Sunday, November 28, 2004

The lunatics on the far right with the invisible best-friend (read; Christians) apparently feel that Bush 'owes them' and the debt can be repaid, most notably, in the courts.


Cass wants a U.S. Supreme Court that will outlaw abortion and gay marriage. "Do you want to take your children to a National League baseball game for instance and have homosexuals showing affection to one another? I don't want my kids to see that," he said.

Aaaaaaaaaugh! A human is showing another person they care about them! Aaaaaaaaaaugh! Aaaaaaaaaaugh! Holy fucking shit, make it stop, MAKE IT STOP!!!

Good thing Cass wasn't there for Jesus' baptism. That was half-naked men showing affection for each other. In water, no less.

Why is it that the more someone claims to follow Christ, the less they act like him?

Thursday, November 25, 2004

I'm in the Mood To Do Something Big, Something Important, Something Life-Adjusting.

Only I don't know why we're here in the first place.

And therefore what the goal is.

And therefore what I should be doing to achieve it.

I guess this is the one upshot of religion. Gives you answers where none actually exist.

Ah, paralyzed again!

Wednesday, November 24, 2004

"Fwoomp." [we both break]


"What would you say if I told you I just came up with a theory that explains the creation of the universe, time travel and god all at once."
"Tell it to me."
[explanation given]
[long, long pause]
"Well ...good for you for figuring it out."

Tuesday, November 23, 2004

The BBC website has a slideshow dedicated to the newly-embraced Western consumerism in China. In the fourth slide, a hotel manager quips:

"There should be more places like this in Beijing - they have everything you could want, and even things you never realised that you wanted."

God, apple pie and buying shit you didn't even realize you wanted.

God Bless America.

Sunday, November 21, 2004

Saturday, November 20, 2004

I think I might have a job as a creative-type at a web development company, courtesy of an old friend ho tells me that she'll seriously bump my name and that I destroy, skill-wise, anyone in that dept. now. They're looking for design and programming skills (PHP, no less). I'd be kind of surprised if I didn't get it. Lexington. $32-38k/yr. That's 2-3x what I'm making now.

Long story short, I work at a Radio Shack. I normally clean up at sales jobs but there is one person working there who knows EVERYONE in town. Someone walks in for a cellphone, they ask for her by name. This week she has 8 cellphone sales (at around $27/ea ($216 total) added to her paycheck). I have precisely zero. In fact I haven't even had a sale to screw up this week.

Not to be a prick, but if you put her in any other store she'd fall flat on her face. She's a clerk. So clocking $7.63/hr is really driving me nuts because there isn't anything I can do about it.

Today I told my boss that I'd like to investigate going to another store post-holiday. He was surprised and asked why. I gave him a bullshit answer. He pressed the issue. I told him that he already knew why and that I wasn't bringing it up because I knew nothing was going to change. He agreed but stated that (a) it would have to be post-holiday (no problem) and (b) that it couldn't happen until he found a replacement for me. In other words, my fate is determined by something I have zero control over.

I don't fucking think so.

If I could make a list of the "Top Ten Sucky Things," someplace close to the top would be "going to bed when someone you care about is really pissed at you."

Tuesday, November 16, 2004

Ella: What was that noise?
Me: Was that the fish?
Ella: [breaks]
Me: What??
Ella: You asked if that was the fish...
Me: Well I thought maybe it bumped it's head into the wall!

Monday, November 15, 2004

When opening a box cutter, always try to make sure that the blade end isn't facing your palm.

Sunday, November 14, 2004

In addendum to my earlier post, this is the text that the creationists want to place in the public school textbooks:

"This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."

That's funny because I've always wanted the same thing put on Bibles. Wouldn't that be swell? A bright white Surgeon General warning -- complete with a skull and crossbones (let's have some truth in advertising!) -- on the spine of every Bible.

But I gotta say, haven't heard anyone clammoring for that one...
You all probably remember when Alabama tried to upend evolution by calling it mere theory (you know, with the other weak "theories", like gravitation...).

A trial opened Monday over whether a warning sticker in suburban Atlanta biology textbooks that says evolution is "a theory, not a fact" violates the separation of church and state by promoting religion.

