I can't get enough of this song...

Sometimes, I feel really lucky

for being relatively healthy...
for being alive even though I've done enough stupid things to get me killed....
for my awesome, supportive family....
for having more freedom and choice than many many other people...
for not having to think about job security just yet....
for having amazing, hilarious friends...

*sigh* I hope I'll feel lucky forever...

I am SUCH a girl

or am now, anyways. I've realized that shopping has become a top method of de-stressing for me. WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN? AH!

Junkyard of Old Memories

Half Nelson = Wholly Engrossing

plus, Ryan Gosling got hot. I would've never guessed from The Notebook.

"Crimewave"

fuckin' sweet song... soundtrack of my life right now.

"Apologize" by OneRepublic and Timbaland

What's in the middle?

That's a good question....

my sister is cooler than I am

hence I will repost a video that she put on her myspac.e It rocks!

A lil bit of food for thought

Original source here: "Is Climate Science Biased?"
-Richard Black, BBC News

Of all the accusations made by the vociferous community of climate sceptics, surely the most damaging is that science itself is biased against them.

That was a view I put forward nearly a year ago now in another article for the BBC News website, and nothing has changed my mind since.

The year seems to have brought no diminution of the accusations flying around the blogosphere.

"The research itself is biased," as one recent blog entry put it.

"Scientists are quick to find what they're looking for when it means getting more funding out of the government."

That particular posting gave no evidence to support its claim of bias. I have seen none that did; which made me wonder whether there was any evidence.

Drought or deluge?

In that earlier article, I invited sceptics to put their cards on the table, and send me documentation or other firm evidence of bias.

For my part, I agreed to look into any concrete claims.

Given the fury evidenced by sceptical commentators, I was expecting a deluge.

I anticipated drowning in a torrent of accusations of research grants turned down, membership of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) denied, scientific papers refused by journals, job applications refused, and invitations to speak at conferences drying up.

I anticipated having to spend days, weeks, months even, sifting the wheat from the chaff, going backwards and forwards between journal editors, heads of department, conference organisers, funding bodies and the original plaintiffs.

I envisaged major headaches materialising as I tried to sort out the chains of events, attempting to decipher whether claims had any validity, or were just part of the normal rough and tumble of a scientist's life - especially in the context of scientific publishing, where the top journals only publish about 10% of the papers submitted to them.

The reality was rather different.

Paper trail

I received emails from well over 100 people; some had read my original article, others had seen the idea passed around in blogs and newsgroups.

Four people said they had had problems getting research published, and three sent me the papers in question.

The other said he did not want to disclose details as he was preparing his paper for submission to another journal.

Of the three papers I did receive, one was far from complete, and another was a review article from an author who endorsed the IPCC position and said the bias was against scientists "supporting man-made climate change".

The third was from Reid Bryson, a US meteorologist and climatologist whose team at the University of Wisconsin has developed its own method of looking at historical climate change.

He said he had had problems getting research published on the extent to which he believes volcanoes drive climate change. But he had not kept his rejection letters, so it was impossible to investigate specifically.

A fifth correspondent said magazines had turned down letters for publication; but letters are not research, and magazines are not journals, which perform a vital role in the formal processes of science.

In terms of first-hand claims of bias, that was it.

At second hand

Other correspondents referred to two well-known cases involving the top-line journals Science and Nature.

Nature's refusal to publish a re-analysis by Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick of the famous (or infamous, depending on your point of view) "hockey stick" graph has been so well documented elsewhere, not least in hearings instigated by US congressmen, that there is really nothing new to say.

The Science issue involved its decision not to publish a response by UK academic Benny Peiser to a paper by Stanford University's Naomi Oreskes, in which she had claimed to find more or less unanimous support for man-made climate change among published scientific papers.

This saga has also been so well documented, not least on Dr Peiser's website, that again there is little new to say; except that Dr Peiser now says he is glad Science decided not to publish his research because "my critique of Oreskes' flawed study was later found to be partially flawed itself".

