LadyCrimson

Hey, now ... I've met plenty of blokes who are rude as heck ... ladies too, but it all tends to balance out, for me. I think basic manners - where people acknowledge other folks actions or even just their presence - has been on the decline for years. But doesn't every generation think that? Grandpa's griping about rude young whippersnappers. If people hold open doors or give up seats, I say thanks. I'll wave drivers or walkers to pass first if it seems safe and polite to do so. If I see someone in obvious distress I'd ask what's the matter. And if someone's right behind me I'll hold the door open till they get through to make sure the door doesn't whack them in the face. But I'm not generally over-solicitous about the small things often lumped into the "manners" category as a rule. Neither are most people I encounter, and honestly, 95% of the time it doesn't bother me if they aren't, since I'm not thinking about it either. That gal having her feet up on a seat on crowded bus, that would bother me, tho, because that's not about going an extra mile to dash over and hold open doors for people or whatever - that gal was plain selfish/thoughtless re: a certain social environment need. People who put their feet on the back of a movie-theater chair when someone is sitting in that chair- especially ones that "jiggle" their legs - really bug me, as well.

This afternoon I discovered that after 12 years, the plastic "shade" film you can use to cover your windows (to block sun - just use water to stick it on) will be so dried out and stuck on the glass that you'll have to spend a couple hours scraping it off with a razor blade. Dust mask and eye-protectors necessary. Ugh. Remind me never to use that stuff again ... if only because I'll forget it's there and thus leave it on too long.

It's all relative to area, or even street by street sometimes. In "expensive" cities, $1100 is fairly cheap if you're only talking about price and nothing else. Course, size of the rented space + features + area/street is more important in terms of defining what "cheap" is. A 1-3 bedroom, 600sq. ft. to 1500sq. ft. place might be between $1200-$3500 a month where I live. Tiny 400-500sq. ft. studio apartments (those w/out any separated rooms except for the bathroom) might run between $900-$1300. Most apts/condos would have at least 1 covered parking space and complex laundry facilities - even if that only means a single washer/dryer shared by 8 units - but not all the very cheapest rentals do. Rents were higher a few years ago - they've been going down/stabilized some now. That's based on my observations of the area, others might think differently. But in some areas of the US, it's a lot cheaper to rent than where I am - ie, you'd get two or three times the rental for the money, so to speak.

I finally saw The Postman, a film my hubby rented ages ago but I never bothered to watch. The first half wasn't too bad, and I loved Will Patton obviously having so much fun hamming it up as the bad guy, but the last third became progressively more silly in the typical over-blown & over-earnest Costner way. Still, I'm not sure it deserved the outright general critical panning it received when it came out 10(?) years ago. It's not great and it's about 30 minutes too long, but it's not completely awful either.

Nice waterfowl photo. Did you take it, Walsh? Soon I'll be much closer to my favorite marshland park again, which makes me happy. Today ... uh ... the packing continues. Not much else in my life at the moment.

I think that's a decent separation/difference. And it's true that a lot of wealth for people like Gates/Trump is tied up in business affairs etc. Still, they'd have to give away/do a lot more before I'd consider them to not be hoarding their wealth. Not that I find hoarding some wealth to be against my personal principles...that is, if I had any wealth to speak of.

I feel bad for the kids who helped him - they'll have nightmares for years. :/

I'd agree polluting the environment isn't a good thing, but some clarification on what degree of "polluting the environment" = mortal sin might be useful for believers. A lot of people have to drive to work ...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...RM&refer=uk While I understand the sentiments behind the modernizing of the "list", it really strikes my funny-bone with it's non-specific nature for things like pollution and excessive wealth etc.

I'd heard so many good things about that one, but I guess I didn't "get" it, because I didn't like it very much. I saw Mystic River. I'd seen most of it, over the years, but not all, so it was nice to view it complete in one sitting for the first time.

I'm not sure if that was a response to what I wrote or to someone else - if me, I don't think that changes my view's point on human motivations re: cruelty.

