Live the dream...

...wear the dream.

Not the droid we're looking for

First, this is awesome. And about time they put this shit on some stamps, too.

But more importantly, it allows me the perfect segue to talking about the Star Wars dream I had the other night. Darth Vader, along with zombies, is a recurring character in my dreams. It used to be the same dream all the time: Wherever I was sleeping, I would dream I woke up to see Darth Vader coming at me, and it would be just like that part in "The Empire Strikes Back" when Luke is on Degobah and chops off dream-Vader's head. Kinda like slow motion? So scary. But the one I had the other night is part of the Darth Vader Dreams- Series II. In this variation, I (or, more accurately, the small ship I pilot) am captured and taken aboard an incomprehensively massive ship, where I meet and fight Darth Vader in a cavernous and bare cargo bay. I've had this dream before. The ship is not really any of the Star Wars ships I recognize from the movies; it's much larger, and somehow darker and more sinister.

Go about your business.

another green world

Clearly, environmental specialists are a nitpicky crowd. Which is why it's particularly noticeable that Wal-Mart, an unequivocal emblem of 21st-century middle America for both flattering and not-so-flattering reasons, is earning their seal of approval as a major corporation that's putting out legitimate green initiatives.

And with their organic food initiative, I think Wal-Mart is making major moves to go after new classes of shoppers, those not traditionally associated with Wal-Mart.
Allow me to boldly predict, however, that it won't work. Criticism of Wal-Mart was never really about environmentalism. Even if every single fully-health insured, living-waged, unionized, child-cared and dignity-ensured Wal-Mart greeter ate and pooped pure flourescent sunshine, the criticism would not stop.

Even before any such advertising kicks in, the attitude of many hard-core environmentalists will be "proceed with caution." "I have never shopped at Wal-Mart. I still wouldn't,' said Lloyd Alter, citing concerns about the company's manufacturing and labor practices.

Then it will be concerns about the leather used in the seats of their trucks, or the fact that they use non-recyclable plastic materials for coffee machines in the office, or that one of the executives kids bought a purebred puppy. Good for Wal-Mart, I guess, but I hope they're not laboring under the illusion that it will change their customer base at all.

crossover

I would hope that the overlap in the audience between this blog and those that would vote for Sanjaya would be pretty goddamn small. But in case there is someone, or in case a 12 year old girl stumbles across this post while Googling that walking haircut, let me say this: YOU NEED TO STOP. Sanjaya is a plague on our nation. He is a chemical weapon from which no good can come. Please. Stop. Hear my plea.

In other news, robots love to dance to indie rock.


What's funny is that I have pretty much the same look on my face when I dance.

WTF?

Wait, so Dylan has a fight club? And Tarantino is in it? And he fought Dylan? There's so much I can't understand in this story.

This...

...is the credited response.

bees are on the what now?

tonight we blog in hell

One of my favorites, Neal Stephenson, takes a jab at the national debate over 300.
I had no idea that the movie was so popular with nerds, but it makes sense.

Who will take care of the polar bears children?

Turns out global warming is caused by testosterone.

tha madness

I just wanted to say that my local CBS affiliate is ROCKING OUT WITH THEIR COLLECTIVE COCK OUT! They are showing ALL 4 tournament games right now on the digital sub-channels. They even added a whole nother channel (5.4) to show the 4th game. THIS is what HDTV should be about.



This public service announcement brought to you by VODKA.


Also: HAPPY BIRTHDAY, TRUCK!

only republicans dispute climate change?

“Nowhere does Mr. Gore tell his audience that all of the phenomena that he describes fall within the natural range of environmental change on our planet,” Robert M. Carter, a marine geologist at James Cook University in Australia, said in a September blog. “Nor does he present any evidence that climate during the 20th century departed discernibly from its historical pattern of constant change.”

In October, Dr. Easterbrook made similar points at the geological society meeting in Philadelphia. He hotly disputed Mr. Gore’s claim that “our civilization has never experienced any environmental shift remotely similar to this” threatened change.

Nonsense, Dr. Easterbrook told the crowded session. He flashed a slide that showed temperature trends for the past 15,000 years. It highlighted 10 large swings, including the medieval warm period. These shifts, he said, were up to “20 times greater than the warming in the past century.”

