that has little to no connection with his actions. What I've learned, however, is that his words nevertheless have power. Words matter.

Words matter because they set a tone. They matter because they inspire action. They matter because they define the ethics of what the words are about. But perhaps most importantly, they create confidence. An effective leader engenders a sense of comfort in the organization he leads. When Obama talks, America looks good.

And how can you not like that?

I'm driving to work this morning and there is a VERY reckless driver on the road with me. Not just a little bit. Excessive speeds and obscene levels of lane-swerviness is the norm in Nashville, but this guy is taking it to a whole new level. He is going to kill somebody.

I (unwisely) make an attempt to prevent him from getting in front of me as we are both exiting the interstate. He swipes over two lanes, zooms ahead, and swipes back right in front of me, very proud of himself. It is now evident that he is headed toward the high school of which the middle school where I teach is a feeder school.

I have his license number.

I could call up the high school, but they can't do much more than talk to him since he did nothing on school grounds (Although they can undoubtedly identify him and do that much, if they want to). I could call the cops, but how many cranky old ladies make similar calls on a daily basis? I dunno, maybe I'm being a cranky old lady myself.

Plus, I was jousting with this guy, somewhat unsafely. I don't exactly have too much moral authority.

But if this kid keeps driving the way he was, someone is going to die. I'm not entirely comfortable just letting it be.

When it first started, it was all about the irony, the cuteness, and the nostalgia. People bought up 80’s Star Wars t-shirts from thrift stores until they started making fake ones. They bought up cult classics in the droves. The cornier, the better. There was a sudden revolution in celebrating simplicity.

Then it started affecting our media. Old cartoon and toy franchises are about the only things in this economy being bought up like mad right now. Transformers, Speed Racer, and coming soon, GI Joe and possibly even Thundercats. Aside from the blatant nostalgia, there’s an increasing degree of movies that make no attempt to hide – nay, advertise – that they are plotless, depthless schlock designed for sheer juvenile delight. Snakes on a Plane comes to mind immediately, but there are plenty of others. Geekdom has become nothing but a constant reliving of the power fantasy: heroes in fancy dress killing stuff. We’re all a bunch of overgrown adolescents, and it’s time to grow up.

Look, Star Wars is great. Harry Potter is great. They are both retelling of myth, and myth is fundamental. The problem is the myth is merely fundamental. For all ancient civilization accomplished, we’ve learned a thing or two since then, and if our entertainment doesn’t reflect that then we’re trapped in a very childish world of moral certainties, clear choices, and cliché melodrama (Harry Potter evolved somewhat past this in the later books, I’m told, but I saw no signs when I’d finished book three).

But even myth is a step up in maturity from our current obsession with zombies.

It actually makes me miss the Star Trek days where geek media actually inspired thought. Where you could easily sit around a restaurant table and talk for hours over whether Riker and Shelby had a right to destroy their own clones, where it was handy to know what a main deflector dish was and how Bohr’s Law affected transports. Such geekdom demands something of you.

This has been replaced by the “I have a Starfleet Insignia patch on my backpack, tee hee!” Our geekdom has regressed back to adolescence, and it is defiantly staying there. It is doing nothing for our minds, except perhaps causing them to atrophy. It has become pure indulgence where it used to inspire knowledge, imagination, and hard honest thought. The trend is not toward more intelligent, more eye-opening, but merely more intense, more violent, all the while making the subject matter and character less complex and meaningful.

If this trend continues, the stereotype of geeks will not be as social rejects in high school who went on to use their smarts to become successful, but rather social rejects in high school who went on to sit in their parents’ basement playing with action figures and pretending to be axe-swinging dwarves.

Oh wait…

The last two seasons of Battlestar Galactica have kind of gone adrift. Even Moore admits he'd written himself into corners and had planted several plot devices with no real resolution of them in mind.

Well, man did he save both his ass and the series in one incredible finale.

I am truly thrilled.

Now...

Please let our baby pass on to the next world in its peak. All the additional mini-series and crap have to stop. I want BSG to be remembered in its greatness, not after it has been sucked dry into a shriveled crusty corpse that we'll all be sick of hearing about.

EDIT: Spoilers in the comments

Rush Limbaugh has been irrelevant for the past eight years. Suddenly a Democrat is president and everyone is bitching about him again. Why does Democratic relevance suddenly make a conservative ideologue relevant? 

My conclusion is that radicals must always hate the perceived leader of the other side. When that leader is no longer the president, they go for the next in command, which oddly enough tends to be a media figure.

Don't forget that for the past eight years conservatives directed their guns at someone who, when you think about it, is a creepy ante-Rush to a comic book degree; an equally obnoxious, abrasive, arrogant, dishonest fathead, just on the other side.

But who has heard from Michael Moore since Obama was elected?

