In The Mix

Best and Worst Career Moves of 2009

2009-11-19T18:19:00.002-05:00

Yikes, I have not posted a new blog in a while, so I guess I should make this one an extra large entry to make up for lost time.

2009 is almost over. This year saw some major changes for celebrities and politicans alike, especially in the areas where the line between the two are heavily blurred. It's amazing how quickly things can change for some people, either by accident or as the result of years of planning. Even though there is a still a month to go, I am pretty confident that these four people have made the biggest changes in their careers this year, for better or for worse.

The Best Moves

WHO: Sarah Palin

BEFORE: Governor, VP candidate,

AFTER: Pundit, "Author," Celebrity

WHAT HAPPENED: First off, I'm certain anyone who has read this blog before is shocked to see me list Palin on a positive note in any way, but hear me out. While I generally don’t think highly of Palin, but she made one move that for her (and likely everyone else), was the best thing she could have done: she quit politics.

Her meteoric rise in fame in the national political scene was only marginally hindered by her and John McCain's massive loss to Obama in the 2009 election. Palin quickly polarized people's opinions of her, with adoration turning into idolization from her fans and general dislike turning into outright hatred from her detractors. Palin's fame came with a major drawback, however. The more attention she got, the more people lost confidence in her ability to be a political leader. Not to mention, ever aspect of her personal life was scrutinized in the public forum, every dime she spent was analyzed and her lack of knowledge on certain subject matters were considered major problems.

In the world of politics, 59 million people can vote for you and you can still go home with nothing at the end of the night, but in the world of entertainment, only one million can buy your book and you're considered a rock star.

Palin made the right move for her career. She had the name recognition and media attention she claims to hate and could obviously read the writing on the wall as far as her future in politics was concerned. Though she continues to say she hasn't ruled out future political office ventures, it seems like an obvious attempt at superficially connecting her new career to her old one for life support. A recent pole show more than 70% of Americans now think Palin is unqualified to be President. Though that number seems to grow the more time goes by, it now means nothing to Palin's future plans. The 30% who do think she is qualified are more than enough to keep her career outside of politics going.

If Palin admitted she would never run for office again, it's likely her fame would fade quickly as speculation about her 2012 plans and beyond would stop being fodder for the 24 news networks. Her supporters continue to champion her as a role model and someone they would like to see as President, so it's very unlikely she'll outright dash those hopes when they are what keep her supporters (and critics) interested.

WHO: Conan O'Brien

BEFORE: Host of Late Night with Conan O'Brien

AFTER: Host of The Tonight Show

WHAT HAPPENED: This was years in the making. Jay Leno's contract with NBC expired, and the network decided it was time to move on to a new host (though they did not let go of Leno). O'Brien has enjoyed immense popularity in the late night slot for years and his ability to draw younger viewers made him the most likely choice to succeed Leno. Though the Tonight Show is no longer the rating juggernaut it once was and David Letterman is now leading in the ratings, it's not really a problem for NBC or O'Brien. NBC has much bigger issues to be concerned about right now, like the horrible ratings and reviews for Leno's new show, and even though O'Brien now attracts fewer viewers than Letterman, he dominates in the younger demographics NBC was hoping he would.

The switch from Leno to O'Brien signifies a massive shift in the Tonight show dynamic. Leno was as traditional of a comic as they come, where as O'Brien's approach is decidedly a more post-modern approach, where the scripted jokes themselves are often not the primary source of humor. Rather, O'Brien calls attention to the formulation of the jokes and the show itself for humor, often mocking himself, the (purposefully, I suspect) poor production value of some of the show's skits or mistakes that others shows might edit out before airing.

Not surprising, some of Leno's older viewers likely jumped shipped to Letterman, who has gotten a ratings boost in recent months, in part, due to two controversies (a poorly worded Sarah Palin joke and an alleged blackmail scheme). Nevertheless, Conan's younger viewers seem to like him, and he is following the footsteps of Johnny Carson, which, even when ratings are down, is not a bad job to have.

The Worst Moves

WHO: Rod Blagojevich

BEFORE: Governor of Illinois

AFTER: Reality TV "star"

WHAT HAPPENED: It's incredible how far and fast Blagojevich fell from grace. After Obama won the presidential election, his seat in the Illinois Senate was scheduled to be vacated and Blagojevich could fill the opening. Though he did fill the seat, it wasn't without a massive amount of controversy. Blagojevich was arrested on federal corruption charges stemming from accusations that he was seeking personal or financial gain in exchange for filling the open seat. In short, he's accused of trying to sell a seat in the state senate. Well, he was removed from office in Jan. 2009 and is awaiting his 2010 trial, but in the meantime, Blagojevich is not shying from the spotlight. Most disgraced politicians seem to avoid drawing further attention to themselves, but Blagojevich is different. Over the summer he tried to be a contestant on "I'm a Celebrity... Get me outta here!" but was reminded by the courts that the show was filmed outside the country and leaving the US is a big no-no for people facing political corruption charges. So.... his wife Patricia went instead, because apparently she's a celebrity. Apparently the Blagojevich family is hard up for money after being booted out of the governor's mansion, so these ventures into reality TV are their only way of making money. Though he was spotted making appearances at office parties for money singing Elvis tunes with a Fabio impersonator. You can't make this stuff up, it's just too sad.

Now Blagojevich is set to be a contestant on the new season of Celebrity Apprentice as his career, and apparently his self-respect, have all but vanished. And just think, at this time last year he outranked Obama.

WHO: Kanye West

BEFORE: Hip-hop star with a knack for AutoTune and an ego the size of the moon

AFTER: "Jackass"

WHAT HAPPENED: Like you don't already know. Country singer Taylor Swift won her first MTV Video Music Award in a category where she was competing against Beyonce. During her acceptance speech, West, as he has done in the past, decided to steal the spotlight. He jumped on stage, grabbed the mic out of her hand and said " Yo Taylor, I'm really happy for you, I'mma let you finish but Beyonce had one of the best videos of all time!" To which everyone in the audience, including Beyonce, responded to with shock and horror. Booing ensued, and a seemingly defiant West shrugged, flipped off the crowd, and walked off stage.

Within a mere minutes the incident set the blogosphere on fire. Wests antics have annoyed some in the past but most people brushed it off. This time, however, it looked like he amused nobody. It didn't help his image when Beyonce, who later won a different award, and in classy move gave up her mic time and called Swift back out on stage so she could finish her original speech. West apologized the next day via his website, but it didn't stem the backlash against him. He would later go on The Jay Leno Show and apologize again. For the first time in his career, West actually appeared humble for a moment. But it didn't matter. The media, like always, fueled the flames by asking everyone they could what they thought, from rock stars like P!nk to President Obama himself, who was recorded calling West a jackass in what was clearly meant to be an off-the-record moment.

West has since canceled most of his plans and is said to be taking some time off to reflect. No doubt he is hoping the storm he created blows over, but it doesn't seem to be happening anytime soon. Not surprisingly, "Kayne interrupts.../ I'mma let you finish" has become one of the fastest growing and most widespread Internet memes of all time.

Obama inspires Independence Day 2?

2009-11-06T16:42:00.001-05:00

In a bizarre bit of news, director Roland Emmerich has said President Obama has inspired him to make a sequel to his Sci-Fi/Action film Independece Day, which starred Will Smith and Jeff Goldblum facing off against an alien invasion.

The reason he gave... the country needed a President that could be made into a "king" for the film, and "It was not thought that George W. Bush would have made a great king. Now with Obama, it's another story."

SPOILER ALERT Not to mention all the aliens are killed at the end of the first film and their mothership is destroyed by a nuclear weapon, so I'm not even sure how Emmerich sees a direct sequel making any sense. This is just weird. Of crouse it's all still in the planning stages, and it's not even confirmed that the film will get enough funding. Here's hoping it doesn't, as it sounds like a terrible concept already.

Read the full article here

Ironic

2009-11-06T15:31:00.002-05:00

About 5,000 people joined Michelle Bachman and other GOP speakers at what was officially called a "press conference" outside the Capital Building yesterday. The group was a mix of anti-abortion activists and Tea Party protesters voicing their disapproval of the health care bill schedule for a vote tomorrow.

The protest was similar to others though this one had the official blessing of the GOP. The Washington Post reports, however, a total of five people needed medical attention during the event, all of whom were treated by government health care workers.

The details of only one incident are reported:

"a man standing just beyond the TV cameras apparently suffered a heart attack 20 minutes after event began. Medical personnel from the Capitol physician's office -- an entity that could, quite accurately, be labeled government-run health care -- rushed over, attaching electrodes to his chest and giving him oxygen and an IV drip. This turned into an unwanted visual for the speakers, as a D.C. ambulance and firetruck, lights flashing, pulled in just behind the lawmakers. A path was made through the media section, and the patient, attended to by about 10 government medical personnel, was being wheeled away on a stretcher just as House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) stepped to the microphone. "Join us in defeating Pelosi care!" he exhorted."

Read the full article here

Two groups of people were arrested during the event, one was a group of protesters staging a sit-in in Pelosi's office while throwing crumbled pages of the proposed bill around. The other, oddly enough, was a group of Code Pink (a liberal, anti-war group) protesters who were staging a similar sit-in... in Joe Lieberman's office.

One a side note, Bachman is getting high praise from tea party activists for organizing the event, and many want Bachman as the face of the movement, a move that Democrats think is a great idea.

Commerical Teardown: There's a lawsuit for that

2009-11-05T17:32:00.002-05:00

AT&T has their fair share of stupid commercials, but their not the only ones, and this time Verizon has them beat. So much so that AT&T has filed a lawsuit against them. No, not because AT&T has stupid commercials trademarked, but because they say the recent "There's a map for that" ad by Verizon are misleading about AT&T coverage compared to Verizon's. In case you haven't seen the ad, here is the first one they ran:

The ad plays off the popular iPhone "there's an app for that" commercials. AT&T is the exclusive service provider for iPhones.

Here's the problem:

While the map clearly states it's showing 3G coverage, there are some "fine print" details AT&T feels need to be mentioned as well:

- AT&T customers can still use their phones for voice and data just fine outside of the areas colored in blue on the map because AT&T has a large data network. The map of which takes the steam out of their comparison.

- Verizon does not have anything besides their 3G network, so the bare spots on their map are spots where your phone won't work at all.

Are these details really lawsuit worthy? AT&T thinks they are, but for customers I guess it depends on where you live. People in the Metro Detroit area aren't likely to be effected by it one way or the other, but strangely enough there are parts of Texas where AT&T offers 3G and Verizon doesn't have coverage at all. Details, details. Of course, Verizon was trying to make a dig at iPhones prior to the release of the Droid phone, and the ad would not have as much impact if it showed maps comparing total coverage areas.

Nevertheless the ad has already been changed with footnotes reflecting that voice and data are available outside of the blue areas on the AT&T map. Odds are the ads won't be around much longer anyway. The Droid phone comes out tomorrow and Verizon is already touting it as the iPhone killer, so I would expect to see these ads replaced by adds comparing the phones themselves in the near future.

