it just occurred to me that it's been just over 10 years since I first saw Moxy Früvous.

though in the same thought, it also occurred to me that it's been almost 8 since I last saw them.

where has the time gone? and was it really only during a slightly less than three year period that I was going to their shows?

how the hell did this get greenlit?

I read Whedonesque, and today someone posted a link to this blog entry about non-white characters, or lack thereof, in Buffy.

and I say wtf to that. who CARES? When I think of character descriptions, the first thing that comes to mind when I think of any of the main characters is NOT "Oh, he/she is [insert skin colour here]."

I'm sorry, but how is her point NOT racist? If we want to overcome racism and become a truly colour-blind society, this should not be important at all. They're all people, all characters. They all live and any of them may have relationships with any of the others, and any of them may meet a gruesome, untimely end.

True, this blogger doesn't seem insane like this person, but it's still a kind of pointless gripe she makes. Would she rather Joss use a quota system and go out of his way to make his characters less white?

you know, I used to kind of respect Joe Lieberman. But now he's become a right wing nutball on Iraq and is echoing the same absurd rhetoric the Bushies all like to spew.

Leaving Iraq would not be 'losing'. Staying would not be 'winning'. It can't be defined in those terms, even. Lieberman and McCain and the rest of the warmongering crazies would rather endlessly sacrifice American lives to no useful end in Iraq.

Obama is actually trying to do something to change course in Iraq, because the current one isn't working. He's actually trying to save lives, not pointlessly end more.

Oh yeah, and also, back in 2002, before the US had made the catastrophic mistake of invading Iraq, he predicted the current situation there perfectly.

The bottom line is this: McCain and Lieberman and the others who throw around meaningless terms like 'win' and 'lose' in an effort to sway voters who don't care about details have their priorities completely in the wrong order. They do not care if more Americans die.

Obama does. It's time to bring the troops home and get them out of harm's way. Keeping them in Iraq any longer at this point is no different from murder.

I'm not sure why I made a post about Dr. Horrible after part II and not just when it was all over, but oh well. Now I spam you with posts on the same subject two days in a row.

( the best part of Dr. Horrible Part III )

for those who haven't yet seen it, go watch acts I and II of Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog.

( don't want to spoil the best parts )

I really shouldn't read the comments on the Facebook US Politics application. On the question "Could either Barack Obama or John McCain be a good President?" the answer choices are neither, both, or one.

My answer was, of course, only one, with the comment:

McCain would be nearly as bad a president as Bush.

And here's a sampling of the comments from those who believe only one or neither could be a good president. I'm only quoting the really ignorant or strange ones, not the ones I simply disagree with (and yes, before anyone asks, I did look for ignorance on both sides, but most of the Obama supporters simply stated their positive impressions of Obama or fact-based negative impressions of McCain. It seems to be the pro-McCain/anti-Obama people who are the worst informed):

Neither: "We don't need a Marxist in office and we don't need someone who's proud of selling out his party's principles."

A Marxist? Do you even know what that word means or do you just like throwing it around to label someone you disagree with on economic issues?

Only one: "it is too dangerous to have someone as stong in public speaking as obama, he could talk the country into doing something dangerous. he may be a great politian and may be good for the country, but he could be terible, and we would never know."

What a bizarre position. I guess this person must really love Bush, because he's pretty much the exact opposite of a strong public speaker.

Neither: "obama is a socialist, mccain is too liberal why can't we get another reagan in there?"

Again with the 'socialist'. And McCain is not a liberal, either. He may not be nearly as ultra right wing as Bush, but he's still pretty damn conservative by many of the same metrics used to label Obama the 'most liberal Senator'.

Only one: "I don't feel that a candidate whom has not served our coutry should become Commander in Chief. John McCain served our country with honor and sacrifice."

How do you feel about George W. Bush? I don't necessarily think that's an invalid qualification, but as Wesley Clark said, just having served does not automatically qualify someone to be president. Nor does not having served disqualify someone.

Only one: "Obama couldn't be a good President because he is a communist."

No he's not, moron.

Only one: "After hearing his speech on economic policy, I've decided to call the Democratic candidate "Comrade Senator Obama." His populist message will only drive up national debt and potentially spark higher inflation. Besides, he's a Chicago Democrat, that means he's probably corrupt."

Again, not a communist. I can't speak to the corruption charge, but pretty much all politicians have some kind of past dealings they shouldn't be proud of. No one is perfect, and nearly everyone can be bought for the right price, including Obama and McCain. But I could say about McCain: "He's from Arizona, that means he's probably old." Oh, wait, he is old.

Neither: "McCain is just as liberal as Obama is."

Dude, not even close, unless Bush somehow fits your skewed definition of a moderate.

Only one: "McCain would be a very good president, if Obama wins will have a civil war... Blacks still can't get out of the past, everything is always about them and there rights...if they stopped acting like they need something or we owe them something then it wouldn't be a problem.Please Wake Up USA"

Civil War? Blacks still can't ... oh, I get it, you're a racist.

Only one: "John McCain - not my first choice, but damn better than Mr. Hussein Obama himself."

No comment.

I'm not sure what disturbs me the most. That there are false rumours going around about Obama being Muslim, that people believe them, or that the people who do believe them seem to consider that a negative quality.

It is offensive to me that referring to someone as a Muslim (whether true or not) these days can be considered so insulting or politically damaging.

The people spreading the rumour are either anti-Muslim bigots themselves (most likely), or simply counting on the fact that enough other people are that it may affect Obama's chances of being elected in November. It's just sickening.

I wonder if we'll elect a Muslim president or an atheist president first.

Or ever.

so, if I'm reading this correctly, soon the notion of a top level domain will be as arbitrary as the current domain names you see on .com.

This brings up an obvious question.

ICANN has .cheezburger?

this is what voting for Bush got you, I hope you're happy.

the second amendment does NOT include any and all weaponry, and the DC handgun ban was not so restrictive as to be in violation of that amendment. the right to bear arms was not infringed by it - you could still have shotguns and rifles. Plus, arms != firearms. You can still have knives and swords, too.

This is one of the worst decisions the Supreme Court has ever made. Big FOADs go out to Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito and Kennedy. Thanks for making us all less safe, assholes.

There is only one solution now. The second amendment must be repealed. Then we can outlaw ALL guns entirely.