"Fanitullen" -- Tapani Varis
"Mizu Asobi" -- Asobi Seksu
"Shampoo" -- Elvis Perkins
"Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh" -- Say Hi
"I Feel It All" -- Feist
"You're Almost There (DJ Rexford Remix)" -- You Say Party! We Say Die!"
"Gyroscope" -- The Dismemberment Plan
"Wasabi" -- Bipolar Jukebox
"Becky" -- All Girl Summer Fun Band
"Brother Sport" -- Animal Collective
"Esa Noche" -- Cafe Tacuba
"99 Red Balloons" -- Angry Salad
"The Lightning Strike" -- Snow Patrol
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Mix: NOW 6.0
"Mi Viejo" -- Ratatat
"Cemeteries of London" -- Coldplay
"Teenage Hit Wonder" -- You Say Party! We Say Die!
"I'm A Cuckoo" -- Belle & Sebastian
"Second Chance" -- Liam Finn
"Gobbledigook" -- Sigur Ros
"No More Running Away" -- Air Traffic
"Another Bleeding Heart" -- Alex Parker
"Pies Deslcalzos, Suenos Blancos" -- Shakira
"Bipolar Jukebox" -- Bipolar Jukebox
"Hey" -- Elvis Perkins
"My Moon My Man" -- Feist
"If There's a Rocket Tie Me to It" -- Snow Patrol
"Cemeteries of London" -- Coldplay
"Teenage Hit Wonder" -- You Say Party! We Say Die!
"I'm A Cuckoo" -- Belle & Sebastian
"Second Chance" -- Liam Finn
"Gobbledigook" -- Sigur Ros
"No More Running Away" -- Air Traffic
"Another Bleeding Heart" -- Alex Parker
"Pies Deslcalzos, Suenos Blancos" -- Shakira
"Bipolar Jukebox" -- Bipolar Jukebox
"Hey" -- Elvis Perkins
"My Moon My Man" -- Feist
"If There's a Rocket Tie Me to It" -- Snow Patrol
Local Trivia: Knit or not?
Bayberry Knitting in downtown Plainville seems to be having trouble staying on message. Above the sign indicating the knitting store is a giant banner that says in large, red bannerlike letters on a white background, "Now Open."
In the window is a smaller sign saying in small, white, smaller-signlike letters on a red background, "Sorry, We're Closed."
Though the closed sign is smaller, it seems to be more accurate -- or else the Grand Opening went way, way better than planned. The store appears to be completely empty.
In the window is a smaller sign saying in small, white, smaller-signlike letters on a red background, "Sorry, We're Closed."
Though the closed sign is smaller, it seems to be more accurate -- or else the Grand Opening went way, way better than planned. The store appears to be completely empty.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
PSA: Things I would do for a Klondike bar
Trade in an ice cream sandwich
Build a small sand castle at the beach
Eat one lima bean
Drive to Torrington, CT
Watch one hour of sports
Build a small sand castle at the beach
Eat one lima bean
Drive to Torrington, CT
Watch one hour of sports
Saturday, June 27, 2009
PSA: Things I wouldn't do for a Klondike bar
Fill out tax forms
Watch any of the shows I wouldn't watch over the evening news
Walk 500 miles
Walk 500 more
Eat a bowl of lima beans
Sleep in a bathtub
Bait a shark or bear
Wear a clown costume in public
Watch more than one hour of American Idol
Agree to be sprayed by a skunk or touched in any way with manure
Perform any type of sexual favors
Vote Republican
Watch any of the shows I wouldn't watch over the evening news
Walk 500 miles
Walk 500 more
Eat a bowl of lima beans
Sleep in a bathtub
Bait a shark or bear
Wear a clown costume in public
Watch more than one hour of American Idol
Agree to be sprayed by a skunk or touched in any way with manure
Perform any type of sexual favors
Vote Republican
Friday, June 26, 2009
PSA: Other cars I forgot until this morning.
BMW
Hummer
Mercedes
Nissan*
*This list was actually an attempt to see if I could remember "Nissan" when listing all the cars I knew. Apparently, I couldn't.
Hummer
Mercedes
Nissan*
*This list was actually an attempt to see if I could remember "Nissan" when listing all the cars I knew. Apparently, I couldn't.
Confessions XXXVII
I have four different gallons of ice cream in my freezer right now.
One of them is a chocolate/vanilla combination that I got for making milkshakes over a year ago.
But I like crystallized ice cream, so even though I got a new vanilla for making root beer floats, I won’t throw the old one away.
One of them is a chocolate/vanilla combination that I got for making milkshakes over a year ago.
But I like crystallized ice cream, so even though I got a new vanilla for making root beer floats, I won’t throw the old one away.
Unsolicited Advice XIV
If you ever pass by an estate sale, stop and see what they’ve got. It’s someone’s whole life there, and if you’re lucky, you’ll end up with an antique quilt from the Iowa farm like I did from my grandparents’ estate sale or a portrait painting that’s free just because the canvas has a smallish hole in it, and you’ll come to regard the woman in the picture (who you call Elaine) as a benevolent friend even though you don’t know who she is, have never met her and probably wouldn’t recognize her if you did. (She seemed to be in her twenties 40 years ago.)
PSA: Good news, re: Brandeis
Well, in a miraculous stroke of good luck (I can only call it luck since I’ve made so little actual effort to get my Brandeis ducks in a row, if you don’t count excessive worrying about them), I called the financial person for the cultural production program at Brandeis last week to see about either getting more money, or deferring entrance for at least a semester in order to save up enough to pay the difference between Brandeis tuition and my government loans – and she told me that the school simply hadn’t cross-referenced my scholarship with the fact that I’d filled out the FAFSA, which doubled said scholarship. Which made up the difference.
It also increased my prospects of actually starting a master’s program in the fall, and in the field I’d most prefer (be still my bleeding, hippie, liberal-artful heart), by about 50%. Now instead of having to figure out a way to see friend Sharon more than last year while still technically living in Connecticut and working as much as possible, and how to defer entrance into a school I know won’t make me any more money in the long run, I’ve moved on to thinking about potential moving dates, how to get my lease signed over to P.C. (and whether I can keep my name technically on the lease so I don’t have to change my car’s registration and license), and what my schedule will be once school starts.
Will I be able to keep some days a week at my current job, at least until I find one that pays decently in Waltham? How often will I be able to see P.C.? What will my apartment finally look like when I get all this extra stuff out of here and into where it belongs – a study-room/bedroom outpost in Waltham? (Awesome? Or Super-Awesome?)
I finally feel more excited than frustrated about the process.
And I finally feel completely justified in owning all this TV.
It also increased my prospects of actually starting a master’s program in the fall, and in the field I’d most prefer (be still my bleeding, hippie, liberal-artful heart), by about 50%. Now instead of having to figure out a way to see friend Sharon more than last year while still technically living in Connecticut and working as much as possible, and how to defer entrance into a school I know won’t make me any more money in the long run, I’ve moved on to thinking about potential moving dates, how to get my lease signed over to P.C. (and whether I can keep my name technically on the lease so I don’t have to change my car’s registration and license), and what my schedule will be once school starts.
Will I be able to keep some days a week at my current job, at least until I find one that pays decently in Waltham? How often will I be able to see P.C.? What will my apartment finally look like when I get all this extra stuff out of here and into where it belongs – a study-room/bedroom outpost in Waltham? (Awesome? Or Super-Awesome?)
I finally feel more excited than frustrated about the process.
And I finally feel completely justified in owning all this TV.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
PSA: All the car types I can think of, in alphabetical order
Audi
Buick
Cadillac
Chevy
Chrysler
Citroen
Dodge
Ford
Geo
Honda
Hyundai
Isuzu
Jaguar
Jeep
Kia
Lexus
Lamborghini
Mazda
Pontiac
Porsche
Saturn
Suzuki
Toyota
Volkswagon
Volvo
Buick
Cadillac
Chevy
Chrysler
Citroen
Dodge
Ford
Geo
Honda
Hyundai
Isuzu
Jaguar
Jeep
Kia
Lexus
Lamborghini
Mazda
Pontiac
Porsche
Saturn
Suzuki
Toyota
Volkswagon
Volvo
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
SYD #2
This week, the judges settled into their respective roles and catchphrases.
Nigel mentioned the choreographer first when he really liked a routine, in the middle when he kind of liked it (after a bit of critique), and not at all when he seemed to feel the routine wasn't very good.
Mary, as usual, screamed when she loved a routine, put one couple on the Hot Tamale train, and continually repeated herself in tag-question format when she really liked a performance. (Did this annoy me? This annoyed me, yes it did.)
Toni Basil, the guest judge, kept up Lil C's tradition of just saying a bunch of stuff, but with her own annoying additions of the words "street," "groove," "connection" and "tough" in gratuitous and random fashion.
Karla and Jonathan – “smooth” hip-hop
Nigel: "There’s no excitement in the routine…I can’t forgive you [Jonathan] then. Because you had no contact with your partner…There’s no great hip hop style in putting your hat back on your head together. Betcha they’re in the bottom three. Do you wanna take bets? You wanna take bets?"
Mary: They had no chemistry, no gangsterism.
Toni Basil: "Street has to have a groove and a funk."
Unfair! Karla’s wearing a bra and a string and she did better than Jonathan.
Note: Also, Cat’s dress doesn’t make me want to gouge my eyes out this week. (Could the wardrobe crew have been reading my blog?)
Vitolio and Asuka – “thrash rocker jazz” to Heartbreaker …out of sync, good lift, but nonsensical choreography on the whole by Mandy Moore.
