Is it a mist? Is it a fog? The droplets are not grounding the bugs---and the mosquitoes are amazingly aggressive---whoa. And all I did was walk Bob to the car this morning. At 6:10am, it was still dark.
Shuttle launching today to go fix the Hubble. (at 1:07 CT good launch!)
I think I shall go to Walmart today. My list is small: coffeemate liquid, Bob's 'showtime' Old Spice body liquid soap, and oats to make oatmeal. And maybe get some prints out of the digital camera.
The talk shows on the radio will be all over the white house dinner and mean spirited commedian, and hopefully, highlighting some good things Cheney said.
Has everyone seen the new Star Trek movie? Ready to talk about it's "message"?? If you have not seen it, you'd better stop reading. I was puzzled by the agenda of the new Star Trek movie, but then it hit me---a new timeline means the liberty to rewrite Spock as more loving/feeling/emotional. Logic is blown up. Blown up as in the whole planet Spock came from. And alert, more observant bloggers have noted how the utopia Star Trek pushes---a future without money, and without nations---and where sex has no consequences...what are we teaching the next generation at the church/religion that is Hollywood??
Propaganda, bias, and what is that word? _____________
Sure, the new movie is smart, and action-packed, and loud, and amazing in its special effects. And such nostalgia for those of us who watched the original as little kids. Will I see it again? Yes. I like to see movies in the theater. I miss a lot the first time, and now that I know the ending, it is fun to go back and see details. Some are complaining about the music, as if not grand enough. It nodded back to the past.
One of the pluses someone mentioned was the fact that the movie does not bore us to death with diplomacy. But, the strange theme of an elderly/wise omnipresent Spock from the original series trying to fix what he was blamed for breaking, and the what ifs. Sequel? They seem to leave that possibility open. Why wasn't the original Shatner given a role? He still seems hale and hearty enough to do hotel/travel ads. And why not the now openly gay character? I am being sarcastic here---but isn't Hollywood all about shoving homosexuality down our you-know-whats?
It is refreshing to see the bad guys blown away. But, sad to see the good guys fly into a trap where all of their other ships have been blown up. And the bad guy---he was just vengeful for a perceived wrong. If only the bad guy had been enlightened, he would not have been bad. What is Hollywood selling? Do they really think the radical extremist muslim criminals would stop blowing stuff up if we could just reason with them and make them feel better and show them what really happened in history? Do they really think we can educate them or enlighten them to be nice? Legislate loving? Sure---lets look at how loving and nice they were at the white house dinner. The comedian called Rush Limbaugh treasonous for disagreeing with the present administration's policy. The comedian proclaimed a painful death, and waterboarding as punishment for someone who disagrees with her. Education and enlightenment is not helping the left get along. And the irony---if given a chance, the taliban sees no difference between President Bush and President Obama. The taliban would love to kill Rush as well as comedians. The honorable men and women who are at this very moment fighting for the comedian's right to spew her hatred is also fighting for Rush Limbaugh's right to have an opinion.
Who is Hollywood in bed with? Who does Hollywood hate, and who do they love?
And the left, liberal main stream media press---they all voted for Obama. When will they return to being objective? When will they set their feelings aside, and report the news? Funny---I do not remember any need for the press or media in the future utopia that is/was Star Trek. I guess in the future, there will be no need for money, or newspapers. And isn't it fun to see how they solved that weightless/gravity thing in space, too?