A Thread Requested By Nate From Skooter


sorabji.com: Is it art?: A Thread Requested By Nate From Skooter
THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016).

By Skooter on Tuesday, May 1, 2001 - 08:22 pm:

    So....The gloves are off. Talk on this thread about anything that you feel is really important, like the color of your underwear, where you think that heaven is, and what kind of popsicles you like etc...Have Fun and wear a condom.


By Antigone on Tuesday, May 1, 2001 - 11:38 pm:

    Did you know that the planar structure of B-DNA and a topologically correct rendering as found inside the Gaussian bell curve via the first 200,000 binary digits of PI display a striking resemblance to one another?


By Kalliope on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 12:13 am:

    I can't stop eating this sour spray candy.

    It really tastes horrible tho.

    But I can't stop.


By Skooter on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 09:54 am:

    Sour Spray? Doesn't Sound Good. What the hell is going on with Bushes asshole ideas about an unfounded missle defence system which has already cost us a billion dollars in testing and which he wants to spend another billion, and it still probably won't work? Does any one think thats a good idea? Shouldn't we be spending that billion dollars on AIDS research or to feed the homeless? Compassionate Conservative my asshole.
    Don't touch my RATT tapes duder.


By dave. on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 10:15 am:

    i just heard that hiv may never be cured. something about how it lives in memory t-cells or something like that. this may not be new news but i just heard it. knowing that, aids research mey not be where the investments should go. prevention and health care seem more appropriate.


By patrick on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 11:46 am:

    Bush scorecard


    Compassion 0



    Conservative +50

    where's the compassion in repealing workplace ergonomic benefits?

    where's the compassion in abolishing the ABM and setting a more isolationist tone to the world?

    where's the compassion in artic drilling?

    where's the compassion with more arsenic in the water (granted its a small area, but still)?

    where's the compassion in repealing funding for overseas clinics?

    the list goes on.......



By patrick on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 11:47 am:

    dammit, where are the Bush supporters when we need a good ole fashioned witch hunt?


By Skooter on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 01:49 pm:

    Time for the Maelifcus Malificarium...Lets Burn Some Bushes! In just 100 days he has taken our country back to 1981. Think about it...We have the beginning of another cold war, a major increase in arms spending, "Star Wars", high pollution levels, and a looming energy crisis. That with the reappearence of MR T, makes me feel like I'm seven again.


By J on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 01:57 pm:

    The energy crisis was here before Bush was in office,and I'm all for a arms increase,and the pollution levels were here before Bush was in office.Maybe Bush is worried about China now that fucking Clinton sold our technology to them.


By patrick on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 02:07 pm:

    Bush is not worried about China, he is merely using it as an excuse. There is no need to increase arms....it's media induced paranoia J, don't believe the hype....christ. The type of threats that face the US do not require more airpower, seapower or nuclear power, muchless a missle defense system. We are more likley to be involved with terrorist actions taht involve suitcases and small viles than fullscale ground/air/sea combat.



    our democratic governor did nothing to smooth the situation out. In fact he pretty much failed on the matter.


    BUT

    bush, instead of working to find alternative energy sources, promoting more efficient means of consumption, he is scapegoating the crisis as more reason to drill in Alaska. He still has faith in fossil fuels, when efforts should be made to find alternative energy sources.

    He is looking to inherently delay the problem, line the pockets of business and use the crisis to weaken environmental standards. Wrong solution, not that the democrats have a better solution.

    Notice how the bankruptcy laws changed and badda bing, PG*E files for bankruptcy the same week?


By Nate on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 02:33 pm:

    "Notice how the bankruptcy laws changed and badda bing, PG*E files for bankruptcy the same week?"

    aside from the work "bankruptcy" those two aren't even close to being related.

    bush is a moron on a leash. i'm tired of picking apart these arguments, untwining the liberal media mornics from the compassionate conservative moronics.

    however you label it, he hasn't done anything gore wouldn't have done.


By patrick on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 02:40 pm:

    totally.

    if you didn't clear things up for us, we'd never get things right.


By cyst on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 03:13 pm:

    bush has done lots (that gore wouldn't have done) to undermine pro-environment policies.

    it's not the president's prerogative to deal only with problems that are new since his term began. he has to deal with what he's been handed. he knew that going in.


