I got a bad feeling about this. Last night I was watching some CNN as they talked to scholars and other experts regarding the claims I mentioned in yesterdays post. I see some serious backlash to this. I think we’re going to hear how this was a conspiracy by the “Jewish run media” to try and disprove Christianity. Seriously, this is going to get ugly. Call me a prophet, because I see the future; this isn’t going to go well. Of course, I know this because it was discussed in our monthly publication that details exactly how we control the media and Hollywood. It’s the year 2007, you’d think my people would have a website rather than an actual newsletter. (I’m kidding, there’s no newsletter) But in all seriousness, I think this is going to get pretty ugly with lots of bigotry and ignorance.
So I guess this week is when I get into all sorts of controversial issues, it’s really not a plan to piss off my 9 readers. But it might happen anyway. Sunday night I was channel surfing and came across Fox News (still not sure how they can use that name, shouldn’t it be Fox Propaganda) as they were rallying against Hollywood. Being Oscar night, they decided to guess at how Hollywood would cast the White House and all the big parts. It was, oh so clever.
So, I thought I’d flip it. I’ll flip it for real, ya know. How would movies look if the White House wrote the screen plays and cast the stars. So let’s see what I come up with:
• The Passion of the Christ II: Christ Strikes Back, Mel Gibson single handedly takes on those that crucified Jesus.
• The Departed II, all illegal aliens face the same fate as Leo, Matt and Jack.
• A Really Convenient Truth, where weapons of mass destruction are found and the world now loves President Bush, who is played chillingly by Ben Stein.
• Bush: Cultural Learnings of America Make Benefit For American Controlled World
• Rambo 9, Sly Stallone takes on North Korea
• Dream Girls, a group of women who sing yet still also their place in the home. Starring Greta Van Susteren, Ann Coulter and former American Idol Carrie Underwood
• Arabs on a Plane. Bruce Willis faces a plane full of venomous Arabs, and of course kills them all.
And lastly, last night I caught a speech by Minister Louis Farrakhan on C-Span. He spoke about uniting Jews, Muslims and Christians. He also spoke about how he loves this country, that rappers are the new leaders and they need a better message and that the Democrats should impeach Bush and his entire cabinet and let Speaker of the House Pelosi take over the Presidency or at the very least censure the President. And this all proved me right, because if there were signs, the end of the world would be days away.
February 27, 2007
February 26, 2007
Might Cause Some Trouble
Today the big story actually has nothing to do with Britney Spears or Anna-Nicole Smith. That very fact itself is newsworthy. The story is that there’s a James Cameron documentary hitting the Discovery Channel on March 4th, in which they examine if archeologists found two stone ossuaries that some say may have contained the remains of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. (Off topic real quick, if Jesus were around today, and dating, would his relationship get one of those cool TomKat or Bradjolina type names? Maybe JesuSpears? Although I’m sure he’d have better taste, but if anyone needs saving….)
Anyway, I really don’t have much on this. Except that I was reading a story about it, in which biblical scholar, Stephen Phann from the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem (wonder what their mascot is?) said, “How possible is it? On a scale of one through 10 -- 10 being completely possible -- it's probably a one, maybe a one and a half."
Now, I wonder if you use the same scale, what are the odds that there’s actually a God and that he had a son? DNA is used in courtrooms across the globe to prove, or disprove someones guilt or innocence. Shouldn’t the fact that Jesus probably doesn’t have any DNA from his pops, change how much credibility we give DNA testing?
For the record, this isn’t cause I’m some anti-Christian Jew who doesn’t believe that Jesus is the son of God. The truth is I’m an agnostic-Jew who really doubts any of that stuff is true, but I do see the value in the idea of God. And hey, some of my best friends are Christians. But I also have an idea that the Mets will win the World Series this year, it’s an idea that I hold and enjoy. I don’t necessarily think the whole world should agree with me, or they are wrong if they disagree. I just hope they are proven wrong. Just listen to what Chris Rock said in Dogma.
“It bothers Him to see the shit that gets carried out in His name - wars, bigotry, televangelism. But especially the factioning of all the religions. He said humanity took a good idea and, like always, built a belief structure on it. I think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea. Changing a belief is trickier. Life should malleable and progressive; working from idea to idea permits that. Beliefs anchor you to certain points and limit growth; new ideas can't generate. Life becomes stagnant.”
Anyway, I really don’t have much on this. Except that I was reading a story about it, in which biblical scholar, Stephen Phann from the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem (wonder what their mascot is?) said, “How possible is it? On a scale of one through 10 -- 10 being completely possible -- it's probably a one, maybe a one and a half."
Now, I wonder if you use the same scale, what are the odds that there’s actually a God and that he had a son? DNA is used in courtrooms across the globe to prove, or disprove someones guilt or innocence. Shouldn’t the fact that Jesus probably doesn’t have any DNA from his pops, change how much credibility we give DNA testing?
For the record, this isn’t cause I’m some anti-Christian Jew who doesn’t believe that Jesus is the son of God. The truth is I’m an agnostic-Jew who really doubts any of that stuff is true, but I do see the value in the idea of God. And hey, some of my best friends are Christians. But I also have an idea that the Mets will win the World Series this year, it’s an idea that I hold and enjoy. I don’t necessarily think the whole world should agree with me, or they are wrong if they disagree. I just hope they are proven wrong. Just listen to what Chris Rock said in Dogma.
“It bothers Him to see the shit that gets carried out in His name - wars, bigotry, televangelism. But especially the factioning of all the religions. He said humanity took a good idea and, like always, built a belief structure on it. I think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea. Changing a belief is trickier. Life should malleable and progressive; working from idea to idea permits that. Beliefs anchor you to certain points and limit growth; new ideas can't generate. Life becomes stagnant.”
February 22, 2007
Slow Hirp Day
Slight spoiler alert.
I was doing a little catch up and watching my Monday Night shows last night. Those shows being: “Studio 60,” “Two and a Half Men,” “How I Met Your Mother,” and this new “Rules of Engagement.” That, along with “What about Brian,” is my Monday rotation. Anyway, there aren’t any really great sitcoms on television today. There’s no “Seinfeld” or “Friends.” But there are a few solid to very good shows, the best being “2 and ½” and the much underrated “How I Met.”
“Rules” is this new David Spade show, also starring the guy that played Puddy from “Seinfeld” fame. It’s watch-able, but far from spectacular. Anyway, this past weeks episode centered around one couple, that is recently engaged, and how they were fighting on what to do with items acquired while with previous boyfriends/girlfriends. There was a bed, a chair, a cleverly used spatchula, and other useless items. Not a bad premise at all, but strangely it was nearly identical to the premise from this weeks “How I Met Your Mother.”
So, how do two shows that air on the same night and same network, have the same idea? Shouldn’t there be someone that kind of looks out for this sort of thing? Like when Armageddon was coming out around the same time as Deep Impact, that was overkill. But that came from two different studios at least. It’s just as lame as the fact that this season NBC put out two shows, “Studio 60” and “30 Rock” that are both based on being behind the scenes at a SNL type show.
I know it’s popular in Hollywood to recycle ideas, but shouldn’t someone else be done using it before it’s actually recycled? Or does this all just mean I take my entertainment a little too seriously?
I was doing a little catch up and watching my Monday Night shows last night. Those shows being: “Studio 60,” “Two and a Half Men,” “How I Met Your Mother,” and this new “Rules of Engagement.” That, along with “What about Brian,” is my Monday rotation. Anyway, there aren’t any really great sitcoms on television today. There’s no “Seinfeld” or “Friends.” But there are a few solid to very good shows, the best being “2 and ½” and the much underrated “How I Met.”
“Rules” is this new David Spade show, also starring the guy that played Puddy from “Seinfeld” fame. It’s watch-able, but far from spectacular. Anyway, this past weeks episode centered around one couple, that is recently engaged, and how they were fighting on what to do with items acquired while with previous boyfriends/girlfriends. There was a bed, a chair, a cleverly used spatchula, and other useless items. Not a bad premise at all, but strangely it was nearly identical to the premise from this weeks “How I Met Your Mother.”
So, how do two shows that air on the same night and same network, have the same idea? Shouldn’t there be someone that kind of looks out for this sort of thing? Like when Armageddon was coming out around the same time as Deep Impact, that was overkill. But that came from two different studios at least. It’s just as lame as the fact that this season NBC put out two shows, “Studio 60” and “30 Rock” that are both based on being behind the scenes at a SNL type show.
I know it’s popular in Hollywood to recycle ideas, but shouldn’t someone else be done using it before it’s actually recycled? Or does this all just mean I take my entertainment a little too seriously?
February 19, 2007
Brit
If Anna-Nicole Smith’s life was a train wreck, what does that make Britney Spears’? In the last week she checked herself into rehab, checked out less than 24 hours later, shaved her head and got two tattoos. And to top it all off, she went to the Valley. It was wacky and strange when she was getting marrying white trash and chomping gum, but now it’s crossed over to truly disturbing and borderline scary.
I flipped on the television this morning as I was getting ready for work; I wanted to know what the story was with all the sirens that woke me up that were followed by multiple helicopters flying near my apartment. And all I could find was everyone was talking about her shaving her head. They were interviewing psychologists and hair stylists for their take on what’s going on with Britney. But it took a caller on a radio station to actually make sense. It’s postpartum. Someone call Tom Cruise.
