Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Comprised of Switchfoot’s frontman Jon Foreman and Nickel Creek’s founding member and guitarist Sean Watkins with all that talent you would think something good would happen...
Fiction Family - When She's Near from ATO Records on Vimeo.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Derek Webb announced he is back in the studio working on his next album rumored to be titled "Stockholm Syndrome".
Well, yeah, heck yeah we are excited. Did you not hear the total awesomeness that was his last album "The Ringing Bell"?
Anyway, this is what people are saying about the new album:
"He's collaborating with long time friend and former Caedmon's Call bandmate Josh Moore on what is rumored to be a more experimental, electronic album. Teasing with programmed and decidedly more 'inorganic' elements, Stockholm Syndrome is shaping up to be Derek's most ambitious album to date. Be on the lookout for a tentative May 2009 release."
Oh, the excitement! and dont forget you can download all his music, and many other artists like him for free at Noisetrade.com.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Jeremy Says: hmm....lots of thoughts here. our author seems to be just regurgitating all these thoughts and ideas from his head, and it's stuff I've all heard before, so they are probably not original ideas to him either. but, I don't think we should necessarily judge him for "venting" or "ranting". you're absolutely right, that evangelicals come up with nice clichés and what not that may be true, but about the third time you hear it, it starts to lose it's luster. I think this guy is probably spewing thoughts that are true to him, and things that he feels strongly about, but maybe he has never tried to use language that he himself has come up with? maybe he just knows how he feels when other people say things, so the best way for him to then tell someone else is to use the same communication technique. maybe he needs some more ammunition for explaining the love of Christ to other people, but his legalism prevents him from really knowing how to do that, so when he hears the next catchy "Christian" he thinks, "oh, now this will really make them understand"... but when you're not a Christian, typically stupid clichés that sound cool to us, sound like stupid clichés to non Christians.
this reminds me of the Derek Webb song, "they'll know us by the t-shirts that we wear": "they’ll know us by the billboards that we make...just turning God’s words to cheap clichés...when love, love, love is what we should be known for..." problem is...I'm guilty too. it's easier, I guess, to throw out a fun phrase or thought to get someone to stop a think instead of just loving them. I don't think we are really disagreeing with the content of our author so much as we are questioning his method, but do you find any flaws or falsehoods in his statements. in the example, I would have to say that I'm completely agree that "it's a relationship, not a religion", but so what... does that change people's lives? probably not. I often think to myself that people look as us the same way we look at Catholics, and that is: we know we do bad things, and need Jesus to save us. the problem with Catholics is obvious...people think you can fulfill any selfish desire you might have as long as you participate in confession. thus, there is no real validity to their belief system, and I think that's where we as evangelicals try to separate ourselves from them and their "religion". so how do we do that? well, come up with an end-all phrase that will catch people's attention and make them realize we have validity. alas, we probably just sound stupid. so it seems the only way to really validate your belief is to live it, which to me, means loving as Christ loved.
Adam Says: I agree, saying it’s a relationship and not a religion is basically just creating your own form of religion based on not being a religion. You are caught in a quandary, of beliefs and communication, what you really want to say is that you believe in a mystical power that is so great that it (He in our case) transcends humanly created religious structures, and at the same time this great mystical power is so in love with you that it is willing to do whatever it takes to have a daily relationship with you. So we are, unable to say what we want to say because honestly God is so mystical and so great that he seems like a contradiction. So logically you run into so many issues that you fall apart trying to think about it let alone explain it. However, this is the beauty of faith, because we know that God’s spirit is ministering to the hearts of men so that even the most unbearably cliché or awfully clumsy explanation of God’s love can penetrate straight to the heart.
Jeremy Says: Yes, and although God is unfathomable and mystical, Jesus was a human, and we can relate to him. Yes, he was unlike any other human to ever live, but he still went through temptations and faced trials and all that, we have something we can look to that's not so "out there". this kinda brings me back to: simply (or complexly) "just loving people" like Jesus did. sure, we can try to explain God to someone who does not believe, and it's hard like you were saying. it makes better sense to just love them (which is something we have all the capabilities of doing) and explain that we "know" the love of Jesus, and that's why we love you. it sounds much less religious, but when you boil it down, it is still a form of religion if you want to call it that. but it is a religion much different from a dogma such as Catholicism or Islam.
Adam Says: It’s true and it’s not; it is true that our faith is as simple as love but it is also as complicated liturgical traditions like Catholicism or Islam. If you were to ask me what you must do to go to Heaven I would say believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who sacrificed His life for your sins, where as in other religions you may get an answers like “be a good person, and try to follow the rules,” so in that regard our faith is obviously more simplistic. But at the same time we strive to have a relationship with a God who created heaven and earth, good and evil and who is so complex that we cannot even fully grasp any one figures of the Godhead. I mean hear is a God who told Job to get ready to fight like a man just for questioning God, but who then shows his scars to Thomas when he doubts… It is so difficult to understand and yet that is our entire purpose in life… to get to know God… to be his companion.
