Month: March 2006

mixed media

maybe, not winning was a good thing!

by  •  • 12 Comments

Usually, every year, the winner of the Best Picture Oscar always takes FOREVER to come out on DVD; something about capitalizing on the fame the Oscar brings at the box office. So, naturally, when Brokeback lost, a little bit of me was all, “sweet! now they HAVE to release it soon!”. And, today, I just randomly came across this, which says that it will be released on DVD April 4th! That is just a few weeks away! I certainly hope this is true, because that is like the fastest theater to DVD release I have seen in a while; and good for me, because now I will be able to watch it again (and again)! If there is anything that Annie Proulx can breathe easier about (since her panties have been in an uproar lately), it is that she can buy the DVD and enjoy her story on April 4th! I know that I will be at the store on that day, DVD in hand, ready to buy… I wonder if they will have a collector’s edition; I normally don’t care about that crap, I just want the movie, but in this case, I may have to spring the extra dollars for more features with Jake!

Now, I really want that new TV… that’s how I’ll spin it; “James, we NEED the new TV to watch Brokeback!!” Yes… it’s all coming together now…

blog on blog

trying something new…

by  •  • 4 Comments

I always check flickr like 10 times a day; even when I haven’t uploaded anything new, and I wonder why. I guess I just want to be up in the know about what is going on, who’s updated, who’s commenting, etc. I know that I don’t upload as much as I want, and I want to be able to have super powers of photo-editing, but I don’t, which is what prevents me from uploading new pictures every day (even though I have tons just waiting… I know, I know). So, in an effort to both remedy this situation of adding new fun things to my flickr page, AND to finally start realizing and utilizing the full potential (well, at least some of that potential) my snazzy cell phone possesses, I am going to start a new thing! I am going to start taking pictures with my cell phone at random times and places, and send it to flickr; which will give you even more of an idea of where I am, and what I am doing!! (thus upping the big brother component of my life) I think that it will be a fun way for me to share all of those silly little mundane things that I go through each day that aren’t “important enough” to make the blog! Think of it as a supplement to the blog; in pictures!

I know that I am a super dork for being excited about this, but I honestly really am… I think that it is going to be fun. I have already gotten started, so check out the photos I have taken; and stay tuned… more pictures to come!

show the love

I feel bad about it, I really do!

by  •  • 11 Comments

Lately, I feel like a bad blogger; I haven’t been reading and commenting on other blogs as much, mainly because I have been super distracted. It has nothing to do with the bloggers themselves, or their blogs, and I wanted to post this so that all of you out there know what is going on; I feel bad about it! Hopefully, I will be able to shake this distraction, and go back to enjoying all of your wonderful blogs, so keep your eye out for me; I haven’t forgotten about you, and I wanted you to know that.

I do miss you all, and I feel bad… Let this be an apology or message of atonement; whatever you need… I promise I’ll stop by soon. Thanks for sticking with me, and know that I am still with you… promise.

show the love

Happy Saint Patrick’s Day!

by  •  • 18 Comments

Is this a real holiday? I googled it, and here’s what I found: (from st-patricks-day.com

Saint Patrick’s Day has come to be associated with everything Irish: anything green and gold, shamrocks and luck. Most importantly, to those who celebrate its intended meaning, St. Patrick’s Day is a traditional day for spiritual renewal and offering prayers for missionaries worldwide.
So, why is it celebrated on March 17th? One theory is that that is the day that St. Patrick died.

So, basically, people get shit faced on green beer to celebrate the death of the guy that brought Christianity to Ireland? Sweet! It’s like the world’s way of pouring a 40 on the pavement for old Saint Patrick! What what! Now, that I know the significance, and to celebrate my Irish heritage (have you ever seen me eyes? but seriously… my family does have some Irish desent), I am going to go out tonight and drink several for old Saint Patrick; I may even do a few Irish car bombs… anyone in?

Oh, and I didn’t even wear green today; I forgot. I had plenty of time to think about it while I sat on the freeway at a dead stop though, 85N was closed on my way to work… people need to learn how to drive and NOT CRASH in this city. geez… Anyway…. I usually don’t care that much about stuff on my cat, but this was too appropriate and funny to pass up:

But Happy Saint Patrick’s Day!

