Log in

No account? Create an account
Vasaris, the Fuzzy Dragon
.:: ..::. .::..:...... .::
Back Viewing 0 - 10  

Today I learned that Texas is not in the same time zone as Canada.

That being said, I find it pretty amazing that Canada left the continent when no one was looking. It's SUPER IMPRESSIVE and we should all bow down in awe.

Current Location: Home
Current Mood: amusedamused

...isn't the longest war in US history Korea? Last I checked, no peace treaty has been signed.

(That said, yes, Ms. Maddow, I would agree that Afghanistan and Iraq are definitely the longest conflicts of the modern generation.)

Current Mood: confusedconfused


Originally posted by elfs at Evolution has an announcement to make

In a public press announcment, a spokesbeast for Evolution gave the following statement:
Recent news reports show that support for evolution has fallen below 50% among members of the Republican Party. Due to this, Evolution has decided to drop any support it currently gives to the Republican party. Evolution will not work on or for Republicans, and Republicans will cease evolving.

Evolution would like to remind Republicans that species that cannot, or will not, evolve in environments as dynamic as the American electorate quickly go extinct. Eventually, should the Republican party continue to avoid Evolution, the Republican party will be remembered only by its old and mouldy fossils.

Can't help it, I've got to giggle. I want to be as awesome as elfs when I grow up.

When I ask you where the hell the goods are, the answer is not 'oh, we'll look for it eventually' and the statement 'we don't know' is not acceptable. I now have less than 24 hours to try and fix the fuckup you made.

No love,

On Whether He (Benedict Cumberbatch), Matt Smith, and Tom Hiddleston Have Cheekbone-Polishing Parties:

We like nothing better than buffing our Zygoma. And imagining a horny time traveling long overcoat purple scarf wearing super sleuth nordic legend fuck fantasy. Get to work on that, internet.

I'm half tempted to take on WhoVengeLock, except I've never seen Dr. Who.

Current Mood: amusedamused

Cthulhu on a cracker. I'm mostly posting this because its simultaneously hilarious, ridiculous, and lachrymose.

Apparently, Alyssa at ThinkProgress thinks there's been no revelation of what average people think of superheroes in the Marvel Universe. There's no context, no background for SHIELD. She finds this disappointing, given the basic plot of Agents of SHIELD.

Never mind that the Marvel Universe is approaching its its 100th birthday. There's plenty of evidence for how average people feel about superheroes -- even in the cinematic universe, since Whedon made a point of montaging it in Avengers, and it comes up in the Iron Man franchise -- because it's been dealt with in a variety of ways in the comics. I never read them, but a brief dip into Wikipedia is enough to see that, yes, there's a context for SHIELD.

The TV show is a spinoff of movies spun off of multiple comic book series that are, in some cases 50+ years old. There is no feasible way for a TV pilot to back fill all of that in, especially when at least, what, ten movies including the overall Avengers (Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Captain America, Avengers) franchise, the X-men/Wolverine franchise, and Fantastic Four movies haven't done more than hint at some of it.

Inasmuch as I can understand disappointment with the script, or the acting, but recognize that the base premise, in many ways, isn't Whedon's. He's working from a play book that has, in fact, already been written, in a universe already familiar to millions. He wants to entice those of us who are unfamiliar or marginally familiar, but his audience is made up of people who would be bored and turned off by exposition about a universe they grew up with.

And, quite seriously, I have to laugh at you, Alyssa. If you're interested in the "we need to discuss the deployment of superheroes in a public forum" I direct you to the Civil War storyline. Also - did you even notice how you implied that superheroes are weapons and not people? Fictional people, true, but still -- not objects. The idea that a show about the structures that might support superheroes or superhero teams should be deliberately exploited for political purpose and debate in essentially real time? Please. Don't get me wrong, philosophical underpinnings are undoubtedly there, but that isn't the purpose of the show. Being disappointed that a vaguely-campy-already-has-a-fanbase show doesn't live up to your LET'S BE TOPICAL BECAUSE REASONS! expectations is ludicrous.

Dude, what is the point of asking a chef for a vegan/vegetarian restaurant if she'd be willing to use test tube grown beef? For that matter, what is the point of asking three chefs who appear to be anti-meat/anti-science to comment on it? I mean, wow, a breakthrough in the possible future of low impact food production that could potentially feed the world cheaply and we're going to discuss how food should be more expensive to drive demand down? We're not even going to touch, say, whether similar methods might be used for veggies? Really? The only pro-for-the-idea person was the dude who is ex-PETA? Dear MSNBC, I don't expect perfection in journalism. I recognize your bias. But WTF was that?

(Btw, to the jack off who felt the need to whine about the amount of vegetable matter it takes to produce muscle. Please note that herd animals tend to consume vegetable matter humans cannot gain benefit from, often on land that is somewhat marginal for farming things humans can eat. By definition, it doesn't matter what the plant/meat ratio is, because we can't eat the plants anyway.)

The frequency of non-sequitur. It's a great place to practice abbreviated wit or snark, but sometimes the moment when someone re-tweets something you're not following and have no context for is more than a bit baffling.

MvDonalds and Visa put out this gem of a budget this week in the attempt to claim that a person can totally live on $8.25/hr. Ignoring obvious issues (no utilites other than electricity in that $600/mo apartment, gas/car payment $150 -- suuure... In my area, if your apartment is that cheap, you're generally making at least a 20 mile round trip), they've effectively admitted that people making $12-14/hr in their full time jobs are barely making enough to survive on.

Think about that for a moment.

Simply by saying "Well, you get a second job somewhere in the current market" they've admitted that they do not pay a living wage, and worse, they could pay their employees half-again more, and said employees would still wouldn't be making enough to do more than scrape by.

So, even the people making half again more than the McWageSlave should be pounding the pavement for 2nd jobs, which further saturates the market with people actually willing to be underemployed. Given the continuing saga of corporations eager to hire those they won't have to give benefits to, it's got to make them happy the jobless have to be willing to take whatever is offered, because its better than nothing. But there's the conundrum, for every person working 2 (3, 4) jobs, that's likely to be 5 (10, 100) who applied while having none. There aren't enough jobs out there for everyone to have multiple.

I'm not going to claim to know the magic solution, but I think I can state that I'm a little tired of the poor being blamed for being jobless or in need of assistance when a single job cannot support a single individual, much less one with dependents. Never mind "illegals" taking away jobs -- ever person who has 2 or more by necessity has increased the pool of un- or under-employed. Driving down prices by driving down pay still results in people not being able to afford your goods. It's an inevitable downward spiral.

So I find it rather bitterly amusing that instead of paying living wages, McDonalds would rather advocate continuing the problem without apparently realizing it.

Back Viewing 0 - 10