It’s actually not even that funny anymore. After seeing Anna-Nicole die, I actually wondered who would go next; Britney, Lindsay or Paris. I really don’t know what is about these girls. They’re all kind of trying to replace Michael Jackson. They’ve had too much, too soon, never had a childhood and haven’t a clue of how to act or even survive. And there’s no one who can set them straight. This won’t end well. So if Anna-Nicole was a train wreck, Britney must be a Space Shuttle tragedy. The entire voyage has been caught on tape, and we’ll analyze every second of the flight for years go come.
I flipped on the television this morning as I was getting ready for work; I wanted to know what the story was with all the sirens that woke me up that were followed by multiple helicopters flying near my apartment. And all I could find was everyone was talking about her shaving her head. They were interviewing psychologists and hair stylists for their take on what’s going on with Britney. But it took a caller on a radio station to actually make sense. It’s postpartum. Someone call Tom Cruise.
It’s actually not even that funny anymore. After seeing Anna-Nicole die, I actually wondered who would go next; Britney, Lindsay or Paris. I really don’t know what is about these girls. They’re all kind of trying to replace Michael Jackson. They’ve had too much, too soon, never had a childhood and haven’t a clue of how to act or even survive. And there’s no one who can set them straight. This won’t end well. So if Anna-Nicole was a train wreck, Britney must be a Space Shuttle tragedy. The entire voyage has been caught on tape, and we’ll analyze every second of the flight for years go come.
February 15, 2007
Smoked
I forgot to mention something about Austin, a little fact that really did contribute to making our night out there so much fun. It’s fairly common, completely logical and of course something not done in Kansas City. I’m talking about smoke-free restaurants and bars. It’s the standard in New York, Los Angeles and even near by Lawrence. But of course, KC is behind the times on this as well. I hear smokers say how they have to smoke when they drink, and that’s a load of crap. Know how I know? There are smokers in New York, LA and Austin and they still make it out to eat and have a cocktail.
I’m pretty anti-smoking, just because it’s dumb, but I understand it’s a choice and I don’t think it’s right to legally tell people they can’t. But that doesn’t mean their choice should affect my life. Here, if I go out, I know I’ll come home smelling like an ashtray. I don’t enjoy that, it’s pretty disgusting. It’s not my disgusting habit, so I find it very rude. What if I just decided not to cover my mouth when I sneeze, and start spraying all the smokers? Hey, it’s a disgusting rude habit but, I gotta sneeze ya know. Tell me how they react when I cover them in snot. Probably prefer I wouldn’t do that.
Bar owners and restaurant owners in KC say how banning smoking will hurt their business, that’s bullshit. People will go out, I don’t think you’ll see a jump in Law & Order ratings when everyone decides they’ll stay home and smoke a pack while watching TV since they can’t smoke in a bar. People like to smoke when they drink, because in a bar everyone is smoking. Imagine if no one was. Wow, you could go out have a couple drinks and not have to smell it on your sheets for the next week. Go smoke-free, your patrons will be happier, as will your staff. There won’t be butts all over your floors, burn marks on chairs, or the stench. If it can work in college towns like Austin and Lawrence, and in every high school, I’d bet my life it can work in Kansas City.
Couple other things that bug me about smoking, and smokers. First, how come they always put the non-smoking section in the back of a restaurant? The point is I don’t want to be near it, but they’ll make you walk through a cloud of smoke to get to your table. And in many cases, there’s nothing separating the sections. Is the smoke supposed to know where to stop?
Another thing that baffles me about smokers, how they’ll “bum one” from a complete stranger. You won’t hand the bum on the street your spare change, but you have no problem asking someone you’ve never met for one of their cigarettes and no problem passing one off to some jerk off you made fun of 30 seconds before? Also, how do so many smokers walk around without a lighter or matches? You know you smoke; it’s not news to you. And to smoke, you need a way to light the damn cancer stick. Yet it’s 50/50 weather or not you actually have one or the other with you. What if I just went up to a stranger and asked for a stick of gum, a sip of their beer or one wing? They’d say no. Ask for a cigarette, and they won’t mind that I interrupted their conversation. Don’t tell me smoking doesn’t affect the brain, that’s just friggin dumb. Either smoking helped dumb you down to the point you can’t remember a lighter, or being that dumb is why you started smoking. Either way, it puts you on par with Corky. Only you smell worse, and he can do it without Becca!
I’m pretty anti-smoking, just because it’s dumb, but I understand it’s a choice and I don’t think it’s right to legally tell people they can’t. But that doesn’t mean their choice should affect my life. Here, if I go out, I know I’ll come home smelling like an ashtray. I don’t enjoy that, it’s pretty disgusting. It’s not my disgusting habit, so I find it very rude. What if I just decided not to cover my mouth when I sneeze, and start spraying all the smokers? Hey, it’s a disgusting rude habit but, I gotta sneeze ya know. Tell me how they react when I cover them in snot. Probably prefer I wouldn’t do that.
Bar owners and restaurant owners in KC say how banning smoking will hurt their business, that’s bullshit. People will go out, I don’t think you’ll see a jump in Law & Order ratings when everyone decides they’ll stay home and smoke a pack while watching TV since they can’t smoke in a bar. People like to smoke when they drink, because in a bar everyone is smoking. Imagine if no one was. Wow, you could go out have a couple drinks and not have to smell it on your sheets for the next week. Go smoke-free, your patrons will be happier, as will your staff. There won’t be butts all over your floors, burn marks on chairs, or the stench. If it can work in college towns like Austin and Lawrence, and in every high school, I’d bet my life it can work in Kansas City.
Couple other things that bug me about smoking, and smokers. First, how come they always put the non-smoking section in the back of a restaurant? The point is I don’t want to be near it, but they’ll make you walk through a cloud of smoke to get to your table. And in many cases, there’s nothing separating the sections. Is the smoke supposed to know where to stop?
Another thing that baffles me about smokers, how they’ll “bum one” from a complete stranger. You won’t hand the bum on the street your spare change, but you have no problem asking someone you’ve never met for one of their cigarettes and no problem passing one off to some jerk off you made fun of 30 seconds before? Also, how do so many smokers walk around without a lighter or matches? You know you smoke; it’s not news to you. And to smoke, you need a way to light the damn cancer stick. Yet it’s 50/50 weather or not you actually have one or the other with you. What if I just went up to a stranger and asked for a stick of gum, a sip of their beer or one wing? They’d say no. Ask for a cigarette, and they won’t mind that I interrupted their conversation. Don’t tell me smoking doesn’t affect the brain, that’s just friggin dumb. Either smoking helped dumb you down to the point you can’t remember a lighter, or being that dumb is why you started smoking. Either way, it puts you on par with Corky. Only you smell worse, and he can do it without Becca!
February 14, 2007
H-Day
What a dumb, pointless holiday. Seriously, it’s just dumb. And it isn’t because I’m a guy that I think this. I think women should hate this holiday more than us. Maybe not hate, but they should be upset or even offended by it. The single biggest complaint I hear from the women I know, is that men aren’t romantic enough. Well, I’ll argue that there is nothing romantic about Valentines Day.
My proof is in the Jennifer Aniston movie, The Break Up. She wants him to want to help do the dishes. The point isn’t if Vince Vaughn actually does help with the dishes, it is just his simple desire to help her out. And every woman agreed with her. But if he did it, just cause the calendars happen to say it’s Dishes Day, it wouldn’t be a sincere gesture. Much like Valentines Day. Nothing done today is “romantic,” it’s like drinking on St. Patrick’s Day, it’s just what you do because the calendar says it’s that day. It’s just a date to make guys do the things that women like, and if your dude doesn’t already do those things, he shouldn’t get points for doing them now.
A guy isn’t supposed to be reminded for weeks in advance to be romantic, and how unique is it when every other couple is doing something? I understand it’s a woman’s DNA to always like flowers, candy and the rest of it. Really, I get it. It’s like how guys will always like tits, beer and a ball game. So in that respect, Valentines Day is the female version of the Super Bowl. But then call it that. The Super Bowl is the one day where almost every one watches the game, men and women alike. But women don’t get credit for being sports fans on that day, and guys shouldn’t get credit for being romantic on Valentines Day.
Editors note* Wait, do I really need an editors note since this is all from the editor anyway? Moving on, this is really just a note for the women and the single ones at that. I’m not just bashing V-Day cause I’m some bitter, single guy. Not that I’m not bitter or single, but that isn’t my motivation. Also, I don’t need a day to tell me when to buy flowers. Just thought I’d put this out there. Do what you wish with the tidbit of info.
My proof is in the Jennifer Aniston movie, The Break Up. She wants him to want to help do the dishes. The point isn’t if Vince Vaughn actually does help with the dishes, it is just his simple desire to help her out. And every woman agreed with her. But if he did it, just cause the calendars happen to say it’s Dishes Day, it wouldn’t be a sincere gesture. Much like Valentines Day. Nothing done today is “romantic,” it’s like drinking on St. Patrick’s Day, it’s just what you do because the calendar says it’s that day. It’s just a date to make guys do the things that women like, and if your dude doesn’t already do those things, he shouldn’t get points for doing them now.
