Flame On!

[Poop Fresh-Herbed Pickles]

Why don't you take a piggy back ride on a buzz saw? 

Too close to my groinal axis.

Are you trying to threaten my precious seed, Dan?

[Doctor Rock]

Why don't you take a piggy back ride on a buzz saw? 

Too close to my groinal axis.

Are you trying to threaten my precious seed, Dan?

Kurt worries aboot his "precious seed"...  Feeling the peer pressure from your fellow male crappitiers, eh?   

[Just Some Girl]

Yeah, jeez. Which boy here doesn't have a kid? Tripp, Matthew, Kurt, Pat, Chad and Evan? Get on that, willya?

For that matter, Bamah, Kimmy and KGB... time's a-tickin'!



(And whomever else I've missed, 'cept myself.)

[Just Some Girl]

FPB! I'm so sorry to hear your work woes. I hate that kind of office politics, and it's a shame it's making you so miserable. Hang in there. Don't let the man get you down.

[Just Some Girl]

I just did about 100 crunches, and rewarded myself with a cigarette (and probably a cider next). I'm taking my exercise cues from Moetown.

[matthew]

I kinda liked it, actually.

i don't believe you. i don't even think it was good in a sentimental way.  the caricature of the rocky character was the equivalent of some hack comedian saying "yo adrian!" over and over. but with less feeling. and all the self referencing was beyond predictable. just laughable. and absolutely no drama at all.  no emotional tugging. no suspense.  nothing satisfying at all. no real conflicts.  the conflicts that did exist (between rocky and his kid, mason dixon and his staff, etc.) all magically resolved themselves without explanation. even the fight scene (only one, by the way) was a snoozer.   i don't know what i was expecting, but definitely not that royal stinker.

Is this really how I sound?

[matthew]

Speaking of bad movies, I caught "I, Robot" last night.

It is stupid by any standard, whether you've read any Asimov or not.  It strained believability to me that Will Smith's detective couldn't get ANYONE to believe what he was saying...even when he was attacked by like 100 robots, everyone still thinks HE'S crazy.

Ha! I caught a bit of that on television a couple months ago and the exact same thought came to me.

Similarly, when I was watching the Rifftrax take on Independence Day I had to wonder, "Why are people continuing to give Randy Quaid's "hick UFO abductee" character the gears AFTER aliens have attacked Earth and incinerated 75% of the population?" Like, in one of the final scenes as America's ONLY SURVIVING PILOTS assemble to fly into battle WITH ALIENS WHO HAVE ATTACKED EARTH ...the pilots laugh at him when he mentions that he was once abducted.

[matthew]

CONGRATS JEFF AND M_______

exciting


had a great weekend, ex worked double time at the new stadium so i wasnt tortured at all...

went to water park AND saw

THE BATMAN IN IMAX,  worth it, you feel the explosions the color is incredible and it was a bit disturbing when the building blew up, really real.


imax recommended

my days are numbered at this fuckan place, i got wrote up for being late today;  luke's before/after school thing wasnt opened today on the first day of school and

luke's bus was late and it takes me 35 minutes to get to work, they want me gone, just waiting for the family to get back from the wedding of the guy who hates my guts to fire me.  using me now.  first wrtite up today.  i hate life

i hate looking for a job

oh well who gives a fuck, glad little rock was swell

im miserable and i think i am going to take my miserable mood elsewhere, nothin to say

congrats gocat, that is great

see ya later maybe on the other side

kim

You have bummed me out. 

[matthew]

Sounds kinda like Ginger Snaps in tone... you know that one? Wish I had time to fill ya in, if not, but gots to go back to my desk in a couple minutes...

Ginger Snaps was great.

(also: nice lattice with Quaid/Hearbeeps)

[matthew]

I'm gonna make some shirts that say HOT SHIT  on them.

I want one! 

Whatever they say eventually, I want one soon!

