Monday, May 29, 2006

Scottbane

That is one of the flavors of Ivanna Cone I tried for the first time this evening. Alright, it isn't actually called Scottbane, but it should be. It was Chocolate Covered Espresso Bean. A chocolate ice cream with ground beans in it. Really great. My kind friends were able to do what I could not and secure some of Haagen-Dazs new flavor, Mayan Chocolate, for me. I'll keep you updated. So far my favorite flavor from the Dazs is their Chocolate Peanut Butter.

Black and Tan is my favorite Ben & Jerry's variety. I like their ice cream quality, it is smooth and very edible, but they try to do to much with their flavors. It seems they have at least four things going on in each pint. First an ice cream flavor, then two things going on with the mix-ins (either a coated or filled thing or two different entities), and finally a ripple of fudge or caramel or berry. Just chill. Of course it can work to have multiple elements in an ice cream flavor, but the more variables the more opportunity to disappoint. One of my favorite chocolate ice creams, which is how I judge a brand, is Godiva's milk chocolate.

I've now tried the Mayan Chocolate. It is a "rich chocolate ice cream with a fudge swirl and a hint of cinnamon." It was very smooth ice cream. The fudge swirl was a pleasant accent. The "hint" of cinnamon was not as subtle, which is okay, but distracts from the chocolate. Chocolate Peanut Butter still reigns.

Labels:

4 Comments:

At June 01, 2006 1:25 PM, Blogger Cerise said...

I looooove coffe bean ice cream! Goody's, in Bend and Sun River, makes their own, which has a vanilla base. You can smell the waffle cones the whole way down the street. Perfection in ice cream.

 
At June 01, 2006 1:31 PM, Blogger Karen said...

Well that settles it. We'll need to take Scott first to Greatful bread for a large steaming bowl of creamy Heineken cheese soup and then it's off to Ivanna Cone for a quadrupel scoop of "Scottbane." Scott, are you busy on Saturday?

 
At June 01, 2006 5:15 PM, Blogger Ellen said...

yum. that sounds like a nice saturday meal.

 
At June 09, 2006 10:21 PM, Blogger Wee Katie said...

Scottbane. Ha.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Signature

Saturday night, I went to the Da Vinci Code with Karen. I enjoyed it. I haven't read the book, I've heard a couple passages when Scott was listening to the audio book, but that was it. I thought all the actors were fine in their roles. Ron Howard did a fine job keeping the tempo, considering they could get bogged down in the conspiracy theory and miss out on the action. Overall, it was National Treasure with international sets and European actors. A cerebral Indiana Jones is a fair comparison. As for the actual conspiracies, I don't really care about them. If someone were to lose their faith or religion because of them, they didn't lose much.

Sunday, I did my two for one special with X-Men 3: The Last Stand, and Over the Hedge. X-Men has potential, Ebert talks about how the plot evokes a myriad of social issues. It didn't do that for me. I liked the second installment better, more history and personal conflict. Famke Jansen's Jean Grey/Dark Phoenix is supposed to have a personality conflict issue but you really can't tell from her acting, only when she delivers the lines do you know. So I think this trilogy would compare (on a much much smaller scale) with The Godfather. One and two were great with three finishing the job but poorly. Buffy would appreciate that the mother from House of Sand and Fog is a scientist in the movie.

I liked Over the Hedge. On a smaller scale (again), they had their musician companion with three songs from Ben Folds. I liked them and have always liked him. This is where the use of a know talent worked for them. The voice cast was most all known actors: Nic Nolte, Bruce Willis, Eugene Levy, Catherine O'Hara, Wanda Sykes, Steve Carrell, Gary Shandling, Allison Janney, Avril Lavigne, and William Shatner. I have two and a half takes on the voice work. Nolte, Willis, and Shatner weren't able to enter into or create another character with their voices for the film. Shatner worked though because they embraced his mystique with the script, lots of dramatic CAN'T . . . .GO . . . . . . . ON!!! stuff. Nolte's voice, while full of character, never translated to his character, and Willis was weak (much better in the Look Who's Talking Franchise). Sykes was very similar to Shatner, in that the role was written for the actor, not requiring much more than being herself. Levy, O'Hara, Carrell and Shandling were successes. I could tell it was them, but if I didn't know them I would still be pleased with the results. They each become their character. Carrell's experience voicing Gary from the Ambiguously Gay Duo probably helped. And I'm sure Levy and O'Hara's sketch and improv work aided them.

