Just wanted to update my little Political Round-up post the other day. Governator backed off on the whole killing puppies things. Guess it finally occured to him what he was suggesting. The Vice Presidential Dick apologized for telling Senator Leahy to go fuck himself and expressed his shame at using such langugage in the halls of the Senate to attack an elected representative of the people. Oh, wait, no that didn't happen. He expressed a deep sense of satisfaction, no regret, said he felt better having cursed out a Senator, and that it was something that "badly needed to be said" and was "long overdue". Majority Leader Bill Frist thinks there is no problem with this because it is an election year and people are just being passionate. And then he proceeded to slam Democrats for their lack of civility. Not really. Well, not quite, anyway. Civility, of course, is Republispeak for staying quiet while you bend over and get fucked up the ass. Big time.
So remember, feel free to tell Republicans to go fuck themselves. Their party leadership considers this just the kind of discourse that is long overdue, so feel free to give them what they want.
And speaking of civility, Ralph Nader is in the news again. He's calling Michael Moore a "giant beach ball" Nader's bitchy because Moore is distancing himself from Nader because he doesn't support his Presidential campaign. So Nader responded in the adult way by releasing an open letter mocking the director's weight and bragging about how he and his friends are "trim and take care of themselves". Democrats and Republicans are like? Seems more like Dick and Ralph have a lot in common. But remember, the progressive war hero is completely unacceptibly liberal. We need someone like Nader who hates fat people, mocks gays and women, ignores blacks, busts unions, abuses employees, and invests in corporations that engage in genocide, war profiteering, sexual discrimination, exploitation of the oil market, weapons production, and price gouging on medications. Because nothing says progressive better then, well, all that. Real class act that Nader. Just remember his "giant beach ball" remark the next time some self-righteous Naderite whines about how put upon Ralph is.
6.29.2004
6.25.2004
politcal round-up
In the words of Ben Folds, "Yeah, well fuck you, too!" In case you haven't heard, Dick Cheney told Senator Leahy of Vermont to "go fuck himself" on the floor of the Senate the other day. And what did Leahy say to get Dick all worked up. "Hello". This launched Cheney into attacking Leahy for criticising his dealings with Halliburton. In response, Leahy expressed his displeasure with the Bush administration calling him a bad Catholic for opposing Bush's judicial nominees. To which, Dick responded as only a Dick can with "go fuck yourself." The Administration has taken to euphamisitically calling Cheney's blow-up a "frank exchange of ideas". Yeah, way to go on that whole restoring dignity to the White House thing.
And good ol' Ralph Nader continues to destroy what remains of his reputation. Aside from his self-serving and absurd endorsement of John Edwards as John Kerry's running mate (Edwards is unquestionably more of a moderate than Kerry), he clearly knows who really supports his campaign. Republicans. Out in Oregon, reports are coming in that the Bush/Cheney campaign is actively soliciting people to attend a Nader signature drive. A script has also gotten out from Citizens for a Sound Economy where they explicitly urge people to try to get Nader on the ballot in order to jointly defeat John Kerry. Nader's spokespeople have said they don't see anything wrong with this. In case you're curious, CSE is Republic special interestes group financed by corporate money and run by Dick Armey. You may remember him as the Republican attack dog/Majority Leader who called gay Massachusettes Congressment Barney Frank, Barney Fag. Remember, this is all *after* Nader failed to generate support on his own to get a place on the Oregon ballot. They have a rule where you can bypass the law require thousands of signatures if you get 1,000 at one event. Nader went for the easy way and failed. Now he's going for the easy way with explicit support from far-right-wing corporate interests. And lets also not forget that down in Arizona Nader is likely to get knocked off the ballot as over 32% of signatures gathered appear to be invalid. And how was he gathering signatures? By piggy-backing on petitions for an anti-immigrant law and the repeal of clean elections in Arizona. Yeah, Ralph is really trying to build a progressive movement. You can tell by the alliances with the corprorate funded, gay-bashing, anti-immigrant, opponants of clean elections. Because what progressive doesn't agree with those values?
And finally, Governor Arnold wants to kill kittens and puppies. No, really. That isn't a joke. He wants to repeal the law that says the top priority for animal shelters is to find homes to adopt stray pets. Arnold wants the top priority to be the swift murder of all the pretty kitties and puppies. Did he miss a class in Politics 101? Honestly, when does a politician come out on the pro- side of killing kittens. Don't you learn that right after the whole kissing babies thing?
And good ol' Ralph Nader continues to destroy what remains of his reputation. Aside from his self-serving and absurd endorsement of John Edwards as John Kerry's running mate (Edwards is unquestionably more of a moderate than Kerry), he clearly knows who really supports his campaign. Republicans. Out in Oregon, reports are coming in that the Bush/Cheney campaign is actively soliciting people to attend a Nader signature drive. A script has also gotten out from Citizens for a Sound Economy where they explicitly urge people to try to get Nader on the ballot in order to jointly defeat John Kerry. Nader's spokespeople have said they don't see anything wrong with this. In case you're curious, CSE is Republic special interestes group financed by corporate money and run by Dick Armey. You may remember him as the Republican attack dog/Majority Leader who called gay Massachusettes Congressment Barney Frank, Barney Fag. Remember, this is all *after* Nader failed to generate support on his own to get a place on the Oregon ballot. They have a rule where you can bypass the law require thousands of signatures if you get 1,000 at one event. Nader went for the easy way and failed. Now he's going for the easy way with explicit support from far-right-wing corporate interests. And lets also not forget that down in Arizona Nader is likely to get knocked off the ballot as over 32% of signatures gathered appear to be invalid. And how was he gathering signatures? By piggy-backing on petitions for an anti-immigrant law and the repeal of clean elections in Arizona. Yeah, Ralph is really trying to build a progressive movement. You can tell by the alliances with the corprorate funded, gay-bashing, anti-immigrant, opponants of clean elections. Because what progressive doesn't agree with those values?
And finally, Governor Arnold wants to kill kittens and puppies. No, really. That isn't a joke. He wants to repeal the law that says the top priority for animal shelters is to find homes to adopt stray pets. Arnold wants the top priority to be the swift murder of all the pretty kitties and puppies. Did he miss a class in Politics 101? Honestly, when does a politician come out on the pro- side of killing kittens. Don't you learn that right after the whole kissing babies thing?
6.18.2004
the "i-don't-give-a-fuck-kids"
I've occassionally shilled for [adult swim] on Cartoon Network here, so I wanted to link to an article from Washington Monthly that is a great study of the programming block's history and significance. Very good analysis about how good things happen when no one cares what you're doing. Check it out.
christian idolotry
So, there is going to be a Christian version of American Idol. The latest of many Idol impersonators, the Christ Pop folks are predictably behind the curve on this one and jumping on a fad as its already outliving its usefullness. But such is the way of contemporary Christian co-opting of pop culture.
Co-opting of cultures, of course, has a long history in Chrstianity. The Catholic scholars I went to college with termed it "Putting New Wine in Old Bottles". Basically, it was a way of winning converts by shortening the trip from pagan to believer. So, it really shouldn't be a surprise that Christian's continue to immitate the work of the pagans in service of their faith.