Jeremy Says: So why would people want to believe in something they can’t understand…
Adam Says: I suppose that is the element of faith that sets our belief system apart from other belief systems… you can’t work your way to heaven… our God is not something so small as to be understood by simple human minds… you can’t be good enough… but instead you can only have faith and only through this do your receive not only eternal salvation but a fulfilling purpose in life.
Jeremy Says: You know how sometimes we refer to “our faith” as a set of standards and guidelines to what we believe. It’s basically saying the same thing as “our religion”… I wonder why we do that, because that basically negates the meaning of the word “faith”. You’re right about faith being the important thing about Christianity, but I think we’ve realized that it’s hard to explain or understand something/someone like Jehovah God. So if someone asked, “why would I want to believe in something that I can’t fully understand?” I think I would respond with, “well, there are some really important things in life that I do understand (to some degree) like love and beauty and truth. And if those important things originated from God, then I can get over not understanding the little complex ideas about Him that make Him multifarious.
Adam Says: I could not agree more… knowing God is to understand what truth and beauty are. I liken it to my understanding of the electoral system of the United States when I was a child… when I was little I knew that people voted for President and whom ever received the most votes was the winner, and so I believed in the system but as I grew older I discovered that the president is actually elected by the electoral college who are chosen to represent the votes of the different localities and states. Does that mean that what I “knew” when I was younger was incorrect… not really, but it was not a full understanding… and even if I never fully understood the system I could still have faith in it and cast my vote and for the most part the person who received the most votes would win… I realize that’s kind of a clunky analogy but it is the best I can do whilst sitting at my desk on a Thursday morning.
Jeremy Says: So I think the point is that although we do believe and follow a “religion” of sorts, it does differentiate itself from all other religions. And it does that in what we feel to be a very good way, so we strive to make people aware of its difference. But we need to be more careful on how we strive to do that. Like instead of coming up with cheesy clichés, we live truth, beauty, and love, and share that with other people through our actions.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
"Rock N Roll is dead," you may say. We contend this is not quite true; Rock may certainly be dying but on this week Rock N Roll has made one last fantastic gasp and for that we are truly thankful.
Not only did we get a fresh new EP from Underoath drummer Aaron Gillespie's fantastic side project the Almost, but we also got the most anticipated album of all time, Chinese Democracy, and may we say that Axl and his assembled Roses still Rock. Sure this may be the last gasp of Rock N Roll, but it sure is a great way to go, aint it?
We can see that some of you may still not be convinced, let us add that this week features solo releases from Weezer front man Rivers Cumos and Scott Wieland of Stone Temple Piolts fame... yeah that really isn't to convincing we know, but add that to yet another release for the Killers, a follow up EP from arena rockers Coldplay and new stuff from the voice of a generation, Kanye West... and suddenly our claims of Rocks last hoorah are not all that far-fetched... are they?
We know the onslaught of Myspace and American Idol poppers is unstoppable... the Internet and iPod have created a world of over produced one hit wonders (trust us that new T-Pain song is the same as the old T-Pain song) but for one last week we want to revel in the Rock N Roll... So thank you Rock N Roll... thank you for holding on just a little longer.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
How many artistic influences do you think these guys have?
Can they be any more dorky white?
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Did you know that Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood (pro-abortion education and lobbying group), is a proponent of Eugenics, an archaic theory that espouses the use of select breeding (like dogs) to create a better breed of Human. This is interesting because Eugenics is the same theory that Hitler used to justify annihilating Jews, and people dealing with disabilities. Eugenics was also behind the purposeful sterilization of black men by the U.S. Government in the 30’s and 40’s. Sanger went so far as to say that minorities and poor people were inferior and should use abortion to help strengthen them genetically. We should also mention that by the turn of this Century blacks had been displaced by Hispanics as the largest minority group in America. Now that has a great deal to do with immigration of Hispanics, but you may also draw a correlation between black women’s choice to kill their children and their statistical decline.
Jeremy Says: not sure how we went from a discussion on a current political issue to social trends and race, but I guess there are entwined. if what you say is true, then I think your theory holds validity. what Margaret Sanger said sounds horrible, but is that really where she was coming from? I've been giving people the benefit of the doubt recently, and there is pretty much nothing positive to say about eugenics. this is a tough issue, and one I've never thought about before really. it would seem true that if you tried to cut down on the # of pregnancies between "inferior" people, it would in turn create a society/culture that is less inferior. is that wrong? yes, because God chooses who is really created in this world, and he can use whatever people group he wants, so ultimately there is no human control. is it wrong ethically? yes, if you are using abortion to prevent the birthing of these "inferior" children. but, other than that, it is wrong to want to better society by saying, "hey, if you're not really fit to raise children the way they should be raised, maybe you should consider not having children." it sound gross coming out of my head, but you see what I'm saying? I mean who can honestly tell someone else, "you are inferior, so don't pro-create."? and that's the other issue, according to America all men are created equal, so there is no way to define someone as "inferior", but I think you can make a case of whether or not someone is fit to raise a child. I guess that's the point of social services. there would really be no need for social services if those people would not get pregnant in the first place, and now we are going in circles. this conversation leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and reminds me of issues we talked about in GNED Ethics class. and although, we might know what is right for us, how do we react to people who might disagree, or people who screw up and are asking for help?
