Palin-drama
Bubba Speaks
Let the Conventions Begin
Roger Clinton
Roy Obama
Biden Plagiarism
Something light
Sweet Gig
-Cindy McCain
Well dear Cindy has a point here. But lets not also forget that this took place over the course of just more than 2 years. That comes out to just more than 1 day in session/ week. Wow! How do they do it. I mean seriously, between raking in kickbacks and ripping off the taxpayer with "campaign trips" I'm surpried they have time for that 1 day/ week. I know that some of you are saying, "Oh patrick don't be so hard on them...they have committee meetings to go to that counts for something." If you said that to yourself turn on C-span and watch a committee meeting. Actually, watch anything on C-span. More often than not you will see either an empty room or a media circus that is supposed to be a committee meeting. Otherwise, you will see an empty floor of thje house with one person speaking. For some reason, every time I turn on C-SPAN (it happens more than you might think) its Rep. Dennis Kucinich speaking. The guy may be a nutball but he certainly does put the time in to get his voice hear by...NO ONE. Furthermore if you think that our erudite representatives and senators are actually spending their time drafting legislation, researching the facts, or anything else that might benefit the country then you have never met a "congressional aide." These are the workhorses of congress running all around trying to get signatures and draft important legislation while their "do-nothing" bosses live the high life. Now, our congress has set a new record for the lowest amount of legislation passed in the last 20 years. To put that into historical perspective, the so called "do nothing" 80th congress that Truman railed about worked almost 100 days more than our current congress. Its a sad thing to know that we put our faith in such a small group of people who claim to be devoted to public service who can do so little and have little more concern than being re-elected and scoring political points.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121910897089651793.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
So what do I advise we do about all this. Well when election day rolls around...vote for the new guy. "When in doubt vote incumbents out." I was channeling Johnny Cochran right there. Patrick OUT!!!
ABBA?!?!?!?!
So the UK's guardian newspaper (perhaps my favorite overseas source for news and a touch of gossip) recently asked the US presidential candidates to list their top 10 favorite songs. Normally, I would glance at such a list and then move on from the silly concept having gained nothing. BUT... McCain listed ABBA amongst his favorite song artists...TWICE! Thats a full on 20%! If you let me list my 500 favorite songs, ABBA wouldn't make the cut. Even when I'm all alone with nobody watching me, Dancing Queen still sucks. Obama might have reverened wright and (terrorist) fist bumps but now McCain has his own sweedish pop Willie Horton which seriously calls into question his judgement. I really hope that McCain pulls a Sister Souljah moment on ABBA and that he takes time at the convention to "denounce and repudiate" them. I just can't wrap my head around how a millitary man who spent years in a hanoi prison being tortured and beaten by the north vietnamese can come back and list Dancing Queen as his #1 song. I mean seriously, I would take "The Chicken Dance" over this. I think it might also be a sign that he has officially given up on the "black vote" and apparently the "not deaf vote" as well. For comparison...my top 10 favorites (as I can think of them this moment) are below
1. Cocaine - Eric Clapton / J.J. Cale
2. Caroline in My Mind- James Taylor
3. Got my Mojo Working - Muddy Waters
4. The Weight - Grateful Dead (and many others)
5. Fools' Moon - Government Mule
6. Georgia on my Mind- Ray Charles
7. Aint No Sunshine- Bill Withers (Buddy Guy Cover)
8. Woodstock - Crosby Stills Nash and Young
9. At Last - Etta James
10a. House of the Rising Sun - The Animals (and many others)
10b.Amazing Grace - Blind Boys of Alabama
The tenth spot is shared because they share the same melody and so I can't really pick one over the other. Also I realize that the list includes no classical offerings. Perhaps I will make another list in the future of my classical and operatic faves for when the mood is right. Patrick OUT!!!
