Tuesday, October 31, 2006

i love1 fundamentalists' responses to halloween.

on the 700 club website, there's a whole page about halloween. it's got links to all sorts of articles about the eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevils of halloween, or how to turn it into a tract-distribution day. it even talks about how satan loves when christians stay locked up in homes and churches on halloween, allowing the occult to run wild, and how christians should instead send their kids out to trick-or-treat--and proselytize as they take their candy.2

but, my favourite is this blurb that accompanies the link to an article about a vampire who found christ. the blurb states:

"Prominent in their string of monstrous acts is all consuming hate; hate for anyone or anything that stood for morality; hate for Christians; hate for The 700 Club; hate for Pat Robertson."

congratulations, pat robertson. you get the self-aggrandizement trophy today. good job.

1 and, by love, i of course mean "appreciate the fulfillment that it brings to my sense of train wreck syndrome."
2 a mission that disturbs me even more than the little girl with the jesus ribbon that i saw a couple years ago...more disturbing in that it's not a passive thing like wearing a ribbon, but something active that the child may not actually understand what they're doing.

Monday, October 30, 2006

i was coming home from school today, and i saw something that deeply bothered me. in front of every single apartment building owned by wash u, there were campaign signs, urging people to vote yes on amendment 2.

i, personally, support amendment 2, the stem cell research amendment. if i owned my own property, i would put a pro-2 sign in my front yard. but, i think that wash u putting these pro-2 signs in the front yards of all of their student apartments is offensive. as the owner of the buildings, the university was clearly within its legal rights to place the signs in the front yards of the apartment buildings, but it was an invasive thing for them to do. they've already gotten their point across...they sent letters out to the students last week, informing them that the university, as an institution, supports amendment 2 and amendment 31. i thought sending the letters was approaching the line between appropriate and inappropriate behaviour of the university, but just slipped in on the appropriate side, since the letter was tactfully written.2

the signs, on the other hand, cross any boundary of tact. embryonic stem cell research is a very hot button issue. there are probably a lot of people in the wash u community, such as myself, who support the initiative...but there are also undoubtedly many who do not. there's almost no way that everyone in university-owned apartment housing supports amendment 2, and having a sign in front of their apartment building urging people to support an amendment that some of the people living on the property may find unethical just bothers me.

i think the university, if it wanted to further promote the amendment, could have done other things. the university has already decided to take a public stance for amendment 2. it could have sponsored an advertisement, or possibly hung pro-2 flyers around the university or the community. it could have done almost anything that didn't invade our living space, our front yards, with campaign materials. the university taking a public stance for a state ballot measure is, in my opinion, of dubious enough wisdom; placing political signs in university-owned apartment yards is probably more likely to cause friction and animosity among residents who do not agree with amendment 2 than it is to change anyone's mind.

1 amendment 3 is a large tobacco tax hike to fund healthcare programmes, as well as smoking cessation programmes.
2 i have very mixed feelings about universities taking stances on political issues. in a perfect world, it wouldn't bother me at all...large clusters of educated people have the ability to be a strong catalyst for social change. but, many real political issues have truly educated arguments to support multiple viewpoints on it. for a university itself to take a position on a political issue may pose more harm to the intellectual discourse on campus than the imprimatur of the institution may assist the passage of a measure it supports. there are some situations in which action by a university as an institution may be more appropriate than others (living wage campaigns for university workers come to mind), but issues and actions that do not primarily affect the university community, but rather are larger social issues, might not be proper for universities to take public stances on. it's not an issue i've resolved in my head one way or the other; it still causes me much uneasiness.
letters_in_sand posted this this morning, and it's awesome. it's an article from wired, with various authors' and other people's six word stories. some of them are just amazingly witty.

my favourite is the one by margaret atwood:

Longed for him. Got him. Shit.
straight outta compton? pshaw. posers. st. louis is more dangerous.

Sunday, October 29, 2006

i don't know if it's the melody, the singing voice, the lyrics, or a crazy combination of the three. i don't know what it is. all i know is that snow patrol is way too darn good at making me cry. i just heard this song for the first time this evening, and it's amazing.

"chasing cars"
by snow patrol

we'll do it all
on our own

we don't need
or anyone

if i lay here
if i just lay here
would you lie with me and just forget the world

i don't quite know
how to say
how i feel

those three words
are said too much
but not enough

if i lay here
if i just lay here
would you lie with me and just forget the world

forget what we're told
before we get too old
show me a garden that's bursting into life

let's waste time
chasing cars
around our heads

i need your grace
to remind me
to find my own

if i lay here
if i just lay here
would you lie with me and just forget the world

forget what we're told
before we get too old
show me a garden that's bursting into life

all that i am
all that i ever was
is here in your perfect eyes
they're all i can see

i don't know where
confused about how as well
just know that these things will never change for us at all

if i lay here
if i just lay here
would you lie with me and just forget the world

Friday, October 27, 2006

pearls before swine for the win...because i love clever word play. (well, and guard duck. i love guard duck too.)