Adam Says: I think we are wrong to say that anyone should not have children. The problem is not that poor people or uneducated people are having children, the problem is that we are not creating outlets for these people and their children to expand themselves past the very narrow paradigm the world is trying to keep them in. There are so many people who are willing to help out the poor and less fortunate, but there are very few who are willing to help them become rich and fortunate. Think about social services, they are willing to give you food, and willing to provide health care and education, but are they willing to teach you how skills that you can market to employers? Are they willing to honestly look at the faults in the current public education system and find creative ways to fix them? Are they willing to make health care cheaper instead of just making health insurance for expensive health care available? The problem, as I see it, is not with the people, but instead it is with the approach. You can’t give people food, housing, health care, and money and expect them to want to move out of their current situation. Instead, you must offer people opportunities and let them work their way out of trouble. Does that make sense? Finally, I seriously think that any measure of targeted, state sponsored birth control or baby killing, in the name of making things better or helping lesser classes of people is an offense to God and His Creation and should be stopped.
Jeremy Says: does the state currently sponsor planned parenthood or any other birth control? I see what you are saying about poor people or uneducated people, but what about druggies and deadbeats, etc. that abuse their children through neglect and other harmful parenting practices? that's more of what I was thinking about when saying that you could make a case for those people in their current state not being able to raise a child....or pro create. as far as offering people opportunities to let them work their way out of trouble, I totally agree... do I have any ideas on how to do that or am I qualified to make proposals on how to do that? no. seems there should be some committee or think tank that is in charge of that. I think it would be to much to expect the president to brain storm that whole operation by themselves. as of right now, I think everyone in America is looking to Obama to all of a sudden have these great/creative/inventive ideas that will fix everything. when he was campaigning, I didn't see really anything of substance from him or McCain that convinced me they had any great ideas to fix the things that are messed up...especially without breaking the few things that are working well.
Adam Says: Federal funding does go to operations that we would consider pro-abortion, like planned parenthood. What about druggies and dead beats? I assume both of us are operating under a intensely Christian world view, and as such I believe both of us feel that no one is without hope, so if Christ refuses to give up on a person why would we give up on them? By telling a person they are so awful that they cannot procreate we are essence telling them that they are so hopeless that nothing they could do would be redeeming, and this especially includes having Children.
Jeremy Says: that is crap! how can the government give tax payer money to organizations like planned parenthood?
you're right, we can't really say, "you're worse then me, so you don't have the right to bear children", but i did say "in their current state" it would be a good suggestion/recommendation for those people that they should not do it. and i guess if they are committing crimes against children such as abuse/neglect, then they are simply guilty of that, and should go to jail...which in a way is taking away their right to have kids.
Adam Says: You are an amazing observer, and yet an awful discourser
Jeremy Says: you really think my casual conversational tone is awful discourse?
Adam Says: No. I think your willingness to let your mind give up on issues is awful for discourse.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Jeremy Says: I agree about giving him a fair shake, but I'm not sure what you mean by "we owe it". here are the reasons I'm not worried about him being president...
-God put him there to begin with
-He appears to me to have (what he thinks) is the countries best interest in mind. sure he has some sketchy acquaintances, but I don't think he is plotting to destroy America behind his smile. and he might be wrong a lot of issues, but if he gives his best for the country, then I cool with that
-even if he wants to destroy America, he is only the president and there is not much power in that position in my opinion. hes more like a poster child of the country
-the only taxes I really care about lowering are state taxes....and social security taxes.
-I loved GW, and he didn't turn out so good, so even if I don't like Barack, there's not much place to go but up.
-GW was pro-life, and how much did that affect roe vs wade? how much will Barack being pro-partial birth abortion affect it? my guess is the same.
Adam Says: I agree with everything but the pro-life assertion… the fact is that BO will have his pick of liberal Supreme Court Justices and those appointed Justices will eventually have an impact on this issue.
Jeremy Says: but didn't bush pick two of those also? nothing came of it....
Adam Says: Yet
Jeremy Says: if they didn't make a decision before, why would they make it now?
Adam Says: Because they do not have the majority needed to do anything yet.
Jeremy Says: the majority in the court or the majority in the nation?
Adam Says: The court…
Jeremy Says: i don't believe that will ever happen.
Adam Says: That makes me sad
Jeremy Says: sad because that's what i think or sad because you agree?
Adam Says: Probably both, but I am only willing to admit the first point.
Jeremy Says: i just think with the way the country is so divided on the issue, and the way we seem to float back and forth from presidents who agree with the issue and disagree with the issue, there is no trend showing that we will ever get a majority in the court to make that decision. in order for that to happen, i think we would need a revival in the nation to where people make it a huge issue for the future elections...so much so they wouldn't care about taxes or health care as much as they care about over turning roe vs wade. then when there are multiple presidents elected who share that belief, there might be a steady enough trend to get a majority in the court.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Wait. Are you disapponted we are not comenting on the recent election results? Stay tuned...
