domino:
murderball:
| Muppet Babies You scored 70 in Muppet know-how! |
| You know something about this stuff, but kids as young as 8 can probably get all of the same jokes as you, even if they miss the obscure movie references. |
My test tracked 1 variable How you compared to other people your age and gender:
|
| Link: The Muppet Trivia Test |
| President You scored 57% Campaigning, 79% Personality, and 68% Effectiveness! |
| After serving as a Senator for many terms you decide that its time you threw your hat into the ring to become President. After a bloody and vicious campaign you win the primaries by a tiny margain. In the national elections you are lucky in the fact that your competitor is easily misunderstood and hated by the press, you beat him by a small margain. As President you are noted for your hardwork and effective foreign policy, although sometimes those in charge of your image sabotage you. Despite this you are remembered as a liked and effective Executive. |
| |
Link: The achievable political office Test
Tuesday, March 07, 2006finally, there is hope for meNalmefene pill for shopping addictsYears ago, a friend of mine had to go into group therapy for what she called "Jackie Onassis Disease," otherwise known as compulsive shopping. (I must have been living in a cultural vacuum, as I never knew Jackie Onassis was a shopaholic.) I don't know if my old friend still suffers from this addiction, but if she does, she may soon be able to turn to a pharmaceutical cure. The drug, Nalmefene, was developed by a Finnish company, Bio Tie Therapies, to treat alcoholism, and has since shown promise in U.S. trials in treating compulsive gamblers. Scheduled to be tested on shopping addicts, Nalmefene also has potential for treating other compulsive disorders. I wonder what the consumer credit industry is thinking about this (I personally think all credit cards should carry a warning like the Surgeon General's warning on cigarettes). Via newlaunches.com (source: The Times of India) Posted by Hoyun on March 7, 2006 11:12 AM | Permalink Monday, March 06, 2006oscar recap...take two
i woke up this morning and thought 'was that the most boring oscars ever?' and then i thought, that's probably not fair. i was just really tired. and i only had enough energy last night to blog my gloating. so i'm going to give it another shot.
first things first - gracias to erin for hosting the viewing suaret. and joy and kelli - always a pleasure. the evening started with the e! red carpet show. i was eagerly awaiting isaac mizrahi's pre-show antics, but alas, i was completely disappointed. there was no groping of scarlett johanssen, no looking down teri hatcher's dress, or discussion with queen latifah about her spanks. what a disappointment. but as isaac and his boyfriend ryan seacrest both mentioned, he had been warned. sadness. at least there were plenty of celebrities to pick on in the comfort of erin's apartment with plenty of junk food to go around. what the heck was wrong with charlize theron and michelle williams? who let them out of the house like that?? jessica alba looked gorgeous, although i would have thought celebrities could afford better tattoos. and was i the only one surprised that sandra bullock and keanu reeves showed up together? e! host giuliana depandi had a terrible dress seam (making it look like it was very very cold), and naomi watts should have tried a little harder to make heath regret his jump to michelle--unless curtains really turn him on. come to think of it, that's what michelle was wearing too. thank heavens for the saving graces; eric bana, george clooney, and jake gyllenhall, who were looking mighty good. and felicity huffman looked stunning. the oscars themselves started off well, with an entertaining sequence (seen below). you might want to scroll to the bottom of the page and pause the background music before you hit play. but after that, there weren't a lot of highlights. the gay cowboy montage provided a good laugh (also included in the above clip), but the other 19 montages fell flat. hmm...wonder why these things always go long... i digress. there did come a very tense moment when kelli and i nearly came to blows over the importance of 'grease' to the human race. but fortunately, we were able to find common ground on the sheer awfulness of 'gone with the wind.' phew! mostly the show was interesting to me because the company was good, and my competitive nature kicked in. i was crossing my fingers that i would win our little oscar pool. when 'picking' the winners, i was sometimes torn by those i thought would win, and those i just really really hoped for. i shot for a balance of the two and did okay. as previously mentioned, i was surprised that brokeback didn't win more. i was also a little surprised reese actually won best actress (despite being the favorite), and the biggest, most wonderful shock of the evening was crash's best picture win. well deserved in my book. i'm still tired, and i don't know if take two was any more interesting/informative than take one, but at least you can watch the opening sequence again, right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
|