For what it's worth, I've always felt marketing products as the killer of another wildly popular product is a bad idea. Verizon may want to compare maps now but they're certainly not going to be calling a lot of attention to their apps. While they claim the Droid will have about 10,000 apps available at launch, the iPhone currently runs 96,845 apps, a number that almost doubled in the last 4 months and is showing no signs of slowing. So, while the Droid is getting good reviews so far, Verizon has lot of ground to make up before they can start really touting the killer status of their new product line.

Spinning the results of the 2009 election

2009-11-05T16:28:00.001-05:00

It wasn't surprising to see how quickly both sides tried to spin the results of the 2009 elections in their favor. While conservatives were touting the gubernatorial results in Virginia and New Jersey, liberals were celebrating the two-seat pickup in the US. House, especially the NY-23 victory.

It's both funny and sad that both sides are so predictable in their spin but neither is likely to be an accurate interpretation of the results.

CONSERVATIVES

The SPIN: Republicans winning two new gubernatorial seats is a clear referendum on Obama, and this spells doom for the democrats in future elections. Even L. Brooks Patterson called it a backlash against Obama, saying “That’s clearly what it was...It speaks volumes."

The REALITY: It really doesn't mean that at all. Gubernatorial races don't give much, if any indication of how a state will vote in national elections. Patterson should know this since even our own state's local history shows it to be true. Despite electing Republican John Engler three times as Governor, Michigan went Blue in every following Presidential election. California has a Republican governor and is considered a democratic stronghold in presidential elections. Likewise, Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts, another "safe" blue state.

Virginia is different though, and to an extent I have to agree that some votes there were likely votes against Obama. However, I strongly disagree that it's statistically significant or will play a role in national races in 2010 or 2012. Virginia's gubernatorial races are odd for several reasons, primarily:

1) They are held in an "off-off" year where no national races are held in the state.
2) Incumbents are legally prohibited from seeking re-election (though they are permitted to run again in the future)

So having to choose between two new candidates in off years likely leads to much lower voter turnout than you would get in other states.The elections always follow the presidential election by a year, and who is more likely to turnout to vote, the party who won or the party who lost the last election? With low voter turnout, the shift in attitude from the previous election can have a major impact, and in Virginia, history seems to show it does have such an impact. Someone on Fark.com was nice enough to compile this list, so I copied it here for you to see.

1976: Carter (D) elected President
1977: Dalton (R) elected Governor of Virginia

1980: Reagan (R) elected President
1981: Robb (D) elected Governor of Virginia

1984: Reagan (R) re-elected President
1985: Baliles (D) elected Governor of Virginia

1988: Bush I (R) elected President
1989: Wilder (D) elected Governor of Virginia

1992: Clinton (D) elected President
1993: Allen (R) elected Governor of Virginia

1996: Clinton (D) re-elected President
1997: Gilmore (R) elected Governor of Virginia

2000: Bush II (R) elected President
2001: Warner (D) elected Governor of Virginia

2004: Bush II (R) re-elected President
2005: Kaine (D) elected Governor of Virginia

2008: Obama (D) elected President
2009: McDonnell (R) elected Governor of Virginia

History has been following a pretty simple pattern in Virginia for the last 8 election cycles... so while it may be fair to say Virginia gubernatorial races reflect animosity toward the sitting President, it would be equally fair to say they have been doing it for some time now and are not indicative of larger movements in the national political scene. Three of the six Presidents listed above won reelection despite the Virginia results, so to suggest this one election spells doom for the democrats is beyond stretching.

LIBERALS

The SPIN: Bill Owens (D) winning NY-23 over Doug Hoffman (C) destroyed the Tea Party movement.

The REALITY: The Tea Party movement isn't going away any time soon. A democrat winning over a third party candiate is hardly Earth-shatting. The only reason the congressional race in NY-23 got any attention at all was because it was a rather slow news cycle for an election and Sarah Palin decided to throw her celebrity behind Hoffman. While NY-23 was considered a Republican stronghold prior to the election, Democrats picking it up won't change the overall course Congress is heading down at this point, and Owens' victory is more a reflection on a growing divide within the Republican party than an overall rejection of the Tea Party movement.

Owens was not expected to win the district in the original showdown with Dede Scozzafava (R), who was classified by critics and supporters alike as fiscally conservative, but socially liberal. Sarah Palin decided to endorse 3rd party candidate Hoffman because he was more conservative, and other big name Republicans followed. The problem was Hoffman was not a very charismatic candidate, especially when under the tight gaze of the national media, he did not live in the district and was quickly criticized for showing a lack of understanding of the issues facing the district. Scozzafava withdrew from the race and, likely feeling rejected by her own party, threw her support behind her former opponent.

In short, Owens won because the Republican stronghold was divided between conservatives and moderates, not because of backlash against the Tea Party movement. It was a poorly planned move by Republicans that backfired.

Of course, there are still some who touted Hoffman's loss as a "win" for the movement because it was a close race. But it shouldn't have even been close. Scozzafava was heavily favored to win and polls taken prior to Palin's endorsement of Hoffman showed her with a significant lead over Owens. Republicans had the district locked up, which is probably why some saw it as an opportunity to shift the party in an even more conservative direction. Even after withdrawing, Scozzafava still received 5.5% of the vote, while Owens bested Hoffman by only 3.5%.

This was not an uprising of Democrats trying to send a message to Tea Party activists, this was a house divided that, clearly, cannot stand. However, it does not mean the end of the Tea Party movement. If anything, it means Republicans will have to work to bridge the gaps between the conservative base and the party's moderates leading into the 2010 elections.

A lot has changed in the last 12 months and it's likely a lot more will change in the upcoming year that will influence the next election. Trying to predict the results based on what happened in four local races this year is a waste of time.

Game Over for the Birther movement

2009-10-30T17:17:00.005-04:00

Following the fringe group known as the Birthers has been very amusing to me, but it looks like their time in the spotlight is coming to a quick end.

Yesterday, the last case filed by Orly Taitz, Captain Pamela Barnett v. Barack Hussein Obama was dismissed in federal court. This is the case mentioned in a previous entry that Taitz has been smugly referring to in recent interviews because 3 weeks ago the judge declined to make an initial ruling on the matter and set a potential trial date for January 2010. Though Judge Carter was just following legal protocol, Taitz and her supports took this as a success and began bragging that they have forced President Obama to stand trial. As I previously indicated, the delay in a ruling did not in any way imply the judge supported their efforts and if anything, was the equivalent of not saying "get lost" immediately.

Well, now he's told them to get lost. The full opinion can be read here, but in short: Carter said the filings by Taitz on behalf her clients (who included former Presidential candidate Alan Keyes) showed a fundamental misunderstanding of the US Constitution and, in the case of Taitz, legal proceedings. Even with extended deadlines and the legal equivalent of coddling, Taitz frequently failed to properly follow court procedures or even file the proper paperwork. The patience on the part of the judge should dismiss any argument that Taitz was treated unfairly, but she's almost certainly make the case anyway should anyone care to interview her at this point.

One line in the opinion that is certainly the most damning for Taitz and her followers:

"Additionally, the Court has received several sworn affidavits that Taitz asked potential witnesses that she planned to call before this Court to perjure themselves."

That's the game ender. And to be sure, this is a game to them. Up to this point, Taitz has used a legal system she clearly does not understand to push a political agenda based in conspiracy theories and to get attention for herself. She has already faced financial sanctions and has complaints lodged against her to the California Bar Association. Now, sworn affidavits that Taitz has no problem breaking the law and is encouraging others to help her do so. She already presented a bogus Kenyan birth certificate in a past court case, which was quickly and mercilessly debunked. Taitz claimed she was duped by people trying to hurt her credibility but I think most people feel she's done quite a good enough job of that on her own.

She's refused to pay her financial sanctions, all her cases have been dismissed, and she may face charges of some kind. Cetainly she will be disbarred in the near future.

Like it or not, Home Depot had every right to fire employee for God button

2009-10-28T15:30:00.003-04:00

The story about Trevor Keezer, a 20-year-old man from West Palm Beach, Florida caused quite a bit of commotion yesterday after Keezer sued his former employer Home Depot. Keezer was fired on Oct. 23 for wearing a pin that said "One nation, under God, individsible."

Read the full article for more information.

Keezer said he feels like he is being punished for loving his country, which may be how he actually feels, but it seems he knows that's not really the case. The fact that they offered him a different "patriotic" pin and he refused is pretty much going to ruin any chance he has in court. By refusing any pin that did not mention God, he made it clear it's not an issue of patriotism, it's an issue of religious freedom to him. Unfortunately for Keezer, private companies don't have to employ anyone that refuses to follow the rules, even if they are doing so to express religious beliefs. It's not like they suddenly fired him out of the blue either. They brought up the issue, offered a comprimise and he refused.

The lawyer for Home Depot made it pretty clear when he said "we have a blanket policy, which is long-standing and well-communicated to our associates, that only company-provided pins and badges can be worn on our aprons.” That's pretty much the end of the story as far as the law is concerned. Sure, that won't satisfy a lot of people, but hurt feelings don't change the law. A commenter on thefoxnation.com succinctly stated it: "Having to adhere to your employer's policy on dress code is not the same as being punished for your beliefs. There are plenty of other ways to share your faith."

In the past, when a large corporation is getting sued for something embarrassing, I'm used to seeing their high-priced attorneys say they can't comment on pending litigation. This time though, they had plenty to say, and it seems pretty clear why: they're not worried about losing this case.

Now, Keezer claims he wore the pin for over a year and nobody said anything to him. While the sudden change of heart is unusual and interesting to people on a personal level, it's not legally relevant. If he was violating the company dress code and they let it slide for a year, lucky for him, but it doesn't make the policy void should they choose to enforce it. Home Depot is a private company and they set the rules for working for them. I can't think of a company I've ever worked for that didn't have some kind of dress code policy. The only reason this made headlines is because this guy wouldn't follow the policy. Odds are any other retail store he wants to work at will have a similar one.

Comments on the story have readers debating the issue as though it's an issue of athiests vs. Christians, but it's not. This is a simple matter of company policy. Some people are suggesting boycotts or protests, and they have every right to do so. However, I'm skeptical if any real action will be taken and doubt it will have much, if any, impact. They are welcome to try and prove me wrong though. I'm sure there will be outrage from some Christians who feel this is someone being persecuted for his beliefs, but they will have a hard time arguing why a private company has to allow this.

It doesn't matter if the pin said "Under God," "Jesus Saves," "Shabbat Shalom," "Praise Allah," "Darwin was right" or "Satan is my homeboy" though I imagine those making this out to be an issue of religious freedom wouldn't have a problem with anyone wearing a pin that said any of those things... right?

