1. Speed.

WTF? You come home from work, and you're tired, but too keyed up to crash just yet. So you decide to artificially stimulate your adrenal glands or whatever into keeping you awake until next Wednesday, but you'll be too jittery to get anything done.

Some of us are like that to begin with.

Posted by: Attila at 10:48 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.

Goldstein has the definitive roundup/debate.

Posted by: Attila at 05:16 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 9 words, total size 1 kb.

. . . prefers the "plug-in drug."

Who knew?

(h/t Goldstein)

Posted by: Attila at 12:30 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 19 words, total size 1 kb.

Although I never thought I'd see a situation in which O'Conner would get an issue right, and Scalia would get it wrong. What is that man smoking?

Scalia is a piggy cow, I tell you: a piggy piggy piggy cow.

Posted by: Attila at 11:51 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 52 words, total size 1 kb.

For those who need background, here's the previous Althouse summary of the issues. Apparently she plans on reviewing the decision today, and posting a new analysis.

I'm not a lawyer, and I simply don't agree that growing pot for use at home is "commerce." And I think this whole affair is an egregious intrusion into state matters by the Feds.

But, you know: that's me. Just a chick with an opinion. We'll see what Ann has to say.

UPDATE: Ann's got a couple of entries up on the subject; hit her main page, and keep scrolling.

Posted by: Attila at 09:09 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 100 words, total size 1 kb.

I've always known that Desert Cat and I largely agreed about the evils of the drug war (and in particular Marijuana Prohibition). But I'd never before read this piece of his, in which he explains why his postions are not inconsistent with his evangelical beliefs.

It's pretty convincing.

Posted by: Attila at 12:54 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 56 words, total size 1 kb.

. . . writes about the Supremes taking their sweet time adjudicating California's medical marijuana law; it's a nice summary of the legal issues involved.

Here's my constitutional reasoning: we passed a freakin' law. For the Feds to come in here and arrest cancer patients who are following state law is just outrageous.

Growing dope and then smoking it is not commerce, any more than knitting a scarf and wearing it is. If the weed wasn't purchased, you must acquit.

If SCOTUS upholds the Feds on this, I'm going to scream. And you'll be able to hear me around the world. After that, I'll hold my breath until I turn blue. Then I'll join the tunnel-vision single-issue losers at NORML, out of frustration.

Posted by: Attila at 01:53 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 125 words, total size 1 kb.

1 I'll come with you.

Posted by: gail at May 16, 2005 05:21 AM (47cun)

2 Yes.

Posted by: k at May 16, 2005 10:01 AM (ywZa8)

3 Can an employer fire an employee if he/she doesn't pass a drug test that envolves Medical Marijuana?

Posted by: JFH at May 16, 2005 12:38 PM (XD9Ug)

4 Interesting theoretical question, but a lot of the people approved to receive marijuana are too sick to work, at least full-time. And their conditions--and treatments--would be known prior to employment.

Posted by: Attila Girl at May 16, 2005 01:18 PM (x/EKm)

5 When they're done with this case, maybe SCOTUS can look into some Florida cases. Here, we jail patients for taking legal, legally prescribed painkillers. You think you got it bad? It really can get worse.

Posted by: k at May 16, 2005 04:07 PM (6krEN)

6 Nothing wrong with joining them early either. They may be single-issue, but that issue has wide applicability for the concept of individual liberty.

Posted by: Desert Cat at May 16, 2005 10:10 PM (xdX36)

7 Yes. And I've been a single-issue "loser" forever WRT the NRA and All Things Gunny. So it's probably time.

Posted by: Attila Girl at May 16, 2005 10:41 PM (x/EKm)

8 Heh! Look at your google ads. Can they zero in or what?

Posted by: Desert Cat at May 16, 2005 11:28 PM (xdX36)

9 I'm seeing ads for hotels in Weed, CA; gardening supplies; and two ads for "vaporizers," which appear to be the latest alternatives to bongs, I mean water pipes.

