Gay Patriot Header Image

Back to Blogging with a New Computer

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 6:15 pm - March 7, 2006.
Filed under: Blogging

When I spilled water on my laptop while liveblogging the Oscars, I hastened the demise of that computer. Perhaps he knew that I was planning on getting a new one and wanted to end things with me before I ended things with him. I just returned from the Apple Store in the Grove with a new computer and expect to be back to blogging by Thursday.

It has been an unusual past few days for me. The battery in my car died, then I accidently broke a window in my apartment (more on that perhaps anon) and then my computer (beginning to experience some odd problems almost as soon as the AppleCare warranty expired) blew a fuse probably because it could not process the fact that George Clooney won an Oscar for acting. What next, Madonna winning an award for Catholic piety?

So, I’m back on line and expect to delight y’all soon enough with diverse discourse and debate.

Share

31 Comments

  1. LOL….an Apple Store in the Grove.

    That brought a smile to my afternoon.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — March 7, 2006 @ 7:17 pm - March 7, 2006

  2. ND30–Funny how many times I’ve been there and didn’t think of it until you commented.

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — March 7, 2006 @ 7:25 pm - March 7, 2006

  3. Hey Dan, did you buy the old computer with a credit card? If so you may still be warranty covered. Many credit cards automatically double the manufacturer’s original warranty and cover any costs incurred if the item would otherwise be covered by warranty….

    Just a thought.

    Comment by caltechgirl — March 7, 2006 @ 8:14 pm - March 7, 2006

  4. ya just can’t let go of George Clooney, can ya? heh heh heh.

    Conservatives using Macs? maybe there is hope.

    Comment by Kevin — March 7, 2006 @ 8:23 pm - March 7, 2006

  5. Perhaps he knew that I was planning on getting a new one and wanted to end things with me before I ended things with him.

    Well, at least you can still be friends.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 7, 2006 @ 8:37 pm - March 7, 2006

  6. Hey Kev, in the interest of completely destroying each and every one of your preconceptions…

    I’m as conservative as they come, and I run a 17-inch G4 Powerbook. Been a Mac guy ever since Final Cut Pro became the industry standard, and I wouldn’t go back to a PC (or that f*cking Blue Screen of Death) if ya paid me to.

    Eric in La-La Land

    Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — March 7, 2006 @ 10:22 pm - March 7, 2006

  7. Caltechgirl, the old computer was over three years old and I did buy it with a credit card. I even remember which card I used so may go through my old receipts.

    And Eric, looks like we now have the same computer.

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — March 7, 2006 @ 10:30 pm - March 7, 2006

  8. 6: it’s called satiric humor…

    Comment by Kevin — March 7, 2006 @ 11:22 pm - March 7, 2006

  9. #6

    Ever see Why Mac Sucks over at Google Video? ;P

    #8

    Oh. That explains all your posts.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 8, 2006 @ 4:53 am - March 8, 2006

  10. LOL, TGC!!!!

    Some people think they’re the only funny ones in the room, huh?

    Lighten up, Kev, will ya please?????

    Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — March 8, 2006 @ 10:30 am - March 8, 2006

  11. TCG, I don’t which was funnier…. and Apple in the Grove by NDXXX or the notion that all of Kev’s comments are meant as satiric humor.

    But I am smiling –thanks to both.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — March 8, 2006 @ 11:38 am - March 8, 2006

  12. Beware Mercury in retrograde.

    Comment by Miss Grundy — March 8, 2006 @ 5:06 pm - March 8, 2006

  13. My first note was meant as little con vs lib joke. It’s unfortunate that a specific few here are so intent about attacking anyone who disagrees their point view that they’ve blown it so out of proportion. sheesh.

    Comment by Kevin — March 8, 2006 @ 9:40 pm - March 8, 2006

  14. Hang tough, bud!

    About Macs… back when I bought my iMac last year (before the Intel chip onslaught) Apple used to brag that Macs were better and faster because they DIDN’T have Intel chips! Their tune has changed, for reasons this user can’t explain.

    But whatever… I’m still feeling the love of my iMac, I just love it, even with the (now) inferior chip.

    Comment by -Ed. — March 8, 2006 @ 10:23 pm - March 8, 2006

  15. Kevin said…

    “It’s unfortunate that a specific few here are so intent about attacking anyone who disagrees their point view that they’ve blown it so out of proportion. sheesh. “

    Hey, don’t blame me if you’ve earned a reputation for being such an unconscionable asshole that anything you say is taken literally.

    Eric in The Valley (albeit temporarily)

    Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — March 9, 2006 @ 12:59 am - March 9, 2006

  16. By the way, Kev…

    Nobody attacked you, Mr. Paranoia. Get a grip.