Worst Halloween Costumes for 2009

2009-10-27T17:18:00.013-04:00

Well, it's been a while since I've posted a list like this but with Halloween only 5 days away there's no time like the present. As I said last year, fly-by-night costume shops pop up all over the place, and there are numerous quality websites making it easier than ever to find the perfect costume for a party or trick-or-treating.

Not all costumes are created equally however, and I'm not talking about the quality of material used. It would seem in an effort to fill more shelves, some costume makers will mass produce any idea suggested to them.

For the second year in a row, I have found a few of the worst mass-produced costume ideas out there. Yes, there are certainly worse, more offensive, tasteless, or downright poor quality costumes out there, but many I have come across are home-made or one-of-a-kind and not likely to be available at a Halloween USA.

There are certainly other costumes that could be on this list, but in keeping with a top five, I had to pick only one from each of the follow categories: adult male, adult female, youth male, youth female, infant.

Adult Male: Michael Jackson

Last year it was Heath Ledger's Joker, this year it's Michael Jackson. When a celebrity dies, apparently everyone thinks the best way to reflect on their life is to dress up like them for Halloween. Not surprisingly there have been a huge number of Michael Jackson costumes being made this year, with a vast majority of them being related to his Thriller costume. Really? You want to dress up like Jackson when he was dancing with the undead? This may have been a semi-creative costume idea to wear last year, but now it's about as unoriginal as you can get.

Adult Female: Kate Gosselin

Beside an ugly wig, your "costume" is basically an act... one that requires you to be an obnoxious attention seeker who nags all the men at the party all night. What better way to be the life of the party? There's not much else to say about this costume other than it's not even remotely fun or funny.

Youth Male: Balloon Boy

Yes, this is a real costume. You knew someone was going to rush to capitalize on this story before the hype fades. Microflight.com were the ones to do it, just as people have stopped caring. Besides not being funny, there's nothing in this costume that requires you to spend a lot of money:

A cardboard box... free.
A name tag... $3.00 for a pack of 40
A silver mylar balloon turned sideways... $1
If you want to be more accurate, you can take a strip of cardboard from your free cardboard box, tape it into a circle, spray paint it silver and tape that to the bottom of the balloon... $5 (for the paint)
Or... you can pay $19.99 for the same stuff (not assembled) from Microflight plus express shipping to get it here in time for Halloween.

You read that right... they are charging you $20 + shipping to ship you a deflated balloon and a cardboard box inside another cardboard box.

Youth Female: The TRAVELOCITY Gnome

There are a lot of bad costumes out there for kids, but this one is just downright confusing. In the end, this was the worst choice for a few reasons:

1) It's a corporate mascot for a travel plan company
2) The entire concept of the roaming gnome is not their idea but the costume is branded with Travelocity.
3) The costume is being marketed to girls for some reason

What girl doesn't dream of dressing up like a male gnome and promoting price guarantees? What's that? None of them do? Oh, then I guess you must work for Travelocity and got this costume as SWAG.

Infant: Air Freshener

Odds are your baby doesn't smell pine fresh and won't enjoy being carried around inside this monstrosity. Even the kid they used for the ad looks miserable. This costume screams: "My mommy went shopping this afternoon and this was all that was left." For goodness sake there are more creative costumes for dogs out there than this.

Would you pay for Hulu?

2009-10-23T15:34:00.000-04:00

Executives at News Corp. are hoping you will. It was announced yesterday that starting sometime in 2010 the ultra-popular video site Hulu.com will begin charging users a subscription fee, though the details were not made clear. Instant feedback shows most people are not happy about it, with 70% of people responding to a poll by Entertainment Weekly saying they will not pay for Hulu.

I'm sure execs knew making the jump from a free service to pay service would be difficult, but this mught just be impossible. Despite featuring ads in all their videos, Hulu has not been able to make a profit. However, a subscription fee isn't likely to fix that. While Hulu currently offers a great service, the FREE part was what made it great. In the internet age, they should by now if they won't offer their content for free, someone else will.

Despite the legal restrictions on posting copyrighted video on free video services, popular TV shows and movies are still easy to find on YouTube and other free video sites. If Hulu removes all their free content, I'm sure there are countless other sites anxious to take their place. While nowhere near the same level in popularity, TV.com is already building a following and will be the most likely site to try and step in to fill the void in a legit way. When Napster became a pay service, countless clones sprung up to take over. I have no doubt the same will happen with Hulu.

http://news-briefs.ew.com/2009/10/22/hulu-to-start-charging-in-2010/

A World War II vet speaks about the freedoms he fought for

2009-10-21T20:35:00.000-04:00

I'll let him speak for himself:

Snake Oil doesn't cure H1N1

2009-10-20T23:42:00.002-04:00

A friend sent me a YouTube video featuring alternative medicinal advice from Dr. Joseph Mercola regarding how to fight the H1N1 flu virus. I could explain everything he said, but it's best you hear it straight from the source:

This video concerns me because I'm certain a lot of people take it seriously. While I'm sure Dr. Mecola is serious, his advice is at best misguided and at worse, potentially detrimental to your health. Sure, there are a lot of everyday things people can do to help stay healthy during the flu season like washing your hands, but to suggest that flu vaccines are a scam and that all you need is vitamin D is very, very bad advice.

First off, saying that people get the flu but actually die of pneumonia is like saying people get HIV but actually die of AIDS. The flu virus attacks the lungs and causes pneumonia. How is this an argument against getting vaccinated? Would you tell a woman she shouldn't be vaccinated against HPV because people who get it actually die from cervical cancer, not the virus itself?

Naturally there are some strange theories from supporters of this type of alternative medicine, ranging from the insane (the government creates clouds to block the sun so our bodies won't produce Vitamin D naturally) to the common (vaccines cause autism.)

The vaccines/autism debate is too lengthy to get into now, but suffice to say there are mountains of evidence against any connection between the two. However, Dr. Mercola does bring it up in the video, building on misguided fears. It's easy to throw out numbers to back up your argument, but saying the EPA and CDC report vaccines are only safe for people 550 lbs or heavier is just plain wrong. A vaccine that contains about 50 micrograms of thimerosal (a mercury-based preservative used in vaccines) only contains about 25 micrograms of mercury. Meanwhile, studies suggest, on average, people ingest between 8.3 and 8.6 micrograms of mercury daily in their food. So a vaccine contains less mercury than you get through dietary sources over the span of 4 days (less if you are a big fish eater.) This information comes from a report by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, an agency of the US Department of Health, just like those CDC guys Mercola claims say this is toxic to anyone who isn't morbidly obese. Of course, Mercola suggests everyone do the research themselves, and so do I, which is why I provided the links.

Mercola also states that ethylene glycol (aka "antifreeze") is present in the H1N1 vaccines which is just not true. It is used in the manufacturing process, a big difference that experts like Mercola and Jenny McCarthy seem to gloss over. So please... do the research yourself, especially on the numbers.

I'm sure it's not a coincidence that Dr. Mecola sells vitamin D supplements and books about Vitamin D on his website (only $14.95 for a months supply). Of course, he doesn't just say Vitamin D can cure H1N1, he lists a whole variety of things it's needed for with the implication being you should be taking his supplements year round for the bargain price of $180 plus shipping. But why stop there when Dr. Mecola also sells his own TANNING BEDS (only $3,000 a piece) to boost your body's natural Vitamin D production?

Obviously I'm not suggesting that vitamins are a waste of time. Our bodies use vitamin D for a lot of things, but saying it will stop a flu pandemic is going too far. You shouldn't be taking my opinion any more seriously than Dr. Mecola's though. You should see a doctor. My concern with seeing a video like this go viral is that if someone shows signs of the flu, this might cause them to head for a tanning salon over a doctor's office.

Not the smartest way to protest

2009-10-15T14:01:00.003-04:00

As I mentioned yesterday, conservative websites immediately went on the attack against Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine for her yes vote to move one version of the health care reform bill out of committee. Some of the attacks are pretty vicious, but this one is just plain silly:

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/10/13/pour-rock-salt-on-snowe/

Here is the full post:

Olympia Snowe has sold out the country. Having been banished to our world after Aslan chased her out of Narnia, Snowe is intent on corrupting this place too.

So we should melt her.

What melts snow? Rock salt.

I’m going to ship this 5 pound bag of rock salt to her office in Maine. It’s only $3.00. You should join me.

It is a visible demonstration of our contempt for her. First she votes for the stimulus. Now this.

It’s time to melt Snowe. ORDER YOUR BAG HERE.

The mailing address is:

3 Canal Plaza
Suite 601
Portland, ME 04101
Main: (207) 874-0883

This is perhaps the most poorly thought-out symbolic attack plan I have seen for two extremely obvious reasons:

- Rock salt is not used to melt snow, it's used to melt ice. You use shovels to remove snow. If you're trying to be clever in your protest you need to at least get the symbolism correct.

- Maine, like Michigan, will likely use a lot of rock salt this winter. So go ahead, buy and send a ton of rock salt to her. I'm sure she'll be happy to give away the free bags to her constituents or use the dozen or so bags she'll probably get to keep the sidewalks around her office clear.

Hopefully they will decide to protest me next. I could use the rock salt.

Do Republicans really want a "Maverick?"

2009-10-14T15:39:00.002-04:00

It seemed liked a good selling point during the last election. Bush's approval numbers were so low the only chance McCain/Palin had was to distance themselves from what they perceived as the standard Republican way. Of course, neither McCain nor Palin were doing anything that actually distanced themselves from Bush in any radical way. Even the phrase "Going Rouge" which Palin is now using as the title of her upcoming book, was not really describing any political differences between Palin and her party, but rather her inability/refusal to work within the confines McCain's campaign managers wanted her to. The strategy obviously didn't pay off for either of them, unless of course Palin's plan all along was to ride her newfound popularity out of politics and into her current job of punditry.

Sure, the idea of someone not walking lockstep with their party line is a nice idea and both parties love to tout they're the ones who do it. However, reaction to the yesterday's senate finance committee vote suggests Republicans are not really looking for someone like that. Meet Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine. If you haven't heard about her, you will very soon. Snowe has been gaining media attention for a few months now, but as of yesterday she is in the center of the spotlight because she was the only Republican to vote in favor of the health care bill in committee yesterday. This vote doesn't put the health care bill into effect, it just gets it out of committee, which Snowe said was the major reason she voted for it. Snowe said after the vote that she does not like many things in the current form of the bill but believes the people want action. In essence, she said her "yes" vote was intended to move the bill into the next stage of the process so more things can be worked out. Hardly a huge vote of confidence for Obama, but nevertheless, the backlash came quickly against Snowe from a party claiming it doesn't walk in lockstep. She's a RINO (Republican in Name Only), she's a traitor, she needs to be removed from office immediately. These are some of the more kindly-worded attacks aimed at Snowe to appear on conservative websites in the last 24 hours.

