(Just in case your jab towards "stupid white kids" was aimed at me, I should probably clarify that I'm black. I could very well still be called stupid though ha.)

Do you really believe that words can't be rendered powerless? (And I'd suggest by your final sentence, which reads as a concession, that you don't) We live in an age where words previously considered outlandish are frequently uttered on television. We've moved from a society where Lucille Ball's pregnancy was never referred to by that particular word, to one where the words "bitch" and "ass" are par for the course on public television. Would I be so glib as to suggest that they've been rendered powerless? No, of course not. But I will suggest that their power is diminished because a quick glimpse at our social landscape supports the claim. I should also note that my original statement had less to do with obsoleting a word than it did with adjusting its meaning and context, or "reconstructing" it. Something of this nature admittedly requires a protracted and concerted effort on the behalf of either the masses or an few notably influential minds, but I wouldn't say that it couldn't be done at all.

No way, that album was garbage.  Nothing he'll ever come out with will be as sick as Illmatic.

Agreed, but I guess that's neither here nor there.

As for the album title itself, I'm an avowed supporter. It may or may not be his ulterior motive to use the controversy sure to follow such a title as a means of selling more albums that he could otherwise, but I can't understand why this title could be considered any more deplorable than the use of the copious usage of the word in black culture. Do I use it? Yeah, of course, but the amount of black friends that I routinely chill with at the present sort of hampers that. That being said, if we are to defile such a powerful word and render it impotent, then we must first approach it as it is - an amalgamation of alphabetic letters which purport to create a word, a construction that in turn purports to harbor a certain meaning. To neuter this word, we must first treat it as a word. Only then can we deconstruct it, and then we reconstruct it as something new and powerless.

[/far-reaching rant.]

That's actually a good question, and one that I haven't given much consideration yet. And after a bit of consideration (re: five seconds), I realize that I'm insufferably broke and therefore incapable of giving anything to anyone this year. And it certainly doesn't help that I'm a frigid bitch either.

Merry Christmas, motherfuckers. Santa Claus ain't coming. I slew him.

I'm having an exceedingly difficult time understanding the argument here. Is it supposed to be cogent? (It isn't) Is it supposed to be droll and ironic? You're predicating your contention on an incredibly poor foundation - one must first, indisputably, prove the existence of paranormal beings in order to offer them as unassailable proof of the existence of an afterlife. Of course, even if such proof were objectively verifiable, substantial debate could be made of how this relates to the issue of an afterlife.

I'm willing to have an intelligent discourse over the possible existence of apparitions, but this is, quite honestly, a myopic and trite way of approaching the subject. And if it seems as if I'm being harsh, it's because I am. It's for the best I believe. A suggestion - citations and credible evidence supporting your claims are your friends. Get acquainted with them.

Good lord. How does the (inane) real guitar vs. simulated guitar argument surface at least once in every discussion of this series? It's essentially the most absurd and misguided tripe that could possibly be said about a game; the simulation is inferior because of its illusionary nature and therefore it is pointless to indulge in it. I play Guitar Hero for the same reason that I play the actual guitar, for entertainment value. Not because I have some misgivings about possessing the keenest technical ability. Not because I believe that there is a certain prestige that comes with dominating all others. I do it because it's fun. When on earth did video games become about anything other than that?

*breathes* </rant> and steps off of soapbox.

Anyway, I haven't actually gotten GHIII yet because I'm currently very, very broke and I'm still not entirely dissuaded from getting Rock Band instead. I'll eventually have both of them, though the current plan is to get GHIII (which I believe has the better immediate appeal) and then purchase the drum kit and Rock Band (which I believe will have the better long term value) when the instruments are offered separately next year.

And no, we don't count the 80s game. We never, ever count the 80s.

... damn.

For that much, it'd better come with a handjob.

Who says that they haven't? (Admittedly, I wouldn't be surprised if they haven't devised this for Smash. It sounds brilliant though.)

Also, the amount of fan service contained in this title is unparalleled. This is as close to getting a blow job from a Nintendo developer as any of us will ever get.

