"I copy that" is walkie-talkie talk for - I understand, will do, gotcha, ok, alright, yup, uh-huh, and much more depending on the inflection of the voice.
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
I am on my old powerBook, because my new one is getting cleaned, (disk dr. and speed disk for you fellow dorks out there). I am going to install the new version OSX.4, pre-release... lil' excited.
Saw Transamerica at the TriBeCa film festival - it was good, suprpisingly so. I only say this because I was there, everyday, for a month, and it was the most low-budget thing I have and will ever work on. Also saw Sin City - great - and the interpeter - fine, whatever - and Cova, the something dove, that I don't want to get into.
Went to the Transamerica party, filicity huffman (ala desperate housewives) and william h. macy (ala everything) were there (they are married).
blah, blah, blah - nothing makes me happy, and I can't link because blogger doesn't like safari, so... nothing, there is no news, you can all go home and watch TV.
I still don't know if someone is moving here, she hasn't called me back.
working on "without a trace" tomorrow, I like taking pictures, I might work on that for money.
yeah, I've slowed down, I need a personal assistant.
office of memories:
jonah and I had a lil' somethin' ta drink the othernight and shared with our roomate videos from our russia trip and then we went around reading our journal entries from 5 years ago.
people like this one.
whew, time to pay bills, and maybe get a new camera lens and bike a bit.
Sunday, April 24, 2005
This started with reading anah's post (she was on a drug trial where the punishment did not fit the crime) and one of the comments brought up "Jury nullification". I thought to myself, "Myself, you should find out more" and so I did. I found an informative site where they hope to, " inform all Americans about their rights, powers, and responsibilities when serving as trial jurors. Jurors must know that they have the option and the responsibility to render a verdict based on their conscience and on their sense of justice as well as on the merits of the law." Meaning - if a law is wrong, a jury can find the person not guilty even if there is overwhelming evidence against said person.
So, now I am going to give you a gigantic quote from this article.
"An Abbreviated History of Jury Nullification
Jury independence is well established in American law. In 1804, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase was impeached for denying a jury's right to judge law. He holds the dubious distinction of being the only Supreme Court ever impeached. Why did the Founders give juries such awesome power? Theophilus Parsons, first Chief Justice of Massachusetts, explained:
The people themselves have it in their power to resist usurpation, without an appeal to arms. An act of usurpation is not obligatory; it is not law; and any man may be justified in his resistance. Let him be considered a criminal by the general government, yet only his fellow citizens can convict him; they are his jury, and if they pronounce him innocent, not all the powers of Congress can hurt him; and innocent they certainly will pronounce him, if the supposed law he resisted was an act of usurpation.
Or, as Patrick Henry put it: Why do we love this trial by jury? Because it prevents the hand of oppression from cutting you off. This gives me comfort that as long as I have existence, my neighbors will protect me.
American history is full of proud examples of jury nullification. The common-law tradition of freedom of religion and of assembly has its origins in the 1670 trial of William Penn, accused of preaching an illegal religion in Gracechurch Street , London . The jury refused to convict Penn in spite of clear evidence of guilt, because they were unwilling to brand a man a felon for worshiping God according to his own beliefs. When the court attempted to punish Penn's jury for their act of nullification, a higher court reversed on the principle that it is only the jury, not the judge, which has the authority to decide whether a defendant is guilty. The American tradition of freedom of the press began in 1735, when a
But jury nullification of the law is not just a remnant of Colonial days, when Americans were still proud, independent and free. During the nineteenth century, juries as far South as
If you know anyone who gets one of those magic jury notification letters, please encourage them to learn about their rights. No matter what else is going on and what I may question - I am a fan of this little upstart of a country we have here.
"The Watermill Center was founded in 1992 to support new approaches to the arts, to provide individuals with unique opportunities for artistic creation and research, and to document the work of its artistic director Robert Wilson and his contemporaries. Located in a secluded, natural, six-acre setting in Southampton, Long Island, New York, the Center is in essence an Academy for the Arts of the 21st century, where intern artists from all disciplines learn in collaboration with established, professional artists."
so the video is a collection of sections from Danny's work that I have taped in the past 4 years.