That being said, Snowe's vote should not have come as that big of a surprise to people. The American Conservative Union gives Snowe a lifetime rating of 49.12 for her voting history and The Washington Post rates her at 58 for the current congress. Those numbers indicate the percentage of times Snowe has voted the same as her Republican colleages. In comparison, John McCain has a lifetime rating of 81.43 from the ACU and some people still weren't happy with the times he crossed the isle on issues.

Clearly one is more "mavericky" than the other, and since Snowe has held her Senate seat for 14 years it's strange that suddenly now her moderate stance is such a shocking problem for some. Despite the immediate and angry calls to push her out of office, such an outcome is unlikely. Snowe has kept her seat in a state that has leaned heavily in favor of Democrats for the last 20 years likey because she is a moderate and does not vote straight along party lines.

Let's be honest, this one vote does not make Snowe a radical champion of health care reform to democrats nor a two-faced traitor to her own party. She's a moderate Republican who would rather work within the system on a solution than stubbornly argue endlessly about ideology. If a maverick is someone who doesn't walk the party line then Snowe fits the definition much better than McCain or Palin, but it seems that's not what people want... at least not in the big picture. Now before anyone says I'm only harping on Republicans, the way Joe Lieberman was treated by Democrats during the 2008 election cycle shows they're not really looking for someone to step outside the lines either. However, they weren't the ones touting such a trait as their biggest strength while simultaneously attacking those who actually did it.

Birther Queen one step closer to a straight jacket

2009-10-13T13:30:00.009-04:00

The "Birther" movement seems to have lost some steam in the last month or so. My initial thought on the sudden surge in the movement was a lot of people unhappy with Obama's election saw it as an attempt to undo the 2008 election results, regardless if they bought into the conspiracy or not. As we quickly approach the one year mark, however, it seems attention has shifted to getting "payback" in the 2010 election instead.

One person, however, remains vigilant in her quest to unseat Obama despite a few setbacks from reality. Orly Taitz, lawyer/dentist/real estate agent, was fined $20,000 this morning for misconduct by Judge Clay Land of the U.S. District Court in the Middle District Of Georgia. Land already dismissed Taitz's frivolous attempts to use the court system to further her political agenda, and Taitz responded the way any rational person would: she accused the judge of treason and incorporated him into her ever-growing conspiracy.

Taitz's claims have been dismissed at nearly every turn (see below), several clients have cut legal ties with her, and her refusal to back down is causing the courts to further the punishment. Taitz has already said she will not pay the fine, meaning the courts will likely put a lien on her property. Another attorney has filed a complaint with the California Bar Association saying Taitz behavior and her comments toward Clay are reason for sanctions and possible disbarment.

It's unlikely Taitz would be disbarred at this point, but if she continues down the path she has been on for nearly a year now, the courts may find themselves with no other option.

But Taitz is pushing on, encouraged by what she considers "a major victory" when U.S. District Court Judge David Carter decided to delay his ruling on whether or not to dismiss a case filed by Taitz on behalf of former Southern Baptist Convention second vice president Wiley Drake. Drake sought the vice presidential seat with Alan Keyes for the American Independent Party presidential nomination in the 2008 election. After a 3-hour hearing on October 5 Carter stated he wanted more time to review arguments on both sides. So for Taitz, not being told to get lost immediately is a victory. And she wonders why some of her clients (including Drake) no longer want to be represented by her.

The constant setbacks for Taitz are likely leading to the slowdown in the "birther"
movement. While most "birthers" are probably content to slap bumper stickers on their car and wallow in their own anger, Taitz is pushing as hard as possible to accomplish her goals, and being slapped down for it. Seeing the queen bee getting punished is likely discouraging the rest of the hive from acting up.

Soon this whole discredited "movement" will likely be a faint memory, but what will happen to Taitz? If she is stripped of her legal powers, will she fade into obscurity or will she continue screaming her messages until they have to throw on a straight jacket and take her away? Or worse yet... will she make an infomercial?

Obama's Nobel Prize seems, at best, premature

2009-10-09T14:53:00.004-04:00

Well, I certainly wasn't expecting this. President Obama was awarded a Noble Peace Prize in a move that was "designed to encourage his initiatives to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the Muslim world and stress diplomacy and cooperation rather than unilateralism."

While I support these initiatives, I've always thought prizes were awarded for accomplishments, not to encourage these accomplishments. If this trend catches on, will we be giving the Detroit Lions a Super Bowl trophy to encourage them to be a better team?

Back when Arizona State refused to give Obama an honorary degree because he hasn't accomplished anything yet, I felt they were being overdramatic about the whole thing. It is, after all, Arizona State, and an honorary degree at that. Did they think he was going to abuse it to beef up his resume?

This time, however, it seems like a fair criticism. After all, Obama has only pledged to do these things. While he has shown to be following up on those pledges, there is a loooooooooooooooooooooooong way to go towards nuclear arms reductions and easing tensions with the Muslim world before he can say "mission accomplished." When there is tanginable evidence that he is following up on these initiatives, I would fully support such an award. Now it just seems like a premature gesture given for good intentions.

CNN is now fact-checking satire?

2009-10-09T14:31:00.000-04:00

It must be hard to fill 24 hours of programming, but CNN is now dedicating their time to fact-checking.... Saturday Night Live?

Normally, I get the impression that conservatives are the ones that can't take a joke, but in this case, CNN has really made liberals seem like thin-skinned whiners. Come on guys, I know SNL isn't funny most of the time, but you have to realize they are still in the business of satire. You didn't see fact-checks on Tina Fey's Palin impressions or any of Will Ferrell's Bush spoofs, so why start now? If CNN was trying to dissuade anyone of the persistent liberal media rumors... this didn't help.

There just has to be something more important they can be doing with their time...

...okay, maybe not.

Letterman knows how to handle a scandal

2009-10-02T13:34:00.004-04:00

Twice now in just a few months, David Letterman has been involved with some sort of scandal. The first time was for a very poorly worded joke about Sarah Palin's family. Dave apologized and moved on despite continued criticism from some, which is probably the only thing he should have done. Palin tried to make it a bigger deal than it was, but that's not surprising considering it was her family that was insulted. Nevertheless, it was a joke, regardless of who found it funny, and a single apology was all that was needed.

That's not the case this time. In case you missed it, here is what happened in Dave's own words:

Needless to say Dave is not going to come out clean from this one. Even though he did not outright state it, it seemed implied and I think most people will assume Letterman cheated on his wife. He will have egg on his face for a while for sure, but in the big picture Letterman played the whole situation perfectly. Today's headlines are about how someone was trying to extort him, not his affairs. Even Dave's mea culpa ended up being more of a story about how the man who wanted 2 million from him was arrested and now faces charges. Letterman will undoubtedly get ratings boost from this, and he not only helped catch the man allegedly trying to extort him, but, by publicly admitting his mistakes, he obliterated any chance anyone else had of making money off it. For those not wanting to watch the video, the man was allegedly threatening to write a book and screenplay about the affairs unless Letterman gave him $2 million. Either way, it appears he was looking to make a buck off of Letterman's secrets. Now they're not secrets anymore, and the only thing the guy is likely to get for his alleged efforts is a few years in jail.

“Neither party has an exclusive on wack jobs.”

2009-09-11T21:57:00.004-04:00

That's quite a bold statement. It came from Republican media consultant Mark McKinnon, who, like several others, is concerned about the perception of his party.

The whole article can be read here, but the real question I have is... how does either party fix this?

Who's the real winner the "You Lie" debate? Rob Miller

2009-09-11T15:44:00.004-04:00

Two days ago, very few people probably even knew who Rob Miller was, but now, thanks to Joe Wilson, Miller has raised $800,000 in less than 48 hours by doing little besides twittering.

Miller, who is running against Congressman Wilson in 2010, suddenly has a formidable amount of financial backing. After word of the surge of donations made the news, Sean Hannity encouraged supporters of Wilson to donate to him as well. Today CNN is reporting that Wilson has also raised about $200,000, which when combined with the $200,000 he already had on hand, he's still only about half-way to what Miller raised in less than 2 days.

But even if there was no money to speak of, the attention the two men have gotten has almost completely benefited Miller. Wilson is, for the most part, in a no-win situation until the heat dies down. Come November 2010, this will likely be old news, but for now, Wilson has yelled out, which made him look uncivil and disrespectful, he apologized, which made him look spineless to his supporters, then went on to talk to Hannity seeming unapologetic, which made him look two-faced and even more spineless (if he only apologized because the higher-ups told him to). The best thing he can do now is keep his head down unil the smoke clears. Today's media thrives on knee-jerk reactions, and Miller is benefiting from those reactions. But the election is a long way off. Instead of feeding into the frenzy, he needs to go back to doing his daily job as Congressman and let the smoke clear.

Health care bill not really bipartisan

2009-09-10T19:32:00.000-04:00

While President Obama did acknowledge incorporating some ideas suggested by John McCain into his health care plan, the idea that it is a bipartisan effort is kind of a joke. The plan is almost entirely the work of Democrats, and as POlitifact points out, ideas incorporated from Republican plans are "mostly technical."

From Politifact:

"In his address on health care to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 9, 2009, President Barack Obama suggested the health care bills in Congress are a bipartisan collaboration.

"It’s a plan that incorporates ideas from many of the people in this room tonight — Democrats and Republicans," Obama said.

Earlier in the day, in a conference call with the media, Obama's deputy communications director, Dan Pfeiffer, argued that while the health bills in the House and Senate have not gotten Republican votes, the process was bipartisan because dozens of Republican amendments were adopted.

And that's technically true. But it's a stretch to characterize it as bipartisan.

The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions adopted 159 amendments offered by Republicans, but only two of them were significant or controversial enough to merit roll call votes. One of those two affected the manufacture of biologics medication and another required members of Congress and congressional staff to enroll in the government-run option.

Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, said 132 of the 159 were for "technical amendments" and that it was a misnomer to call them proof of bipartisanship.

None of the Republicans' priorities have gotten any traction, he said: Tort reform, equalizing the tax code, reducing the proposed cuts to Medicare spending, and scrapping the proposed "public option."

In fact, he said, only one big-picture Republican issue seems to have gotten the attention of the Democratic majority: creating incentives for wellness, such as cutting insurance costs for people who exercise or don't smoke.

Over in the House, several versions of health care bills have passed various committees. Here's how Republican amendments fared there:

In the Energy and Commerce Committee, 16 Republican amendments were adopted. With the exception of one that would create a pathway for nonpioneer drug companies to manufacture "follow-on" biologics, said Lisa Miller, a spokeswoman for Republicans on the committee, none of the Republican amendments could be considered major, and none change the core of the legislation.

"The process in our committee was bipartisan only in that we were given the opportunity to mark up the bill," said Miller. "In large measure, the bipartisanship that existed during the E&C markup was that of luck and circumstance, not intent among Democrats."

In the Education and Labor Committee, just six of the 17 amendments offered by Republicans were adopted. Several "probably are best described as technical," said Alexa Marrero, a spokesman for Republicans on the committee. And one, which sought to have members of Congress be enrolled in any government-run plan that would be created, was defeated by Democrats in other committees.

