I did it. I can't believe it, but I did it. I'm done. 50,000+ words in thirty damn days. (Final, official word count, according to the kind NaNoWriMo bots: 51,247)
That's like: whoa. (Sorry, but it really is kind of a "I know kung fu" moment)
So: that's all. I wanted to revel in the glory of winning this damn thing for the first time. I think I'm going to sleep soon - maybe that will stop the incessant bleeding from the eyes.
Stay tuned for an upcoming announcement re: the thing I just got done writing. (Even though I am not quite done with it yet)
Boy, this has been a parenthetical post, hasn't it?
(FYI: Title comes from cbeard, who got it from some other insane dude. Manky bastards, both.)
But this here ain't no foolish consistency, Mr. Emerson. I'm not at all certain that it's a wise consistency, but hey: three weeks in a row is, for me, "consistent-with-a-capital-C-and-a-silent-Q" (because having a silent Q makes a word that much more important, you see).
Anyway, put away your hobgoblins, kids. The list (non-Genius-ified, natch):
1. "No Answers" - Aeon Spoke
2. "Two at a Time" - Guster
3. "Elysium" - Hans Zimmer & Lisa Gerrard (Gladiator soundtrack)
4. "Cigarettes, Wedding Bands" - Band of Horses
5. "Honor Him" - Hans Zimmer & Lisa Gerrard (Gladiator soundtrack)
6. "Smoke" - Ben Folds Five
7. "Thousands Left Behind" - Richard Gibbs (Battlestar Galactica (2003) soundtrack)
8. "As if I Hadn't Slept" - Idlewild
9. "Call and Answer" - Barenaked Ladies
10. "Marry Song" - Band of Horses
And the bonus, FTW (please, please FTW):
11. "Dozen Wicked Words" - Longpigs
Huh. I'm pretty sure that an English band hailed as better than Oasis (and certainly more fucked up than the brothers Gallagher, if that's even possible) doesn't count as full of Win, but ... eh, what the hell. Have some 90s English radio-friendly modern rock.
"She Said" - Long Pigs: (couldn't find a video for "Dozen Wicked Words", the bastards)
Postscript: I have a couple of movie/TV soundtrack albums in my library because I like to listen to them while I write. Movie scores - especially for sci-fi/fantasy films, or anything epic (like Gladiator) - actually make for great writing music. So I've found, anyway. YMMV.
Anyway, that's why they keep showing up. And, no, I don't know why I felt the need to justify their presence. Maybe I'm a little sensitive, all right? Just back off, man. Back. Off.
I'm a regular reader of Peter King's Monday Morning Quarterback over on SI.com, have been for a while now. Don't know why, really: his writing and opinions tend toward the facile, there's a tendency on King's part to name-drop till the cows come home (a habit that plagues most sports columnists and commentators), and I don't think I've ever come away from reading one of his columns with significantly more NFL insight than I did going in. For whatever reason, I always read it (both the big column, which appears on Monday mornings, and the so-called "MMQB Tuesday Edition", which is smaller and more of a mailbag, in which King responds to selected reader correspondence and clarifies points made in the big column), and always kinda enjoy it.
Here's the thing: King uses his column as a bit of a personal soapbox, often injecting non-NFL related topics into the big column, be they family matters (like the ongoing saga of his daughter's high school softball team from a few years back) or the news of the day. Earlier in the season, King made the mistake of writing about the election, and started taking all kinds of heat from his readership for it. What he was writing wasn't in any way controversial or inflammatory, but you could pretty much tell King favored Obama for the presidency. I'm assuming that the two are more than a little related.
Well, King swore off politics in the column for the rest of the election cycle, and he was true to his word. I didn't miss it - like I said, he's not a scintillating commentator, on anything really - but I wouldn't have minded if he'd ignored his readers' protests and kept talking about the election. I mean, Jesus: it's not like it was historical or anything.
So, flash-forward to yesterday, when he devotes the second page of his online column to talking about Obama's historic victory on 04 November, and the reaction from various players throughout the NFL to the election results. Seems pretty kosher, no? Here's this transformational, generational event in American life - the first time a black man has been elected President of the United States - and King talks about the reaction of various NFL players to said event. This is not controversial, at all. Hey, it's actually kind of like news!