The first play was the end of NTI when I was an intern there, I chose to direct it. The next was an extra piece done at NTI just for the fun of it- visual and all. the final section is 3 parts from the play that I took to scotland.
All of this shows danny's "new approach to the arts" and that is why we chose those sections.
*fun fact - the guy kissing in the second section is none other than our favorite "Jim Halpert" from "the office".
Friday, April 22, 2005
I just finished making a reel for my friend/co-creator, People Food.
In the reel - I directed and designed the first piece, produced the evening of the second piece and produced the third (brought it to Scotland and the like).
My internet skills are still improving, but try this.
PC right click save as, or Mac ctrl+click and "save as" ... or just plain click on the link and watch... whatever, I'm not your mom, seriously, get over it... man...
it's about 14 mins and small, but fun none the less. A weekend treat, if you will.
Thursday, April 21, 2005
A week or so ago, someone was trying to keep idle-party-chat going by bring up "Project Greenlight".
Tonight I watched.
I can't believe I got the whole way through. It was like working a really bad job. Why would anyone want to watch? Maybe, they think that is what film making is like.
REALITY TV IS NOT REAL
documentary tv is closer to real, but still not all encompassing.
I have worked on reality shows, 1 "day" really takes 3 days to make. Project Greenlight was made to make for "entertaining" TV, fights and all... to do that - hire some young, excitable, inexperienced egos and give them a power trip.
Part of the episode was firing a very competent script supervisor because she was rightfully calling out the problems with the production and her problems with the first AD (not so good at his job, read: dick). They put in her place, a script supervisor who has only done soft core porn. (they didn't say this, I looked it up)
I think it is really hard to make any sort of show or film about a 80 person, month to three month, community. During the making of a film there is always someone working on some part of the film 24 hours a day.
I guess this rant was brought to you by the wonder of, "why would anyone would want a to watch show about a bad experience?" mostly if it isn't funny, at all.
One more reason I wish the "Lowest Common denominator" was only a mathematical phrase.
It makes me wonder why other people don't get in more trouble when it comes to drugs... on second thought - no, there is no wondering.
so, sometimes I am able to see how people end up at my web page. these are recent searches that have brought people to Icopythat;
google - tina fay snl AND "tina fay" bio
MSN search - where do smart people live
google - "britney spears is trash" "pictures"
google - rent spank OR spanks OR spanking "Idina menzel"
yahoo - chubby
huh... what does that say about me?
whatever it may say about me - it is nothing in comparison to the chart topping google - "giant horse cock".
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
While paddling is banned in Houston schools, Dutton said that under state law a parent can give a public or private school consent to use corporal punishment.
now, I don't even hit dogs, I may have been spanked once or twice - I was threatened more than that - to about age 6, but, really, come-on Texas, so weird.
doin' it again tomorrow.
Monday, April 18, 2005
Today we also found out that Armstrong will do this last tour and then retire.
Back to the important things - me.
I started going through Queens,
then onto spooky (but oddly friendly and community-like) Roosevelt Island. I even took the tram to Manhattan (you use it just like the metro, very cute)
I then saw this guy, he looked sad, and old, and the shoes were not quite right.
Then went to the Central Park - It was packed.
I went around the park once. wheshew. I have to RUN around it once - bike three times. I may die, do say something nice at my funeral - and if you can, I'd like this tomb.
happy almost spring!
Saturday, April 16, 2005
The article is entitled "Nuclear Option". This is happening right now, and I feel like I have to explain it to nearly everyone I talk to because the traditional media is not giving it time, probably because it would take a minute to explain, there is no neat graphic, or too many lines in a paper.
Anyway, here you go -
The 'nuclear option', as used in American politics circa 2005, is a catchprase referring to a political maneuver that would allow the Senate majority (currently Republicans) to prevent the minority party (currently Democrats) from filibustering judicial nominees. By U.S. Law, certain judicial appointees, particularly Supreme or other federal court Justices, must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate before taking the bench. Under current Senate rules, a minority of senators are able to prevent the confirmation of judges via filibuster unless a supermajority can be reached to 'break' the filibuster. The 'nuclear option' refers to the technicality that only a simple majority is necessary to change this rule. That is, although a supermajority is currently necessary to break the filibuster, a simple majority could alter the Senate rules so that only a simple majority would be required to break the filibuster.
