Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Who seeks, and will not take when once 'tis offer'd,
Shall never find it more.

Antony and Cleopatra II.vii. 77-78.


REV BRIAN TAMAKI: Because the chicken was gay! Isn't it obvious? Can't you people see the plain truth in front of your face? The chicken was going to the 'other side' to be closer to the devil!

WINSTON PETERS: To steal a job from a decent, hardworking New Zealander.

DR. SEUSS: Did the chicken cross the road? Did he cross it with a toad? Yes! The chicken crossed the road, but why it crossed, I've not been told!

ERNEST HEMINGWAY: To die. In the rain.

MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR: I envision a world where all chickens will be free to cross roads without having their motives called into question.

GRANDPA: In my day, we didn't ask why the chicken crossed the road. Someone told us that the chicken crossed the road, and that was good enough for us.

ARISTOTLE: It is the nature of chickens to cross the road.

KARL MARX: It was a historical inevitability.

SADDAM HUSSEIN: This was an unprovoked act of rebellion and we were quite justified in dropping 50 tons of nerve gas on it.

RONALD REAGAN: What chicken?

JIM ANDERTON: I intend to prove that the chicken crossed the road at the behest of the Leader of the Opposition in an effort to distract law enforcement officials and the Kiwi public from the pre-election criminal wrongdoings he has been trying to cover up. As a result, the chicken is just another pawn in Dr Brash's election campaign - the ongoing and elaborate scheme to obstruct justice, undermine the rule of law & fool the voting public. For that reason, my staff intends to offer the chicken unconditional immunity, provided he co-operates fully with our investigation and gives his Party Vote to the Progressive Party. Furthermore, the chicken will not be permitted to reach the other side of the road until our investigation and any Parliamentary follow-up investigations have been completed. (We also are investigating whether Peter Dunn has leaked information to the Rev. Brian Tamaki, alleging the chicken to be homosexual in an effort to discredit any useful testimony the bird may have to offer, or at least toruffle his feathers.

CAPTAIN JAMES T. KIRK: To boldly go where no chicken has gone before.

FOX MULDER: You saw it cross the road with your own eyes. How many more chickens have to cross before you believe it?

FREUD: The fact that you are at all concerned that the chicken crossed the road reveals your underlying sexual insecurity.

BILL GATES: I have just released eChicken, which will not only explore your documents, and balance your checkbook-and Internet Explorer is an inextricable part of eChicken.

EINSTEIN: Did the chicken really cross the road or did the road move beneath the chicken?

BILL CLINTON: I did not cross the road with THAT chicken. What do you mean by chicken? Could you define chicken please?

WILLIE JACKSON: The road, you will see, represents the black man. The chicken crossed the 'black man' in order to trample him and keep him down.

THE BIBLE: And God came down from the heavens, and He said unto the chicken,' Thou shalt cross the road.' And the chicken crossed the road, and there was much rejoicing.

COLONEL SANDERS: You mean - I missed one?!?!?

Sunday, January 22, 2006

Only in Russia!

Zoo animals fed vodka as temperatures plunge past -30C in Russia
19.01.06 1.00pmBy Andrew Osborn

MOSCOW - Animals at zoos across Russia were being given shots, or in some cases buckets, of vodka, to keep them warm yesterday as temperatures in the European part of the country plunged towards an exceptional minus 40 degrees Celsius.

In the ancient town of Yaroslavl a travelling circus there said it had been forced to start giving its trio of Indian elephants vodka mixed with water in buckets as the mercury dipped. In Lipetsk, where meteorologists recorded temperatures of minus 32, the zoo's contingent of macaques was being fortified with cheap French table wine three times a day and in other zoos camels, wild boars and reindeer were being given regular shots of vodka to stave off the chill.

People who clutched their mobile phones to their ears for too long had to be taken to hospital with frostbite, homeless people froze to death where they slumped and some of Moscow's famously bright lights had to be temporarily turned off as the city consumed record amounts of electricity and moved to selective rationing. With the temperature hovering around minus 30 Celsius yesterday Moscow, a city of 12 million, seemed eerily quiet with locals saying they had not experienced such extreme cold for half a century. The coldest temperature recorded in Moscow, of minus 42, was recorded in 1940 and experts said that the current Arctic conditions could last until the end of the month with the temperature steadily dropping towards minus 40 as the week progresses.

Moscow's infamous traffic jams vanished into the icy air as many people left their cars at home and shops, bars and restaurants saw custom plunge. With nostril hair freezing on impact with the outside air and ice quickly forming on eye lashes, Moscow's pavements were also far less crowded than usual and the foyers of metro stations were crowded with the dispossessed who were- exceptionally- allowed to sleep in the subway system overnight.