[picture from stuffonmycat.com]

is it just me?

does this sound wrong to anyone else?

by  •  • 10 Comments

Woman. Boy. Sex. Baby. Statutory Rape. Question: why is she only getting 9 months in jail and being forced to stay away from her husband (the minor), until he is 17? Why not more of a penalty? I understand that she has a baby, with a 15 year old boy, but seriously, why is there not more of a punishment in this case? I ask, because I know that statutory rape carries this sentence: “if the person so convicted is 21 years of age or older, such person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than ten nor more than 20 years”, here in Georgia. Here is the portion of the House Bill that describes the stakes for a statutory rape conviction:

SECTION 7.
Said title is further amended by striking Code Section 16-6-3, relating to statutory rape, and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
“16-6-3.
(a) A person commits the offense of statutory rape when he or she engages in sexual intercourse with any person under the age of 16 years and not his or her spouse, provided that no conviction shall be had for this offense on the unsupported testimony of the victim.
(b) Except as provided in subsection (c) of this Code section, a A person convicted of the offense of statutory rape shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than 20 years; provided, however, that if the person so convicted is 21 years of age or older, such person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than ten nor more than 20 years; provided, further, that if. Any person convicted under this subsection of the offense of statutory rape shall, in addition, be subject to the sentencing and punishment provisions of Code Section 17-10-6.2.
(c) If the victim is 14 or 15 years of age and the person so convicted is no more than three years older than the victim, such person shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.”

I ask, because she committed, admitted to, and was convicted of statutory rape. So why is she escaping the punishment befitting the crime (a minimum of 10 years)? I am not trying to say that I believe men or women deserve preferential treatment, but, I know that if this were a man that had convicted this crime, he would be looking at 10-20 years in jail, right? Now, I am not naive, I know that there are different kinds of statutory rape; I don’t condone any of them, and I think that if you are convicted, it doesn’t matter if you are a man or a woman, you did the crime, you do the time. This woman is a sexual predator that manipulated her child’s friend (!), and she is basically getting off with a big slap on the wrist. She even gets to be with him when he turns 17! There is something seriously wrong with that! I guess that I am just wondering why there is not more of a penalty in this case (i.e., the minimum), especially because of the legislation that says that it should be? Wouldn’t that be a clear message to act as a deterrent to the future of this kind of crime? Wouldn’t it be better to punish someone for manipulating a minor and sexually abusing them; rather than just giving them a very reduced sentence, and just making them stay away until he is old enough?

Does anyone else agree or disagree? Why? I personally see sex crimes against children as the worst kind of crime, and I just don’t think that anyone should be able to carry such a lenient punishment for something so manipulative and harmful to the child. Yes, this boy was 15, but is he still considered a child? He is by every other standard, and she was even covicted of statutory rape! I guess I am just wondering this, because I see all sex offenses against minors (that’s 17 and under, right?) as deplorable and horrible crimes. I know that she will be registered as a sex offender, but, when he turns 17, they can be together. Does anyone else see something wrong with that? This child has obviously been deeply manipulated, and the state pretty much has said, “not right now, but soon” to the sex offender. I just don’t get it.

What do you all think? Seriously? Am I being too hard on the woman, or does she deserve what the law says?

[article, for reference]

james says

reason #674 why James is the cutest boyfriend ever:

by  •  • 19 Comments

Almost every night, our ritual is the same; eat dinner, watch tv/movie, go to bed. Very little changes in that routine, unless, say, I have something to go to, or James has grad school work to complete. Regardless of what else may find its way into the ritual, it always ends the same; James asleep on the couch while I watch tv. Now that we have the new couch, I couldn’t be happier, I love spending time with him, and now, we are on the same piece of furniture, so that just makes the ritual that much more enjoyable.

Like clockwork, when the clock strikes 10:30 (sometimes he lasts til 11), James is either pretty much completely asleep and either snoring, grinding his teeth, or a lovely combination of the two. I usually have to jostle him awake a few times if the noises get too intense to hear the tv (which is easier now that we are on the same couch), but usually, it is cute to see him just laying over there grinding/snoring away, and rustling his feet back and forth; he’s a cute sleeper. But him being a cute sleeper isn’t reason #674, reason #674 has to do with what happens while he is sleeping, or really, what happens just after he has been woken up, in order to be taken to bed. James has this little thing he does, where he talks complete nonsense for a minute; sometimes, it is a little intense, but most times, it is just super-cute. Take last night for example.

Last night, we were watching a movie, and somehow he fell asleep sitting almost completely upright. The best thing about that, was that he wasn’t snoring or grinding his teeth (but he was still jostling his feet). I noticed it, because I didn’t have to constantly wake him up every time the noise got out of control, but being the loving man I am, I still felt the need to jostle him and make sure he was sleeping well. When I did, he launched full force into his “I just woke up silliness”.

