Moving on...

I'm going to leave the post below up for a couple of more days

Ok, so there's a new something availible at Writings of the Wombat. Its from the play, which I should have finished by now. I have written more, but its all very rough draft. I figure that when I finish it I'll make an anouncement to the effect that anyone who wants the final draft can email me for it.

I will also have more material to post there shortly

Also: I thought I was going to have something to say here, but couldn't think of anything.

System of a Down's new album, Mezmerize, rocks hard. I still don't quite know what makes them so awesome.

That is all for now


  1. Awaiting your new stuff. How many sites do you have anyway?
    Get to work.
    Funny, you posted a comment with a reference to asexuality in my blog. I recently had along discussion with some people about it; the reasons for this were long and convoluted but I was asking some friends if being a virgin at age 21 and being male would allude to asexuality. I guess I didn't really know what asexuality meant but after that misinformed question I did find out.
    Speaking of Boston and sports, I went to a RedSox game this week and the fans are brutal.

  2. yeah, not all of the fans in Boston speak for me. I tend to rock hard to the Sox, if that makes any sense, but not to the point of actually hurting anyone.

    You were in Boston? when? Did you check out Newbury Street?

    Yeah, I pretty much had the idea of what it meant as soon as I heard it, but it must have been weird for the audience to watch as I reacted to that new concept. As far as nonheterosexuals go they have it easy. No one's going to call them "unnatural" or anything like that. But you know, I can understand homosexuality. I just cant comprehend what it would be like not to have sexual impulses.

    As for sites, there are just the two.

    I actually have some stuff that I haven't typed up yet (I write most of my fiction in either a notebook or a sketchbook). Not sure how much of it is worthy of being posted. I'll get right on it, though.

  3. Wombat: You would have finished that play by now if you hadn't been so busy repeating those silly shopworn shibboleths about Iraq...Anyway... better hurry it up. I have a feeling that the coming theocracy might not cotten to your play. Want me to put in a good word for you?

    Long Live the THEOCRACY!!!

  4. Wombat...saw somewhere you said that "Republicans only believe in checks and balances when Democrats are in power."

    You won't find that phrase "checks and balances" anywhere in the constitution:

    What you will see is the delineation of three branches of government: Executive, Legislative and Judicial.

    Nowhere is there any consideration for a check or balance among political parties (which you seem to despise anyway).

    In regard to the current Judicial controversy, The Senate, as it is legally constituted (according to the constitution)has the power of advice and consent AFTER the President nominates.

    Since the Senate is legally controlled by Republicans, it would have been completely right and proper to define "advise and consent" according to Senate tradition and existing rules.

    Find something in the constitution if you can about a minority veto, but perhaps your time would be better spent finishing that play.

  5. The Senate was designed to be a body that acted as a buffer against change that is too radical. The rules of the Senate, including the filibuster, support this. The Constitution was never designed to be the be all and the end all. It was designed as a base. The rules have worked thus far, and throwing them under a bus because you don't get your way is an act of craven immaturity no matter who does it.

    The Senate isn't legally controlled by Republicans. It is controlled by 100 men and women, most of whom happen to be Republicans. There is a difference.

    Thank you for your assumption that I ever supported Howard Dean, or blindly accepted the word of any pundit, liberal or conservative, and thank you moreover for kind offer to join the party of Orwellian politics, homophobia, and Constitutional debauchery. Next time I feel like joining a party that needed to take a stab at gays to win Ohio, I'll drop you a line. No, I'm fine without a political party, thanks.

    Oh, and you're saying that I should stop wasting my time making sound arguements and having them ignored while my only somewhat weaker arguements are thrown back in my face?

    You know, that's a novel idea! Enjoy your fuckwit judges.

  6. you don't have that many parts, why don't you stage it and film it so I can see it acted? maybe?

  7. hmm... maybe... don't have the equipment though. I do have ideas for people to play the roles though... I'll look into it. Though its probably not going to be the next play of my authorship to be acted out... but that's another story (which I will reveal at another time *grins*)