Well, school went by blazingly slow last night. My analytical writing class is a real snoozer. I actually spent a lot of time doing my assignments for class incorrectly, and was pretty disappointed to find out that I wasn't supposed to analyze the writing, but report what was written.
Besides that, isn't it a bit demanding to assign a one-page paper on an article that's only 2 pages long? What am I supposed to say without plagiarizing the whole thing?
In class we read and reviewed a couple of newspaper/magazine articles. One we reviewed was written about a VH1 show, Behind the Music. Once again, we were supposed to report (verbally) on the content, answering the question, "What is this saying?" For some reason, I thought that we might actually be studying some writing techniques, not just doing micro book-reports.
Our first paper is a profile based on an interview that we have to give. We must interview a newsworthy person, someone whom would be of note to a reader. Like, not a friend of simple business owner, but someone significant. My initial thought is to try someone big, like Hillary Rosen. Of course, that's been done by better writers than I. Maybe the new head of the RIAA (the real axis of evil) would comment for me. In any case, back to the drawing board.
Alias was darn cool on Sunday, though, wasn't it? You did watch it, didn't you? Even Dave thought it was good, and he hasn't been watching it to know what the heck was going on. Of course, Jennifer Garner in lingerie can't ever be bad. Here's a great site about Alias, in case you wanted to read about one of the best shows on TV.
Well... I hate to admit this next bit. I think I may be wavering on my position against the war with Iraq.
Yeah, yeah, I know... I've been against it for so long, and with what I think are good reasons. It just turns out that there might be a better pro-war rationale than what I had expected. Not to say that the speculation (no evidence was cited or provided, but you can find reference to some here) in the linked article can't be refuted, just that it offers a more sober reasoning for why destroying Iraq (actually, Saddam Hussein specifically) might be a good idea.
Suffice to say that if there is a war, I hope it is quick, decisive, and spreads herbicide on the seed of terrorist thought.
And I feel bad for Janeane Garofalo, because she says what she believes and they still think she's just trying to be funny. She uses humor to point out problems in our thinking, but that makes it too difficult even for the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz (the columnist) to look past to get to her serious anti-war sentiments.
I guess if the state of the union is on tonight, we might find out what Bush's plans are. Of course, if congress would just sit down and let the man talk instead of clapping after every other phrase, we could probably get more info out of him.