A guy isn’t supposed to be reminded for weeks in advance to be romantic, and how unique is it when every other couple is doing something? I understand it’s a woman’s DNA to always like flowers, candy and the rest of it. Really, I get it. It’s like how guys will always like tits, beer and a ball game. So in that respect, Valentines Day is the female version of the Super Bowl. But then call it that. The Super Bowl is the one day where almost every one watches the game, men and women alike. But women don’t get credit for being sports fans on that day, and guys shouldn’t get credit for being romantic on Valentines Day.
Editors note* Wait, do I really need an editors note since this is all from the editor anyway? Moving on, this is really just a note for the women and the single ones at that. I’m not just bashing V-Day cause I’m some bitter, single guy. Not that I’m not bitter or single, but that isn’t my motivation. Also, I don’t need a day to tell me when to buy flowers. Just thought I’d put this out there. Do what you wish with the tidbit of info.
February 12, 2007
Got Dict
We came, we saw, and we got Dict. I’m not allowed to give any of the gory details, but there won’t be any trips to New York in March for Pulp Diction. The trip wasn’t a total loss, the boys and I hit the town Friday night. Austin stepped up to the plate and delivered, even though we didn’t. Seriously, best way I can describe it is its like a mix between Lawrence and Chicago. A pretty substantial claim especially based off of one night and really just one area of town. But as much as I love Mass street, it’s 1996 Barry Bonds and 6th Street is 2001 Bonds.
I never had any desire to really come to Texas, but now I really think I’d put Austin on the short list of places I’d move to. I’ll get back to that later, now I gotta tell you about my favorite bar. Pete’s Dueling Pianos on 6th St. This place has everything you’re looking for in a bar. It had great music, friendly *and cute* staff, and the perfect crowd. College kids, bachelorette parties, drunk thirty-something’s who are getting over a heart breaking defeat, and drunk college girls. I can’t stress that enough, someone should start producing a DVD series that just follows drunk college girls around, it’d make a few bucks.
So Sunday afternoon, the three of us were dragging ass to say the least. Haven’t been that drunk in a long time, nor have I had that much fun in an even longer time. So we drove around Austin a bit and made our way to the UT campus. The campus is huge, but I couldn’t find Kevin Durant and wasn’t able to Kerrigan him to help out KU. Tell ya what I liked about Austin. I loved the architecture of both the buildings downtown and some of the homes in the surrounding area, great mix of old and new. There were murals on buildings, and un-like Kansas City, they weren’t advertising for something lame like UMKC basketball. It was just art. There were people outside for a reason. Like joggers by the river, and people just wondering the sidewalks. Bicycle drawn cabs, pizza joints all along 6th street serving what looked like decent pizza.
It has atmosphere and personality, something Kansas City is lacking severly. And personality goes a long way. For me to speak this highly of a city in Texas is remarkable to say the least. I don’t change my mind often, and I was ready to trade Texas to Mexico in exchange for Paz Vega. But now I’d actually consider moving. It’s not like I’m buying a 10 gallon hat and a belt buckle the size of a hubcap, buying a pick-up and mosing on down. Shit, I won’t even say “Ya’all,” but I’ll admit I was wrong. There is something worth while in Texas. And it’s not just Austin, I was impressed with San Antonio too. Again, only had one night there and didn’t get to see much but, I liked what I saw. We ate some good steaks at Landry’s on the River Walk. The fact that Kansas City hasn’t copied the River Walk is a mystery to me. It just seems like Kansas City doesn’t want to do anything to make itself a desire-able location. You don’t have to be Chicago, New York or Vegas to be a city people will actually choose to go visit.
All in all, it was a great a trip. Can’t say we aren’t disappointed that we aren’t headed to the next stage, but at least we gave it a shot. So we aren’t losers, we’re failures.
I never had any desire to really come to Texas, but now I really think I’d put Austin on the short list of places I’d move to. I’ll get back to that later, now I gotta tell you about my favorite bar. Pete’s Dueling Pianos on 6th St. This place has everything you’re looking for in a bar. It had great music, friendly *and cute* staff, and the perfect crowd. College kids, bachelorette parties, drunk thirty-something’s who are getting over a heart breaking defeat, and drunk college girls. I can’t stress that enough, someone should start producing a DVD series that just follows drunk college girls around, it’d make a few bucks.
So Sunday afternoon, the three of us were dragging ass to say the least. Haven’t been that drunk in a long time, nor have I had that much fun in an even longer time. So we drove around Austin a bit and made our way to the UT campus. The campus is huge, but I couldn’t find Kevin Durant and wasn’t able to Kerrigan him to help out KU. Tell ya what I liked about Austin. I loved the architecture of both the buildings downtown and some of the homes in the surrounding area, great mix of old and new. There were murals on buildings, and un-like Kansas City, they weren’t advertising for something lame like UMKC basketball. It was just art. There were people outside for a reason. Like joggers by the river, and people just wondering the sidewalks. Bicycle drawn cabs, pizza joints all along 6th street serving what looked like decent pizza.
It has atmosphere and personality, something Kansas City is lacking severly. And personality goes a long way. For me to speak this highly of a city in Texas is remarkable to say the least. I don’t change my mind often, and I was ready to trade Texas to Mexico in exchange for Paz Vega. But now I’d actually consider moving. It’s not like I’m buying a 10 gallon hat and a belt buckle the size of a hubcap, buying a pick-up and mosing on down. Shit, I won’t even say “Ya’all,” but I’ll admit I was wrong. There is something worth while in Texas. And it’s not just Austin, I was impressed with San Antonio too. Again, only had one night there and didn’t get to see much but, I liked what I saw. We ate some good steaks at Landry’s on the River Walk. The fact that Kansas City hasn’t copied the River Walk is a mystery to me. It just seems like Kansas City doesn’t want to do anything to make itself a desire-able location. You don’t have to be Chicago, New York or Vegas to be a city people will actually choose to go visit.
All in all, it was a great a trip. Can’t say we aren’t disappointed that we aren’t headed to the next stage, but at least we gave it a shot. So we aren’t losers, we’re failures.
February 09, 2007
WSOPC and...
“It’s go time,” in 24 hours the Entourage is headed down to Austin City Limits to take our shot at making it Big. We know that “only have disaster can we be resurrected.” Are we prepared? No, we know “we should have fuckin’ shotguns,” but sometimes you just gotta say what the fuck. First prize at the World Series of Pop Culture is $250,000 does it have my name on it? I don’t know. But, I’m gonna find out. Cause we’re men who discovered the wheel and built the Eiffel Tower out of metal and brawn. That’s the kind of men we are. (How many Pop Culture references did you count?)
Anyway, let’s move on to more pressing issues. And there really is one. Yesterday America lost a national treasure. Actually, we lost two. Anna-Nicole Smiths breasts passed away, and I think she did too. So, from every bad comes a good. But the devil himself asked the perfect question in response to this horrible news.
“Losing those enormous (even when skinny) fun bags is a national tragedy. Here is a question to ponder: If you were the mortician/coroner, would you still touch them after she has been dead a day? I think I would. But what about 2 days? 1 week? Just where would you draw the line?”
I think the ruling has to be two days; you gotta draw the line some where. I don’t know why, but two days just seems right. Anything past two days is just sleezy. Seriously, the body temperature drops like one degree an hour, I think that’s what I heard on CSI Miami. So after two days, the body would be just cold and then it’s like feeling up frozen foods. Which is fine when you’re 12, wait. Never mind.
There’s more to the story. As we all know, Anna Nicole recently became a mother. So this newborn baby, who lost his brother the same weekend he came in to the world, isn’t sure who his father is and now has lost his mother. Sounds tragic right? Wrong. The baby just hit the fucking lottery. Seriously, now he doesn’t have to get to know his psychotic freak of a mother, nor share the loot with his brother. It may sound cold, but it’s true.
This could be the first time a baby actually benefited from a parents death. This could totally change everyone’s take on abortion. Maybe now we’ll start giving the baby a choice. Really, this was the first ever 156th trimester abortion.
I hope Paris Hilton is paying attention, this is the woman (that’s using the term loosely, much like Anna Nicole herself) that paved the way for all the talent less, gold digging fame-chasing, pill popping, useless whores that some how find fame and fortune, whose simply by breathing prove evolution is a work in progress.
Now I don’t suspect that the Post Office will fly flags at half mast. It just wouldn’t be a fitting tribute to a pair whose sole purpose in life was to raise poles.
Anyway, let’s move on to more pressing issues. And there really is one. Yesterday America lost a national treasure. Actually, we lost two. Anna-Nicole Smiths breasts passed away, and I think she did too. So, from every bad comes a good. But the devil himself asked the perfect question in response to this horrible news.
“Losing those enormous (even when skinny) fun bags is a national tragedy. Here is a question to ponder: If you were the mortician/coroner, would you still touch them after she has been dead a day? I think I would. But what about 2 days? 1 week? Just where would you draw the line?”