One, from Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., would allow employers who would have to cut jobs to meet health coverage costs the opportunity to seek a waiver from the bill’s requirements. It was adopted by voice vote.

In the House Ways and Means committee markup, all 38 of the Republican-sponsored amendments were rejected along a party-line vote.

To see a more detailed accounting of some of the Republican amendments that have been considered, click on some of the links in our list of sources. But suffice to say, we didn't come across many that passed that seem significant.

Michael Steel, spokesman for House Republican Leader John Boehner, said that while it's true that some Republican or bipartisan amendments were accepted, the legislation itself has received zero Republican votes.

"No amendments have changed the core of the legislation" or altered the public option, Steel said.

Back when the House Education and Labor Committee considered its version of the bill in mid July, several Republican legislators complained that there was little real effort to engage a bipartisan process, and they called on Democrats to scrap the plan and start over.

According to an article in Congressional Quarterly , the panel’s chairman, George Miller, D-Calif., said that Republicans and Democrats simply have a "serious difference in opinion on how to approach health care in this country."

We also note that after Obama's appeal to the joint session of Congress, the man designated to offer Republican rebuttal, U.S. Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La., again called on Obama and Congress to "start over on a common-sense, bipartisan plan focused on lowering the cost of health care while improving quality."

When Obama said the health plan incorporated ideas from Democrats and Republicans, we think he grossly overstated the bipartisanship of the process to date. Both sides claim the other party is to blame for that, an issue that we will not wade into here. However, we note that none of the plans that have graduated from congressional committees have received a single Republican vote. Yes, Congress adopted dozens of the amendments proposed by Republicans, but we couldn't find any that dramatically altered the plan. Still, to the extent there were at least some, we give Obama's statement a Barely True."

So let's face it, Obama has not bridged the gap between parties on healthcare reform and likely won't. I noticed an interesting tidbit in the polling about his health care reform plans. Approval ratings were steadily dropping prior to the speech, but shot up drastically following. Note this the approval rating for how the health care issue is being handled, not the plan itself. If nothing else, the speech reaffirmed supporters beliefs that Obama is not compromising much, if any, of his plan.

Politifact says Joe Wilson lied, not Obama.

2009-09-10T00:05:00.008-04:00

Congressman Joe Wilson has already apologized for yelling "You Lie" during President Obama's speech tonight, but it's probably not going to help him much at this point.

The blog-o-sphere lit up almost immediately following the incident. Almost the moment it was confirmed Wilson was the heckler, his website crashed, his office phone lines were busy, and within hours his 2010 Democratic opponent Rob Miller was close to raising $50,000 from internet donations. (Updated 9/10 4:30 p.m Rob Miller has now raised approximately $425,000 in online donations since the outburst)

To make matters worse, fact-checkers pounced all over things, with Wilson pretty much getting chewed up and spit out.

From Politifact.com:

"Joe Wilson of South Carolina said Obama lied, but he didn't

We suspect it's rare that the president gets heckled during a speech to a joint session of Congress, but Rep. Joe Wilson didn't hold back.

"You lie!" shouted the South Carolina Republican. This was in response to President Barack Obama's statements on illegal immigrants.

"There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants," Obama said. "This, too, is false – the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally."

So who's right here? Wilson or Obama?

Incidentally, Wilson apologized for the outbust after the speech, but said he still disagreed with Obama's statement.

We've been monitoring claims about health care reform and illegal immigrants for some time now. Most notably, a chain e-mail claimed that page 50 of the House bill gave free health care to illegal immigrants. That page didn't say that. Rather, it included a generic nondiscrimination clause that said insurers may not discriminate with regard to "personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services." So we rated the chain e-mail's claim Pants on Fire.

We read all 1,000-plus pages of the health care bill and were struck by the fact that it is largely silent on health care for illegal immigrants. Keep in mind that experts estimated there were 6.8 million uninsured illegal immigrants in the United States in 2007, out of a total of 11.9 million illegal immigrants. Right now, most states have laws on the books that require hospitals to treat severely ill people who arrive at the hospital, regardless of immigration status, and we didn't see anything that would change those laws, either.

Most illegal immigrants are also now excluded from Medicaid, the government-run health care for the poor. We didn't see anything that would change that.

One place where the bill does mention immigration status is for "affordability credits." These are tax credits for people of modest means need to buy health insurance. The credits would help them buy insurance on a national health insurance exchange. The bill specifically says that people in the United States illegally are not eligible for tax credits, on page 132, section 242.

Still, given all that, we have heard from people who said that other aspects of reform could benefit illegal immigrants.

One of the most detailed responses was from the anti-immigration group Federation for American Immigration Reform, called FAIR. You can read their statement on the matter on their Web site.

Primarily, they argue that illegal immigrants would be permitted to purchase insurance on the national health insurance exchange because the bill does not include a mechanism for verifying citizenship. So illegal immigrants would have the chance to purchase insurance in the public option, a government-run health care plan that would offer basic coverage at a low price.

FAIR also argues for more robust verification measures for the affordability credit and making sure that illegal immigrant parents won't be able to receive coverage if their citizen children are eligible.

FAIR has a point that illegal immigrants would likely be able to buy insurance on the national health insurance exchange. We don't see anything in the bills that would hinder that. A Congressional Research Service report issued Aug. 25, 2009, confirmed our observation. The House bill "does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens participating in the Exchange—whether the noncitizens are legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently," the report said.

But it's worth pointing out that illegal immigrants participating in the exchange would be paying for their insurance like everyone else. That's similar to the current system -- we're not aware of any particular restrictions that stop illegal immigrants from buying private insurance now. Under health care reform, illegal immigrants would be able to buy private insurance or the public option.

When we look at all of this evidence, it seems that health reform leaves in place the status quo on illegal immigration, and certainly does not provide any new benefits particularly for illegal immigrants. We hope to look at this issue more in the days ahead, because some hospitals are particularly concerned about recouping their costs for treating illegal immigrants, and we're curious to know more about that problem and how it might or might not be solved by reform.

The best argument that we find that health reform would help illegal immigrants is that some might be able to purchase the public option -- if it passes, and it might not -- on the new health insurance exchange. They would purchase that at full cost. Obama's said "the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally," which Wilson said was a "lie." Actually, Obama can make a pretty thorough case that reform doesn't apply to those here illegally. We don't find the public option argument enough to make the case that Obama "lied." We rate Wilson's statement False."

Obama's speech to students: Much Ado about Nothing

2009-09-08T19:27:00.005-04:00

Funny how quiet the comment sections on stories covering President Obama's speech to school children have been. That is, at least, in comparison to how they were late last week. Conservatives were in an uproar, suggesting the speech was going to be indoctrinating children into becoming hardcore socialist. Even L. Brooks Patterson suggested the speech would"brainwash these children at that early age to believe Obama is the messiah."

Well, now that it's over, it turns out it was all for nothing as the speech was not the propaganda film they claimed it would be. Surely all these people will step up and admit when they were wrong and making a big deal out of nothing. Right?

Anyone?

Of course there is one question asked by critics that still lingers... why not release the content of the speech until the day before? I can't say for sure, but I have some ideas:

a) He knew the speech was harmless and has better things to do

b) The President doesn't have to satisfy every critic's demand

c) With the outcry from critics over Obama's proposed health care reform giving him a PR headache, it couldn't hurt to show his critics getting melodramtic and worked up about something, only to have all their outlandish claims be proven wrong.

I'm not saying any of these are the reason why, but c) would certainly hurt his critics' credibility in the world of political theatre at a time where he needs it.

Objections to Obama's school video are beyond absurd

2009-09-04T12:51:00.003-04:00

Normally, I try to see both side of an issue even if I disagree with one side completely. This time however, there's nothing to be said for those pulling their kids out of school to prevent them from watching a 15-minute video from President Obama about the importance of staying in school.

The irony of it all is almost too much to handle.

Even L. Brooks Patterson said he thinks the purpose of the speech is to "brainwash these children at that early age to believe Obama is the messiah"

Please Patterson, spare us the melodramatic hyperbole and tell us specifically what is wrong with the leader of the country telling children it's important to stay in school?

What's next? If Obama makes a "don't do drugs" video are parents going to make their kids smoke pot in protest?

This is beyond absurd. Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush both made similar addresses during their tenures in office. Liberals went equally off the deep end back then about Bush's speech and made an absurd amount of noise about something that most people probably don't even remember. Heck, I was in grade school when it happened and I don't remember a word of what was said. The point is, it's stupid regardless of which side does it. Liberals were wrong then, and conservatives are wrong now.

This knee-jerk reaction to the speech has, ironically, shown those making the outcry to be blindly partisan and paranoid. What exactly are they afraid Obama is going to say? Are they worried he is going to end the video by reminding kids to go home and tell their parents to support his health care initiatives or vote Democrat? How can anyone think a "stay in school" video will turn into some sort of brainwashing propaganda piece? If you do, your tinfoil hat may be on too tight.

I've yet to read any legitimate criticism of this video being shown to students. The only consistent theme seems to be those objecting to it simply don't like Obama and therefore, nothing the man says can have any value. The worst part is, parents telling their children nothing Obama says can be good are telling their children how to think rather than letting them do so for themselves. Who's really brainwashing?

Notes from outside Gary Peters' town hall meeting

2009-09-02T13:53:00.006-04:00

Tuesday night was the first time I had ever gone to a town hall meeting, though I ended up spending the entire time outside in the crowd of people who could not get in.

A few quick thoughts and stories I thought were worth sharing:

- MOST (not all) protesters were much more civil than you see on the news. (Note that I am referring to the protests outside the hall only.) Even if the person next to them disagreed with them, most people stood peacefully with their signs and I saw several people debating calmly.

- There were a few people getting into shouting matches, but for the most part the only large group arguments consisted of opposing chants of "Kill the bill" and "Pass the bill."

- It wasn't all kind and respectful though. I heard many comments attacking individuals sexuality, intelligence and motivations as well as rumors of firearms (nothing on display though).

- Using children to promote your political views is extremely distasteful. There weren't a lot of people doing it, but both sides were guilty of it.

- Even though the crowd seemed pretty evenly split, people protesting against the current health care bill seemed to exaggerate the total number of people present when talking about the crowd. There were easily several hundred people present, but not thousands.

- I was personally accused of being a member of ACORN twice because I was filming and asking people questions.

- People protesting against the current bill carried homemade signs, while a majority of the people who showed up in support of the current bill were holding up pre-printed signs. This lead to accusations that ACORN was paying people to protest in support of the bill. However, the signs appeared to be brought by members of SEIU and distributed throughout the crowd.

- At one point, about 10 protesters gathered around several men holding signs with depicting pictures of Obama with Hitler's mustache and the group began shouting "Kill the bill." In response, two women stood silently in front of them holding up their signs showing support. After a moment, another protester accused the women of being paid to do so. I spoke briefly with both the silent protesters and the woman who accused them of being paid to do so after. One of the silent women was over 90 and could not speak over the crowd noise, but the other, who identified herself as her daughter said they didn't need to yell to speak their mind. The woman who accused them of being paid to do so said they were being disruptive to the other protesters, which I found odd considering the larger group was standing on a stone podium and yelling.