But this, apparently, was all the evidence that some of King's readers needed to prove, once and for all, King's libtard tendencies. This email, in particular - reprinted in King's Tuesday column - made me facepalm:
"This is the last time I ever read your column, Peter. I got so sick of reading Michael Silver's liberal opinions that I stopped reading him. You have finally pushed me too far. Electing a black man president is a good thing. Electing Barack Obama president, a closet socialist with questionable ties to terrorists, felons, and racists, well, it's just a sad day for our country. I am permanently through with your column and watching any TV show you are on. Goodbye, Comrade."
I don't feel sorry for King - at least, not for having too-stupid-for-douche-tag readers. I do pity him, having to wade through intellectual atrocities like the email quoted above - read enough of that shit, and your eyes are gonna bleed, no question about it.
Almost makes me happy that my readership is, like, nil.
Less than 24 hours before the presidential election, Kevin Sheen has yet to decide who will get his vote.
"I'm actually still wrestling with moral issues," says the 29-year-old registered Democrat, who voted for George W. Bush in 2004.
Sheen is one of the 5 percent of American voters who are either undecided or could change their mind before Election Day.
I hate these people. How can you really be undecided at this point, after close to two years of damn near constant campaigning? Of five straight months of Obama v. McCain smackdown coverage all ofer the goddamn place? Of 2+ months of wall-to-wall news coverage since the end of the conventions?
Jesus H. Christ on a popsicle stick, what more do you people want? Is it that you're simply incapable of committing? What terminal idiocy prevents you from making a decision? Is it like this when you go to Subway? Cold or toasted, man! Cold. Or. Toasted.
*sigh* Hopefully, only one more day of this shit, then we can rest up until the campaign for the 2010 mid-terms begins. In December.
Oh, yeah: Go vote tomorrow. Or you'll be an asshat. And you don't want to be an asshat, do you?
In a stunning fit of consistency (two weeks in a row? madness!), I offer unto you this week's FRT:
1. Liz Phair - "Dance of the Seven Veils"
2. Weezer - "My Name is Jonas"
3. Pixies - "Silver"
4. Pixies - "Alex Eifel"
5. Radiohead - "Videotape"
6. Coldplay - "Violet Hill"
7. Liz Phair - "Soap Star Joe"
8. Soul Coughing - "Soft Serve"
9. Elbow - "I've Got Your Number"
10. Bon Iver - "Team"
And the bonus track, FTW:
11. The Shins - "Caring is Creepy"
Ah, slightly better bonus track this week. Still not full of Win, but then, I'm not sure any of the music I listen to would be considered Teh Hawesome by the kids these days.
Anyway: sparkly: (and multiple colons, too!):
Note: Couldn't find a decent video for "Caring is Creepy", so you'll just have to make do with "New Slang". I think you'll live.
Don't say I didn't warn you. And, no, I will not tuck you in OR get you a glass of water. Especially from the kitchen sink! IF I got you water - and that's a big if, Mister Smartpants, since I told you not to click that link, didn't I? - you'd do with bathroom water.
No, they do not taste different! It's the same water!
So, Amanda over at Pandagon, who's much cooler than me (a fact which is consistently reflected in the music she listens to), has taken to doing the FRT with the new Genius function in iTunes. I'd do that, but apparently the Genius function only works for the music library on your computer, not on any iPod you might have hooked up to said computer. I'm at work, so I don't put a ton of music on my work box, preferring to listen to music from my iPod through iTunes. So: no Genius for you!
Anyway, my Friday Random Ten:
1. Silversun Pickups -- "Lazy Eye"
2. Muse -- "Assassin"
3. Death Cab for Cutie -- "Passenger Seat"
4. Ben Folds Five -- "Smoke"
5. Nick Drake -- "One of These Things First"
6. Pixies -- "Gouge Away"
7. Jimmy Eat World -- "Work"
8. Bjork -- "All is Full of Love"
9. Coldplay -- "Spies"
10. Weezer -- "Buddy Holly"
And... bonus track FTW!:
11. Elbow -- "Snooks"
Okay, Elbow's not really full of Win, but... look! Shiny!