Diatribe and Dribble
Olympic Fever
Paris for President
You should all check out the link above and look for the paris hilton campaign video. Actually, its a response to, "that white haired dude" (John McCain) who used paris hilton in one of his ads against Barack Obama. All in all, I would say that this was the most effective satire of the campaign yet. Its a shame that it took Paris hilton to top the likes of letterman, leno, colbert, stewart, and even THE NEW YORKER. In brief, Paris declares her candidacy and threatens to "Paint the white house pink" if she is elected. She also gives an outline of a soundly reasoned energy policy...no, I'm not kidding. Signing off with, "see you at the debates bitches." If I were in charge that would be how all presidential candidates signed off from political ads. Of course, the other sad thing is that if she were to go to the debates she would already be doing better than some political candidates. Namely Obama, who, by and large, refuses to take questions from audiences whenever possible. This is in stark contrast to McCains townhall meetings where hours go by until all questions are exhausted. I wonder if the obama campaign is worried about the potential of dirtying the image of powerful public speaker. Apparently, Paris Hilton isn't worried about such things...OK, we all know that Paris really doesn't care what any of the "poor (making under 500,000/year)" people think. If she did, then she might be more like Obama and keep her mouth shut. Of course, then we might not have ever had the video above. With that, Paris for President '08. I figure if I'm going to throw my vote away in a state that doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of electing a politician I believe in...I might as well throw it as far away as possible. Patrick OUT!!!
Back
Obamessiah
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/gerard_baker/article4392846.ece
So, I'm writing a book..."Obama Goes to Europe!" Think fievels american tail in reverse and with throngs of germans in the streets. It is really a bit silly...200,000 germans came out to see our presidential candidate. Or let me put it this way...200,000 germans came out to see the junior senator from the state of illinois. Do either of those make sense??? Furthermore, besides the photo-op...why did he go? THESE PEOPLE CAN"T VOTE. Furthermore, while Obama may already envision himself as President...he will never be president of the world (thats what Bill Clinton wants...remember his "run" for secretary general). His speech was pretty much devoid of any real content and sort of sounded like a self-parody. It was so over the top with optimism and unity, I almost threw up in my mouth watching it last night on C-Span. Really, there was nothing controversial about it...that is fundamentally the problem...the only things worth discussing are those in which opinions differ. So, are we to vote for obama because Europeans like him? Are we to suppose that Europeans really do know whats best for us and want that? That they will be able to act entirely devoid of self-interest? When a country elects a president they should do so entirely in their own self-interest (not necessarily on an individual level but on a national level), and yet our candidates campaign outside our borders. Again...WHY? It seems to me that the risk he runs is the media catching up to the fact that this was his FIRST visit to europe as an elected official. So, we have John McCain who has been multiple times to Europe and spends time in the good ol' US of A thinking about our issues and apparently eating german sausage with lindsay graham (seriously, thats where he was yesterday).The final nail in the coffin was watching McNeil Lehrer News Hour on PBS. They wanted a European perspective on Obamania. The commentators in both France and Germany both essentially said that Obama was a symbol that it was ok to believe in the american dream again. Ummm...why did they need Obama for that. Nothing says american dream like being abandoned by your father, raised in foreign countries and becoming a corporate lawyer. I think not. The american dream is in the family that struggles for years to own their own home and eventually succeeds because the country allows it. The american dream is in China town where imigrants form a pocket of another country while at the same time being american in every sense of the word. The american dream is the huddled masses, and the suburban family not the lawyers and CEOS and certainly not the government...those things are all working very hard against the american dream...republicans and democrats both do it. The only difference is that one knows their doing it and the other has convinced itself its not. But who am I to tell the French anything of that. Do the french have a dream...is it the disenfranchisement and exploitation of foreigners pushing them to the point of riots and violence in the capitals streets. I'm glad they have something to believe in here in the US, because they aren't going to find it within their own borders. Patrick OUT!!!