After watching this movie, I'm rethinking my disdain for celebrity voiceover work in commercials. John Krasinski (ask.com), Gary Sinise (Cadillac), Dennis Haysbert (All State), George Clooney (Budweiser), and Kathleen Turner all have fine voices, not their fault they can also act. Maybe some voice over artists are doubling up their talents as well, working as cabbies at night or bartenders. Oh well.

Labels: , ,

4 Comments:

At May 29, 2006 8:25 AM, Blogger Voth said...

Here is my issue with X-men. Near the end, Jean is standing on a pile of stones. She is causing destruction. Wolverine is trying to get to her. His shirt burns off, his skin burns off and heals on his chest. His pants don't burn. They stay fine.

I guess I was just wishing for some XXX men.

 
At May 29, 2006 3:25 PM, Blogger Daniel said...

I noticed that too. Very weird. I mean at one point she burns through so much that you can see his adamantine spine and ribs. Needless to say I was disappointed with Mystique's modesty.

 
At May 29, 2006 7:57 PM, Blogger Ellen said...

thanks for going and seeing all the movies i wanted to see on the weekend i wasn't here. except for "over the hedge" that's all yours to enjoy by yourself.

 
At May 29, 2006 10:14 PM, Blogger Daniel said...

Don't worry I still haven't seen Art School Confidential or Neil Young's Heart of Gold.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Sunday, May 28, 2006

They Scream

against ice cream!? I mentioned the Black and Tan rhubarb in my previous post. I thought I would provide some more evidence that the world aches to defame ice cream because it is so joy inducing. Meet the innocent Nogger Black. And the defenseless treat's detractors. That blasted "diasporic African culture;" always getting in the way.

Labels: ,

1 Comments:

At May 28, 2006 11:58 AM, Blogger Voth said...

Good grief. I'd be tempted to buy it just to spite the world, but I don't like licorice. I don't live in Sweden either.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Thursday, May 25, 2006

Bill of Fare

Rhubarb Crisp. Strawberry Rhubarb Custard Pie.

7ish. Our Apartment. Bean Bags. Be There.

2 Comments:

At May 25, 2006 7:40 PM, Blogger Angela said...

you're killing me.

 
At May 25, 2006 11:15 PM, Blogger Daniel said...

Don't worry Angela; the pie was bad and old and a bit moldy, so it was just the crisp.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Wednesday, May 24, 2006

Caring Hearts and Killing Cars

This past week end, I drove up to SD then hitched a ride to DAA for my sisters graduation. I left at 6:12 am on Friday morning and 424 miles later at 12:07 pm I arrived in Rockham. Yes, I sped. On my way up, I hit a smaller bird. Then going up to DAA, we (my mother, Denny and I) hit a larger bird. The weekend's events went smoothly without any major hitches in the giddy-up. I'll share my notes that I took in the program later.

One fun piece of advice that Charles Reel, Dakota Conference Treasurer, gave in his commencement address: "If you lend someone $20 and you never see them again, it was probably worth it."

I stayed, after we packed my sister up on Sunday, to ride back from DAA to Rockham. Yes, we hit another bird. Monday was cleaning out the front porch and playing plenty of bean bags. I headed out for Lincoln later than I wanted, so I sped again. This time though, I was pulled over and given a ticket. Oh well. I felt no remorse or guilt or anger or anything really. It was a consequence of breaking the law like falling off a table is consequence of gravity. Then I stopped at the Wal-Mart to get a pint of ice cream and Arrested Development. Jennapher was the girl that checked me out, literally, not as figuratively. Why would a parent do that to their child? I was fortunate to purchase gasoline for 2.57 in Sioux City. Who knows when gas will be that cheap again. Then an hour later, I hit a deer. Don't worry; I was terribly precise with my hit. The deer only took out my headlight, nothing else.