By Nate on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 03:26 pm:

    "bush has done lots (that gore wouldn't have done) to undermine pro-environment policies."

    i bet you can't name one thing.

    bush has done well in continuing the clinton/gore regime. that's it.








By patrick on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 03:43 pm:

    what a bunch of shit nate.


    Bankruptcy laws?

    Arsenic/water regs?

    White house offices of faithbased charities?

    Ashcroft?????

    Backing down on a campaign promise to impose standards to reduce carbon emmissions from power plants??

    Ceasing funding of family planning clinics abroad???

    Workplace ergonomic policies that Clinton established?

    Tax cuts as large as Bush wants?

    Education agenda that pushes standardized testing and vouchers?


    there's plenty that he has done that Gore in most likelihood would have never done.

    He's reversed enough Clinton executive orders to make that last statement total crap.


By dave. on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 03:48 pm:

    the salon.com premium shit really pisses me off.


By Antigone on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 03:52 pm:

    How about three: lower arsenic standards in drinking water, lower efficiency standards for large in home appliances, reverse his stand on carbon dioxide emissions.

    Two of those were reversals of Clinton executive orders. Do you think Gore would have reversed those?

    Uh....no...

    Nate, you're losing your edge.

    I am happy with one thing from Bush/Cheny, though. Cheny mentioned recently that nuclear power is one way we can avoid a future energy crisis. Finally some government balls on the nuclear energy issue.


By Antigone on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 03:53 pm:

    Why, dave? It's cheap! And they really need the money to stay afloat.


By Nate on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 04:12 pm:

    "Two of those were reversals of Clinton executive orders. Do you think Gore would have reversed those?"

    no, Clinton would never have ordered them if Gore had won.

    "Arsenic/water regs?"
    Clinton wrote these up on 1/19/01. he could have done something 8 years previous, but he decided not to (for some reason?) The order Clinton signed stated that it shouldn't go into effect until 2004 anyway, so here we are: clinton/gore status quo.

    Further, Tom Daschle and his Democratic Posse spearheaded (and won) an effort to stop any reduction of arsenic in water last october.

    "Workplace ergonomic policies that Clinton established?"
    Again,. 1/19/01. Clinton could have passed new OSHA standards at any time in his 8 years.

    "Backing down on a campaign promise to impose standards to reduce carbon emmissions from power plants??" Gore's campaign promises at times contradicted themselves. there's no way this is unique to bush.

    Further, the clinton/gore machine was the first in 20 years to not impose requirements for better fuel economy from US auto manufacturers. reagan hit detroit, and bush the elder hit them even harder. how much CO2 has that put into the air in the last 8 years?

    bush has not overturned any CO2 regulations imposed by clinton. all he has done is set us up to maintain the same emissions of the past 8 years. status quo, baby.

    "Ceasing funding of family planning clinics abroad???"
    Clinton had already signed an order banning US funding of foreign abortions. Bush expanded it to include family planning clinics that include abortion as an option. big fucking difference. besides, i think this was a good move. on clinton AND bush.

    the government funded faithbased charities under clinton/gore. bush is just more in the open about it. and the argument hasn't passed muster, and it isn't in effect. this is one thing i have a problem with. i don't think it is unique to bush.

    "Ashcroft?????" name one thing Ashcroft has done (after he was appointed) that you think is wrong. name one thing Ashcroft has done, period.



    getting your political opinon from salon.com makes you a moron. sorry, guys.

    and i've hardly lost my edge.

    nothing bush has done is a far cry from the status quo of the last 8 years.


By Margret on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 04:24 pm:

    Yeah, so fuck all you bastards who siphoned votes away from Ralph Nader/No Confidence. Bitches! NeoConLiberalCrats.


By pez on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 04:54 pm:

    where're we gonna be in four years?


By patrick on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 05:37 pm:

    i didnt vote nadar.

    i rarely read salon, in fact today was the first time i have been on the site in months. I only the read Camile Paglia columns.

    im really not in the mood to go and verify everything you state here as far as voting records go.

    whether Bush has done anything far cry from the last 8 years, is really irrelavent.

    I admit yacking here for nearly 2 years has made me more politically aware. So I admit to being asleep at the wheel during the majority of the Clinton/Gore years.

    I do know Clinton let me down in many ways. But I'm not surprised.

    The fact that Ashcroft is even in office is enough nate. His record is enough cause for alarm.

    And you seem to assume praise for Clinton/Gore when a negative is made about Bush.