Note: Boo Mandy Moores. Both of them. Also note that Nigel doesn't mention Mandy Moore's choreography, though he's clearly very pleased with this routine.
Nigel: “He’s strong, he’s macho, he’s throwing her around – I like that! Tonight, you did the work. Fantastic!”
Mary: “It wasn’t really together, and that should’ve been.”
Toni: “Watching that video clip of you caressing her when she was crying…” (Wow. I stopped transcribing here, because I just couldn't think of what might come next that wouldn't scare me or gross me out.)
Melissa and Ade – rumba (in which Melissa wears half a dress). Not bad for a ballroom routine. At least is was more interesting than Vitolio and Asuka’s.
Nigel compliments Melissa’s body rather than her dancing, giving special mentions to her hips and back. Ade was the star of the show, Nigel says. And as is the way with SYD, Nigel compliments the choreographer when he likes the routine.
Mary: “What you’re selling right now, I am buying, yes I am!” And she screams.
Toni Basil fans herself, compliments the choreographer in SYD fashion, and neglects to say anything at all about being “street.”
Brandon and Janette: hip-hop, wherein Brandon represents hip-hop and Janette represents a rocker that Brandon wishes he could be. The wardrobe conception of “rock” leaves something to be desired; it's like Cyndy Lauper-meets-dominatrix. Nice synchronization (finally). Brandon’s winning here.
Nigel: “This is like junior all-stars 50 cent and Cher…and you both worked it.”
Mary: “I think you guys really hit that, yes I do! And I am so proud of you tonight, yes I am.”
Toni: "I think that the juxtaposition of the rock and the hip hop that Dave laid on you guys was strategic on his part and good for you. Street is a really really tough thing to do…[something something] groove, [something something] connection.”
Kapono and Kayla: Viennese Waltz – to a Jewel song(???), which is very distracting (Jewel doesn't even have the faux majesty of Celine Dion, and majesty is necessary for Viennese Waltz), and neither of them are wearing any shoes, which is weird for a ballroom routine.
Nigel: “It’s not one of those routines where you’re going to get a hundred rounds of applause…I hope I’m wrong about that.”
Mary: “That was no nightmare, Jean Marc, no it wasn’t!...and you young lady, you’re just absolutely dead gorgeous to watch dance.” And they got on the Hot Tamale train, and Mary screamed.
Toni: “No shoes in a waltz? Jean Marc, you are pushing the envelope, with no shoes in a waltz!”
Evan and Randi: Mia Michaels' contemporary – “it’s all about the booty”
Nigel mentions Mia then goes on to compliment dancing and Randi’s butt.
Mary does some kind of weird voice, then screams. Then mentions Mia. Then says “…and we went down that path, yes we did!”
Toni talks almost exclusively about Mia Michaels for awhile, and I get bored and stop listening.
Caitlin and Jason: paso doble – Caitlin has hypnotic boobs, for some reason, meaning that she's been wardrobed into a bizarre boob-centric concoction that whirls around only those portions of her chest. (“It looks like something Jafar would make Jasmine wear,” says friend Liz.)
Nigel: “A lot of the things you were doing were exceptionally good in the time you had to do it.” But he didn’t mention choreographers.
Mary: “That was really a strong performance, yes it was.” Jason lost his posture, but “it was fearless, yes it was.”
Toni: says the lack of consistent form “didn’t get in the way of the performance.”
Philip and Jeanine: Broadway – Philip has to jump the couch…and he makes it. They also got to pillow fight, which hasn’t even happened in a Mia Michaels routine. Also, Philip's pants split.
Nigel: “Like so many vaudeville dancers that went before him, Philip now knows what it’s like to dance with his ass hanging out of his trousers. Many of us had to do that, believe me.” [Mary loves this.] He mentions choreography, but then also tells Philip to grow even more than he has.
Mary: “I wasn’t allergic to that routine, no I wasn’t….[to Jeanine] you were fabulous, yes you were!”
Toni: “I think you did better as a couple this week than last week.”
Note: Prince Certainpersonio loses a bet that Toni will mention "street" in her last chance in the show. (I thought she probably wouldn't, since it would have been so out of place in commenting on a Broadway routine, though Liz points out that Broadway is, in fact, a street.)
Nigel mentioned the choreographer first when he really liked a routine, in the middle when he kind of liked it (after a bit of critique), and not at all when he seemed to feel the routine wasn't very good.
Mary, as usual, screamed when she loved a routine, put one couple on the Hot Tamale train, and continually repeated herself in tag-question format when she really liked a performance. (Did this annoy me? This annoyed me, yes it did.)
Toni Basil, the guest judge, kept up Lil C's tradition of just saying a bunch of stuff, but with her own annoying additions of the words "street," "groove," "connection" and "tough" in gratuitous and random fashion.
Karla and Jonathan – “smooth” hip-hop
Nigel: "There’s no excitement in the routine…I can’t forgive you [Jonathan] then. Because you had no contact with your partner…There’s no great hip hop style in putting your hat back on your head together. Betcha they’re in the bottom three. Do you wanna take bets? You wanna take bets?"
Mary: They had no chemistry, no gangsterism.
Toni Basil: "Street has to have a groove and a funk."
Unfair! Karla’s wearing a bra and a string and she did better than Jonathan.
Note: Also, Cat’s dress doesn’t make me want to gouge my eyes out this week. (Could the wardrobe crew have been reading my blog?)
Vitolio and Asuka – “thrash rocker jazz” to Heartbreaker …out of sync, good lift, but nonsensical choreography on the whole by Mandy Moore.
Note: Boo Mandy Moores. Both of them. Also note that Nigel doesn't mention Mandy Moore's choreography, though he's clearly very pleased with this routine.
Nigel: “He’s strong, he’s macho, he’s throwing her around – I like that! Tonight, you did the work. Fantastic!”
Mary: “It wasn’t really together, and that should’ve been.”
Toni: “Watching that video clip of you caressing her when she was crying…” (Wow. I stopped transcribing here, because I just couldn't think of what might come next that wouldn't scare me or gross me out.)
Melissa and Ade – rumba (in which Melissa wears half a dress). Not bad for a ballroom routine. At least is was more interesting than Vitolio and Asuka’s.
Nigel compliments Melissa’s body rather than her dancing, giving special mentions to her hips and back. Ade was the star of the show, Nigel says. And as is the way with SYD, Nigel compliments the choreographer when he likes the routine.
Mary: “What you’re selling right now, I am buying, yes I am!” And she screams.
Toni Basil fans herself, compliments the choreographer in SYD fashion, and neglects to say anything at all about being “street.”
Brandon and Janette: hip-hop, wherein Brandon represents hip-hop and Janette represents a rocker that Brandon wishes he could be. The wardrobe conception of “rock” leaves something to be desired; it's like Cyndy Lauper-meets-dominatrix. Nice synchronization (finally). Brandon’s winning here.
Nigel: “This is like junior all-stars 50 cent and Cher…and you both worked it.”
Mary: “I think you guys really hit that, yes I do! And I am so proud of you tonight, yes I am.”
Toni: "I think that the juxtaposition of the rock and the hip hop that Dave laid on you guys was strategic on his part and good for you. Street is a really really tough thing to do…[something something] groove, [something something] connection.”
Kapono and Kayla: Viennese Waltz – to a Jewel song(???), which is very distracting (Jewel doesn't even have the faux majesty of Celine Dion, and majesty is necessary for Viennese Waltz), and neither of them are wearing any shoes, which is weird for a ballroom routine.
Nigel: “It’s not one of those routines where you’re going to get a hundred rounds of applause…I hope I’m wrong about that.”
Mary: “That was no nightmare, Jean Marc, no it wasn’t!...and you young lady, you’re just absolutely dead gorgeous to watch dance.” And they got on the Hot Tamale train, and Mary screamed.
Toni: “No shoes in a waltz? Jean Marc, you are pushing the envelope, with no shoes in a waltz!”
Evan and Randi: Mia Michaels' contemporary – “it’s all about the booty”
Nigel mentions Mia then goes on to compliment dancing and Randi’s butt.
Mary does some kind of weird voice, then screams. Then mentions Mia. Then says “…and we went down that path, yes we did!”
Toni talks almost exclusively about Mia Michaels for awhile, and I get bored and stop listening.
Caitlin and Jason: paso doble – Caitlin has hypnotic boobs, for some reason, meaning that she's been wardrobed into a bizarre boob-centric concoction that whirls around only those portions of her chest. (“It looks like something Jafar would make Jasmine wear,” says friend Liz.)
Nigel: “A lot of the things you were doing were exceptionally good in the time you had to do it.” But he didn’t mention choreographers.
Mary: “That was really a strong performance, yes it was.” Jason lost his posture, but “it was fearless, yes it was.”
Toni: says the lack of consistent form “didn’t get in the way of the performance.”
Philip and Jeanine: Broadway – Philip has to jump the couch…and he makes it. They also got to pillow fight, which hasn’t even happened in a Mia Michaels routine. Also, Philip's pants split.
Nigel: “Like so many vaudeville dancers that went before him, Philip now knows what it’s like to dance with his ass hanging out of his trousers. Many of us had to do that, believe me.” [Mary loves this.] He mentions choreography, but then also tells Philip to grow even more than he has.
Mary: “I wasn’t allergic to that routine, no I wasn’t….[to Jeanine] you were fabulous, yes you were!”
Toni: “I think you did better as a couple this week than last week.”
