blorky: (What would Al do?)
I had read "Legends of the Fall" years ago, and was prompted to re-read it after Anthony Bourdain visited Jim Harrison for a chapter of "No Reservations" on Montana.

I'm baffled as to the relative lack of fame for Harrison. He had a long run writing odd screenplays for Hollywood. (The world is a sadder place without the production of Harrison's screenplay for John Belushi in "A Confederacy of Dunces".)

Harrison is first and foremost a poet - a form that I don't understand very well. It shows in an absolutely masterful command of his craft. There isn't a sentence or phrase that isn't considered, that doesn't work for a living. I wonder if he's ever had an editor.

Pick up the 3 novella volume entitled "Legends of the Fall". It's great stuff. Foodies on my f-list will like "The Raw and the Cooked".
blorky: (Default)
Goldberg, of all people, gets it right.
blorky: (Default)
I was thinking about M. Night Shyamalan. In a recent interview, he strenuously denied that his recent movies have exhibited downward spiral of popularity and critical acclaim. The reporter seemed flummoxed by this and had no substantive followup questions, clearly not expecting to have to prove that the world is round.

I was wondering what it's like for people who know that thousands and thousands of people despise them for their work. I remember at the height of the anti-Microsoft hatred wondering what it's like to be Bill Gates and be blamed (rightly or wrongly) for all sorts of things going wrong with computers, the internet, and life in general. Same with Dubya - was he insulated from the sheer vituperative dislike of him personally?

When M. Night goes to pitch a movie, is he aware that there's this subtle undercurrent of "Why should we give you money ever again?". I'm presuming there is, but maybe Hollywood is different. Quentin Tarantino's output is lower, but doesn't anyone ever say "Look, maybe you won't ever again be as good as those early films."?
blorky: (Default)
It just dawned on me. The day that Fred Phelps dies is the day I'm buying the stock of any regional airline flying out of San Francisco. The Gay Pride gathering at that funeral will be a FABULOUS event...
blorky: (Omar coming!)
Arguments about gun control invariably center around two areas - the Constitutional component and the public health and safety component.

long post copied from another location after someone asked me my opinion about gun control )
blorky: (Goddam MONKEY PEOPLE!)
To the person who highlighted the library copy of "The Quants: How a New Breed of Math Whizzes Conquered Wall Street and Nearly Destroyed It:

a) It's not your book, shitspigot. Highlighting is really distracting for people who get to read it after you.
b) WTF are you highlighting? I can't make heads or tails of what you think is important. For a while I thought you were accentuating sentences or words that referred to trader hubris, then it was sentences or words that could have been cut from an editorial standpoint, then it was references to historical precedents. After about 90 pages, I really think you're just highlighting random shit to make the book hard to read. There seems to be no thematic consistency to what you feel is relevant enough to take a yellow pen to someone else's book.

blorky: (Default)
"Everything is amazing and nobody is happy..."

blorky: (What would Al do?)
Saints preserve me from people who think status meetings are a marker for managerial productivity. I'm trying to figure out a graceful way to say "You're embarrassing yourself with the attempt to convince people you're a leader."
blorky: (Default)
Why MMA is the best sport in the history of evar itself:

1) Ducks, for no reason whatsoever.

2) Fan posts, including the the description of the neologism of "BJ'ed": a) to spend some pleasurable time with an accommodating friend or b) to be choked out by an angry Hawaiian
blorky: (Default)
Things about which I will not argue:
- creationism
- Obama's citizenship
- Trig's mother's identity
- The decision to go to war in Iraq
- Holocaust denial
- AIDS denial
- [edited to add:] Ayn Rand

Things I will occasionally argue about:
- gun control
- originalist doctrine
- the relative value of religion in shaping society
- the net effect of the Obama administration to date
- WoD

Things I will argue about at the drop of a hat:
- Miranda
- Takings
- WoT trials

Things about which I have an opinion, but have not done my due diligence to consider it an informed opinion:
- Climate change
blorky: ('Cause everybody needs more Lo Pan.)
I've found a repulsive little corner of the WoD. I was trying to find the origin of lawsuits against inanimate objects, like the amusingly named United States v. $8,850, and wound up digging into property forfeiture laws. It boils down to this: the government can arrest you and seize your property. You challange the forfiture and they pursue a civil suit against the property and you have to disprove *probable cause* in a civil court. Since you don't have to make the government pass the higher hurdle of a criminal case against YOU beyond reasonable doubt, they can keep your money/stuff w/o even bringing a charge against you. Now it's a fair point that they have to demonstrate PC for actual criminal activity, but depending on the state, having your cash contaminated by cocaine constitutes PC. Feeling good 'bout that?
blorky: (True!)
From a friend:

IM: and the popularity of the UFC is growing rapidly
IM: the douchebagnaraok is coming
IM: a frat boy in a wolf shirt will devour the sun
blorky: (I clicked on what???)

Who are the 14% that think Fox is "mostly Liberal"?
blorky: (Default)
It strikes me that the Australian economists have something in common with the Peak Oil crowd in the 70's and the global warming crowd in the 80's. Dismissed as a fringe element, their problem is that they all told a truly inconvenient truth with some dismal predictions and recommendations. Over time, it will require a Kunhian notion of how to establish scientific truth rather than a Popper-ian model. As M is fond of pointing out to me, economics isn't a science the same way that chemistry is a science, however predictions and hypothesis can be demonstrated to be consistent with reality. The other distorting factor is that the very nature of politics shapes how consensus reality is perceived.

However, in this case, Kuhn will win. People will learn that debt is not free money. The Federal Reserve isn't going away, but my hope is that it's ability to drive reckless spending will be overcome by people's experience with their own reckless spending. As my Dad used to say, experience doesn't teach, but the interpretation of experience teaches. Some people will get it, some won't. The ones that do will begin to rely on their own due diligence to investigate their spending patterns, investment patterns, educational choices, and in a broader context, the nature of their grasping and aversion. (Sorry, Stick, if I got the serial commas wrong.)
blorky: (Default)
I'm a sad man. I'm watching the first Laura Croft movie and am finding the dual H&K Match 45's nearly as hot as AJ.
Page generated Sep. 21st, 2017 09:15 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios