pages

Tuesday, June 22, 2004

More Detractions of Moore

Joe Scarborough rips Michael Moore a new one.

It's stuff that I've seen before but it's always nice to read it from an mainstream source, or rather, a television personality rather than a written pundit (people don't read).

Monday, June 21, 2004

Michael Moore was on the Today Show This Morning

What we have is Moore dueling with Katie Couric. The interview must have been irrelevent to a large degree. I cannot recall anything from it, aside from Moore laughing at his detractors.

Couric read a letter from a conservative who didn't write quite well enough. So Moore made smug noises at the letter.

I forgot most of the contents of the interview and for some reason that bothers me. The fools at the Moorewatch Forum wouldn't and couldn't fill in blanks (I'd link to the respective post thread but it will disapear in a little over two months anyway). This man is a jerk. There was a point where Couric and Moore were debating whose programs were more hard-hitting. One leftist and one anti-Conservative were hammering at each other deciding which bashed the Conservative cause more, under the guise of journalistic drive and integrity. It'd be disgusting if it wasn't almost humorous. It was almost humorous.

Video Games Can Be Funky

Imagine that my entire battle for the Plains of Rohan will be lost if two miscellaneous, cosmically useless video game characters, two villagers, burn to death.

I don't rememeber either of them hauling the Ring to Mordor near the end. Why did I fail the mission?

"The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" is a freaking hard video game

I borrowed the game from my friend Mr. Jennings. The game is difficult but it's very very fun.

It's somewhat silly that the interview on one of the "making of" tracks on the DVD-ROM makes the open declaration that if someone plays the game and says to themselves or others "it's the movie" then they have done their job. What kind of reality-deluded nut job is going to confuse one with the other? The video game is really fun and quite beautiful to look at but in no way does it closely resemble a live action film, and the voices and stuff recorded is indeed done by the original cast of the film trilogy but of course the result is dry and stilted. That's not a complaint; I expect it and hearing these heroes speak dry lines in stitled voices is fun.

As difficult as the game is the IGN Walkthrough/Guide is here.

I'm on the Rohan stage.

The next stage is Helm's Deep.

It's funky hearing Elijah Wood talking about how fun it is to play video games. The biggest difference between him and me is that he's rich and famous and his voice is higher than mine.

Wotta way to make a living.

"Watching your carbs?"

I don't. That's none of your business.

Truth is that I grew up with what was then the common wisdom for eating healthy. After the Four Basic Food Groups was suddenly ruled out and what should be Five Food Groups turned out to be a Food Pyramid, I saw this Pyramid primarily on the side of cereal boxes purporting grains and the Grain and Cereal Group to be what you should eat the most of.

They still do. This is a big surprise from a cereal company.

Despite that, even old wisdom regarding grains and carbohydrate sources had been reporting that I should eat that stuff. The new wisdom is followed commonly arbitrarily. That it is common is arbitrary. New wisdom demands that I eat less carbohydrates and eat more meat. I love meat. I really do love eating cereal and pastas. But after all this time why should I believe the words of Dr. Atkins and all these mindless food zombies when it flies directly in the face of the coda that I grew up being taught. What makes the new wiser than the old? What makes this one small sect of doctors more reliable than the old world approach? You know in five years the next new thing will become the common wisdom.

I will be the first to insist, if I can be, that the contents of meat, and the benefits of meat are neccessary. Grains and breads, cereals and carbohrdates are needed. Man must have protein. The proper ratios are desired... the proper quantities must be limited. I don't understand the notion of throwing out the entire chunk of bread groups that generations of long-lived folk have been devouring! Still, meat, not fake meat, is important too.

The question in the title is that asked in a commercial I recently saw. I'm disgusted that this is so common an idea that it's just there, unchallenged in our advertising. It's accepted that it's a good idea to throw out chunks of bread and to make your sole source thin wraps and such.

That so few do not publically challenge this aside from those anti-meat PETA freaks is something thatI do not understand. There is the Atkins Diet. There is the South Beach Diet. Whatever happened to watching what you eat and excercising? What happened to a regular practice of moderation? I don't always successfully moderate what I eat but I know what I have to do.

Note that I seek to profit from what I consider to be pure idiocy. Frankly I was surprised that Doctors Agatston and Atkins each had respectively wrote so much material, especially since Atkins is dead.

Monday, June 14, 2004

Supreme Court Dismisses the Case to Dismiss God

The Supreme Court dismissed the case to remove the words "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance, under a technicality.

At first I thought that the technicality was the man raising the issue was a rabble-rouser and a prick.

The actual technicality is that the man's power to represent his daughter's supposed interest(s) is not clearly present. (Although he really does seem to be prick).


Comments-Update:
Erik
I'm assuming you know the guy is a prick as you saw him at your last meeting of Prick's Anonymous? Oh wait. You're not anonymous about it...
Wednesday, July 14, 2004, 1:35:04 PM
Reply
Arndt
I'd say he's a prick because he pays his dues on time at every meeting.

Of course it's not anonymous. But at least he pays his dues.

That and I did read the article, did read his words, and he was over-reaching his own responsibilities.
Monday, July 26, 2004, 1:07:04 AM

Tuesday, June 08, 2004

They Mis-Describe Detroit's triumph!

ABC is running commercials for the NBA Finals, describing the first game between the Pistons and the Lakers and telling us the time for Game 2.

First of all, I hate that boy band-written crap-song and prefer John Tesh's composition, dropped since the NBA broadcast liscense went from NBC to ABC.

The commercial says that "Shaq was nearly unstoppable" and that the Pistons "turned the game around" in the second half to "steal a victory".