The fierce cold, which is extreme even by Russian standards, especially in European Russia, had serious human consequences. Russian media said that the number of people to die from hypothermia in Moscow since October had shot up to 109 with at least 24 people dying of exposure in the last 24 hours.

In the Volga region a minibus on its way to Moscow plunged through the ice of a frozen river it was crossing killing six while cracks opened up on concrete road bridges and entire villages in remote regions were left without heat or light in a few extreme cases.

Russia's efforts to weather the cold snap were felt further west with Hungary and Italy reporting that they had started to receive less Russian gas and were being forced to dip into their own reserves. Gazprom, Russia's energy monopoly, admitted it was diverting more gas to its domestic customers because of the freezing temperatures. It said that Moscow alone was receiving 40 per cent more gas than usual. However it insisted that it was strictly fulfilling the terms of its contracts with European gas customers.


Friday, January 20, 2006

You would not like the beach today

You would not like the beach today,
You would not like me today.
We are both battered and unclean
from the storm.
I want to seek you out
so you can hold me
like you did once.
But you are too far
and we, too, are distant.
I need your touch, your security.
But that is like building
a castle in quicksand.
So I am alone - again.
You would not like the beach today.
Beneath the thundering waves
the taniwha are weeping.
You would not like me today.

A good trick -
not sly
but always beats me,
the forgiving and trusting.
A bad trick
with a believer.

there is an angel face
and there is an ice face.
The ice face is cruel and angry,
but his angel face
is soft and safe -
leans into me, and I am
mother and lover.

~ anon.

Wednesday, January 18, 2006

English Motherfucker, English!

Jeebus H. Christ on a bicycle, learn to type like a semi-literate person, not a goddamn lazy bastard!

Doc's guide to not typing like a goddamn fucktard (a primer for the lazy):

What it is: A consumable aid, usually confers a buff or regenerates health/mana/etc.
What it's not: Pot. You smoke pot. And you don't brag about it if you're smart and want to continue to doso without being arrested or fired.

What it is: To gain advantage by turning somebodies weakness into your strength. IN 14 year old gaming dialect, to cheatzor. Or anything that that 14 year old didn't like you doing. Really, they arnt' very creative nor are they as clever as they would like to imagine.
What it isn't: Sploit. This is the sound fish probably make if you step on them kind of hard. No, don't try this at home to find out, you cruel, sadistic little hucklefuck.

What it is: To ask nicely for some positive endeavor. What you really ought to say whenever you want something from another person.
What it isn't: Plz. Jeeezus, it's six letters insted of three, and they all make sense. It's not Supercalifragilisticexpialidoceous for fuck sake, if you really wanted to be invited to a group, buffed, etc, atleast show enough goddamn courtasy to type three more letters and perhaps fools us into thinking you're not server trash.

What it is: A positive delta applied to the interger expressing how far your character is from death.
What it isn't: Somehting you need to yell for a healer to do. Ever. We have eyes, motherfucker, and we're paying closer attention to our teammates health then even YOU are. How would you like us to try and micromanage your playtime? PULL! FIGHTFIGHTFIGHTFIGHT!!!! Taunt! Shoot! CAST A SPELL! TANK! What's that you say, you don't need us to tell you how to do your job? Hello, pot. This is kettle calling....

What it is: Happy, or you're possibly into members of the same sex.
What it isn't: A derrogative term 14 year olds for just about everything. Oftentimes when said 14 year old isn't quite sure about their own sexual security, they'll try to up the ante by appending 'homo', as if to increase the derrogatory factor twofold, i.e, a gay homo.-

- Hellacious
What it is: Distasteful and repellant. Extraordinary; remarkable, depending on one's mood. See also, Hellified.
What it isn't: Hella. I think this is actually a Sweedish girl's name. Really, does it hurt to type a few more godamn letters to make a point? You're a fucking poster child for retroactive abortion, you lazy fuck!

- U
What it is: The 21st letter of the alphabet. Sometimes denotes a 180-degree change in direction.
What it isn't: The second personal pronoun. For you dim smacktards, thats the space of two extra characters that when typed makes others think you're marginally worth their time to converse with. If you type U to somebody in a sentence and they respond, they're either:
-a saint and probably pity you
-your Mom
-a fellow 14 year old fucktard.

What it is: a minor quantity.
What it isn't: SUM, which is really the additive total of a given quantity. Its one more letter, come on now, type it, smacky, it's not going to kill you.-CoolWhat it is: a good thing. A quality expressed by mass in a low-energy state.What it isn't: SUM 1 who types like this 4 U. There's a special place in hell for folks who type like that, I just know it...

