when playing video games there are a few constants in my life. I love going back and popping in an oldie but goodie, sometimes I just need to blow stuff up, and other times, I prefer hacking and whacking like Butcher Pete and his long sharp pen-errrrr knife.
rarely ever though do I want to get immersed in some mystical far off land of prissy elves, racist humans, and isolationist dwarfs, and idiot orks. The Era of steel blades and chainmail just flat do not do it for me. I did not enjoy playing Final Fantasy 1 at all, and Dragon Warrior... forget it.
Later in life I went back to these oldies because I forced my way through more modern RPGs, but there is still a huge problem with them.
Magic. call it what you will, but every role playing video game has Magic of some sort. Some kind of ability that turns ordinary people into gods among men. even in Sci Fi oriented games like Parasite Eve there was magic (mitohondial Powers). and it is a crutch that you can not ignore in order to complete the game.
Fallout 2 was the first RPG game I came across that had no magic per say in it, and it was a wonderful experience. Only equipment and training mattered. the post apocolyptic science fiction setting was welcome as well. I would love to see more such games with a set up. level building to invovle "getting better" at stuff, great equipment, an immersive story, but no Magic system. that includes the Force for you KOTOR fans, and Parasite energy for the PE club.
I want to keep my RPGs real.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
David Souter
Oh, damn, holy crap, Barack Obama is not even a year into his term and he gets to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court. And Legions of so called conservatives are shaking in their boots because “he will pick a liberal justice.” OF COURSE HE WILL YOU FUCK-TARDS. Liberal politician, liberal appointees. This is what happens when a party sweeps an election cycle, and the Conservative party in my country has had that free ride for eight gods damned years and squandered it like a kid in a baseball card store.
I am sick and tired of hearing this fear with David Souter’s retirement. First David Souter, while appointed by a republican president, was not exactly a strictly conservative judge. Souter was a champion for personal liberty and responsibility. If a case had to do with Government vs. people, he generally sided with the people. This in my mind made him a very conservative judge, as he was a check on federal power. I would like to see his successor in a similar vein.
Case in point is the infamous Planned Parenthood v. Casey trial, which was a challenge to the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act in 1992. The States argument was poor, and part of it was a direct request to overturn Roe V Wade. Souter wrote that Roe v. Wade should not be overturned because it would be surrender to political pressure... So to overrule under fire in the absence of the most compelling reason to re-examine a watershed decision would subvert the Court's legitimacy beyond any serious question.”
Long Story short, he was not going to vote to overturn a ruling based on the sole argument of being asked nicely.
The most distressing part about this appointment coming up is the expectations of the people. Again, it was not until about a quarter of a century ago that nobody even cared about Supreme Court nominations. The average vote by the senate for approval was in the nineties, and in pre vote hearings, often times nominees did not even show up. It was not until Ronald Regan’s nomination of Sandra Day O’Conner that such a practice became commonplace, and damned the nomination of Robert Bork in 1987.
I wander around my workplace and I am surprised to see how many people think that the High Court in this country actually has to answer to some other federal agency. Buzz Words and talking points like Judicial Activism arise, as though to accuse the Courts of trying to legislate from their seats.
The Supreme Court was set up as a third equal and separate branch of federal power, not as a division of the Department of Justice. They are an island, and through the constitution act as the final, almighty and ever present arbiter of what is and is not law in this land. The Marbury v Madison case opinion perfectly outlines this.
“It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the Courts must decide on the operation of each.
So, if a law be in opposition to the Constitution, if both the law and the Constitution apply to a particular case, so that the Court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the Constitution, or conformably to the Constitution, disregarding the law, the Court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty. If, then, the Courts are to regard the Constitution, and the Constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the Legislature, the Constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.
Those, then, who controvert the principle that the Constitution is to be considered in court as a paramount law, are reduced to the necessity of maintaining that courts must close their eyes on the Constitution, and see only the law.
This doctrine would subvert the very foundation of all written constitutions.”
I think that the best nominee would be one who would hold to that ideal very closely, criticisms of activism be damned.