Getting personal, he mocked Mr. Gore’s assertion that scientists agreed on global warming except those industry had corrupted. “I’ve never been paid a nickel by an oil company,” Dr. Easterbrook told the group. “And I’m not a Republican.”

*

Senator President District Attorney President

Fred Thompson may run for president. Some fun facts about Fred Thompson:

* Fred Thompson has blasted more people in the face with a shotgun than even Dick Cheney.
* The reason Fred Thompson didn't want to stay in the Senate for long is because all the extra scrutiny kept him from doing his favorite hobby: Prowling the streets at night killing drug dealers.
* Fred Thompson took over what was Al Gore's Senate seat, thereby dramatically reducing the Senate's carbon footprint. Fred Thompson then created carbon offset offsets by wastefully burning hippies.
* Fred Thompson once stood on our south border and glared at Mexico. There was no illegal immigration for a month.
* When terrorists get to the afterlife, they'll find that none of their seventy-two women are still virgins. Why? Because of Fred Thompson.

remember me as a zombie

Just briefly, cos I gots work to do today...

I had another zombie dream. This actually happened on Friday night, and it was considerably shorter than the last one, but just as dark and scary. Basic story line: I was breaking into a prison in order to visit my wife, who was an inmate, and also a reformed prostitute. Yeah, I don't know. So I get into the prison just fine, and we're hanging out, when we first hear the news about the zombies. Again, I was unaware of their coming. And this time, there were zombie animals to contend with, as well. Fleeing the zombified women's prison, I remember quite clearly being attacked by a zombie alligator. I don't know, maybe the prison was in Florida or something. I think the only thing scarier than just regular zombies is a horde of zombies all wearing orange jumpsuits, which makes them look like some sort of unified zombie army.

That's all. Go about your business.

politics in the shade

3000 was a bit disappointed, I think, but I rather enjoyed 300. It's one of the coolest looking movies, in terms of "visual effects" and like cinematography, I think I've ever seen. The script was a bit hokey, but what can you do. Plenty of blood and gore.

What struck me, though, that I wasn't expecting was the politics in the movie. Now, if you don't care, or don't want to have the movie ruined by politics (like when the hippies tried to ruin Episode III for me by insisting that Chimpy McHalliburton is a Sith lord [which, what a ridiculous thing to argue about, in retrospect; it still makes me bristle and harumph (I do these things now, as an old man) every time I see what should be a dramatic high point of the movie, and indeed, of the entire series; and I resent that]), you can just skip right on to the next solipsistic rant about cow farts or whatever it is I'm on about this week.

But feeling, as I do, that conservative and, particularly, pro-war sentiments are underrepresented in the mainstream media, it's worth pointing out that 300 provided exactly that. Indeed, provided to such an extent that those paragons of pacificsm, the Germans, suggested that the movie was funded by the Bushies! Although it seems there is some debate on whether Bush is Leonides or Xerxes, I think it's difficult to put aside the points that, basically, a man who is seen by much of the world as a macho warmonger is hell-bent on defending his land and his way of life against crusading Persian hordes while routinely using "Freedom!" as a rallying cry. Of course, those of a different political stripe will latch onto Xerxes as "God-King," believing, as they do, that contemporary America is in the malignant grips of a theocratic dictator who crushes all dissent and insists on absolute loyalty. More...

Moreover, the Spartans are portrayed as strong, upright and conservative - there's even an image of Leonidas in the pose of a Christian martyr - whereas the Persians are depicted as effete, weird and decadent, all kinky and body-pierced. No wonder, then, that the Persians were lousy soldiers, victorious only because of behind-the-scenes maneuvering and outright betrayal. Indeed, the most sinister figure in the film is a Spartan politico who specifically identifies himself as a "realist."

And so go the parallels today, where for many Americans "realist" is code for "cynical," "cowardly" or, worst of all, "French." These Americans believe the United States is destined to lead an epochal struggle against the forces of evil - led by Iranians, aka Persians - in the Middle East.

The "realist" senator is the other point I wanted to make. I liked the "Leonides started this war"/"No, Xerxes started this war" interchange. Also, I thought it was interesting that he was so blatantly bought off. While I certainly don't suggest that all current foes of the American foray into the Middle East are universally corrupt, I do think it's important to point out that some politicians are exactly that, and that the UN's Oil For Food program provided the gold coins.