Thursday, October 26, 2006

this website makes me happy. if you love penguins, it will make you happy too.

it's a camera stationed in antarctica, in a place where gentoo penguins (my favourite kind!) enjoy hanging out and nesting. some of the cameras refresh every 15 minutes, and some of them refresh every half and hour, but all of them provide cute, silly, and whimsical penguin pictures this time of year.

there was a thread on fark about scientology today. one of the posters, BizarroHulk, made a brilliantly silly comment:

"Man, I hate it when n00bs are so proud of hitting Operating Thetan Level 7. After you've been World of Hubbardcraft for a couple years your Thetan will hit Level 60, then you can try the epic endgame Scientology quests and raids."

i am an advice column junkie. i read them all the time. most of the time, nothing that anyone writes into the column affects me very much, gets me particularly excited or particularly mad.

someone who wrote into savage love this week really pissed me off.

it's not one of the people who wrote in asking for advice, but someone who wrote in commenting about one of last week's letters. the letter was a woman writing in, discussing her boyfriend's extreme jealous streak. the boyfriend wouldn't let her talk to her old guy friends, and even stormed out and got pissed after some guy grabbed her bum at a club, and she told him to stop it, and that she was with her boyfriend. dan savage told her to DTMFA1, and told her that such jealousy and possessiveness is a form of emotional abuse--which could later escalate to physical abuse, as well as cause lasting emotional damage.

i thought dan savage's advice was right on target. he has no business being that possessive, and getting pissed off in those situations. if the writer of the letter was describing her description accurately, i think the boyfriend is toxic, and has the mindset of an abuser. the mature way to deal with his jealousy would be to talk to her about his concerns, and trust her until he finds a concrete reason not to. getting mad when she talks to people that she's not cheating on him with, or contemplating cheating on him with, is not going to solve what he sees as a problem with her talking to members the opposite sex.

this week, savage love printed a series of responses to his advice to her last week. a lot of people wrote in telling him that his advice for her to dump him was good advice for very similar reasons that i think it's good.

some people wrote in to disagree with his advice. some people said that they needed to talk about it, that this kind of jealousy wasn't necessarily the kind that was overly possessive, wasn't necessarily the kind that would cause, or lead to, life-ruining consequences. i didn't agree with those assertions, but i could see why they were made. those aren't the letters that made me mad.

this is the one that made me mad:

Big fan of your column, but your response to GREEN was over the top. This guy isn't "emotionally abusive" or "controlling," he's just a passive-aggressive, insecure, beta-male crybaby who doesn't know how to handle or cope with jealousy. If this guy truly was "controlling," he would be telling GREEN that she can't EVER talk to or see another guy, or be verbally threatening her. Yet this guy can't even muster up the courage to talk to her about it. That's not abusive behavior, it's just being an insecure baby.

You are right for saying that she should break up with him, but you went a BIT too far by throwing in all that physical-abuse scare-tactic baloney. If this guy can't even talk to his girlfriend about what happened, I highly doubt that he would have the courage to raise a fist or foot at her.

Curb Your Alarmism

this guy is actually trying to argue that the guy is too much of a pansy to beat up his girlfriend, or to actually cut her off, and therefore he's not a threat? i take issue at his assertion that beating up your girlfriend, or cutting them off from the world, takes any courage at all--much less more courage than communicating about the problem. facing what he perceives to be a problem, and trying to solve it, takes a lot more courage. addressing problems in a relationship requires openness, and willingness by both parties to come to a solution that is beneficial. addressing problems requires someone to face the possibility that they may be doing something wrong or hurtful, and changing behaviour accordingly. admitting this takes courage.

beating or isolating a person, on the other hand, doesn't require any courage at all. an abuser is, among many things, too scared to face the idea that they might be wrong, or that they might not have all the power in the relationship. an abuser goes ahead, assumes his or her position is correct to the exclusion of any others, and resorts to abuse to scare the other party into staying in line with their autocratic agenda. the writer of that letter seems to think that abuse is something that only a highly secure person uses...when, if the person was personally secure, and secure in the relationship, abuse would not be perceived as a necessary tactic for maintaining the relationship's status quo.

i've heard people try to justify abuse before, but it's always couched in terms of a response to someone else's perceived transgressions. that isn't a justification for it either, but it's one i'm used to people spouting, and one i'm used to refuting. but, arguing that abuse is a display of an abuser's courage? that's a new one, and a frightening one.