I think the ruling has to be two days; you gotta draw the line some where. I don’t know why, but two days just seems right. Anything past two days is just sleezy. Seriously, the body temperature drops like one degree an hour, I think that’s what I heard on CSI Miami. So after two days, the body would be just cold and then it’s like feeling up frozen foods. Which is fine when you’re 12, wait. Never mind.
There’s more to the story. As we all know, Anna Nicole recently became a mother. So this newborn baby, who lost his brother the same weekend he came in to the world, isn’t sure who his father is and now has lost his mother. Sounds tragic right? Wrong. The baby just hit the fucking lottery. Seriously, now he doesn’t have to get to know his psychotic freak of a mother, nor share the loot with his brother. It may sound cold, but it’s true.
This could be the first time a baby actually benefited from a parents death. This could totally change everyone’s take on abortion. Maybe now we’ll start giving the baby a choice. Really, this was the first ever 156th trimester abortion.
I hope Paris Hilton is paying attention, this is the woman (that’s using the term loosely, much like Anna Nicole herself) that paved the way for all the talent less, gold digging fame-chasing, pill popping, useless whores that some how find fame and fortune, whose simply by breathing prove evolution is a work in progress.
Now I don’t suspect that the Post Office will fly flags at half mast. It just wouldn’t be a fitting tribute to a pair whose sole purpose in life was to raise poles.
February 01, 2007
More Departed?
I was making my daily website rounds yesterday when I came across some upsetting news. It isn’t earth shattering (yet) and it probably only matters to a few, but that’s who I write for. It seems as if there are talks for a sequel to The Departed. When I first read the article, it was like having my hand slammed in a door. It hurt, but not on that stomach-punch or kick to the nuts level.
Now, if you haven’t yet seen The Departed I’m telling you to stop reading now. Stop right now. Mark this post and come back to it after you’ve seen the movie, in fact you should probably just log off your computer, leave work and run to the movies. Can’t get a sitter? Call me, or just leave them some water and put all sharp objects out of reach. I don’t care. Do whatever you have to do just go see the movie already. Oh, and it’s coming out on video in two weeks.
There are a few glimmers of hope for this project. First, Scorsese is still involved and they want Robert De Niro to play a part. With De Niro and Scorsese it’s hard to go wrong. Now lets be honest De Niro, hasn’t exactly had the best track record of late. But this could be like Jordan’s famed “double nickel” game in the Garden. (For those that don’t know the story, Michael Jordan’s first comeback started off kind of slow and then he scored 55 against the Knicks in the most famous arena in the world)
Also, many don’t know this, but The Departed is actually a re-make of a Hong Kong film called Internal Affairs, and that was a trilogy. The first story I read, just mentioned a sequel, but I’ve done some research and they are actually talking sequel AND prequel. Could this end up as Scorsese’s Godfather? Well, we all know that they made one too many there. So personally, I’d rather just see a prequel. I don’t see how a sequel could really work. I mean, everyone is dead by the end of The Departed except for Mark Whalberg.
So last night I began thinking about how they could do this, and a prequel is all that made sense. Only I don’t see how you can bring back Matt Damon and Leo DiCaprio, at least not as major characters. So here is how I see it:
Taking place a few years before Damon and Leo are even in the police academy, Jack is running has his crew. But where as in The Departed we didn’t see that he had any competition, in the Hirp version of the prequel there’s another gangster in town. And the two factions don’t play nicely. Oh, this one just happens to be lead by Robert De Niro. Can you imagine a scene with De Niro and Nicholson? It’d be the biggest movie event since De Niro and Pacino.
Now Jack has what the Italians call a consiglierie, played by Brad Pitt who was originally casted in the first movie. It turns out this isn’t such a good thing for Jack. Pitt is actually working for De Niro (he couldn’t join Cosa Nostra because he isn’t 100% Italian) Well, when Jack finds out the shit hits the fan of course. He ends up getting a visit from the Feds who help him smoke out Pitt, as well as kill De Niro. Which leads to him owing the Feds a favor, and this is how he ends up in bed with them as we heard in The Departed. Also, the fact that he was infiltrated by a rival is what gives Jack the idea to put a mole in the police department.
I can still see Martin Sheen having a role, as well as Mark Whalberg. They’ve been on the case for a while. And maybe small roles for Leo and Matt, but I don’t really know if that’s necessary. I really think that a story along these lines could work, but I don’t see how a sequel could work. And to be honest I really rather they not make one. Just because a movie is both great, and makes a ton of money doesn’t mean they need to make a sequel. I think that’ll have to be its very own post some day.
Now, if you haven’t yet seen The Departed I’m telling you to stop reading now. Stop right now. Mark this post and come back to it after you’ve seen the movie, in fact you should probably just log off your computer, leave work and run to the movies. Can’t get a sitter? Call me, or just leave them some water and put all sharp objects out of reach. I don’t care. Do whatever you have to do just go see the movie already. Oh, and it’s coming out on video in two weeks.
There are a few glimmers of hope for this project. First, Scorsese is still involved and they want Robert De Niro to play a part. With De Niro and Scorsese it’s hard to go wrong. Now lets be honest De Niro, hasn’t exactly had the best track record of late. But this could be like Jordan’s famed “double nickel” game in the Garden. (For those that don’t know the story, Michael Jordan’s first comeback started off kind of slow and then he scored 55 against the Knicks in the most famous arena in the world)
Also, many don’t know this, but The Departed is actually a re-make of a Hong Kong film called Internal Affairs, and that was a trilogy. The first story I read, just mentioned a sequel, but I’ve done some research and they are actually talking sequel AND prequel. Could this end up as Scorsese’s Godfather? Well, we all know that they made one too many there. So personally, I’d rather just see a prequel. I don’t see how a sequel could really work. I mean, everyone is dead by the end of The Departed except for Mark Whalberg.
So last night I began thinking about how they could do this, and a prequel is all that made sense. Only I don’t see how you can bring back Matt Damon and Leo DiCaprio, at least not as major characters. So here is how I see it:
Taking place a few years before Damon and Leo are even in the police academy, Jack is running has his crew. But where as in The Departed we didn’t see that he had any competition, in the Hirp version of the prequel there’s another gangster in town. And the two factions don’t play nicely. Oh, this one just happens to be lead by Robert De Niro. Can you imagine a scene with De Niro and Nicholson? It’d be the biggest movie event since De Niro and Pacino.
Now Jack has what the Italians call a consiglierie, played by Brad Pitt who was originally casted in the first movie. It turns out this isn’t such a good thing for Jack. Pitt is actually working for De Niro (he couldn’t join Cosa Nostra because he isn’t 100% Italian) Well, when Jack finds out the shit hits the fan of course. He ends up getting a visit from the Feds who help him smoke out Pitt, as well as kill De Niro. Which leads to him owing the Feds a favor, and this is how he ends up in bed with them as we heard in The Departed. Also, the fact that he was infiltrated by a rival is what gives Jack the idea to put a mole in the police department.
I can still see Martin Sheen having a role, as well as Mark Whalberg. They’ve been on the case for a while. And maybe small roles for Leo and Matt, but I don’t really know if that’s necessary. I really think that a story along these lines could work, but I don’t see how a sequel could work. And to be honest I really rather they not make one. Just because a movie is both great, and makes a ton of money doesn’t mean they need to make a sequel. I think that’ll have to be its very own post some day.
January 31, 2007
FOXn Idiots
I don’t know if you’ve seen or heard about this, but it looks like we may have a new Bad Boy Records-Death Row Records-like beef. With one twist, rather than a beef between two record companies, this time it looks to be between two “news” organizations. Recently Fox News ran an ad that took a shot at Anderson Cooper. You can watch the clip here.
There, did you watch? Would Peter Jennings and Tom Brokaw ever be involved in something like this? What I love was the crack about the “publicity” that Anderson Cooper gets. C’mon! Here you are, giving the guy publicity for crying out loud! That’s just one example of what makes those at Fox News a bunch of morons. The other is the crack about Cooper not being a real journalist and losing to a girl. Well, let’s look at that alleged “girl,” Greta Van Susteren. This opportunistic piece of plastic-Scientologist crap isn’t a journalist at all. She has a law degree, and because she was easy on the eyes she was given a chance to get on the air during the William Kennedy Smith trial. Later she popped up on of all places, CNN, to help cover the OJ case.
It really reminds me of a rap beef, Fox News bragging about ratings like rappers brag about record sales. Let me set the record straight here, making more money than someone else doesn’t make you better. Being more popular, doesn’t make you smarter. And saying completely assanign crap doesn’t make you edgy. If Fox News was comfortable with their place in the market, would they really feel the need to take a shot at someone?
And who the hell does Fox think they are? They must have a short memory; they seem to have forgotten what made them. When the Fox Channel first made its splash, it was with “Married with Children” and “The Simpson’s.” Two shows that thoroughly pissed off the religious right for their lack of family values. Isn’t it ironic, don’t ya think? And now they air “American Idol,” which has a done more to dumb down America than President Beavis or Vice President Butthead.
The truth is that this is all just a crappy marketing campaign. A campaign that happens lacks class, originality, a point and anything that could resemble intelligence. Fox News is pimping out their little “journalist” to take shots at actual journalists. So Greta has to keep her raitings high, cuz bitch betta have Rupert “Suge Knight” Murdoch’s money. The only good that can come from all this, is if Bill O’Reilly gets taken out in a drive-by in Vegas.
