Comic for Thursday, June 29th, 2006

Posted: 7:50 am, Thursday, June 29th

If I had a lot of teenage-boy fans (or alternately, 35-year old comic shop owner fans), the girls' outfits would be what is known as 'fan service.' As it is, I dunno, girls at a rooftop cookout on the 4th, is it actually out of the realm of possibility they'd be wearing swimsuits? I don't think it is. And, predictably, Pete's just happy to be there.

Being crazy and having taken two full courses and several week-long seminars on Dante, I am torn between appreciating this for its humor and going into academic mode and pointing out how horrible the punishments in the Inferno actually are. Since there’s not a single person this side of Ted Cachey that wants to hear me do that, I’m going to say this is funny. But inaccurate.

I can’t believe this isn’t a joke. No offense, Carla, but, uh…  I guess it’s a nice project Gawker does, though, donating leftover ad space to artists. Then there’s this one. I’m hoping he’s taking the piss out of himself with this paragraph… Speaking of bad art, I've got some other good stuff. Anyone see Something Awful's Awful Link of the Day yesterday? It's fantastic. It's an art wholesaler that sells fantastic stuff like this, and also a whole range of Thomas Kinkade crapola. As my final installment of bad art, there's this artist that has a mystifying ad in the back of this month's Harper's. Even odder, none of the art on this page seems to reflect what's being advertised in Harper's - it's this really ... kind of bad drawing of a guy freaking out over a metallic-shiny pool of red liquid or something. I dunno. I was hoping the picture would be on his site. Alas.

2.0 is tearing through the Left Hand of God right now – delaying my completing it, but allowing me to finally blow the dust off some old New Yorkers – and also found this in the new simple-to-navigate and pleasing-to-the-eye Slate. It is the blog of an “ignoramus” reading the Bible, and it’s been going on for nearly two months. So far, it’s pretty enjoyable. I especially like the title of the second edition of the Genesis blog, “Abraham v. God.” It's an interesting series, focusing mostly on how appallingly violent the first two books (so far) are, and how sometimes there's an inconsistent moral message there.

2.0 and I, while and walking around on my birfday this past weekend, happened by some Jews for Jesus. If you’ve ever been to their website, it’s kind of completely impossible to tell what their deal is, but I’ve always given them the benefit of the doubt of being a pretty down-home well-meaning organization. It finally dawned on me to do a wiki search for them, and evidently, the group’s name is something of a total misnomer. They’re not really Jews at all, but evangelical Christians.

Our man on the scene Tree is back from the World Cup, and he failed utterly in providing on the spot reports. To me, anyway. Douchebag had no problem giving live updates to the Washington Post. He is dead to me.

Man, first pitch, out of the park today.

bullfrog

Thank you Knicks for, yet again, ruining my season 4 months before it even begins! Drafting a guy who could have gone UNDRAFTED at #20 with Marcus Williams available (stolen laptops aside)...UGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHH! You suck.

I find it interesting that the guy reading the bible is going to delve into the King James' version... If memory serves, that thing was put together to sound good and fit with what the English church was doing at the time, not necessarily to make a good translation. I guess the upside is that it is easier to memorize than the less lyrical versions.

He's Jewish, so I assume the decision to go with the King James was just based on popularity more than anything else. I'm pretty sure most Christians go by the King James.

And possibly he's using a version (and this knowledge is derived from the wonderful graphic novel Blankets) that has footnotes listing alternate translations.

Is the KJ really that popular still? I thought most Protestants were using the New International Version and Catholics are onto the New American Version. I really like the Oxford version with amazing footnotes (bought it for Theo 100).

The Catholic Study Bible? Yeah, that thing's unbeatable.

I guess I'm operating off of decade-old knowledge... All my Baptist friends from high school used the KJV, as did all the kids at the Christian summer camp I went to during the summers. (Northern Frontier - good times, great oldies. I learned sailboating, archery, and that my Jewish uncle was going to hell. Let me tell you, Revelations actually makes for some fantastic campfire stories.)

Anyone think Obama will run in 2008? And beat Hiliary? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/a rticle/2006/06/28/AR2006062801970.html

My standard line on this is two-fold (I lived in IL when Obama ran for Senate): 1. As a Democratic Senator from IL, Obama is set up to inheret vast amounts of power as the old guard of the party (Durbin included) decide to stop running. And, in sticking with the Senate, he can stick to his very liberal politics. I would advocate his staying put because we need more people like him in the Senate. 2. The national Dems only see the rhetoric and money, but Obama is too liberal to be elected nationally and, I think, will be unwilling to tack to the center as a national campaign would require.

Though I'm less sure on this one, I would go out on a limb and say that had Obama wanted to be President, he would have run for a Senate seat in IL with an eye to the governership (or just the governership)-- not the US Senate seat. Not that folks don't get to the White House from the Senate, but it hasn't been terribly popular of late.

I hope Hiliary runs through the primaries and takes all the crap that will be thrown at her by the Republican party and then step out (falling on her sword), leaving the race wide open. And, while she may run, I don't think she'll be the Democratic nominee because she doesn't engender much support in the netroots, which will be a major factor in '08. Clark, Feingold, Warner, and Gore are all generating more (positive) conversation online than Hiliary.

I wish he had another term under his belt, because I don't think he'll try it this time around... But if he does, I think he'll beat Hillary, yes. Using a broad brush, he speaks to faith and reason both, while she speaks to opportunity.

Emily is, indeed, better than me. I mean, when's the last time I wrote out the lyrics to 'Love Stinks' in my blog? Eeemmilyyy, you do, indeed, rock.

Zero

She's way cooler than you. Than all of us. Live, laugh, love, yo!

To answer the question more directly, if he runs, he'll do better than Hillary, but I don't think either of them will end up with the nomination.

Sweet somethin' of somewhere!

Sweet lion of Zion! was the other one I remembered.

My world is shattered! You - you mean that Shitwit was operating outside of the Constitution?!

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/29/washington/2 9cnd-scotus.html?hp&ex=1151640000&en=1aa0983620edfa9b&ei=509 4&partner=homepage

For those that care about both soccer and one of my opinions (that should narrow the list down...): Sports Illustrated is kicking ESPN's butt in terms of online World Cup coverage. I expected much more from the "world wide leader".

Of course, both pale next to the Washington Post's Tree shout-out.

The leader has been brutal lately.. They've shifted too many of their columnists to InSider, and the Deadspin/sportblog era has basically replaced the usefulness of Page 2. And SportsCenter - yikes, that's practically unwatchable.

According to the ND Alumni Assoc.: "Demand was highest for the Sept. 9 home game vs. Penn State (66,670 tickets requested) and the Sept. 16 home game vs. Michigan (61,631), making those games the two highest-demanded home games in the history of Notre Dame Stadium." Uh, both numbers look like less than capacity, so I expect tickets, right!?!?

I certainly don't have any insider info here, but I'm going to guess that there is quite a discrepancy between stadium capacity vs. seats made available via the lottery. Cross out the student section for starters, then move on to "friend$ of the univer$ity" that don't have to bother with the lottery. I can only speculate where that leaves us.

Approximately 33,000 seats are available to lottery applicants, putting odds at around 50% for Penn State tickets.

Growing up in a Southern Baptist church, I used (and our pastor preached from) an NIV.