Jimmy Falon replied, "As a compromise, dinosaurs are now called 'Jesus Horses'."
I'm listening to this group Arcadia Fire. They're like emo. Like really bad emo (who knew you had to *try*?) with a drummer who really likes miscelaneous mid-phrase breaks. The male singer looks suspiciously like Napoleon Dynamite.

I can, however, put on Radiohead's Kid A (both, natch) and always find something new. Every time I hear it, reminds me of a 12 month-old discovering it's toes and being the subject of (and subject to) idiotic fawning.

If you haven't seen Radiohead's Rabbit In Your Headlights video, check it (Bearshare works well for me). Best video ending ever. Perhaps because we all have days when we feel like that, figuratively.

If you haven't seen Jon Stewart's (of the Daily Show) appearance [I recommend the ABC bittorrent client] on Crossfire, me -- spend the next ten minutes downloading it while you make popcorn or poptarts or what have you. Then come back, play the video and choke on whatever you just cooked. It's that stunning. It's kind of like finding a ten dollar bill in the pocket of a jacket you haven't worn in two years.

It's so stunning I actually felt bad for the Republican.

Oh. One more: If you have never heard the Beatles' Tomorrow Never Knows, grab it. I was at work today and it came over the satellite radio. Indistinguishable from modern avant-esque stuff. Progressive, even. Listen and while listening, tell me this isn't 2004 Liam Gallagher, Beck, Squarepusher with a full blotter sheet between them.

So how'm *I* doing? ... I'm doing ok. Brain is warming up. I know my own breathing again.

Friday, November 12, 2004

Interviewer: Would you ever license your music for use in a television advertisement for something like soap or mid-size Korean automobiles?

Thom Yorke: No. The way ad agencies work is to suck the blood of any vaguely original or unique thing in order to breathe life into their dead creations.

[later in interview]

Interviewer: Why are British situation comedies so lame?

Thom Yorke: What, and American ones are better? OK, I do like that one about the Texas Republican rigging his way into the White House. How we laughed..

Tuesday, November 09, 2004

First, never talk to the crazies. Ever.

Second, I'm in Brooks Pharmacy when a woman in line in front of me laments how she can't find those hammer-and-peg toys she was so fond of.

Woman: [speaking to myself and the cashier] Yeah, you go into a toy store and ask for them and they're like [shrill, aghast voice] "oh noes, you can't have that anymore!" Everything is so PC these days.
Me: Hm. I think it might have something to do with stupid lawsuits. I'm not sure I see how politics fits into this one.
Woman: [her Fox (tm) WaveBlocker momentarily losing it's hold] Uh ...well ...everything is PC today. [gets her stuff, leaves]
Me: [talking to her as she's walking out the door] Still not seeing how stupid lawsuits have anything to do with politics...
Me: [to cashier] No bag, thanks. I'm trying to save a tree. =)

Monday, November 08, 2004

"The ...VCR? Seriously?" - me

Sunday, November 07, 2004

"Ever been to the grand canyon?"
"It's a giant rock."
"No, it's a giant hole."
"So your favorite thing is an absence of a giant rock?"

     - Conversation with my co-worker

"Do you have CD players?"
"Sure [showing her the spot]. We have CD players that can also play MP3s. It's a smaller file so you can fit about ten albums worth of music on one CD."
"No, we're only interested in one at a time."

     - Conversation with customer five minutes ago
I know there are a lot of you who are pretty disgusted with this last election. The previous (2000) election was easy to hate because it wasn't legitimate and the entire world knew it. Bush was selected, not elected.

This time it's different -- the citizens (albeit by a slim 51% margin) have actually chosen this former cokehead to continue leading them despite failure after failure. Iraq. Job creation. Energy policy. The economy. Enron. Osama. The Patriot Act.

But I suggest everyone step back and take a look at the grand scheme. Progressives, by their very definition, progress. Conservatives, by their definition, are conservative about progress. And given that a conservative's agenda in 2004 was a progressive's agenda in 1974, you can't escape the conclusion that despite some dire, backward-moving years (read; Reagan), we are winning. In fact I'm here to suggest it's inevitable.

All the next four years are going to achieve is to demonstrate in undeniable terms how catastrophic the conservative agenda is. Bush said he needed four more years. Ok, he just got them. Congress is heavily conservative-controlled, so he can't use that as an excuse for his failure. His full 8-year term are his responsibility and his alone. Both for the successes and failures.

So where could his policies take us?

