Showing posts with label G W Bush is an idiot. Show all posts
Showing posts with label G W Bush is an idiot. Show all posts
9/18/2008
7/29/2008
2/05/2008
I promise to return to regular programming soon.
"Together we can build a world that's just and inclusive for all."
With the tizzy that I've been in over Super Tuesday, I almost forgot about this misguided buffoon.
Moving on, or back I should say, look at us two *young* *under 30* voters communicating instantly via the Internets:
me (9:37:04 PM): haha mitt romney's fans are holding up "change" signs
me (9:37:08 PM): change how?
Moe (9:37:17 PM): haha
Moe (9:37:24 PM): his son is named tagg
me (9:37:52 PM): he said that its important to him to preserve the kind of nation that we've had because we all want our children to grow up with the kind of prosperity that we've had
me (9:37:58 PM): um who's "we" motherfucker
me (9:38:13 PM): tagg and mitt. boyhood games
Moe (9:40:47 PM): dog names
me (9:41:10 PM): ha
Moe (9:41:20 PM): yes, I want my children to grow up with racism, homophobia, no separation of church and state, and with a war going on
Moe (9:41:29 PM): what a motherfucker
me (9:41:38 PM): mmm yes and lots of poverty, too
me (9:41:43 PM): and failing schools
Moe (9:41:56 PM): yes, poverty and a giant fence around our country
me (9:42:00 PM): NOW that's the america i'd like to see my non-existent children grow up in
Moe (9:42:04 PM): and no health care!
me (9:42:05 PM): oh yes!
Moe (9:42:33 PM): how can people even buy that shit?
me (9:42:33 PM): and while we're at it
Moe (9:42:42 PM): yes?
me (9:42:43 PM): let's chain chastity belts onto our daughters
Moe (9:43:00 PM): and strip away roe v. wade
me (9:43:10 PM): and stop teaching evolution
me (9:43:21 PM): i'm not related to a monkey!
Moe (9:43:35 PM): haha
Moe (9:43:57 PM): god breathed life into adam and then made eve for child bearing purposes
me (9:44:14 PM): and laundry-doing purposes
Moe (9:44:35 PM): [Moe's ex-boyfriend] (9:44:54 PM): u see my guy huckabee mopping up
Moe (9:44:40 PM): AAHHHHHHHHHHH
me (9:44:48 PM): NO WAY
Moe (9:44:57 PM): huckabee is below the mason-dixon line conserv
me (9:46:33 PM): he fried squirrels with a popcorn maker in his dorm in college
One more thing. I've just watched McCain's speech, and then Obama's, and something has sort of come to me. Their rhetoric is so vastly different, and it's not just a Republican/Democrat, progressive/conservative thing. McCain spoke about the campaign, and about his opponents, and about being the Republican front-runner; his speech was focused. And his audience was supportive but subdued. Obama doesn't have the focus. He talks about the abolitionists and the suffragettes and the freedom-riders and the woman in New Orleans who was told her city won't be rebuilt; and his audience speaks back to him as he speaks to them. It's dynamic. Reminds me of the call-and-response phenomenon in African American English that I looked at in a few of my classes last semester. I wonder what implications the success of Obama's campaign, which must be very much related to his inspiring speeches, might be for the status of African American English in relation to "Standard" English. Although really, he doesn't follow that many of the linguistic rules of African American English (habitual be, absent copula, etc.).
If it's not blaringly obvious to you, my dear reader/s, I've updated this post at various points during my viewing of the primary coverage. Hence the hodge-podge-ness.
With the tizzy that I've been in over Super Tuesday, I almost forgot about this misguided buffoon.
Moving on, or back I should say, look at us two *young* *under 30* voters communicating instantly via the Internets:
me (9:37:04 PM): haha mitt romney's fans are holding up "change" signs
me (9:37:08 PM): change how?
Moe (9:37:17 PM): haha
Moe (9:37:24 PM): his son is named tagg
me (9:37:52 PM): he said that its important to him to preserve the kind of nation that we've had because we all want our children to grow up with the kind of prosperity that we've had
me (9:37:58 PM): um who's "we" motherfucker
me (9:38:13 PM): tagg and mitt. boyhood games
Moe (9:40:47 PM): dog names
me (9:41:10 PM): ha
Moe (9:41:20 PM): yes, I want my children to grow up with racism, homophobia, no separation of church and state, and with a war going on
Moe (9:41:29 PM): what a motherfucker
me (9:41:38 PM): mmm yes and lots of poverty, too
me (9:41:43 PM): and failing schools
Moe (9:41:56 PM): yes, poverty and a giant fence around our country
me (9:42:00 PM): NOW that's the america i'd like to see my non-existent children grow up in
Moe (9:42:04 PM): and no health care!
me (9:42:05 PM): oh yes!