Another correspondent raised an apparently similar issue, where Japan-based researcher James Annan had repeatedly been rejected in his bid to publish a comment article on "climate sensitivity", a term widely used to mean the temperature rise seen in response to a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

It is a key figure, because it basically tells you how fast the Earth warms as CO2 levels rise.

Last year the journal Geophysical Research Letters (GRL) published a paper from Dr Annan's group using historical data to indicate a value probably between about 2C and 4C.

If this is correct, it rules out both the lower estimates of about 1C favoured by some climate sceptics, and the higher values of about 6C which some scientists believe could swiftly bring catastrophic impacts.

Later, the researchers wrote a comment piece emphasising that values above 4.5C were very unlikely. GRL and one other journal have collectively turned it down a total of five times.

"I think it does count as bias to some extent," Dr Annan told me.

"But it's not really a 'sceptical' or 'alarmist' bias; it's more a political thing to do with not wanting to offend the wrong people. It's a bit of gentlemen's club."

He also pointed out that while the emphasis of his comment piece was on ruling out high "catastrophist" scenarios, the data itself was the same as in his earlier paper, which had been published in a prestigious journal.

The rest of the emails contained a mixture of positive and negative comments on the worth of this exercise, links to newspaper articles and blog entries that typically contained accusations of bias but no evidence, links to scientific papers which the writers said challenged anthropogenic warming, tirades against the media, and several suggestions that for an authoritative exposition of bias in climate science I should read Michael Crichton's novel State of Fear.

Known and boring

Several people who wrote to me argued that my original definition of bias was insufficiently subtle.

"Scientific bias occurs the same way that any bias is created, when people say 'I have already figured this out, so I do not need to revisit it'," said Forrest Baker.

Others said that with billions of dollars spent each year on climate research, no-one would risk "rocking the boat" by performing, or publishing, work that could refute humankind's carbon emissions as the cause.

Stefan Rahmstorf from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, who is something of an anti-hero to sceptics' groups as he believes IPCC projections of sea-level rise are far too conservative, had heard this argument before, and he wrote in telling me it was far from convincing.

"How likely is it that my funding would suffer if I found a good alternative explanation for the observed global warming, or that I would have trouble publishing it (assuming it would be methodologically sound, of course)?" he asked.

"Quite the contrary, I would see it as a path to certain fame! Scientists always strive to find something radically new and different - just reconfirming what is already quite well-known is boring, and certainly will not get you the Nobel Prize.

"In many countries, including my own, scientific funding is a lot less competitive than in the US - I'm a professor for life, my institute has a solid base funding for doing its research, and basically I can do what I want without risk that this is taken away from me. I don't need to get new grants all the time."

And some research groups are investigating ideas which could challenge anthropogenic warming. For example, several teams have published work within the last three years on the Sun's possible role as a driver of modern-day warming.

One is Henrik Svensmark's group from the Danish National Space Center (DNSC), which published results of laboratory work in the journal Proceedings A of the Royal Society last year - work which they claimed showed the Sun, rather than greenhouse gases, as the chief actor.

"As editor, I can't have a position on publishing any scientific paper other than that it should be peer-reviewed," commented the journal's editor-in-chief Professor Sir Michael Berry when I asked him whether there was a climate bias in scientific publishing.

"I wouldn't pay any attention at all to whether it's 'sceptical' or not."

Proof negative?

The sum total of evidence obtained through this open invitation, then, is one first-hand claim of bias in scientific journals, not backed up by documentary evidence; and three second-hand claims, two well-known and one that the scientist in question does not consider evidence of anti-sceptic feeling.

No-one said they had been refused a place on the IPCC, the central global body in climate change, or denied a job or turned down for promotion or sacked or refused access to a conference platform, or indeed anything else.

If there is an anti-sceptic bias running through the institutions of science, it is evidently keeping itself well hidden.

Whether this exercise has conclusively disproved a bias is not for me to say - I am sure others will find plenty to say, doubtless in the courteous and gracious language that typifies climate discourse nowadays.

But I will say this; if someone persistently claims to be a great football player, and yet fails to find the net when you put him in front of an open goal, you cannot do other than doubt his claim.