1 for all of you who don't read savage love (shame on you!), that's savage-ese for Dump The Mother Fucker Already.

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

my beautiful plans for what classes to take for the rest of law school have been foiled! all three remaining semesters in law school present serious problems.

first of all, spring 2007. i was planning on taking indian law. i can't, which makes me sad because the professor (my property prof from last year) is awesome, and he's not teaching this class 3L year. it meets monday, tuesday, and thursday from 2-3. problem is, i'm in a clinic that has meetings on tuesday from 3:30 until 5:30. these meetings are at the st. louis county public defender's office, and there's no way i can get from the law school to the public defender on public transportation in half an hour. since i'm not going to pay for a cab every week, and i'm not going to set up a class schedule that's contingent on being able to bum rides every week, indian law appears has to be a no go. on top of that, criminal justice administration is being taught next semester, but it meets at 9:30am on wednesdays and fridays. monday through thursday morning classes are bad because it could conflict with court dates for my clinic, and friday morning classes are just plain unpleasant. this class poses both problems. it's being taught again next semester, but that leads to my next problem:

fall 2007. the semester of Too Many Interesting Classes. i'm listing all the classes i want to take next year, by semester, and so far i have twenty-six hours worth of classes that look interesting to take next fall. most of them aren't even being offered any semester i'm here except for that semester. this makes me sad, because it means that i won't get to take everything i want. i know advanced trial advocacy is non-negotiable, but beyond that, i don't even know which classes i'm going to take. maybe i'll dump my ethics all the way to spring semester and hope i get into reel justice? that would suck in a sense, because i hate watching movies, but maybe watching movies would still be better than reading for the legal profession? i don't know. i also want to take the MPRE while i'm in school, so i have at least two shots at it before the bar, so i should find out if i have to take ethics before it, or just delve in and take the darn test. who knows.

finally, the biggest problem of all: spring 2008. the class offerings for spring 2008 suck. they suck a lot. fall 2007 is full of classes that look absolutely fascinating, and then spring they offer nothing that tickles my fancy except for advanced practical criminal procedure. this means that if i can't swing being able to take a second clinic that semester, then i'm going to be stuck, my last semester of law school, taking a bunch of classes that are going to bore me to death. if i had any interest in the washington DC clinic, that would be the time to do it, except i don't. i don't want to go into politics or administrative law, and furthermore, i'd rather jump off a bridge than ever live there again. the summer of 2002 was more than enough for me. DC is a terrible place to live...between the summer heat, the lack of fun things to do, and the transportation shutting down so early, i'd be more than happy never to go there again. this means i'm going to have to swing another clinic here in st. louis that semester, either the appellate clinic, the civil justice clinic, or the judicial clerkship clinic. the enjoyment of the end of my 3L year depends on it.

what a mess.

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

yep. hunch confirmed. audition was terrible. didn't make the trademark moot court.
rinkworks is awesome...it's basically a compendium of funny stuff. i've been reading "computer stupidities" on there for a while, and have finally started reading other humour pages they have.

this one's specifically for the mad jurist, and his collection of things that should not go on cover letters. they call it resume quotations, but it includes terrible lines from both resumes and cover letters. many of them are extremely amusing, but these are my favourites:
  • "I have a bachelorette degree in computers." (so you got a degree in looking at strippers on the internet while drinking lots of beer? where can i get one of those?)
  • "I can play well with others." (do you also avoid running with scissors?)
  • "I am the king of accounts payable reconciliation." (do you get a funny hat, like the Burger King? can you sneak up on people in the morning, reconcile their accounts payable, and slip away as if they were hallucinating?)
  • "Skills: Operated Pitney Bones machine." (what did you do to Gene Pitney's bones?! "only love can break a heart" was sappy, but it's a good oldie!)
  • "I saw your ad on the information highway, and I came to a screeching halt." (so, i looked up "cheesy" in webster's dictionary. i think this was in the definition somewhere.)
  • "My fortune cookie said, 'Your next interview will result in a job' -- and I like your company in particular." (that one could work out really well, or really poorly. it's humourous, but all i can think of is someone like my music theory sub from twelfth grade, or that "god warrior" lady from trading spouses, would find it and start screaming that the candidate was giving credence to fortune cookies instead of the bible. i don't know why i'm picturing this, but it amuses me. so, there.)
this is neat. it's a trading firm who hosted a poker tournament for its college recruits. i love the idea...as long as the traders who were watching the people play knew something about poker, they could get a really good idea of how people made tough, big-money decisions under pressure, and how people reacted if their mathematically correct poker decision ended up blowing up in their fact. call it a high-stakes case interview.

i wish legal recruiting involved poker games. it wouldn't be nearly as relevant as in trading, but it would have made the gauntlet of interviews these last two years a lot more entertaining.
the results of the trademark tryouts aren't out yet, but they're probably a moot point. i know i completely tanked my tryout. nothing i did, said, or answered felt right.

this year keeps beating me over the head with one recurring theme: i better find my great, hidden love of transactional work, because i'm never going to make it as a litigator.

