Log in

Excerpts from the Thoriad [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Web pimp [Feb. 20th, 2009|11:33 am]
My place of employment has Oscar picks online, for those what are interested.

Hey, if you're reading this, poke around the site and make a comment. Electricland does, so you know she's cool.

Oscar picks here-no they aren't mine personally.
link3 comments|post comment

(no subject) [Jul. 22nd, 2007|01:06 am]
[mood |aggravatedaggravated]

I just saw Transformers.

It sucked hard.

Mainly _because_ of the robots.

When it started as a remake of Herbie the Love Bug, I was totally on side.

Then Optimus Prime finally showed up, and everything transformed into crap.

You know how George Lucas edited together and then refilmed a whole bunch of clips from old third rate war movies to make the battle scenes in Star Wars?

Michael Bay re-edited and re-filmed a whole bunch of clips from old third-rate Michael Bay movies.

link1 comment|post comment

Two things: [Jun. 30th, 2007|11:06 am]
One: A friend of mine has started to grow sub-facial hair. That is to say, it's hair growing under his chin and at the very edge of his jawline, but not on his actual face. He calls it an Abraham Lincoln. He told me he was inspired to grow it by my example.

I'm always a little shocked when my friends tell me I've influenced them in any way. I see myself as a follower. I dispense advice and opinion freely because I assume no one will take it seriously. On occassion, someone tells me that they do, and it throws me for a little loop.

Two: Speaking of influence, I just realized that the beard I have grown belongs, at least in part, to Umberto Eco.

Not that he would want credit for said beard ...

although he might be a amused by the possibility of a beard that has its own double-coded subtext of literary influence, a subtext which was not consciously intended by the beard's author.
linkpost comment

Un-ill an [Aug. 3rd, 2006|10:54 am]
Well, looks like we can rule out "direct descendant". Looks like he didn't have kids.

Which isn't too suprising, I imagine any johnson clan would attempt to connect itself back to Samuel.

I'm still as intrigued by the discovery of this chunk of family lore.

Factual or not it reeks of truthiness (coming to a dictionary near you).
linkpost comment

Ill An [Aug. 3rd, 2006|10:37 am]
So, I was recently told that I am directly descended from Dr. Johnson.

Yes, that Dr. Johnson.

Not that that's a totally solid fact, but my mum mentioned it, and said that her mother (who was born a Johnson) believed it to be the case--which is to say, it was believed by her family to be the case, and based on more than having the common surname.

Thing is, I've always thought of myself as more of a Boswell.

Other thing is, that makes Dr. Johnson the only ancestor of mine I have any idea about, going back more that one generation beyond people I have know in my lifetime. (I.e., I know only an iota or two of information--mostly geographical--about the parents of some of my grandparents).

There's even some ethnic confusion about ancestral family names, so its weird to have a historical celebrity suddenly expose himself from between obscured roots.
linkpost comment

Cartoons: Last Words [Feb. 13th, 2006|02:33 pm]
Everything you ever wanted to know about the Danish Mohammed cartoons story but were unable to unravel from the shrieking mass media is probably covered in this Q+A with Doug Saunders of the Globe and Mail. You may need to register to see it. It will be worth it. Pass it around to interested people.

P.S. My brain is totally gay for Mr. Saunders.
link1 comment|post comment

Protocols of the ELders of Copenhagen. [Feb. 8th, 2006|09:29 am]
Sadly, this explains a lot about the Danish cartoon crisis. (Although it did give a chance for the Daily Show to run the graphic "Mohammed, Mo' Problems").

Cartoons of Mohammend as a dog and pig, and having sex with animals (I think), were circulated to Muslims as if they had been published in a Danish newspaper.

I had read rumours about this, and it is interesting/good to see it substantiated.

Basically, Danish Muslim activist, offended by original cartoons and unable to get appropriate response from mainstream Denmark, puts together a folio with the cartoons to show to leaders of influence in predominantly Muslim countries, in order to get some international outrage going (see: Canadian seal hunt).

He also includes PIECES OF PERSONAL HATE MAIL SENT TO HIM BY ANTI-IMMIGRANT NUT JOBS WHO OPPOSE HIS ACTIVISM, including crude, disgusting, anti Mohammed drawings. These hate mail drawings are also presumed to have been published in Danish newspapers, by the kinds of people who tend to form crazed mobs. Voila.

The 'net rumour cast him as a sinister agent provocateur (possible wearing same under the robes), distributing forgeries to bring about / inflame the Clash of Civilizations (TM).

Turns out he's just a well-meaning moron.
linkpost comment

What? There was no wall outlet handy? [Feb. 7th, 2006|08:59 am]
From news aggregator www.nealenews.com:

"UPDATE: Police consider charging actor Joe Pesci with battery..."
link3 comments|post comment

There you go. [Feb. 3rd, 2006|08:46 am]
From the Globe:

“The protests in the Middle East have proven that the cartoonist was right,” said Tarek Fatah, a director of the Muslim Canadian Congress.

“It's falling straight into that trap of being depicted as a violent people and proving the point that, yes, we are.”

That's quite a quote there. Dig that exasperation. Dude usually has his head on straight from what I've read.

I do feel that the EU newspapers have passed the tipping point from showing solidarity for free speech to deliberate nose tweaking, but whaddya gonna do?

I also believe that as with Toronto gun violence/French riots/Queens' Homecoming riots/what have you, the root cause of violent reactions to these cartoons is young men 15-27. But again, whaddya going to do?
link2 comments|post comment

(no subject) [Jan. 24th, 2006|09:22 am]
I am remarkably pleased with this outcome. As someone who despises the current incarnation of all four major federal parties, it's probably close to the mix I would have voted for, had we had that option.

Good things:

-We are no longer run by this country's version of Mexico's PRI

-The Liberal Party's nutsack gets a good tazering. They've needed it for a while.

-Paul Martin resigns. Maybe someone new and good can come along. (I suspect I'm an Ignatieff Liberal at heart, so we'll see how that plays out).

-The Cons did less well than predicted, and face three much more progressive parties.

-We now have two funcioning national parties, instead of just one. This, I hope, will raise everybody's game.

-The Bloc Quebecois lost seats and popular vote.

-NDP gained ground, which offsets IMO much of the Conservative advance.

-Now the "West" has _nothing_ to kvetch about. (Hah!)

-The federal politics are less crippled by the potentially fatal four-way regional standoff (AKA Canadian standoff).

-Conservative minority, with an actual or ad hoc coalition with either the Bloc or the NDP, occupies basically the same space on the political spectrum as the Liberal and old Progressive Conservative majorities have since 1984, if not earlier.

-Ignatieff in; Bulte out; Kent out; Stronach in (teehee); Chow in;

-The person I voted for did not get in, which is okay with me, because I really dislike her, and was none too pleased about having to choose her.

-If I thought my decision was a tough one, at least I'm not elligible to vote in the Palestinian Authority (good luck over there!).

-The Gomery business was close to the worst kind of political corruption. Hopefully we've taken care of it.

Bad things:

-Wappel in (grrrr!); Fry in (I think); Minna in; the Maritimes look like goofballs.

-Albertans still vote like Midwich Cuckoos, provincially and federally.

-I'm worried about the CBC
link3 comments|post comment

[ viewing | most recent entries ]
[ go | earlier ]