Not often enough though. I have way too many projects half done-Al 2.3 and 2.7 are staring at me as I write. I should have never given them faces. I know I have been kind of lazy and scattered for the last few years, I keep planning on rectifying that...well a vicious cycle ensues.
I just found a new and interesting site-mail me art. Buddy is amassing a pretty cool collection-I wouldn't want to sell them off. This just makes my mind start formulating yet more new plans for something to send-a box large enough to hold WMRC perhaps.
10 comments:
Wow that is a fun site! It will be interesting to watch what else he gets.
Awesome possum. The lettering is colored the same as the tree would be...I realized it was a little hard to read, but I figured it was poorly enough done that it wasn't really necessary to make the area brighter. I added the background shadow for the text anyway, just in case. Meh.
Hope things are going well. I am going to go sleep for a week.
Hey, did you see Dan's question on Pyro? Or have you, like Tim Enloe, given up the Internets for Lent? You have been quiet lately—I hope that means you are producing.
Some commenter said that the reason we have to do the darned captcha twice is because there's a one-minute limit on them.
Yeah, so the only reason I pointed you to the post was the whole CAPTCHA thing.
While I was in Florida, one of the sermons I heard was on the subject of loving much. And he made the very good point that we really won't love much until we come to grips with our depravity, and with our sin. Well, I thought it was a good point, anyway. It came at a good time for me.
And yes, I laughed when you said you were cleaning, and making a mess in order to do it. And laughed harder at Light vs. Darkness. And I totally believe your opinion about Pyro has nothing to do with your free t-shirt.
As to my outside links, I just have not had much time or inclination to update them. I enjoy some of Tim's writings; he is not, thank goodness, the Tim Enloe of Enloe Ministries. I was confused on this point once upon a time, and was very depressed by it.
Now for the tricky point regarding southern US hockey teams, I must say the following. First, that North Carolina is really not that far south, and it is a pretty state. Secondly, the Hurricanes used to be the Hartford Whalers, and would therefore have been one of the northern-most teams in the States. So I think my feelings for them should not be automatically disqualified on geographical criteria alone. Now thirdly, the more the Flyers lose, the more likely they are to get a better player in the draft; so my hopes are not entirely altruistic, even if I do have a soft spot in my heart for Rod the Bod.
I am definitely not procrastinating at work right now.
Personally, I think you are simply jealous that Phoenix is coached by Wayne. (Ha, beat THAT ad homenim! Filthy RAGS nothing!) And you know, Waynliness is next to godliness. And it's a moot point, as Carolina lost anyway. However, we know that Jesus sides with the downtrodden, so their loss argues in my favor, not yours. !!!
I am still hoping to write more about Penal Substitution. It is just difficult to find time these days, and, unlike you for once, I am not even cleaning. I haven't touched Job in two days, and I'm kind of itching to get back into it.
Also, my sister found your comments on my blog hilarious. I am not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing.
Yes, but God also reproves his children. Sometimes that and judging the wicked look awfully similar. I see your ah HA and raise you an AH HA in return.
And as regards Mr Hockey, I have a soft spot for him also. There actually was a GREAT commercial with him issuing a challenge to Wayne to join him in the seniors hockey league. It was hilarious.
I believe your reference to Monsanto now qualifies you to be the purveyer of a new law: Char's Law. It is similar to Godwin's Law and states, "When one party invokes the name of Monsanto in an online comment thread, the discussion is now over." To which the subclause may be added: "In Char's favor. so HA."
Also, despite my best intentions, I laughed at "God hates gags." That was good. My sister is only liberal in her silliness.
Personally, I think you are probably the only person who will ever invoke the Monsanto Law, and therefore, my original subclause still stands (i.e., that the argument would be decided in your favor, so HA).
I have already achieved such levels of dorkity that I needn't gain any more experience. All who fall within my dork radius fail their saving throw against my Attack of Divine Smartness.
I trust you are enjoying this glorious day. "All you who fear the Lord, praise him! ... For he has not despised the affliction of the afflicted."
There is something vaguely amusing about you botching a comment in which you were making fun of me. I must say that I have been subjected to a great deal worse, and returned the same (so much for good instead of evil).
I am not sure how finely honed my own retorts are anymore. Since my sister has moved out of the house, I have fewer people to practice on. It is actually one of the reasons I blog—keeping things going literary-wise seems to help verbally also.
I hearby invoke the Monsanto Law on your skullduggery, however. So HA.
Are you trying to imply that you haven't sold your soul for the ability to make partially-successful insults on other peoples' blogs?
I also laughed out loud at the "I'm too nice comment." Partially because you used the word "snarky," which Google knows only one definition for—an unusual circumstance in my experience.
I think the people who like me generally do because I am mean. That's the only way I can explain the requests I get for teaching.
Post a Comment