So if you're keeping score, I had four legs to my journey, and each resulted in a dead animal. Four for Four.

The caring heart of the title is the scholarship my sister won from the NAD.

Labels: , , ,

3 Comments:

At May 25, 2006 7:59 PM, Blogger Angela said...

killing cars...and birds, don't forget the birds.

drives to nd are always a little risky. who knew the plains could be so daring.

i feel so far away from that dakota life. i'm sure your sister is off to do great things with her caring heart award. you must be very proud.

 
At May 25, 2006 11:16 PM, Blogger Daniel said...

I'm very proud of her, I even got a bit choked up when she received it.

 
At May 25, 2006 11:32 PM, Blogger Cerise said...

I used to believe that birds wouldn't allow themselves to be hit by automobiles. Until I hit one.

But three in a weekend? Wow.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Friday, May 12, 2006

Answers and More Part Two

Jeff and Amy both mentioned my kowtowing statement in their comments, so I guess it deserves more clarification because it touches on other things.

RESPECT. By kowtow, I meant servile deference and from fawn: obsequious (to follow) behaviour. And a God who chases humans around with his love hoping they'll take it from him is obsequious and servile. But, thanks to some clarification from Jeff, God doesn't do that, so he isn't servile or obsequious or fawning. He is steadfast and powerful and loving. I can and do respect that. Amy, you thought if I were God that I wouldn't kowtow to humans. I probably wouldn't, but that doesn't mean I'd be a good God, and I think we're all fortunate I'm not.

VALUE. I'll try to make the last part of my previous post a bit clearer, hopefully Ockam won't get me. I'll rephrase by saying, "I don't find my value in the fact that God sacrificed his son for me." Jeff, you're right that my possibility comes from the Creator. [While the previous assumption about unrequited love being more valuable has been debunked, I'll continue to defend my reasoning. I figured rejected love was more valuable, so if I accepted God's love instead of rejecting it, that made it less valuable. So according to that thinking, identifying yourself by a love you have devalued by accepting it doesn't make sense. That is why I don't identify myself by God's love for me. I hope I provided more answers than questions.]

MORE. I talked about my disillusionment before in the "Jeremy Birge" post. Now I'll talk a bit about my beginning and a different disillusionment. I was baptised the summer before my freshman year. I chose to be baptised because I wanted to be part of the Remnant (there was a Prophecy Seminar the previous autumn from our pastor.) We were in the eleventh hour of eschatological time. I didn't want to miss out. The problem with this was that ten years later I don't have that urgency, and since I was baptised into the second, not first, advent part of Seventh-Day Adventism, I'm left with not much. When I was baptised, I didn't really accept what I should have as a baptismal candidate, Christ's sacrifice. This continued from that point. I've never prayed to Jesus, always God. So I understand my circumstances have come from my past and my honesty, or lack thereof, with what I truly believe. Which brings us to . . .

BELIEF. To me belief is an acceptance of an intangible based on evidence. Faith is acceptance of an intangible in spite of evidence. Faith is important, as hope is important. I believe in God and have faith in many aspects of Him. A lot of my evidence of God comes from my ability to reason. I've also felt strong emotion during worship which I attribute at least partly to God. I also hope that there is a god, which is my main exercise in faith.

Vansittart Huggins

Labels: , ,

1 Comments:

At May 17, 2006 8:13 PM, Blogger Jeff said...

Hello from the Loveland Public Library. I came home early because of health problems. CEB continues to git-r-dun in Seoul.

Interesting.

"I also hope that there is a god, which is my main exercise in faith." There's a lot I'd like to respond to, but my time is pretty limited on this comp.