Andres Millan, who wrote to me on the subject from Mexico, offered another explanation for why scientific journals, research grants, conference agendas and the IPCC itself are dominated by research that backs or assumes the reality of modern-day greenhouse warming.

"Most global warming sceptics have no productive alternatives; they say it is a hoax, or that it will cause severe social problems, or that we should allocate resources elsewhere," he wrote.

"Scientifically, they have not put forward a compelling, rich, and variegated theory.

"And until that happens, to expect the government, or any source of scientific funding, to give as much money, attention, or room within academic journals to the alternatives, seems completely misguided."

Avril Lavigne's "Hot"

I didn't like the song "Girlfriend" but this is way better:

100 Hilarious Ways to Say I Love You

The Complete List

Some of my favorites:
(4) with wee spaniels
(10) - (17)
(20) You told her about your well-managed herpes
(29) In the late 19th century you cut her name into the cornfields, hoping someone would invent the airplane.
(43) With a heart filled with lies.
(54) By telling her that she really captured something beautiful about what it means to be a young woman who rides horses in Connecticut
(86) via the poetry of Pablo Neruda or Jorge Luis Borges that you have copied into a small black journal
(95) by standing outside in the snow looking up at her dorm room until campus security asks you what’s going on.

LGB?

House Approves Employment Nondiscrimination Act

I approach this with mixed feelings. While something of a pragmatist myself, I always consider it the role of government to advocate the most idealistic position, because everyone knows that, in practice, everything is several degrees from perfect.

In this case, it means if you're going to pass anti-discrimination legislation meant to buffer the sexually unorthodox, you have to include the entire LGBT, not "everyone except the tricky transsexuals." After all, if the Democrats aren't going to stick up for transgendered people, who will? Certainly not employers who are sexualphobic to begin with. And let's face it - most of us don't know enough transgendered individuals to create a successful grass-roots movement.

I can only hope this will set up an adequate legal precedent/argument so that transsexuals will eventually be covered under this act too.

3 Amy Winehouse Music Videos

in honor of the 3 songs I've been listening to non-stop:

Now play "Marry, Fuck, or Kill" with the Amy Winehouses of those music videos (I know, they're really similar, but it's all about the subtleties, guys!).

Does Louis Menand want me to develop a sick love affair with Oliver Wendell Holmes?

methinks so. The intellectuality, the tragedy....

I quote:

"Complete certainty was an illusion; of that he was certain. There were only greater and lesser degrees of uncertainty in our lives, and that was enough. It was, in fact, better than enough; for although we always want to reduce the degree of uncertainty in our lives, we never want it to disappear entirely since uncertainty is what puts the play in the joints. Imprecision, the sportiveness, as it were, of the quanta, is what makes life interesting and change possible. Holmes liked to call himself a "bettabilitarian": we cannot know what consequences the universe will attach to our choices, but we can bet on them, and we do it every day.

For although Holmes believed that experience is the only basis we have for guiding our affairs, he also believed that experience is too amorphous, or too multiple, ever to dictate a single line of conduct. Experience makes everything blurry at the edges; it reduces knowledge to a prediction of what should be the case most of he time, and we treat a prediction as an absolute at our peril..."

"He read, all his life and in every field... But it all amounted, for Holmes, to an endless, fascinating, beautfitully empty diversion, since at the bottom of every passionate belief and noble expression he saw the same armies of the night, fighting the same eternal war. There are, one comes to feel, only two spheres in Holmes' thought: the glittering toy store of art and ideas, and the darkling plain of Fredericksburg and Antietam. Most of us spend our lives in a middle world, in which beliefs matter to us for reasons better than the fact that they happen to be ours. Holmes lived in that world, too, of course, and he must, each day, have feit its reality urgently enough. But it seems for him to have been largely inarticulable. The inner life was one of the few things about which Holmes had nothing to say."

Fuckin' Menand. He's like a love letter to my brain.

because everything I listen to, you must too

ah, the wonderful, incandescent, gleeful "Landslide Baby" by Beulah

Is the nerve horoscope still being run by Neal Pollack?