Posted by: Attila Girl at May 17, 2005 09:32 AM (x/EKm)

10 Right. Growing and using supplies. Nobody grows tomatoes indoors under HID lights.

Posted by: Desert Cat at May 17, 2005 12:37 PM (n/TmV)

11 Shocked, shocked!

Posted by: Attila Girl at May 17, 2005 01:57 PM (x/EKm)

12 Great. Good ol' Florida. After the turnkey hydroponics and Medical Marijuana Pro/Con ads, I see: Help for Marijuana Addict. And where? It's a Florida facility. **sigh** This used to be such a fun place to live.

Posted by: k at May 18, 2005 06:15 PM (6krEN)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

. . . doesn't think The Wall (the album) quite lived up to its hype. I haven't heard it all the way through in over a decade, but there are a handful of tracks on it that are truly amazing.

It is worth noting, however, that when it was time for me to buy Floyd CDs, I started with Dark Side, and then I acquired Wish You Were Here. I'm now ready for The Wall again; I hope absence has made the heart grow even more fond.

Posted by: Attila at 01:18 AM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 89 words, total size 1 kb.

1 You have to get "Animals." Best Floyd album EVER! I have burned through 3 cassettes and 2 cd'.

Posted by: William Teach at April 28, 2005 05:15 AM (HxpPK)

2 Heck I own the Wall on DVD, waht and odd flick. Also learned redheads will ruin you life....

Posted by: the Pirate at April 28, 2005 06:21 AM (Khg8i)

3 Animals is better than The Wall. And The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway (by Genesis) is a better story told as a double album. See if you can find the DVD of the movie, The Wall, probably not worth buying, but worth seeing once. And yes, it is an odd flick...

Posted by: Zendo Deb at April 28, 2005 09:38 AM (S417T)

4 I did see it, but it was in the 80s and my memories have faded a little. I'd see it one more time.

Posted by: Attila Girl at April 28, 2005 10:08 AM (U8eQl)

5 The Wall lived up and surpassed any hype...period. Have you played Dark Side while watching Wizard of Oz? I thought it was just a bunch of exaggerated hype. Then I did it and it blew me away. Either one of the most amazing series of coincidences of all time or it was intentionally written to coincide with the film.

Posted by: Don at April 28, 2005 11:15 AM (FsGoB)

6 That is one of my life goals, yes.

Posted by: Attila Girl at April 28, 2005 01:14 PM (U8eQl)

7 I was too hip for Pink Floyd, whom I considered fat old rockers. And I couldn't take seriously a bunch of millionaires telling kids they didn't need to go to school

Posted by: jeff at April 28, 2005 02:25 PM (LRJb7)

8 I wrote my own Wall post about a week into my blog. it is still one of my favorite albums - and posts

Posted by: Stephen Macklin at April 28, 2005 04:54 PM (U3CvV)

9 Done the Wizard of OZ thing, it was pretty interesting. Come to think of it, my parents took me to see them when I was 4, that really could explain alot.

Posted by: the Pirate at April 28, 2005 10:26 PM (Khg8i)

10 And now, my list of "Most Overhyped blogs" ...

Posted by: Laurence Simon at April 29, 2005 07:04 AM (uBCxH)

11 Uh-oh.

Posted by: Attila Girl at April 29, 2005 09:55 AM (U8eQl)

12 If y'all can find it, buy or rent Pink Floyd's Live at Pompeii. Incredible.

Posted by: William Teach at April 29, 2005 04:42 PM (HxpPK)

13 Live @ Pompeii - OK. I really like Seamus (my dog Seamus) Most of the music is from Meddle. If you are serious about old Floyd Albums, buy Uma Guma (is this out as a DVD?) it was 2 old single albums combined and sold as 1 double. Great stuff like Set the Controls for The Heart of the Sun. This was truly acid rock.