Monday, October 23, 2006

wish me luck. trademark moot court tryouts are in forty minutes. i'm praying for a hot bench.1

1get your mind out of the gutter. i'm not praying that the judges look like greek gods and goddesses. i'm praying that the judges ask me a lot of questions, because i really don't want to stand there yammering for twelve minutes with no idea of what the judges want. although, if they were easy on the eyes that wouldn't be so bad, either.

Saturday, October 21, 2006

sweetest day. every year i forget about it, because i hate holidays, and because it has got to be the most insignificant, card-company-fabricated holiday ever. and, every october, it rolls around. i had forgotten about it again, until some people accosted me near belmont and clark on thursday.

two women about my age accost me. one of them shoves a price list in my hand.
woman: come into the store! we're selling expensive name-brand perfumes, discounted from retail.
me: looks at them, bewildered. umm...i don't use perfume.
woman: without skipping a beat, as if she's reminding me of an obligation i have. get some for your boyfriend. sweetest day is on saturday.
me: he doesn't wear it either. hands price list back to woman. continues walking quickly toward clark street.

it's ridiculous. of course sales of schmaltzy, shmarmy stuff must go down in october. no one is major-end-of-the-year-holiday shopping yet, and the summer lovin' has been over for a month or two. that doesn't mean that people have to accost me on the street and try to guilt me into buying things that i don't need. i'm sure all the perfume companies and card companies and flowermongers are going to sell more than enough of their wares during the holiday season. it's coming up. i promise.

happily, i'm not the only one who treats this "holiday" with the derision it so clearly deserves. i was eating lunch at this little greasy spoon a few blocks from The Foof's place, and i heard the following deadpan chat transpire between my waitress and the cook:

waitress: today's sweetest day?
cook: yeah.
waitress: happy fuckin' sweetest day.

that waitress? my hero.

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

abby told me about a website a while ago. i had looked at it a bit, but i have spent the whole morning glued to it, and have hardly scratched the surface. it's got to be one of my favourite sites on the internet. it's a wonder.

what is this wonderful site? it's chicago-l.org! it's got all sorts of history of the chicago L, pictures of the trains they've used over the years, pictures of stops both in service and defunct...basically, it's the ultimate repository of chicago transit trivia. this morning, i'm reading the entire history of the L system, with frequent detours to gawk at shiny train pictures and old defunct train stops.

i'm in transit geek heaven.

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

alright. i find it somewhat prescient that i already posted a picture of flavor flav on my blog today. why? no, i don't have any crazy new flavor of love spoilers. but, he's famous for his shiny gold grillz...and i just read an article about a very silly crime that involves gold teeth.

this dude was sleeping in his house. he wakes up, and his gold teeth were gone. kaput. jacked right out of his mouth.

he claims he is a heavy sleeper...but how in the world is he such a heavy sleeper that he slept through some guy reaching into his mouth and stealing his gold teeth? he had to have been drunk out of his mind, or high, or in some kind of altered state of consciousness. i'm a pretty heavy sleeper. i can sleep through loud noises, thunderstorms, light in the room, people climbing into bed, but i really can't fathom sleeping through someone sticking their fingers into my mouth and pulling out gold teeth.1

one of my friends suggested insurance fraud. if they were expensive, that might be it, although it would be the silliest insurance fraud plan ever. but, he's only claiming the teeth are worth eighty dollars! maybe he really needs eighty dollars. maybe he needs some more weed, or crack, or whatever whacked him out so much to think of the idea that his gold teeth got swiped in his sleep.

the other weird thing about this case...it's in the guy's house! if he were sleeping on a park bench, it would still be weird, the whole thing about reaching into his mouth and stealing gold teeth. but, there would be a lot more chance for random people to be walking by while his mouth was gaping wide open if he were sleeping outside, in public. but, he was in his house, in his own bed! that's just nasty. he said some friends were over, but the friends didn't steal anything else, just his gold teeth. if it were a prank, i'm sure they'd have given it back to him when he woke up, they'd all have a good laugh, and he'd pop his gold tooth or grill or whatever back in. but, he never got it back! 2

this all leads to one issue, the question presented if you will: why would some guy steal gold teeth out of someone else's mouth???