[matthew]

FPB! I'm so sorry to hear your work woes. I hate that kind of office politics, and it's a shame it's making you so miserable. Hang in there. Don't let the man get you down.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/0jNN-NSHZ6w" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/0jNN-NSHZ6w</a>

Speaking of things burning, ganesha has two new "songs" on the myface and they have some guitar. One is a stupid little fuckoff typical of ganesha jams...but the other sorta resembles a song...sorta, kinda...

Playing in the jam space is a mix of pros and cons. The snare is super crisp while my snare at home is perpetually fucked up...bad. The down side is that I have a tendency to hook everything on the snare when I play there, because the cymbals are dreadful and I can barely reach the toms because the jam space has the WORST drum stools I have ever encountered. I believe there are three rooms and ALL of the stools are like a foot off the ground and cannot be adjusted properly (though neither can the snare). Anyway, the title refers to the Homestead Strike, making it the second song in a row referring to labour struggles (the former referred to the Pullman Strike), but that history is far more interesting than our silly little jams.

[Doctor Rock]

Dude, why don't you stalk Montreal's craiglist and kijiji (lespac also does the trick) for better drum parts?  I see good deals going on all the time! 

[matthew]

Well, I was talking about Music City - or ANY jam place - every one I have ever been to has fucked up drum stools - and I ain't buying them drum parts. I have been thinking recently that I should replace my ENTIRE drum kit soon.

[matthew]

Bush to relax protected species rules

By DINA CAPPIELLO Mon Aug 11, 7:22 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Parts of the Endangered Species Act may soon be extinct. The Bush administration wants federal agencies to decide for themselves whether highways, dams, mines and other construction projects might harm endangered animals and plants.

New regulations, which don't require the approval of Congress, would reduce the mandatory, independent reviews government scientists have been performing for 35 years, according to a draft first obtained by The Associated Press.

Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne [Matthew's note: formerly of the Food Machinery and Chemical Corporation] said late Monday the changes were needed to ensure that the Endangered Species Act would not be used as a "back door" to regulate the gases blamed for global warming. In May, the polar bear became the first species declared as threatened because of climate change. Warming temperatures are expected to melt the sea ice the bear depends on for survival.

The draft rules would bar federal agencies from assessing the emissions from projects that contribute to global warming and its effect on species and habitats.

"We need to focus our efforts where they will do the most good," Kempthorne said in a news conference organized quickly after AP reported details of the proposal. "It is important to use our time and resources to protect the most vulnerable species. It is not possible to draw a link between greenhouse gas emissions and distant observations of impacts on species."

If approved, the changes would represent the biggest overhaul of endangered species regulations since 1986. They would accomplish through rules what conservative Republicans have been unable to achieve in Congress: ending some environmental reviews that developers and other federal agencies blame for delays and cost increases on many projects.

The chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, which oversees the Interior Department, said he was "deeply troubled" by the changes.

"This proposed rule ... gives federal agencies an unacceptable degree of discretion to decide whether or not to comply with the Endangered Species Act," said Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W.Va. "Eleventh-hour rulemakings rarely if ever lead to good government."

The new regulations follow a pattern by the Bush administration not to seek input from its scientists. The regulations were drafted by attorneys at both the Interior and Commerce Departments. Scientists with both agencies were first briefed on the proposal last week during a conference call, according to an official who asked not to be identified.

Last month, in similar fashion, the Environmental Protection Agency surprised its scientific experts when it decided it did not want to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.

The rule changes unveiled Monday would apply to any project a federal agency would fund, build or authorize that the agency itself determines is unlikely to harm endangered wildlife and their habitat. Government wildlife experts currently participate in tens of thousands of such reviews each year.

The revisions also would limit which effects can be considered harmful and set a 60-day deadline for wildlife experts to evaluate a project when they are asked to become involved. If no decision is made within 60 days, the project can move ahead.