I am sick and tired of hearing this fear with David Souter’s retirement. First David Souter, while appointed by a republican president, was not exactly a strictly conservative judge. Souter was a champion for personal liberty and responsibility. If a case had to do with Government vs. people, he generally sided with the people. This in my mind made him a very conservative judge, as he was a check on federal power. I would like to see his successor in a similar vein.
Case in point is the infamous Planned Parenthood v. Casey trial, which was a challenge to the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act in 1992. The States argument was poor, and part of it was a direct request to overturn Roe V Wade. Souter wrote that Roe v. Wade should not be overturned because it would be surrender to political pressure... So to overrule under fire in the absence of the most compelling reason to re-examine a watershed decision would subvert the Court's legitimacy beyond any serious question.”
Long Story short, he was not going to vote to overturn a ruling based on the sole argument of being asked nicely.
The most distressing part about this appointment coming up is the expectations of the people. Again, it was not until about a quarter of a century ago that nobody even cared about Supreme Court nominations. The average vote by the senate for approval was in the nineties, and in pre vote hearings, often times nominees did not even show up. It was not until Ronald Regan’s nomination of Sandra Day O’Conner that such a practice became commonplace, and damned the nomination of Robert Bork in 1987.
I wander around my workplace and I am surprised to see how many people think that the High Court in this country actually has to answer to some other federal agency. Buzz Words and talking points like Judicial Activism arise, as though to accuse the Courts of trying to legislate from their seats.
The Supreme Court was set up as a third equal and separate branch of federal power, not as a division of the Department of Justice. They are an island, and through the constitution act as the final, almighty and ever present arbiter of what is and is not law in this land. The Marbury v Madison case opinion perfectly outlines this.
“It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the Courts must decide on the operation of each.
So, if a law be in opposition to the Constitution, if both the law and the Constitution apply to a particular case, so that the Court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the Constitution, or conformably to the Constitution, disregarding the law, the Court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty. If, then, the Courts are to regard the Constitution, and the Constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the Legislature, the Constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.
Those, then, who controvert the principle that the Constitution is to be considered in court as a paramount law, are reduced to the necessity of maintaining that courts must close their eyes on the Constitution, and see only the law.
This doctrine would subvert the very foundation of all written constitutions.”
I think that the best nominee would be one who would hold to that ideal very closely, criticisms of activism be damned.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen Trailer Recap....
so it starts out "Bumblebee, you are to dumb for college! And then here mom proves SHE is to dumb for College, and Dad is to CHEAP for college, so only the annoying kid from the first movie goes.
And then you ask yourself “is Meghan Fox wearing Panties ion that shot? I don’t think she is. Can not quite see….. NONONONONONO DON’T GET UP!”
And then it is the annoying kid again and he drops the last chunk of that rubiks cube. And then it becomes a discovery channel special on Egypt, or Cyberton I do not know. HOLY CRAP IS THAT A FACE!
And then same starts writing on the chalk board, and stabbing the ground and then you hear Optimus Prime?
HOLY CRAP IT IS OPTIMUS PIRME! HOW DID THEY GET HIM BACK? His contract after the first movie had to be outrageous!
And he goes “I have not been honest with you Sam” is that the kids name? I never really cared. And He Goes “it is not my war” which makes me think he is going to die! Wait a second, wasn’t stuff blowing up by now?
BOOM BAM BANG thumpthumpthumpthump
Ah there we go, all better now.
Stuff is always better with explosions. WAIT WHAT THE HELL WAS THAT? It looks like a Decepticon on a unicycle. EXTREME UNICYLING IS AWESOME! Yes it is a real sport. Or it should be.
And now we see bumblebee has two friends, I hope they die. I miss Jazz. And then that guy from the usual suspects ask that kid “does this look familiar?” and plot tries to get in the way of a good trailer.
And then we are underwater, and four big Decepticons surround Megatron. And one of them is HUGE, like just as big as Megatron. And on the third year MEGATRON SHALL RISE FROM THE ABYSS! And he looks like he has taken steroids! He was huge as it was but now…. Holy crap he is huge! And he has a really big gun and every thing and he sneaks up on this girl.
HOW CAN YOU MISS A 30 FOOT TALL ROBOT!? ARE YOU BLIND?