Jesus. That's some luck you've got there. Maybe I should stay on the other side of the Internet...

Anyway, here's hoping that insurance doesn't ream you too badly, though that is their way. Quite interesting (for me... I'm sure that you have other, more colorful words to describe it ha) that the Golf is so expensive to repair. The BMW though? Wow. That's fucked. And obviously very unfortunate. I take it that your brother is fine though?

Last year, I dressed as a Hobo. I got the oddest looks while working the front counter at work with the last remnants of my charcoal stick scrubbed over my face and appendages, my filthy and tattered shirt and my piecemeal blue jeans. I enjoyed myself quite a bit.

This year? There's supposed to be a speakeasy themed party on campus, which I believe is a brilliant idea. I'm pretty tempted to dress up as a flapper, but I'm not willing to shave for the part. If I was going for era authenticity though, my costume might consist solely of a noose ha.

Also, one might be weary of unnecessarily condemning American culture based upon the puritanical polemics ubiquitous in our purported liberal media. Admittedly, being from the south, I've experienced my fair share of trivial vilification towards Halloween, but most seem to view this as a neutral rite. The younger the individual, the more healthy the skepticism tends to be.

(Dubious source, ho!?!?)

Intriguing, but this seems an entirely logical means of introducing your child to language and perhaps one not entirely novel if not for lack of adoption in formalized education. It makes less sense to attempt to teach a child to read by simply showing them words themselves, devoid of context and meaning, as they might appear in a text book. Still, it is interesting to see how early a child may be able to internalize such things.

Also, it's nice to see how many baby geniuses we have floating about the internet. I had no idea it was so common to be reading (and comprehending... that's pretty important too.) before the age of three. I wonder if there are any of us who can recall reading through War and Peace while safely tucked away in our mother's wombs. (I, for one, found it shallow and pedantic)

I don't really know enough about Into the Moat to suggest something particularly similar to them, but I can definitely oblige you with the chaotic/atonal/Stravinsky school. Consider - if you haven't already done so - Bartók, Holst, Grieg, and, more progressively, Varese (not necessarily his electroacoustical works, though those should be explored as well), Penderecki and maybe Messiaen. Most of these composers aren't explicitly similar to Stravinsky, (and really, how fun would that be?) but you'll find that they often share a similar sense of aesthetics. Except for Varese maybe. That man is pretty damn idiosyncratic.

At least three of my friends went to Voodoo, and I'm still somewhat incensed that due to being stranded in the middle of fucking nowhere (aka, Marlboro, Vermont), I couldn't possibly have gone myself. Granted, I'd have only really been going for a handful of bands and staying far, far away from the premises on Sunday (Common being the sole exception in a day filled with tripe), but still... I'm going to be petulant about this.

Well, not really. I just talked to one of them who was of course raving about the Rage set (although he apparently thinks that they didn't play that long though I'd take an hour and half for sure) and somewhat violent due to the fact that the Pumpkins didn't play Zero. Lucky bastard also got to see Porcupine Tree, which would have made my year I believe.

I have a fauxhawk of sorts (it would probably be more accurate to describe it as a 'frohawk'), though I'm fairly certain that I'm about to start over with something new. One of the more annoying things about being on a campus of this size (~350 students) is that individuals are assimilated at a rather expedited rate, as evidenced by the outbreak of mohawks and fauxhawks within the last month or so. I distinctly remember being one of two people with that hairstyle before this. Oh well, individuality, like all jokes, shouldn't be taken too seriously anyway.

I'm considering the possibilty of dreadlocks now, though I'm not entirely sold on whether or not I'd look like a cunt with them or not. Only a precious few manage to avoid that. Other than that, I'm pretty conflicted. Wearing my hair short is interminably dull, and I've never been partial to rocking an afro. And, finally, I'm still not convinced that any black male should ever, ever straighten their hair. In my experience, black hair just seems to be too coarse and tightly coiled to suspend this state for very long. This may not stop me from trying again.