There, did you watch? Would Peter Jennings and Tom Brokaw ever be involved in something like this? What I love was the crack about the “publicity” that Anderson Cooper gets. C’mon! Here you are, giving the guy publicity for crying out loud! That’s just one example of what makes those at Fox News a bunch of morons. The other is the crack about Cooper not being a real journalist and losing to a girl. Well, let’s look at that alleged “girl,” Greta Van Susteren. This opportunistic piece of plastic-Scientologist crap isn’t a journalist at all. She has a law degree, and because she was easy on the eyes she was given a chance to get on the air during the William Kennedy Smith trial. Later she popped up on of all places, CNN, to help cover the OJ case.
It really reminds me of a rap beef, Fox News bragging about ratings like rappers brag about record sales. Let me set the record straight here, making more money than someone else doesn’t make you better. Being more popular, doesn’t make you smarter. And saying completely assanign crap doesn’t make you edgy. If Fox News was comfortable with their place in the market, would they really feel the need to take a shot at someone?
And who the hell does Fox think they are? They must have a short memory; they seem to have forgotten what made them. When the Fox Channel first made its splash, it was with “Married with Children” and “The Simpson’s.” Two shows that thoroughly pissed off the religious right for their lack of family values. Isn’t it ironic, don’t ya think? And now they air “American Idol,” which has a done more to dumb down America than President Beavis or Vice President Butthead.
The truth is that this is all just a crappy marketing campaign. A campaign that happens lacks class, originality, a point and anything that could resemble intelligence. Fox News is pimping out their little “journalist” to take shots at actual journalists. So Greta has to keep her raitings high, cuz bitch betta have Rupert “Suge Knight” Murdoch’s money. The only good that can come from all this, is if Bill O’Reilly gets taken out in a drive-by in Vegas.
January 29, 2007
Solid Aces
Jeremy Piven was always a “that guy.” He was always a guy in a movie that when you talked to your friends about, they thought “that guy” was funny, and they remember “that guy” from every John Cusak movie or from Rush Hour, or PCU. Or you knew you had seen “that guy” in some other movie, but couldn’t remember the flick. He was the quintessential “that guy.” Then along comes some little HBO series, and he becomes everyone’s favorite asshole. Liberace couldn’t find an asshole he liked as much as we like Ari.
And being that I’m the kinda guy who is trying out for a Pop Culture game show, I knew his filmography better than most. I had seen, enjoyed and even own an indie movie called Just Write that he did. And within 2 minutes of Smokin’ Aces I recognized Alex Rocco’s voice (Mo Green from GF2) as his father from said indie flick. Basically, I knew who Piven was to the point that he wasn’t a “that guy” to me. He was Piven, Cusaks sidekick who needed bigger roles.
So when Smokin’ Aces was announced, I was excited to say the least. Then I saw a preview, and I was still pumped. Then I saw it on a more regular basis, and I got scared. I started seeing a colossal screw up. It started looking like it was more The Big Hit than Oceans 11. More Lucky Numbers than Get Shorty. So as the release date neared, I found myself excited to see a movie I was sure was going to be a disappointment. Usually I only feel that way before a poker tournament.
Turns out I was pleasantly surprised, and totally relieved. It isn’t the perfect movie by any means, and as much as Joe Carnahan tries, he can’t make Pulp Fiction. In a movie full of over the top characters, Piven actually underplayed the coke head snitch. Look for the scene between Common and Piven. This isn’t Ari, but a guy I can see one day getting an Oscar nomination.
The biggest surprise for me was Ryan Reynolds. That’s right, Van Wilder. The guy has made a career of basically playing an R-rated Zach Morris, and just as Mark-Paul Gosselaar shocked me when he showed he could actually act on “NYPD Blue,” Reynolds held his own opposite of Ray Liotta. It’s a fun little ride, and definitely worth checking out.
And being that I’m the kinda guy who is trying out for a Pop Culture game show, I knew his filmography better than most. I had seen, enjoyed and even own an indie movie called Just Write that he did. And within 2 minutes of Smokin’ Aces I recognized Alex Rocco’s voice (Mo Green from GF2) as his father from said indie flick. Basically, I knew who Piven was to the point that he wasn’t a “that guy” to me. He was Piven, Cusaks sidekick who needed bigger roles.
So when Smokin’ Aces was announced, I was excited to say the least. Then I saw a preview, and I was still pumped. Then I saw it on a more regular basis, and I got scared. I started seeing a colossal screw up. It started looking like it was more The Big Hit than Oceans 11. More Lucky Numbers than Get Shorty. So as the release date neared, I found myself excited to see a movie I was sure was going to be a disappointment. Usually I only feel that way before a poker tournament.
Turns out I was pleasantly surprised, and totally relieved. It isn’t the perfect movie by any means, and as much as Joe Carnahan tries, he can’t make Pulp Fiction. In a movie full of over the top characters, Piven actually underplayed the coke head snitch. Look for the scene between Common and Piven. This isn’t Ari, but a guy I can see one day getting an Oscar nomination.
The biggest surprise for me was Ryan Reynolds. That’s right, Van Wilder. The guy has made a career of basically playing an R-rated Zach Morris, and just as Mark-Paul Gosselaar shocked me when he showed he could actually act on “NYPD Blue,” Reynolds held his own opposite of Ray Liotta. It’s a fun little ride, and definitely worth checking out.
January 26, 2007
Dakota Porning?
So there is a controversy swirling around the new Dakota Fanning movie. You know Dakota, she’s the kid actress who has worked with better actors than Nicole Kidman and has resume that is more impressive than Drew Barrymore’s. Well it seems little Dakota, who is now all of 12 years old, is in a new indie movie “Hounddog” in which she plays a rape victim. And they actually filmed the scene. Putting people up in arms over how anyone could let this happen. Without seeing the movie and the scene, I’m not entirely sure how I feel about this.
My gut tells me they could have told the story and left out the scene. Maybe what we need is to actually see the brutality of the crime. But there have been great movies that dealt with awful things such as the Holocaust, that didn’t have to show us men, women and children in the gas chambers and I don’t see how they could have been any more poignant. And even if the scene makes the movie, and goes beyond that to reach its audience and even cause some sort of change, is it right to film it? Is it child pornography? Is it unfair to Dakota, who is now telling the media that “it’s called acting.”
Really though, no 12 year old can handle this. Sure she understands how awful rape is, and she gets that it makes for a powerful scene. And of course she wants to do something shocking that garners attention, what 12 year old girl doesn’t want that? There’s just no way she can see how this could traumatize her down the road. I know Jodie Foster turned out okay after “Taxi Driver” and Dakota “saw” some horrible acts of violence in “Man On Fire” and “War of the Worlds”, so maybe she’ll turn out just fine and this won’t affect her. Or maybe she, and other child actors, shouldn’t be in subject to most of the violence in their movies.
Let’s assume she’s fine, that it doesn’t screw her up and we never see her on “E! True Hollywood” stories talking about how she turned to doing coke off of the DVD box to “Hounddog” and taking late night calls from Charlie Sheen. Okay, that doesn’t happen. She goes on to have a career like Jodie Foster, and she wins more Oscars than Meryl Streep. Now if that’s how her life turns out, great, but what about the impact the scene has on others? Is it worth it if some guy rents the movie after stopping off at the drug store to stock up on Kleenex and baby oil. Then takes it one step further and starts watching the playgrounds before he snatches a kid up and acts it out? No of course it wouldn’t be the films fault; people are responsible for their own actions. And that sick fuck was probably going to do something eventually anyway. But then he gets arrested and ends up being interviewed by Matt Lauer Jr, and he blames the movie. This then leads to a screenplay about the crime, which of course includes a reenactment of both the scene in the movie and his actual crimes. Then what? Or maybe I’m just getting ahead of myself.
I know this, watching that scene is going to fuck up someone. Maybe the actors involved will come out unscathed, but I guarantee some ones uncle or parent, brother or sister is going to need some serious therapy. If one of my nieces or nephews was acting, and they were part of this scene, I would go absolutely nuts. Oh, and the reviews of the movie are pretty horrible and no one seems to want to pick up distribution.
On a lighter note, here are two new additions to the list of things that bother me:
Very cold toilet seats
Oddly warm toilet seats
My gut tells me they could have told the story and left out the scene. Maybe what we need is to actually see the brutality of the crime. But there have been great movies that dealt with awful things such as the Holocaust, that didn’t have to show us men, women and children in the gas chambers and I don’t see how they could have been any more poignant. And even if the scene makes the movie, and goes beyond that to reach its audience and even cause some sort of change, is it right to film it? Is it child pornography? Is it unfair to Dakota, who is now telling the media that “it’s called acting.”
Really though, no 12 year old can handle this. Sure she understands how awful rape is, and she gets that it makes for a powerful scene. And of course she wants to do something shocking that garners attention, what 12 year old girl doesn’t want that? There’s just no way she can see how this could traumatize her down the road. I know Jodie Foster turned out okay after “Taxi Driver” and Dakota “saw” some horrible acts of violence in “Man On Fire” and “War of the Worlds”, so maybe she’ll turn out just fine and this won’t affect her. Or maybe she, and other child actors, shouldn’t be in subject to most of the violence in their movies.