Cross-cultural exchange
The Dark Knight
To start, the movie is directed by christopher nolan and stars christian bale, heath ledger, morgan freeman, maggie gyllenhall, and that guy from thank you for smoking (which also gets a healthy seal of approval). Obviously the movie focuses around batman and his associated dering-do in battling the JOKER. Heath ledger as the joker is really quite spectacular. It is further than I ever imagined he could go with a character and makes the old TV series Joker and even Jack nicholson's Joker, look downright silly. Seriously, this joker is flippin creepy. The plot has him pretty much appearing out of nowhere with no backstory whatsoever which was a little strange but I'm glad they didn't waste time with something really campy. Of course, the movie is two and a half hours long so whats another 30 minutes...but I digress. Anyways, the Joker appears and begins a not so sophisticated scheme of stealing money from mob bosses and pretty much scares them into believing that the real problem is batman. Of course, we the audience know this is only half way true but the mob bosses are fairly easily convinced and essentially hire the joker to kill batman...so now we have a movie. There is a somewhat convoluted plot with a chinese business man and shady business dealings that really felt like a relic of an earlier script but it did allow for some cool action sequences in the high rises of hong kong. Without giving too much away, lots of plot twists ensue and new enemies are made and other defeated. Among those defeated is one of the heads of the mob who is played by Eric Roberts (Julia's brother) who still sucks...this guy really can't act at all and should be barred from the studios at the first opportunity. Apprarently acting ability is not genetic...who knew??? Anyways, back to the movie itself. The acting was well done on the part of ledger, gyllenhall, and freeman. Christian bale needs some work in places but part of the problem was some really cliche dialogue for his character. In addition, he has a certain voice as bruce wayne and then another voice as batman. Unfortunately the batman voice just sounds like bruce went on an alcoholic bender the night before and has not fully recovered. That got really old really quick. Batman also has a lot of new toys to play with in this one...including a bat cycle (motoycycle with guns and really big tires), a new costume (still has pointy ears but not with projectile razor blades on the wrist), and a weird kind of sonar thing. Morgan freeman plays lucius fox who is essentially batman's R&D and makes all of the neat stuff for batman to use. At one point in the movie he threatens to quit over this sonar system thing saying, "this is too much power for one man and I won't be a part of it." OK...let me get this straight...you have no problem building, rocket cars, machine gunning motorcycles, bat grenades, razorblade projectiles, and other objects of mayhem but when bat sonar comes on the table, "oh no batman...thats going TOOOO far!" Please...that is rediculous...ok, so you need a reason to not have it in the second movie (and there will be another movie) but please don't let that reason be some half-assed moralizing. Along those same lines, the movie tries real hard to be really profound in its address of civic virtue, heroics, self-sacrifice, and public service. A little of that would be fine but they wanted more...and I wanted more too...more of batman pounding heads together that is and less talk about who is a bigger hero and guy in rubber bat suit, the DA, or commissioner gordon. Lets be simple here...the hero is the guy willing to go out in public and pick fights in a bat costume....ummm, thats bravery my friends. Overall, aside from those minor miscues, the movie is definately worth seeing...if you can get tickets...apparently it already setting records for attendance. Fandango is selling 12 tickets per second, ALL DAY. A blockbuster if I ever seen one...Patrick OUT!!!
New Favorite Blog
Its really great...written by a husband and wife team who have cooked all over new england and new york. They have lots of neat posts on the science and experimental side of cooking and really do some innovative things with food. Also, their photography is excellent. I'm thinking about including a link-out to some other blogs here on this site and they would certainly be close to the top. Check them out
Patrick OUT!!!