Friday, October 31, 2008
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
so, we all know that it is in fact true. even I will wrongly stereotype someone as maybe not as smart just because they cant communicate well. but why do we relate that to lack of intelligence? im not sure why I do it, but I know it happens.
one of my thoughts was simply an association thing. typically people that are less intelligent are also not good at communicating. my other thought was that is simply shows how important being a good communicator is to our social stigmas. it's so important, in fact, that we will categorize someone as "stupid" just because they can't communicate well...even though they could be a genius.
I remember my first thoughts on this matter back when I worked my first two weeks at the camp in SC right after moving from lynchburg. the first two weeks were "disabled/special needs" camp for adults. it was two of the hardest weeks of my life, but I also loved it. anyway, I remember thinking that these people may not really be as stupid as we think, they just have communication problems. but maybe that's the point....if they cant learn how to be a good or even decent communicator its a strong indication they are mentally disabled? It might not prove they are mentally disabled, but its one of the symptoms or something?
that reminds me of a recent episode of this american life I was watching...this dude is totally paralyzed, can not talk, eat, breath or do anything on his own, but he learned how to spell out words using this special computer that interprets his eye movements. and if you were read the stuff that he spells out, you would think he was a normal guy. he even goes so far as to getting a girlfriend and having sex with her. certainly she had to do all the work, but apparently he was pretty good at it. not really the point, but he almost proves his intelligence by being a good communicator by spelling out what he wants to say.
so it appears there will always be an exception to the rule, but maybe the rule still implies that people who are decent communicators are also have normal mental capacities, and vice versa?
Adam Says: I have several thoughts here… First, Speech is not our strongest form of communication. Speech can only communicate if the receiver and speaker share a meaning of certain words. So if in the 80’s some young person said, “that is bad” and some old person heard it the old person would think that whatever they were talking about was not a good thing, but the young person really meant that whatever they were talking about was really good/cool. That is the reason we have the phrase, “you would have to see it to understand.” Because our words fail to describe so frequently what we understand that until you both have seen the object you are talking about you will never truly understand each other just by talking about it.
Next I do think it is a social thing. We are trained to believe that people who speak well are intelligent… so much so that people actually get tricked by smooth talkers.
Also, scientifically people who are intelligent have a larger lexicon and use more of it. We can see anecdotal evidence of this in our Grandparents feelings about cursing as a stupid mans communication.
Oddly enough Kiwi’s work with Children with Autism has shed light on this issue for both she and me. While, we do not totally understand autism we do know that it can create effects in the minds of those dealing with it that verge on genius. People with Autism can have photographic memories… Kiwi has students who can run whole movies back through their minds.
The thing that is funny though is intelligence turns out to be more relative than anything. People regularly talk about the difference between street smarts and book smarts, but the truth is intelligence is measured by subjectively so if you can quote Niche and know the entire periodic table from memory, but don’t remember how to tie your shoes… we think you ain’t too smart.
I wonder if Moses had a speech impediment. We know that he told God he could not speak in front of the Pharaoh so Aaron had to be the spokesman. Could it be that he stuttered?
Jeremy Says: Moses could have stuttered and been dumb. we dont ever really have insight to his intellect do we, but he did drop everything and let God use him how he wanted. that doesnt really require intelligence, but what ended up happening in his life inspired so much spiritual belief that it would seem he was a smart guy. "God uses the foolish things of the world to shame the wise..."
one thing i was thinking is that we dont have enough patience to get to know someone before we judge whether they are smart or dumb. for example, our first impression of someone who doesn't talk well will be negative. but what if we give them just a few more minutes and maybe our impression will change. like that guy on this ameircan life. if we gave him thirty minutes, he could prove to us how smart he really was. so should we offer everyone more time before building an impression of them? you would think that since we grew up in the eighties and use word like phat or sick or raw to describe something cool, we would be less quick to finalize our thoughts on someones speech until we know them better.
i like to say things like "y'all" and "y'anto"(do you want to?), "i reckon", and the ghetto "crunk" or "cra nay nay" and my new favorite curse phrase "dad jim it". probably because when i first heard them they sounded funny, and maybe i think im funny when i say those things. i think i might also like to break the mold a little bit, so if i say that to someone who has a good impression of me, they might think "well maybe people who talk with ridiculous words aren't always as dumb as they sound?".
ha! wishful thinking, but im willing to take one for the team. if anything, it sounds funny, and since im a funny guy....
Adam says: That is the odd thing about life right? We don’t spend enough time getting to know people so we end up just assuming who they are. I was reading about G. K Chesterton today… if you don’t know then you must look it up… and it was talking about his philosophy on charity and giving, and part of that philosophy is that he gave money to every beggar he came across, which obviously got my attention, but on top of that he said that the charitable thing to do is to speak with someone and try to understand them, and so when he gave money to beggars he would try to talk to them. As a person who has both given money to beggars and tried to talk with them I can’t imagine going around trying to speak with every poor person I gave a quarter to. It seems impossible, and yet I get the strange sensation that this is what Jesus calls us to do… off the point I know, but still relevant.