1 well, i don't have gold teeth. but, if i did, i still would probably be awake by the time that nasty old thief was reaching into my mouth.
2 maybe he stole the gold tooth to hock for weed or crack?
awesome picture of the day:


Monday, October 16, 2006

this is awesome. someone put the i give shaw muffin page back up!!

it may be the second most useless page on the internet.1 why is it only the second most useless? because it serves no useful purpose, except for the fact that it's actually funny.

1 second to this one, of course.
it's raining outside, and i'm watching bad TV.

by bad TV, i mean the mother of all bad tv: "wildest dating show moments" on e!.

in the first five minutes of the show, they've already shown pumkin. from the first flavor of love. on blind date. in a hot tub. propositioning some dude to go to a motel with her.

i love trash!

Sunday, October 15, 2006


flav isn't that dumb! he realised new york was a jealous bitch! he sent her home and picked deelishis! HOORAYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!

so ends the fantastic second season of the flavor of love.
tonight is the season finale for Flavor of Love. i can't wait. it's down to deelishis and new york...deelishis had better win. why? because i hate new york. i know, instinctively, that new york is going to win...she got brought back from last season, and i'm sure flav won't drop her again. but, i can hope. i'm not enamoured with deelishis, but at least she's not an annoying, psychotic bitch. although...if flav saw what a harpy new york was last season and brought her back, i guess he's getting what he deserves if he picks her this time.

other than that, there's not a whole lot up. i spent yesterday recovering from friday night, sleeping in, lazing around, and then sleeping some more. i got to the grocery store yesterday evening--that's useful and practical, right? right? bueller?

i did learn one important lesson this afternoon. teaching oneself basic trademark law can make one go nuts.1 i was reading about certain trademark suits you can file, and all i could think was whether or not voldemort had registered the dark mark as his service mark?2 it would be a shame if poor voldemort had to deal with inferior evil wizards doing evil deeds. doesn't he have an interest in restricting the use of the dark mark to real death eaters and their evil deeds and ties?

1 no, i'm not teaching myself trademark law for no reason. there is a reason. i'm trying out for trademark law moot court in about a week, and since i have no knowledge of trademark law whatsoever, i decided i may as well know some basic stuff about it so i can sound Not Completely Dumb in my oral argument for tryouts.
2 if you haven't read harry potter, you suck. for your benefit, here's a dark mark, the symbol used to identify death eaters (followers of voldemort, the main bad guy) and their evil deeds.

Thursday, October 12, 2006

the onion has generally been less than funny, but this week they actually posted something awesome. my commentary will only detract, so i shall post the whole article here, for your amusement. it's the first thing they've done that has made me laugh out loud in a while...it's so darn smug.

George Steinbrenner Fires Tigers

NEW YORK—Immediately following the Yankees' first-round playoff elimination last Saturday, George Steinbrenner released a statement announcing his intention to fire the Detroit Tigers, whose "inexcusable postseason performance stunned and saddened" the 76-year-old Yankees owner.

"The Tigers' level of play during the ALDS was deeply disappointing and absolutely not acceptable to both me and the great and loyal Yankee fans," the statement read in part. "This is a mid-budget team with a payroll under $85 million, and I expected them to play like one."

Even though Steinbrenner was reportedly pleased with the way the Tigers played down the stretch, and even commended the team's starting pitching after Game 1, his mood soured as they went on to win three straight games, at one point holding the Yankee lineup scoreless for 20 consecutive innings. This drew the ire of the historically volatile Yankee owner, who had "certain expectations" for the Tigers heading into the series.

"I made it very clear how I wanted the Tigers to perform this postseason, and they failed on every level to produce the desired results," Steinbrenner's statement continued. "They had several opportunities to turn this series around, but they just went out there and played like they didn't care whether the Yankees won or lost."

"The pitching was fantastic, the offense was timely, the defense was flawless… Frankly, it made me sick," Steinbrenner added.

Steinbrenner was especially critical of Tigers manager Jim Leyland, whom he claims was primarily responsible for the Yankees' ineffective postseason. A poll conducted after the ALDS echoes Steinbrenner's sentiments, as an overwhelming 100 percent of Yankee fans say they do not support Jim Leyland, and nearly zero percent say they would be disappointed if Leyland were fired from his current managerial post.