You can't win the war on terror with the use projection of force against a group that isn't state-sponsored. If you can't threaten immediate destruction (nuclear weapons) and you can't negotiate with them (since negotiation invariably involves compromise, something that religious folks seem to take a dim view of), then your policy is useless against those who either don't fear your threats or find a way through the cracks. Witness 9/11.

Progressives believe the only way to "win" is to have policies that treat other countries fairly so that such hatred never forments and if it does, you'll have too many friends to allow it's spread. In other words, "the only way to win is to not play the game."

Sound familiar? It was considered both obvious and insightful in War Games because it was a computer that arrived at this conclusion. I still think it's obvious and insightful.

You can't continue depleting natural energy resources. They're finite. As the situation in the middle east becomes more tenuous, their use becomes more costly. Not only in terms of dollars but in terms of human life and global and domestic political goodwill. The solution is renewable sources such as hydrogen.

Does anyone doubt that hyper fuel efficient cars will be widely available in 2050?

You can't continue to spend 400bn every year on your miliary and only a fraction of that on education and domestic infrastructure. The Soviet Union learned this in a pretty painful way.

Gays have moved from the alleys (1960s) to the bars (1970s) to the TVs (1980s) to the senate (1990s) to demanding equal protection under the law (2000s). If you think they're going to get back in the closet you're out of your fucking mind.

Call me crazy, but I predict that being gay in 2024 will be pretty much like being black in 2004 (read; annoying only the truly ignorant).

Nah, call me progressive.

Friday, November 05, 2004

"Hey diddle diddle,..."
"D'ya mind this song?"
"No, this is fine. ... But can you not put on any more of this crap, ok?"
"So an medulla oblongata walks into a bar... There, there's your cerebral humor." - Ella

Thursday, November 04, 2004

"You and I should go to India."
"Ok, but let me pee first."
"It's a pussy, not a clown car!" - unknown
"You know, if Tone Loc and Mos Def had a baby, it would be 'Tone Def.'" - Ella

Wednesday, November 03, 2004

Hi padraiceen.

First, let me start off by saying that generally, discussions like this start off as a flamewar and don't end much better. So far your replies have been lucid and not mean-spirited and I appreciate that. I, however, tend to come off as far more caustic than I intend.

I just want you to understand that in this reply, in the capacity that I'm attacking anything, I'm attacking ideas, not you.

So have a seat. It is not a cut-and-paste, I have bothered to spend a good two hours to compose and edit this reply so it is coherent. It is long. It's long because when it comes to an indictment of Bush's policy and neo-conservative theory, what we have is an embarrassment of riches.

padraiceen writes:
Is there any way I can beg you and everyone who reads this to be constructive about it? Please? /moderate still desperately clinging to the hope that people won't be awful about it this time around

Because of how the last election sifted out, I think a lot of people looked at the presidency and said, effectively, "He's not my president. He doesn't represent me." And Bush always had a pall of illegitimacy thanks to being selected, not elected.

This time is different. This time the American people have spoken and truly had thier voices heard. This is not a sham election but a truly representative one. My anger is directed at them. Wait, no. It isn't anger. It's disgust. No, not strong enough. Revulsion. Bafflement to the point of nausea. The type of feeling you get when you begin to hydroplane with your wife and your kids in the car with you. Only this feeling is going to last for four years.

Since you suggest we should see the upside to all of this, and that you worry we might be "awful" about the vote result, let me explain this progressive's interpretation of a Bush (re)election...

America has willingly chosen a leader who has proven that he is determined to disregard the Geneva Convention, invent new categories for prisoners out of thin air so he can detain them indefinitely and lie to his own citizens repeatedly about the link between Iraq and al Queda (then claim, somehow, that he never made such a link), the threat that Iraq posed and it's capacity for following through with that threat (that it never made). And America will not mind or equivocate too much about these inconvenient facts but instead gloss it over with terms such as "standing together."

This leader has ignored the common sense of the rest of the world -- a world which, in retrospect, seems to have been quite correct.

The entire planet (well, with the exception of the few we could convince with substantial financial incentives) told Bush that there was no WMD (there wasn't, Bush admits, without saying he was actually wrong), no 45-minute threat (Bush blamed that one on the UK and our own intel said it was bogus), no uranium (Cheney asked the CIA to investigate, the CIA reported it was bogus, Bush used it in his State of the Union anyway), no chemical weapons, no mobile chemical weapons labs and that, in fact, the UN Weapon Inspectors had done their job so well that Saddam didn't have a drop of anything left.