Posted by: Zendo Deb at April 29, 2005 05:58 PM (S417T)

14 Got it. Someone pinched my "Works" album, gotta buy it on CD. Best title "Several species of small furry animals gathered together in a cave and grooving with a pict." The rumours I read were that it was a tribute to Hendrix. No clue if that is true or not.

Posted by: William Teach at April 29, 2005 06:09 PM (HxpPK)

15 I've heard that "song." It was on a compilation tape someone made that I think I still have.

Posted by: Attila Girl at April 29, 2005 07:03 PM (U8eQl)

16 Yup, pretty much noise for, um, stoners and trippers to listen to. The end has the words, in a really deep Scottish Broughe, "and the wind cried Mary."

Posted by: William Teach at April 30, 2005 03:44 PM (HxpPK)

17 Yeah we used to get the new kid (what ever new kid that came up in the rotation) really ripped and then play "small furry animals...pict" for him at Vol. 11 on the stero. The only thing funnier than that was doing juggling when your audience was tripping on windowpane. It's a wonder I lived through that season of my life. JD

Posted by: jd bell at May 01, 2005 06:31 PM (PiRll)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I've been tearing the sofa apart. Nothing. Except some weird looks from my husband.

Posted by: Attila at 01:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 20 words, total size 1 kb.

Via Desert Cat, we find this means of attaining real absinth*, which is apparently legal in the U.S. if it is only for individual consumption and not for re-sale.

Ith must be a happy girl indeed. I wonder if she is sometimes tempted to simply drink milk . . . after all, it isn't easy to get the good stuff.

* Eastern European spelling.

Posted by: Attila at 02:25 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 74 words, total size 1 kb.

Michele actually runs a picture of the latest obscenity from Mickey D's:

This is a McDonald's Adult Happy Meal. Salad, water and a prize of a fitness book and stepometer.

That is not a Happy Meal. It is a Sad Meal.

Ice cream, tequila, nachos and a prize of porn: That is a happy meal.

Posted by: Attila at 01:53 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.

Via Venomous Kate, two porn stars have just tested positive for HIV; a number of performers have been quarantined as potentially exposed, and production has been suspended on a few sets until the extent of the outbreak is known.

So much for economic growth in the San Fernando Valley.

Posted by: Attila at 08:55 AM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Are you volunteering to pick up the slack? I know a brilliant - albeit a tad slow in actual shooting - cinemaphotographer and a linguistically adept fluffer...

Posted by: Little Mr Mahatma at April 16, 2004 07:56 PM (BZ0tI)

2 "Fluffer." I'm going to tell him you said that.

Posted by: Attila Girl at April 17, 2004 12:04 AM (SYwua)

3 Of course, what will actually reflect well on the industry is if this gets them to finally implement a long-overdue condoms-mandatory policy. (To be fair, many of the large producers are already condoms-mandatory, and hats off to them.) They'd better; if they don't, the goverment will do it for them.

Posted by: Christophe at April 17, 2004 12:55 AM (2rBIo)

4 I'd like to see how many porn actors have contracted HIV, and compare it to the number working, and then do a similar analysis of stunt performers for action films, to determine which group is at greater risk. What proportion of current smut features condoms at present? Would you be willing to be the trailblazer, if the government isn't willing to step in?

Posted by: Attila Girl at April 17, 2004 02:09 AM (SYwua)

5 The problem is market. If condoms in U.S. productions become mandatory how will it affect sales of U.S. films. I bet sales'd drop. Will it send yet another American market overseas where rules may be more lax? -LMM

Posted by: Little Mr Mahatma at April 17, 2004 07:29 PM (/KtV/)

6 While we don't know how many porn actors have contracted HIV, this is the first HIV scare in the industry since 1999. I'll admit that Blowfish hasn't had a consistent policy on this, but in our defense, I'll say that: (a) We've made exactly one film, and (b) the one M/F couple in it knew each other before the shoot, are married, and don't use condoms in their daily sex life. If we became a standard producer, we'd be condoms-mandatory. I'm not convinced that requiring condoms would cause a huge flight overseas. Many of the major producers (Wicked, Vivid, Private, VCA) are already condoms-mandatory, even when doing overseas production. Requiring proper safety requirement to any business adds cost, but that doesn't mean it is the wrong thing to do.