Thanks Doc :)

Monday, January 16, 2006

Be that thou knows't thou art, and thou art
As great as that thou fear'st.

Twelfth Night; or, What You Will V.i. 136-137
Thrice-crowned queen of night, survey
With thy chaste eye, from thy pale sphere above.

As You Like It III.ii.4-5.


Roman epic proves a little vexing

15.01.06Reviewed by Frances Grant

After years of reality telly, the sight of legions of actors strolling about in draperies declaiming lines dripping with fatefulness comes as a shock to the system. TV One's Sunday night miniseries Empire (8.30pm) is an old-school sword and sandals epic, a genre that these days has its work cut out for it avoiding coming off as high camp or pure cheese. No expense has been spared in this US$33 million ($47.3 million) costume drama, which in last night's opening instalment offered a cast of thousands (well enough to make a mob, anyway), sumptuous villas, imposing marble temples, lush Italian rural vistas, and of course, a catacomb or two for good measure.

The six-hour miniseries has even managed to drum up a reasonably coherent story, complete with voiceovers from a vestal virgin, laden with breathless portent: "The fate of the Empire will fall upon one man", we were told at the start and, to bring us back next week, "All the world hinges on the outcome".

Unfortunately, much of the script sounds like Shakespeare updated as a language exercise by a college English class. The result can be oddly disconcerting, like this greeting from Julius Caesar: "Noble Cicero! Just read your latest". History students certainly should not rely on its account of the death of the Roman Republic as material for assignments. The hero is the fictional Tyrannus (Jonathan Cake), a slave and gladiator whose slice'n'dice skills were established in the drama's bloody opening scenes in the Colosseum. The story follows Tyrannus as he struggles to fulfil his promise to the dying Julius Caesar to protect his nephew and heir, Octavius, who, the history books tells us, became the great Emperor Augustus. At this stage in the drama though, it is hard to see the lad has that much leadership potential, perhaps because picturesque actor Santiago Cabrera plays him just like one of those spoiled rich kids from The OC.

The drama also wears its political sympathies on its toga. It portrays the dictatorial Caesar as a noble man concerned only with the welfare of the Roman people, while the Senate defenders of the republic are seen as low, conniving, whining politicians. The history may be dodgy and the continuity lacking - in one scene Julius Caesar had a chat with Tyrannus which started in the dead of night and suddenly shifted to broad daylight - but Empire manages to be mildly entertaining, even if it can't quite avoid those pitfalls of toga party-camp and epic cheese. So far, it has had some great trimmings - a bucket of goats' blood as a portent on the Ides of March, a vestal virgin whose maidenhood looks as shaky as the republic, an oh-so-Oedipal attachment between Brutus and his mum, and Brutus has great, sticky-out ears, the sort that look as if they could be detachable for lending. Those hoping the show will really get stuck into some cliches of life in the Roman Empire, should not be disappointed by next week's instalment. On the bill: a slap-up orgy in Marc Anthony's villa, followed by the assassination of everyone by placing poisonous snakes in their beds. It always pays to leave before the tailend of the party.

The Americans make annoying someone a crime...

Perspective: Create an e-annoyance, go to jail

By Declan McCullagh
Published: January 9, 2006, 4:00 AM PST

Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime.

It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.
In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.
This ridiculous prohibition, which would likely imperil much of Usenet, is buried in the so-called Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison.
"The use of the word 'annoy' is particularly problematic," says Marv Johnson, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. "What's annoying to one person may not be annoying to someone else."

Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called "Preventing Cyberstalking." It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy."

[It's illegal to annoy:
A new federal law states that when you annoy someone on the Internet, you must disclose your identity. Here's the relevant language.
"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both." ]

To grease the rails for this idea, Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, and the section's other sponsors slipped it into an unrelated, must-pass bill to fund the Department of Justice. The plan: to make it politically infeasible for politicians to oppose the measure.
The tactic worked. The bill cleared the House of Representatives by voice vote, and the Senate unanimously approved it Dec. 16.

There's an interesting side note. An earlier version that the House approved in September had radically different wording. It was reasonable by comparison, and criminalized only using an "interactive computer service" to cause someone "substantial emotional harm."
That kind of prohibition might make sense. But why should merely annoying someone be illegal?
There are perfectly legitimate reasons to set up a Web site or write something incendiary without telling everyone exactly who you are.

Think about it: A woman fired by a manager who demanded sexual favors wants to blog about it without divulging her full name. An aspiring pundit hopes to set up the next Suck.com. A frustrated citizen wants to send e-mail describing corruption in local government without worrying about reprisals.