At best, Saddam had a daydream in which maybe, someday, perhaps he could restart his terror. I bet he longed for the days when he could openly gas Iranian civilians, like back in '88. But then again it was much easier since Rumsfeld was our envoy to Iraq that year and we gave him the gas because we didn't like Iran.

Bush has squandered a budget surplus and turned it into an unprescedended debt for generations to dig themselves out of.

Do I blame him for the recession? No, these things happen regardless of who is at the helm. But I DO blame him for the recovery, or the lack thereof. He claimed his tax cuts would create a certain number of jobs. It didn't even come close. He said his tax cuts would jump-start he economy by a specific percentage. It didn't.

He is the only president that I am aware of that has lowered taxes during a war, nevermind a war and a recession. He has proclaimed his dedication to "freedom" while at the same time supporting government meddling in gay marriage (the government has no say whatsoever in who we love, religious bigotry aside), medical research, and a woman's right to decide what happens with her own body.

And while I'm on the subject, if these religious women are so hell-bent on saving every last embryo, why aren't they busy implanting one in themselves? After all, doing something you shouldn't has the same ethical consequences as failing to do something you should, and these eggs could expire. Er, I mean die. Which would be murder, right? Letting something die when you could prevent it?

Initially opposed to the 9/11 commission, Bush later stonewalled the commission until threatend with subpoenas and, finally, has ignored the recommendations of the panel. On a side note, I don't agree with the recommendations of the panel either. Specifically, the creation of a new intelligence agency. It just shows that we are not systemically opposed to anything Bush does.

Most damning, 1,000+ American soliders killed to date.

Remember Bush bashing Clinton's nation building and then engaging in it wholeheartedly? We're told that "9/11 changed everything!" No it didn't. It changed our perception of the world, now how it actually is. It was a "wake-up call."

Then I guess that makes Clinton a visionary, doesn't it? A little ahead of his time. That's the defiintion of a progressive: what a conservative will be in 30 years.

Cheney is another excellent target. What does this man do when he isn't hooking up his ex-company with multi-billion no-bid contracts or swearing at members of congress? Oh, I know. He is accusing Kerry of supporting military cuts that he, himself, led the crusade against. Viz:

[1] "This is just a list of some of the programs that I've recommended termination: the V-22 Osprey, the F-14D, the Army Helicopter Improvement Program, Phoenix missile, F-15E, the Apache helicopter, the M1 tank, et cetera." - Dick Cheney before the Senate Appropriations Committee

[2] Cheney cut 9 of original 25 Aegis ships planned, putting shipyard in jeopardy [States News Service, 8/14/90; Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/24/90]

[3] Bush-Cheney Budget Terminated The Bradley. "Major weapons killed include the Army's M-2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the Navy's Trident submarine and F-14 aircraft, and the Air Force's F-16 airplane. Cheney decided the military already has enough of these weapons." [Boston Globe, 2/5/91]

[4] Cheney Terminates The Black Hawk. "The Pentagon’s internal budget deliberations recommended termination of the Black Hawk program under Secretary Cheney." [Aerospace Daily, 5/15/90]

This is a very small sample. I could actually go on for a few pages of these quotes.

So am I ranting? F*ck YEAH.

Even with all this evidence to suggest that this so-called "leader" is a disaster, we chose him anyway. So I can no longer hold Bush solely responsible for the state we're in.

America, this is your leader, your responsibility and your cross to bear. We have told the entire world that this is a person who believes what we believe and values the same things we value. I can no longer tell myself that it's our government that these terrorists hate. No, they hate us. And they now know that what they hate is not some bananna republic dictator whose own people don't want him there. Yesterday fully legitimized Bush.

padraiceen writes:
If people keep saying things like this, we'll just have the same hateful ideological gulf that we had these past few years. Now, THAT is something I don't want a child to experience. Palpable ideological hatred is a terrible thing. ... I just don't see such a grim picture as you on pretty much all of the issues you mentioned below.

Much has been made about how Bush is the first president to be elected with greater than 50% of the popular vote and one reporter on television just said that this was a "great battle." No it wasn't.

What we just witnessed is a fracturing of the American psyche. "You're either with us or you're against us," isn't that what Bush said? If this isn't an "ideological gulf," what is?