To your point of your speech; I do something similar except I do mine out of vanity or pride or something, but whenever I go out to restaurants and such I start to drawl out my words like a true southerner… Why? You may ask. Because one; I feel like it ingratiates me to the working class Richmonder (what kind of snob am I) and two; because it is kind of like a character that lets me speak for freely and easily because in the end I can be painfully shy around people and I am always finding new ways to make myself speak up and get in the mix… usually I do this by being loud and funny-ish… well probably just loud and awkward… good grief I am rambling like an emo kid a Dickenson reading.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Monday, October 20, 2008
We found this on yahoo this morning, so it could be a fake, but the thought of it being real it simply hysterical...in a sad kinda way.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Monday, October 13, 2008
If you have a minute, swing on over to Tiggywinkles to see what their all about. It may seem like a useless endeavour to some, but caring for the earth is a good thing, so we're down with that. I will caution you however that you may be tempted to make a donation, and before doing that, think about the charities out there meeting humane needs who also need support.
Rupert the Deer is now 5 days old
This tiny deer was delivered by Caesarean section at a wildlife hospital after his mother was killed by a car.
Little Rupert, who is so small he can fit in an adult’s hand, was born after vets failed in their battle to save his mother.
He has only recently opened his eyes.
Les Stocker, founder of ‘Tiggywinkles,’ said: ‘Rupert’s mother had very severe injuries.
We brought him out and got him breathing and then he went into an incubator on oxygen. He is now being fed by a tube.’
Staff are optimistic Rupert, now five days old, will make a full recovery.
‘Deer are very, very tricky but this one has spirit. He’s an extremely feisty little guy and quite pushy,’ Mr Stocker said.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Abigail Breslin-She brought us probably the cutest.funniest combination of acting in movie history playing Olive in little miss sunshine
Bear Grylls – I mean we could say all sorts of things about the ex-special forces adventurer, but the man’s name is Bear and we think that sums it up
Ben Stein - Faris Bullers Day Off would have been enough, but then you look at this guys resume and you relize he is a genius who is willing to tak on the myth of evolution!
Bob Dylan - The most cocksure faux foker to ever grace our iPods
Bono - A beautiful Heart and a shelf full of hits can make even the ugliest man beautiful
Bradley Hathaway – We wont pretend to be poetry experts… nor can we really explain what slam poetry is, but in our minds Bradley Hathaway’s rhymes are as beautiful as it comes.
Brennan Manning - May be the most unhearolded bibilical scholoars of our time, and yet can make it asscesable to all of us.
Cameron Strang - The founder and CEO of Relevant Media who bring us Relevant media and Relevant.com
Candace Parker - May be the most attractive Women’s Basketball player ever… oh and her game is pretty good looking as well
Chris Altorf and Jessica Hayes better know as Istoica
Cristiano Ranoldo - the worlds prettiest footballer (take that Beckham)
Colin Meloy - The most cocksure faux gipsy to ever grace our iPods
Derek Webb - Might be the only man in "Christian Music Industry" who cares more about what he says that how much he sells
Donald Miller - Honestly we wish we were cool enough to understand Jazz… but since we are not we are glad there is someone who is cool enough to understand life and what it means for Christians
Dwight Howard - Beautiful Game meets Beautiful Soul
Fernando Torres – The world’s second most beautiful footballer... OH and his Gold Boot Just won a EURO championship… that helps.
Frank Warren - Because Secrets are Beautiful
Franklin Grahm - Daddy saved souls Franklin saves lives. I can't think of a more beautiful way to follow in his fathers footsteps.
George Clooney - Not actually as attractive as US Weekly would want you to think, but if you watch Syriana, Good night and Good luck or Michael Clayton you will quickly realize beauty is more than skin deep
Ira Glass - A beautiful storyteller who is actually kinda beautfiul looking… odd for a radio guy.
Jack and Meg White - These two give hope to every pasty white kid playing off beat blues covers in their garage
Jenny Lewis - Just like her songs Ms. Lewis is demure and beautiful with a deadly dark edge
John Krasinski - Yeah he is kind of attractive, but in reality he is the one person on TV I want to move in with… funny thing is I get the same feeling in his movies as well…
Judie Brown - Presedent and Founder of American Life League and it's hipper offspring Rock for Life
Justin McRoberts-good looks, good witt, and good artistry make a beautiful combination
Ken Gire - Anyone who can help us experince God in a new light is beautiful to us.
Maggie Gyllenhaal - Sure she is the pretty indie girl who won our hearts in stranger than fiction, but what really makes her beautiful is motherhood
Malcolm Gladwell – Sure he looks like Side Show Bob… but read just one of his books and you will realize what a beautiful mind really is..
Maria Alexandra Vettese and Sephanie Congdon Barens - Two women who can make freindship and mornings beautiful... and now evenings...
Marty Campolo - Founder of Mission Year organization dedicated to ministering to the poor in urban areas
Matthew McConaughey...not just cause he makes all women all hot and bothered, but he doesnt give a crap about what anyone thinks... this is the easiest way to explain his movie choices.