In each of those three cases, someone's probably going to be annoyed. That's enough to make the action a crime. (The Justice Department won't file charges in every case, of course, but trusting prosecutorial discretion is hardly reassuring.)

Clinton Fein, a San Francisco resident who runs the Annoy.com site, says a feature permitting visitors to send obnoxious and profane postcards through e-mail could be imperiled.
"Who decides what's annoying? That's the ultimate question," Fein said. He added: "If you send an annoying message via the United States Post Office, do you have to reveal your identity?"
Fein once sued to overturn part of the Communications Decency Act that outlawed transmitting indecent material "with intent to annoy." But the courts ruled the law applied only to obscene material, so Annoy.com didn't have to worry.
"I'm certainly not going to close the site down," Fein said on Friday. "I would fight it on First Amendment grounds."

He's right. Our esteemed politicians can't seem to grasp this simple point, but the First Amendment protects our right to write something that annoys someone else.
It even shields our right to do it anonymously. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas defended this principle magnificently in a 1995 case involving an Ohio woman who was punished for distributing anonymous political pamphlets.

If President Bush truly believed in the principle of limited government (it is in his official bio), he'd realize that the law he signed cannot be squared with the Constitution he swore to uphold.
And then he'd repeat what President Clinton did a decade ago when he felt compelled to sign a massive telecommunications law. Clinton realized that the section of the law punishing abortion-related material on the Internet was unconstitutional, and he directed the Justice Department not to enforce it.

Bush has the chance to show his respect for what he calls Americans' personal freedoms. Now we'll see if the president rises to the occasion.

BiographyDeclan McCullagh is CNET News.com's Washington, D.C., correspondent. He chronicles the busy intersection between technology and politics. Before that, he worked for several years as Washington bureau chief for Wired News. He has also worked as a reporter for The Netly News, Time magazine and HotWired.

10 reasons Gay Marriage is wrong (appreciate the heavy sarcasm)

10 reasons Gay Marriage is wrong:

1. Being gay is not natural. And as you know Americans have always rejected unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.

2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because, as you know, adog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

4. Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.

5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed. The sanctity of Britany Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage wouldbe destroyed.

6. Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.

7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

8. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.

9. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.

10. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we couldnever adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.

Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Lucky Me ~ Bachelor Girl, 1999

I've got an ex-boyfriend who calls me up
To blame me for his life
I get bunches of roses from another guy
And hate mail from his wife
I date a stupid jerk who forgets my name
Likes to make love watching T.V.
And some guy calls in the middle of the night
Just so I can hear him breathe

Lucky Me
Lucky, lucky me
I have everything in this whole wide world
A girl could ever need
Lucky Me

I've got a great car - it's a red convertible
Made by Mattel
Got a nice house in the suburbs
With Hell's Angels as neighbours as well
Got a scholarship for a hundred years of college
If I wanna study dentistry
But my folks just want me married and poppin' out the grandkids
To keep them company

Lucky Me
Lucky, lucky me
I have everything in this whole wide world
A girl could ever need
Lucky Me

Lucky Me
Lucky, lucky little ol' me
I have everything in this whole wide world
A girl could ever need
Lucky Me

Think I'll run and join the Hare Krishna
Give up all my worldly goods, cut off all my hair
Cos nothing that I have right now brings me any joy
And when I'm shopping at the mall, can't find it anywhere

But I've got my Tamagotchi
And I've got my wrist-watch phone
And I've got so many friends on the internet
I could never be alone
I got just enough cash to pay a lot of tax
But not enough to quit my job
Got a fool's gold ring, credit card debt
Psychiatrist for my dog

Lucky Me
Lucky, lucky little ol' me
I have everything in this whole wide world
A girl could ever need
Lucky Me

Happy New Years all!

So...it's 2006 already. It seems weird really as the last few weeks have sped by. Thankfully the weather has been reasonable for a change and I got to spend another weekend at the beach, mucking around at Long Bay :) Anna and Benn have been keeping me company while my flatmate's have been away and it's been a lovely, relaxing long weekend and I even got to sleep in this morning! Back to work at the bank and the church come tomorrow so I'll have to start getting myself organised :) I've started working my way through my much neglected CD collection, since I normally listen to the mp3's on my pc, and that's been fun while I've been mucking around.

No firm and fast New Year's Resolutions this year. I want to keep at the diet & exercise programme, including when I'm back at uni. I want to have a fabulous time in Europe even if I'm over there by myself and to keep working at being less horribly shy (I swear I'm hiding it better!). I want to do fabulously in my final few papers and finally get this BA finished!!! (started in 2000, after many stops and starts - including 2 yrs in & out of hospital and 2 yrs working full time, to be finished 2006.)