I know I haven't posted in a long-ass time - no real excuse: just remember that I am a lazy sod - and this isn't to say that I'm going to be back at blogging, all guns blazing, any time soon. But I read this article today in the NYT (h/t: this post at DailyKos) and ... well, I don't know. Something about it set me off.
I mean, come on. It's a fucking milk jug redesign - one that, by all rights, reduces the overall environmental impact of milk delivery and consumption by a substantial margin, plus is economically more efficient than its antecedent. But - but- but - it's new! And different! And I can't figure out how to pour it, because I'm a fucking moron!
The jugs have no real spout, and their unorthodox shape makes consumers feel like novices at the simple task of pouring a glass of milk.
“I hate it,” said Lisa DeHoff, a cafe owner shopping in a Sam’s Club here.
“It spills everywhere,” said Amy Wise, a homemaker.
“It’s very hard for kids to pour,” said Lee Morris, who was shopping for her grandchildren.
Oh noes! Think of tehchildrnz!
...
Yeah, I might be overreacting a bit, here.
But, like I said, something about the reactions in this article touched off something in me. For some reason, the reactions and attitudes captured in the article seem like the perfect microcosm of average America's inherent dislike of change, even beneficial change.
The title of the post, drawn directly from the linked NYT article, sums it up nicely, I think:
Heard this morning on Marketplace's morning radio report, during a story on the business of selling trinkets and mementos for Chancellor Palpatine's Pope Benedict XVI's visit to Washington, DC:
In reference to the always-funny Pope-on-a-Rope, a woman in the gift shop of the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception: "I think that's disgusting. Why wash your body with the pope?"
The Wife has something awful that she'd like to share with you (pay attention to the last paragraph). Because that's what the Internet is for, right?
But, really, dear: it'll be okay. Don't hang up your Chucks yet.
It's a week late and a benjamin short (ooh, clever! look, I'm teh r0x0rz!), but I finally figured out what began to bug me about Scalzi's last Big Idea entry (mentioned in my previous post). And it is thus:
Day is not a troll in the usual sense - or perhaps it's more accurate to say that he's an higher order of troll. Whatever, he gets his kicks and makes his monies by being a deliberate douche, and that's clear trollish behavior. I don't even care if Day really believes in his own claptrap or not - devotion to ideas or ideals doesn't make you any less of a douche.
It's been written to death by this point, but I'll say it again: it's John's blog, he can do whatever the fuck he wants with it, but... huh? I'm not bewildered by the post, but by the motivations for it, I guess. Someone as Intarweeb-savvy as Scalzi knows exactly what he's doing, so I'm left scratching my head as to why he decided to feed the troll.
Makes me wonder if we didn't all just catch John on a really bad day or something.
Scalzi's opened up a can of worms over at the Whatever by featuring the author Vox Day (a pseudonym) in his ongoing Big Idea series. Day's latest offering, The Irrational Atheists, aims to take down the leading modern day thinkers of the atheist community by taking them on at their own game: namely, by using reason and the scientific method to refute their arguments against the existence of God. I haven't read the book, and I'm not planning to - Day freely admits to ad hominem attacks throughout this book, and I'm just not going to bother with that kind of nonsense when discussions surrounding the nature and existence of God are already rife with that spectacular brand of bullshit - but the comments thread at the Whatever for the Big Idea post featuring TIA (as the author acronyms it) has been a rollicking good read.
It's obviously gotten a bit testy, but for the most part the conversation has been spirited but civil. However, one of the most recent posters - pretty obviously an atheist - wrote one of the single-best put-downs of a belief in God I've ever read. (Full disclosure: I'm agnostic, leaning atheist):
The bottom line is that when you accept nonsense, and cherish it in your heart and make it an importat part of how you think and lead your life, you’ve just shit on your brain.
Now, that ain't nice... but it sure did make me giggle.
"I wanted to give someone a sexually transmitted disease (e.g., herpes, AIDS)."