Movie Review: THERE WILL BE BLOOD
The movie focuses around the slow descent into megalomania of a California oil man at the turn of the century and into the 20s and 30s. Day-Lewis is absolutely phenomenal...though I admit I set myself up to like this movie because I am such a fan of his...that not withstanding the movie did not disappoint. He was so consistent in his portrayal yet laying down that ever so subtle change from beginning to end that his very complex character demanded. Furthermore, the movie has strong undertones (is a strong undertone an overtone...i'm not sure) of revenge which culminate in perhaps the finest movie bludgeoning I have ever seen (not that I can name very many outside of fight club...but this is better than any of those...besides the first rule is you don't talk about fight club...or is that the second rule???). Anyways, there are also a lot of neat religious elements that really get me going because I am becoming more of an atheist every day and a movie that shows the corruptive power of religion has a not so subtle appeal to me. Of course, we can always extrapolate the movie a little further to say that its a battle really between two men who represent the worst of business and the worst of religion. Each of them is trying to capitalize on and take advantage of a generally ignorant population. Anderson is content to have them fight amongst themselves but is this an allegory for our modern situation...I tend to think the model still fits. Though I might vote republican anyways. The soundtrack while mostly scored is also great...really adding to the tension of the film at just the right moments and to exactly the right effect. My only gripe about the movie is the clear distinction between those who know and those who don't. In short, a few characters seem to be absolutely brilliant...most others are nameless faces in the crowd...and i'm not just talking about extras here. Characters with dialoge often come across as robotic without real need while other characters show such depth it makes their idiot counterparts all that much harder to tolerate. Either way, the acting of Day-Lewis carries the film...and its a good thing it did because he is in almost every scene of the film. Before I close out this review let me share a particularly good quote in relation to oil drainage.
Drainage! Drainage, Eli, you boy. Drained dry. I'm so sorry. Here, if you have a milkshake, and I have a milkshake, and I have a straw. And my straw reaches across the room, and then I start to drink your milkshake... I... drink... your... milkshake! I DRINK IT UP!!!
I understand that all that might seem like a silly quote...but once you see the film you'll understand...until then, count the days until that happens. PATRICK OUT!!!
100th POST!!! and more about the Obamas
The image plays upon a lot of the things that have plagued obama over the past few months including accusations of him being a muslim, the fist bump with his wife (apparently a terrorist greeting...I always thought it was just something college kids did), and of course the ever present idea that he is somehow anti-american. In response both the Obama and McCain campaigns issued public condemnation on the New Yorker for I guess encouraging these negative images. So I suppose the thinking is as follows: most people are stupid, these people will see this cover, stupid people will not get the satire inherent, most people will therefor believe that this is a commentary on actual events on the part of the new yorker editorial staff. Now I don't claim to be the smartest guy in the world (OK, I have made that claim on a few occassions but not right now), but this cover seemed pretty clear to me. I can see why the campaign might be a little bit disappointed in it but at the same time to issue public condemnation is pretty lame. I think the real problem presented by this flare-up is not that the new yorker is going after barack or michelle obama, not that there are undertones of bigotry or racism, not even that the cartoon is in bad taste...its more that the cartoon is edging on that line of being too hard to interpret for the average person (in the opinion of the Obama and McCain campaigns). This of course suggests that these campaigns are counting on the votes of people who are less intelligent than me and, for that matter, anyone I know because I have yet to meet someone who interpreted this as anything different than I did, mainly SATIRE. Of course, the other problem is that many of the cartoons in the new yorker that are so lauded over, really are over the head of the average person (assuming you take my head as that of an average person). For instance the following cartoon appeared recently.
What does that even mean? Is this humor? Should I have laughed when I saw this? Is it social commentary on something I've never heard of. I would seriously encourage anyone to leave me their explanations of why this clearly elitist dribbel deserved to be published and what I as consumer should have gotten out of it. The New Yorker's humor pages, which they take great pride in, are absolutely useless. They far too often forget that if people don't get the joke...its not funny. That the fundamental requirement for writing, humor, and communication in general is that people understand. Language bogged down in obscure terminology or arcane references is not communication at all, rather it is boastful in its superiority to the desired reader. I believe that too many readers of the New Yorker are ashamed to admit that these things just don't make sense. Of course, after looking at the latest cover...I think I know why it all works out this way. For once, the magazine publishes a comic that is an effective satire of topical and familiar nation wide events...the response, public damnation. Go on New Yorker comic writers...keep on being obscure...its safer. Patrick OUT!!!