By Skooter on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 06:01 pm:

    Getting back to the missle thing....Does even Nate think that's a good idea?


By Nate on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 06:01 pm:

    _I_ voted Nader.

    what's wrong with Ashcroft's record?

    i'm arguing that the status quo is being maintained.


    i said this:
    "bush has done well in continuing the clinton/gore regime. that's it."

    you said this:
    "there's plenty that he has done that Gore in most likelihood would have never done."

    and antigone said this:
    "Nate, you're losing your edge."


    and margret has my nader-voting back.

    and the rest of you can suck my cock.





By Nate on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 06:04 pm:

    i don't think the missle defense plan is good because i don't think it would be effective. the tests done (under the clinton/gore regime) showed how weak the systems are.

    i definitely think that something is necessary. incase you forgot, clinton/gore sold a mess of nuclear weapon technology to the one nation on earth that could actually get fed up with our bullshit AND send enough fire in our direction that life would cease for the globe.


By Antigone on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 06:18 pm:

    I voted for Nader too.

    I've contemplated getting active in the Green party locally. Their attitudes on nuclear power are rather irrational, but I've thought about getting involved just to challenge their status quo thinking on that particular issue.

    Nate, your cynicism is blinding you. You sound like a broken record.


By patrick on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 06:25 pm:

    Ashcroft's record stands against abortion rights repeatedly.

    He is a religious conservative who makes statements like this "America is different. We have no king but Jesus".

    He is an honorary memeber of Bob Jones University

    He has voted against flag burning.




    Im sorry who did Clinton sell nuclear arms to? Israel (officially) and China (unofficially)?




By Nate on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 06:28 pm:

    "Nate, your cynicism is blinding you. You sound like a broken record."

    can you show me where? seriously. i don't think cynicism blinds. it's a valuable trait.

    i'm not big on the green party. but i like the message it could send.

    republicans and democrats at the national level are bought. republicans are openly evil, democrats hide the daggers with flowers. same net result.




By TBone on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 06:32 pm:

    Nate's not big on anything, except... well... You
    know.


By M on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 06:35 pm:

    i remove my mouseball and whip at your collective head


By patrick on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 06:35 pm:

    on my jock?




    i just read a bit about GA releasing tapes of an execution.

    thats sick

    i think the airing of the Timothy McVeigh execution is also sick.


    bunch of fuckin heathens.


By Nate on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 06:39 pm:

    asssex, tbone. you can say it.

    "Ashcroft's record stands against abortion rights repeatedly.

    He is a religious conservative who makes statements like this "America is different. We have no king but Jesus".

    He is an honorary memeber of Bob Jones University

    He has voted against flag burning."

    and he was appointed by a republican president. what's your issue? where's the injustice? you don't think gore would have made appointments that aligned with his views on rather unimportant issues?


By Margret on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 06:52 pm:

    Jesus christ, it's not Ashcroft's responsibility to make sure I can have an abortion safely, it's mine. He's not my fucking father, he's not my husband, and he does not have the power to overturn Roe v. Wade on his own. And if there ends up being a majority Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, then I guess we're going to have to get off of our fat asses and get it protected at the state level. Poor little us.
    My preference is, of course, that abortion stays legal.
    My preference is also that people should have to attend executions in the same way they have to do jury duty.
    Wake up, citizens.


By cyst on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 07:32 pm:

    "bush has done lots (that gore wouldn't have done) to undermine pro-environment policies."

    "i bet you can't name one thing. bush has done well in continuing the clinton/gore regime. that's it."

    -----

    the new york times would not have published an editorial like this if the popular-vote winner had taken office in january.

    excerpts from April 22, 2001, New York Times staff editorial:

    One of his [George Bush's] his first acts was to suspend a half-dozen of the Clinton administration's environmental rules, which Mr. Bush's people persist in labeling "last-minute" regulations, though most had been in the works for years. He then embarked on several precipitous moves of his own reversing a campaign pledge to cut carbon dioxide emissions, suspending rules requiring mining companies to observe sound environmental practices and weakening enforcement of the Endangered Species Act.

    These were minor affronts to the Clinton legacy. The two defining environmental decisions of Mr. Bush's early months have been his renunciation of the Kyoto agreements on global warming and the beginning of what may be a broad effort to turn the oil and mining industries loose on public lands, many of which deserve special protection.