Meg Ryan - Well really just Meg Ryan from Sleepless in Seattle to You’ve Got Mail and maybe Kate and Leopold
Mel Gibson - So the dreamy eyes and hard body Mel gave way to the funny and witty Mel which eventually gave way to man whose desire was to make Christ real to everyone through film… and he came pretty close… I would say that is beautiful
Natalie Portman - We defy you to think of an actress you would rather bring home to your parents
Nelson Mandela - He is like 500 years old and yet he is still fighting for justice and equality for all
Nigella Lawson – Who wants to watch some stick thin Italian woman cook? Not us… give us a charming full figured Englishwoman any day of the week… That’s beautiful.
Orson Scott Card - Making science fiction beautiful is a beautiful feat worth noting.
Queen Latifah – Big is beautiful
Rachel Ray-She can cook a great meal in thrity minutes. need we say more?
Rafael Nadal - It is one thing to be an attractive successful tennis player. However, after Wimbelton we see that Raffy is a completely other beautiful thing.
Reece Roper-Dorks can be beautiful too
Regina Spektor – Russian Jews are always hot in our book, but when have a voice with as much emotional range as Reeg we think you are extra beautiful
Rob Bell - The man has revolutionized how I think about the Bible and my faith
Shaun Groves - There is some acustic music that won't let us get over the whole unplugged deal and the beautfiul work of this man is in that group.
Stephen Colbert – remember when we thought John Stewart was the funniest newsman on TV? Well no more Colbert not only funnier, but at least to us way more attractive.
Steve Carell - funny and handsome
Sufjan Stevens – What a pretty boy… with a pretty voice… and pretty songs… and a really cool back story and as much indie cred as musician can possibly have
Vincent Moon - The man behind the lens of the most moving music blog in the world … Take Away Shows
Whitney Matheson – This adorable Pop blogger is into comic books, indie music, sci fi and all things geek… honestly what isn’t beautiful about that
Zooey Deschanel - dark hair and pale skin are plus but its those huge blue eyes that draw us in every time
Monday, October 6, 2008
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Admittedly Goldman quoting Dylan does not show up in many poll's as a desired qualification for a mayor, but we think it is pretty cool that an individual we support would up and quote one of our all time favorite Artists.
Before you go bananas telling us that we are shallow, calloused, yuppies who's since of irony is overpowering to the point of insanity let us state our process. We looked at the issues and pretty much everyone is saying the same things... better schools and less crime... great guys, W2G! So we had to dig deeper... Quickly we decided that Pantele was too much of a Dork to vote for... plus we get the sinking feeling that Pantele would do little to change the broken parts of the City Machine... I mean he has been in City Hall for a while now and we have not seen anything that says "Pantele worked hard to make things better for Richmond." We are sure he tired, but he has failed to this point so...thanks, but no thanks (however, if the run off comes down to Big P and someone other than Goldman we may revisit him as the lesser of two evils candidate.)
Dwight Jones has the smoothest, sexiest voice of any politician we have ever heard. It is not quite Barry White deep, but none the less we think we could put on a Dwight Jones sermon to get the ole' wives in their respective moods. On top of that, the man can preach! We got saved three times just listening to him speak during the South Side Forum. So we know that whatever he does he will sound good doing it, but we have to ask the question Mr. Jones; what are you doing to reach out to us? We heard you talk about better schools... we agree better schools are a good thing, but we don't have kids... just dogs. We heard you talk about Battery Park, but we don't live in Battery Park. We heard you talk about bringing the City together, but then our neighbors got visits from your team... they even got signs for their yards and everything, but we apparently were not home, because we have yet to see you or your team in person. Once again... thanks, but no thanks.
Paul Goldman may be crazy... we are not sure about that... and we will admit that the Yankee accent and bad haircut are not very appealing. But the guy blogs like a mad man... getting that much insight into a candidates thoughts is a plus... if not a little annoying. The man has some revolutionary ideas... shut down Carytown to car traffic (we have lived in Europe and have seen this very idea in action so it was not that crazy to us) Cutting the Business tax to bring in business and with them JOBS! (With Renyolds and Wachovia on the way out this seems like a better and better idea, no?) He certainly has been in the game for a long enough time to have the credentials, but he seems to dream big enough to move Richmond out of its current under performing rut. Plus, we see him everywhere we go; City Hall, Greek Festival, South of the James Farmers Market. Honestly, we are a little worried that he may have cloned himself, but we will deal with that issue when we come to it. Finally, if all of this was not enough to convince us Goldman quotes Dylan! Sure, sure, we know that middle aged men quoting Dylan sounds a little cliche reformed hippieish, but we grew up in homes with reformed hippies so we are okay with that as well. Plus, we love Dylan! So as far as we are concerned let's go Goldman... Richmond's next Mayor.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Friday, September 19, 2008
Lost middle-class tribe's 'secret' eco-village in Wales spotted in aerial photograph taken by plane
By Luke Salkeld
For five happy years they enjoyed simple lives in their straw and mud huts.