- Both sides accused the other of being "AstroTurf," though frm my interviews it seemed like mostly people who lived within 20 minutes of West Bloomfield High School (including some students).

- The "Chappaquiddick Incident" has absolutely nothing to do with the current health care bill, and I found people referencing it in protest to be in extremely poor taste.

- Regarding Obama/Hitler posters... comparing any modern politician to Hitler is a bad argument. No matter what arguments you have to present, you won't be taken seriously by anyone who doesn't already agree with you. Google Godwin's Law if you want all the details, but in short.... "overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact."

One woman who was openly against the current bill, however, said she was sickened to see posters like that, saying it distracts people from having real conversations about the issues and makes it easier for those who disagree with them to dismiss their arguments. Another, also against the bill, said she found the posters funny. Several people were vocally upset about the posters, saying they had relatives who died in WWII. I'll address this more in another blog entry.

- A woman who described herself as an independent who was standing quietly off the to the side said she got the feeling that most people there had not read the actual bill and were not really sure what they were protesting for/against. I don't know if that is true or not, but I did overhear several people claiming they had read the entire bill but failed to quote or reference it in any way beyond that.

- Even though most people could tell I didn't agree with everything they were saying, they were cordial, discussed things in a calm, mature fashion and we shook hands at the end (with the exception of the first person who accused me of being an ACORN spy). I wish I could say the same for everyone else, but there were plenty of nasty things said by both sides.

- Probably the most interesting thing I observed: Regardless if someone was for or against the current bill, most seemed to think it was going to pass, though most opponents added "... but I hope it doesn't."

Maher elaborates on stupid Americans

2009-08-25T12:56:00.003-04:00

A few weeks ago comedian and political talk show host Bill Maher caused a bit of a stir when he was blunt and unapologetic when he said Americans are stupid. Some people were quite upset by his comments (I wasn't, for the record). When asked about it on The Tonight Show, Maher was once again unapologetic and instead decided to be more elaborate:

I would think as he details things even further the number of people offended would become more focused. Then again I wasn't offended by what he said in the first place so I can't be sure.

Make your own Kenyan Birth Certificate

2009-08-06T13:57:00.003-04:00

Have a friend or relative who supports the "birther" movement?

Want to have a little fun with them?

Imagine the look on their face when you show them a copy of THEIR birth certificate, definitively proving they were born in the Republic of Kenya.

http://kenyanbirthcertificategenerator.com/

Student sues her college, worst idea ever

2009-08-05T15:30:00.003-04:00

By now everyone has heard about Trina Thompson, the 27-year-old Bronx resident who is suing her alma mater Monroe College in New York because she has not been able to get a job in the 3 months since she graduated.

Thompson, who has not retained the services of a lawyer, apparently believe the college owes her $70,000 in reimbursed tuition and an additional $2000 for the stress she has had to endure in trying to find a job.

Not surprisingly, public reaction to the lawsuit has been almost entirely negative towards the unapologetic Thompson, who said she would encourage other unemployeed grdautes to sue, saying "It doesn't make any sense: They went to school for four years, and then they come out working at McDonald's and Payless. That's not what they planned."

What doesn't make any sense is how anyone can go through four years of higher education and not understand that their tuition is payment for that education and in no way a guarantee of employment. Thompson has said the school's placement department has not helped her as much as they should have and show preferential treatment prefer to students with higher GPAs (Thompson graduated with a 2.7 GPA). Imagine that.

Unfortunately for Thompson, her obviously frivolous lawsuit will most likely do the exact opposite of what she wants. In addition to having he case thrown out, Thompson will likely have a much harder time finding a job now that employers know she shows a lack of common sense, is quick to file frivolous lawsuits, and appears to have a massive sense of entitlement. Not the best way to stand out in the worst job market in decades.

"Birthers" are their own worst enemies

2009-08-04T12:15:00.004-04:00

There's a reason nobody takes the "Birther" movement seriously. Pressed for any real arguments, "Birthers" resort to blaming the media for being in the pocket of the POTUS (even Ann Coulter?) and making claims that show just how uniformed they are:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

This is the second time I've seen Taitz interviewed where she argues Obama could not be a US citizen because his father wasn't. The sad/scary thing about it is that neither time did someone correct her. And this woman is a lawyer.

Nevermind that every argument proposed by birthers has been debunked numerous times, they keep coming. And it seems their hope is that if they keep repeating the silly arguments loudly that it will somehow legitimize them.

Of course the question(s) that keeps looming is... "If he's a real citizen, why not... (insert request here)?"

The reason is simple: It won't work. For one thing, even the birthers can't agree on exactly what the truth they are trying to prove is. Second, birthers are not going to be convinced if they were shown video footage of his birth in a hospital in Hawaii time-stamped and authenticated by the CIA. No matter what proof they are shown, the birthers can always claim it is fake. They already do this with the birth certificate that was released before the election. Yet they have shown their own "birth certificate" that "proves" he was born both Muslim and in Kenya and many still cling to it as legit. These people are only going to believe what they want to believe. Responding to anything they demand only gives them the power they want but don't deserve.

The White House and many Republicans and conservative commentators are outright dismissive of the movement and rightfully so. These are not credible activists, these are bitter people who didn't get the result they wanted in the last election and are looking for any way to undermine the President.

In a report by CBS, Professor of Political Science at the Maxwell School at Syracuse University Michael Barkun, an expert in conspiracy theories, had this to say about why so many people get hooked into conspiracy theories like this:

"There are people out there who firmly believe that the truth is always hidden, regardless of whether it's about politics or science or any other subject," he said. "That whatever is presented as public knowledge is necessarily false. That the truth is always hidden from them, regardless of what the subject is."

He also said that, "in a strange way, conspiracy theories are comforting."

"They give people a feeling that we know the truth," Barkun said. "That we have secret knowledge, and that we know how the world really works. In a sense, we're part of a kind of elite of those who know and everybody else is misled or are trapped by illusions."

Americans are stupid...

2009-07-29T11:42:00.007-04:00

...at least, that's what Bill Maher had to say on CNN two days ago. An oh how the outrage poured in. Even before the interview was over, Wolf Blitzer was asking Maher is he wanted to further clarify such a blanket statement after telling him viewers were already sending in angry e-mails. It was clear Maher was not going to back down from his original statement, but "clarified" by saying (I'm paraphrasing) some Americans are very bright, but most are not.

See for yourself:

I think people's knee-jerk reactions to Maher's words are very telling. I wasn't offended by him, were you?

Maher is a comedian, and one who has made a career out of making brash statements about people and politics. This is par for the course for him, I don't see why people were shocked to hear this sort of comment from him.

Intolerance in a small Florida town

2009-07-26T23:53:00.003-04:00

For my final In the Mix blog, I'm going to be examining an outrageous example of guilt by association.

In Fort Myers Beach, Fla., former Town Manager Scott Janke was fired last week after city officials discovered his wife - Anabela Mota a.k.a. Jazella Moore - was an adult film star.

I think as little of porn stars as a typical American, but I think even less of these city officials.

Disapprove of a person's wife's choices all you want, but the city's decisions were not the ways to act on that disapproval.

Here are a couple reasons why not:

First, because city council fired Janke without cause, they will now have to pay him six months worth of severance pay and benefits. That will amount to about $50,000, a huge amount of money for a town of roughly 6,500 residents, especially during this economic downturn.

Second - and most importantly - I find cowardice disgusting, and all these officials are cowards. They are cowards for punishing a man for the actions of his wife. Though most will probably find her actions objectionable, they were completely legal (as far as I know) and okay with Janke.

If the officials could not have convinced Mota to end her adult entertainment career without attacking Janke, they should have been adults and moved on.

Despite the unfortunate turn of events for this couple, I take some consolation in the fact that these officials have been exposed for the intolerant idiots that they are.

Hamas making films in addition to war

2009-07-19T23:55:00.002-04:00

Hamas, Palestine's most prominent Islamic political organization/military force, has recently produced its first feature film and I couldn't care less.
"Emad Akel" is an action movie about the titular commander of the Hamas military wing who was killed in 1993. He was Israel's #1 most wanted man after his suspected killings of 11 Israeli soldiers, an Israeli civilian and four Palestinian informers. An incendiary subject, to be sure.

So why don't I - a patriotic American - feel threatened by this development?

Mainly because I've seen Hamas-produced material before and it's all been crap.
There are numerous clips from Hamas-produced TV shows on YouTube. The most vivid example of one that comes to mind features a Palestinian Mickey Mouse lookalike being murdered by a greedy Israeli.
Sounds terribly offensive, and it would have been if I could talk it seriously, but the production values - from acting to screenplay to you-name-it - were so damn pathetic.
Hamas has already won the hearts and minds of many average Palestinians with its propaganda. If the quality of "Emad Akel" and other "Hamaswood" is on par with its past TV productions, I don't think we'll have to worry about the organization getting any new recognition from Palestinian intelligentsia or foreign film industries.

Glenn Beck and Civil Political Discussion

2009-07-16T13:28:00.007-04:00

It's disturbing that this passes for political discussion in our current political climate. Things get interesting about 2:30 minutes in.

Why does anybody take this guy seriously?

Well, at least we can have some fun with it.
Beck's flip-out is too perfect to not be used as a ringtone.

I reckon this should be interesting, I reckon

2009-07-12T23:51:00.001-04:00

Until recently, it seemed that science fiction was the only genre in which legendary actor John Wayne had not tried his gun-hand. However, a couple news organizations have recently reported that his unseen final sci-fi western movie - "Thunder Riders of the Golden West" - will hit the DVD shelves soon.

"Thunder Riders," about truck drivers on a treasure hunt in an atomic bomb test site, features footage of Wayne shot before his final performance in 1976's "The Shootist."

I'm not against raising artists from the dead. Laurence Olivier's posthumous performance in "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" helped transport me to the time period in which that movie took place. The remixing of The Notorious B.I.G.'s music led to an exhilarating collaboration with Eminem in the song "Dead Wrong" several years after the rapper's death.

"Thunder Riders" could fulfill my desire to see one of cinema's most charismatic personalities dispensing frontier justice a la sci-fi. Maybe we'll get to see The Duke repel cattle rustlers with a phaser blaster or hold off wild Comanches attacking a flying saucer-wagon train.

Probably not, though.

But "Thunder Riders" should prove to be an interesting look into a part of Wayne's repertoire that so far only a handful of people have seen.

Commercial Teardown: Coca-Cola

2009-07-09T12:38:00.005-04:00

I hate bad commercials. I'm sure a lot of people do. With all the different ways we're bombarded with advertising nowadays, it's easy to ignore a lot of it as it gets blurred together in background noise. But occasionally one will stand out to me, not because it makes me want to buy whatever product it's selling, but because for one reason or another its absurdity didn't stop it from being published. When I hear/see one of these ads, I can't help but think "How can something like this get made without a single person saying 'hey this seems like a bad idea' in a focus group or meeting?"