But now it is back to the trailer. BANBG, BOOM, ZAAAAAAP, KECEWL, ZOOM, VROOM!
Crying and ownage, and that stupid kid is in a flying audi. I think it was thrown. Please die kid. Or get arrested at Walgreens again.
And opttimus gets in the fray, dueling up on blades like Samuel L Jackson. But he gets pwned. And then “Fate rarely calls upon us at a moment of our choosing.”
And a bunch of scenes flash and then……
WHAT THE HOLY JESUS BLUE FUCKING MONKEY CHRIST IS THAT????
And then you ask yourself “is Meghan Fox wearing Panties ion that shot? I don’t think she is. Can not quite see….. NONONONONONO DON’T GET UP!”
And then it is the annoying kid again and he drops the last chunk of that rubiks cube. And then it becomes a discovery channel special on Egypt, or Cyberton I do not know. HOLY CRAP IS THAT A FACE!
And then same starts writing on the chalk board, and stabbing the ground and then you hear Optimus Prime?
HOLY CRAP IT IS OPTIMUS PIRME! HOW DID THEY GET HIM BACK? His contract after the first movie had to be outrageous!
And he goes “I have not been honest with you Sam” is that the kids name? I never really cared. And He Goes “it is not my war” which makes me think he is going to die! Wait a second, wasn’t stuff blowing up by now?
BOOM BAM BANG thumpthumpthumpthump
Ah there we go, all better now.
Stuff is always better with explosions. WAIT WHAT THE HELL WAS THAT? It looks like a Decepticon on a unicycle. EXTREME UNICYLING IS AWESOME! Yes it is a real sport. Or it should be.
And now we see bumblebee has two friends, I hope they die. I miss Jazz. And then that guy from the usual suspects ask that kid “does this look familiar?” and plot tries to get in the way of a good trailer.
And then we are underwater, and four big Decepticons surround Megatron. And one of them is HUGE, like just as big as Megatron. And on the third year MEGATRON SHALL RISE FROM THE ABYSS! And he looks like he has taken steroids! He was huge as it was but now…. Holy crap he is huge! And he has a really big gun and every thing and he sneaks up on this girl.
HOW CAN YOU MISS A 30 FOOT TALL ROBOT!? ARE YOU BLIND?
But now it is back to the trailer. BANBG, BOOM, ZAAAAAAP, KECEWL, ZOOM, VROOM!
Crying and ownage, and that stupid kid is in a flying audi. I think it was thrown. Please die kid. Or get arrested at Walgreens again.
And opttimus gets in the fray, dueling up on blades like Samuel L Jackson. But he gets pwned. And then “Fate rarely calls upon us at a moment of our choosing.”
And a bunch of scenes flash and then……
WHAT THE HOLY JESUS BLUE FUCKING MONKEY CHRIST IS THAT????
Thursday, April 30, 2009
There she is, Miss Dumbass
So a lot of hullaballo was raised last week that Miss California was set up by a gay man from California in the Q&A section, with a question she could not answer correctly about gay marriage .
I would like to present to you her original and unedited answer to the question "Should every state allow same sex marriage?"
"I think it's great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land that you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage and, you know what, in my country and my family I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anyone out there but that's how I was raised and that's how I think it should be between a man and a woman."
Forget what she was talking about for a second. The Syntax of her statement was horrible, she seemed selfish and arogant, and she blindly trampled over the hot button issue of sexuality being a choice or not which was not the context of the question.
Basically she sounded like a dumb, rich, blond bitch from California.
I would like to present to you what she should have said, and what would have gotten her the title.
Marriage occupies a unique and contradictory place in the culture of the United States of America. Almost universally marriage is a religious institution, yet the federal state and local governments all have legal definitions of marriage. The fact that many of these definitions strictly follow the Judeo-Christian definition may or may not be a violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment of the constitution of the United States of America.
I was raised in a strictly devout Christian household, and my faith prevents me from personally endorsing same-sex marriage. There are several religions and religious sects however who will recognize same sex couples. Since I am not a member of any of these groups I feel I have no say as to what the legitimacy of their rites are.
