avclub-92cf72685514221c79c830bfcd4aac4e--disqus
SingingEngineer
avclub-92cf72685514221c79c830bfcd4aac4e--disqus

I used to watch that special 10 times a year, uniformly distributed through the calendar.

Most of my high school D&D group was people like Daniel, so, I bought it.

I say that zero Wisdom means you can't observe anything, zero Charisma means nothing can observe you.  Quantum physics would say that getting hit with a sword counts as observing the sword and the sword wielder, so perhaps zero Wisdom also means invulnerability and zero Charisma means inability to affect the world.

He's a great actor, (as is Russel Crowe), but I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed that although he's a passable singer he's terrible for the singing role, and would have not a chance of landing it on Broadway.  Colm Wilkinson could make the high notes sound rich and dark, as could the random understudy who

Rite of Spring is the absolute perfect musical choice for such endeavors. If the idea of getting it on in a forest clearing while primitive russian savages dance around ever more frantically by the light of the moon and the bonfire, doesn't turn you on, then I just don't know what would.  Plus it's chock full of

Nah Tom Waits is all thumping consistent rhythms, songs about heartache and sleaze and despair, surely there's a time and a place when it'll go over great.

That's gonna be the name of my band, thanks.

Fascinating video, though I sort of agree with the thought that it's hard to understand if you don't already know the script.

You are correct if by "about a fifth" you actually mean "very close to a perfect fourth".  The justly tuned perfect fourth is 3:4 and 33:45 is close enough for rock an' roll.

*slide whistle*

Well it'd be even worse if you tried to blare music into your ears over the loud show…

When I wanna listen to a Daft Punk song I listen to the first ten seconds and then ten seconds in the middle and then I'm good.

He did get fat though…

"Toad" or GTFO.

I didn't love firework until I heard Matt Mulholland's cover of it.

I don't think it's hypocritical, but it's amusing.

He specifically mentions couples that can't reproduce and argues that they're a good thing.  It's not, like, a niggling detail that he forgot.

I severely dislike arguments that rely on diagnosing a deep-seated psychological issue in the opponent.  Not all who oppose affirmative action are racist, not all who oppose assault weapon bans are paranoid, not all who oppose gay marriage are homophobic, not all who  oppose abortion are misogynist.  If Mr. Card has

Really?  Not even the slightest bit of basis in the essay, to suggest that maybe he's referring to genetic gender instead of orientation?

It seemed pretty clear to me that he was referring to people born without a clear gender, in that phrase.  He was writing about how you have dudes and you have ladies and they're genetically different so you need one of each to form the whole entity which is a marriage (controlled by a single philote, I suppose,