The latest one I've heard is a radio ad for Coca-Cola. The ad features a man typing a letter which he is reading aloud as he goes. Right from the first line, the commercial made me groan. "Dear inventor of Coca-Cola... are you like a taste guru or something?"

He goes on to list reasons he loves Coke and stuff it goes well with... all the while flattering the nameless inventor with questions about how brilliant he is.

So we're supposed to believe this guy is actually planning to send this letter or e-mail to someone because he genuinely wants to know if the inventor of coca-cola is some kind of taste guru, but he isn't smart enough to use the computer he is typing on to do a quick Google search. You'd think if someone is taking the time to write fan mail fawning over someone, they'd bother to learn their name.

Along the way he probably would have learned that John Pemberton, the inventor of Coca-Cola, died 121 years ago, so he probably doesn't have an e-mail address. He didn't design Coca-Cola to go well with burgers and ice cream either, he made an alcoholic drink for medicinal purposes the previous year (1886) and then prohibition forced him to change the formula. Rather than market Coca-Cola as something that goes great with all kinds of food, the drink was sold as a cure for morphine addiction, something Pemberton himself was supposedly struggling with.

The ad seems harmless enough, and really it is, but it's annoying to see Coca-Cola create an ad where a nameless person puts a ridiculously flattering spin on Coke's origins while at the same time ignoring details like the inventor's name. Believe me I'm not going to lose sleep over these types of ads, but everyone has their pet peeves and I enjoy venting about mine.

Air New Zealand receives new paint job

2009-07-05T15:10:00.000-04:00

"Shock and awe" is a term often used while discussing military tactics, but it may now apply to new methods used by Air New Zealand.
The national carrier has created advertisements and safety videos for its airplanes featuring pilots and cabin crew dressed only in body paint. The actors' most cherished body parts are not shown thanks to carefully chosen camera angles.
Apparently this has been going on for a while, but much of the Western world - myself included - has only recently gotten wind of it.
There are a couple things about this that concern me.
First, although these may make good advertisements, the naked flight stewards may be too distracting for the passengers to pay attention to the safety videos, thereby making them pointless.
Secondly, what about the children? Yes, I know a little nudity can be found in an occasional PG-rated movie, but that's five seconds in a 90-minute film. All these videos are probably 30 seconds long, with about 75% of the footage being risqué. Sure, parents can always cover their children's eyes, but what about those who've never heard of these new videos and don't know what to expect. Young Lamar or Susie may learn about the facts of life a little earlier than their parents intended.
In conclusion, here's a terrible - yet fitting - pun I found on jokesareawesome.com:
"What happened when a ship carrying red paint collided with a ship carrying blue paint?
Both crews were marooned."

Fred Travalena dies! Who is he?

2009-06-29T17:51:00.001-04:00

I wouldn't want to be the C-list celebrity that dies the same day as someone famous.
But in the case of master impressionist and late night talk show comedian Fred Travalena, he got upstaged by the bearded, shouting pitchman for household cleaners.
Pitchman Billy Mays, 50, seems to have stole the spotlight from the 66-year-old comedian.
It's unfortunate that either man is no longer around.
But, it has to stink a little when you've been on television for four decades and worked as a headliner at Atlantic City and Las Vegas to be upstaged by the shouting OxiClean guy.
However, I admit I didn't know who Fred Travalena was until I looked him up on Google.
Then I remembered seeing him on David Letterman a couple times.
Guess if you're low on the celebrity totem pole, hope you die on a slow news day.

Academy Awards changes are of the wrong kind

2009-06-28T23:59:00.002-04:00

Too bad that when the Academy Awards finally get revamped, the changes that have been made are unnecessary.

A few days ago, the Academy Awards organizers made three major announcements about next year's show: there would be 10 (instead of five) Best Picture nominations, no pieces would be nominated for Best Song if they did not match certain criteria and the honorary Oscars would be announced outside the main broadcast.

These changes could possibly help the Oscars' TV ratings, decreasing time for the least popular segments while increasing focus on the more anticipated parts. Also, this could bring about an increase in ticket sales as movie studios will be marketing more movies during the pre-award season.

However, these organizers missed some huge opportunities to honor people in fields they have previously overlooked.

For instance, why not finally add an Academy Award for Best Stunts? These people risk their lives every day in the name of art - and sometimes pay the ultimate price. How about Best Special Effects - different from visual effects - for all the pyrotechnicians or honoring the minor actors with a Best Ensemble Cast award?

While the Academy Awards organizers try to increase their TV viewership, they've forgotten to try to increase their validity and significance. Let's just hope the right changes aren't too far along.

What about you, dear readers? Which Oscars do you think should be added - or subtracted - from the repertoire?

King of pop achieves infamy in death

2009-06-26T16:03:00.002-04:00

It's almost fitting that a celebrity who became tabloid fodder and embroiled in scandal dies far too young.
The last two decades of Michael Jackson's life were light years from his rise as the talented singer/performer.
Since the announcement of his death, people are continuing to argue whether he truly was a pedophile, with fans coming to his defense.
And I'm sure every media outlet will squeeze every word they can out of his life, including the accusations and the often bizarre moments he was involved in.
Regardless of the accusations, I can't believe there is anyone who will say the man wasn't troubled.
The celebrity that brought Jackson to such heights of fame and personal wealth had, in my opinion, as much to do with his crumbling mental state.
The man was barely in his 20s when "Thriller" was released. That album helped cement his status as pop culture icon.
It's hard to know how many people were leaching on to him, building his image and stroking his ego.
By the 1990s, plastic surgery and medical problems resulted in a far different person than what I remembered growing up in the 1980s.
Maybe some people are able to ground themselves in family, able to keep some semblance of normalcy.
Perhaps that was something he didn't have with people because of his fame and fortune.
Or perhaps the fame was only just a small part of an individual stuck yearning for the normal life, but unable to tell between reality and celebrity.
It's often been said Joe Jackson didn't give his children much of a childhood and was abusive.
All one has to do is see the train wreck Britney Spears became.
Perhaps if any good can come of Jackson's death it will be another cautionary tale of the personal pain that fame and fortune can bring.
Like Elvis before him, perhaps Jackson destined to become a real life Norman Maine from the movie "A Star is Born" — always trying to grab hold of the fame and fortune they had once held at the height of their career.

Vino Vidi Vici!

2009-06-22T00:18:00.002-04:00

Here's an example of the type of thinking that will keep independent filmmaking alive.

Iconic director and winemaker Francis Ford Coppola - who was once one of Hollywood's most popular auteurs, but is now struggling to regain the critical and financial power he once possessed - is using an unconventional method to fund his latest film "Tetro."

"Tetro" - about an Italian-American family in Buenos Aires - has been financed and, to some degree, distributed by Coppola. The movie has earned arguably more critical acclaim than any of his films since 1979's "Apocalypse Now."

Coppola wants this film to have a longer theatrical run, so he recently began producing more ads for his Claret Diamond Red Wine. If his plan is successful, the boost in win sales could result in more showings for "Tetro."

Here's the situation for the independent filmmakers who don't already know: you're on your own. This is an age where typical Americans facing uncertain times mostly want to watch big budget escapist fare, not inventive films usually found in indie theaters. And Hollywood producers know this.

If an old school filmmaker icon like Coppola is struggling to keep "Tetro" in theaters, the rest of you will have to be even more inventive to see your films released.

If there's one thing moving media cannot afford to lose, it's independent film. So, good luck and cheers.

Letterman steps in it

2009-06-15T17:55:00.002-04:00

I was on my way into work this morning when, on the radio, a local morning show was talking about Letterman's comments about Sarah Palin's daughter at the Yankee's game and her getting knocked up by Alex Rodriguez.
I got to thinking, it wasn't that funny of a joke and didn't give me a chuckle.
But, obviously, it touched a nerve with Sarah Palin as she went on to make angry comments, especially since she was at the game with her 14-year-old daughter.
Her other daughter is famous for having a child out of wed lock with some moron she knew from high school.
The joke wasn't funny.
But, Sarah Palin really doesn't have a leg to stand on with this one.
When she decided to run for vice president and opened up her own family for scrutiny, this was bound to happen.
She has every right to call Letterman out for making a joke about her family.
But, the minute they decided to let the media into their family, invite People magazine to Bristol's high school graduation and agree to interviews long after the campaign ended, they should realize it's going to come at a price.

George Lucas doesn't need anymore encouragement; others do

2009-06-14T23:41:00.002-04:00

Come on, people!

It's time to stop worshipping George Lucas That Was and demand more from George Lucas That Is.

According to NECN.com, Lucas received the Gene Siskel Film Visionary Award on June 13 in Chicago. This - or a similar type of - prestigious honor is about 20 years too late. The damage has already been done. Blame it on the bread.

Take a journey with me to the 1970s, a time in which Lucas was an auteur. This was the decade in which he made some of his best work: the sci-fi thriller "THX 1138," the joyfully nostalgic "American Graffiti" and the iconic "Star Wars." Filmgoers and Lucas were happy as his movies continued to be critically acclaimed and become blockbusters.

In the 1980s, Lucas even showed Indiana Jones fans he cared about what they thought by featuring Nazis once again in the third film of that franchise.

But then something happened in that same decade: Lucas began milking his franchises for every cent they were worth, regardless of how much that upset their fans. This began with small projects like "The Ewok Adventure" and "The Adventures of Young Indiana Jones." Eventually it spread to bug budget films like "Phantom Menace" and "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull."

After all these years and projects, Lucas doesn't care how his movies are perceived because he'll makes tons of money no matter what.

It's time for film organizations to start recognizing the achievements of young visionaries while they - unlike Lucas - still care about more than just making money.

Palin vs. Letterman... Palin cannot win.

2009-06-11T13:06:00.002-04:00

For those who missed it, David Letterman made fun of Sarah Palin's family. Why is that news? Normally it wouldn't be, but Palin took offense at some jokes aimed at her daughter. Which daughter? Depends who you ask. Neither was named in the jokes, but the content seemed to imply it was 18-year-old Bristol. However, the Palins took it as attacks on 14-year-old Willow.

From the AP story on Letterman's 'apology:'

"Letterman said “an awkward moment” occurred for Palin when, “during the seventh inning, her daughter was knocked up by (Yankee third baseman) Alex Rodriguez.”

Without naming her, the joke seemed to refer to Palin’s 18-year-old daughter Bristol, an unwed mother.

But it was 14-year-old daughter Willow, not Bristol, who had been at the game."

Last night, after the Palin's released a statement attacking Letterman, Letterman made two things very clear on his show:

- He was not and would not joke about a 14-year-old being raped.

- He has no intention of going easy on the Palins.