Note: Prince Certainpersonio loses a bet that Toni will mention "street" in her last chance in the show. (I thought she probably wouldn't, since it would have been so out of place in commenting on a Broadway routine, though Liz points out that Broadway is, in fact, a street.)
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
PSA: Jenny and my smartass
Obviously, friend Jenny is the winner of the tattoo challenge -- in practical terms, it's obvious, since hers was the only response, but I'd like to think it's also obvious that her idea (tattooing "smart" instead of "bad" on my butt) was better than my ideas and probably better than any of the ideas the rest of you were thinking.
Mad props, and a prize, to Jenny.
(Send me your address so I can send you your prize[!!].)
Mad props, and a prize, to Jenny.
(Send me your address so I can send you your prize[!!].)
MFHTDWF #9
Principle: Don’t try to explain yourself to ordinary people. Ever.
This is an amalgamation of several of the previous principles (#1, 2, 8, etc.) that spell out your primary responsibility as a celebrity (fascinate and terrify your audience). Still, it’s worth stating on its own merits that in general, a famous person should never try to explain famous people behavior to ordinary people.
Ordinary people will think they want to see how much they resemble famous people, fundamentally. Remember: They are wrong, and you know what they want from you better than they do.
They’ll think they want you to open up and share about the tragedies in your life, but this will ultimately cause them to regard you with condescension and pity.
They’ll think they want you to tell them what makes you happy, but anything causing you to seem “down-to-earth” or normal (co-ordinary) will also ultimately make them regard you with condescension (the “I could have done that, and better” attitude so many modern artists encounter).
Here is an exemplary conversation from TV between an Ordinary Person and a Famous Person.
Note the different concerns each person expresses.
This dialogue tells us several things. First, it lays out the concerns of a right-thinking Famous Person. Your concerns as a famous person should be similar to his, if not exactly the same (i.e., you may not owe Quincy Jones 75 grand).
Second, it portrays some of the supposed attitudes of Ordinary People: “normal” is good, there’s no problem with a Famous Person being labeled “normal,” and famous people are supposed to be just like Ordinary Person.
Unfortunately, also revealed in the last comment by Ordinary Person, which is sarcastic and condescending, is the ultimate effect of explaining to ordinary people even the most basic principles of fame.
Unless you are Jeff Goldblum, Woody Allen, or another Jewish man with a shtick that includes self-referentialism and self-aggrandizement/abhorrence, you should not explain even these most basic concepts to an ordinary person.
Examples of famous people who succeed at this principle: NASCAR racers (whose explanations are indecipherable to ordinary people), Tom Cruise (ditto), Jeff Goldblum and Woody Allen.
Examples of famous people who succeed in understanding MFHTDWF concepts, but fail at them by explaining them to ordinary people, but it’s okay because they’re fictional: Tracy Jordan
Examples of famous people who fail at this principle: Any famous person who has appeared on a talk show and said things that made sense (i.e., earned more than scattered applause on Oprah).
This is an amalgamation of several of the previous principles (#1, 2, 8, etc.) that spell out your primary responsibility as a celebrity (fascinate and terrify your audience). Still, it’s worth stating on its own merits that in general, a famous person should never try to explain famous people behavior to ordinary people.
Ordinary people will think they want to see how much they resemble famous people, fundamentally. Remember: They are wrong, and you know what they want from you better than they do.
They’ll think they want you to open up and share about the tragedies in your life, but this will ultimately cause them to regard you with condescension and pity.
They’ll think they want you to tell them what makes you happy, but anything causing you to seem “down-to-earth” or normal (co-ordinary) will also ultimately make them regard you with condescension (the “I could have done that, and better” attitude so many modern artists encounter).
Here is an exemplary conversation from TV between an Ordinary Person and a Famous Person.
Note the different concerns each person expresses.
Famous Person: “They’re printing libel about me! Libel!”
Ordinary Person [looks at picture of Famous Person apparently walking out of a Starbucks with small, leashed dog, labeled “Normal”]: “Ugh. Normal – how dare they?”
Famous Person: “That’s what I’m saying! That’s character assassination! That’s not normal! It only looks like I’m walking out of a Starbucks when actually I’m doing the robot going backwards into a Starbucks. And I don’t even know whose dog that is! Yes, I steal dogs.”
Ordinary Person: “What is the problem?”
Famous Person: “I can’t be normal. If I’m normal, I’m boring. If I’m boring, I’m not a movie star. If I’m not a movie star, then I’m poor. And poor people can’t afford to pay back the 75 thousand in cash they owe Quincy Jones.”
Ordinary Person, sarcastically: “Looking at that guy is like looking into a mirror.”
This dialogue tells us several things. First, it lays out the concerns of a right-thinking Famous Person. Your concerns as a famous person should be similar to his, if not exactly the same (i.e., you may not owe Quincy Jones 75 grand).
Second, it portrays some of the supposed attitudes of Ordinary People: “normal” is good, there’s no problem with a Famous Person being labeled “normal,” and famous people are supposed to be just like Ordinary Person.
Unfortunately, also revealed in the last comment by Ordinary Person, which is sarcastic and condescending, is the ultimate effect of explaining to ordinary people even the most basic principles of fame.
Unless you are Jeff Goldblum, Woody Allen, or another Jewish man with a shtick that includes self-referentialism and self-aggrandizement/abhorrence, you should not explain even these most basic concepts to an ordinary person.
Examples of famous people who succeed at this principle: NASCAR racers (whose explanations are indecipherable to ordinary people), Tom Cruise (ditto), Jeff Goldblum and Woody Allen.
Examples of famous people who succeed in understanding MFHTDWF concepts, but fail at them by explaining them to ordinary people, but it’s okay because they’re fictional: Tracy Jordan
Examples of famous people who fail at this principle: Any famous person who has appeared on a talk show and said things that made sense (i.e., earned more than scattered applause on Oprah).
Monday, June 22, 2009
PSA: There's a quiz for that.
Finally, I saw an ad for a quiz that will help determine whether or not your husband is gay.
If you have a husband, and you suspect he might be gay, feel free to take the quiz.
Or, hey, here's a thought -- try to sleep with him.
If he agrees and seems to be having fun, stop worrying: He's not gay.
If you have a husband, and you suspect he might be gay, feel free to take the quiz.
Or, hey, here's a thought -- try to sleep with him.
If he agrees and seems to be having fun, stop worrying: He's not gay.
PSA: Tell it like it is, Bristol.
Bristol Palin was on the cover of People a few weeks ago, in her graduation robe and holding her son Tripp (who continues the "WTF is that name??" tradition of the Palin clan).
The article portrayed Bristol as relatively isolated though living among her family, and she was quoted as saying that if teenagers understood the consequences of sex, they'd never, ever have it.
She's probably right -- probably more right than the detractors who flamed People for putting an unwed teen mother on the cover and smiling. I mean, obviously teens aren't legally (or, I would say, emotionally) allowed to consent to behavior that can result in having to raise children or deal with a lifelong (or even temporary-and-curable) STD, for a reason. Bristol's point, that teens wouldn't choose to have sex if they understood the consequences, is right in line with the view that sex is something only adults (and only some adults at that) can be expected to make reasonable decisions on.
It's totally conventional, in other words.
And the view that despite committing what she may now consider a mistake, her baby isn't one, and that he is lovable and good, is also conventional.
Why do people think that the way to prevent teen pregnancy is to vilify the babies? Wouldn't we all be better off saying "yes, babies are very lovable, and when you have one, you want to take the best care of it you can -- which you're not old/mature/financially stable enough to do right now. Which is a good reason to not have sex."
(Among other good reasons, none of which involve vilifying either the people involved, their impulses and desires, or sex itself.)
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Punitive attitudes toward people who have made bad or stupid choices won't help, particularly when there's a baby involved, and espousing such nonsense isn't a form of "tough love." It's an insufficiency of love. Enough love would cover over mistakes and be able to accept the reality of the situation as it is now rather than being so morbidly focused on the past that those mistakes can never be redeemed.
'Course I'm just quoting the Bible at this point: John when he said "perfect love casts out fear," and that "love covers a multitude of sins."
How's that for conventional source material, h8rs.
The article portrayed Bristol as relatively isolated though living among her family, and she was quoted as saying that if teenagers understood the consequences of sex, they'd never, ever have it.
She's probably right -- probably more right than the detractors who flamed People for putting an unwed teen mother on the cover and smiling. I mean, obviously teens aren't legally (or, I would say, emotionally) allowed to consent to behavior that can result in having to raise children or deal with a lifelong (or even temporary-and-curable) STD, for a reason. Bristol's point, that teens wouldn't choose to have sex if they understood the consequences, is right in line with the view that sex is something only adults (and only some adults at that) can be expected to make reasonable decisions on.
It's totally conventional, in other words.
And the view that despite committing what she may now consider a mistake, her baby isn't one, and that he is lovable and good, is also conventional.
Why do people think that the way to prevent teen pregnancy is to vilify the babies? Wouldn't we all be better off saying "yes, babies are very lovable, and when you have one, you want to take the best care of it you can -- which you're not old/mature/financially stable enough to do right now. Which is a good reason to not have sex."
(Among other good reasons, none of which involve vilifying either the people involved, their impulses and desires, or sex itself.)
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Punitive attitudes toward people who have made bad or stupid choices won't help, particularly when there's a baby involved, and espousing such nonsense isn't a form of "tough love." It's an insufficiency of love. Enough love would cover over mistakes and be able to accept the reality of the situation as it is now rather than being so morbidly focused on the past that those mistakes can never be redeemed.