While I do not agree that Same Sex couples should be allowed to marry within my own faith, I do think that if government in this country is going to continue to recognize marriage in the form of licenses and tax benefits, that those benefits should be non discriminatory, provided that the marriage ceremony is performed in an established house of God within good standing of that religions hierarchy.
a little wordy, and it might violate time standards in the competition. but it sounds intelligent, and neatly sidesteps the issue of personal beliefs over policy.
Now as for Parez Hilton, not related to Paris as I found out, he was an ass-hat anyway. This openly gay man makes a living on invading the personal lives of celebrities and trying to find out if they are gay or not. he has an impressive record of outing people against their will. For evidence I would recommend logging onto his blog and doing a search for CNN anchor "Anderson Cooper."
I understand WHY he asked the same sex marraige question. He has a personal stake in it and California, in the top 5 of most liberal states in the union is among the states that led this push towards permitting gay people to wed. so asking a Californian about the issue may make a certain amount of sense. it does not change the fact though that we are asking a beauty queen a political question. this is a crew that for nearly a century has been famous for giving six year old answers to thousand year old problems. Asking for a coherent opinion is like asking for a hand job from someone with no hands. it JUST DOES NOT HAPPEN!
my simple sollution to this horrible misunderstanding is that we remove the Q&A section all together. I want to stare at babes in bikini's, watch them do cool useless shit, and be poised. I do not want to hear these little girls talk.
I would like to present to you her original and unedited answer to the question "Should every state allow same sex marriage?"
"I think it's great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land that you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage and, you know what, in my country and my family I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anyone out there but that's how I was raised and that's how I think it should be between a man and a woman."
Forget what she was talking about for a second. The Syntax of her statement was horrible, she seemed selfish and arogant, and she blindly trampled over the hot button issue of sexuality being a choice or not which was not the context of the question.
Basically she sounded like a dumb, rich, blond bitch from California.
I would like to present to you what she should have said, and what would have gotten her the title.
Marriage occupies a unique and contradictory place in the culture of the United States of America. Almost universally marriage is a religious institution, yet the federal state and local governments all have legal definitions of marriage. The fact that many of these definitions strictly follow the Judeo-Christian definition may or may not be a violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment of the constitution of the United States of America.
I was raised in a strictly devout Christian household, and my faith prevents me from personally endorsing same-sex marriage. There are several religions and religious sects however who will recognize same sex couples. Since I am not a member of any of these groups I feel I have no say as to what the legitimacy of their rites are.
While I do not agree that Same Sex couples should be allowed to marry within my own faith, I do think that if government in this country is going to continue to recognize marriage in the form of licenses and tax benefits, that those benefits should be non discriminatory, provided that the marriage ceremony is performed in an established house of God within good standing of that religions hierarchy.
a little wordy, and it might violate time standards in the competition. but it sounds intelligent, and neatly sidesteps the issue of personal beliefs over policy.
Now as for Parez Hilton, not related to Paris as I found out, he was an ass-hat anyway. This openly gay man makes a living on invading the personal lives of celebrities and trying to find out if they are gay or not. he has an impressive record of outing people against their will. For evidence I would recommend logging onto his blog and doing a search for CNN anchor "Anderson Cooper."
I understand WHY he asked the same sex marraige question. He has a personal stake in it and California, in the top 5 of most liberal states in the union is among the states that led this push towards permitting gay people to wed. so asking a Californian about the issue may make a certain amount of sense. it does not change the fact though that we are asking a beauty queen a political question. this is a crew that for nearly a century has been famous for giving six year old answers to thousand year old problems. Asking for a coherent opinion is like asking for a hand job from someone with no hands. it JUST DOES NOT HAPPEN!
my simple sollution to this horrible misunderstanding is that we remove the Q&A section all together. I want to stare at babes in bikini's, watch them do cool useless shit, and be poised. I do not want to hear these little girls talk.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
All of the has happened before....
http://news.spong.com/gateway?Games+Addiction+Researcher+Admits+%22I+Made+an+Error%22/%2Farticle%2F17790%2FGames_Addiction_Researcher_Admits_I_Made_an_Error
People with an agenda trying to do research to suit their needs. Jack Thompson probably spooged his shorts when he read this paper initially.