Anyway. I'm gonna go do some sit-ups. Those Spartans were fucking ripped.

the short answer

Women think all kinds of ridiculous things: "Put the seat down!" "Let's watch Sex and the City!" "We should be allowed to vote!" But this has to be the most ridiculous thing ever.

I fail to see anything childish about shorts. Do children wear them? Of course. But children also wear pants, shirts, ties, shoes, etc. and none of these things are considered childish in the least. And why is this dictum exclusively applied to men? If shorts are childish, they should be considered childish on women, too. And while we're condemning childishness, women, can we drop the supremely retarded "princess" shtick? If so, maybe we can compromise on shorts.

But in the meantime, what is a man supposed to wear in, say, the oppresive heat of the south? Women can wear skirts, presumably, or shorts, hypocritically. But a man must suffer in pants? Ludicrous.

It goes without saying that in any sort of formal or semi-formal situation (work of really any stripe, meals at most restaurants, etc.) shorts should be frowned upon. But when you're just out walking around, shopping, having a fuckin beer... shorts are totally fine. Capris, however, and this goes for both sexes, are off limits. On this, we can all agree.

wi-fi

The new air-conditioning.

go commies! go!

Another reason to love the tubes!

also #1 in underage cheese consumption

Past-month underage drinking was lowest in Utah and highest in Wisconsin in 2004-2005, according to the newest state-by-state report on substance use and mental health prepared ... for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

I seriously wonder what percentage of this is contributed by UW-Madison students.

(I can't give you link, cos it's from my company's intranet, but trust me. It's legit.)

all this stupid crap no one cares about

I've been blogeeking* out about global warming or whatever for a little bit, I realize. I just want to go on record as saying that I really have no agenda in doing this, and that I'm not advocating one side or the other, really. Not that I think there should be sides, necessarily, either. I mean, science is science, and if it's true, it's true, and if it ain't, it ain't. I've just been clicking on more global warming links during my recent trips through the tubes, for whatever reason, and since this is a weblog, I'm logging my web... stuff. And since I have a serious fetish for anything that subverts or challenges convential wisdom, this is what you get. So, yeah. Eat a cow fart if you don't like it, hippie.




*This is a new word. ^


^Presumably. #


#I mean, I didn't look it up or anything.

knife-wielding squirrels found on mars!

Earth is currently experiencing rapid warming, which the vast majority of climate scientists says is due to humans pumping huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

Mars, too, appears to be enjoying more mild and balmy temperatures.

In 2005 data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps" near Mars's south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row.

Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun.

"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars," he said.

Martian Halliburton representatives could not be reached for comment on their obvious funding of this guy's research.

put yer money where yer mouth is?

Ha.

who doesn't die?

Research published today suggests that regular consumption of a wide range of vitamin pills, taken by more than ten million people in the UK, may actually increase the risk of dying, while eating low-fat dairy products could make it harder for some women to conceive.

The vitamin study, published in The Journal of the American Medical Association, overturns earlier research suggesting that vitamins A, E and beta carotene could protect against heart disease and cancer.

But far from helping, the new study says, the evidence is that taking vitamins, either singly or as part of a multivitamin pill, actually increases mortality by 5 per cent.

Increases it to what, 105%?

making it worse

MANY readers profess puzzlement as to how carbon offsets could fail to reduce one's carbon footprint. The answer is that they probably do reduce one's carbon footprint, but by nowhere near the one-for-one ration that seems to be implied by the extraordinarily low price of carbon offsets. Unless they are implemented under a cap-and-trade system, these sorts of environmental efforts are plagued by something called the rebound effect, which is to say that using more efficient technologies causes the price to fall, which causes people to use more of the carbon-emitting substances in question. This is particularly true in markets for things like electricity, which are characterised by monopoly providers and extremely high fixed costs for existing plant, making it unlikely that carbon emitting generators will actually be taken offline (and made worse by the fact that the dirtiest power is supplied by the baseload plants, which are least likely to be taken offline). If you are salving your conscience by buying carbon offsets, which allows you to cheerfully emit 20 times more than the average person, then even a conservatively estimated rebound effect means that carbon offsets are increasing the amount of emissions. *

Economics.