I don't know. It just hasn't been as raunchy and witty as it used to be. Still good, but more and more, it sounds like something syndicated in Ladies Home Journal. Nerve, we expect better. After all, not just any horoscope can get away with being called "Your Week in Sex." Compare for yourself below.

Horoscopes October, 2007

Scorpio (Oct. 23-Nov. 21) Can't decide between glittery white angel wings and a sexy red devil costume? Why not choose both? You'll have ample opportunity to showcase both side of your personality this week, Scorpio, as you'll be lucky in love and unusually creative. Can you show us just what a good little devil can be? Sagittarius (Nov. 22-Dec. 21) Halloween may bring out the ghosts and ghoulies, but for you it will be much more treat than trick. Wednesday will bode well for romance, as well as your living situation. If you've been unsettled at home, things should start to smooth themselves out. And if you've been unsettled in love, you've got a wonderful chance to bring home your very own wicked witch or hot zombie. Capricorn (Dec. 22-Jan. 19) Have you been seeing the world in black and white lately, Cap? If life's been feeling grey and gloomy, cheer up. This week brings more treats than tricks, and a colorful infusion of love and creativity. The only darkness you'll be experiencing will be when you turn off the lights, and the stars predict you'll be making the dark a damn sexy place to be. Aquarius (Jan. 20-Feb. 18) This would be the perfect week to host a Halloween party, Aquarius, and not just because Halloween is this week and this week alone. The stars predict good friends and good times all week long, especially if you're close to home. If you've been invited to other folks' parties, just make sure to bring a special friend back for the after-party at your house. Pisces (Feb. 19-Mar. 20) Your Halloween costume will be over the top this year, Pisces. Always creative, lately you've been downright inspired. Now your challenge is to take these lofty ideas and give them a solid base. Don't be afraid to experiment and get a little dirty. The same could be said for romance — there should be plenty of opportunity for some loving, so seize it, so to speak. Aries (Mar. 21-Apr. 19) Your vivacious personality normally makes you the life of the party, Aires. But if you've been feeling neglected of late, just know that it's not you — it's them. Really. You didn't suddenly come down with a severe case of halitosis. Your friends have just been busy with their own lives. But with Neptune going direct on October 31, the stars predict your social life will be back where you like it: one big party, with you at the center. Taurus (Apr. 20-May 20) If you thought Neptune was only important as a minor character in The Little Mermaid, think again. Neptune turns direct on Wednesday, and then it's full-speed ahead in terms of your career. If you've been struggling with a stalled job search or project, this week and next month should see a huge turnaround. Enjoy the new beginnings. Shell bikinis and dolphin wrestling optional. Gemini (May 21-Jun. 21) Neptune, that naughty planet, has been in retrograde for months now. But Halloween is bringing more than just carved pumpkins and egg tossing this year. Neptune will turn direct on the 31st, and shine a lovely light on your career and professional reputation. Life will be very exciting, very soon. But you may want to save the "sexy nurse" costume for after-hours, unless you work in a hospital. Cancer (June 21-July 21) True wealth isn't defined by money, right Cancer? It's defined by friendship, love, health . . . blah, blah, blah. Well, this week bodes well for an increase in financial wealth. You might have new benefits at work, pick up a freelance assignment, or receive an inheritance from Great-Aunt Myrtle's estate. Who knew she invented button-fly jeans? Leo (July 22-Aug. 22) This should be a sweet week for you, Leo, and I'm not talking about Halloween candy. No, the planets are simply showering you with love and creativity. You're apt to find your perfect partner, a person who will bring you immeasurable happiness and, if you're lucky, chocolate. Unfortunately, you'll choke on said chocolate and nearly die. Keep that new soulmate nearby for Heimlich purposes. Virgo (Aug. 23-Sept. 21) Are you entering any costume contests this Halloween? You should. You'll be reaching some creative peaks right around midweek, so make sure to employ all those crafty ideas bumping around in your head, whether it's at work, or a fabulous All Hallow's Eve bash. Oh yes, you should be hitting some fabulous romantic peaks, too. Thank God creativity and passion aren't mutually exclusive. Libra (Sept. 22-Oct. 22) You're not a huge fan of Neptune, but did you know he's a fan of yours? This week, Neptune turns direct for the first time in five months, jumpstarting your romantic life and your creative flow. You might find true love, or spend one wicked hot night with . . . you know, someone wicked hot. At any rate, you should sing Neptune's praises, because this week he's got nothing but treats for you.