Here’s how the *short* conversation went:
Me: “Hello!”
Him: “I am sorry, daddy.” (yes we call each other daddy… we do have a baby (Sydney) after all!)
Me: “What for baby?”
Him: “Snoring.”
Me: “You weren’t snoring, for once.”
Him: “I can’t help it, I have a disassociated sternum.”
Me: “Uh, don’t you mean a deviated septum?”
Him: “That too.” *falls back asleep*

See, that is reason #674 why James is the cutest boyfriend ever.

listen up!

get involved! email your senator to support censure!

by  •  • 8 Comments

I always talk about being involved. This time, I am. I emailed my senators, you must do the same. There is no reason why a censure cannot be supported; this is an issue of criminal action, not an issue of politics. Go here to email your senator. Here’s what I sent to Chambliss and Isakson:

Senator Chambliss/Isakson,

I am writing you today as a concerned American citizen, asking you to please support and back Feingold in his request to censure president Bush. What the president has done is criminal, and at a minimum, his actions set a bad precedent, especially if no action is taken against someone who breaks the law. When he went against the law and avoided the safe guards in place, and proceeded in conducting illegal wiretapping, he violated the freedom of the American public, and did so under false pretenses; more importantly, he broke the law. Senator Chambliss/Isakson, I challenge you to look at what is important here; the president is not above the law, and should not be allowed to conduct himself in that manner. Please, support the censure, and show your constituents that you support our freedom and believe in justice. The president is not above the law, and he cannot continue to believe that he is. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Duane Moody

Let’s get involved!

UPDATE: I don’t know how many of you care (not many people have commented), but I did get a response from Senator Chambliss, and I sent him another reply. Since it is long, it is after the jump… so click the read more.

Read more →

listen up!

reflections on Sunday’s L Word

by  •  • 8 Comments


I don’t know how many of you out there watch Showtime’s the L Word, but I know that if you do, then you know about Dana’s struggle and subsequent death from breast cancer this season. Honestly, I usually don’t get too into shows, but with this one, I have to say, much like Queer as Folk, I do find that I relate more to the characters because they are gay, and as such, I have more of a connection with each of them than I would on a regular show. That being said, when Dana was diagnosed with breast cancer, my worst fear was that she would end up dieing; mostly because she was my favorite character, but also, because she was so likeable and, well, normal. Additionally, she was healthy, an athlete at the top of her game. She was a part of an awesome group of friends. She was out to her family, and last season, she even came out nationally as a lesbian tennis player. She was your typical woman (with the exception of being a tennis superstar), and just like so many women out there, she was diagnosed with breast cancer, and unfortunately, died. But after giving it a lot of thought (I know, right?), I am honestly at peace with the fact that they killed off my favorite character; mainly because I think the purpose was much greater, and the message was much stronger.

Read more →

well?

why not censure?

by  •  • 12 Comments

I just have to comment on the impending censure bill that should be introduced against the president today; comment on the republican response, that is. Seriously, what planet is Bill Frist living on? In response to Fiengold’s efforts to censure the president, and rightfully force him to answer for his crimes (remember, breaking the law is a crime, even if you are the president) of illegal wiretapping, Frist responded that:

“attacking our commander in chief … doesn’t make sense.”
“We are right now at an unprecedented war where they really want to take us down,” he said. “A censure resolution … is wrong. It sends a signal around the world.
“The American people are solidly behind this president in conducting the war on terror.”

See ya’ll! You too can become Senate majority leader!! Just ignore everything that is going on with the constituents you are supposed to be representing, ignore the response of almost 70% of Americans, and shove your head up your rich white ass!!! Then, you are a shoe in! Apparently, since only about 30% of Americans actually even believe in the president anymore, then that must mean we are “solidly behind him”. I love crazy people.

I better be careful, I guess, ’cause you know that the NSA and Dept of Homeland Security are reading this right now; I am probably just giving them one more reason why we should enact martial law. Seriously though, anyone else see that things are kind getting out of hand these days? I mean, a censure is kind of a big formal slap on the wrist, right? What’s so bad about getting the president to admit to criminal action? It’s not like he is trying to impeach him for something silly, like, oh, say, a blow job, right? Whatever. I say censure him, because it does send a message around the world; it says that Americans DO believe in democracy, and that even though you are the elected president, you are not above the law. Doesn’t THAT make sense? I think that I am going to have to start a category for “crazy republican sayings that cause me to react” or something. Happy Monday, ya’ll; hope your weekend was scrumptious.

(oh yeah, quote above came from this article.)

venting

stop with the spam!!!

by  •  • 14 Comments

Seriously, over the past couple of weeks, the amount of spam that I have gotten in my personal email address has quadrupled! It has gotten out of control. I just want to know what these people think when they send emails where the subject line is “have you tried hoodia?” (WTF?) or, “hey, I know you want to impress your woman”; do they really think that I am going to even look at that other than to check the delete box next to it? Also, MANY of these emails are coming from people where their name may look familiar, and the subject line is something like “about your blog” or “hey!”, which pisses me off, because I sometimes end up checking them. But, I have been deleting emails like crazy, so if I don’t get back to you for whatever reason, I may have deleted your email by accident, thinking that it was spam. Anyone have any ideas on how to get this spam madness to stop?? This is in regards to my @duanemoody.com email, btw.

Hope everyone’s Sunday is awesome… I doubt anyone is reading blogs, because the weather is FANTASTIC! I may (ha! who am I kidding with may) do another round of margaritas tonight. Also, I have been listening to Imogen Heap’s Speak for Yourself today, and it is awesome! Thanks Thomas!