'Course I'm just quoting the Bible at this point: John when he said "perfect love casts out fear," and that "love covers a multitude of sins."
How's that for conventional source material, h8rs.
Local Trivia: Tell it like it is, Bristol.
Observed on route 6 in Bristol, CT: in a trailor on the side of the road, in the midst of a dusty semi-field -- the "Wasteland Gift Shop"
Accusations X
Drivers who go 35 mph on Route 10 in Cheshire, where the speed limit is 45 mph.
People who complain about their neighborhoods being boring but never take a walk to see what's actually there.
Amateur climbers who go to Yosemite "to climb El Cap!" and get themselves or others injured or killed through amateurish behavior.
People who complain about their neighborhoods being boring but never take a walk to see what's actually there.
Amateur climbers who go to Yosemite "to climb El Cap!" and get themselves or others injured or killed through amateurish behavior.
Friday, June 19, 2009
PSA: From the desk of: Mr Banker Paul
How fortuitous that his parents, in a splendid display of prescience where their son's future vocation was concerned, named him "Banker."
Though one wonders why they didn't go for the more prestigious "Doctor" or "Engineer," it seems clear from his email that he's done well for himself -- if only some middle-class American would help him get his $15 million out of the country.
Though one wonders why they didn't go for the more prestigious "Doctor" or "Engineer," it seems clear from his email that he's done well for himself -- if only some middle-class American would help him get his $15 million out of the country.
Local Trivia: Whoever she is, he didn't like her.
Overheard, male customer at the Pizza Hut: “There was this woman and she said ‘don’t mention that you know me to them,’ and if you had seen this woman – don’t worry, lady, I wouldn’t tell anyone I met you, anyway.
I don’t even remember her last name. She goes ‘don’t drop my name.’ Don’t worry. I wouldn’t ever drop your name.
I’ve been in a number of relationships.”
I don’t even remember her last name. She goes ‘don’t drop my name.’ Don’t worry. I wouldn’t ever drop your name.
I’ve been in a number of relationships.”
Thursday, June 18, 2009
New word: Cramazy
adj. something both crazy and amazing, or so crazy that it is amazing, or so amazing that it is crazy.
SYD #1
Last night was the first night I remembered to watch "So You Think You Can Dance" since Vegas week -- meaning I missed the first week of actual competitions, just like last year.
And I missed the first 20 minutes of last night's, and would have missed more thanks to this totally confusing, "this is as bad as calculus and 'adjusted gross income' lines on tax forms" digital TV switch-over, if it hadn't been for Prince Certainpersonio coming to my rescue and fixing the menu and antenna to permit Fox to show up on my TV.
Never do I feel more like a damsel in distress than when dealing with digital technology (and the aforementioned calculus and "adjusted gross income" lines).
But I did get to watch most of the second week of SYD competition, and mostly (as a surprise treat) with P.C. himself, as he was enamored of his ability to put the show simultaneously on his digital screen TV, hooked up to his computer, and my CRT TV, hooked up to my three DVD players, his PS2, and the antenna box that converts to a digital signal.
As a result, I spent most of my time, and most of the time the judges were talking, explaining what I've learned about dance, teen girl voting habits, and the judges who work on SYD, over five years of watching the show.
I don't have much of a bead on the contestants yet this year, and so I can't quite tell who will occupy the supreme spots of "girl I wish I could be" and "guy I wish I could have as my boyfriend" that determine who wins especially the earlier parts of the competition. None of the routines last night stood out much to me, although the pop jazz routine, the disco, and the tango were all pretty good. So instead of reviewing individual performances this week, I figured I'd share with you all what I forced P.C. to hear last night, over pepperjack popcorn and diet sodas.
--It's probably the case that Mary Murphy got a permanent judge spot, which she didn't have in initial seasons of SYD, because of her patented scream and, more recently, her coining and usage of the phrase "hot tamale train" in complimenting dancers.
Hearing a scream from Mary is like receiving a really ugly trophy, I told P.C.: It kind of annoys you, but the deeper you are into the competition, the more you set aside questions of appearance and irritation and accept it for the honor it is.
-- Cat Deely's wardrobe crew spends most of its time trying to one-up their previous efforts to make Cat look really, crazily weird. Last night she wore a red dress that looked like it had been made from a very large towel pinned at the shoulder, but that was nothing compared to the tuxedo dress or other, less nicknamable dresses from past seasons.
In Cat's favor, however, is her genuine attachment to the dancers that remain, which grows more poignant and obvious as the weeks of competition go on. I often feel almost as bad for Cat to see later dancers go as I do for the dancers themselves.
-- The show has tried, successfully, to incorporate dance styles from "all over the world" -- there are probably corners of the earth SYD hasn't mined yet, but India, Russia and South-Central L.A. seem like a good enough list for an "all over the world" claim -- and Nigel points this out regularly.
-- There seems to be emerging this year, perhaps because of Adam Lambert's recent coming-out (and Clay Aiken's obvious and belated coming-out awhile ago), a new category of dancer-to-vote-for: the GBF (gay best friend). (To be added to GIWICB and GIWICHAMB.)
-- The top ten dancers are really the winners. At that point, you're in the tour, and if you're not going to win the money, you're just as well off being number 10 as number 5.
Tonight is the results show, but I don't review those unless I happen to watch them and they're interesting, or until the final weeks of the season.
In the meantime, feel free to youtube last night's performances for yourselves, biotches.
And I missed the first 20 minutes of last night's, and would have missed more thanks to this totally confusing, "this is as bad as calculus and 'adjusted gross income' lines on tax forms" digital TV switch-over, if it hadn't been for Prince Certainpersonio coming to my rescue and fixing the menu and antenna to permit Fox to show up on my TV.
Never do I feel more like a damsel in distress than when dealing with digital technology (and the aforementioned calculus and "adjusted gross income" lines).
But I did get to watch most of the second week of SYD competition, and mostly (as a surprise treat) with P.C. himself, as he was enamored of his ability to put the show simultaneously on his digital screen TV, hooked up to his computer, and my CRT TV, hooked up to my three DVD players, his PS2, and the antenna box that converts to a digital signal.
As a result, I spent most of my time, and most of the time the judges were talking, explaining what I've learned about dance, teen girl voting habits, and the judges who work on SYD, over five years of watching the show.
I don't have much of a bead on the contestants yet this year, and so I can't quite tell who will occupy the supreme spots of "girl I wish I could be" and "guy I wish I could have as my boyfriend" that determine who wins especially the earlier parts of the competition. None of the routines last night stood out much to me, although the pop jazz routine, the disco, and the tango were all pretty good. So instead of reviewing individual performances this week, I figured I'd share with you all what I forced P.C. to hear last night, over pepperjack popcorn and diet sodas.
--It's probably the case that Mary Murphy got a permanent judge spot, which she didn't have in initial seasons of SYD, because of her patented scream and, more recently, her coining and usage of the phrase "hot tamale train" in complimenting dancers.
Hearing a scream from Mary is like receiving a really ugly trophy, I told P.C.: It kind of annoys you, but the deeper you are into the competition, the more you set aside questions of appearance and irritation and accept it for the honor it is.
-- Cat Deely's wardrobe crew spends most of its time trying to one-up their previous efforts to make Cat look really, crazily weird. Last night she wore a red dress that looked like it had been made from a very large towel pinned at the shoulder, but that was nothing compared to the tuxedo dress or other, less nicknamable dresses from past seasons.
In Cat's favor, however, is her genuine attachment to the dancers that remain, which grows more poignant and obvious as the weeks of competition go on. I often feel almost as bad for Cat to see later dancers go as I do for the dancers themselves.
-- The show has tried, successfully, to incorporate dance styles from "all over the world" -- there are probably corners of the earth SYD hasn't mined yet, but India, Russia and South-Central L.A. seem like a good enough list for an "all over the world" claim -- and Nigel points this out regularly.
-- There seems to be emerging this year, perhaps because of Adam Lambert's recent coming-out (and Clay Aiken's obvious and belated coming-out awhile ago), a new category of dancer-to-vote-for: the GBF (gay best friend). (To be added to GIWICB and GIWICHAMB.)
-- The top ten dancers are really the winners. At that point, you're in the tour, and if you're not going to win the money, you're just as well off being number 10 as number 5.
Tonight is the results show, but I don't review those unless I happen to watch them and they're interesting, or until the final weeks of the season.
In the meantime, feel free to youtube last night's performances for yourselves, biotches.
PSA: Remy [not] Zero
Sorry to everyone to whom I said "Remy Zero is not that good."
I was wrong. They're pretty good, and "Golden Hum" is worth having.
I was wrong. They're pretty good, and "Golden Hum" is worth having.
PSA: Politics and mail don't mix.
After P.C. washed my car a week or two ago, I put my "Vote Nov. 4" (Obama / Biden) circular car magnet on my mailbox, since it was the only metal thing in the vicinity, intending to return it to my car one morning on the way out, after the wax had dried. (That's right -- he waxed Betty, too.)
I found it on my steps one day after work, but assumed it had fallen off and returned it to the mailbox before heading up the stairs with whatever I was carrying. I don't remember which day it was, but since I'm always carrying something up the stairs when I come home, it's guaranteed that I was loaded down with things, possibly things I had just recently paid good money for.
Which is why I was shocked on leaving the house with P.C. today to find that my landlord had put the magnet inside my mailbox with a note that said roughly (or verbatim):
If you read this the way I did, you're bound to hear the emphasis on my in the last line. And the line breaks are as written, not ones that I made up.