Except, the motivation seems to have changed dramatically, and the result ain't as nice as Christmas. I mean, who is getting converted by the awful pop music that's put out by the Christ Pop industry? Come on, you've all heard the damn informercials late at night. The music sucks, plain and simple. A couple artists have found ways to incorporate faith into their music, but not the complete-lack-of-subtlety artists that are all the rage of full-blown Christ Pop. I don't know a single Christian who enjoys "Christian" music, because frankly its just plain awful.
Clearly, a lot of people do enjoy it, though. I have to suspect, however, that they do so not on the merits of the music (one hopes, anyway), but rather purely on the subject matter. They consider all non-Christian music to be sinful or whatever. They only want worshipful music. Fine, whatever. A lot of good worshipful music has been made over the years, though. Gospel, hymnsongs, spirituals, the great masses, all really fantastic and enjoyable music. Why not listen to that?
Because I suspect the real purpose of Christ Pop is retention, not conversion. They fear pop-culture's pull, but instead of presenting a fundamentally different alternative, they just want to remake pop culture in Christ's image. The think the young folks won't stick around unless they can play Pagan like all their friends. The thing is, the folks who seem to like Christ Pop are pretty much the sort of people who would loathe anything not completely Christian. So, why bother with the pseudo pagan Idolotry?
Its funny, because I actually really want to see the new movie Saved, which at first glance looked like a Christ Pop kinda movie, but a second glance is clearly a more mature look at Christian youth culture, neither cheerleading or condemning them. I'm especially encouraged to see Mandy Moore playing the stock character of the overt Christian who is more concerned with everyone knowing how Christian she is than actually being a good Christian. Moore is very committed to her faith, but its good to see that she's not a blind bible-thumper, but that she can have a sense of humor about the subject, too. I love her line-reading on the commercial quote "I am FILLED with Christ's love!" Its clearly an over-the-top portrayal, but I can't say I don't know people just like that.
But, I suspect, more thin skinned Christian's will take issue with the film, just as they take issue with all things pop-culture until they figure out how to imitate it.
Co-opting of cultures, of course, has a long history in Chrstianity. The Catholic scholars I went to college with termed it "Putting New Wine in Old Bottles". Basically, it was a way of winning converts by shortening the trip from pagan to believer. So, it really shouldn't be a surprise that Christian's continue to immitate the work of the pagans in service of their faith.
Except, the motivation seems to have changed dramatically, and the result ain't as nice as Christmas. I mean, who is getting converted by the awful pop music that's put out by the Christ Pop industry? Come on, you've all heard the damn informercials late at night. The music sucks, plain and simple. A couple artists have found ways to incorporate faith into their music, but not the complete-lack-of-subtlety artists that are all the rage of full-blown Christ Pop. I don't know a single Christian who enjoys "Christian" music, because frankly its just plain awful.
Clearly, a lot of people do enjoy it, though. I have to suspect, however, that they do so not on the merits of the music (one hopes, anyway), but rather purely on the subject matter. They consider all non-Christian music to be sinful or whatever. They only want worshipful music. Fine, whatever. A lot of good worshipful music has been made over the years, though. Gospel, hymnsongs, spirituals, the great masses, all really fantastic and enjoyable music. Why not listen to that?
Because I suspect the real purpose of Christ Pop is retention, not conversion. They fear pop-culture's pull, but instead of presenting a fundamentally different alternative, they just want to remake pop culture in Christ's image. The think the young folks won't stick around unless they can play Pagan like all their friends. The thing is, the folks who seem to like Christ Pop are pretty much the sort of people who would loathe anything not completely Christian. So, why bother with the pseudo pagan Idolotry?
Its funny, because I actually really want to see the new movie Saved, which at first glance looked like a Christ Pop kinda movie, but a second glance is clearly a more mature look at Christian youth culture, neither cheerleading or condemning them. I'm especially encouraged to see Mandy Moore playing the stock character of the overt Christian who is more concerned with everyone knowing how Christian she is than actually being a good Christian. Moore is very committed to her faith, but its good to see that she's not a blind bible-thumper, but that she can have a sense of humor about the subject, too. I love her line-reading on the commercial quote "I am FILLED with Christ's love!" Its clearly an over-the-top portrayal, but I can't say I don't know people just like that.
But, I suspect, more thin skinned Christian's will take issue with the film, just as they take issue with all things pop-culture until they figure out how to imitate it.
6.10.2004
great expectations?
"I never thought I'd be sitting next to an Iraqi president of a free country a year and a half ago." -George W. Bush
Really? So as we were preparing to invade Iraq and overthrow its dictator, W. didn't think we'd actually win? Really, what is that quote supposed to mean? Yeah, I know its just self-congratularoty pap, but its also just plain stupid. What did he think was going to happen when he invaded Iraq? Had he thought about that? Its not like he's sitting next to a democratically elected Iraqi president, where maybe he just meant he was unsure if we'd have a democratic government set up by now. (not that being a democratically elected president is a big deal to W.) This guy is just appointed. What was Bush thinking about 18 months ago if not about the defeat of Sadaam Hussain?
Really? So as we were preparing to invade Iraq and overthrow its dictator, W. didn't think we'd actually win? Really, what is that quote supposed to mean? Yeah, I know its just self-congratularoty pap, but its also just plain stupid. What did he think was going to happen when he invaded Iraq? Had he thought about that? Its not like he's sitting next to a democratically elected Iraqi president, where maybe he just meant he was unsure if we'd have a democratic government set up by now. (not that being a democratically elected president is a big deal to W.) This guy is just appointed. What was Bush thinking about 18 months ago if not about the defeat of Sadaam Hussain?
6.04.2004
guilt before innocence
I've been wanting to post for a few days on the Scott Peterson trial going on California. No, not to revel in the horrible specticle. But rather, to question why everyone assumes this man is guilty. The way this story has gotten reported on, I'll admit I fell into that trap, too. He had to be guilty, after all. Everyone said so. So it came as quite a shock when I saw reports about the trial discussing how tough it was for the Prosecution.
Really? Because I hadn't heard anything about that before.
So I looked into it, and I was shocked at just how weak a case there is against Scott Peterson. It rests entirely on the assumpsion that he acted kind guilty afterwards. It'd be an insult to even call this a circumstantial case! Yet this trial is going to last 6 months? I realize that the less direct evidence you have, the longer a case will run, but just what is the evidence? Suspicious coincidences are not enough to convict someone. The concern is, are they enough to inflame a jury when a defendant can't completely prove their innocence. After all, Scott Peterson may have killed his wife. I certainly see reason to suspect him, but I'm kinda stunned the case has gotten this far and that the media coverage has been so one-sided.
I can't even get past the motive. Supposedly, Scott wanted to carry on an affair so he killed his wife. Except, Scott's a bit of a dick and he's had affairs before. And this time its with a woman who already has a family, so why would he be so eager to kill his wife and unborn child just to be with a woman who has a kid already and who he has only known for a month. It doesn't make sense.
What's more, the police have been lying about their case. They had long claimed that Peterson lied about a tv show that his wife was watching when he left her, insisting the show he described aired a day earlier. I read this claim myself just a couple days ago. Turns out, its completely untrue. The show was on exactly when Peterson said it was on. They've lied at other times, too, to try to turn Laci's family against him.