If "hatred" isn't saying that anyone who disagrees with you is morally equivalent to mass murderers, what is?

In 2004 America, there is no room for "flip flopping" (some might call it "recognizing when you're wrong") or having a moderate stance on anything. Moderation is seen as wishy-washy when any senior citizen will tell you that wisdom is knowing that there are two sides to everything and the surest sign of maturity is backing down when the facts turn out to be other than you anticipated.

Equvocation is the very antithesis of fundamentalism. And what is Bush's core constituency if not fundamentalists?

Show me some moderation, some compromise in the neo-conservative agenda.

My daughter is ten years old. Her mother is gay and Rebekah lives with both her mother and her mother's girlfriend. All three are supporters of Bush. I've brought up Bush's position on gay marriage. I get dead silence in return. Why? Because to be pro-gay marriage is to be anti-Bush. And to be anti-Bush is to be pro-Osama.

If that doesn't go against the grain of everything American, I don't know what does. Wait, let me back up. It is very American, apparently. Just another mental stop-gap between what we're taught this country stands for and cold, hard reality.

If we're so hell-bent on giving Afghanistan and Iraq a democracy, why didn't we just give them a copy of ours? Hell, we can give them the original. We don't seem to have much use for it these days.

It's amusing to watch people who got their knickers all in a bunch over Clinton's dry cleaner bill argue that listing the names of the dead American soldiers on television would be "unpatrotic." What is more patriotic than acknowledging the biggest sacrifice a person can give to their country?

So to answer your question about whether I can be constructive about it ...I guess I have to turn the question back to you; what is there to be constructive about? If the next four years will be more of what we've just seen, what can I look forward to?

padraiceen writes:
If it's about abortion rights in general, there is no way Roe v. Wade would be overturned. It would be political suicide for the entire party.

Overturning Roe v. Wade is literally the holy grail of the Bush's base constituency. I do think that it would be political suicide and I don't think they could accomplish it. But I do know that it can be made into an issue large enough to seize up any other meaningful political discourse for a few years.

The looming threat of your reproductive rights being taken away isn't so far removed from actually doing it. The definition of "terrorism" is both the threat and application of a catastrophic event. If you grant that we are polarized as a country right now, the next four years of unfettered neocon control of all levels of government are going to make this much, much worse.

To argue otherwise is to make the tacit argument that the Republicans have gained even more control in this election and, somehow, they're going to become more moderate in response? No. This is Bush's first experience with legitimacy. This is a mandate from the United States. A friend of mine argues that Bush doesn't speak for all of us. Unfortunately, given the way our laws are structured, yes he does.

padraiceen writes:
It's kind of alarming how the implication is that you're ashamed that people exercised their rights to vote the way their personal ideologies said they should, because you disagree with their choices.

You're framing her position in a way that distorts the situation. We, as a country, must elect one person to be our leader. Half the country doesn't get Bush while the other half gets Kerry. So in selecting Bush as a leader, we are saying "Our system of government affords us a method to select our leader. The leader that we and our system have arrived at is Bush." So far I think we can agree.

Some of us perceive Bush's four years in office as a literally non-stop litany of failures. That people selected Bush makes us conclude one of three things: (a) We're wrong about Bush failures, (b) people selected Bush despite the failures or (c) our system is broken. I can't speak for Dolly, but I'm going with option B.

I'm going with option B because -- and please understand it's hard for me to keep this rant down to a few sentences -- Americans don't seem to have even a small grasp of the facts. Even after the final report of Charles Duelfer to Congress saying that Iraq did not have a significant WMD program...

• 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%).

• Fifty-six percent assume that most experts believe Iraq had actual WMD and 57% also assume, incorrectly, that Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program.

• 75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda.

• 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found.

• Sixty percent of Bush supporters assume that this is also the conclusion of most experts, and 55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission.

So I don't think the situation is quite as you've phrased it. It's not a matter of being ashamed that people used their right to vote, it's being ashamed that Americans don't seem to be disturbed that all of their "news" comes in from sources that have a financial interest in them not knowing certain things. Further, Americans don't seem to have an interest in reading the facts when it's laid out for them in a report signed by their own government.

That's not embarrassing. That's disgusting.

At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 18, 1787, a Mrs. Powel anxiously awaited the results, and as Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task now finished, asked him directly: "Well Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?"