Also the spelling of "speach," though I realize it's petty to point that out; I've gotten that one wrong a few times.
Still, the hostility I read into this note -- and into the fact that he didn't come talk to me in person, or call me on the phone -- caught me off guard and stung. I did what I always do in these situations, which is to immediately formulate the perfect reply before allowing myself to think of anything else (in the world).
At first I explained, in my perfect reply, that I use the magnet to remind me which side of the car my gas tank is on, that I like that the magnet says primarily "Vote Nov. 4" with a small in-between "Obama * Biden," and that I had been using the mailbox as a convenient location rather than a soapbox.
In mental editing, though, I removed the first two notes from my reply. My landlord doesn't need to know what value I place on that magnet. He doesn't need to be placated into thinking I'm in favor of voting (which I am) over and above a certain candidate -- because I did vote for Obama, in the primaries and the general election, and I gave money to the campaign to get that magnet originally, but more importantly -- because it's not really any of his business what my politics are or who I support. I pay rent every month and except for the time my bathroom sink overflowed into his kitchen, I'm a good tenant.
I suppose he has a point about his house appearing to support a candidate he apparently didn't want in office.
But I think mine about personally being allowed to support whatever candidate I want without even passive-aggressive/WASPish hostile reactions is a better one. And I'm pretty sure that renting from someone doesn't make me less qualified to expect this.
On the other hand and on further reflection, it was probably illegal of me to post something political on my mailbox. I know from past complaints that it's illegal to put something without a stamp into someone's mailbox. They're like federal property or something.
So one point for each of us.
I found it on my steps one day after work, but assumed it had fallen off and returned it to the mailbox before heading up the stairs with whatever I was carrying. I don't remember which day it was, but since I'm always carrying something up the stairs when I come home, it's guaranteed that I was loaded down with things, possibly things I had just recently paid good money for.
Which is why I was shocked on leaving the house with P.C. today to find that my landlord had put the magnet inside my mailbox with a note that said roughly (or verbatim):
Free speach is fine
on your car
on your house
But please don't put anything political or any other posting on my house.
Thanks, [Landlord Guy]
If you read this the way I did, you're bound to hear the emphasis on my in the last line. And the line breaks are as written, not ones that I made up.
Also the spelling of "speach," though I realize it's petty to point that out; I've gotten that one wrong a few times.
Still, the hostility I read into this note -- and into the fact that he didn't come talk to me in person, or call me on the phone -- caught me off guard and stung. I did what I always do in these situations, which is to immediately formulate the perfect reply before allowing myself to think of anything else (in the world).
At first I explained, in my perfect reply, that I use the magnet to remind me which side of the car my gas tank is on, that I like that the magnet says primarily "Vote Nov. 4" with a small in-between "Obama * Biden," and that I had been using the mailbox as a convenient location rather than a soapbox.
In mental editing, though, I removed the first two notes from my reply. My landlord doesn't need to know what value I place on that magnet. He doesn't need to be placated into thinking I'm in favor of voting (which I am) over and above a certain candidate -- because I did vote for Obama, in the primaries and the general election, and I gave money to the campaign to get that magnet originally, but more importantly -- because it's not really any of his business what my politics are or who I support. I pay rent every month and except for the time my bathroom sink overflowed into his kitchen, I'm a good tenant.
I suppose he has a point about his house appearing to support a candidate he apparently didn't want in office.
But I think mine about personally being allowed to support whatever candidate I want without even passive-aggressive/WASPish hostile reactions is a better one. And I'm pretty sure that renting from someone doesn't make me less qualified to expect this.
On the other hand and on further reflection, it was probably illegal of me to post something political on my mailbox. I know from past complaints that it's illegal to put something without a stamp into someone's mailbox. They're like federal property or something.
So one point for each of us.
Monday, June 15, 2009
PSA: July 4 is a Saturday this year.
Best check your corporate calendars to see if the overlords gave you Friday the 3rd off instead.
PSA: Reductio ad absurdum
Well, I've watched the first disc of Big Bang Theory, season 1, and I do find it charming and geeky enough to cover over the fact that it was created by the same guys who came up with the much-and-accurately-maligned "Two and a Half Men" and "Dharma and Greg."
Sheldon is, indeed, the best.
The difference between Sheldon and Leonard, actually, seems to be the difference between the two types of nerds Benjamin Nugent points out in American Nerd: The Story of My People. The first type (Sheldon) is a human that acts kind of like a robot -- overly concerned with precision and execution, viewing social interactions as a kind of complex matrix of behavior rather than a spontaneous, organic way of living. The second type (Leonard) is someone associated with the same activities and ambitions as the "real nerd" but without the actual robot-like social impulses. The second type is a nerd by association, in other words.
Which is what makes Leonard so much less attractive as a character and human being than Sheldon is. Sheldon has the kind of self-assertion that only extremely arrogant people have, but without the social mettle required to be truly annoying. He's obviously not going to grease himself up and pick up a surfboard to get "chicks," since his is the power of precise observation, and he knows that neither he nor Leonard are likely to ever succeed in surfing or picking up women, except possibly as the result of some kind of physics experiment.
Leonard can understand Sheldon, but isn't able to quite grasp the idea that he occupies a certain place in society (one that doesn't include getting heavy furniture up the stairs, retrieving televisions from ex-boyfriends, or dating Penny) the way Sheldon can, partly because Leonard doesn't unambiguously occupy that place.
This combined with Leonard's general unattractiveness makes me feel less likely to befriend him, less likely to like him if I met him, and also saves the show from being a plotless portrayal of geeks in their native environment.
"Leonard wants Penny but can't have her" becomes, then, the main conflict of the show, and yet background for the much funnier, much more charming, much more endearing subplot, "Sheldon is a true nerd."
Sheldon is, indeed, the best.
The difference between Sheldon and Leonard, actually, seems to be the difference between the two types of nerds Benjamin Nugent points out in American Nerd: The Story of My People. The first type (Sheldon) is a human that acts kind of like a robot -- overly concerned with precision and execution, viewing social interactions as a kind of complex matrix of behavior rather than a spontaneous, organic way of living. The second type (Leonard) is someone associated with the same activities and ambitions as the "real nerd" but without the actual robot-like social impulses. The second type is a nerd by association, in other words.
Which is what makes Leonard so much less attractive as a character and human being than Sheldon is. Sheldon has the kind of self-assertion that only extremely arrogant people have, but without the social mettle required to be truly annoying. He's obviously not going to grease himself up and pick up a surfboard to get "chicks," since his is the power of precise observation, and he knows that neither he nor Leonard are likely to ever succeed in surfing or picking up women, except possibly as the result of some kind of physics experiment.
Leonard can understand Sheldon, but isn't able to quite grasp the idea that he occupies a certain place in society (one that doesn't include getting heavy furniture up the stairs, retrieving televisions from ex-boyfriends, or dating Penny) the way Sheldon can, partly because Leonard doesn't unambiguously occupy that place.
This combined with Leonard's general unattractiveness makes me feel less likely to befriend him, less likely to like him if I met him, and also saves the show from being a plotless portrayal of geeks in their native environment.
"Leonard wants Penny but can't have her" becomes, then, the main conflict of the show, and yet background for the much funnier, much more charming, much more endearing subplot, "Sheldon is a true nerd."
Saturday, June 13, 2009
PSA: Shows I’ve watched mainly for the theme songs
Thundercats
Fraggle Rock
NYPD Blue
Dangerous Minds (TV version with Annie Price)
Fraggle Rock
NYPD Blue
Dangerous Minds (TV version with Annie Price)
MFHTDWF #8
Principle: Get a Jewish mother equivalent (JME) to keep you down to earth, but if you are ever discovered, say she is your dominatrix.
This is especially effective for women.
As a famous person, it is your job to fascinate and terrify the public. However, only the rare sociopath can continually fascinate, terrify, and walk on the edge of overwhelming hubris required by audiences without occasionally requiring that someone keep you feeling some semblance of the moral qualms faced by the rest of us, and by you in your pre-fame life.
A JME can effectively provide this service by making you feel horribly guilty for next to no reason. You continue to experience some of the moral qualms that likely afflicted you in your life prior to gaining fame, but you are not forced to associate that guilt with any actual shameful actions, thus freeing you to continue engaging in those presumably fascinating/terrifying behaviors.
“Fascinate and terrify,” however, means you should avoid saying or doing anything that may make you seem “just like us.” We should not have to hear that your parents or children keep you “down to earth,” even if you’re being interviewed on Oprah (though this is the situation in which it is most understandable to see you crack and confess to normal down-to-earthedness).
Instead, keep your need to stay “down to earth” a secret as long as possible by sidetracking conversations about your down-to-earthedness; if all else fails, sabotage them by talking about your new world-domination plan, complaining loudly about the tornado patterns in American today (could they actually be caused by the federal government?), or, in a pinch, screaming and dismantling the set of whatever show you’re on.
The JME should not be related to you, for obvious reasons, and should resemble a Jewish mother as closely as possible. You may designate a single individual to be your JME and your dominatrix cover-up story, but as JMEs are ideally older and nagging, and dominatrices are ideally younger and look good in leather, it is understandable if you choose to employ two separate individuals for these positions. (This is mainly relevant for male actors who would like to be viewed as having “a thing” for young, hot women, in order to continue receiving the attentions of such women. However, this should be measured against the inherent fascination/terror in confessing that one employs an older, nagging woman as a dominatrix, which will undoubtedly last several news cycles.)
