"As for the climate, you could take every dollar spent on "global warming" and blow it on internet porn, and the Earth's climate in 2050 will be pretty much what it would be anyway." --Mark Steyn
not only that, but your money would be doing much more for the economy. i say it's a win-win situation.
20071016
quote of the day
Posted by
Daniel
at
19:01
|
Labels: humor, the environment
20071015
20071012
20071008
movie review, in however many words it takes
movie: Brick (2005)
starring: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Nora Zehetner, Lukas Haas, and some other folk
plot: guy gets a call from his ex-girlfriend, who sounds totally freaked out. she's hooked on drugs, winds up with the wrong crowd, and gets killed. guy enters a local drug ring to try and figure out what happened.
verdict: well worth watching, and worth paying to see if necessary. a rather dark and very strange movie, but well acted and incredibly well shot. the folks who put this one together definitely knew what they were doing.
Posted by
Daniel
at
01:10
|
Labels: movie reviews
20071002
20070925
Best. Headline. Ever.
remind me again why we leave the government in charge of things? if a local government can be this stupid, imagine what it must be like at the federal level...
20070918
20070907
my thoughts exactly
finally, someone with the balls to tell it like it is when it comes to the poor people and money. of course, compared to him i'm poor people as well, but i'm working my way up the economic scale instead of bitching and moaning about how other people have more money than me.
also, this gives me a chance to bring up one of my favorite benjamin franklin quotes. it's going to be a longer version than I normally use, because some of it seems to fit perfectly with the article
i linked above:
available here, on pages 347-348. (you may need a google account to view the original)I am for doing good to the poor; but I differ in opinion about the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor is, not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. … I observed in different countries that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and, of course, became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer. There is no country in the world where so many provisions are established for them…. Under all these obligations are our poor modest, humble, and thankful? And do they use their best endeavours to maintain themselves, and lighten our shoulders of this burthen? On the contrary, I affirm that there is no country in the world in which the poor are more idle, dissolute, drunken, and insolent. The day you passed that act you took away from before their eyes the greatest of all inducements to industry, frugality, and sobriety, by giving them a dependence on somewhat else than a careful accumulation during youth and health for support in age or sickness. In short, you offered a premium for the encouragement of idleness, and you should not now wonder, that it has had its effect in the increase of poverty.
Posted by
Daniel
at
18:29
|
Labels: the economy
20070906
Ooh! Ah! BJ!
phil ryan is my new hero, for posting the following video:
i make my appearance around the 1:54 mark... i'm the guy in white running in from the right and getting knocked down by vader. then i just kind of wander off. i should have been in the michael jackson scene as well, but i lacked confidence in my dancing abilities, and stayed backstage.
Posted by
Daniel
at
17:47
|
Labels: awesomeness
20070831
20070830
miscellaneous
1) gun control doesn't reduce gun crime. ummm... duh?
2) women: more violent than men?
h/t say anything
what, behind the rabbit?
it is the rabbit!
this is what the dems want us to "redeploy" away from in iraq:
20070829
20070827
questions of the day
1) how strict/stupid can people really get? about this much.
2) from the above-linked article:
"Under the policy, students are required to wear collared or polo shirts that must be tucked in. The shirts must be in a solid color of white, gray, green, pink or khaki. The shirts must be 3 inches below the waist, which is school board policy." (emphasis mine).so... how exactly are you supposed to tell whether or not a shirt is 3 inches below the waist if it's tucked in? do they make students untuck their shirts to prove the length, then tuck it back in? do they have a series of stretches that would cause any shirt that did not meet the required length to come untucked? or am i just missing something here?
h/t dave barry
20070824
whoops
anybody else see a contradiction here? and if so, is anyone actually surprised?
Posted by
Daniel
at
21:53
|
Labels: the environment
20070820
20070818
why?
some things really bug me, because i really don't understand the point of them. if i didn't invade ireland or eat missionaries, why the hell should i be apologizing for it? everyone involved has been dead for quite some time now, so it should really be a case of letting bygones be bygones. just like slavery here in america. was it a bad thing? definitely. but nobody alive today was either a slave or a slaveholder, and i really don't think we should be apologizing on the behalf of someone who most likely would not have apologized for their actions (since there was a time that it was considered perfectly normal to own slaves) to someone who was not affected (at least not directly, though you could argue about disadvantages to being descended from slaves) by the actions. if you do something wrong, you should apologize for it; if someone else does something wrong, it is up to them to either apologize or not, as they see fit.
20070811
20070807
whoops
get out and drive, america: walking causes global warming.
h/t wizbang
Posted by
Daniel
at
20:01
|
Labels: the environment
20070805
if only i were rich
so, it looks like i've become the person who never updates their blog, which i always make fun of my friends for. but in my defense, i was busy doing this. or maybe just wishing that i was.
Posted by
Daniel
at
01:45
|
Labels: awesomeness, random