It all really upsets me because an uncle of mine was sent to prison in a high-profile case because the police, prosecutors, and judge all railroaded him. I've seen these abuses up close. I was maybe 5 when he was put on trial and it'd be a few years before his conviction got overturned and his case subsequently tossed out for lack of evidence. (in brief, a confession from another man was suppressed by the police) He may have been released, but it ruined his life. It doesn't matter if the evidence isn't there or even if someone else confesses. When you get brought up on horrible charges (in my uncle's case it was rape/kidnapping/murder of a young girl), it stays with you. People assume you must be guilty. He got himself killed while driving drunk a couple years latter.
I'm ashamed at myself for jumping to a conclusion about Scott Peterson's guilty, but I'm more ashamed at the Prosecution's haste to bring so weak a case.
Really? Because I hadn't heard anything about that before.
So I looked into it, and I was shocked at just how weak a case there is against Scott Peterson. It rests entirely on the assumpsion that he acted kind guilty afterwards. It'd be an insult to even call this a circumstantial case! Yet this trial is going to last 6 months? I realize that the less direct evidence you have, the longer a case will run, but just what is the evidence? Suspicious coincidences are not enough to convict someone. The concern is, are they enough to inflame a jury when a defendant can't completely prove their innocence. After all, Scott Peterson may have killed his wife. I certainly see reason to suspect him, but I'm kinda stunned the case has gotten this far and that the media coverage has been so one-sided.
I can't even get past the motive. Supposedly, Scott wanted to carry on an affair so he killed his wife. Except, Scott's a bit of a dick and he's had affairs before. And this time its with a woman who already has a family, so why would he be so eager to kill his wife and unborn child just to be with a woman who has a kid already and who he has only known for a month. It doesn't make sense.
What's more, the police have been lying about their case. They had long claimed that Peterson lied about a tv show that his wife was watching when he left her, insisting the show he described aired a day earlier. I read this claim myself just a couple days ago. Turns out, its completely untrue. The show was on exactly when Peterson said it was on. They've lied at other times, too, to try to turn Laci's family against him.
It all really upsets me because an uncle of mine was sent to prison in a high-profile case because the police, prosecutors, and judge all railroaded him. I've seen these abuses up close. I was maybe 5 when he was put on trial and it'd be a few years before his conviction got overturned and his case subsequently tossed out for lack of evidence. (in brief, a confession from another man was suppressed by the police) He may have been released, but it ruined his life. It doesn't matter if the evidence isn't there or even if someone else confesses. When you get brought up on horrible charges (in my uncle's case it was rape/kidnapping/murder of a young girl), it stays with you. People assume you must be guilty. He got himself killed while driving drunk a couple years latter.
I'm ashamed at myself for jumping to a conclusion about Scott Peterson's guilty, but I'm more ashamed at the Prosecution's haste to bring so weak a case.
5.28.2004
in cars
There are some weird cars out there. Not like I have any right to an opinion on automotive aestethics since I don't even have a liscence, but some cars just seem wrong.
It all started with the New Beetle. But, while at the time, it seemed like it might run the risk of being a very "in the moment" design, I think its held up well. The design is very classic in its own way, while also anticipating design trends. Now, it seems everything is designed like that, but the New Bug still feels individual. It also ushered in an age of inventive car design. Odd that something that started with the beautifully round Beetle has yieled so many annoying boxy cars.
I've kinda warmed up the Honda Element. I hated it at first. Those plastic side panels just put me off. But, its grown on me. The new Scion cars from Toyota, however, are just dreadful. I wanted to like the Element right away, I just didn't. The Scion cars are just obnoxious. They are litterally boxes on wheels. It hurts me to look at those things. Someone in my neighborhood drives one, and he looks very intetionally trendy, which seems to be the target demo. I don't get it, though. Its just an ugly looking car.
Also ugly are the new PT Cruiser convertables. That's just a car which shouldn't be. I was never a huge fan of the PT, but I didn't really hate it, either. But the idea of an SUV-ish, station-wagon-is convertable? Who the hell thought of that? Its not like they made the unlikely work, either. It is just disturbing. It looks like some weird West Coast chopped car with its top up, and just generally seems out of place. Its just not a car meant for the convertable treatment. I'm amazed that wasn't obvious.
But its not just car makers coming up with ugly cars. Drivers get in on the act, too. I saw the most amusingly absurd car accessory today. A boxy, older, grey Honda Civic with a full-fledged racing spoiled tacked onto the hood in defiance of all logic and purpose. Not even one of those understated spoilers often seen on newer sedans of a more pedestrian design. (hehe, get it) No, this thing was jacked up a good foot, flaring out for all the world to see. Honestly, how does that make sense when you own an old, grey Honday Civic? Bizarre.
It all started with the New Beetle. But, while at the time, it seemed like it might run the risk of being a very "in the moment" design, I think its held up well. The design is very classic in its own way, while also anticipating design trends. Now, it seems everything is designed like that, but the New Bug still feels individual. It also ushered in an age of inventive car design. Odd that something that started with the beautifully round Beetle has yieled so many annoying boxy cars.
I've kinda warmed up the Honda Element. I hated it at first. Those plastic side panels just put me off. But, its grown on me. The new Scion cars from Toyota, however, are just dreadful. I wanted to like the Element right away, I just didn't. The Scion cars are just obnoxious. They are litterally boxes on wheels. It hurts me to look at those things. Someone in my neighborhood drives one, and he looks very intetionally trendy, which seems to be the target demo. I don't get it, though. Its just an ugly looking car.
Also ugly are the new PT Cruiser convertables. That's just a car which shouldn't be. I was never a huge fan of the PT, but I didn't really hate it, either. But the idea of an SUV-ish, station-wagon-is convertable? Who the hell thought of that? Its not like they made the unlikely work, either. It is just disturbing. It looks like some weird West Coast chopped car with its top up, and just generally seems out of place. Its just not a car meant for the convertable treatment. I'm amazed that wasn't obvious.
But its not just car makers coming up with ugly cars. Drivers get in on the act, too. I saw the most amusingly absurd car accessory today. A boxy, older, grey Honda Civic with a full-fledged racing spoiled tacked onto the hood in defiance of all logic and purpose. Not even one of those understated spoilers often seen on newer sedans of a more pedestrian design. (hehe, get it) No, this thing was jacked up a good foot, flaring out for all the world to see. Honestly, how does that make sense when you own an old, grey Honday Civic? Bizarre.
5.26.2004
there must be a word for this.
My life has been oddly sychronized the last few days. I'm sure there must be a word for this phenomenon that I'm just not clever enough to know, but 3 times in just the last two days I had a weird moment where something came up that I had been talking about earlier. Not ordinary things, either. Let me explain...
So, I'm chatting with a nice young woman the other day and she expresses her love for Karaoke. A unique passion, for the most part. It was probably the only time that karaoke came up on conversation for me in over a year. And then last night, I was talking with my ex-girlfriend and she mentioned being at a BBW dance and some guy kept bugging her about whether she liked Karaoke. Seemed funny at the time, but probably just coincidence.
Then last night, I was talking about my Orange Coverse Chuck Taylor All-Star sneakers and was asked by a friend if they made plaid ones anymore. So, I checked out their website. Failing to find plaid ones, one pair did catch my eye. A really cool pair of black Chuck Taylors with a cool flame design. A very unique design that I've seen before online I liked, but have nevery actually seen. I liked them enough to send the specific address for those sneakers to my friend. So what do I see this morning on my way to work? Yep, a guy wearing those very sneakers.