"We were all relying on Jim, but he just didn't get the job done for us," Yankees GM Brian Cashman said. "We thought long and hard about it, but in the end we decided that the Yankee organization is better off without the Detroit Tigers around."

Steinbrenner concluded his statement by criticizing the Tigers' "shameful post-game celebration," saying that "the way they were acting, you'd think the Yankees had won the pennant."

Among the other Tiger players fired by Steinbrenner are Carlos Guillen, the Tigers shortstop who batted a "disappointing .571" during the series; outfielder Curtis Granderson, who hit two home runs and had five RBI in what Steinbrenner called "an abysmal performance"; and pitchers Kenny Rogers and Jeremy Bonderman, who "cost the Yankees the series" with back-to-back outings in which they recorded a combined 12 strikeouts and gave up just two runs.

Yankee players were not shocked by Steinbrenner's announcement.

"He's the Boss—he owns the Yankees, and that gives him the right to fire whoever he wants," shortstop Derek Jeter said. "The Yankees have a long tradition of winning, and the Detroit Tigers failed to respect that."

For the Tigers, news of their firing couldn't have come at a worse time.

"I know we didn't quite live up to the expectations of certain fans, media, and baseball organizations, but it felt like things were really starting to come together for us, like something big was right around the corner," Leyland said. "We thought we still had a lot to prove here. Who knows, if we weren't eliminated in this unexpected fashion, we might have even gone on to win a world championship."

With the Oakland A's currently waiting for an opponent for the championship series, Steinbrenner is expected to announce that the newly vacant Detroit Tigers roster will be filled by the roster of the 2006 New York Yankees, effective Game 1 of the ALCS.
this morning, someone called me asking if i'm the roofing company.

this afternoon, someone asked me if i was the city clerk.

i love wrong numbers.
this makes me happy. it's a series of links to youtube videos of beavis and butt-head, making commentary on videos.

some of them i remember. some of them i don't. the only real disappointment is that it doesn't have a link to the greatest one ever. i still can't remember what song it's for, but it has a bunch of women running around in these crazy short skirts that flounce way out, at which point beavis chants "butts! butts! butts!"

that was the funniest thing ever when i was thirteen. now that i'm twenty-three, i find it just as funny.

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

okay, vault zero probably doesn't actually taste terrible...i think i'm just so tired and flipped out about my seminar paper that my taste buds have gotten very confused.

that big sip of red bull i just took tasted like chocolate. i know that's not right. it's reasonable to think that vault zero may actually taste bad instead of good, but there's no way that a green concoction composed of water, sucrose, glucose, sodium citrate, taurine, glucuronolactone, caffeine, inositol, niacinamide, calcium pantothenate, pyridoxine hydrochloride, vitamin b12, artificial flavours, and artificial colours can taste like dark chocolate. that is a thoroughly unreasonable result.

lesson? law school is bad for your health and your sanity.
happy national coming out day!!! :D

and, on a related yet less happy note...am i the only one who thinks it's completely messed-up that the army JAG is doing their on-campus interviewing at school today, on national coming-out day?1 i doubt it was planned that way, but it's still really unnerving, and quite obnoxious. it's at best a terrible coincidence.

sigh. i wonder what the ameliorative measure is going to be this year. it had better be better than last year, the "being out in the workplace" workshop that disseminated no helpful information and turned out to be an hourlong ad for firm x, whose people did the workshop.2 that was pretty darned tasteless...yes, it's great to know that firm x is a great place for queers to work, but not everyone is going to work there, and not everyone wants a firm job to begin with. hopefully the flak and fallout from last year is enough to get the school to do something better than that this year.

1 yay! happy coming out day! wanna interview for a place where you have to shove yourself back into the closet? closer, closer...there's that slap in the face for you.
2 firm x shall remain nameless here, although if you're at wash u or you've heard me bitch about that last year, i'm sure you know who it is.

Tuesday, October 10, 2006

michael phillips, entertainment writer for the chicago tribune, wins the first annual snark-tastic award from the prestigious journalistic academy of persecuted crack smokers.

there's a new british mockumentary coming out called "death of a president", dealing with the fallout of a hypothetical assassination of president bush. many of the large movie theatre chains have refused to carry the movie, and the movie is going to open at the music box, a sort of artsy movie theatre in chicago. the final paragraph of his article in the trib underscores the huge problem with the knee-jerk reactions to controversial books, articles, and movies:

"Director Gabriel Range's movie has come under fire from many conservative pundits. Some have even seen it."