Generating their own power and growing their own food, they strived for self-sufficiency and thrived in homes that looked more suited to the hobbits from The Lord of the Rings.
Then a survey plane chanced upon the 'lost tribe'... and they were plunged into a decade-long battle with officialdom.
Pioneering: Eco-dweller Emma Orbach is delighted planning has been approved
Yesterday that fight, backed by more modern support for green issues, ended in victory.
The eco-community in the Preseli mountains of west Wales was set up in 1993 and lived contentedly away from the rat race round a 180-acre farm bought by Julian and Emma Orbach.
In 1998, it was spotted when sunlight was seen glinting off a solar panel on the main building, which was built from straw bales, timber and recycled glass.
When the pilot reported back, officials were unable to find any records, let alone planning permission, for the mystery hillside village surrounded by trees and bushes.
They insisted the grass-covered buildings should be demolished.
The eco-community endured a decade of inquiries, court cases and planning hearings.
The 22 villagers fought planners even when they were within hours of the bulldozers moving in to demolish their eight homes.
Now, however, they can celebrate, thanks to the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority's 'sustainability' policy.
With green issues now getting a more sympathetic hearing, the commune has been given planning approval for its roundhouses along with lavatories, agricultural buildings and workshops.
Community founder Emma Orbach, a 52-year-old mother of three, said yesterday: 'We are really excited and happy as it has been a very long battle.
'Even when planning inquiries and court hearings went against us we were determined to fight on.
'The villagers are pioneering a new lifestyle and are determined to prove it's possible for people to live more simply.'
Tony Wrench, 62, who lives in the original roundhouse with his partner Jane, said: 'We are very relieved and delighted.
'We have been able to prove to the planners that it is possible to have a sustainable and low-impact community in the countryside.
Green: The houses use only solar power and get light from a roof window
'We had to prove we were improving the biodiversity of the area and conserving the woodland and we did that. It's great that our efforts to build a community using renewable resources have now been supported by the planners.
'The planners have worked miracles in making a new policy which enables communities which are self sufficient to exist.'
Amid the celebrations over the victory, however, it seems that life away from the rat race has not run entirely smoothly for the pioneers of simple living.
The two founders, architectural historian Julian Orbach, 55, and his wife Emma are divorced, and the commune has been split into three entities.
Caught out: An aerial view of eco village Brithdir Mawr. The complex could not be seen from the road
The original 180-acre farm was divided up into the area around the farm, a section around the original roundhouse known as Tir Ysbrydol (Spirit Land) where Mrs Orbach lives, and 80 acres of pasture and woodland run by a community known as Brithdir Mawr.
Each community is independent and they co-exist as neighbours in a more traditional style.
Brithdir Mawr continues to support sustainable living based around the original farmhouse, with eight adults and four children sharing communal meals, looking after goats, horses and chickens - and also holding down part-time jobs to raise the £200 per month rent they each pay Mr Orbach, who lives in a house in nearby Newport.
The current residents now run businesses such as courses in furniture making and sustainable living for around £95 a head.
On their website they explain: 'We are eight big people and four little ones who choose to live here: working, eating, meeting and laughing together. Being a community is a large part of what we do. To sum up the rest; we are striving towards a life in which our footprints are as light as they can be.'
One resident, Ben Gabel, 38, who runs a seed business with his partner Kate, said: 'It is completely different to what it was. Most people would consider the set-up quite normal.
'The kids watch DVDs and we run a business from the farm.'
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Some of our favorite artists are teaming up for the Art, Music, and Justice Tour this fall. Unfortunately, if you live in the Richmond or Asheville area, the closest place you will be able to see it is a little north of Charlotte. Who knows, they may add some more dates...
Anywho, check out the website, and support a good cause only to just get something back in return....candy for your ears.
Monday, September 8, 2008
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
So in honor of him, here is the cool Geico commercial he did.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
So, this is semi-strong support for our claim, but snopes had something else to say about it:
Darn you snopes! So you might could say that snopes has blown our claim, but just because it doesn't glow like some nuclear chemical doesn't mean it's not bad for you. And yes, we still love snopes even because of this video.
Monday, August 18, 2008
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
On a side note am I the only person who realize the futility of posting Karl Rove zingers even though Karl Rove will actually never read those zingers? and Yet I am still posting them... I need a vacation.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
I mean I am not upset that he said that Richmond was a small City... because it is... we ain't New York or Chicago... but to compare us to suburban municipalities of big cities like San Diego, Denver, Phoenix, and Las Vegas was just too much for me. I have been out to those places... and the Big Cities are are wonderful, but places like Messa are little more than strip malls and McMansion Subdivisions for the Hummer H3 set. I could go on and on about the rich History of Richmond and the fact that it actually has its own economy and does not feed off of some larger City like a leech, but everyone has done that already. So let me ask you this KARL (or shall we call you Darth?); do you think all of America should be mowed down and transformed into mile upon mile of asphalt parking lots, GAP stores, Starbucks and gated communities? Do you think the value of a community is measured in the number of TGI Fridays it house within a ten mile radius? Obviously you don't see any value in small cities.