    Eric in the shit

    Comment by HollywoodNeoCon — March 9, 2006 @ 1:01 am - March 9, 2006

  17. It just gets under your skin like a chigger doesn’t it? Bet you’d be happy to live in a world tht brooks no dissent, wouldn’t you? You just can’t stand the fact that this guy is good looking, popular, rich and uses his career as a place to express his constitutionally protected point of view.

    Comment by Kevin — March 6, 2006 @ 7:54 pm – March 6, 2006

    “It’s unfortunate that a specific few here are so intent about attacking anyone who disagrees their point view that they’ve blown it so out of proportion. sheesh. “

    Comment by Kevin — March 8, 2006 @ 9:40 pm – March 8, 2006

    Comment by V the K — March 9, 2006 @ 10:13 am - March 9, 2006

  18. 15: You may have that opinion of me, but this coming from a website that indulges itself on continually attacking people (even the most casual of poster) who dares to even suggest disagreeing with the tiniest part of the ideology of neoconservatism? please.

    By the way, I happen to notice that posts about what a great job Bush has been doing have been trickled to almost nothing. 34% job approval, the Dubai port purchase debacle, video showing that he was told in advance of the havoc Katrina would wreak on the gulf/new orleans. Hmmmm.

    If you don’t want to read other opinions, then I suggest that you make this a password protected site so you can enjoy a mutual admiration society.

    Comment by Kevin — March 9, 2006 @ 3:51 pm - March 9, 2006

  19. GPW: “So, I’m back on line and expect to delight y’all soon enough with diverse discourse and debate.”

    Suggested Topics:

    1. Dubai (resolved)
    2. NSA on FISA Warrantless Wiretaps
    3. White House Katrina on Tape
    4. Michael Brown’s Indictment of the President
    5. Impending Civil War in Iraq
    6. Government Checks and Balances (Imperial Presidency)
    7. Congress’s Impotency (Snowe, Hegel, et alia)
    8. Right-Wing Scheme to Deny Gay Adoptions
    9. The “Homosexual” Agenda
    10. Unintelligent Design (Robertson’s Ministry in Dover, PA)
    11. What Is “Conservatism?”
    12. Why GWB Is Not a Conservative
    13. Fascist Impulses (Clues to Current Goverance)
    14. Islamofascism and the Religious Right (Birds of a Feather)
    15. Patriotism in a Time of War

    Or, you can rehash DADT again, consuming endless pages of “argument” over a simple “equality” matter.

    Comment by Stephen — March 9, 2006 @ 4:12 pm - March 9, 2006

  20. Stephen, you left off YOUR favorites… “Rumsfeld secretly meets with Saddam to plot MiddleEast implosion” or “Bush lied, soliders died” or “GOP National Party Platform hints at the need for Gay Concentrations Camps” or “My dissent is patriotism personified; your dissent is anti-American” or “Why a cut-and-run President like Tommie Jefferson would be good for all of us Blame America 1sters”.

    Stephen, I don’t think someone who knee jerks to HowieDean’s last talking point should chide Dan on anything.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — March 9, 2006 @ 4:43 pm - March 9, 2006

  21. 15: You may have that opinion of me, but this coming from a website that indulges itself on continually attacking people (even the most casual of poster) who dares to even suggest disagreeing with the tiniest part of the ideology of neoconservatism? please.

    Right. We’ll file that away with where you called me a “fascist” because you claimed I never disagreed with Bush.

    Of course, you didn’t want to see otherwise, because it rather neatly blows out of the water your theory that everyone is attacked here who ever disagrees with Bush and exposes you as a stereotyping idiot.

    But unfortunately, the truth IS the truth.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — March 9, 2006 @ 6:57 pm - March 9, 2006

  22. And Matt, you forgot Stephen’s best post: the one where he says gay Republicans and conservatives want to write the Bible into the Constitution, strip gays of jobs and housing, and march them off to concentration camps.

    By the way, I notice Kevin and the other Stephen apologists here who regularly cheer his words as gospel ran like hell when I reposted that.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — March 9, 2006 @ 7:16 pm - March 9, 2006

  23. For everyone here who supported, admired, respected or loved Ronald Reagan, I herewith post an article from Wednesday’s edition of the Washington Post:

    If the ancient political wisdom is correct that a charge unanswered is a charge agreed to, the Bush White House pleaded guilty yesterday at the Cato Institute to some extraordinary charges.

    “We did ask a few members of the Bush economic team to come,” explained David Boaz, the think tank’s executive vice president, as he moderated a discussion between two prominent conservatives about President Bush. “We didn’t get that.”

    Now why would the administration pass up such an invitation?