Let’s assume she’s fine, that it doesn’t screw her up and we never see her on “E! True Hollywood” stories talking about how she turned to doing coke off of the DVD box to “Hounddog” and taking late night calls from Charlie Sheen. Okay, that doesn’t happen. She goes on to have a career like Jodie Foster, and she wins more Oscars than Meryl Streep. Now if that’s how her life turns out, great, but what about the impact the scene has on others? Is it worth it if some guy rents the movie after stopping off at the drug store to stock up on Kleenex and baby oil. Then takes it one step further and starts watching the playgrounds before he snatches a kid up and acts it out? No of course it wouldn’t be the films fault; people are responsible for their own actions. And that sick fuck was probably going to do something eventually anyway. But then he gets arrested and ends up being interviewed by Matt Lauer Jr, and he blames the movie. This then leads to a screenplay about the crime, which of course includes a reenactment of both the scene in the movie and his actual crimes. Then what? Or maybe I’m just getting ahead of myself.
I know this, watching that scene is going to fuck up someone. Maybe the actors involved will come out unscathed, but I guarantee some ones uncle or parent, brother or sister is going to need some serious therapy. If one of my nieces or nephews was acting, and they were part of this scene, I would go absolutely nuts. Oh, and the reviews of the movie are pretty horrible and no one seems to want to pick up distribution.
On a lighter note, here are two new additions to the list of things that bother me:
Very cold toilet seats
Oddly warm toilet seats
January 22, 2007
Soda Jerk
Right off the bat, let’s get one thing straight. It is soda, it isn’t pop. Pop describes a sound, or an action. It can also be another name for “dad.” It is not a carbonated beverage. Don’t tell me this is just a regional name for it, I don’t buy into that. It is just flat out incorrect. If any of the candidates in the upcoming Presidential election includes this into their message they’ll get my vote. Even if it that candidate were Jeb Bush. Okay, that might not be true. I happen to believe that if we can all come to agree on this issue, we can accomplish anything. It separates the country as much as political affiliation.
I know it’s a losing argument on par with abortion, the war, gun control, and what comes first the chicken or the egg. But these are the type of issues I tackle. Today though, I’m not here to set the world straight. No, today I’m here to talk about something that totally baffles me. I just can’t understand why the taste of soda is so determinate on the medium is served, this baffles almost as much as women.
You can have one drink and it will taste totally different from a 2 liter plastic bottle, a can, a soda fountain (notice it’s not called a pop fountain) or a 1 liter bottle from a vending machine. And there is always a clear cut best. Take Coke for example. Recent studies show that 9/10 people prefer it from a fountain, and the majority feel McDonalds has the right mix. Okay, probably making up these numbers, but you know you don’t doubt them for a second. Now Coke from the 2 liter is also pretty solid, but it’s a completely different flavor from a can. And no drink tastes good in the bottle from the vending machine.
• Mountain Dew is best from the can, sickening from a 2 liter and battery acid from a fountain.
• Sprite excels from the 2 liter, solid from the fountain, and drinkable from a can. Really, it’s the most consistent soda.
• Diet drinks, well I can’t stand them. They taste nothing like their calorie-enhanced counterparts no matter what the companies claim. Those that drink diet seem to have some fanatical attachment to it. This isn’t healthy, even if the nutritional value says otherwise.
I just don’t understand why this happens. I watch the Discovery Channel on occasion, how come they haven’t looked into this? What about Myth Busters, can’t they figure out a way to make all soda taste the same? This is a week after Martin Luther King Day, and I don’t mean to belittle his dream, but I have a dream of my own. I have a dream, that one day all soda will be created equally.
*******************
Now, a totally separate thought. This weekend I was talking to a friend of mine who was going through some tough times, and in the conversation I used “well on the bright side…” and she made an interesting point. Whenever something has a “bright side” it usually isn’t all that good. So we talked and decided that phrase needs to be changed. Bright side just isn’t accurate. It’s more of a dimly lit side.
I know it’s a losing argument on par with abortion, the war, gun control, and what comes first the chicken or the egg. But these are the type of issues I tackle. Today though, I’m not here to set the world straight. No, today I’m here to talk about something that totally baffles me. I just can’t understand why the taste of soda is so determinate on the medium is served, this baffles almost as much as women.
You can have one drink and it will taste totally different from a 2 liter plastic bottle, a can, a soda fountain (notice it’s not called a pop fountain) or a 1 liter bottle from a vending machine. And there is always a clear cut best. Take Coke for example. Recent studies show that 9/10 people prefer it from a fountain, and the majority feel McDonalds has the right mix. Okay, probably making up these numbers, but you know you don’t doubt them for a second. Now Coke from the 2 liter is also pretty solid, but it’s a completely different flavor from a can. And no drink tastes good in the bottle from the vending machine.
• Mountain Dew is best from the can, sickening from a 2 liter and battery acid from a fountain.
• Sprite excels from the 2 liter, solid from the fountain, and drinkable from a can. Really, it’s the most consistent soda.
• Diet drinks, well I can’t stand them. They taste nothing like their calorie-enhanced counterparts no matter what the companies claim. Those that drink diet seem to have some fanatical attachment to it. This isn’t healthy, even if the nutritional value says otherwise.
I just don’t understand why this happens. I watch the Discovery Channel on occasion, how come they haven’t looked into this? What about Myth Busters, can’t they figure out a way to make all soda taste the same? This is a week after Martin Luther King Day, and I don’t mean to belittle his dream, but I have a dream of my own. I have a dream, that one day all soda will be created equally.
*******************
Now, a totally separate thought. This weekend I was talking to a friend of mine who was going through some tough times, and in the conversation I used “well on the bright side…” and she made an interesting point. Whenever something has a “bright side” it usually isn’t all that good. So we talked and decided that phrase needs to be changed. Bright side just isn’t accurate. It’s more of a dimly lit side.
January 19, 2007
January 12, 2007
Nani Babaco Malia
It’s a sad day in Hirpvile, for a friend is leaving. Everyone has seen friends move away, and it’s always the same. You promise to keep in touch. There’s talk about getting together, you’ll visit them, they’ll visit you or you’ll meet up somewhere cool. And you mean it. But often life gets in the way and you don’t meet up. And the emails become less frequent, and phone calls non-existent. It’s just a sad fact of life. No one means for it to happen.
Today one of my best friends moved away. And here’s the catch, he was already living in Washington DC. So how much farther away could he go? Well, how does Kenya sound? Yes, that is far. He came to the US 10 years ago, and we met while working together at Lenscrappers 7 years ago. It didn’t take long before we had our crew. It was four Jews and a Kenyan. There was even an Easter spent at Worlds of Fun by two of the Jews and the Kenyan.
Typically people love to hear a baby laugh, but I never met a person who didn’t love this guys laugh. And sure that sounds some what gay, but so what. From the surface, it probably didn’t make sense that we became such good friends. Talk about different backgrounds. I grew up in the ‘burbs of Long Island, Connecticut and Kansas. Yet we have a lot in common. Similar sick senses of humor, we had a similar appreciation for movies. More than that, we had identical values; loyalty to friends and family, and standing up for principles.
So it’s sad that he’s going. And it wasn’t under the best of circumstances that he’s going home, so the whole situation sucks that much more. I’ve never known anyone whose been through as much and yet never made an excuse or backed down when he had every reason to. If we happen to win the World Series of Pop Culture, I fully intend on making a trip to Kenya. If we don’t, I’m still going to try and get out there some day. I just hope they have a McDonalds.
Today one of my best friends moved away. And here’s the catch, he was already living in Washington DC. So how much farther away could he go? Well, how does Kenya sound? Yes, that is far. He came to the US 10 years ago, and we met while working together at Lenscrappers 7 years ago. It didn’t take long before we had our crew. It was four Jews and a Kenyan. There was even an Easter spent at Worlds of Fun by two of the Jews and the Kenyan.
Typically people love to hear a baby laugh, but I never met a person who didn’t love this guys laugh. And sure that sounds some what gay, but so what. From the surface, it probably didn’t make sense that we became such good friends. Talk about different backgrounds. I grew up in the ‘burbs of Long Island, Connecticut and Kansas. Yet we have a lot in common. Similar sick senses of humor, we had a similar appreciation for movies. More than that, we had identical values; loyalty to friends and family, and standing up for principles.
So it’s sad that he’s going. And it wasn’t under the best of circumstances that he’s going home, so the whole situation sucks that much more. I’ve never known anyone whose been through as much and yet never made an excuse or backed down when he had every reason to. If we happen to win the World Series of Pop Culture, I fully intend on making a trip to Kenya. If we don’t, I’m still going to try and get out there some day. I just hope they have a McDonalds.
January 10, 2007
Hollow of Fame
This week Cal Ripken and Tony Gwynn were rightfully voted in to the Baseball Hall of Fame. Both guys had great careers, each only playing for one team and always class acts. But their election into the Hall has been overshadowed by the exclusion of Mark McGwire, who was kept out because of steroid allegations and one horrible appearance in front of Congress. Now, I may be wrong, but I only thought he should have spent time preparing for plate appearances, not court appearances.