Also when talking to my ex last night, she recommended the moving company she used and I figured I'd finally look into it just in case my friend flaked out on helping me move. So I contact them for a quote. She'd mentioned them before, but I never really paid attention. They are a biggish moving company, but I don't think I'd ever heard of them or seen them. So they got back to me pretty quickly to let me know that they were booked for this weekend. And what should I see parked across the street from my office? A truck from this moving company.
None of these were too bizarre and probably all just coincidences, but still odd in their repetition. Is coincidence the right word for this? Doesn't seem quite right to me. Just thought I'd share.
So, I'm chatting with a nice young woman the other day and she expresses her love for Karaoke. A unique passion, for the most part. It was probably the only time that karaoke came up on conversation for me in over a year. And then last night, I was talking with my ex-girlfriend and she mentioned being at a BBW dance and some guy kept bugging her about whether she liked Karaoke. Seemed funny at the time, but probably just coincidence.
Then last night, I was talking about my Orange Coverse Chuck Taylor All-Star sneakers and was asked by a friend if they made plaid ones anymore. So, I checked out their website. Failing to find plaid ones, one pair did catch my eye. A really cool pair of black Chuck Taylors with a cool flame design. A very unique design that I've seen before online I liked, but have nevery actually seen. I liked them enough to send the specific address for those sneakers to my friend. So what do I see this morning on my way to work? Yep, a guy wearing those very sneakers.
Also when talking to my ex last night, she recommended the moving company she used and I figured I'd finally look into it just in case my friend flaked out on helping me move. So I contact them for a quote. She'd mentioned them before, but I never really paid attention. They are a biggish moving company, but I don't think I'd ever heard of them or seen them. So they got back to me pretty quickly to let me know that they were booked for this weekend. And what should I see parked across the street from my office? A truck from this moving company.
None of these were too bizarre and probably all just coincidences, but still odd in their repetition. Is coincidence the right word for this? Doesn't seem quite right to me. Just thought I'd share.
5.17.2004
wedded bliss
And in happier news, a hearty congratulations to all of the couples getting Married today in the Commonwealth, who couldn't have done that yesturday. Even if our Governor is being a complete asshole about it, you have my best wishes as you join the completely screwed up institution of marriage. Hope you folks have better luck with it than we heterosexuals.
advertising graffiti artists of the world unite!
So, I'm on the train this morning and I look up and see that someone has affixed a sticker onto one of the ad posters on the train. Then, someone else had written onto of the offending sticker with a Sharpee. I didn't think much of it until I realized the writing was very carefully positioned only on-top of the sticker. I figured it'd be worth my while to bother to read the darn things now.
The sticker was promoting the Workers World Party, a Communist orgnazing group. The graffiti atop it was "Trotskites". I found that impressive. Who even knows to use Trotskites to go after Communists any more? Moreover, its apparently quite accurate. The WWP is ideologicially linked to Trotsky. On the one hand, I believe in the free exchange of ideas, but on the other hand the WWP had put up graffiti of their own so its hard to feel too bad for them, and besides that I really strongly oppose communists and was impressed with the graffiti artists knowledge of Communism. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big supporter of Socialism as it exists in the US Government or in some of our good allies like Canda or Brittain, but Communism and Marxism were just plain wrong. So, horray for intellectual graffiti artists on the subway!
The sticker was promoting the Workers World Party, a Communist orgnazing group. The graffiti atop it was "Trotskites". I found that impressive. Who even knows to use Trotskites to go after Communists any more? Moreover, its apparently quite accurate. The WWP is ideologicially linked to Trotsky. On the one hand, I believe in the free exchange of ideas, but on the other hand the WWP had put up graffiti of their own so its hard to feel too bad for them, and besides that I really strongly oppose communists and was impressed with the graffiti artists knowledge of Communism. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big supporter of Socialism as it exists in the US Government or in some of our good allies like Canda or Brittain, but Communism and Marxism were just plain wrong. So, horray for intellectual graffiti artists on the subway!
5.16.2004
what happened to "the practice"?
There is basically nothing I watch Sunday's at 10pm, especially with Cartoon Network offering nothing worthy in the slot. So, I was flipping and caught the start of "The Practice", the first I've seen of the show since it jumped the shark when it made its two leading characters into murders in the span of a year AND let them both get away with it.
When the hell did this show become a sitcom? Honestly, I'm a 20 minutes in and its been all comedy, mostly from people who never had anything to do with this show. Mafia comedy. Sex perversion comedy. Drug Comedy. Violence Comedy. Disability Comedy. William F'in Shatner Comedy. I'm not sure a show has ever devolved like this before, while having the audacity to still call itself by its original name. Supposedly, they are remediying this next year with a "spin off" that presumably just picks up where this leaves off but without the whole "The Practice" bagage. Though, it does sound like they are keeping up the flimsy pretense of a drama when the show is so obviously a sitcom.
Though, I hear someone actually from the original cast is trying to angle her way into an honest to goodness sitcom. Has that ever even happened? I know a couple of sitcoms have spawned drama spin-offs, but never the other way around.
When the hell did this show become a sitcom? Honestly, I'm a 20 minutes in and its been all comedy, mostly from people who never had anything to do with this show. Mafia comedy. Sex perversion comedy. Drug Comedy. Violence Comedy. Disability Comedy. William F'in Shatner Comedy. I'm not sure a show has ever devolved like this before, while having the audacity to still call itself by its original name. Supposedly, they are remediying this next year with a "spin off" that presumably just picks up where this leaves off but without the whole "The Practice" bagage. Though, it does sound like they are keeping up the flimsy pretense of a drama when the show is so obviously a sitcom.
Though, I hear someone actually from the original cast is trying to angle her way into an honest to goodness sitcom. Has that ever even happened? I know a couple of sitcoms have spawned drama spin-offs, but never the other way around.
turkey ham
Okay, weird thing. I just turned on the TV and saw some comedian on Showtime at the Apollo. He started in doing a routine on the absurdity on turkey ham. What I actually wanted, though, was Comedy Central. So I change the channel. What do I get?
A completely different comedian, just starting in on a routine on the absurdity of turkey ham.
Weird.
A completely different comedian, just starting in on a routine on the absurdity of turkey ham.
Weird.
5.13.2004
catching up
Yeah, I know I haven't been posting. Though, no one is probably reading so it all evens out. So this will be a bit of a random assortment of stuff post as I catch up.
First off, I will never buy scented Fabreeze again. Well, actually its pseudo-Fabreeze from ALL. God, it stinks. I sprayed it two hours ago and I'm still sick from the smell.
Anyway, I was getting very gung ho about going to NYC, but my enthusiasm is plummeting. After doing everything but buy my bus tickets, I started realizing that I really didn't want to spend 9 hours on a bus in a single day. I really do want to visit the Whitney, but I'm just not sure I can justify that. I usually can't justify the 45 minute train ride into Boston unless I'm going to work. The idea of spending 9 hours on a bus, an additional 2 hours waiting for buses, ANOTHER additional 2 hours getting two and from the bus station in Boston, and I'm looking at spending 13 hours just so I can get 6 hours in New York. Not sure my rate of return is high enough there, no matter how much I want to do it. And I was finally going to walk through Central Park and everything! Oh, well.