    Well, it could have been because of the first speaker, former Reagan aide Bruce Bartlett, author of the new book, “Impostor. How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy.” Bartlett called the administration “unconscionable,” “irresponsible,” “vindictive” and “inept.”

    It might also have had something to do with speaker No. 2, conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan, author of the forthcoming “The Conservative Soul: How We Lost It; How to Get It Back.” Sullivan called Bush “reckless” and a “socialist” and accused him of betraying “almost every principle conservatism has ever stood for.”

    Nor was moderator Boaz a voice of moderation. He blamed Bush for a “48 percent increase in speanding in just six years,” a “federalization of public schools” and “the biggest entitlement since LBJ.”

    True, the small-government libertarians represented by Cato have always been the odd men out of the Bush coalition. But the standing-room-only forum yesterday, where just a single questioner offered even a tepid defense of the president, underscored some deep disillusionment among conservatives over Bush’s big-spending answer to Medicare and Hurricane Katrina, his vast claims of executive power, and his handling of postwar Iraq.

    Bartlett, who lost his job at the free-market National Center for Policy Analysis because of his book, said that if conservatives were honest, more would join his complaint. “They’re reticent to address the issues that I’ve raised for fear that they might have to agree with them,” he told the group. “And a lot of Washington think tanks and groups of that sort, they know that this White House is very vindictive.”

    Waiting for the talk to start, some in the audience expressed their ambivalence.

    “It’s gonna hit the [bestseller] lists, I’m sure,” said Cato legal expert, Roger Pilon.

    “Typical Bruce,” replied John Taylor of the Virginia Institute for Public Policy.

    Admitted Pilon: “He’s got a lot of material to work with.”

    (Continued)

    Comment by Jack Allen — March 9, 2006 @ 7:19 pm - March 9, 2006

  24. (Cato forum story continued)

    Bartlett certainly thought so. He began by predicting a big tax increase “to finance the inevitable growth og government that is in the pipeline that President Bush is largely responsible for.” He also said many fellow conservatives don’t know about the “quite dreadful” traits of the administration, such as the absence of “anybody who does any serious analysis” on policy issues.

    Boaz assured the audience that he told the White House that “if there’s a rebuttal to what Bruce has said, please come and provide it.”

    Instead, Sullivan was on hand to second the critique. “This is a big-government agenda,” he said. “It is fueled by a new ideology, the ideology of Christian fundamentalism.” The bearded pundit offered his own indictment of Bush: “complete contempt” for democratic processes, torture of detainees, ignoring habeas corpus and a “vast expansion of the federal government.” The notion, he said, that the “Thatcher-Reagan legacy that many of us grew up to love and support would end this way is an astonishing paradox and a great tragedy.”

    The question period gave the two a chance to come up with new insults.

    “If Bush were running today against Bill Clinton, I’d vote for Clinton,” Bartlett served.

    “You have to understand the people in this administration have no principles,” Sullivan volleyed. “Any principles that get in the way of the electoral map have to be dispensed with.”

    Boaz renewed his plea. “Any Bush economists hiding in the audience.”

    There was, in fact, one Bush Treasury official on the attendance roster, but he did not surface. The only man who came close to defending Bush, environmental conservative Fred Singer, said he was “willing to overlook” the faults because of the president’s Supreme Court nominations. Even Richard Walker, representing the think tank that fired Bartlett, declined to argue. “I agree with most of it,” he said later.

    Unchallenged, the Bartlett-Sullivan tag team continued. “The entire intellectual game has been given away by the Republican president,” said Sullivan. “He’s a socialist in many respects, a Christian socialist.”

    Bartlett argued that Richard Nixon “is the model for everything Bush is doing.”

    Sullivan said Karl Rove’s political strategy is “pathetic.”

    Barlett said that “the administration lies about budget numbers.”

    “He is not a responsible human being; he is a phenomenally reckless human being,” Sullivan proclaimed. “There is a level of recklessness involved that is beyond any ideology.”

    “Gosh,” Boaz interjected, “I wish we had a senior White House aide up here.”

    -30-

    I’m not saying I agree with everything said at the forum; just putting out here to prompt some debate.

    Comment by Jack Allen — March 9, 2006 @ 7:42 pm - March 9, 2006

  25. Mac guy here as well…Running a 14 inch iBook G4 here. Also have a U2 iPod that the significant other got me for Christmas year before last. I’m hoping to get one of those new hot MacBook Pro’s as soon as they get the bugs worked out of them regarding the screens (hear that the screens have a tendency to mess up on them for no reason).

    Comment by ARCountryBoy — March 9, 2006 @ 7:45 pm - March 9, 2006

  26. I’m not saying I agree with everything said at the forum; just putting out here to prompt some debate.

    LOL….first it was invoking Barry Goldwater. Now it’s invoking Ronald Reagan.