Proponents call it a nuclear option because they see it as a last resort with possibly catastrophic consequences for both sides. There is no consensus among republicans over whether it would be strategic to employ it, with Robert Novak supporting it and National Review opposing it. Fears that this action would cause, at the least, an obstinate opposition by Senate Democrats, and at worst a shut down of the entire legislative branch, were increased on March 15, 2005, when Senate Minority leader Harry Reid stated publicly that, were the Republicans to pursue this technique, the Democrats would be uncooperative on all future legislation, except national security and military issues.
Opposition to the action includes the following
Republicans employed the technique of filibustering judicial nominees under Clinton, thus any such move would be hypocritical.
The nuclear option would cause the Senate to grind to a halt, compromising any future legislation.
Proponents of the action maintain that the Senate's sole role regarding judicial nominees is to 'advise and consent'; a minority of Senators should not be allowed to overrule the consent of the majority. Proponents also argue that the filibuster technique here is not constitutionally grounded, and has never been used throughout American history to prevent the appointment of judges of the opposite political affiliation.-----
so, the gist - Bush nominates whoever he wants to the supreme court (or lesser court) and that person will be accepted. Then nothing will get done in congress for the next 4 years. This is a big deal because these supreme court justices are old and sick. Civil liberties... who needs 'em?
McCain put the nail in his coffin of presidential dreams by saying that the Republicans should not use the nuclear option... which means Frist is on the attack,
"the majority leader, has agreed to join a handful of prominent Christian conservatives in a telecast portraying Democrats as "against people of faith" for blocking President Bush's nominees...
The telecast also signals an escalation of the campaign for the rule change by Christian conservatives who see the current court battle as the climax of a 30-year culture war, a chance to reverse decades of legal decisions about abortion, religion in public life, gay rights and marriage.
"As the liberal, anti-Christian dogma of the left has been repudiated in almost every recent election, the courts have become the last great bastion for liberalism," Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council and organizer of the telecast, wrote in a message on the group's Web site. "For years activist courts, aided by liberal interest groups like the A.C.L.U., have been quietly working under the veil of the judiciary, like thieves in the night, to rob us of our Christian heritage and our religious freedoms.""The problem with arguing with fundamentalists is that there is nothing to say to change their minds.
I really urge you to learn about this, it's a big deal.
Thursday, April 14, 2005
went to my favorite fake park.
watched arm wrestling on ESPN "the ocho", and then practiced our own form.
did some clowning in Central Park
Notice the shoes, they are from my mom, thanks mom.
Saw "Tierno Bokar", really frickin' good. (thank you, stacey)
cooked and ate the World Famous Xanadu Bluegrass Brunch.
Heard some good music ala Roland and Greenestreet at the Rockwood Music Hall.
I recovered some more, went to the doctor, worked on a shoot for an improv troupe.
and then listened to some more good music ala Christina Courtin. she is really good. we like her.
Tonight, going to an art opening and dance show.
and more music this weekend - weee.
Yesterday was the Day of Silence - a way for students to protest the abuses done to the Gay (LGBT... whatever) students. They just don't say anything.
Today is the Day of Truth - a way for students to protest the homosexual agenda. They tell people that they are wrong.
Now, I am all about the whole "may not agree with - but fight to the death to say it" sort of mentality, so go ahead you crazy christians (I say "crazy" because I do believe there are sane christians that are ok with the "homosexual agenda").
I looked into the truth site a bit and found a very good section on, "hostile questions regarding the day of truth". They are actually "valid" questions... but hostile - sure. The one that made everything so clear was the final question and answer. I think it is what summarizes ALL fundamental beliefs - that there is only one truth, and no debate. (the same way one can justify killing by saying, " "Because I believe that abortion is murder, I also believe that force is justified ... in an attempt to stop it," he wrote, "whether these agents of the government are armed or otherwise they are legitimate targets in the war to end this holocaust."" - coming from Eric Rudolph, crazy christian)
anyway here is your crazy statement;
"How do you know your truth is the absolute truth? Isnt truth a relative term?
