Textbook Example of “Thinking Too Much”

These sorts of things embarrass me. Can y’all stop overthinking this shit and just enjoy the movie, please?


The Pixar Theory: Every Character Lives in the Same Universe

Jon Negroni spent one year untangling the secret world hidden deep within Pixar films. This thesis (printed in full below) originally appeared on his personal blog and quickly became a viral sensation. Negroni continues to update his post based on interesting feedback from readers.

Several months ago, I watched a fun-filled video on Cracked.com that introduced the idea (at least to me) that all of the Pixar movies actually exist within the same universe.

Since then, I’ve obsessed over this concept, working to complete what I call “The Pixar Theory,” a working narrative that ties all of the Pixar movies into one cohesive timeline with a main theme.

This theory covers every Pixar production since Toy StoryA Bug’s LifeToy Story 2Monsters Inc.Finding NemoThe IncrediblesCarsRatatouilleWall-EUpToy Story 3Cars 2Brave and Monsters University.

Every movie is connected and implies major events that influence every single movie. Here we go.

Writing blegh

All my writing has been political lately, which is starting to drive me mad. It’s becoming blatantly clear, over the past couple years of living in DC, that people are too immature. They won’t entertain any rational discourse, and just fling poo at you instead. And yes, I notice this more often from the baby boomers than I do from youngins.

Ah, well. If we’re going to hell in a handbasket, might as well do with some style, right? Hey, you there, pass the rye.

What all this means is that I haven’t really had time to work on any of my fiction. I partially blame this on playing too many computer games, though I deleted Steam and thereby uninstalled all my computer games for now. I hope that will have a positive effect on my productivity…at least, once I get a couple of major political essays out of the way.

Speaking of which, I’ve been published now at the DailyCaller, FITSNews, and TheBlaze. This is getting to be serious. I’m getting put on a national stage. This isn’t really where I wanted to go with my life ten years ago, but I’ll enjoy it as much as I can while I’m here.

I have been trying to try out Scrivener lately, but I haven’t had the opportunity to really put my butt in the chair on write. I am a fan of the corkboard layout, and arranging scenes as cards. That’s pretty durn cool. Really helps with the plotting, which I always have trouble with. (Great characters, great settings…always a tad weak when it comes to organizing my plot.) I just need to actually use it for an extended period of time to see if it’s worth the price. Thankfully, though, Scrivener’s trial only takes up time if you actually use it; if you don’t, the 30 days don’t count down. This is most excellent, and a great model for other software developers to use. All I wish is that the Scrivener add-ons and the other programs made by the company–at this point, really just Aeon Timeline and Scrapple–were available for Windows. What is this crap with making creative programs only for Macs? Have you ever heard of the phrase “starving artists”? Jeez.

But that’s enough about me. How is your day?


I’m an igtheist, or an ignostic atheist. I can’t pray. I just can’t. For once, I envy the religious for their prayer. Because there is nothing else I can do. I can’t pray for the victims. They are definitely in my thoughts, but what will that do?

All I can do is say the following: we don’t really know what happened, so be careful what you see and retweet. Be very skeptical of what you hear or read.

Secondly, no politics. Do not politicize this. Not today. Maybe tomorrow.

Third, if you even THINK about declaring this a “false flag” operation, you should be ashamed of yourself. As terrible as our government is, as bad as Obama and his administration are, they would not bomb American citizens. Nobody in our government is that depraved. While things have been getting worse, we are nowhere near the Middle East or third world countries.

So stop. Just effing STOP.

That’s all I got for today.


cavecat_milkStrangely enough, I had a discussion earlier on Facebook today with people over the paleo diet. I think the paleo diet is rather strange, cultish, and is more creepy when you consider that a lot–and I mean, a lot–of libertarians try it.

Anyways, after this discussion and a couple of others on diet, I found this hilarious story from BuzzFeed with the picture above.

Let it be known I will never, EVER, give up my milk. I love it far too much. Yes, I drink 2%, and I think I will switch to 1%. But I will never, ever give it up.

I’ve explained how much I love milk before. Here’s my lengthy, indepth treatise on the subject. Suffice to say, I love it quite a lot, and consider it indispensable. I drank a gallon of milk every two days as a child, and while I don’t hit quite that stratospheric number, I have never given it up.

And I never will.

In other news, I am contemplating trying Volumetrics.

Couple of totally random political philosophy thoughts

So I wrote a post awhile back where I said that libertarians, conservatives, and the free market movement in general should be supportive of a universal basic income, probably via some sort of negative income tax. One of the reasons I was supportive of it was because that we can’t really take advantage of our negative rights–basic freedoms to do what we want, which libertarianism champions–if we’re homeless and starving.

Anyways, I was looking for a book a friend of mine recommended to me to add to one of Amazon’s wish lists–the one that will never be fulfilled because I will probably never order (and thus read) the books on there, but oh well–and I stumbled across Norms of Liberty: A Perfectionist Basis for Non-Perfectionist Politics by Douglas B. Rasmussen and Douglas J. Den Uyl (the Doug & Doug show). What I found interesting was the book’s description. It’s a bit wordy, but you can safely focus on the bit in bold:

How can we establish a political/legal order that in principle does not require the human flourishing of any person or group to be given structured preference over that of any other? Addressing this question as the central problem of political philosophy, Norms of Liberty offers a new conceptual foundation for political liberalism that takes protecting liberty, understood in terms of individual negative rights, as the primary aim of the political/legal order. Rasmussen and Den Uyl argue for construing individual rights as metanormative principles, directly tied to politics, that are used to establish the political/ legal conditions under which full moral conduct can take place. These they distinguish from normative principles, used to provide guidance for moral conduct within the ambit of normative ethics. This crucial distinction allows them to develop liberalism as a metanormative theory, not a guide for moral conduct. The moral universe need not be minimized or morality grounded in sentiment or contracts to support liberalism, they show. Rather, liberalism can be supported, and many of its internal tensions avoided, with an ethical framework of Aristotelian inspiration-one that understands human flourishing to be an objective, inclusive, individualized, agent-relative, social, and self-directed activity.

So basically, if I get this right, the basic function of any political system is to protect one’s negative rights and individual liberty. Well, if you’re on the street, starving and homeless, with your negative rights being of no use to you…are they under attack?

That’s a very bad argument, I know. But I still think there is something there, something that my tired brain at just past midnight can’t articulate. I think there is something that can be a good justification for a universal basic income from a libertarian/classical liberal standpoint, and which I think will make the libertarian/classical liberal/neoclassical liberal argument that much more appealing to anyone who isn’t on the far left.

PS: The book I was looking for was Liberty and Nature: An Aristotelian Defense of Liberal Order, an attempt to kinda sorta merge deontological ethics with virtue ethics; or to defend a system of natural rights (or “side constraints”) within a wider system of virtue ethics. Yes, me and my friend get quite intellectual at times.