In mundane personal news, I've got a part-time job. Not the interesting part-time job I was hoping for, but rather sales floor work in the Women's Clothing section of Target. Eh. Its a living. And I'm getting paid more than I expected, so that's a small (very small) comfort. Plus I get the employee discount, which should come in handy enough.
I've also found a place to live. Woo hoo! Great apartment, great roommates I know I'll get along with, nice neighborhood, great view from my bedroom, just a lot to feel positively about. I'll probably post more about that eventually.
Its also been a banner week for the couple of video game franchises I enjoy. The good folks at EA Games/Maxis released a neat utility for their upcoming Sims 2 game. Basically, it allows you to create characters for the game and is mostly a test drive for the new character creation tools. I'm really impressed. I was able to create a computer character that looked very realisticly like me, right down to the details of my face and nose. I just hope I can go in and add some of my scars and birthmarks, because I get geeky like that. One thing I loved is that they thought to put in a tool that would allow you to add a double chin. Its damn realistic looking, too. I've never seen this before, as usually you just have to blow up the face to get a "fat" look, but I'm very impressed. I'm less impressed that the game's "fat" bodies are still noticably not fat. Especially the woman's body. My virtual doppleganger deserves a VBBW! Oh, well.
Speaking of fat video game characters, a torrent of news has been released about the follow-up to Grand Theft Auto III and Grand Theft Auto: Vice City, GTA: San Andreas. One minor tidbit is that the game requires you to eat to keep up your stamina, but if you eat too much, you can get fat and this will slow you down and result in you getting verbally attacked when you walk down the street. *groan* The solution, of course, is going to a gym and working out. Its an interesting twist on video game's stamina regulation, and the fattened character looks more realisticly fat than most fat characters in video games, but I'm really annoyed that dieting is getting built into a video game. Sims 2 may have the same thing, actually, and I'll be more annoyed with that. Other than that, the new GTA game looks very cool. Set in early 90's California, the game deals more with street gangs than the earlier use of conventional organized crime. They are also seriously pushing the evelope on what a game like this is capable of. If you've played Vice City or GTA III, you're no doubt impressed with how expansive and open-ended the environments are. GTA:SA goes much further. Instead of playing out in 1 city, its not spread across a whole state with three distinct urban environments, each larger than the whole of Vice City. Plus, you have to drive through the country side to get from town to town. How cool is that? The game takes you from a psuedo Los Angelas to San Fran to Las Vegas. Its also the first GTA game to feature a black main character, and I'm curious to see how some of the white suburban fan base takes to that. Early word is that there is clearly some racially motivated distaste going on, which is ironic since it sounds like the game will deal head-on with race issues in the inner city. It also sounds like the plot will deal more with the noble crooks of GTA III instead of the Scarface inspired drug dealing of Vice City, which is a nice switch. The screenshots look gorgeous and engrossing, and I can't wait for its October release.
Hmm. What else. I haven't discussed TV lately, which is a shame since there are several things I wanted to talk about, including the end of Friends and the return of the Dick Van Dyke Show and the impending end of Angel. For another day, perhaps.
First off, I will never buy scented Fabreeze again. Well, actually its pseudo-Fabreeze from ALL. God, it stinks. I sprayed it two hours ago and I'm still sick from the smell.
Anyway, I was getting very gung ho about going to NYC, but my enthusiasm is plummeting. After doing everything but buy my bus tickets, I started realizing that I really didn't want to spend 9 hours on a bus in a single day. I really do want to visit the Whitney, but I'm just not sure I can justify that. I usually can't justify the 45 minute train ride into Boston unless I'm going to work. The idea of spending 9 hours on a bus, an additional 2 hours waiting for buses, ANOTHER additional 2 hours getting two and from the bus station in Boston, and I'm looking at spending 13 hours just so I can get 6 hours in New York. Not sure my rate of return is high enough there, no matter how much I want to do it. And I was finally going to walk through Central Park and everything! Oh, well.
In mundane personal news, I've got a part-time job. Not the interesting part-time job I was hoping for, but rather sales floor work in the Women's Clothing section of Target. Eh. Its a living. And I'm getting paid more than I expected, so that's a small (very small) comfort. Plus I get the employee discount, which should come in handy enough.
I've also found a place to live. Woo hoo! Great apartment, great roommates I know I'll get along with, nice neighborhood, great view from my bedroom, just a lot to feel positively about. I'll probably post more about that eventually.
Its also been a banner week for the couple of video game franchises I enjoy. The good folks at EA Games/Maxis released a neat utility for their upcoming Sims 2 game. Basically, it allows you to create characters for the game and is mostly a test drive for the new character creation tools. I'm really impressed. I was able to create a computer character that looked very realisticly like me, right down to the details of my face and nose. I just hope I can go in and add some of my scars and birthmarks, because I get geeky like that. One thing I loved is that they thought to put in a tool that would allow you to add a double chin. Its damn realistic looking, too. I've never seen this before, as usually you just have to blow up the face to get a "fat" look, but I'm very impressed. I'm less impressed that the game's "fat" bodies are still noticably not fat. Especially the woman's body. My virtual doppleganger deserves a VBBW! Oh, well.
Speaking of fat video game characters, a torrent of news has been released about the follow-up to Grand Theft Auto III and Grand Theft Auto: Vice City, GTA: San Andreas. One minor tidbit is that the game requires you to eat to keep up your stamina, but if you eat too much, you can get fat and this will slow you down and result in you getting verbally attacked when you walk down the street. *groan* The solution, of course, is going to a gym and working out. Its an interesting twist on video game's stamina regulation, and the fattened character looks more realisticly fat than most fat characters in video games, but I'm really annoyed that dieting is getting built into a video game. Sims 2 may have the same thing, actually, and I'll be more annoyed with that. Other than that, the new GTA game looks very cool. Set in early 90's California, the game deals more with street gangs than the earlier use of conventional organized crime. They are also seriously pushing the evelope on what a game like this is capable of. If you've played Vice City or GTA III, you're no doubt impressed with how expansive and open-ended the environments are. GTA:SA goes much further. Instead of playing out in 1 city, its not spread across a whole state with three distinct urban environments, each larger than the whole of Vice City. Plus, you have to drive through the country side to get from town to town. How cool is that? The game takes you from a psuedo Los Angelas to San Fran to Las Vegas. Its also the first GTA game to feature a black main character, and I'm curious to see how some of the white suburban fan base takes to that. Early word is that there is clearly some racially motivated distaste going on, which is ironic since it sounds like the game will deal head-on with race issues in the inner city. It also sounds like the plot will deal more with the noble crooks of GTA III instead of the Scarface inspired drug dealing of Vice City, which is a nice switch. The screenshots look gorgeous and engrossing, and I can't wait for its October release.
Hmm. What else. I haven't discussed TV lately, which is a shame since there are several things I wanted to talk about, including the end of Friends and the return of the Dick Van Dyke Show and the impending end of Angel. For another day, perhaps.
5.05.2004
a hell of a town
I think I mentioned here that I'm looking for an apartment and a 2nd job. Still looking for both, but hoping for an answer soon. Hoping to, actually, as a dearly want to get down to New York City in May.