Horoscopes March, 2007

MAR 26 - APR 1

	Aries (Mar. 21-Apr. 19) Just like a troubled youth who finds a positive outlet for his aggression in kickboxing, you need to let off some steam before you explode. Things have been bubbling up from your nether regions for some time, and if you're not careful, you'll be knocking over 7-Elevens by week's end. Check this slide into delinquency by expending your energy sexually. Put on some Eminem, hold your breath and balance on one foot as you go at it, before it's too late.
	Taurus (Apr. 20-May 20) A little sensitivity will make this week successful for you. There's nothing worse than making a joke about how you spend all your time naked and jumping off things, only to have someone give you the "you're crazy and freaking me out" look. If they had played that a bit cooler and not hurt my — I mean your — feelings, they'd be in for some good times. Ignore treatment that hurts your feelings and continue doing what you know is right for you.
	Gemini (May 21-Jun. 21) Paying attention to the outside world will bring unexpected sexual benefits this week. Sure, it makes you a good citizen too, but poring over newspapers will yield some tidbit that will improve your sex life dramatically. It could be an advancement in the science of intercourse, a new gadget pertinent to your mid-section, or maybe even a really hot picture of Vladimir Putin you can masturbate to. Who knows? Just get to reading.
	Cancer (June 21-July 21) A good breakfast is very important. You've been skipping it or having a skimpy, nigh-on-useless version lately, and it's taking its toll. You’re sluggish and slow, and you miss a big part of the day. So get up in time to have hearty helpings of eggs, bacon, waffles, penises and vaginas. What? You didn't realize that they were an essential part of a balanced breakfast? Someone hasn't been keeping up with the latest changes to the food pyramid.
	Leo (July 22-Aug. 22) Sharp cries of surprise are the result of your sexual tack this week. Take it easy, let muscles adjust, slide things in in a more leisurely fashion. We know you're a very busy person, but all that haste is uncomfortable to those around you.
	Virgo (Aug. 23-Sept. 21) Putting your hands in your pockets feels good. The chilly weather has given you reason to fiddle around in there constantly, keeping constant contact with those year-round birthday-presents-from-God. And what else do we find in those pockets? Money! Hooray! Let's spend it! Just know that there are all sorts of fiscal traps for you out there, so try to be careful. Better to leave your hands and money in your pockets. There are way more smiles to be had in there.
	Libra (Sept. 22-Oct. 22) We all like to fantasize about not having things or people we have to do, but that's not life. Duty calls us to clock in and mount those whom we have promised to mount. This week, ignore any chafing you may feel at your sexual responsibilities. Sure, you have to wake up, stretch your muscles into all sorts of shapes and make noises one normally only hears on Meerkat Manor — it's a tough life. But seriously, you get to have really great sex. Is that really such a bother?
	Scorpio (Oct. 23-Nov. 21) Not that you need to wander about in formalwear and a pig mask, but exotic things should feature in your week. I know exotic is a corny kind of word, but re-enacting party scenes from Eyes Wide Shut won't feel as silly as you think. Yes, it's a little creepy, but think for a second about what intercourse really is, and you'll see that a pig mask won't really make any difference.
	Sagittarius (Nov. 22-Dec. 21) I like proper lighting and precision in my backup dancers, too, but there comes a time to quit fussing with the stage and put on a live sex show for all of America. You're spending too much time with the accoutrements of sex and not enough time doing that act which links you with all the animals; that humping, bumping dance of sweaty life. It may prove difficult, but if you can manage to put down the smoke machine and the ten-speed vibrator, things will go much better.
	Capricorn (Dec. 22-Jan. 19) It is time for a heart-to-heart this week with that person you sleep with. I'm not saying you have to sit in the candlelight and sing Tracy Chapman songs to each other, but engage each others emotions this week. If that doesn't work, at least do it facing them and pretend you're doing something meaningful.
	Aquarius (Jan. 20-Feb. 18) There's something gleefully smutty about those old 2 Live Crew lyrics. They're juvenile, sure, but sometimes "heads down, ass up, that's the way we like to fuck" seems not so much silly as succinct. Don't be surprised if you're overcome by a certain matter-of-fact junior-high dirtiness this week. Just let it make its way into your bedroom and work its magic the way "Me So Horny" still does on a dance floor.
	Pisces (Feb. 19-Mar. 20) In bed, try not to make like DMX and other rappers who are a smidge too hardcore. Sure, it sounds good in a song, but getting all crazy-aggressive with people's genitals isn't all it's cracked up to be. They may appreciate your enthusiasm, but new bruises on top of old do not a happy crotch make. Mitigate your excitement to safer levels.