    Mr. Bush's decision to abandon Kyoto has international ramifications. Kyoto is a flawed instrument, and the Europeans were foolishly resisting various trading mechanisms that would ease the costs of the treaty without undercutting its objectives. But instead of negotiating a better treaty, Mr. Bush simply pulled out, leaving America without a coherent policy and removing from the bargaining table the world's largest producer of greenhouse gases.

    Here at home, meanwhile, Mr. Bush seems bent on carving out large swaths of public land to satisfy his appetite for new energy reserves. His interior secretary, Gale Norton, is talking about making "boundary adjustments" to allow commercial activity in some of the 22 national monuments created or expanded by Mr. Clinton. More ominously, his administration has signaled a willingness to retreat from Mr. Clinton's most ambitious conservation measure a rule protecting nearly 60 million acres of largely untouched national forest from new oil and gas leasing and most new logging.

    ...

    Perhaps mindful of unfavorable polls, the White House has lately been trying to put a better face on things. Three Clinton-era regulations have been allowed to stand. The most important of these was a controversial rule that would greatly restrict the emissions of soot and other pollutants from diesel-powered vehicles. Last week, Christie Whitman, the Environmental Protection Agency administrator, announced with great fanfare a decision to support a Clinton administration rule protecting wetlands. It is possible that Mrs. Whitman is pushing the White House toward more enlightened policies. Still, there is something pathetic and potentially deceptive about these triumphal exercises. The occasional decision to uphold existing law should not divert our attention from the more fundamental question of whether Mr. Bush is going to allow his Interior Department to become a captive of the oil and mining industries.


By patrick on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 07:54 pm:

    stompin mad margret is in the house.

    Ashcroft is an asshole.

    It's ASShcroft's responsibility, as Attorney General to uphold the law, and his voting record as a senator and governor put into question whether he would be an effective Attorney General. Considering a large portion of his donations came from religious right institutions and much of the law as it is is in conflict with his personal beliefs on some of the more sensational of topics it is curious if he can be an effective Attorney General.

    Mandatory execution attendence is a barbaric idea margret. Of course execution is barbaric to begin with. Your sense of citizenship is almost always admirable but you lost me on this one. At least at jury duty they dismiss you if you have political comflict with the case you are potentially about to try.


By cyst on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 08:06 pm:

    oh, come on, patrick. you just don't like ashcroft because he's an extreme-right asshole.

    every attorney general is going to have political opinions. every attorney general who used to be in congress is going to have a voting record. it will be clear what sides of issues they fall on.

    but enough with this "effective" crap. if congress were to pass all sorts of scary anti-civil rights legislation, then he'd be very effective, I'm sure.

    ------------

    does the idea of mandatory attendance at executions turn a gray-white pale in comparison to the idea of execution itself?


By cyst on Wednesday, May 2, 2001 - 08:39 pm:

    you are totally right, however, about how wrong it is that lawyers and judges can dismiss death-penalty skeptics "for cause." prosecutors should only be allowed to use the death-penalty issue (and pretty much anything else) as reason to issue peremptory challenges to potential jurors, but they shouldn't be allowed to systematically exclude people who think it's wrong to kill other people. death-penalty skeptics are also mainly women and/or black. pretty convenient to be able to stack the deck like that.



By Margret on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 10:19 am:

    So, I think as long as capital punishment is legal it should require mandatory attendance by a pool of citizens. I didn't say there would be no way out of it, jeezis I'm not inhumane. I shelved my idea for requiring every public school grade to have a field trip every year, too. It's just I believe that people can be sanguine about the death penalty because they don't get the immediacy and finality of an execution. I would wholly endorse reform of the entire process from the first arrest through the sentencing and finally to the incarceration because it is intolerably wretched. But I believe there are cases in which execution is the only appropriate action; in these cases I believe it's the duty of people like me to watch old Yeller get put down -- not because it wasn't in him to be a good dog, he'd been a good dog. Rather, because circumstances beyond his control had rendered him entirely unfit to live among other beings. I cried at the end of old Yeller -- but I believe not only that I could have pulled the trigger but that it would have been my responsibility to do so.
    Uphold this law: fuck you, you ass.
    I think Ashcroft sucks, get me not wrong.
    I think Bush double-dang-doodle-super-sucks.
    I believe the entire process was a travesty from the beginning to the end.
    I also think it's my responsibility to think of work-arounds to the worst case scenario. And I'm really, really tired of being encouraged towards histrionics by people who seem to have some fantastic entitlement approach to government.
    You know what's bad? That I deeply suspect that the entire energy crisis was engineered so we could unprotect some alaskan wilderness. Oh, well. You know, solar energy has not gotten significantly cheaper to capture in the 40 plus years people have been interested in it? You know why? Once we have the tech in place, we can't charge for it. Noone is investing in the R&D. Noone. No. One.