You should pay your JME exorbitant sums of money and use “X-wing spy plane,” “Time travel R&D” or “Floating laser tag island, LLC” as the line-item in your budget to account for this expense. This will appear as an obvious cover-up to any paparazzi with access to your accounting records, encouraging investigation, National-Enquirer coverage and the chance to act out in public.
Ultimately, if discovered, you should confess to having kept a dominatrix on retainer “to keep it real.” This should be followed up with release of pre-recorded explicit phone conversations and a planned media discovery of your “love den.” If your JME is not the same person as your “dominatrix,” you should also prepare your JME for this apparent revelation at the beginning of your arrangement so that she does not step forward to “defend” you during the subsequent media storm.
If you are discovered, pay the JME a follow-up exorbitant one-time payment to keep silent, but do not buy her real estate.
When you embark on your scheme to stay down to earth via JME, pay a one-time sum to a beautiful young struggling actress, preferably Asian, who is willing to come forward as your dominatrix should the need arise. If you and she are “outed” as S&M lovers, buy her a tasteful house in L.A.
Under no circumstances should you employ an actual dominatrix, as you will no longer be able to control the story should a real dominatrix come forward with tales of your exploits. The only exception to this rule is for those who will commit such bizarre acts with a dominatrix that confession of the true events of such sessions would serve to fascinate and terrify the public.
Examples of famous people who succeed at this principle: Donnie Osmond, Courtney Cox
Examples of famous people who succeeded at this principle but were discovered and used the sex-buddy cover-up: Pres. Bill Clinton, R. Kelly
Examples of famous people who fail at this principle: Kate Hudson, Tom Hanks
This is especially effective for women.
As a famous person, it is your job to fascinate and terrify the public. However, only the rare sociopath can continually fascinate, terrify, and walk on the edge of overwhelming hubris required by audiences without occasionally requiring that someone keep you feeling some semblance of the moral qualms faced by the rest of us, and by you in your pre-fame life.
A JME can effectively provide this service by making you feel horribly guilty for next to no reason. You continue to experience some of the moral qualms that likely afflicted you in your life prior to gaining fame, but you are not forced to associate that guilt with any actual shameful actions, thus freeing you to continue engaging in those presumably fascinating/terrifying behaviors.
“Fascinate and terrify,” however, means you should avoid saying or doing anything that may make you seem “just like us.” We should not have to hear that your parents or children keep you “down to earth,” even if you’re being interviewed on Oprah (though this is the situation in which it is most understandable to see you crack and confess to normal down-to-earthedness).
Instead, keep your need to stay “down to earth” a secret as long as possible by sidetracking conversations about your down-to-earthedness; if all else fails, sabotage them by talking about your new world-domination plan, complaining loudly about the tornado patterns in American today (could they actually be caused by the federal government?), or, in a pinch, screaming and dismantling the set of whatever show you’re on.
The JME should not be related to you, for obvious reasons, and should resemble a Jewish mother as closely as possible. You may designate a single individual to be your JME and your dominatrix cover-up story, but as JMEs are ideally older and nagging, and dominatrices are ideally younger and look good in leather, it is understandable if you choose to employ two separate individuals for these positions. (This is mainly relevant for male actors who would like to be viewed as having “a thing” for young, hot women, in order to continue receiving the attentions of such women. However, this should be measured against the inherent fascination/terror in confessing that one employs an older, nagging woman as a dominatrix, which will undoubtedly last several news cycles.)
You should pay your JME exorbitant sums of money and use “X-wing spy plane,” “Time travel R&D” or “Floating laser tag island, LLC” as the line-item in your budget to account for this expense. This will appear as an obvious cover-up to any paparazzi with access to your accounting records, encouraging investigation, National-Enquirer coverage and the chance to act out in public.
Ultimately, if discovered, you should confess to having kept a dominatrix on retainer “to keep it real.” This should be followed up with release of pre-recorded explicit phone conversations and a planned media discovery of your “love den.” If your JME is not the same person as your “dominatrix,” you should also prepare your JME for this apparent revelation at the beginning of your arrangement so that she does not step forward to “defend” you during the subsequent media storm.
If you are discovered, pay the JME a follow-up exorbitant one-time payment to keep silent, but do not buy her real estate.
When you embark on your scheme to stay down to earth via JME, pay a one-time sum to a beautiful young struggling actress, preferably Asian, who is willing to come forward as your dominatrix should the need arise. If you and she are “outed” as S&M lovers, buy her a tasteful house in L.A.
Under no circumstances should you employ an actual dominatrix, as you will no longer be able to control the story should a real dominatrix come forward with tales of your exploits. The only exception to this rule is for those who will commit such bizarre acts with a dominatrix that confession of the true events of such sessions would serve to fascinate and terrify the public.
Examples of famous people who succeed at this principle: Donnie Osmond, Courtney Cox
Examples of famous people who succeeded at this principle but were discovered and used the sex-buddy cover-up: Pres. Bill Clinton, R. Kelly
Examples of famous people who fail at this principle: Kate Hudson, Tom Hanks
Friday, June 12, 2009
Quantifiable Living: Wedding party member-Social satisfaction scale
Emotion: Satisfaction (with social life)
Unit of measure: Wedding party members living within X/5 miles
How it works: Satisfaction with one’s social situation may be measured in the number of people within X-number of miles who would be chosen and welcomed into one’s ideal wedding party (as a groomsmen or bridesmaid).
Relatives who are forced into wedding parties by necessity but would not have been chosen freely do not count on this scale. (See “cultural miles-geographic dissatisfaction scale” to account for these relatives.) Relatives or other loved ones who would traditionally occupy other positions in an actual wedding ceremony (i.e., “mother of the bride”) may be imagined and included as bridesmaids or groomsmen for the purpose of this scale.
Women may choose “groomsmen” as well as “bridesmaids,” and men may choose either as well. However, the total number of people chosen as one’s ideal wedding party must not exceed seven, and 7.0 is the maximum level of social satisfaction in this scale. Zero (0.0) is the lowest possible measure.
To calculate social satisfaction levels, each person in the ideal wedding party is the equivalent of 1.00 pwpm (potential wedding party members) when living within five miles. For every five additional miles away each pwpm lives, .05 pwpm is subtracted from each wedding party member’s initial 1.00. The lower number in the range of miles distant (i.e., “fifty to fifty-five miles away” is reduced to exactly fifty miles) is the number to be multiplied by .05 and subtracted from 1.00.
Example:
You have one pwpm living eighteen miles away. How many wpm is this person?
18 miles / 5 miles = 3, R3*
3 x 0.05pwpm = 0.15
1.00 pwpm – 0.15 pwpm = 0.85 wpm**
* Remainders are inconsequential in the Wedding party-social satisfaction scale.
**Once “real numbers” are determined for each potential wedding party member, units of measure change from pwpm to wpm.
The resulting numbers for each of the potential wedding party members are then added to determine social satisfaction.
Example:
One pwpm within five miles: 1.00 wpm
Two pwpms between five and ten miles away: 0.95 + 0.95 = 1.90 wpm
Three pwpms between thirty and thirty-five miles away: 3(0.70) = 2.10 wpm
One pwpm between eighty and eighty-five miles away: 0.20 wpm
Total social satisfaction: 1 + 1.9 + 2.1 + 0.2 = 5.2 wpm
Elaborations: This scale may also be used with the number of people “within a day’s drive” who would be chosen and welcomed into one’s wedding party, rather than the more particular 5-mile intervals. Individual definitions of “a day’s drive,” both in terms of number of hours one is willing to drive, and the distance able to be traveled over those hours, vary, but do not factor into this scale.
Limits: The total number of people chosen cannot exceed seven. This number accounts for the potential addition of two parents to the reasonable number of five bridesmaids/groomsmen, and must be adhered to exactly as a maximum for the sake of universalizing the scale.
Less than seven people in a potential wedding party is mathematically acceptable and preferable to adding people to the measure that one would not truly want to include in an ideal wedding party.
This scale cannot measure social satisfaction for those whose social satisfaction relies on factors totally unrelated to being in proximity with close friends and/or family, such as the ambitious, or hermits. See Lemon-Satisfaction scale for alternative measures.
Unit of measure: Wedding party members living within X/5 miles
How it works: Satisfaction with one’s social situation may be measured in the number of people within X-number of miles who would be chosen and welcomed into one’s ideal wedding party (as a groomsmen or bridesmaid).
Relatives who are forced into wedding parties by necessity but would not have been chosen freely do not count on this scale. (See “cultural miles-geographic dissatisfaction scale” to account for these relatives.) Relatives or other loved ones who would traditionally occupy other positions in an actual wedding ceremony (i.e., “mother of the bride”) may be imagined and included as bridesmaids or groomsmen for the purpose of this scale.
Women may choose “groomsmen” as well as “bridesmaids,” and men may choose either as well. However, the total number of people chosen as one’s ideal wedding party must not exceed seven, and 7.0 is the maximum level of social satisfaction in this scale. Zero (0.0) is the lowest possible measure.
To calculate social satisfaction levels, each person in the ideal wedding party is the equivalent of 1.00 pwpm (potential wedding party members) when living within five miles. For every five additional miles away each pwpm lives, .05 pwpm is subtracted from each wedding party member’s initial 1.00. The lower number in the range of miles distant (i.e., “fifty to fifty-five miles away” is reduced to exactly fifty miles) is the number to be multiplied by .05 and subtracted from 1.00.
Example:
You have one pwpm living eighteen miles away. How many wpm is this person?
