Below are the 25 most recent journal entries.
Anybody still on here?
May the gods kill you quickly.
This is a test. It's only a test.
Mood: All by myself
There's an echo in here.
Miss you Nicole.
We got a little puppy. A chocolate, long-haired, mini dachshund. She's cute...but, currently she likes to poop on the carpet.
She's a lot like me in that way.
Answer and be counted...spastic and generic fratboy comedians are waiting for your votes...
The new benchmark for herding masses of the general public has been decided. Pop Cultural integrity be damned! No longer can we ask routinely at the beginning of dates, classes, interviews, and small fondue gatherings whether a person prefers Seinfeld or Frasier, The Beatles or Elvis, James VanDerBeek or Jason Priestley…no…the new standard involves Dane Cook.
Is he funny?
Surrender your opinions and preferences and be judged ye mighty men of valor (mighty women and chillins too).
(After watching a small portion of his Vicious Circle special on HBO last night, I say, emphatically, and with a loud voice, like those sweaty-abbed bastards from 300...NO!)
There...I feel better. By the way, anybody who wants to know what cinema warrior culture SHOULD look like, go rent or buy Bad Boys (the non Fresh Prince version). You don't need homoerotic, comic book, geektopian bloodfests to get your kicks. Just Sean Penn, Esai Morales and juvee-jailhouse shanks.
Ahhh...serenity. Maybe the new herding standard should be Bad Boys versus 300. Penn's O'brien would kick Gerard Butler's Leonidas any day of the week my greasy pec'd peeps.
'Cause, hey...the more you know...
Art and MySpace
( When the Church Decides to Swallow Everyman WholeCollapse )
You can check out more on my MySpace page here.
This means, of course that I DO finally have a myspace page set up and I have updated it. So...if you're on my pals list here and would like to be on my pals list there, check me out. If you are on my pals list here and you hate me or just don't care for being on said list...drop dead.
The Red Sox aren't much easier to love...
It's a great day in the universe when the New York Yankees are seven games under .500 and 13.5 games out of first place.
I know this entry seems a bit misplaced when read after my previous post...I don't quite know how to respond to that.
If I prayed, I would for you...
The five year-old son of a coworker was killed on Friday after being hit by a car. Obviously, everyone is saddened and feels terrible for the woman's loss. My boss got a card and wanted everyone to sign it, which I did.
My question is what you write in said card? I don't know what to say to the mother who just lost a child. Sorry? Is that enough? How about deeply sorry? Or terribly sorry?
I'm not trying to sound insensitive or trite, I'm not trying to be funny, I truly don't know what I'm supposed to say. Part of me wanted to simply write my name in a measure of emotinal solidarity, but the expectations of signing a card include a response, right?
Most of the comments said something about "Keep your head up, I'll be praying for you." These are fine, I'm sure they'll probably mean something to the mother...the point is that the religious community has a clear-cut response. All you have to say is, "I'll be praying for you," or "Keep the faith" whatever the hell that means. I'm not even sure most people really even think about it when they write it. Perhaps they say a short prayer for the afflicted or grieving: "Dear god, be with ________ as they have recently lost a child." Maybe that's it...maybe not. It doesn't matter.
I just don't know what I am supposed to write. "I'm sorry" seemed to be the best option and yet it still sounds trite and unnecessary. I'm making too much of this, I know.
A new employee, when told of the situation actually replied with, "Well, you know what they say, 'god giveth and god taketh away.'"
I'm hoping he didn't sign the card.
Clinton Portis is a moron...
"I don't know if he was fighting dogs or not, but it's his property, it's his dog," Washington Redskins running back Clinton Portis told WAVY-TV in Virginia. "If that's what he wants to do, do it. I think people should mind their business."
When told that dog fighting is a felony, Portis replied, "It can't be too bad of a crime."
Bleah. Even the athletes in D.C. are idiots.
It was a mistranslation, JC...not JT is bringin' the 'sexy' back...
A friend of mine works for a Christian-based marketing firm and he recently received an interesting email request. It sounds like a joke, but it certainly could be real, considering the abundance of Christian cultural items and movements. This makes it all the more interesting, if only for the socially enlightening perspective regarding sex toys:
Does your PR firm only promote faith-based books, music, and videos?
I have a "start-up" faith-based business and called 'divine~intimates' that offers a collection of products to help couples reclaim, restore, and enhance spiriitual and physical intimacy in their marriages. This is a very tasteful and appropriate business/ministry ( a significant portion of profits will support Christian ministries that have our same mission as well) Our first item- in production.... is a "discreet intimacy enhancer"- yes, it is what you think it is. We call her "Dixie".... More on this later.
The 'divine~intimates collection' will include a book called 'Dixie's guide to Divine Intimacy", along with a very discerning line of lingerie and loungewear for women of all shapes, sizes, and seasons to feel beautiful, comfortable, and supported ( each item comes with built in shapewear) I also will offer various tasteful "private label" items such a spa items, truffles...
Choosing the right Faith-based PR and Marketing firm is one of 'divine intimates' #1 priorities.