By patrick on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 11:47 am:

    Well yeah cyst, of course i don't like Ashcroft cause he's a bumbling churchy.

    apparently.......and i say it again APPARENTLY BP, Mobile and companies of the like ARE indeed doing research into new forms of energy. But that could be a facade.

    Im pretty damn sure execs of energy companies were confident their pal-o-mine Bush would be in office by last summer. Unfortunately this is not limited to Republicans. Our Deomcratic governor has had his hand in the same honey jar.


    Lets see some wedding pictures marge


By Skooter on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 02:25 pm:

    Got to give big ups to Mad Margret...You speak very well, and so what if your ideas are considered radical? They are after all just ideas. "Fuck you, you ass..." A song from way back.
    The whole nation is being led around by the nose abou the death penalty because of the looming McViegh sentence. I predict that there will be another national terrorist activity around that time, by another dumbass, whit trash backwoods "Jesus is for whites only" retard.
    This country is going to shit.


By cyst on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 03:04 pm:

    I may have to rethink my opinion on the for-cause dismissal of potential jurors who don't like the death penalty. many cannot truthfully promise to uphold the law. but the law is fucked! maybe the truly moral person who opposes capital punishment should lie to get on a jury in order to try to save a life. fuck.


By cyst on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 03:07 pm:

    hung out with a litigator last night, and he said if you get called for jury duty and you really need to get out of serving time as a juror, you should show up wearing a crucifix around your neck or some sort of christian pin, then somehow work in a statement about how you feel that insurance companies totally screw people over all the time, and you'll be home in time for lunch.


By Antigone on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 05:03 pm:


By Antigone on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 05:05 pm:

    Generally, the best way to be dismissed for jury duty is to have a college education. With a master's degree you're thrown out on the street faster than you can say "critical thinking."


By patrick on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 05:23 pm:

    thats not true. I was inquired as to whether I or someone I know has ever felt "wronged" by the court system, how I felt about prostitution, if I or someone I know ever been convicted of crime. I take that back, we did have to mention our education experience.

    Also, the prosecution AND defense have equal numbers of jurors they can dismiss. Eventually they have to settle on whats left.

    So if one side wants you off because of your education, the other wants you on.


By The Watcher on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 05:38 pm:

    That's probably because "most", certainly not Antigone, people with Higher degrees can't think at all.


By Antigone on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 05:49 pm:

    Why didn't I think of that, Watcher? Educated people can't think! Shit, I better not get that PhD. It'll make me stoopid.


By The Watcher on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 05:54 pm:

    After reading your replies. You'ld never get stupid. You'll be the Exception that proves the rule. "More education equals less common sence."

    By the way that is a compliment. Don't take it the wrong way.


By dave. on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 06:36 pm:

    i wrote on my entry form or whatever it's called that i am not a team player, that i will not cooperate and that i will vote guilty no matter what the circumstances and that i hate all you people. something to that effect.



    of course, i never got called.


By agatha on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 07:07 pm:

    isn't that sooooooooooo punk? dave is so cool when he's cynical!


By cyst on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 07:34 pm:

    I was hoping that the signature gatherers in westlake park would ask me to sign today because I was going to say, "sorry--I hate people."

    lawyers have limited numbers of peremptory challenges for juror dismissals. they can just say you're off for any reason except race or sex. but they have countless "for cause" dismissals (for instance, death-penalty skeptics in capital offense cases). (my grammar isn't good here.)

    but if you portray yourself as extreme, chances are one of the sides is going to kick you out.


By heather on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 07:38 pm:

    i guess i should skip graduation


By Dougie on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 07:41 pm:

    I just got a jury summons in the mail yesterday for appearance May 24th. Postponed 4 times, and 2 absents. Not a good record. Can't make it on May 24th either.


