apocalypsos | (no subject)

Oh, jeez, why did I agree to go into work tomorrow at nine? I'm trying to look at the bright side of this, which in the immediate gratification department means I'm letting myself have greasy, fattening McDonald's-type breakfast food, but it still means I have to get up at six just to get my hair done and whatnot. URGH.

However, have already set the VCR to tape The Amazing Race tomorrow night, so that at least I have that to look forward to. Oh, please win, Kris and Jon, pleeeeeease. *crosses fingers*

In other news, Medium is really starting to grow on me. I've never been the biggest Patricia Arquette fan on the planet, but she and Jake Weber are so very, very cute together. And I started having the feeling that the oldest daughter was psychic, too, when the father started ranting about her doing tenth-grade level geometry and stuff. Aww. I felt so sorry for him later on when Patricia Arquette had to break it to him she was actually reading his mind.

Oh, and guess who's back on middays on WJFK again around here? That's right, that gigantic fuckstick O'Reilly. So I guess two weeks of the Junkies was just a vicious taunt. So, in honor of his return, I bring you the Idiotic O'Reilly Response of the Day. Today, O'Reilly is talking about gay marriage, and a guy calls in to say that he believes that being gay is not something that you choose, but something you're born with and can't change. And much like you can't change your skin color and it's wrong to legislate who can marry whom according to their skin color, it's unlawful to legislate who can marry whom according to their sexual orientation. All of which was a perfectly reasonable and logical explanation.

O'Reilly's response was, "Well, you can't really say that there's a gay gene. I mean, what if I tried to argue I had the polygamy gene?" Well, then, Bill, millions of women would never stop throwing up. Blech.