Please let me know if your firm could be a fit for us. Or perhaps you have one you could recommend that is more brand/business focused. I will then forward our Business Description and Mission for your review.
Somehow, I think when users of this “discreet intimacy enhancer” scream out the name of god…it’s not an act of worship…at least not in the manner most appropriately titled “faith-based”.
My dildo has a first name…it’s D-I-X-I-E…
"Grandma, who is that?"
"That, my boy, is a security guard."
"What's a security guard?"
"Well, you know how you like to play policeman sometimes? It's the same thing..."
I like to shout...I'm an actor...hear me ROAR!!!
Somebody should alert the actors of the movie 300 that screaming a line does not add emotion or intrigue. Volume does not increase the believability or intensity of anger or tragic reaction...it just makes everything louder.
I found it all so very melodramatic. Although the battle scenes were gory and good. The rest was just loud...and not in a good way.
Hey there dummy
Yesterday after an upset victory by the Golden State Warriors in the first round of the NBA playoffs, Baron Davis was interviewed by a reporter who asked how they possibly could have beaten the heavily favored Dallas Mavericks.
"Well, we really didn't have anything to lose..."
How about the game? How about the series? Don't you "play to win the game" (as Herm Edwards likes to say)?
I've heard this tired cliché before...most athletes have a list of plastic responses they give in postgame interviews. It's a joke, really. I'm sure they don't want to say too much...it is much easier, after all, to spout off readymade truisms than to be honest and intellectual and real, especially when you don't probably trust the media to begin with.
But this is too boneheaded to pass up. Baron, Baron, Baron.
You're an idiot.
Buy me stuff...do it...you know you want to
Here is a short list of the books I'm supposed to read before starting school in September. Perhaps you'd like to order one for me...you know, because of my good friendship and behavior. What do you think? Tis the season...of something.
'Joey Tribbiani' once got paid 100 g's to pimp ketchup
I had a few commercial auditions this week...they sucked. I'm no good. I can't do what they want...which basically amounts to smiling (realistically) on command. Or not looking uninterested. You'd think I could fake that a little better.
The head of the agency said, "You need to maintain your personality throughout the audition...too often between sections you get this 'what next' look on your face and you look bored. We need to see that 'happy, fun guy' come out throughout. We want the client to see that guy."
Okay. I'll work on that.
She looked so disappointed throughout the audition. That was the worst. It was for a freaking tire commercial! I even had to pretend to conduct an imaginary tire symphony (whatever the hell that is) with a makeshift wand made from two pink highlighters stuck back to front. Somehow my two beat to four beat rythmic movements didn't awe the directing team.
I felt like I was being scolded by my mother. Somehow this also played with my insecurities regarding being an actor, until I realized that these commercial shoots have very, very little to do with acting, per se. They are glorified modeling gigs.
And, let it be stated, ever so importantly, that I am not a model.
Regardless, I will sleep a little better tonight, just knowing that my boredom is so real and credible and my 'happy, fun guy' is safely tucked into my personality-drenched trousers.
"Drenched" being a figurative term, of course.
"It should not be lost on us that Thomas was depicted as no less righteous for refusing to believe so wild a claim without physical proof. We have as much right, and ought to follow his example. He got to see and feel the wounds before believing, and so should we. I haven't, so I can't be expected to believe it. And this leads me to one final reason why I don't buy the resurrection story. No wise or compassionate God would demand this from us. Such a god would not leave us so poorly informed about something so important. If we have a message for someone that is urgently vital for their survival, and we have any compassion, that compassion will compel us to communicate that message clearly and with every necessary proof--not ambiguously, not through unreliable mediaries presenting no real evidence. Conversely, if we see something incredible, we do not attack or punish audiences who don't believe us, we don't even expect them to believe--unless and until we can present decisive proof.
. . .
Any claim can be made about a drug, but people are rightly wary of swallowing anything that hasn't been thoroughly tested and re-tested and tested again. Since I have no such proofs regarding the resurrection story, I'm not going to swallow it, and it would be cruel, even for a god, to expect otherwise of me. So I can reason rightly that a god of all humankind would not appear in one tiny backwater of the Earth, in a backward time, revealing himself to a tiny unknown few, and then expect the billions of the rest of us to take their word for it, and not even their word, but the word of some unknown person many times removed.
Yet, if one returns to what was probably Paul's conception of a Christ risen into a new, spiritual body, then the resurrection becomes no longer a historical proof of the truth of Christianity, but an article of faith, an affirmation that is supposed to follow nothing other than a personal revelation of Christ--not to be believed on hearsay, but experienced for oneself."
From Richard Carrier (here).
"I do solemnly swear...to change my mind." -God
...on that day I swore to them, to bring them out from the land of Egypt into a land that I had selected for them, flowing with milk and honey, which is the glory of all lands.
Also I swore to them in the wilderness that I would not bring them into the land which I had given them, flowing with milk and honey, which is the glory of all lands...
When I had brought them into the land which I swore to give to them...