Couple of reasons. Most importnatly, I want to go to the Whitney Museum of American Art's Biennial Exhibition. I went to the last one in 2002 (part of the post 9/11 NYC tourist boom) and I really loved it. Didn't even expect to go. Just something I did on a lark. It was in the right place, essentially.
Their Biennial is essentially an overview of whats going in Art in America. It is incredibly expansive, but I enjoyed that. It was a deep retrospective that sort of intimidates you if you don't, well, introspect. Its more of a sampler of what's going on. That just really worked for me. I especially enjoyed the installation art, which is simply something you can't enjoy from a book. Its not usually my thing, but I really did enjoy it. So I decided then that I wanted to make going to the Biennial "my thing". But alas, its just not worked out too well and I'm running out of time. Funds have been short, work has been busy, and I always planned to do it in May but now everything is in flux for me and I want to get that all settled first. Even still, I'm not sure I've got the money.
But, then I remembered that May is the month when FleetBoston allows their bank customers free admission to a slew of museums in the northeast. Including the Whitney! Well, actually no, the Whitney wasn't on the list. BUT the Met was, and I do enjoy the Met, too. So, now I'm thinking about going in early on the cheap bus, then getting out late (though, it probably won't need to be too late) after hitting the Met and the Whitney. Just have to figure out how much it will cost, but I'm frankly pretty detirmined to do it.
$10 bus to Boston, get to NYC at 11:30
$5 lunch in NYC at some conveniently cheap location
$7 Metrocard for the day
$12 Admission to the Whitney
$10 cheap dinner
$10 bus back to Boston, leave NYC at 7:00pm
Total: $54. And frankly, dinner should only cost me $5. But that gives me room to pick up some H&H Bagels.
I can do that. I think. A lot of traveling for one day, though. But, I think it'd be worth it. Something to think about.
Couple of reasons. Most importnatly, I want to go to the Whitney Museum of American Art's Biennial Exhibition. I went to the last one in 2002 (part of the post 9/11 NYC tourist boom) and I really loved it. Didn't even expect to go. Just something I did on a lark. It was in the right place, essentially.
Their Biennial is essentially an overview of whats going in Art in America. It is incredibly expansive, but I enjoyed that. It was a deep retrospective that sort of intimidates you if you don't, well, introspect. Its more of a sampler of what's going on. That just really worked for me. I especially enjoyed the installation art, which is simply something you can't enjoy from a book. Its not usually my thing, but I really did enjoy it. So I decided then that I wanted to make going to the Biennial "my thing". But alas, its just not worked out too well and I'm running out of time. Funds have been short, work has been busy, and I always planned to do it in May but now everything is in flux for me and I want to get that all settled first. Even still, I'm not sure I've got the money.
But, then I remembered that May is the month when FleetBoston allows their bank customers free admission to a slew of museums in the northeast. Including the Whitney! Well, actually no, the Whitney wasn't on the list. BUT the Met was, and I do enjoy the Met, too. So, now I'm thinking about going in early on the cheap bus, then getting out late (though, it probably won't need to be too late) after hitting the Met and the Whitney. Just have to figure out how much it will cost, but I'm frankly pretty detirmined to do it.
$10 bus to Boston, get to NYC at 11:30
$5 lunch in NYC at some conveniently cheap location
$7 Metrocard for the day
$12 Admission to the Whitney
$10 cheap dinner
$10 bus back to Boston, leave NYC at 7:00pm
Total: $54. And frankly, dinner should only cost me $5. But that gives me room to pick up some H&H Bagels.
I can do that. I think. A lot of traveling for one day, though. But, I think it'd be worth it. Something to think about.
5.02.2004
earthquake's gonna get you!
So, I'm watching NBC's ratings gimmick, er, TV Movie, 10.5 because I've got a thing for disaster movies. I missed the start when they destroyed Seatle, but I caught the start of the destruction of Northern California. Some of it has been watchable, but other parts have been absolutely embarassing. Especially as it can't seem to stop adding side stories which keep collapsing back onto themselves. The silliest thing though was a scene shot like a chase scene from a monster movie as the Earthquake follows a train and eventually catches up to it and takes it down. The "earthquake" was the old fashioned tear in the earth style which trailed exactly along the train tracks and then conviently stopped once it ate the train.
Another thing I've noticed is that President Beau Bridges is remarkably Bush-esque, focusing more on strong leadership then getting the facts right. The movie is pushing this as a strength, but its not hard to see another side to it.
Also, I'm officially declaring John Schneider a "movie star" style actor. Which is funny because he's not a movie star, but I'm sticking to it. For me a "movie star" style actor is some who basically doesn't act. They just go out and be themselves and rely on the strength of their persona. Ever think of an actor who's performances are all the same? They aren't an actor. They are a "movie star". Alec Baldwin and Ben Affleck are two of the most noticable examples. Think about it. Isn't Alec Baldwin always basically doing the same thing? Its always just Alec Baldwin mugging for the camera, which is enjoyable enough.
Schneider has just enough star power to pull it off, but only just enough. But its fine, because he's settled into the world of television. His work in 10.5 is so identical to his work on Smallville that's almost tough to keep up. Its all the same schtick. I like it and all, so I'm willing to look at it as "movie star" acting instead of a lack of ability.
More later.
Another thing I've noticed is that President Beau Bridges is remarkably Bush-esque, focusing more on strong leadership then getting the facts right. The movie is pushing this as a strength, but its not hard to see another side to it.
Also, I'm officially declaring John Schneider a "movie star" style actor. Which is funny because he's not a movie star, but I'm sticking to it. For me a "movie star" style actor is some who basically doesn't act. They just go out and be themselves and rely on the strength of their persona. Ever think of an actor who's performances are all the same? They aren't an actor. They are a "movie star". Alec Baldwin and Ben Affleck are two of the most noticable examples. Think about it. Isn't Alec Baldwin always basically doing the same thing? Its always just Alec Baldwin mugging for the camera, which is enjoyable enough.
Schneider has just enough star power to pull it off, but only just enough. But its fine, because he's settled into the world of television. His work in 10.5 is so identical to his work on Smallville that's almost tough to keep up. Its all the same schtick. I like it and all, so I'm willing to look at it as "movie star" acting instead of a lack of ability.
More later.
4.27.2004
kerry's ribbons
Bush has sent out his minions do to some dirty work and stir up trouble over Kerry lying about throwing away his medals in a major protest after he returned from Vietnam. You seem, Kerry didn't really throw away his medals. He throw away his ribbons. But in 1971, he said medals, so he's a no-good liar who doesn't deserve to be President unlike the saintly G.W. who was obviously doing nothing wrong in 1971. (cough)
One problem, though. Its all a great big lie.
Bush's people are counting on ordinary people's definition of medal. Meaning, those shiny metal things. Kerry didn't throw those away, but he said medal. The thing is, the Navy calls the ribbons he did throw away medals. Kerry was just using the Navy's terminology. Basically, if you've seen a formal Naval uniform, you may have noticed the field of ribbons worn over the chest. Every medal given out comes with a ribbon meant to represent the medal. The Navy regards these ribbons as Medals. Indeed, given that they are the symbolic representation of the medal, it made sense that Kerry would choose to return those as a symbolic expression of opposition to the continuing Vietnam War. When Kerry called them medals, he was 100% accurate. That is what the Navy calls them. But Bush are counting on people not learning the context and just accepting the 100% dishonest spin they are putting on it about Kerry being a liar.