18 miles / 5 miles = 3, R3*
3 x 0.05pwpm = 0.15
1.00 pwpm – 0.15 pwpm = 0.85 wpm**
* Remainders are inconsequential in the Wedding party-social satisfaction scale.
**Once “real numbers” are determined for each potential wedding party member, units of measure change from pwpm to wpm.
The resulting numbers for each of the potential wedding party members are then added to determine social satisfaction.
Example:
One pwpm within five miles: 1.00 wpm
Two pwpms between five and ten miles away: 0.95 + 0.95 = 1.90 wpm
Three pwpms between thirty and thirty-five miles away: 3(0.70) = 2.10 wpm
One pwpm between eighty and eighty-five miles away: 0.20 wpm
Total social satisfaction: 1 + 1.9 + 2.1 + 0.2 = 5.2 wpm
Elaborations: This scale may also be used with the number of people “within a day’s drive” who would be chosen and welcomed into one’s wedding party, rather than the more particular 5-mile intervals. Individual definitions of “a day’s drive,” both in terms of number of hours one is willing to drive, and the distance able to be traveled over those hours, vary, but do not factor into this scale.
Limits: The total number of people chosen cannot exceed seven. This number accounts for the potential addition of two parents to the reasonable number of five bridesmaids/groomsmen, and must be adhered to exactly as a maximum for the sake of universalizing the scale.
Less than seven people in a potential wedding party is mathematically acceptable and preferable to adding people to the measure that one would not truly want to include in an ideal wedding party.
This scale cannot measure social satisfaction for those whose social satisfaction relies on factors totally unrelated to being in proximity with close friends and/or family, such as the ambitious, or hermits. See Lemon-Satisfaction scale for alternative measures.
Quantifiable Living: Liz Lemon-Social satisfaction scale
Emotion: Satisfaction (with social life)
Unit of measure: Liz Lemons
How it works: Satisfaction with one’s social situation may be measured in Liz Lemons (LL). This scale may be used in two ways, and assists those who do not consider proximity to potential wedding party members to be the highest possible social good (i.e., the ambitious, who consider “networking” a high social good, or hermits, who consider proximity to anyone to be a social problem).
Unlike all other QL scales, the Liz Lemon-satisfaction scale relies partly on the use of particular grammar to properly relay its message of how socially satisfied an individual is feeling. This should not be construed as a “creative” use of language, as the usages are as specific and effective as functions in a math equation (i.e., “equals,” “times,” or “square root of”), and as creativity undermines the essential purpose of QL (to quantify all aspects of life).
One may feel “X-number like Liz Lemon” or feel “X-number Liz Lemons.”
“Like LL”: To feel “like” Liz Lemon is to feel embarrassed or temporarily dissatisfied with one’s social situation, often despite other apparent success (career, creative, etc.), due to a tendency to commit faux pas.
The number of feeling “like” Liz Lemon – l(LL), expressed mathematically – is, simply, the number of social faux pas one has performed in a day. Individual discretion may be used to determine what constitutes a faux pas, though typically this will be determined by the amount of shame one feels during or on recollection of the situation.
Examples:
Three faux pas performed in one day: 3 l(LL)
Seventeen faux pas performed in one day: 17 l(LL)
Elaborations: Individual discretion is purposely factored in to this scale, as more neurotic individuals who would judge “faux pas” on a stricter scale than most, are actually experiencing less social satisfaction than others.
Limits: Those who fail to judge their objectively legitimate faux pas as such (the extremely arrogant or otherwise socially inept) may fail to record any dissatisfaction, ever, using this scale, and may wish to resort to cultural miles-geographic dissatisfaction or wedding party members-social satisfaction scales in order to express their (dis)content with their social situations.
“Liz Lemons”: One Liz Lemon as a unit of measure equates to the feeling one gets from watching one Liz Lemon quip on an episode of 30 Rock. “Quip” here refers to not only the sarcastic phrases LL uses to get the upper hand in any given situation, but also those used to cope with obvious failure or faux pas. It often helps when using this scale to think of one’s favorite 30 Rock quip and imagine the enjoyment caused by hearing it to accurately measure how socially satisfied one is feeling.
Simply calculate current feelings of social satisfaction as multiples of one LL quip-watching.
Examples:
Found $5 on the street: 2 LL
Found $10 on the street: 3 LL
Found $32.49, the exact amount of money needed to pre-order 30 Rock, season 3, on amazon.com, on the street: 140 LL
Limits: Those who find a preternatural enjoyment in watching LL quips may find their LL levels to be consistently lower than others’, as each LL for these individuals amounts to a greater degree of happiness. These individuals may wish to double their LL levels when speaking to non-fans of 30 Rock, or else to think of a slightly less enjoyable quip before calculating their LL levels.
Unit of measure: Liz Lemons
How it works: Satisfaction with one’s social situation may be measured in Liz Lemons (LL). This scale may be used in two ways, and assists those who do not consider proximity to potential wedding party members to be the highest possible social good (i.e., the ambitious, who consider “networking” a high social good, or hermits, who consider proximity to anyone to be a social problem).
Unlike all other QL scales, the Liz Lemon-satisfaction scale relies partly on the use of particular grammar to properly relay its message of how socially satisfied an individual is feeling. This should not be construed as a “creative” use of language, as the usages are as specific and effective as functions in a math equation (i.e., “equals,” “times,” or “square root of”), and as creativity undermines the essential purpose of QL (to quantify all aspects of life).
One may feel “X-number like Liz Lemon” or feel “X-number Liz Lemons.”
“Like LL”: To feel “like” Liz Lemon is to feel embarrassed or temporarily dissatisfied with one’s social situation, often despite other apparent success (career, creative, etc.), due to a tendency to commit faux pas.
The number of feeling “like” Liz Lemon – l(LL), expressed mathematically – is, simply, the number of social faux pas one has performed in a day. Individual discretion may be used to determine what constitutes a faux pas, though typically this will be determined by the amount of shame one feels during or on recollection of the situation.
Examples:
Three faux pas performed in one day: 3 l(LL)
Seventeen faux pas performed in one day: 17 l(LL)
Elaborations: Individual discretion is purposely factored in to this scale, as more neurotic individuals who would judge “faux pas” on a stricter scale than most, are actually experiencing less social satisfaction than others.
Limits: Those who fail to judge their objectively legitimate faux pas as such (the extremely arrogant or otherwise socially inept) may fail to record any dissatisfaction, ever, using this scale, and may wish to resort to cultural miles-geographic dissatisfaction or wedding party members-social satisfaction scales in order to express their (dis)content with their social situations.
“Liz Lemons”: One Liz Lemon as a unit of measure equates to the feeling one gets from watching one Liz Lemon quip on an episode of 30 Rock. “Quip” here refers to not only the sarcastic phrases LL uses to get the upper hand in any given situation, but also those used to cope with obvious failure or faux pas. It often helps when using this scale to think of one’s favorite 30 Rock quip and imagine the enjoyment caused by hearing it to accurately measure how socially satisfied one is feeling.
Simply calculate current feelings of social satisfaction as multiples of one LL quip-watching.
Examples:
Found $5 on the street: 2 LL
Found $10 on the street: 3 LL
Found $32.49, the exact amount of money needed to pre-order 30 Rock, season 3, on amazon.com, on the street: 140 LL
Limits: Those who find a preternatural enjoyment in watching LL quips may find their LL levels to be consistently lower than others’, as each LL for these individuals amounts to a greater degree of happiness. These individuals may wish to double their LL levels when speaking to non-fans of 30 Rock, or else to think of a slightly less enjoyable quip before calculating their LL levels.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Confessions XXXVI
I dreamed about buying TV on DVD last night, in the nightmarish way one might dream about forgetting to do homework. ("What if it's not on sale tomorrow??")
I bought Big Bang Theory (season 1) on the recommendation of blog readers and since it's on sale at Target this week.
TV-on-DVD financial math is the only kind I'm capable of performing (in a complex way) anymore.
I bought Big Bang Theory (season 1) on the recommendation of blog readers and since it's on sale at Target this week.
TV-on-DVD financial math is the only kind I'm capable of performing (in a complex way) anymore.
Challenge: Cracker contest
To win, you can:
1. prove you're the whitest person on earth, by telling an anecdote in which you acted "really white," preferably with reference to Stuff White People Like, or
2. solve a mystery by sussing out the criminal's mindset at the time of the crime, but in a more entertaining way than in the American version of the TV show "Cracker."
Winner will receive a Cracker packet.
1. prove you're the whitest person on earth, by telling an anecdote in which you acted "really white," preferably with reference to Stuff White People Like, or
2. solve a mystery by sussing out the criminal's mindset at the time of the crime, but in a more entertaining way than in the American version of the TV show "Cracker."
Winner will receive a Cracker packet.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Local Trivia: Everything must go!
Today in the Waterbury area, I saw 15 cars (or trucks) for sale by their owners on the sides of the roads.
There was also one motorboat and one unidentified piece of machinery.
There was also one motorboat and one unidentified piece of machinery.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Money vs. migration
Well, I've put in for the highest govt. loan I can get for my education, which is just over 20K, to finance my financially worthless degree at Brandeis.
I'm not sure I want to do this. I think I need an M.A. for the rest of my life plans, and I'd like to move out of central CT soon, especially since I won't need to completely cut ties to do it -- P.C. will likely take over my apartment -- but I don't know if starting out with twenty grand in debt is the best way to achieve these goals.
Maybe I should take online classes instead?
Opinions welcome.