Jesus Christ said, I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me (John 14:6). In over one hundred passages in the four gospel accounts of Christs life, He either begins with the phrase, I tell you the truth or identifies Himself as the source of revealed truth. As Christians, this provides us with the assurance that Christ is the one and only source of Truth of God.
When there is no standard for truth - when truth means different things to different people - the consequences can be tragic. Most people would agree that the commandment from God, Thou shalt not kill is truth. But what happens if someone rejects that as truth, and their truth allows them to engage in the killing of innocent human beings? We are simply pointing to what our founding documents, the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, recognize: that there are absolute truths, and that such truth comes from our Creator, God."
"When there is no standard for truth - when truth means different things to different people - the consequences can be tragic"... yes, but more tragic is the end of learning, education, freedom, and the complete fear in "the only truth". If this was true - Galileo would still be in trouble and the earth would still be flat. THE EARTH WOULD BE FLAT - That was the TRUTH given to the people by the church.
The earth would be flat. I rest my case.
ok, I don't - how about that whole, "But what happens if someone rejects that as truth, and their truth allows them to engage in the killing of innocent human beings?" who decides who is "innocent" - because if I am reading this right, than "innocent" is the only difference between war (which side is good), Eric Rudolph, abortion, and capital punishment.
Who chooses the innocent? God? good - let's say it is God - then leave it up to God. You shouldn't kill anyone because you cannot see the innocent - let alone the truth. How about this: God = Truth. We can all try to be like God, and were made in His image, and we must strive to be more Godlike... then yes, we must all strive for the truth and question, and look, and work, we must look for the truth in everything, truthfulness = faith. Religion = search for truth.
I am religious because I seek the truth and question everything.
... alright I walked away from this entry and then I realized I don't want it to sound like I don't believe in anything - I do. There are things that I don't understand that I believe in - there is room for faith, I guess I just don't know how to catagorize the things in which I believe that don't have material substance. This was just a statement on how I feel right now, right here, always changing - maybe that's it - I am always changing and it upsets me when there isn't room for change and growth.
I was actually busy. It was fun, educational, and I didn't earn any money. So - I am now tired, smarter, poorer, and running out of room on my computer from taking pictures.
I wrote blog entries on paper... I think they are called journal entries... I don't remember - I try to stay away from "paper". (I'm lying - I like paper. hee hee, fooled you) I don't know why the whole world isn't wireless for me - can you get on that? thanks.
So, this is what I wrote waiting for the doctor,
""Do you have work tomorrow?" is a perfectly normal question asked on a Monday in New York City to a person in their mid 20s is that weird?
Granted, when this happened to me I was in the Eye and Throat hospital and I looked like warmed over, day-old poop.
So, now I am in the waiting room, possibly for hours. Dont worry about your unfaithful Icopythat author, he has his powerbook and DVDs (international action flicks Bourne supremacy and Ronin)"
Turned out that I probably have some sort of cold that was aggravated by the flight back from france and some bacteria stuff got into my ear... which I can almost hear out of again!
I got through all of Bourne and half of Ronin in the waiting room. Really nice Dr, though. He even had a pack of gum in his pocket so that his breath didn't smell bad.
Another bad thing about being busy - my reading has really piled up, books, mail,Ok, and the New Yorker - I'm about 12 issues behind... at what point do you forgive the loss and just move on to the current week?
Ok, I'll try not to write it all at once - more posts to come, I'll pick out some nice pictures for you... ooo - and some silly news (there has been a lot of that).
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
I am sick... like, can't quite hear or sit or stand for long, sick. I'm ok, just not wanting to move.
I purchased the first season of "alias" because I have never seen an episode - and i knew if i was going to be lying around all day that alias would entertain me - all 22 episodes. I'm almost done.
there will be 4 people staying with me this weekend, two plays - circus - and maybe buying a dog. yeah.
I just let my lunch over cook.
- ► 2007 (29)
- ► 2006 (101)
- ▼ April (16)