Anyone who has made a move into Richmond in the last year can tell you that the growth of Suburban sprawl is disturbing at best... Shortpump, Chester, Brandermill, Midlothian, all of Staples Mill Road! No longer are these sleepy towns or rolling farm lands... now they are a collection of cookie cutter commerce littering the country side and leaving abandon strip malls in their wake. Look at Broad Street, Look at Cloverleaf Mall, Shoot look at all of Petersburg these are the victims of corporate consumerism... so Karl (Darth Vader) Rove you can have your Chula Vistas and Mesas, and ten years from now when Middle Aged Parents are telling their teens they shouldn't be caught in Messa after dark because its not safe to be in that kind of place (read URBAN and run down) at night, I will laugh... well maybe just giggle as I double check that my car is locked as I head over to YMCA for a late night jog.
Monday, August 11, 2008
Seriously, my wife and I have decided that James Franco is the coolest drug dealer to ever be filmed.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Monday, June 30, 2008
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Jeremy Said: So I was watching the new season of This American Life last night. hmm....it amazed me as always, but i also found it a little annoying because it leaned obviously to the left. still....it's a really cool show. ira glass looks older than i remember.
Adam Said: Yeah the radio show has always had a leftward bent, but the one thing they do really well is tell stories, and in this day and to me the best way to communicate is through story.
Jeremy Said: yeah, but when you're communicating a story that is one sided and misleading, that's not really a good thing even if it is good communication. none the less, i can't complain much, because i still like the show, and i think its a good program.
Adam Said: Yeah but are not all stories meant to communicate the storytellers point of view? I mean if this were the news then I could see why it is bad to only give your point of view, but this is entertainment, and as such we are given the entertainers point of view.
Jeremy Says: i guess it comes down to...does "good communication" also involve the truth. I guess a lie can be communicated in a good way, and it's still good communication. I was just kinda thinking that good communication should also be "true" communication.
Adam Says: Wow and I will be the first to admit that relativity in the post-modern sense is driving my thought process on this, but I think in most cases that the truth is different depending on the person and the situation… some things like color and shape and size are absolute and in my mind Faith and God are as well, but other times absolute truth is harder to find… like what is the real story in Iraq… you ask a Marine in one area and it is that Iraq is doing great… you ask a poor person in another area and Iraq is doing awful… I mean there is a truth there, but people have a different perspective of that truth and we want to get a qualitative report about it when the truth is quantitative.
Jeremy Says: but a relative truth is not truth....when i think about truth, i think about absolute truth that you are talking. asjklgdft9p3t83hpvw4p5oy84p59y8hv4;ogalekrh;
let me start over...
i dont like it when someone says the truth can be one thing to one person and another thing to another person, and i understand how that is very possible, but i don't like the idea of throwing around the word truth like it can be relative depending on who you talk to. just because its "true to them" doesn't really mean it's truth. does it? truth can only be one thing in my mind, and its not like I always know it. actually I rarely know it. I guess I get annoyed when people speculate on whats true to them even though it may not be the actual truth....
and I understand im kinda walking a hypocritical line, because christians are often known for what is true to them, but not true to other people.
Adam says: Shall I say that you have done a wonderful job of explaining your point? I agree, and have obviously done a poor job of explaining my own point of view on this matter. Truth is true no mater what. In all situations there is truth. A cynic will try to destruct truth so that it is always relative, but in the end they are more or less parsing verbs. Let us take this example; I go to the store to buy a chair. When I get there I see a chair that has four legs (everyone can know that to be true) it is red (if you are color blind or if you know too much about shades of red you may not think it just red… but for the most part we think of it as red) it is covered in a soft material and is cushy to sit in ( soft and cushy are comparative terms based on my own experience and, while they may be informed by popular opinion, they are still subject to my personal interpretation.) In all three of these cases there is a truth. The chair has four legs, the chair is red, and the chair is soft and cushy. The relativity comes in to our own understanding of this truth. If I am color blind it is harder for me to understand the truth that the chair is red.
I think the same principal is in place for everyone in all situations. The truth is that God loves you, but if your dad was a jerk and you have never had anyone explain that God loves then it is harder for you to understand the truth that God loves you. I suppose that at the heart of all debates is peoples unwillingness to admit that they do not fully understand the truth.
Jeremy Says: So is there a solution to the problem? Can someone like Ira Glass explain the truth to someone without giving his own perspective? He probably could, but like you said, that is more like the job of a news anchor and not so much like a subjective communicator like Mr. Glass.
Let's say I'm trying to communicate a point of view of the truth, but I understand that it could be interpreted different ways. Should I speak as if it is the absolute truth, or should I give suggestions as to "this is my interpretation, but you could think something else..."
I think the latter is a better form of communication. I think when you open yourself up to being venerable like that, people who may not share the same point of view with you are more likely to hear you out and then make a decision on whether you are right or wrong in your interpretations of the situation. Sure some people may look at your vulnerability as a weakness, but if you are passionate about why you believe that, they will get past the weakness, and simply listen, I think.