Did he use steroids? It’s quite possible. But as of now, there are only allegations. And I’m pretty sure our country claims that you are innocent until proven otherwise. I know that was meant for the courts, and not the court of public opinion. Baseball writers and fans claim they are just interested in protecting the integrity of the game. I call bullshit. Other players, who have actually failed tests and been suspended for steroid use, aren’t raked over coals like Big Mac, or Barry Bonds or Sammy Sosa. No, they save their lashings for only those that hit home runs. Because baseball has always been tied so closely to its records. 755, 61, 56, .400, 511 all mean something to baseball fans.
And it’s not that I think these guys are innocent. I know that steroid use has been rampant in baseball. But, I don’t believe it started in 1998 when Mac and Sosa went after the single season home run record. And I don’t, not for a second, believe it’s a problem special to baseball. But the writers and fans don’t seem to care about other sports. Barry Bonds hits 73 home runs, and a year later his name is mentioned in the BALCO case. Then everyone comments how obvious it is that he was on something. That he got so huge. Same with McGwire, after Jose Canseco outs him in his book, it’s suddenly obvious because he was so big.
But only in baseball, does being strong mean you’re on steroids. No one seems to mind the difference in how LaDainian Tomilson is built totally different then the running backs from the 80s. Look at how he’s built compared to Marcus Allen. No one bats an eye at how big and strong LeBron James was coming out of high school compared to Michael Jordan when he came out of college. How about the fact that Allen Iverson has so much more muscle than Isiah Thomas? Or how Greg Oden, as a freshman at Ohio State, is already stronger then David Robinson or Patrick Ewing ever got. These young guys got that way from working out. Riiiiight. They couldn’t possibly be on anything, we all know how tough the high schools test for steroids. And that high school kids would never, ever, look for a way to get ahead or put something illegal in their bodies.
And how about the stats? Three times in the last four years, the single season rushing touchdown mark has been broken. When Michael Jordan was scoring 30 a night in the late 80s and early 90s, he was almost always the only guy in the league to average over 30 points a game. Last season three guys accomplished that, and another averaged 29.3. But no one bats an eye.
Only when you hit a small round ball over a fence a certain amount of times, do people begin to worry about the integrity of the game. Now writers want to play the role of morality cop, and tell us that Mark McGwire cheated us. They write that his accomplishments are tainted. But they didn’t mind using it to sell papers then, or now. And they still turn a blind eye to plenty of other cheaters. Yet they still have the nerve to lecture us about right and wrong.
Did he use steroids? It’s quite possible. But as of now, there are only allegations. And I’m pretty sure our country claims that you are innocent until proven otherwise. I know that was meant for the courts, and not the court of public opinion. Baseball writers and fans claim they are just interested in protecting the integrity of the game. I call bullshit. Other players, who have actually failed tests and been suspended for steroid use, aren’t raked over coals like Big Mac, or Barry Bonds or Sammy Sosa. No, they save their lashings for only those that hit home runs. Because baseball has always been tied so closely to its records. 755, 61, 56, .400, 511 all mean something to baseball fans.
And it’s not that I think these guys are innocent. I know that steroid use has been rampant in baseball. But, I don’t believe it started in 1998 when Mac and Sosa went after the single season home run record. And I don’t, not for a second, believe it’s a problem special to baseball. But the writers and fans don’t seem to care about other sports. Barry Bonds hits 73 home runs, and a year later his name is mentioned in the BALCO case. Then everyone comments how obvious it is that he was on something. That he got so huge. Same with McGwire, after Jose Canseco outs him in his book, it’s suddenly obvious because he was so big.
But only in baseball, does being strong mean you’re on steroids. No one seems to mind the difference in how LaDainian Tomilson is built totally different then the running backs from the 80s. Look at how he’s built compared to Marcus Allen. No one bats an eye at how big and strong LeBron James was coming out of high school compared to Michael Jordan when he came out of college. How about the fact that Allen Iverson has so much more muscle than Isiah Thomas? Or how Greg Oden, as a freshman at Ohio State, is already stronger then David Robinson or Patrick Ewing ever got. These young guys got that way from working out. Riiiiight. They couldn’t possibly be on anything, we all know how tough the high schools test for steroids. And that high school kids would never, ever, look for a way to get ahead or put something illegal in their bodies.
And how about the stats? Three times in the last four years, the single season rushing touchdown mark has been broken. When Michael Jordan was scoring 30 a night in the late 80s and early 90s, he was almost always the only guy in the league to average over 30 points a game. Last season three guys accomplished that, and another averaged 29.3. But no one bats an eye.
Only when you hit a small round ball over a fence a certain amount of times, do people begin to worry about the integrity of the game. Now writers want to play the role of morality cop, and tell us that Mark McGwire cheated us. They write that his accomplishments are tainted. But they didn’t mind using it to sell papers then, or now. And they still turn a blind eye to plenty of other cheaters. Yet they still have the nerve to lecture us about right and wrong.
January 08, 2007
The Next Big Star
When it comes to movies, the line between creativity and commercialism has always been blurred. And in recent years the line has been pretty much erased. Or as Joey would say, “the line is a dot to you.” There are the slick scenes in which a product is placed (cleverly called product placement) such as a cell phone and attention brought to the brand name, all the way to movies being used to reveal new cars. The majority of movies are now made successful or flop, based mostly on the marketing before it even hits the theatre. Studios can intentionally make horrible movies, market them as complete jokes and make a fortune as they did with “Snakes on a Plane.”
Well, I have the idea of the future. I have thought of the perfect blend between a commercial and a movie. It would both entertain the hell out of, well at least me, there would be a video game to follow, perhaps a theme park, toys and it could easily be a franchise. All this comes from one of my favorite commercial characters. Who doesn’t love the Gecco from the Geico ads?
I swear that little green fella would kill at the box office. Now, I see him sort of as an Austin Powers type hero, but you could go so many different ways with it. There was a time that the “spoof” was usually a riot. “Airplane,” “Naked Gun,” “Hot Shots,” even the first “Scary Movie” were all hysterical. And they’ve given way to crap like “Epic Movie” and everything else the Wayans Brothers put out. But with the Gecco, you can take your favorite movie, and just insert your new leading man in place of the likes of Mel Gibson or Tom Hanks. It would be just that easy to make “Cast Away” the funniest movie of the year.
Normally watching an hour and a half long commercial would lead me to gouging out my own eyes and lighting myself on fire, but I’d watch that Gecco if he were doing the play-by-play for C-SPAN. Maybe he shouldn’t have his own movie; he could just as well be the next sitcom star. I’m telling you it would work.
>..>
Well, I have the idea of the future. I have thought of the perfect blend between a commercial and a movie. It would both entertain the hell out of, well at least me, there would be a video game to follow, perhaps a theme park, toys and it could easily be a franchise. All this comes from one of my favorite commercial characters. Who doesn’t love the Gecco from the Geico ads?
I swear that little green fella would kill at the box office. Now, I see him sort of as an Austin Powers type hero, but you could go so many different ways with it. There was a time that the “spoof” was usually a riot. “Airplane,” “Naked Gun,” “Hot Shots,” even the first “Scary Movie” were all hysterical. And they’ve given way to crap like “Epic Movie” and everything else the Wayans Brothers put out. But with the Gecco, you can take your favorite movie, and just insert your new leading man in place of the likes of Mel Gibson or Tom Hanks. It would be just that easy to make “Cast Away” the funniest movie of the year.
Normally watching an hour and a half long commercial would lead me to gouging out my own eyes and lighting myself on fire, but I’d watch that Gecco if he were doing the play-by-play for C-SPAN. Maybe he shouldn’t have his own movie; he could just as well be the next sitcom star. I’m telling you it would work.
>..>
Super Size This
“Haven’t you seen Super Size Me?” is quickly becoming my least favorite some what regularly heard question. Two years ago, when it first came out, it was somewhat common to have people ask me that question when they saw how often I ate at McDonalds. I didn’t run out and see it then, and I still haven’t seen it in its entirety. And now it’s making the rounds on television, and luckily for me people are actually watching it.
Now it’s probably only happened like three, maybe four times in the past couple of weeks, but it feels like a daily occurrence that I’ve been asked that very question when I was on my way to lunch. And last night “Super Size Me” was on one of my many movie channels, so I thought I’d try and watch it. I really tried, but I couldn’t get through it. The aroma of bullshit was about as over powering as McDonalds fries.
First, I dare that guy to over eat food from any one restaurant over a 30 day period, and see how he feels. Seriously, over doing anything is going to be un-healthy for you. Secondly, as far as my McDonalds habit well, I don’t super size my meals. In fact I only eat one double cheese burger and a medium fry. He gained like 5 pounds in one week of his diet, I’ve gained 10 pounds in the last 13 years. I’m not claiming that eating McDonalds on an almost daily basis has lead me to becoming a picture of perfect health, but I’ve done more than 30 days of research.