So, they are lying to call Kerry a liar. Not that lying hasn't been a major part of their campaign to date, but this is getting even more absurd.
One problem, though. Its all a great big lie.
Bush's people are counting on ordinary people's definition of medal. Meaning, those shiny metal things. Kerry didn't throw those away, but he said medal. The thing is, the Navy calls the ribbons he did throw away medals. Kerry was just using the Navy's terminology. Basically, if you've seen a formal Naval uniform, you may have noticed the field of ribbons worn over the chest. Every medal given out comes with a ribbon meant to represent the medal. The Navy regards these ribbons as Medals. Indeed, given that they are the symbolic representation of the medal, it made sense that Kerry would choose to return those as a symbolic expression of opposition to the continuing Vietnam War. When Kerry called them medals, he was 100% accurate. That is what the Navy calls them. But Bush are counting on people not learning the context and just accepting the 100% dishonest spin they are putting on it about Kerry being a liar.
So, they are lying to call Kerry a liar. Not that lying hasn't been a major part of their campaign to date, but this is getting even more absurd.
4.25.2004
low expectations
Hey, remember when I said this was going to be a pop culture blog and I would eventually start a separate blog for politics?
Oh, you don't? Well, I once said this was going to be a pop culture blog and I would eventually start a separate blog for politics. Forget I said it. Or, forget I just reminded you I said it. So, forget I just said this. I keep wanting to write about politics and its silly of me not to because I want to set up a separate political blog that I still haven't bothered to start. So screw it.
So, anyway, today was the March for Pro-Choice rights which drew somewhere in the area of a million people to the mall in Washington. I'm very happy that there was such a strong turn-out, since there has been such a growing concern of complacency over the issue by some on the left who take pro-choice rights for granted. Ralph Nader was a big part of this as he as often taken to ridiculing pro-choice advocates and mocking the suggestion that these rights may be at risk, ignoring the plain language of those on the rights. Meanwhile, the White House response to the March included a "bi-partisan" declaration that all people, regardless of their stance on abortion, could come together to support Bush's attacks on Pro-Choice rights. Seriously, they did this. More of W's "bi-partisan" means everyone agrees with me. But its not getting much play on the blogosphere for a big reason. Because Karen Hughes, Bush campaign big-wig and former Administration official, said this.
Yet again, its all about 9/11. Yet again, the Bush agenda is cleanly transformed into being all about terrorism. The Bush folks aren't like the terrorists, and that's why they aren't like us pro-choice advocates. Because, you know, so many fundamentalist Muslims are really into a woman's right to choose. But this is the same administration that compared teachers to terrorists, so no one is really surprised any more. The soft bigotry of low expectations is pretty big with the Bushies, don't you know?
Oh, you don't? Well, I once said this was going to be a pop culture blog and I would eventually start a separate blog for politics. Forget I said it. Or, forget I just reminded you I said it. So, forget I just said this. I keep wanting to write about politics and its silly of me not to because I want to set up a separate political blog that I still haven't bothered to start. So screw it.
So, anyway, today was the March for Pro-Choice rights which drew somewhere in the area of a million people to the mall in Washington. I'm very happy that there was such a strong turn-out, since there has been such a growing concern of complacency over the issue by some on the left who take pro-choice rights for granted. Ralph Nader was a big part of this as he as often taken to ridiculing pro-choice advocates and mocking the suggestion that these rights may be at risk, ignoring the plain language of those on the rights. Meanwhile, the White House response to the March included a "bi-partisan" declaration that all people, regardless of their stance on abortion, could come together to support Bush's attacks on Pro-Choice rights. Seriously, they did this. More of W's "bi-partisan" means everyone agrees with me. But its not getting much play on the blogosphere for a big reason. Because Karen Hughes, Bush campaign big-wig and former Administration official, said this.
Yet again, its all about 9/11. Yet again, the Bush agenda is cleanly transformed into being all about terrorism. The Bush folks aren't like the terrorists, and that's why they aren't like us pro-choice advocates. Because, you know, so many fundamentalist Muslims are really into a woman's right to choose. But this is the same administration that compared teachers to terrorists, so no one is really surprised any more. The soft bigotry of low expectations is pretty big with the Bushies, don't you know?
4.22.2004
run for your life
I know I haven't been posting much lately. Sorry. Work has been busy with the end of our concert season. Also I'm just very worn out with looking for a new apartment and trying to find a part-time job. Asking people for things is, lets just say, not a skill of mine. I find it extraordinarily stressful so I'm just generally not in a good mood. It will all work itself out soon, but I'll be happier when its settled. Knowing it will be settled won't do much for me. The part-time job thing really is weighing on me. I know I need to, and I don't mind working retail though something nicer would be, well, nice. The easiest jobs to find, though, I'm not going to consider. Telemarketing and food service are non-starters for me, though I might get desperate and apply at Starbucks just because they seem to always be hiring and it could be much worse. I don't hate food service, but I know how draining it is. Telemarketing, I hate. Like I said above, I hate asking people for things. I did telemarketing for a week as a temp 4 years ago. Made me sick every night and I did an awful job.
Anyway, there is something I've been meaning to post since Monday. You see, Monday was what we here in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts call Patriot's Day. Do other states have state holidays? Massachusetts has two of them. One isn't a big deal because no one really acknowledges it except the state (St. Patrick's Day is actually a legal holiday in MA; and we wonder where we got our reputation), but not Patriot's Day. Patriot's Day actually forces a change in Tax Filing many years since it falls near tax day. The City of Boston basically shuts down (I had to work, but it wasn't very productive since most everyone else was closed) and parties in honor of the Boston Marathon.
As you might guess, Patriot's Day's true origin lies in the American Revolution. It honors the first skirmishes between Colonials and British soldiers at Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775. Its now a Monday holiday but this year it actually fell on the real anniversery. Not that anyone really cares about this anymore. (Well, except the Revolutionary War re-enactors) Now, its just Marathon Monday. The biggest sports event in Boston, and that's saying a lot considering the devotion Boston holds for the Red Sox, Celtics, Bruins, and Super Bowl Champion Patriots. Now, every year, some sports freaks start whining about how they don't get the Marathon. But the reasons they don't get it is the same reason I love it and why it draws huge crowds stretched out across 26 miles every year.
I've been lucky to see the Marathon live for each of the last 8 years. At least some part of it. I saw the Elites run through 4 of the 8 years, too, though a couple I only got out after work 3 hours after the leaders ran through and once I only watched it from my bedroom window. Nevertheless, its something I love. Part of it is the tradition. This was the 108th race. And because it is held on Patriot's Day, crowd participation has long been encouraged among all people. I don't get the feeling other cities have marathons anywhere near as iconic. The Marathon isn't a disruption. It isn't something to ignore (not that I think anyone could). Its something that brings everyone out. But more than that, its a sporting event where no one is rooting against anyone. Boston sports fans are infamously bitter and mean-spirited, which makes the Marathon all the better. This confuses some of those bitter fans, who don't know why they should care if they aren't rooting for someone who might win and if they don't understand why they should care about the Kenyans who've dominated the race in recent years.