GRR

I am so apathetic towards my next test. I just want to sleep. I'd rather spend time looking for my iPod and flash drive, both of which I lost this weekend (incredibly sucky). I need to work out but hate doing it without loud, pounding music. I want to go to costume Halloween parties, but it looks more and more like Halloween is going to be a bust for me this year. My bangs need to grow the fuck out. I miss my family. I am sick of everyone being so distant and bitchy, me included. I want to sun. I want to visit a museum, and look at art (like this guy's). I want to read non-medicine related books. My book list is growing longer each day, and I am impotent to even start on it: Oracle Bones, Cathedral, Golden Compass, Sand Country Almanac, American Studies, Sacred Work, Random Families, Aging with Grace, Three Kingdoms... I feel behind on everything. I feel old. I feel abnormal.

I know, I whine. But I can't help it. I need a break.

MSFC Conference

Went to the Medical Students for Choice conference this weekend with some fabulous girls. It was a great trip, both before and during the conference. Some highlights for those who wanted to come but couldn't:

• Pro-choice students who want to continue to be involved with reproductive choice need to pick a good residency
• Religious hospital mergers may prohibit you from performing procedures that are the medically indicated standard of care
• Hostile work environments won't give you the family planning training that you need
• Conservative communities will lack the staff to help you deliver the indicated standard of care. Here are some actual cases that have been reported:
  
• A pharmacist who refuses to fill a minor's prescription for Plan B and who won't give her back the prescription to bring to another pharmacy
• An ER doc won't give a rape victim EC even though she asks for it
  
• A nurse won't provide a patient with an emergency cesarean because she believes it would result in the death of the fetus, and leaves the patient "standing in a pool of blood" instead
• A fertility specialist denies seeing your patient because she doesn't believe that a lesbian should have babies
• The ultrasound technician believes your patient will get an abortion once she sees how serious her pregnancy complications are, and preemptively gives your patient a lecture on how abortion is morally wrong
• Student Health wont' give your HIV (+) patient condoms
  
• How do you pick a choice-supportive residency?
• Look at MSFC's residency guide
• Ask up-front during your interview what their curriculum covers in the area of family planning and reproductive choice
• Ask how long your family planning training is (1 week is NOT enough)
• Ask if the hospital is religiously affiliated and if so, what restrictions come with it
• Get a feel for the politics of the people you will be working with most
• A good place to find a list of pro-choice religious denominations is through the Religions Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC)
• Dr. Middleton -whom I worked with at Feminists this summer - gave a wonderful talk on reproductive healthcare for the primary care doctor. I highly recommend doing the MSFC externship, and having an opportunity to work with her yourself. Through the externship, you will learn first-hand
  
• Laws regarding abortion care in Georgia (sneak preview here)
  
• How medical and 1st and 2nd trimester abortions are performed
• Who pays for abortions (hint: probably not Medicare)
• How pre- and post-abortion counseling works
• Who are the women who get abortions?
  