Thirdly, and I’m not sure how many points I’m going to make just yet, most of those people who have asked the question of late need to just shut it. Out of the four I remember, three have SUVs. They’ve also seen “An Inconvenient Truth” and continue to drive around in their gas guzzling pieces of shit. So you mean to tell me, a movie about one idiots eating habits over a 30 day period should change my life, but a movie that shows the effects your automobile has on the entire world isn’t worth a selling your car? Bite me.
Now it’s probably only happened like three, maybe four times in the past couple of weeks, but it feels like a daily occurrence that I’ve been asked that very question when I was on my way to lunch. And last night “Super Size Me” was on one of my many movie channels, so I thought I’d try and watch it. I really tried, but I couldn’t get through it. The aroma of bullshit was about as over powering as McDonalds fries.
First, I dare that guy to over eat food from any one restaurant over a 30 day period, and see how he feels. Seriously, over doing anything is going to be un-healthy for you. Secondly, as far as my McDonalds habit well, I don’t super size my meals. In fact I only eat one double cheese burger and a medium fry. He gained like 5 pounds in one week of his diet, I’ve gained 10 pounds in the last 13 years. I’m not claiming that eating McDonalds on an almost daily basis has lead me to becoming a picture of perfect health, but I’ve done more than 30 days of research.
Thirdly, and I’m not sure how many points I’m going to make just yet, most of those people who have asked the question of late need to just shut it. Out of the four I remember, three have SUVs. They’ve also seen “An Inconvenient Truth” and continue to drive around in their gas guzzling pieces of shit. So you mean to tell me, a movie about one idiots eating habits over a 30 day period should change my life, but a movie that shows the effects your automobile has on the entire world isn’t worth a selling your car? Bite me.
January 03, 2007
New Years Eve
I’ve never really been a huge fan of New Years Even, in fact I’ve never really been a big fan of any holiday that just gives people an excuse to go get shit faced. Really, if you want to go get drunk with some friends then just do it. I don’t think you should have to wait for the calendar to tell you when. Plus the whole fact that bars just get ridiculously crowded, just kind of takes away the fun. Normally I spend New Years Eve just hanging out at a friends house. This year was a bit different as I went out with a pretty large group. We did it right too. To avoid the whole threat of either getting a DUI or ending up dead we decided to get a limo for the night. With 14 people, it’s actually cheaper then getting 14 cabs. And hey, you can start drinking right away and that’s a plus.
So we hit some bars downtown, starting with the Cashew. I had never been there before, and it was pretty much perfect. Good size crowd, but not so crowded that you couldn’t move or get near the bar. And yep, plenty of eye candy which is a necessity. From there we went to the Cigar Box, and my buddy tried to get me to smoke a cigar. But really, I’ve made it 30 years without smoking anything, why would I want to start now?
But this was the highlight of the night. See, some of these friends of mine happen to be pranksters. The women like to wear horrible wigs and go out and just mess with people on occasion. And this night, we were situated near the front door, when they realized there was no one checking ID’s of customers coming in. So of course they decided they would provide this service. And it didn’t matter who was coming in, could be a guy with a cane and more wrinkles than Bea Arthur, they were checking that ID. So I made the suggestion of charging a cover, totally kidding of course. Well, we made $20 before deciding that probably wasn’t a good idea. Mainly because I figured it put my good health on the line. No one was gonna get too upset with two cute drunk blondes, but one short bald guy making money off random drunks could easily find himself in trouble. Still, I’m kinda kicking myself because I know we could have paid for the whole night if we kept it up.
So that was my New Years Eve. No resolutions that I won’t keep or stories that involve me streaking down 48th. The one thing that baffles me is how the hell is it already 2007? Are the years going by faster simply because I’m older, or is this also the work of global warming? Someone needs to fund a research team to look into this. Otherwise, why are we paying taxes?
So we hit some bars downtown, starting with the Cashew. I had never been there before, and it was pretty much perfect. Good size crowd, but not so crowded that you couldn’t move or get near the bar. And yep, plenty of eye candy which is a necessity. From there we went to the Cigar Box, and my buddy tried to get me to smoke a cigar. But really, I’ve made it 30 years without smoking anything, why would I want to start now?
But this was the highlight of the night. See, some of these friends of mine happen to be pranksters. The women like to wear horrible wigs and go out and just mess with people on occasion. And this night, we were situated near the front door, when they realized there was no one checking ID’s of customers coming in. So of course they decided they would provide this service. And it didn’t matter who was coming in, could be a guy with a cane and more wrinkles than Bea Arthur, they were checking that ID. So I made the suggestion of charging a cover, totally kidding of course. Well, we made $20 before deciding that probably wasn’t a good idea. Mainly because I figured it put my good health on the line. No one was gonna get too upset with two cute drunk blondes, but one short bald guy making money off random drunks could easily find himself in trouble. Still, I’m kinda kicking myself because I know we could have paid for the whole night if we kept it up.
So that was my New Years Eve. No resolutions that I won’t keep or stories that involve me streaking down 48th. The one thing that baffles me is how the hell is it already 2007? Are the years going by faster simply because I’m older, or is this also the work of global warming? Someone needs to fund a research team to look into this. Otherwise, why are we paying taxes?
January 02, 2007
Motive
A friend of mine has an interesting little anecdote posted on her Myspace page. The Cliffs notes version of it goes something like this: someone walking on the beach is tossing Starfish back into the ocean when their friend comments about how they’ll never make a difference in the grand scheme of things, to which the good citizen replies “made a difference to that one.”
Really, it’s a nice sentiment and it’s true. You don’t have to change the world to make a difference. Then last week I was watching something on CNN, I think the special was called “What’s a Christian” or something to that affect. And I made a connection between the Starfish tosser and the Christians. Not really a direct connection, but part of the CNN story talked about the movement among Christian Fundamentalists to help Israel. As usual, I was probably reaching a bit when this occurred to me, but you’ll read it anyway.
My thinking was this: if you toss the Starfish and it lands near a big bad shark that eats it up, was it still a good deed? Much like I thought about the Fundamentalists motive behind helping Israel, as they feel in order for Jesus to return that Israel must remain a Jewish state. Personally, I see those motives as purely self-serving. So between the Starfish and the Christian Right, I began to wonder, how much does motive matter?
If you’re trying to do something for the simple reason that it betters someone elses situation, be it a Starfish or random person, and your deed results in hurting them, well does that lessen the deed? And if you’re doing something solely because it benefits your own cause, and it just so happens to help someone else obtain what they want, is that an act of kindness or a selfish act?
My stance is this, motive matters. It isn’t everything, but it carries more weight than the actual outcome. If someone loans me money for something specific and I go and lose it at the casino, well that’s on me, and me only. They did what they could to help, and couldn’t control anything after that. Now if someone helps me to find a new job, and leads me to believe they are doing it as a favor, when in reality they are doing it so they can fill my current position with a friend. Well that’s just some shady shit. Sure, I might be better off with the new position, and it might be what I want. But what I want just as much is for people to be up front with me.
Not for one second do I view the actions of Pat Robertson and his cronies as friendly. Nor do I find it respectable. If they flat out said, “we’re doing this for the simple fact that it benefits us according to our beliefs,” well I could respect that. Then have the opportunity to decide whether to accept, or decline their “helping” hand.
Motive is what separates the guy who preys on vulnerable women and the good guys who might just end up dating one. Motive is the difference between Snakes on a Plane and Oceans 12.
Really, it’s a nice sentiment and it’s true. You don’t have to change the world to make a difference. Then last week I was watching something on CNN, I think the special was called “What’s a Christian” or something to that affect. And I made a connection between the Starfish tosser and the Christians. Not really a direct connection, but part of the CNN story talked about the movement among Christian Fundamentalists to help Israel. As usual, I was probably reaching a bit when this occurred to me, but you’ll read it anyway.
My thinking was this: if you toss the Starfish and it lands near a big bad shark that eats it up, was it still a good deed? Much like I thought about the Fundamentalists motive behind helping Israel, as they feel in order for Jesus to return that Israel must remain a Jewish state. Personally, I see those motives as purely self-serving. So between the Starfish and the Christian Right, I began to wonder, how much does motive matter?
If you’re trying to do something for the simple reason that it betters someone elses situation, be it a Starfish or random person, and your deed results in hurting them, well does that lessen the deed? And if you’re doing something solely because it benefits your own cause, and it just so happens to help someone else obtain what they want, is that an act of kindness or a selfish act?
My stance is this, motive matters. It isn’t everything, but it carries more weight than the actual outcome. If someone loans me money for something specific and I go and lose it at the casino, well that’s on me, and me only. They did what they could to help, and couldn’t control anything after that. Now if someone helps me to find a new job, and leads me to believe they are doing it as a favor, when in reality they are doing it so they can fill my current position with a friend. Well that’s just some shady shit. Sure, I might be better off with the new position, and it might be what I want. But what I want just as much is for people to be up front with me.
Not for one second do I view the actions of Pat Robertson and his cronies as friendly. Nor do I find it respectable. If they flat out said, “we’re doing this for the simple fact that it benefits us according to our beliefs,” well I could respect that. Then have the opportunity to decide whether to accept, or decline their “helping” hand.
Motive is what separates the guy who preys on vulnerable women and the good guys who might just end up dating one. Motive is the difference between Snakes on a Plane and Oceans 12.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)