"If adopted, these changes would seriously weaken the safety net of habitat protections that we have relied upon to protect and recover endangered fish, wildlife and plants for the past 35 years," said John Kostyack, executive director of the National Wildlife Federation's Wildlife Conservation and Global Warming initiative.

Under current law, federal agencies must consult with experts at the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service to determine whether a project is likely to jeopardize any endangered species or to damage habitat, even if no harm seems likely. This initial review usually results in accommodations that better protect the 1,353 animals and plants in the U.S. listed as threatened or endangered and determines whether a more formal analysis is warranted.

The Interior Department said such consultations are no longer necessary because federal agencies have developed expertise to review their own construction and development projects, according to the 30-page draft obtained by the AP.

"We believe federal action agencies will err on the side of caution in making these determinations," the proposal said.

The director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Dale Hall, said the changes would help focus expertise on "where we know we don't have a negative effect on the species but where the agency is vulnerable if we don't complete a consultation."

Responding to questions about the process, Hall said, "We will not do anything that leaves the public out of this process."

The new rules were expected to be formally proposed immediately, officials said. They would be subject to a 30-day public comment period before being finalized by the Interior Department. That would give the administration enough time to impose the rules before November's presidential election. A new administration could freeze any pending regulations or reverse them, a process that could take months. Congress could also overturn the rules through legislation, but that could take even longer.

The proposal was drafted largely by attorneys in the general counsel's offices of the Commerce Department's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Interior Department, according to an official with the National Marine Fisheries Service, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the plan hadn't yet been circulated publicly. The two agencies' experts were not consulted until last week, the official said.

Between 1998 and 2002, the Fish and Wildlife Service conducted 300,000 consultations. The National Marine Fisheries Service, which evaluates projects affecting marine species, conducts about 1,300 reviews each year.

The reviews have helped safeguard protected species such as bald eagles, Florida panthers and whooping cranes. A federal government handbook from 1998 described the consultations as "some of the most valuable and powerful tools to conserve listed species."

In recent years, however, some federal agencies and private developers have complained that the process results in delays and increased construction costs.

"We have always had concerns with respect to the need for streamlining and making it a more efficient process," said Joe Nelson, a lawyer for the National Endangered Species Act Reform Coalition, a trade group for home builders and the paper and farming industry.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, called the proposed changes illegal.

"This proposed regulation is another in a continuing stream of proposals to repeal our landmark environmental laws through the back door," she said. "If this proposed regulation had been in place, it would have undermined our ability to protect the bald eagle, the grizzly bear and the gray whale."

The Bush administration and Congress have attempted with mixed success to change the law.

In 2003, the administration imposed similar rules that would have allowed agencies to approve new pesticides and projects to reduce wildfire risks without asking the opinion of government scientists about whether threatened or endangered species and habitats might be affected. The pesticide rule was later overturned in court. The Interior Department, along with the Forest Service, is currently being sued over the rule governing wildfire prevention.

In 2005, the House passed a bill that would have made similar changes to the Endangered Species Act, but the bill died in the Senate.

The sponsor of that bill, then-House Natural Resources chairman Richard Pombo, R-Calif., told the AP Monday that allowing agencies to judge for themselves the effects of a project will not harm species or habitat.

"There is no way they can rubber stamp everything because they will end up in court for every decision," he said.

But internal reviews by the National Marine Fisheries Service and Fish and Wildlife Service concluded that about half the unilateral evaluations by the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management that determined wildfire prevention projects were unlikely to harm protected species were not legally or scientifically valid.

Those had been permitted under the 2003 rule changes.

"This is the fox guarding the hen house. The interests of agencies will outweigh species protection interests," said Eric Glitzenstein, the attorney representing environmental groups in the lawsuit over the wildfire prevention regulations. "What they are talking about doing is eviscerating the Endangered Species Act."

[Bizarro]

Some of the fireworks you saw in the Beijing Olympics Opening Ceremony were CGI