Posted by: Christophe at April 18, 2004 09:32 AM (xYu5N)

7 It wasn't a question of cost; I'm wondering whether, from a male POV, condom use detracts from the intended result of the film, e.g., sexual excitement. After all, isn't there supposed to be a vicarious enjoyment of the action therein? A lot of men I know still hate condoms, and I've been told that the only ones that are remotely workable--that is, transmit a sensation approximating that of bareback sex--are the lambskin variety, which of course are next to worthless from a disease-prevention POV.

Posted by: Attila Girl at April 18, 2004 12:33 PM (SYwua)

8 That's a good question. Here's my take on it: Just to get it out of the way, the question isn't (obviously) what the talent thinks feels good. They're professionals, and they'll cope. And except for the minority of serious whackos, they're not any wilder about getting a disease than the female talent. (After all, HIV is the nastiest thing out there, but it is still not the only one.) The jury is out, and might always be, on whether or not condom use in movies turns off the male viewers enough that they don't buy the product. The major studios (Vivid, Wicked, Private, VCA, etc.) that are all-condom are doing just fine, so it's clearly not a product-line-killer. Most of the female Big Name Stars insist on condoms, and no one has a problem with that. In fact, the only major studio that I can think of that is condom-optional is Evil Angel (and I'm not 100% sure on that). Most directors have gotten pretty good at cutting in such a way that you don't see the condom go on or in use except during the actual in-and-out. Transparent condoms are much clearer now than they used to be, too. The smaller studios are generally condom-optional or bareback-required. One could argue that this is their ecological niche, and they are picking up viewers who want to see bareback sex. But none of them are eating the majors alive. Waaaaay back in the mid-90s, the major studios argued that any condom use at all would kill off sales. Then, they felt they had to switch (in part because the female superstars were demanding it), they did, and nothing bad happened... the industry kept growing just like it did before. I'd have to take that as evidence that the concerns about condoms killing sales are overblown. As far as condoms not feeling like anything (the "showering with a raincoat on" problem, as we like to say), condoms have gotten a lot better in that regard over the last five years. The Avanti and Inspiral feel pretty good to my wobbly bits. It's true that we are probably years away from a barrier that feels just like bareback, though. Given the alternatives, though, I think this an area where we can just be grownups and deal with it.

Posted by: Christophe at April 18, 2004 06:35 PM (xYu5N)

9 I hadn't realized that they cut out the actual process of putting the condom on. I'm sure that makes a big difference, experientially, to the male viewer. The big revolution would be if they allowed the man to simply come inside the woman, rather than having to show the semen. I've always assumed that this was so the viewer would know the actor wasn't just simulating orgasm (as if some guys care about whether even the women they see might be doing this).

Posted by: Attila Girl at April 18, 2004 11:44 PM (SYwua)

10 The revolution has been here for quite some time as judging by the plethora of creampie sites and films...not that I'm aware of such things...

Posted by: Little Mr Mahatma at April 19, 2004 08:57 AM (BZ0tI)

11 I will always trust you to be aware of these things.

Posted by: Attila Girl at April 19, 2004 01:03 PM (SYwua)

12 Yep. I have eyes but cannot see, 'specially after the S.O. is done reaming them out with a torque screwdriver.

Posted by: Little Mr Mahatma at April 19, 2004 03:24 PM (BZ0tI)

13 Ah--the vague, fake protests of the fundamentally happy man.

Posted by: Attila Girl at April 20, 2004 12:59 AM (q85Vj)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

James at OTB discusses the DOJ's new policies on enforcing anti-pornography laws. He wonders whether this is a good use of Federal dollars. Me too.

Posted by: Attila at 02:08 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.