    At any rate, already answered. And I see no reason to change my opinion, especially given the fact that it appears Bartlett and Sullivan’s main purpose for being there was to hurl insults and namecall the Bush administration. It makes me wonder if their motivation is less economic and more irrational hatred.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — March 9, 2006 @ 8:00 pm - March 9, 2006

  27. Boy! Silly boys! I understand why you don’t want to go “there,” I sure as hell wouldn’t either. It’s hardly a coincident that any one of the major issues of the past two weeks has not been seen or heard of on this blog.

    What’s truly amazing is that the Michael Specter article in the Mar. 13 issue of the New Yorker fazes none of you (pp. 58 ff.). I don’t know, but I might of have thought that health issues, especially those that directly affect gays, would cross the political barrier, kind of like AIDS. Alas, no.

    Yes, it’s pathetic that our very own President would undermine the demonstrable facts and evidence of evolution theory in favor of unintelligent design, but undermining everyone’s access to basic health needs is way over the top. Of course, we all know about Bush’s spending 33% of the AIDS budget on extreme religious organizations. Never mind the separation of religion and state.

    And, I might have thought that the prevention of the spread of AIDS would be paramount to everyone, not just gays, regardless of political affiliation. You know? Like with condoms? But we can’t tell anyone about preventing AIDS by using condoms. GWB says No. So all you queers must be masturbating incessantly. At least masturbation “fits” under GWB’s definition of “abstinence” — well sort of. But, if you get off by fantasizing “doing it” with GWB, please don’t tell the rest of us. Keep that precious secret to yourselves.

    Now, I know I am a ranting communist liberal for saying this, but maybe things like an HPV vaccination is in everyone’s interest? You think? Even if YOU think women should be coerced into bearing a child because Plan B has been outlawed (or now, significantly marginalized), all people have an interest in stopping the spread of HPV and HIV. Well, almost all people. You’re right, GWB does not like the idea. After all, Focus on the Family say “nicht.” So everyone must suffer because Focus on the Family wants people to pay with their lives for f**king around. Straights, too! You get a disease; you DIE from it! Get pregnant? Suffer! That’s the religious right’s motto. Praise Allah!

    Meanwhile, while treatable diseases go untreated, let’s all join Reverend Pat in Dover, PA, where we can call that pathetic little town to repentance. Gawd’s already done New Orleans in. Now we have to “repair” the damage Dover has done in order to avert Gawd’s wrath. Gawd made heaven and earth in six days, but those idiots apparently don’t read their Bible. They actually believe science. Outrage!

    As for HPV, HIV, and Plan B: What an abomination! Die, you queers. Live with that baby you don’t want. That’s Gawd’s plan for you! It says so in the Bible. And all the GP queers went: Yes, masta! Yes.

    Comment by Stephen — March 9, 2006 @ 8:16 pm - March 9, 2006

  28. Masturbation? Oh, my gawd, Stephen! You’ll give Antonin Scalia, Bush’s favorite Supreme Court justice, a heart attack.

    Don’t you remember as Scalia fumed about Lawrence vs Texas he feared, among other evil deeds, that the majority might even legalize masturbation. The guy has a hard time figuring out whether he’s interpreting the United States Constitution or Catholic dogma.

    Comment by Jack Allen — March 9, 2006 @ 8:34 pm - March 9, 2006

  29. Scalia fumed about Lawrence vs Texas he feared, among other evil deeds, that the majority might even legalize masturbation.

    Um, no. That’s a pretty warped interpretation of what Scalia’s dissent actually read. But, honest characterization of the opposing point-of-view really isn’t your forte.

    Comment by V the K — March 9, 2006 @ 8:51 pm - March 9, 2006

  30. 25: Wait til the major applications get an update too…in some cases they’ll run slower than on the faster g4 powerbook.

    Comment by Kevin — March 9, 2006 @ 9:52 pm - March 9, 2006

  31. And, I might have thought that the prevention of the spread of AIDS would be paramount to everyone, not just gays, regardless of political affiliation. You know? Like with condoms? But we can’t tell anyone about preventing AIDS by using condoms. GWB says No.

    You know what’s funny, Stephen? There’s a group out there that has, for twenty-plus years, completely removed morals and religion from sex discussions, pooh-poohed and mocked abstinence, and pushed condom use as the be-all and end-all of disease prevention.

    It’s called the gay community. And you know what? It still has the highest rate of infection and one of the highest rates of new infection of all groups.

    So, why don’t you prove that you can teach adults safe sex before you try teaching it to teenagers?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — March 10, 2006 @ 12:27 am - March 10, 2006

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.