"A republic if you can keep it" responded Franklin.

padraiceen writes:
I may disagree with people about things, but I can't be ashamed of them for thinking something, really - that's their right. That doesn't gel with tolerance in my mind.

Intolerance is saying Americans cannot choose Bush as a president. It's perfectly within the bounds of "tolerance" to say you think it was a bad idea. If intolerance is saying "you shouldn't think a certain way," isn't your statement intolerant?

Isn't a constitutional ban on gay marriage "intolerant?"

Further, you must feel that the fathers of this country were awfully intolerant folks! After all, about a third of the population of the colonies were pro-Britain, a third were pro-insurrection and a third didn't care. And that 1/3rd minority created this country anyway. Not only did they say that staying a colony was a bad idea, they refused to accept it, regardless of it's "legality."

padraiceen writes:
But again, abortion is effectively a states' rights issue as it currently stands, if memory serves.

Negative. Roe v. Wade effectively made a state's right to oppose abortion illegal. Overturning Roe v. Wade would make this a state-by-state issue again.

padraiceen writes:
Massachusetts has no chance of ever criminalizing abortions, and I hope you can at least take some comfort in that.

It would be comforting if all I was concerned about was my own rights.

padraiceen writes:
[to Dolly] I hope I'm not trivializing your fears or anything, because that's the last thing I'd want to do.

Clearly you and I see a Bush agenda in an entirely different light. I'm not sure that I'd call your comments "trivializing" (I think you've been pretty polite, which, as I've said, is UNBELIEVABLY rare for such a topic). But I do think that your perception of what we have just done as a collective, as a country, is very much at odds with the facts. Not opinions, facts. Here I'm talking about the 9/11 Commission report, the Duelfer report, etc.

Put another way, let's assume that you're the passenger of a car. At some point you realize that the person behind the wheel is intoxicated and your arms are pinned down. Initially, the driver drifts over the yellow line but then recovers. Then over a curb, clipping a jogger and heading directly toward a house.

This is how those who don't trust Bush to either be sane, wise or even put the needs of Americans before those of his financial backers view the current state of this country. One might view your comments as a person sitting in the back seat saying, "you're making too big a fuss over this." We wouldn't call it "trivializing." We'd call it psychotic.

[again, that isn't an attack against you, I'm just trying to paint a picture for you, so you can spend a few seconds inside of our heads and see it the way we see it.]

padraiceen writes:
I don't know. I just have this bizarre hope that people will express their opinions about the election, and when it's all done, will put it behind them and come together, rather than pulling farther apart like last time.

The last four years have been a never-ending train of deceptions and inability to say "we made a mistake." EVER.

How the heck can I get behind that? Why would I want to?

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." - Martin Luther King Jr.

Would you expect the neocons and religious right to "come together" and support liberalized sex education that covered topics other than abstinance if Kerry had won? No. We don't lose our moral compass because Bush won.

padraiceen writes:
And this goes for the people on the right, too. If they start acting smug about it, I'm going to say the same goddamned thing to them. I'm tired of the partisanship on each side. It doesn't help anything, and it hurts the people who would much rather just work on patching things up.

Bush's election is a full-on endorsement of partisanship.

I just think it's amusing that D.C.'s vote margin was 90%:9% in favor of John Kerry over George Bush - the highest margin in the country. "Want to know the real character of someone? Don't ask the guy four states away; ask the guy who lives down the street from him."

     - A friend of mine who works as a technial aide in the Supreme Court

Tuesday, November 02, 2004

Right now my stomach is in a kind of loose knot.

Earlier in the day, while walking in the night rain, I had my first-ever sort of mild panic attack. The kind of feeling you get when you hydroplane. That first second. Passed almost immediately. But everything in my body said "get out of this country."

And not in that intellectual sort of "this country blows, let's take a stand" kind of way.

It was more like "you have ten seconds to leave before it blows up."

Monday, November 01, 2004

So ...Vermin Supreme just came into my store. That just made my whole week.

I asked him what he thought was going to happen tomorrow. "Well, I don't think I'm going to win."

I asked him what his platform was.

"Manditory teeth-brushing."
"And if elected, I will fund time travel, go back in time and kill Hitler."
"Ok, so you're tough on terror."
"Yes, definitely."

I then helped him with what he came in for.