This has always been a great frustration for me as a gamer. People want to see video games as a child's toy, instead of as a legitimate entertainment form like theater, cinema, and television. Since the days of the Magnavox Odyssey in 1972 There has been a niche market of adults that has gotten progressively bigger. the reason why is that children who were playing Colecovision, Intellivision, Atari, the Sega Master System, or Nintendo grew up and continued to game.
and what is the number one criticism. "well video games are just escapism"
Yes, of course they are. just like reading a book, or watching a movie. Video games are at least slightly more constructive then either format, because you control the circumstances. you as a player get to determine the path that the stories protagonist take.
Gaming is a culture, and just because some idiots out there do not agree with it does not mean it does not have a right to exist.
People with an agenda trying to do research to suit their needs. Jack Thompson probably spooged his shorts when he read this paper initially.
This has always been a great frustration for me as a gamer. People want to see video games as a child's toy, instead of as a legitimate entertainment form like theater, cinema, and television. Since the days of the Magnavox Odyssey in 1972 There has been a niche market of adults that has gotten progressively bigger. the reason why is that children who were playing Colecovision, Intellivision, Atari, the Sega Master System, or Nintendo grew up and continued to game.
and what is the number one criticism. "well video games are just escapism"
Yes, of course they are. just like reading a book, or watching a movie. Video games are at least slightly more constructive then either format, because you control the circumstances. you as a player get to determine the path that the stories protagonist take.
Gaming is a culture, and just because some idiots out there do not agree with it does not mean it does not have a right to exist.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
I am owed about 3,000 apologoies by my count
The News story in USA TODAY came, and it is wonderfull.
I have refered to myself as a victim of the Columbine shootings since 2002. Upon self reflection of the circumstances, I realized that the events that took place in Littleton Colorado in 1999 stirred a national panic, and every slightly odd boy and girl in grades Pre-K through 12 was now considered a bomb threat.
I was that slightly odd boy. I played Video games like Doom and Duke Nukem, I loved computers and read whatever was placed in front of me. I studied seven different religons holy text and interpreted all of them. I played board games that required dice with more then six faces. I saw Ballistics as the ultimate expression of Physics, I studied World War II like it was a Religion. I knew how to make various implements of harm out of homemade objects, as well as ingenious devices that could be helpful in a stretch. in the 1980s I would have been refered to as a little MacGuyver. At Bishop Miege High School I was a ticking time bomb.
It was horrible treatment by my fellow students. most wanted nothing to do with me at that point. Others sought to egg me on. Time however has taught me paitence, and thanks to this article, I stand vindicated. I hope that at the very least my entire graduating class reads this article, and understands. I hope they understand that what happened to me by those who sought to prevent another Columbine was a crime, and it is not one that can be prosecuted or repaid.
I am happy to see the back of that school, and I will only look at it again to see it bulldozed to the ground after I bought it.
I have refered to myself as a victim of the Columbine shootings since 2002. Upon self reflection of the circumstances, I realized that the events that took place in Littleton Colorado in 1999 stirred a national panic, and every slightly odd boy and girl in grades Pre-K through 12 was now considered a bomb threat.
I was that slightly odd boy. I played Video games like Doom and Duke Nukem, I loved computers and read whatever was placed in front of me. I studied seven different religons holy text and interpreted all of them. I played board games that required dice with more then six faces. I saw Ballistics as the ultimate expression of Physics, I studied World War II like it was a Religion. I knew how to make various implements of harm out of homemade objects, as well as ingenious devices that could be helpful in a stretch. in the 1980s I would have been refered to as a little MacGuyver. At Bishop Miege High School I was a ticking time bomb.
It was horrible treatment by my fellow students. most wanted nothing to do with me at that point. Others sought to egg me on. Time however has taught me paitence, and thanks to this article, I stand vindicated. I hope that at the very least my entire graduating class reads this article, and understands. I hope they understand that what happened to me by those who sought to prevent another Columbine was a crime, and it is not one that can be prosecuted or repaid.
I am happy to see the back of that school, and I will only look at it again to see it bulldozed to the ground after I bought it.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
I are adult now?