Monday, October 09, 2006

i'm trying to work on my seminar paper due thursday, trying to read through all these law review articles and treatises and cases, in order to not fail my seminar. (not failing my seminar is highly unlikely right about now, but we'll see.) i'm deathly tired for some unknown reason. i shouldn't be, because i slept seven hours last night and fourteen the night before, and i've been drinking caffeine as fast as i can get my hands on it.

today, i'm really, really regretting my strong stance against taking caffeine pills. i think i was scared away from them the same way almost everyone in my generation was scared away from them: the "i'm so excited...i'm so excited...i'm so...scared..." episode of the Show That Will Not Be Named.1 caffeinated drinks are just not waking me up as quickly as whatever fog is clinging to my brain is putting me to sleep.

anyway, i don't know if the fact that i'm so tired is interfering with the communication between my taste buds and my brain, or if i'm just generally this slow to realise things. i'm drinking a vault zero right now. i've been drinking vault zero for as long as it's been out on the market, pushing a year now. i know it's inferior to its ancestor, surge2, but i've been drinking it, convinced that it's alright.

i had a realisation today--vault zero tastes terrible!!

i've been choking down the rest of my bottle of it, because i spent the money on it and because it contains caffeine that may possibly keep me awake for the rest of the afternoon, through my meeting, and possibly through some more work on that seminar paper that i'm going to fail. but, i have to force myself not to taste it, because i really can't stand the taste of that swill today.


1 bite me very much, screech. thank you for killing my childhood.
2 you know surge! at least, you know it if you lived through the nineties.

Saturday, October 07, 2006

suck it, yankees!!!

that is all.

Friday, October 06, 2006

apparently there are still people who believe in the divine right of kings.

well, i use the term "people" in its loosest possible sense, since i'm talking about katherine harris here. yes, the same katherine harris who was secretary of state in florida during the election debacle. the same one that has somehow served two terms in the house.

now she's running for senate. the republican party didn't even want to run her, but no one would contest her in the primaries. she's currently slinging mud regarding the religious sincerity of her opponent, the incumbent democratic senator bill nelson. she commented:

"God is the one who chooses our rulers."

i thought one of the principles of the american revolution was the patent absurdity of the concept of divine right of kings. i thought this concept had been summarily rejected everywhere, except for the ceremonial anointing of british royalty with the holy oils. apparently not. now, not only does she spout all that evangelical hogwash about this being a christian nation and our need to be governed by christian laws (because apparently, non-christians "don't know better"), but she openly and notoriously buys into the concept of the divine right of kings.

(at least, she buys into it up to the point when she loses an election. if she loses this november, i'm not going to be able to resist writing her or calling her, asking for her opinion on the divine right of kings now that God has just chosen for her not to rule. five will get you ten that she'll go off on some unrelated tangent about the voters' moral depravity.)

Thursday, October 05, 2006

i almost forgot to post what is most definitely the quote of the week. tuesday night, i went to juvenile hall to volunteer. a few law students go there every week to moderate debates among the 13-16 year old girls there. this week's topic was whether or not weed should be legalized. (of course, this topic had been suggested by the girls themselves.) they were very excited about this topic...although, to the chagrin of the girls, half of them had to actually argue that weed should be...gasp...illegal.1 i was assigned to help out the group that was arguing that weed should not be legal.

we helped the girls come up with arguments. we were discussing some common ones...the smoke is bad for the kids, it would be a bad influence, everyone would start smoking it. finally, one of the girls pipes up and goes:

"they'd tax it! i'm already paying ten bucks for my joint! if it's legal, i'll be paying $10.99 plus tax! i don't want to pay tax on my weed!"

eventually we got back on topic, discussing more arguments, but we kept coming back to that and cracking up the rest of the night.2

secondly...last week, one of my friends tipped me off to a segment on the radio show rover's morning glory called "dare dieter." apparently this bodybuilder-type guy named dieter does some sort of user-submitted dare every week. it's extra-stupid, of course, because it's on the radio...why do something that stupid if no one can see you do it?3 he was telling me last week about dieter sticking his hand in a large metal bear trap. apparently it broke his arm.

happily, they do post videos of dieter's stunts on the radio show's website. i watched the bear trap one, and it's really not as amusing as i hoped. there's no blood or gore. he shrieks in pain, of course, but that wasn't shocking. you couldn't even get a good look at his face, he was looking away from the camera.

but, there's another video that's absolutely priceless. it's dieter getting pulled, bare-bottomed, down a slip and slide--which abruptly ends, and is replaced with sandpaper. the heck with jackass, this is funnier than any stunt i've ever seen on that show. the camera is pointed right at him, you get a great look at his face, and as soon as he starts getting dragged down the sandpaper, the look of abject horror is the funniest thing i've seen in a long, long time.4 i was watching this video in the lounge, and my friend described my reaction as "cackling." an apt description, really. it will make you cackle too.