That's probably the most disturbing piece of spam I've ever cast eyes upon. I'm assuming it's a unique take on the legion of "Grow your babymaker! Guaranteed!" spams I'm constantly cleaning out of my spam folder. I'm not going to open it up to check - I'm not sure I want to find out for sure.
I loved Garfield when I was a kid - I got something like the first 20 collections through the Scholastic Book Club; sad, but true. However, Garfield lost its luster for me when I hit my teens and discovered the pure hawesome that was Bloom County.
This, however... if Jim Davis actually started doing Garfield like this, there'd be reason for me to read the funny pages again. It'd be the mother of all eff-you retcons, a kind of post-modern "and then I woke up."
I was talking with a co-worker today about the state of the primary race for the major party nominations for the presidential election here in the U.S. He and I are of similar political bent (pretty strongly Democratic), both support the same candidate (Obama), and our conversation quickly turned to the fate of Hillary Clinton, especially in light of the stunning 0-for-10 streak she's on, now that Obama pretty handily beat her in Wisonsin and Hawaii on Tuesday.
Momentum is a huge factor in the American presidential nomination process, and by any definition, Obama has decisively grabbed the momentum in the Democratic race from the establishment candidate and former heavy favorite. Losing streaks of this magnitude have killed off many a campaign in the past, and my co-worker wondered aloud for how long Hillary was going to hang in the race.
And I realized something then: Hillary can't quit. This is her one shot to be president: she just turned 61 in October; if she loses the nomination to Obama, with the better-than-average odds of him beating McCain in the general election in November, she's looking at another eight years before she can realistically run again. That would make her 69 - only three years younger than John McCain now, roughly the same age as Reagan when he was elected. But, here's the thing: those were men. The political calculus, even in this year when history will be made with whomever is the eventual Democratic nominee, I think is pretty clear: this country just ain't ready for Grandma President. Margaret Thatcher, Hillary ain't.
So, Hillary's in this to the end. If she picks up Texas or Ohio on March 4th - or both - she's mathematically back in this thing, and the possibility of a brokered convention becomes more likely. And, let's be honest here: if it comes down to a brokered convention, I'm not betting against the Clinton machine. But even if she loses both Texas and Ohio, I just don't think she bows out. Because of the way the Democratic party apportions delegates from primaries and caucuses, there's an entirely good chance that we won't have a nominee secured until the very last primary vote has been cast. If there's even the remotest hint of a possibility of a chance that she could somehow pull it out, Hillary will stay in it.
This is her one - her only - shot. Her ambition won't let her do anything else.
For those of you who have seen Cloverfield, like myself - and yes, I should post my thoughts on the movie; thanks for asking! - the following screencap may make you go "Grrrrr". Or, like Matt, say, "God damn you JJ Abrams".
You see that? That thing in the red circle, so helpfully drawn by Matt? That's the freakin' Dharma Initiative logo. Y'know: from Lost. That other Bad Robot property. WTF?
So: aptly put, Matt. God damn you, JJ. Damn you to hell.
I will be seeing Cloverfield tonight. I am expecting awesome. I am, in fact, expecting a whole heaping plate of awesome. Perhaps, if I'm lucky, with a side order of tasty goodness. And ketchup. Because I like ketchup.
So, to recap for all zero people who read this blog who are not currently typing this blog post: I'm going to see Cloverfield tonight. With my wife. Who is possibly more excited about it than I am. Of course, this will be the first movie she's seen in a theatre since our daughter was born, lo these 13 months ago; but who's counting?
(Aside: I think the only reason I'm writing this is because I left a comment on Scalzi's blog today, and actually entered this blog's url in the "website" field on the comment box. On the off chance that my stupid, two-line comment - a straight rip-off of a Nelson Muntz quote from one of my favorite Simpons episodes - really resonated with some of his readership, and they clicked over here, I wanted something from the last year to be at the top of the page. Not, you know, a post from 2006. Then I'd just be a lame-o.)
(Aside to the aside: I just wrote "lame-o". Wow. I'm more tired than I thought.)