Moe (9:42:33 PM): how can people even buy that shit?
me (9:42:33 PM): and while we're at it
Moe (9:42:42 PM): yes?
me (9:42:43 PM): let's chain chastity belts onto our daughters
Moe (9:43:00 PM): and strip away roe v. wade
me (9:43:10 PM): and stop teaching evolution
me (9:43:21 PM): i'm not related to a monkey!
Moe (9:43:35 PM): haha
Moe (9:43:57 PM): god breathed life into adam and then made eve for child bearing purposes
me (9:44:14 PM): and laundry-doing purposes
Moe (9:44:35 PM): [Moe's ex-boyfriend] (9:44:54 PM): u see my guy huckabee mopping up
Moe (9:44:40 PM): AAHHHHHHHHHHH
me (9:44:48 PM): NO WAY
Moe (9:44:57 PM): huckabee is below the mason-dixon line conserv
me (9:46:33 PM): he fried squirrels with a popcorn maker in his dorm in college
One more thing. I've just watched McCain's speech, and then Obama's, and something has sort of come to me. Their rhetoric is so vastly different, and it's not just a Republican/Democrat, progressive/conservative thing. McCain spoke about the campaign, and about his opponents, and about being the Republican front-runner; his speech was focused. And his audience was supportive but subdued. Obama doesn't have the focus. He talks about the abolitionists and the suffragettes and the freedom-riders and the woman in New Orleans who was told her city won't be rebuilt; and his audience speaks back to him as he speaks to them. It's dynamic. Reminds me of the call-and-response phenomenon in African American English that I looked at in a few of my classes last semester. I wonder what implications the success of Obama's campaign, which must be very much related to his inspiring speeches, might be for the status of African American English in relation to "Standard" English. Although really, he doesn't follow that many of the linguistic rules of African American English (habitual be, absent copula, etc.).
If it's not blaringly obvious to you, my dear reader/s, I've updated this post at various points during my viewing of the primary coverage. Hence the hodge-podge-ness.
7/28/2007
Brotherhood 2.0
My big brother Johnny (Hi Johnny!) called me last night to tell me about a video he thought I should see since I had been making fun of him and my little brother Neil for their excessive excitement over the newest Harry Potter book.
But I'm intrigued by the video's opening, "Two Brothers, One Video Blog, 365 Days of Textless Communication." The two creators call their project Brotherhood 2.0. And their video messages to one another are hilarious. I especially like all the "in my pants" jokes. I can't help wondering, though, if this kind of communication is really satisfying for them, or if they actually miss each other. Yes, they're responding to each others videos, but it's with the knowledge that other people, and a lot of them, are watching them communicate. It's so un-intimate. I'm a big fan of YouTube and the kinds of things it can make possible, but as a way of keeping in touch, it seems sort of disjointed.
You know who's not a fan of You Tube? President Bush, apparently. In an article titled "Will the G.O.P. say No to YouTube?" TIME reports that many of the Republicans running for the presidential nomination have decided not to attend the Republican version of the YouTube-based debate in which the the Democratic hopefuls participated earlier this week. They think it's silly. "White House spokesman Tony Snow told reporters that the President had not even watched, saying Bush was 'not big on YouTube debates.'" ...That cocky son-of-a-bitch. Too cool for those new-fangled technological advances, Mr. Bush? Especially those that allow real people to ask presidential candidates their real questions? Shocking.
Anyway, I'm leaving Mobile now, and I have some new close friends to keep in touch with. Maybe I'll give this "Textless Communication" stuff a shot before I decide how I feel about it.
But I'm intrigued by the video's opening, "Two Brothers, One Video Blog, 365 Days of Textless Communication." The two creators call their project Brotherhood 2.0. And their video messages to one another are hilarious. I especially like all the "in my pants" jokes. I can't help wondering, though, if this kind of communication is really satisfying for them, or if they actually miss each other. Yes, they're responding to each others videos, but it's with the knowledge that other people, and a lot of them, are watching them communicate. It's so un-intimate. I'm a big fan of YouTube and the kinds of things it can make possible, but as a way of keeping in touch, it seems sort of disjointed.
You know who's not a fan of You Tube? President Bush, apparently. In an article titled "Will the G.O.P. say No to YouTube?" TIME reports that many of the Republicans running for the presidential nomination have decided not to attend the Republican version of the YouTube-based debate in which the the Democratic hopefuls participated earlier this week. They think it's silly. "White House spokesman Tony Snow told reporters that the President had not even watched, saying Bush was 'not big on YouTube debates.'" ...That cocky son-of-a-bitch. Too cool for those new-fangled technological advances, Mr. Bush? Especially those that allow real people to ask presidential candidates their real questions? Shocking.
Anyway, I'm leaving Mobile now, and I have some new close friends to keep in touch with. Maybe I'll give this "Textless Communication" stuff a shot before I decide how I feel about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)