1 not that most of the law students there were fans of the prohibition on weed, either. but, we're just not as funny and punchy about it.
2 really, i think the taxation of marijuana is a reason why it should be legal. it can be regulated, it can be sin-taxed, and be a good source of government revenue on a sin that's probably less sinful than drinking alcohol or smoking tobacco. but, there's just something hilarious about a seveteen-year-old-kid lamenting a price increase on her blunts.
3 and before you start, stop lamenting about how listeners should just use their imaginations. imagination died and had to be buried by about the turn of the milennium, as the internet became more prevalent. we demand visual stimulus!
4 yes. i'm a jerk. we all know it. next question.

Wednesday, October 04, 2006

this video makes me so happy. i don't know what the heck it is (some french pop group? maybe?), but it has dancing penguins, a penguin with a suitcase, and a penguin in a chef's hat. what more do you need?

other than a pirate penguin, of course. that's the only thing they could have added to upgrade it from Just Plain Awesome to Absolutely Perfect.

Tuesday, October 03, 2006

i've had complaints from one of my readers1 that i haven't been updating. despite the fact that my life is pretty dull right now, and i don't have much to rant about, ranting about nothing is still more amusing than attempting to look up void-for-vagueness cases on westlaw, only to be plagued by the patently unreliable wireless internet service in the student lounge2.

first of all..i have scoured the bastion of reliable information that is the internet. so far, i have found nothing to suggest to me that a "daisy chain" refers at all to creatively using the annual exclusion in order to stop the government from taxing gifts and/or estates.3 i think i spent a significant chunk of class today with a look on my face that wavered somewhere between bemused and amused, and this is why.

secondly...i don't read something awful particularly often, but today's update was hysterical. i am specifically alluding to the mental picture of some extremely baked guy buying "joint juice" when he's on a beer run. no, you dummy. joint juice is for old people who want to take nutritional supplements to help their arthritic joints. it's for a legal purpose. if joint juice got you high, they probably couldn't sell it at the store4. reading about people doing idiotic things like that makes me so happy that i'm not a pot smoker. i do enough stupid things on my own anyway.

finally...a hearty round of congrats to The Gay Man for passing the bar. i'll now be able to say that i knew the great Foofy Attorney when he was just a wee lad, mocking trials instead of doing them for real. i also now have my proof positive that you don't have to be a stick in the mud to pass character and fitness, even in illinois where they're that strict. this is good to know, since it's looking like i'll be taking the illinois bar one of these days, coming up far sooner than i would like.

1 i have readers? who depend on me for amusement? i know, i'm just as shocked as you probably are.
2 how am i supposed to look through 200 cases if it takes five minutes to load each one? how?
3 i've checked dictionary.com. i've checked wikipedia. if you really want to gouge your eyes out, you can read another one of my sources, urban dictionary. no references to clever estate planning, or even anything resembling such. i'll just assume it was an allusion to electronic engineering, and leave it at that.
4 this would be tantamount to some cokehead being so high on coke that he bought that controversial new energy drink, cocaine, because he thought it would be a cheaper way to get high. although, i bet joint juice and cocaine are both more expensive than their druggie counterparts, since special-feature drinks tend to be so ridiculously overpriced.

Sunday, October 01, 2006

i don't know what to say about the great american beer festival this year.

new glarus brewery won the mid-size brewery prize. that's just plain awesome...they brew spotted cow, which is the best beer i've ever tasted. (which reminds me, i need to go back up to wisconsin and get some of it. i haven't had it in years, and that makes me sad.)

but, for big breweries...pabst won the blue ribbon. (as they also did in the "american style lager" category.) i thought people got smart enough to stop giving pabst any blue ribbons after 1893, at the world's fair. what is this world coming to? pabst isn't the worst cheap beer there is, but i only drink pabst if i'm broke, or if i'm having such a long night out that i really don't care. it's not award-winning beer. it's...water.

(although, that's really not as scary as the beer that won the "american cream ale or lager" category. who won that one, you may ask? red dog. yep. red dog. not some microbrew that happens to have the same name as the bum-beer staple...but, in fact, the bum beer staple. that's enough to make me want to revoke the great american beer festival's license to drink good beer, like spotted cow and other fine new glarus brewing company products. red dog????? i'm boggled.)
hilary posted this on her livejournal...and i have to share it. not only is keith olbermann a fantastic speaker...but the fact that he called bush out so blatantly and vehemently on national television for his mendacity and his fearmongering is admirable.