Buying a house is an interesting experience. My first forray into home ownership and its consequences was 4 years ago. I found out that my grandfather had left me a substantial amount of investments from when he passed away many many moons ago. so my apartment search ended and my house search began. being shown places and not liking them, real estate listing piling up like oh so many leaning towers, the small mountain of mortgage paperwork... fun times by all.
eventually I settled into the nest I have now. My girlfriend, now wife, moved in with me shortly after. It is a Great condo, four bedrooms, nice living space, and enough electrical outlets to power my modern life. but with the X-01 on the way (our nickname for the incoming baby) we realized that a vertically oriented house, surrounded by old fogies, and in our area is not a good place for an infant.
So I called the relator I went to last time. and he looks at our place and reccomends a lot of clean up work, including but not limited too putting away all of my Battletech Minis. *sigh...* and so we go about cleaning our place. So we go about, boxing up a shit ton of our "fun stuff" My aforementioned Minis, lots of toy collections, porn, Jenny's Altar, porcelin dolls spare computers, DVDs we do not plan on watching in the next 12 months, old files etc. We are also taking the time to ebay or donate stuff we do not want any more, which is good as it contributes less to the clutter we have.
repairs are not easy either. in the past six weeks I have spent close to $4,000 dollars on projects that needed to get done. from repainting to carpet cleaning to fixing trim and sealing cracks. it is not fun, but that nightmare is almost done.
Now we have to look at places. I admit I am spoiled. I grew up in precisely one house. I lived in it from when I was 3 years old to the day I moved out in 2005. so I am spoiled a bit. I expect a lot of open space, rooms with utility and purpose. so I see these houses and say "hey, that has a lot of space." and when we take the tour I am shocked by the photography tricks. Another issue is the general state of disrepair places are in when the owners are gone.
and as for the mortgage paperwork.... oh fuck me running! when I first bought my place in 2005, money was flowing like freaking ethonol (65% less viscous then water) now a days it seems more like molasses. Calling different banks up, some say yes ,some no. some will give you this outrageously high rate, others so low you have to ask "is this a 30 year rate? or did you just give me an ARM?"
and the yes's and no's change almost weekly, it sucks.
the home buying journey continues. our place is going to go on the market by months end. then the dance of negotiations begin.... more coming soon
eventually I settled into the nest I have now. My girlfriend, now wife, moved in with me shortly after. It is a Great condo, four bedrooms, nice living space, and enough electrical outlets to power my modern life. but with the X-01 on the way (our nickname for the incoming baby) we realized that a vertically oriented house, surrounded by old fogies, and in our area is not a good place for an infant.
So I called the relator I went to last time. and he looks at our place and reccomends a lot of clean up work, including but not limited too putting away all of my Battletech Minis. *sigh...* and so we go about cleaning our place. So we go about, boxing up a shit ton of our "fun stuff" My aforementioned Minis, lots of toy collections, porn, Jenny's Altar, porcelin dolls spare computers, DVDs we do not plan on watching in the next 12 months, old files etc. We are also taking the time to ebay or donate stuff we do not want any more, which is good as it contributes less to the clutter we have.
repairs are not easy either. in the past six weeks I have spent close to $4,000 dollars on projects that needed to get done. from repainting to carpet cleaning to fixing trim and sealing cracks. it is not fun, but that nightmare is almost done.
Now we have to look at places. I admit I am spoiled. I grew up in precisely one house. I lived in it from when I was 3 years old to the day I moved out in 2005. so I am spoiled a bit. I expect a lot of open space, rooms with utility and purpose. so I see these houses and say "hey, that has a lot of space." and when we take the tour I am shocked by the photography tricks. Another issue is the general state of disrepair places are in when the owners are gone.
and as for the mortgage paperwork.... oh fuck me running! when I first bought my place in 2005, money was flowing like freaking ethonol (65% less viscous then water) now a days it seems more like molasses. Calling different banks up, some say yes ,some no. some will give you this outrageously high rate, others so low you have to ask "is this a 30 year rate? or did you just give me an ARM?"
and the yes's and no's change almost weekly, it sucks.
the home buying journey continues. our place is going to go on the market by months end. then the dance of negotiations begin.... more coming soon
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