I generally subscribe to the notion that we live in a society that sees cruelty to cute, cuddly, humanistic-seeming (chimps) and/or useful work animals in an extremely bad light. Basically, anything we believe can "suffer" where we are able to somehow humanize their expressions and behavior. I don't know many people who are bothered by killing insects, for example, even when it isn't necessary to immediately kill them for personal health. I have known a few, however.

Considering how expensive I've heard it is to live there, $1100 sounds like a pretty good deal? In the middle of packing myself. What a pain! Must be exciting moving to a whole new location like that; we've never moved more than 30 miles "away". Me too.

Ditto. One of the very few "Diablo-clones" where I played it for longer than a few hours and had a grand time doing so. It did get old faster than Diablo did, but a decent effort/fun game nonetheless. I fear for the PC market ... *random market-ignorant musing* I wonder if digital download will help revive the PC game at all, eventually, since you'd take away some of the, uh, marketing? costs and headaches and such.

Funny stuff.

Beowulf. Kind of dull first half and a much more fun/effective second half. I never felt "connected" to the characters in the film, however, so the "big scenes" had very little emotional impact, making it a film that's not much more than a motion-capture-animation "300". And it looked fine on the big screen TV, even if I didn't get the 3D experience.

I'd agree. I'm very against animal cruelty, but I'm also a realist in that there are far more unwanted/feral pets than may be desirable/can be controlled. Sterilization can work well for small 'colonies' of stray animals, but in mass quantities, it may not be effective enough, soon enough. I'd prefer something other than strychnine be used. But I can understand the expense issue, if there is one.

This morning, upon discovering a dead cranefly on my desk, I proved once again that I'm very strange. http://main.crimsonkeep.com/archives/142

The poll needs a "depends" option. I subscribe to the notion that both "many outweighs the few' and "few outweighs the many" can be equally viable/applicable. For a country/people to completely forgo its desired "way of life" and surrender or willingly be annihilated without fighting for whatever those ideals are, simply on the basis of who might have the biggest death toll, is too close to pacifism for my liking, which I don't believe in.

I wouldn't say it was total crap, but I do mostly agree w/the sentiment It had some comic/amusing moments - if Bruce is in the movie, it's bound to - but overall it was kind of a snooze-fest. I can't watch the theater versions at all anymore for that reason. Extended adds more depth, which was somewhat lacking before. Not that it's super-deep even in the extended, but .... yeah, y'all know what I mean. But after the first time, I haven't been able to sit through all 3 extended without fast-forwarding through a lot of scenes. The more I came to memorize the films, the more scenes there are that I realize I don't find all that entertaining on repeated viewings. And the last movie I saw was Hoosiers. One of those old movies I hadn't seen a long long time, and one of the few "sports" movies that I actually like.

This forum is currently lacking in cute/random animal pictures. (both belong to my sister-in-law)

Agreed. But that's why I'd need space-travel ... sitting around planet-side waiting for civilizations to rise/fall/change dramatically isn't my idea of fun. Plus with the right spaceship tech, it might lessen the effects of 900+ years of sun skin damage and gravity sag.

I agree - he was one of my favorite things about the game. They did a really good job at bringing over the droid "attitude" and charm that made the droids so popular in the films, imo. Funny how you can become so attached to a pile of metal bolts.

Sicko. No one should confuse Michael Moore with being a serious documentary filmmaker, but I do find his movies entertaining opinion-propaganda. This one falls apart towards the end (becomes boring & overly conceited even for Moore) but up to that point it's watchable, gave me some laughs, and occasionally made me nod in agreement with the basic point that "health care system in America is bogus."

I think if my lifespan was 1000+ years, and there was no interstellar space-travel, I'd die of boredom long before. 200-250 years would be nice, both for more time to "have some fun" and for the possible increased tech/culture innovation/stability, but after that I think you'd end up with diminishing returns. But if there was interstellar space-travel, and one could own your own private spaceship to run around the galaxy in, I might change my mind.