Well, for starters, the fact that the Kenyans have so emphatically embraced the Boston Marathon. They LOVE us in Kenya. Really, the Boston Marathon is not a perfect Marathon, but the Kenyan runners have completely made it their own. I'm not entirely sure why, but there is no reason for Bostonians not to love the Kenyans right back and root for them. But aside from that, the race is all about cheering everyone. That's why going there 3 hours after the winner passed by isn't an excercise in futility. Its all part of the fun. You cheer on these people who've already run 20+ miles. On Monday, I saw the race from Kenmore Square which is about a mile away from the finish line. At this point, the runners are almost home. Easy for us to know, not so easy when you've run 25 miles already. That's where the crowd comes in. Even hours after the important stuff, the streets are lined with people cheering on everyone who passes by. These aren't athletes seen from the Upper Decks in Fenway Park. They aren't ball-players making millions (not that I have a problem with sports salaries). They are just regular folks here to compete and they are just a foot away. You just cheer. You encourage them. By name when possible, or at least by t-shirt. Everyone is in good spirits, everyone is there to have a good time. Its just a great thing to see and the kind of thing you really need to see for yourself. One of the reasons I love living in the city.
Well, except that I don't really live in the city anymore, but that's neither here nor there.
Anyway, there is something I've been meaning to post since Monday. You see, Monday was what we here in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts call Patriot's Day. Do other states have state holidays? Massachusetts has two of them. One isn't a big deal because no one really acknowledges it except the state (St. Patrick's Day is actually a legal holiday in MA; and we wonder where we got our reputation), but not Patriot's Day. Patriot's Day actually forces a change in Tax Filing many years since it falls near tax day. The City of Boston basically shuts down (I had to work, but it wasn't very productive since most everyone else was closed) and parties in honor of the Boston Marathon.
As you might guess, Patriot's Day's true origin lies in the American Revolution. It honors the first skirmishes between Colonials and British soldiers at Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775. Its now a Monday holiday but this year it actually fell on the real anniversery. Not that anyone really cares about this anymore. (Well, except the Revolutionary War re-enactors) Now, its just Marathon Monday. The biggest sports event in Boston, and that's saying a lot considering the devotion Boston holds for the Red Sox, Celtics, Bruins, and Super Bowl Champion Patriots. Now, every year, some sports freaks start whining about how they don't get the Marathon. But the reasons they don't get it is the same reason I love it and why it draws huge crowds stretched out across 26 miles every year.
I've been lucky to see the Marathon live for each of the last 8 years. At least some part of it. I saw the Elites run through 4 of the 8 years, too, though a couple I only got out after work 3 hours after the leaders ran through and once I only watched it from my bedroom window. Nevertheless, its something I love. Part of it is the tradition. This was the 108th race. And because it is held on Patriot's Day, crowd participation has long been encouraged among all people. I don't get the feeling other cities have marathons anywhere near as iconic. The Marathon isn't a disruption. It isn't something to ignore (not that I think anyone could). Its something that brings everyone out. But more than that, its a sporting event where no one is rooting against anyone. Boston sports fans are infamously bitter and mean-spirited, which makes the Marathon all the better. This confuses some of those bitter fans, who don't know why they should care if they aren't rooting for someone who might win and if they don't understand why they should care about the Kenyans who've dominated the race in recent years.
Well, for starters, the fact that the Kenyans have so emphatically embraced the Boston Marathon. They LOVE us in Kenya. Really, the Boston Marathon is not a perfect Marathon, but the Kenyan runners have completely made it their own. I'm not entirely sure why, but there is no reason for Bostonians not to love the Kenyans right back and root for them. But aside from that, the race is all about cheering everyone. That's why going there 3 hours after the winner passed by isn't an excercise in futility. Its all part of the fun. You cheer on these people who've already run 20+ miles. On Monday, I saw the race from Kenmore Square which is about a mile away from the finish line. At this point, the runners are almost home. Easy for us to know, not so easy when you've run 25 miles already. That's where the crowd comes in. Even hours after the important stuff, the streets are lined with people cheering on everyone who passes by. These aren't athletes seen from the Upper Decks in Fenway Park. They aren't ball-players making millions (not that I have a problem with sports salaries). They are just regular folks here to compete and they are just a foot away. You just cheer. You encourage them. By name when possible, or at least by t-shirt. Everyone is in good spirits, everyone is there to have a good time. Its just a great thing to see and the kind of thing you really need to see for yourself. One of the reasons I love living in the city.
Well, except that I don't really live in the city anymore, but that's neither here nor there.
4.18.2004
he's rick james, bitch!
I've really been loving Chappelle's Show this season. I wrote a very long post about that, but it sucked. Suffice to say, I'm really loving Chappelle's Show.
Oh, and I'm also enjoying those Brawny commercials. You know, the one with the "softer" Brawny and the old-school Brawny. (Softer Brawny: "Look inside yourself. What do you see?" Old Brawny: "A cardboard tube.")
This post sucks. *sigh*
Oh, and I'm also enjoying those Brawny commercials. You know, the one with the "softer" Brawny and the old-school Brawny. (Softer Brawny: "Look inside yourself. What do you see?" Old Brawny: "A cardboard tube.")
This post sucks. *sigh*
4.14.2004
rain, rain, go the f*** away already!
Sorry, just all this gray is really wearing me down. Man, they weren't kidding about April Showers this year. I know, this is some wonderful drought protection and all and that's good, but I really can't wait for it to be over and for the warm weather to return.
My subway train crosses a river on its way into Boston. Aparently the Mystic River, and thats the first time I've bothered to find that out. When the skies are clear, the water is this amazingly beautiful deep blue. Its very out of place for the surroundings. Heck, one side of the train shows a little industrial area on the river's edge, but still it is something to see. Lately, its just been this bland colorlessly dreck. That's the thing about bodies of water. On a beautiful day, they make it all the more beautiful. On an awful day, they make it all the more awful. They play to the surroundings, never making anything nice or making anything bad, just aiming for whatever's already there.
Meanwhile, I'm very close to giving up on finding a roommate. I have to find one by Saturday and don't have much in the way of strong leads. Oh, well. It sucks that I have to pay for my place on my own in May, but I'll get by. I'm going to try to do some little free-lance graphic design and/or get a retail-ish job to make up the difference. Wish me luck, and feel free to offer me work. hehe
My subway train crosses a river on its way into Boston. Aparently the Mystic River, and thats the first time I've bothered to find that out. When the skies are clear, the water is this amazingly beautiful deep blue. Its very out of place for the surroundings. Heck, one side of the train shows a little industrial area on the river's edge, but still it is something to see. Lately, its just been this bland colorlessly dreck. That's the thing about bodies of water. On a beautiful day, they make it all the more beautiful. On an awful day, they make it all the more awful. They play to the surroundings, never making anything nice or making anything bad, just aiming for whatever's already there.
Meanwhile, I'm very close to giving up on finding a roommate. I have to find one by Saturday and don't have much in the way of strong leads. Oh, well. It sucks that I have to pay for my place on my own in May, but I'll get by. I'm going to try to do some little free-lance graphic design and/or get a retail-ish job to make up the difference. Wish me luck, and feel free to offer me work. hehe
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)