Archive for March, 2004
Author: Toastie Published: March 30th, 2004
Richard Clarke was just on The Daily Show, and Jon Stewart spent about ten minutes with him as opposed to the usual five, and I’m thinking that if The Daily Show is beating out the network nightly newscasts in the ratings, then it is wonderful that Richard Clarke, one of the very few bureaucrats one could ever really admire, could tell his side of things to all the young folk out there whose opinions of the world are shaped in part by The Daily Show. Very long run-on sentence. Bad news–to be fair, I suppose, Jon Stewart will have Bush tutor Karen Hughes on the next show. She’ll probably be as articulate as Richard Clarke, and I’ll be too biased to appreciate it if her arguments are at all convincing. In any event, I love The Daily Show and its mere presence on the airwaves gives some optimism regarding the future of this country. Anyway…I don’t feel the same way about Colin Quinn’s Tough Crowd; it’s terribly grating; I miss Politically Incorrect and don’t get HBO so I don’t see Bill Maher’s weekly talk show. Eek…Kennedy is one of the guests. Must change channel…
Tags: media, television, tv news
Category yet to categorized |
Author: Toastie Published: March 27th, 2004
Cast of Characters version 0.1 has been created.
Tags: friends. personal
Category yet to categorized |
Author: Toastie Published: March 26th, 2004
[It seems Semagic had auto saved this a couple of days ago...]
I had the Croupier DVD from Netflix for over a month before I finally watched it last night. I need to have a database of movies I’ve watched, just one of those numerous to-do projects. Back when I started my journal in 1989, I used to list movie ratings all the time. Too bad I didn’t keep up with that; I’d have hundreds of movies to list by now. There is my IMDB page, which I did sort of copy and put on the old toastie.com site. As with the restaurant list I am working on, I think I’d just limit my comments on movies to a few words, since I don’t proclaim to be an articulate critic of anything.
Croupier – last viewed 3/23/04 – 8 – Fascinating study of dealers and gamblers.
Tags: movies
Category yet to categorized |
Author: Toastie Published: March 9th, 2004
You are the Lovers card. The Lovers card is about
union. Each of us carries in our DNA the
ability to be the opposite of what we think we
are. Often our romantic attachments grow out of
awe and respect as we see in another the
characteristics we repress in ourselves.
Society often presses us into molds of what it
thinks masculinity and femininity should be. As
a result, many of us associate with our gender
certain positive characteristics and call
others negative, when if these same qualities
were held by a person of the opposite sex, our
attitude towards them would be reversed.
Getting in touch with our inner animus and
anima, (Jung’s terms for our inner male and
female), allows us to see the whole of our
personalities in a positive and constructive
light. When you draw The Lovers card in a
reading, you are working with balancing these
forces. Depending on where the card is, you
have either achieved balance or need to. The
Lovers could indicate a romantic or even a
platonic relationship. Ask yourself is this is
a positive relationship that contributes to
your growth as a complete human being, or if it
fills an emotional craving within you that is
actually detrimental to your personal growth.
Image from: The Iranian artist Riza.
http://www.metmuseum.org/collections/view1.asp?dep=14&item=50%2E164
Which Tarot Card Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla
Tags: meme
Category yet to categorized |
Author: Toastie Published: March 3rd, 2004
There’s been an intensely debated thread on the Psi U list this week about gay marriage, and I don’t trust myself to express articulate arguments so I generally stay silent on such issues, but I did find something amusing to post today:
The Bible seems pretty clear on this particular issue:
Leviticus 11:9-12 says:
9 These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat. 10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you: 11 They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcasses in abomination. 12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.
Deuteronomy 14:9-11 says:
9 These ye shall eat of all that are in the waters: all that have fins and scales shall ye eat: 10 And whatsoever hath not fins and scales ye may not eat; it is unclean unto you. 11 Of all clean birds ye shall eat.
(from http://godhatesshrimp.com
How about a constitutional amendment to define what acceptable seafood consumption in the U.S. should be?
Tags: religion
Category yet to categorized |