Yeah, faith seems to be a basic part of humanity. The thing that separates us from animals (or so anthropologists tell us). The faith impulse is so amazing. There is nothing in evolution to have produced the need for faith. And like I said, the Evo Psych class at UNL tried to deal with it. "Homo-Early-Erectus sees effect, but doesn't see cause. There must be a cause, so H.E.E. invents spirits to explain it." So goes the "formula." But why would, for the first time, the evolutionized brain reach for an invisible answer? Why would the evolved brain ever think that something invisible could exist? There was nothing in evolving that would like to such a hypothesis. So here we are with this faith impulse (in fact, I'd say we can never get away from it, because we always have faith in something... until suicide. And then I guess we have faith that suicide can cure more problems than it causes). Every society has had a religious dimension... Science, rooted in religion, led to the first group of people with "evidence" that we have no need of god, no reason to believe in god.

But then there it is, Those Six Numbers, That Uncause Cause, The Uncanny Spiritual Experiences Known the World Over... There really is evidence if we want it.

And I'm way off now, not taking time to edit. Almost none of this has anything to do with what you said...

Because we can find evidence for almost anything we want. Show me one theory of psychology or science that doesn't have evidence to the contrary. There is ample evidence for what we want to believe...

SO... why do humans want to believe in a divine? I think it's because the divine has placed the desire in us. We were created to want to know IT.

In my unedited, thrown-together thoughts.

Yeah, I feel the impulse. Voth feels it. You feel it. And I think there is good reason.

Peace,
Jeff

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Answers and More Part One

I thank all who commented on my Another Try post. Your comments and concerns are very appreciated. I hope to address some of the latter here.

I realize I don't live in a vacuum. I know that I have family and friends that are interested in what I believe and think, especially when those beliefs and thoughts are in conflict with their own. I might have mentioned this before in a follow-up comment, but I want to reiterate that my beliefs don't derive from any of my experiences with other Christians, and actually if they did, I'd probably be finishing up in the Seminary right now. I have many friends and family members whose faith in Christ I admire, and envy. BUT I don't think God wants me to believe based on others, but from my own thoughts and experience with Him.

Since my last post on this topic, I've been reading again from Clive Lewis' Mere Christianity, namely book two What Christians Believe. Page 52 at the end of chapter 3 in that book:
I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him( Christ):'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic--on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg--or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a man or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at his feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.

I agree. So instead of going with what I said earlier about Jesus being a great moral teacher. I'm going to have to go with one of the other two choices.

Page 55: We are told that Christ was killed for us, that His death has washed out our sins, and that by dying He disabled death itself. That is the formula. That is Christianity. That is what has to be believed.

That is not what I believe.

Terri wanted to share 1 John 5 with me. Verses 1 and 5: Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him.
5 Who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?


I believe the first verse says if you believe Jesus is the saviour you are born of God and also that if you love God you also love Jesus, and yourself since you are born of God if you believe Christ (a bit circular). And as for the fifth verse, I'm not really looking to overcome the world.

Jeff made some good points and asked some good questions which I'll try to do justice to now. LOVE. I agree with you Jeff and thank you for your perspective. It makes sense that God, who is unchanging, would have love that is also unchanging. I guess the pill I have a hard time swallowing is that the Crucifixion is the best manifestation of that love.

I've been working on this post since Tuesday, I'll give you what I have now and be assured I'm not done. Til part two. TTFN

Dale Vassantachart

Labels: , , ,

3 Comments:

At May 12, 2006 11:30 PM, Blogger Jeff said...

"BUT I don't think God wants me to believe based on others, but from my own thoughts and experience with Him."

Yeah. That makes a lot of sense to me.

"I guess the pill I have a hard time swallowing is that the Crucifixion is the best manifestation of that love."

I'll be interested to see how you work this one out over time. Everyone has a different perspective with different experiences. At this point, I think it was either His ONLY way to manifest it, or it doesn't make sense to me.

If it was the only way to show love... then WHY? If it wasn't the only way... then WHY? Both ways take some sharp reasoning that seem to be one part formula, one part passion. I'll keep checking in once in a while to see where the journey is going.