First of all, Shaq scored (and he made more free-throws than normal) but he was hardly carrying the game for anybody, especially with the exceptions to leaning on people's backs.

I don't know where and when the "turn the game around" event happened because with the exception of one half-minute period of time the Detroit Pistons led the L.A. Lakers for THE ENTIRE GAME. We won by at least twelve points and led by two for most of the game!

This talk that we stole the game. It is as if my team does not dererve to win, deserve to defeat the oh-so-almighty Lakers! We didn't steal anything. The Pistons held the lead for almost he entire game. We took in the beginning and had a grip on it in the end. We had a solid lead. Nothing was ever snatched from the Laker's grip because they were never given an ounce of victory. The Lakers never possessed the opporunity. Detroit didn't steal anything because Los Angeles had nothing to steal.

These writers as jerks and idiots.

Thursday, June 03, 2004

Chuck Austen's first Super-Travesty

The issue that first marked the injuries upon the Man of Steel is Superman 188, summarized by the Superman Home page here.

It's absolutely terrible for many reasons that I have covered before elsewhere and will cover here later.

It also wounded Joshua Elder in a crucial way which has been detailed well elsewhere.

the Justice League versus Planetary, according to the Superman Homepage

Awhile back the Superman Homepage reviewed Planetary/JLA: Terra Occulta and there's some ideas that I wish to dispute in the future.

As for myself I'd insist that it's a good story. I only have a bare idea of what Planetary actually is and what the series is actually about. I've never read an issue of Warren Ellis's original series (which is still ongoing) but I've read enough from the man himself to get a good idea what the series is about and who the characters are. I also have just enough of a familiarity of the Wildstorm Universe to know the framework surrounding Ellis's stuff.

As for the Justice League, I know them. I know the DC Universe, I know DC Comics, and I've read a good deal of JLA, Justice League, Justice League of America, and all sorts of comics relevent to what's presented today and I know the history. I know the stuff that is included in Terra Occulta and how it differs from the original setting and form. It's actually quite fascinating. Since the DC Universe and the Planetary viewpoint of the Wildstorm Universe cannot be reasonably reconciled, this story is set as an alternate/parallel universe with certain character making new and different impacts on a somewhat familiar setting, making the entire stage to be something roughly new, at least in appearance.

It is original.

It's published as an Elseworlds, which is only sensible given the difference between the tale's contents and the original source canon, both of them.

I liked it; although I don't really care for the part Superman played in the tale.

where you come from: Thought Balloons

I discover that a large and nearly constant stream of people consistently come in from the Thought Balloons weblog. That's likely why I put Kevin's blog on my Roll, although I cannot remember. I do know that Apologies Demanded has a high spot on his Blog Roll because of the alphabetical order, but it is appreciated. He found it because I post comments on his 'blog. It's all good stuff.

Thought Balloons is neat and given that it is an excellent comics weblog with a comparatively massive amount of hits, I'm somewhat honored that he shares that amount with me and mine. I also feel somewhat guilty that some come from his site to mine and find material that isn't related to comics in the slightest. On the other hand it is my primary hobby so there is some relevene and thus it's not entirely inapropriate. Read comic books and come to Apologies Demanded!

I'm somewhat torn. I post comic book news, primarily to Monitor Duty. Yet why should I not post apropriate commentary here? After all, it's mine. I don't feel bad that surfers from Thought Balloons may find scathing rips on Michael Moore or a defense of Dick Cheney. It's my site and I'll complain politically if I want to. Or I won't post at all.

Cannot feel guilty if I'm too busy to post. I can if I procastinate instead but I'll never publically discern the difference, at least not here.

So there may be political news or comic book commentary but either way comic book fans will come here. I'm fine with that; I'm aware of them. Nothing will change because of them.

what kind of people come here: people who are just looking for "apologies"

Honestly it seems like the majority of people coming here are coming off of Google searching for "apologies".

It is so logical that my site be highly ranked on the topic, given the title.

However I'm still wondering what they, you, are looking for. Are you looking for the method of how to apologize or are you so stricken with injustice that you want to read apologies made to you?

I ask two things from you. Feel free to stay awhile and read some of my more pathetic posts and the really cool ones. I also would like to know what the heck you were looking for in the way of apologies and why. Feel free to correspond and answer the query.

Comment-Update:
Ojin (69.34.88.76)
The method one.
Wednesday, June 30, 2004, 3:44:05 PM

what makes you come here: the A-Team

Honestly there is a small trend regarding what brings individuals to visit my weblog. Generally it isn't a search for Republicans or my super-intelligence or my charm.

It's actually many things.

One of the most common referrals is from http://images.google.es/imgres?imgurl=catramm.home.insightbb.com/art/movieposters/ATeam_poster.jpg&imgrefurl=http://apologiesdem. It's a Google image search result, and it's a reference to an ancient link I made many moons ago to a photomanipulation made by Carlin Trammel. He was creating an ideal A-Team film with today's actors. That image brings me so many hits yet the link I made is dead.

This ancient AD post brings people to the AD general site with no reference to the A-Team. Is anyone disturbed by this? Does anyone truly care? Is my link the reason that Carlin Trammel moved the image?

Rather than remain out of date, as I have for nearly a year, I'm updating one bit of information. The current location for the image in question. You can find the new kick-arse poster here.

I am still impressed with it.

I'd apologize for not posting in awhile

but we both know that you don't truly give a tinker's damn.

Fortunately this blog isn't written or being published for you.

Unfortunately I'm emotionally wounded.