I did some diary updating yesterday and added a lot of my regular reads to my favorites list. In retrospect, it probably wasn�t the best idea, as I will likely be more tempted now to read what Dlanders are saying, rather than doing other necessary things, like working.
* * *
Have I mentioned what a Netflix whore I�ve become? It�s all MM�s fault, really. I was perfectly content with an entertainment repertoire that involved only my large stack of books, the occasional t.v. show, and a weekend movie.
MM convinced me that I was cinematically deprived, though. So I subscribed to Netflix. For the bargain price of $19.95, I can watch an unlimited number of DVDs each month. Considering that I seem incapable of returning a rented movie on time, thereby incurring late fees to rival the national deficit, it doesn�t take a mathematical genius to conclude that this is a fiscally responsible decision.
The problem is that I seem to have the same mentality toward Netflix that many people have toward all-you-can-eat buffets. I feel compelled to watch as many movies as possible in order to get my full money�s worth from the subscription.
Consequently, I haven�t read a book in nearly a month. Take this past weekend. I had a full two days without any work at all � a rare occurrence in my world. What did I do? I watched three movies: �Under the Tuscan Sun� (great chick-flick), �Secretary� (tender love story if you can get passed the S&M), and �O, Brother Where Art Thou� (dumb -- should�ve known better than to watch a movie based on the Odyssey made by two men who had never read the Odyssey).
Did I even pick up any of the three books that are awaiting completion or any of the two dozen books that I�ve yet to start? No. The only written word I managed to consume was the Sunday paper. If this continues, I�m surely going to devolve into idiocy.
* * *
Speaking of idiocy (how�s that for a segue?) . . . I don�t think I can adequately express how patently offensive I find the idea of writing blatant discrimination into our Constitution. How can we possibly countenance changing a document that has historically served as the bastion of rights and privileges, by adding language that would deny rights to a segment of society and effectively create a second class of citizens? I thought history had already taught us that separate was inherently unequal. That we would mar the Constitution, and reverse the progress of civil rights by about 50 years, by writing-in inherent inequality is appalling.
By the way, kitchenlogic and trinity63, both had something to say about this today, as well. And I wholeheartedly concur with kitchenlogic�s proposal that there be separate water fountains for bigoted morons. In fact, is there any way we can make Bush use a separate planet all together? Mars, maybe?
Listening To: 3 Doors Down, "When I'm Gone"
Reading: nothing, except boring legal crap
Feeling: angry