Another thought about formulas. I think all systems of belief (science, philosophy, religions...) have set formulas for most questions that they deem important. Some formulaic answers might be right, and some might be wrong. But probably all of them need to be personally re-examined for them to mean anything to us. My evolutionary psychology professor at UNL certainly had his formula answers. Maybe they were right, maybe not (you probably have a good idea about what I thought of some of his formula answers, but that goes in a direction that is tangential to the main ideas in this post).

And two other questions. Why did the Jews want Him dead? And if He was God, why did He let them do it? What we decide about those questions can lead to different overall conclusions, I think.

One part listening, one part nosey, Jeff

 
At May 16, 2006 11:17 PM, Blogger Voth said...

I think the Buddhists have the best def. of love. I also struggle with the idea of the death of Jesus being the only way to manifest gds love. If he is GD, there must have been another way.

The death of someone, even if they later rise from the dead, doesn't make me happy. Pain in others also doesn't make me happy. Well, ok, pain resulting in death, I am a bit guilty of schadenfreude. Anyway, here is the Buddhist philosophy I can't argue with...


LOVE

The definition of love in Buddhism is: wanting others to be happy.
This love is unconditional and it requires a lot of courage and acceptance (including self-acceptance).
The "near enemy" of love, or a quality which appears similar, but is more an opposite is: conditional love (selfish love).
The opposite is wanting others to be unhappy: anger, hatred.
A result which one needs to avoid is: attachment.

 
At June 06, 2006 4:13 PM, Blogger Piiwite said...

I'm on a roll today...

The Clive Lewis comment is really "inside the box". It's the type of argument that can only make sense if both parties view the bible as a truthful historical document free of bias, error, editing, etc. If both parties agree on that much, then the debate is already concluded.

There is a very real possibility that the biblical record of the life of the person we now refer to as Jesus is not entirely accurate. Just because people claim that the bible is the official record of the one true god, doesn't mean it really is...

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Sunday, May 07, 2006

Dustin Halfman

Dustin Hoffman was the Marathon Man in film of same name. I'm just half the man he was.

I finished today in 1:54:27. My mother finished in 2:54:24. I'd like to give a big shout out to Erin Brumbaugh of Sidney, IA. I was fortunate to run with her from miles 8.5 through 11.5 (where I kinda hit a wall). She wore a Rolling Stones t-shirt and made pleasant conversation. You can go here if you want to see other results or more detailed results for other participants like Greg Okimi, Andrea Blake, Yolanda Blake, Mindy Mekelburg, Greg Carlson, and the aforementioned Ms. Brumbaugh.

On the whole, I enjoyed the experience. My first mile, while sorting out the opening was ten minutes. Mile 2 was nine minutes. My fastest mile was probably the sixth going north on 48th to Hwy 2. It took me 71 minutes to get to the eighth mile. 1:27 at the ten mile mark. Then a bit past the eleventh mile marker I kinda seized up and had to walk for a bit.

My "strategy" was to just go however for the first 4 or 5 minutes of each mile, then I would run faster passing people for the last bit til I reached the next mile marker. I guess it worked. I ran 10 miles on Friday, because "they" said I should run at least that before doing the 13.1. Now if I do 3 tomorrow I have the three day marathon.

After the marathon my parents and I went to Granite City for their brunch. Very tasty. You must try eggs benedict, turkey ham instead of canadian. Alright, I'm done.

Labels: ,

3 Comments:

At May 07, 2006 11:18 PM, Blogger Angela said...

that's awesome! i didn't realize the marathon was coming up so quickly. i'm proud of you and a little jealous. i think i'm going to get a new pair of running shoes and start running again...if i can find the time. last night i had the sudden urge to run and run and run.

i'm glad you ran.

 
At May 07, 2006 11:26 PM, Blogger bryant said...

Congratulations on the half marathon. Very nice time, too!

 
At May 08, 2006 8:34 AM, Blogger Cerise said...

Congrats!

 

Post a Comment

<< Home