I'm not sure I want to do this. I think I need an M.A. for the rest of my life plans, and I'd like to move out of central CT soon, especially since I won't need to completely cut ties to do it -- P.C. will likely take over my apartment -- but I don't know if starting out with twenty grand in debt is the best way to achieve these goals.
Maybe I should take online classes instead?
Opinions welcome.
Saturday, June 6, 2009
PSA: CPR
After this morning, I will be recertified to save you.
But I won't be required to, so you should still be nice to me.
But I won't be required to, so you should still be nice to me.
PSA: File this under "the times comma a'changin"
My grandparents are moving out of their "final house" to their final-FINAL house (for real this time, guys) today. This means everyone I've ever lived with is now living somewhere I've never lived.
I have to go pick up my bikes and a picture they're giving me, after taking my family's first computer (not counting the Apple 2E we had in the mid-90's: a Gateway '97) to the temporary e-cycling depot this morning.
I have to go pick up my bikes and a picture they're giving me, after taking my family's first computer (not counting the Apple 2E we had in the mid-90's: a Gateway '97) to the temporary e-cycling depot this morning.
Friday, June 5, 2009
PSQ: Pick a tat.
Here are the three hypothetical tattoos I came up with the other night while laying awake attempting to answer that all-important question: What ironic/self-expressive tattoo would I choose to get if forced to get a tattoo at gunpoint?
It's a question we're all forced to consider at some point in our lives, and I'd like to enlist your help deciding. As you know, any sign of hesitation with these sorts of gunmen and you're dead meat, so a landslide victor is what we're going for, here.
1. A tribal armband-style tattoo circling my upper arm, but made up of an "A" on the outer bicep and "+" signs all around it, in traditional tattoo font.
2. The word "bad" in an old-tyme font with open "a," tattooed on my butt ("badass")
3. A small black arrow pointing to the pinky toe of my left foot, leading from the small-type words "not this one"
Please comment your vote.
It's a question we're all forced to consider at some point in our lives, and I'd like to enlist your help deciding. As you know, any sign of hesitation with these sorts of gunmen and you're dead meat, so a landslide victor is what we're going for, here.
1. A tribal armband-style tattoo circling my upper arm, but made up of an "A" on the outer bicep and "+" signs all around it, in traditional tattoo font.
2. The word "bad" in an old-tyme font with open "a," tattooed on my butt ("badass")
3. A small black arrow pointing to the pinky toe of my left foot, leading from the small-type words "not this one"
Please comment your vote.
Challenge: Tattoos
Think up something better than my three hypothetical tattoos, and I'll send you a prize.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
PSA: 100 Shows I'd Rather Watch
I can't remember where or in what, but I read somewhere last year that most people can think of 100 shows they'd rather watch than the evening news.
I considered it a challenge and made up a list, which I still have somewhere in a notebook. It's hard to think of 100 shows on demand.
But like P.C. and the 24-hour mix, that wasn't enough for me.
Below you'll find a revised and categorized list of shows chosen for a variety of reasons -- ranging from "I love this show!" to "See how much I don't like watching the news?!" -- but in random order, and mainly because those were the ones I could think of at the time.
Feel free to comment your own lists.
I considered it a challenge and made up a list, which I still have somewhere in a notebook. It's hard to think of 100 shows on demand.
But like P.C. and the 24-hour mix, that wasn't enough for me.
Below you'll find a revised and categorized list of shows chosen for a variety of reasons -- ranging from "I love this show!" to "See how much I don't like watching the news?!" -- but in random order, and mainly because those were the ones I could think of at the time.
Feel free to comment your own lists.
PSA: 34 currently-running shows I'd rather watch than the evening news, in no particular order
1. The Daily Show
2. The Colbert Report
3. The Simpsons
4. Family Guy
5. Chuck
6. Heroes
7. Lost
8. House
9. Project Runway
10. The Office
11. So You Think You Can Dance
12. CSI
13. It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia
14. Smallville
15. Nova
16. This American Life
17. Californication
18. Dexter
19. Psych
20. 30 Rock
21. Numb3rs ("numthree'ers")
22. Criminal Minds
23. Tudors
24. Weeds
25. Grey's Anatomy
26. Robot Chicken
27. My Name Is Earl
28. Nip/Tuck
29. Brothers and Sisters
30. Entourage
31. Desperate Housewives
32. South Park
33. Deadliest Catch
34. Hell's Kitchen
2. The Colbert Report
3. The Simpsons
4. Family Guy
5. Chuck
6. Heroes
7. Lost
8. House
9. Project Runway
10. The Office
11. So You Think You Can Dance
12. CSI
13. It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia
14. Smallville
15. Nova
16. This American Life
17. Californication
18. Dexter
19. Psych
20. 30 Rock
21. Numb3rs ("numthree'ers")
22. Criminal Minds
23. Tudors
24. Weeds
25. Grey's Anatomy
26. Robot Chicken
27. My Name Is Earl
28. Nip/Tuck
29. Brothers and Sisters
30. Entourage
31. Desperate Housewives
32. South Park
33. Deadliest Catch
34. Hell's Kitchen
33 shows no longer on TV I'd rather watch than the evening news, in no particular order
1. The Wire
2. Six Feet Under
3. Buffy the Vampire Slayer
4. Firefly
5. Arrested Development
6. ER
7. Law & Order: Criminal Intent
8. Models, Inc.
9. 3 Lbs.
10. NYPD Blue
11. Alias
12. Veronica Mars
13. Dawson's Creek
14. Extras
15. Scrubs
16. Carnivale
17. Dead Like Me
18. Battlestar Galactica (new)
19. Murphy Brown
20. Beatlejuice (cartoon)
21. Animaniacs
22. Tiny Toons
23. Lois & Clark
24. Related
25. Seinfeld
26. Sex and the City
27. Boy Meets World
28. West Wing
29. Party of Five
30. The Animated Adventures of the Gummi Bears
31. Jeeves & Wooster
32. Star Trek: TNG
33. Freaks & Geeks
2. Six Feet Under
3. Buffy the Vampire Slayer
4. Firefly
5. Arrested Development
6. ER
7. Law & Order: Criminal Intent
8. Models, Inc.
9. 3 Lbs.
10. NYPD Blue
11. Alias
12. Veronica Mars
13. Dawson's Creek
14. Extras
15. Scrubs
16. Carnivale
17. Dead Like Me
18. Battlestar Galactica (new)
19. Murphy Brown
20. Beatlejuice (cartoon)
21. Animaniacs
22. Tiny Toons
23. Lois & Clark
24. Related
25. Seinfeld
26. Sex and the City
27. Boy Meets World
28. West Wing
29. Party of Five
30. The Animated Adventures of the Gummi Bears
31. Jeeves & Wooster
32. Star Trek: TNG
33. Freaks & Geeks
33 shows I've never seen that I assume I'd rather watch than the evening news, in no particular order
1. Angel
2. The "L" Word
3. Queer Eye for the Straight Guy
4. Dancing With the Stars
5. Dr. Who
6. The 4400
7. Without a Trace
8. Big Love
9. Gossip Girl
10. Gilmore Girls
11. Moonlight
12. Millennium
13. Big Bang Theory
14. Burn Notice
15. Deadwood
16. Rome
17. The Sopranos
18. Salute Your Shorts!
19. Reno 911
20. The Mentalist
21. Mental
22. Monk
23. Rescue Me
24. 24
25. The Shield
26. True Blood
27. Star Trek: The Original Series
28. Kitchen Confidential
29. Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles
30. Bones
31. Mad Men
32. Fringe
33. Twin Peaks
2. The "L" Word
3. Queer Eye for the Straight Guy
4. Dancing With the Stars
5. Dr. Who
6. The 4400
7. Without a Trace
8. Big Love
9. Gossip Girl
10. Gilmore Girls
11. Moonlight
12. Millennium
13. Big Bang Theory
14. Burn Notice
15. Deadwood
16. Rome
17. The Sopranos
18. Salute Your Shorts!
19. Reno 911
20. The Mentalist
21. Mental
22. Monk
23. Rescue Me
24. 24
25. The Shield
26. True Blood
27. Star Trek: The Original Series
28. Kitchen Confidential
29. Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles
30. Bones
31. Mad Men
32. Fringe
33. Twin Peaks
Shows I would not rather watch than the evening news
The War at Home
Two and a Half Men
American Dad
Everybody Loves Raymond
Medium
Ghost Whisperer
Two and a Half Men
American Dad
Everybody Loves Raymond
Medium
Ghost Whisperer
Monday, June 1, 2009
Confession XXXV
I bought the following TV-on-DVD sets last Thursday: Burn Notice, S1; Scrubs, S1; Flight of the Conchords, S1; West Wing, S5-7.
I then ordered the following TV-on-DVD sets from half.com Friday: West Wing, S1-2; ER, S3-4; Smallville, S2, 4; Lois & Clark, S1; Murphy Brown, S1; The 4400, S1
I'm broke.
I then ordered the following TV-on-DVD sets from half.com Friday: West Wing, S1-2; ER, S3-4; Smallville, S2, 4; Lois & Clark, S1; Murphy Brown, S1; The 4400, S1
I'm broke.
Unsolicited Advice, XIII
Buy 30 Rock, seasons 1 & 2.
If you do it right now, you can get both seasons from Amazon in a bundle pack for just under $24.
(I don't understand why you're still reading this. Go.)
If you do it right now, you can get both seasons from Amazon in a bundle pack for just under $24.
(I don't understand why you're still reading this. Go.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)