• IPAS Workshop on 1st Trimester Abortion
  

Also, a recommended reading list (which I myself need to get to at some point):

• Sacred Work: About the history of Planned Parenthood and supportive clergy
• Random Family: A good look at how difficult it is for disadvantaged women to get the family planning they desire

Obviously, there's a lot of work to be done before pro-choice beliefs become pro-choice policies here in America. However, it was great to see so many thoughtful young people committed to the cause.

*Disclaimer: All these opinions are mine, and mine alone, and do not represent MSFC or any other organization*

Cathedral

Going through Raymond Carver's book of short stories Cathedral again. All I remember from the last time (read quickly at an airport about 3 years ago) was that story "Where I'm Calling From," and how the last few paragraphs of that story inspired me to cry brokenly about the beauty of doomed relationships for days. Funny thing is, I re-read it today and the ending of this version isn't like how I remember it at all.

Where did those lines come from? Did I just make it up?

I still love Raymond Carver's All of Us (a book of semi-autobiographical poetry) but not as much as I used to. Am I growing further from the emotional tumult that was Carver's life? Have I passed the point of potentially becoming an alcoholic? (Cathedral, by the way, is a terrific book to read if you want to know what it's like to be an alcoholic, from an alcoholic's mind). Is this maturity or apathy?

I feel like I'm changing, but I can't tell if it's toward the person I want to be or not. :-/

This is just hilarious

copied from nerve, of course...

	If the government ever brings back Prohibition, parties will get so much better. See: Mame, Some Like it Hot, The Untouchables, Idlewild, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle
	If you're going to solve a murder, you either need lots of hard liquor or a ridiculous accent. Clearly, the liquor is the way to go. See: The Big Sleep, The Maltese Falcon, The Thin Man, Chinatown, Fargo, Murder She Said, Charlie Chan Carries On
	Humphey Bogart only drinks because he cares. See: Casablanca, The African Queen, The Big Sleep
	Drinking + cowboys + horses = hilarious. See: True Grit, Cat Ballou
	Drinking + cowboys + guns = less hilarious. See: Unforgiven
	Warning: drinking to excess can result in hangovers, dehydration, marriage. See: How to Murder Your Wife, Mame, Laws of Attraction, Warm Summer Rain
	Don't let Kim Basinger drink. See: Blind Date, 8 Mile, My Stepmother is an Alien
	Do let Marilyn Monroe drink. See: The Seven Year Itch, Some Like it Hot, The Misfits
	Friends don't let friends drive drunk. Unless those friends are conspiring to murder you. See: North by Northwest, The Postman Always Rings Twice
	Always order Pinot. Do not drink any fucking Merlot. See: Sideways
	There's no point being sober in a Santa suit. See: Bad Santa, Trading Places, The Ref
	If your friend is really judgmental about your drinking habits, he or she is probably a far more entertaining drunk than you are. See: Old School, Can't Hardly Wait, 10 Things I Hate About You, Guys and Dolls
	The important thing when making a cocktail is the rhythm. A Manhattan you shake to fox-trot time, a Bronx to two-step time, a dry martini you always shake to waltz time. See: The Thin Man
	Did you ever try dunking a potato chip in champagne? It's crazy! See: The Seven Year Itch
	Get drunk when you're fighting with someone and you'll end up standing outside their window, yelling their name. See: A Streetcar Named Desire, The Philadelphia Story
	If a bartender lets you drink for free every night, he's probably a hallucination. See: The Shining
	Going to catch a giant killer shark is a great occasion to get drunk. See: Jaws
	No one delivers a monologue better than a half-crazy drunk guy. See: Network, Jaws, Dr. Strangelove
	If a woman can out-drink the locals, she's a keeper. See: Raiders of the Lost Ark
	Old-school James Bond: vodka martini, shaken not stirred. Twenty-first century James Bond: three measures of Gordon's, one of vodka, half a measure of Kina Lillet, shaken over ice, with a thin slice of lemon peel. See: Casino Royale
	Drunks are the happiest people alive. See: Any movie made before 1945.