By patrick on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 08:01 pm:

    actually if your company pays for X amount of days.....i dont see why people avoid it.

    i got to sit on a mushy gushy cross dressing prostitution trial and get paid $5/day for it..and got off at 3ish and didnt have to go in until 10ish


By Dougie on Thursday, May 3, 2001 - 08:28 pm:

    Because it's an annoying huge waste of time. I did it 7 or 8 years ago. My apartment had been robbed 3 months before prior to that. I sat on 3 different panels and was dismissed from all 3 because during voir dire, they ask exactly that, "Have you been the victim of a crime in the last year." So what if I'd been burglarized? If the guy being tried is innocent, he's innocent -- I'm not going to use my prior misfortune against him. It should be luck of the draw, a jury of your peers. Not a hand picked jury of people whom the defense lawyer thinks will be sympathetic. No wonder the court system is so backed up.


By patrick on Friday, May 4, 2001 - 11:29 am:

    like your job isn't a huge waste of time. Like sitting in freeway traffic isnt a waste of time. What ISN'T a waste of time. I know i enjoyed the short days, the scandelous details of the so called "exchange" between the ricky martin look alike with fake tits and the undercover cop.

    The prosecution is allowed to select and dismiss as well.

    I gurantee if your ass is ever in a bind, you'll appreciate the process of juror selection. You don't want a couple of christian nutjobs on your jury for your sodomy charges.


By Nate on Friday, May 4, 2001 - 12:19 pm:

    your job is a huge waste of time, patrick? geez, that sucks.

    you must feel pretty worthless, wasting 25% or your life like that.


By patrick on Friday, May 4, 2001 - 12:25 pm:

    no, i get paid for the time.

    that money makes the other 75% extremely worthwhile.

    this is not my "career".


By Nate on Friday, May 4, 2001 - 12:28 pm:

    hmm, sodomy charges.


By patrick on Friday, May 4, 2001 - 12:31 pm:

    mmmmmmmm nutjobs


By Dougie on Friday, May 4, 2001 - 12:45 pm:

    What's your career, Patrick?


By patrick on Friday, May 4, 2001 - 01:24 pm:

    hell if i know.

    I can tell what i would like to work on for many years to come.


By cyst on Friday, May 4, 2001 - 02:40 pm:

    (from a letter)

    somehow I'd forgotten that you're crazy. I'm disappointed the way I was disappointed when I read about philip roth in the claire bloom book. I had wanted to believe he was sane and reasonable as well as brilliant. I don't want my favorite versions of the truth to come from loons.

    some of my admiration and ill will toward you has been replaced by pity. and that's fine. I'm not mad anymore. I'm even having trouble remembering why I cared. I was just surprised, I guess, even though I knew you would do that. I know how you are.

    we should keep our friendship dormant. but we should be friendly. I'll see you wednesday.

    try to be good.

    j.


bbs.sorabji.com
 

The Stalking Post: General goddam chit-chat Every 3 seconds: Sex . Can men and women just be friends? . Dreamland . Insomnia . Are you stoned? . What are you eating? I need advice: Can you help? . Reasons to be cheerful . Days and nights . Words . Are there any news? Wishful thinking: Have you ever... . I wish you were... . Why I oughta... Is it art?: This question seems to come up quite often around here. Weeds: Things that, if erased from our cultural memory forever, would be no great loss Surfwatch: Where did you go on the 'net today? What are you listening to?: Worst music you've ever heard . What song or tune is going through your head right now? . Obscure composers . Obscure Jazz, 1890-1950 . Whatever, whenever General Questions: Do you have any regrets? . Who are you? . Where are you? . What are you doing here? . What have you done? . Why did you do it? . What have you failed to do? . What are you wearing? . What do you want? . How do you do? . What do you want to do today? . Are you stupid? Specific Questions: What is the cruelest thing you ever did? . Have you ever been lonely? . Have you ever gone hungry? . Are you pissed off? . When is the last time you had sex? . What does it look like where you are? . What are you afraid of? . Do you love me? . What is your definition of Heaven? . What is your definition of Hell? Movies: Last movie you saw . Worst movie you ever saw . Best movie you ever saw Reading: Best book you've ever read . Worst book you've ever read . Last book you read Drunken ramblings: uiphgy8 hxbjf.bklf ghw789- bncgjkvhnqwb=8[ . Payphones: Payphone Project BBS
 

sorabji.com . torturechamber . px.sorabji.com . receipts . contact