Copied from an e-mail I just received:

Subject: Confirmation of ticket purchase at www.delta.com

From: support@delta.com

As you can see, there are none of the usual indicators of spam or Trojan e-mails. The spelling is all correct, and the “from” address looks legit.

Thanks for the purchase!

Booking number: Z2BGT9T

You will find attached to this letter PASSENGER ITINERARY RECEIPT of your electronic ticket.
It verifies that you paid the ticket in full and confirms your right for air travel and luggage transportation by the indicated flight Delta Air Lines.

On board you will be offered:
- beverages;
- food;
- daily press.
You are guaranteed top-quality services and attention on the part of our benevolent personnel.

We recommend you to print PASSENGER ITINERARY RECEIPT and take it alone to the airport. It will help you to pass control and registration procedures faster.

See you on board!
Best regards,

Delta Air Lines

 

DO NOT open the file attached as it is undoubtedly a Trojan program that will install unwanted software on your computer at best and completely fry it at worst.


EDIT: I also sent this out at work and a co-worker replied: "A couple of obvious tip-offs that this is a fake would be that Delta would offer their passengers drinks, food, press, or top-quality services and attention from benevolent personnel!!!" 

 

thndrstd  recommended a website called www.sparkpeople.com from tracking calories. It has been eye-opening. Despite not feeling like I'm eating any less than usual (And despite going over the posted calorie limits twice), I lost another pound last week.

I've also garnered further insights into my general eating habits. Note that these are true for me, and may not be for anybody else.

- I can eat hard boiled eggs pretty much all day and still be under my calorie limit

- Eating a big breakfast does not decrease the size of my lunch or dinner. It's best to just drink my glass of orange juice and leave it at that.

- Milk has way too many calories to be worth it

- A box of Cheeze-Its can do just as much damage as a supersized Extra Value Meal

- Trying to eat just a little bit to try to curb hunger is usually more destructive than just sitting down and eating a whole meal

Welcome to the new system of president-led gerrymandering.

But what really scares me is not Obama taking over the census.

It is the deafening silence about it from the news media.

Imagine if Bush had put Karl Rove in charge of the census. Imagine the outrageous outcry on every news outlet.

"Everyone in this chamber, Democrats and Republicans, will have to sacrifice some worthy priorities for which there are no dollars. And that includes me."

Excuse me? Didn't you just spend 800 BILLION dollars? An amount 300 billion larger than the whole cost of a half-decade war? An amount equaling $2,500 for every single American?

Shut up.

Sucked.

I hadn't watched it until now because of what I feared it would be, and because no one was insisting I do.

It was exactly what I feared it would be.

I don't know if feminists had a field day with this movie, but they should have. Here is Lois Lane, one of the first truly empowered women in popular fiction, reduced to yet another teenage-minded wimp who can't stick to her guns or handle her own emotions.

Here's yet another movie sending the message that if you lose someone you're in love with, just get a replacement boyfriend, whom you can drop as soon as the original comes back around.

Oh yeah, and it was horribly cast and boring, too.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090204/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bailout_executive_pay

There is a lesson here: When you give the money, you get to make the rules.

At first my blood boiled at the thought that government is telling people how much they're allowed to earn. It IS blatantly socialist, possibly the most socialist thing I've seen imposed in my lifetime.

That's how it works: Government funding = government rules = socialism. If you take the money, you take the rules. So the prudent thing, the conservative thing, is to take neither.

But Republicans haven't been doing the conservative thing. They've been doing the neo-con thing, which is government funding - government rules = corporatism. This is what has allowed businesses to believe that they have a right to receive government aid with no consequences and no expectations.

In a sense, Obama is making the clear distinction between being under the control of government and being independent from it. If companies want convenience, they must pay for it in freedom. That's how government control, how socialism, works.

"gays"

Jon Stewart spent part of yesterday's episode mocking the new Republican Party chairman for being more of the same. Multiple shots were shown of him supporting low taxes (yay), delegating power to the states(yes), preserving the integrity of the Constitution (absolutely), and banning gay marriage (meh?).

Possibly the most destructive policy of the Republican party is getting it into their heads that opposing the incorporation of gays into our culture is a battle worth fighting. It's not, and here's why.

1. It's a losing strategy: Among my generation and younger, the issue of gays is a non issue. Those who ardently oppose the assimilation of gays will be remembered by history the same as those who opposed civil rights are remembered today.

2. It's not a winning strategy: How many social conservatives would say "I wanted to vote Republican, but they didn't ban gay marriage, so I'm voting Democrat!"? Please.

Granted, there is a sizable enough social conservative block that you don't want to agitate enough to create a right-wing Ralph Nader. But why make a fight? Take a page from the Democrat rulebook on this issue: Give occasional lip service to your side but never actually put forth any policy.