I know, I know...God changed his judgment based upon Israel's sinfulness and rebellion. But, why, then, did he swear anything at all, and then, why did he swear to do the same thing he swore to do IN the first place after he had already contradicted such a guarantee? Why not simply say that his promise was conditional (as most Christian apologists argue regarding other passages seemingly showing God changing his mind)?
Wait, there's more: those wacky tribal favorites did end up in the land of flowing dairy anyway. So, was God being fickle?
Perhaps he was stressed with running the universe. Or perhaps the previous occupants of flowing honey land had their own sworn allegiance from their own version of divine influence (including the Nephilim: "...we saw...the sons of Anak [who] are part of the Nephilim..." Numbers 13:33, this will become relevant a few paragraphs down the page).
This would, of course, have negated the Hebrew version of sworn allowance that was later contradicted by God through a sworn pronouncement and finally sworn in contradiction to the initial contradiction once more (which contradicted the initial sworn statement) just to swear a final sworn promise of vacancy in a land that wasn't really vacant when God first swore by swearing.
Got it? No?
Well, what would you have expected God to do? He was what he was and all that he ever was and he swore twice to give something to the Israelites...you know...after he sandwiched a contradictory vow in between.
And let's not forget that the Nephilim ("...[suddenly relevant] mighty men who were of old..." Genesis 6:4) were around before and after the flood that supposedly destroyed ALL of mankind (excepting Noah and the Noah-ettes). ("All flesh that moved on the earth perished...all mankind...all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died." Genesis 7:21-22)
I guess cockroaches AND the Nephilim will be the only things standing after nuclear war.
Those sick, twisted survivalist bastards were there in Genesis 6 (pre-flood) and Numbers 13 (post-swear). But, perhaps God swore to kill all of mankind before he later swore he would spare a few peeps to inhabit the aforementioned land of milky flows so he could snatch it away in supposed contradictory fashion. And, to be fair, it does imply that perhaps those buggers made it through the storm to help seed the "daughters of men" (Genesis 6:4).
This doesn't seem like such a bad deal. It could even be construed as an act of contrition--if God were allowed to be wrong--since God knew he'd need to swear again and kick 'em out of the 'sworn three times and promised' land.
"Don't worry, just float on some debris and then have some sex with these ladies. Just don't see Noah naked and drunk...or we'll make your sons slaves to those people who are going to kill you and kick you out of your land anyway. This is God by the way...and not some fiery bush. Put it out...we're not ready for that part of the story. He won't get to inhabit your land either, if it's any consolation."
Remember that since God was/is outside of time, all of this takes/took place at once. If the term "once" were...you know...applicable to those supernatural beings found outside the literal definitions and terms associated with time.
Perhaps you need to read all of the Old Testament once more with an open mind/heart/brain and swear you'll believe it no matter what your mind/heart/brain actually thinks/feels/previously believed.
After all, it's not like God swore he'd send you to Hell if you see it as anything more than just a story.
**(All scriptural references taken from the New American Standard Bible.)**
In Whom I Trust
( Nicole Marie would have been nineteen…Collapse )
In fifteen minutes it just dropped from seventy degrees to fifty-five.
I'm gonna be a Husky...
By the way, I chose Washington...we're moving to Seattle in late August.
Those of you we know and love who wish to be known (not Biblically) and loved even further...feel free to hop on board and move into the, as-yet-undeveloped Pacific Northwestern Rash Commune. We may very well need help with rent.
Questions of faith...
If faith is required for belief in God and faith has been proven as a system or precept which is manipulated by social systems, environments and personality (similar to the arguments against free will), how can God punish someone who doesn’t have faith?
Similarly, if faith is designed and granted from God (Romans 12:3; Hebrew 12:2) through the continued acceptance and study of Biblical ideas (one which circularly requires “faith” to accept in the first place) how can the loss or absence of such a faith be punished?
God is a vampire...
God could’ve used many different ways to redeem mankind…why did he require the death of his “son”? ( More on the necessity of sacrifice and blood in the Christian tradition...Collapse )
This has been done and overdone, I know...indulge me...
What are your top five movies/books/albums?
That is, desert-island-top-five…what are your faves…preferably ones you own? Although I don’t know why you’d list something and not own it…but who knows.
Just generating some meaningless convo to peruse while here at work. Nothing else.
On a related note…I bought a few new albums recently that I’m enjoying. Lily Allen is pretty good and so is Amy Winehouse (for all the British female lovers).
Regarding my last post...
The moderator emailed me and said:
"You've been banned for telling me, a community moderator, that my moderatorial post was irrelevant..."
[Apparently I did...although that post has been deleted, so we'll never know if that is accurate. Of course, she also thought my tone was "combative"...]
"My posts are always relevant and I felt that you didn't respect me. I found your overall tone combative from the get-go, but your approach with me is what got you banned. To answer your question about if that's how we run our community, the answer is yes. It's not a democracy. It's a dictatorship. What we say goes."
Okay...I'm glad we cleared that up.