In fact, it would seem his "apology" was a perfect opportunity to launch more attacks on the Palins.

Not that they'll listen, but my advice to the Palin's would be... accept his apology for what it is worth, and let it go. If you start a fued with a late night comic, you will lose. John McCain learned the hard way how much Letterman can hurt someone's public image if he wants to. Honestly, is it worth it? He's a comedian/entertainer, it's clear he doesn't mean any harm to the people he jokes about (which includes pretty much everyone) and trying to make a bigger and more serious situation out of it is only going to backfire.

Why is 'Pregnant Man' controversial news?

2009-06-10T14:33:00.003-04:00

Thomas Beatie has had another child, and while many mainstream media outlets, including Oprah, embrace the Beatie, others seems shocked and abhorred at the idea of a pregnant man, comparing Beatie to circus attraction. A pregnant man is so unnatural (unless we're talking about seahorses) to some people that Beatie is looked upon as some kind of freak of nature.

Let's get one things straight, Beatie, born Tracy, is not really a man, not in the biological sense. She takes male hormones (thus the facial hair and muscle mass) and had her breasts surgically removed, but that's it. She is still techincally a woman, so concieving and giving birth to a healthy child is not a medical marvel by any stretch of the imagination. People just got weirded out by seeing someone who looks like a man being pregnant.

State law may recognize Beatie as a man, but nature still classifies her as a woman. People may find her decision to alter her appearance strange, but that does not make anyone a freak of nature, and the only controversy I see here is people making way too big a deal out of someone's appearance.

Colbert's visit to Iraq

2009-06-09T14:49:00.002-04:00

Stephen Colbert's "surprise" visit to Iraq finally happened. He made the troops laugh about the very war they are fighting, he had his head shaved by a four-star general, and the POTUS himself made a brief appearance, all inside a former palace of Saddam Hussein. Not bad for a late night comedy show.

This was a pretty big deal for everybody involved it would seem. For obvious security purposes, Colbert couldn't reveal when or where he was going. It's impressive how much clout the comedy show has.

Here's the first episode of the week.

I'll be interested to see what comes next.

Who Better to Play a Hero Than a Hero?

2009-06-04T17:46:00.002-04:00

Producers of the possible movie about Capt. Richard Phillips - the American freighter captain who surrendered himself to Somali pirates to protect his crew - would be wise to consider casting him in the starring role.
I'm glad they might make a movie about Phillips. A film centered on the skipper of U.S.-flagged Maersk Alabama and his rescue would resonate a lot with the public.
The story has everything that a great suspenseful movie needs: a hero, a volatile situation, nonstop tension and a violent climax in which the U.S.-of-A. wins.
The best choice the producers could make in a situation like this would be to seek out Phillips to be the film's star. This isn't such a radical idea. In 2004, an Argentinean movie called "Whisky Romeo Zulu" was released about a pilot who fought corruption in the civil aviation industry in 1999. The person who played the lead role was the actual whistle-blower himself. His performance - apart from being authentic - wasn't bad, showing that one doesn't need an acting background in movies; one only needs to know how to take direction.
Besides providing a layer of authenticity, casting Phillips as himself would also better ensure that his heroic story does not transform into a typical, loud and unrealistic popcorn flick. Phillips, more than anyone, would be best equipped to make sure that the sole purpose of this movie would not be to fatten up the producers' wallets.

No rush to ban smoking

2009-06-02T18:01:00.002-04:00

Well, today Bishop said he's going to take his time reviewing the proposed smoking ban before the Senate takes any action.

However, the hold-up doesn't seem to be over the debate whether or not smoking should be banned in the workplace, rather, it seems to be about whether or not there should be exceptions.

At this point, the ban seems inevitable. If it does pass, Michigan will be the 38th state to have some kind of smoking ban in place. That seems like the expected outcome anyway. Even though Republicans are typically more likely to oppose this type of measure than Democrats, the bill had bi-partisan support in congress and as I already mentioned, the discussion by senate Republicans seems to be who, if anyone, should be exempt, not whether or not the ban should be put in place.

You can read more about it here.

I hate reality television

2009-06-02T17:37:00.003-04:00

I'm sitting at my desk, so annoyed that I really can't think of another sentence to write than the title.
NBC has recently unveiled "I'm a Celebrity .... Get me Out of Here."
I didn't watch it, nor to I care to.
The commercials alone make me physically ill. You take a bunch of D-listers or has beens and toss them into a situation where they are pushed to their limits physically and mentally.
Crap TV at its best.
I'm so tired of people like Heidi and Spencer from "The Hills," John and Kate and their circus family they sold out for money and frumpy women from Scotland that have beautiful voices.
Can anyone explain to me the appeal of any of this?
I can kind of understanding "So You Think You Can Dance," and and "American Idol" (neither show I watch, but am aware of).
There is some actual entertainment value in seeing people that are excellent dancers or talented singers.
I just miss television when networks didn't realize they could get out of paying writers by creating garbage reality show premises.

Conan is back and as good as ever

2009-06-02T13:36:00.004-04:00

Conan O'Brien returned to television last night as the new host of the Tonight Show and I think many fans breathed a sigh of relief when it was clear right from the start that Conan was not going to change his ways for the new time slot. Less than two minutes into the show he performed his oddball "string dance" followed by a brief monologue which took shots at NBC, LA, and GM.

Three video bits were featured as well, and Conan's first guest, Will Ferrell, was carried onto the stage by four men dressed as ancient Egyptian servants. There was no masturbating bear or Triumph the Insult Comic Dog, but there was no mistaking O'Brien brought his old tricks with him from New York.

Also making a return was drummer Max Weinberg and the Tonight Show Band (formally known as the Max Weinberg Seven) who opened the show with a variation on the familiar theme that has Conan has opened with for years.

Returning after the longest absence from the show was Andy Richter, O'Brien's former sidekick who left the show to pursue a career in film and TV. None of Richter's shows lasted very long and he never got more than a bit part in any major movie, so reuniting with O'Brien, even in a different capacity, seems like a return to where he fits best. Richter is now the announcer for the Tonight Show, and rather than sit next to O'Brien, Richter stands a podium off screen.

It's going to take some adjusting, but I think Conan O'Brien was the perfect choice to take over the Tonight Show and in a few weeks time it will be hard to imagine anyone else hosting it.
The only thing that felt awkward was Richter's role. He makes a fine announcer, but throughout the show it seemed he wasn't sure if and when he should chime in with his opinion. He'll have to get used to his new role and the fact that an announcer, unlike a sidekick, doesn't have to banter throughout the show.

Overall though, late night TV just got a lot better.

You can watch the full episode on Hulu

A Celebrity Trainwreck

2009-06-01T12:44:00.003-04:00

If ever there was an example of vapid celebrities desperately clawing for attention, it is the perhaps purposefully bad concept "I'm a celebrity, get me out of here!" that starts tonight and runs for three weeks on NBC.

Contestants include Stephen Baldwin, American Idol finalist Sanjaya Malakar and wife of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, Patricia Blagovich. The last one might really surprise some, but she was only asked to be on the show after a judge prohibited the former governor from being on the show himself (he needs permisson to leave the country and the show is being filmed in Costa Rica). Janice Dickinson, who still has the attitude of a big shot celebrity despite bording on obscurity, appeared on an episode of Christina's Court earlier today (she was the defendant), so apparently she'll do anything to keep her face on TV.

So if you have any interest in watching, you can see these celebrities do "embarassing" things to stay on TV. I put embarassing in quotes because while these things might be embarassing for other people, these celebrities obviously have no shame. I was able to sit through an entire season of The Celebrity Apprentice, but this may be too much to stomach.

Something tells me NBC put this together just for the trainwreck potential.

A sacrifice for the next generation

2009-06-01T12:06:00.005-04:00

President Obama spoke today about GM filing for bankruptcy, saying it would hopefully go as quickly as Chrysler's has.

One thing that Obama said stuck out in my mind. He said autoworkers are going to have to make a sacrifice, one that they didn't choose to make, but one they were called to make for the sake of the next generation. I wonder how many autoworkers see it that way.

While it's clear GM has a lot of problems it needs to resolve, it's always easier to call something a necessary sacrifice when you are not the one making the sacrifice. I'm hopeful about the plans set in place. GM will certainly be a smaller, but stronger, company when all is said and done, but when the that time comes, will those who had to make these sacrifices look back and say "it was worth it..." or will it be too much? The radical changes needed to save GM couldn't happen without sacrifices, but I'm sure many disagree on what is necessary.

I can't say if the ends will justify the means in this case, but I hope they do. As we all wait and see, I hope those making the sacrifices see the good that could come from it.

Good Luck Conan

2009-06-01T11:04:00.004-04:00

Tonight's the night. Conan O'Brien debuts as the new host of the Tonight Show. This has been the plan for nearly 5 years, and hopefully the transition goes smoothly. O'Brien definitely has a different style that Jay Leno, and some have said he will need to do some growing up before he can really take the helm. Here's hoping that's not true. If O'Brien changes his style to accommodate the critics, he'll lose what made him the man picked to replace Leno. I'll definitely be watching tonight to see how he does. A good litmus test for the tone of the new show will be first guest Will Ferrell, who has a history of stripping down to green tights on O'Briens previous show. I wouldn't be surprised to see it happen again tonight. It would definitely get the message across that Conan isn't going to change.

No Smoking Allowed

2009-05-28T13:19:00.003-04:00

If Michigan is going to ban smoking in public places, it's going to have to be across the board.

Personally, I support the ban. I think you can smoke all you want, but I shouldn't be forced to and I shouldn't have to change my actions because of your habit. A person's right to breathe clean air in public is much more important than anyone's right to smoke. Obviously people have the right to smoke if they want to, they just don't have the right to harm those around them with their habit. It's time Michigan caught up with all the other states that have realized this.

And for those opposed to any kind of ban, enough with the "so what's next? No drinking? No talking?" slippery slope arguments. There is no "next." There is no other legal activity you can engage in while in public that is detrimental to the health of those around you. Sure, the guy next to you who has had way too many might be obnoxious to be around, but he's not hurting your liver with every drink he has. Annoying someone and damaging their heath are not even in the same ball park when it comes to consequences.

I understand the concerns about the ban, and while I see why some people think individual businesses should be allowed to decide for the themselves, the reasoning seems flawed to me.
The argument I hear all the time is that some businesses fear a state-wide ban because it would hurt their business. I think it's more likely to have a harmful effect if each business makes the decision themselves.

Imagine two bars located across the street from one another. Moe's and Joe's. If Moe decides to ban smoking but Joe does not, then it's likely all of Moe's regular customers who smoke will start going across the street to Joe's instead. However, if smoking is banned across the board, the smokers would have no reason to change venues since they can't smoke at either place. If it were left to the the individual businesses to decide, it's likely few would actualy choose the ban from fear of sending all their customers to the competition and the ban would be mostly non-existant.

Making this ban across the board is the only way to make sure the ban would have any effect at all.

Yet another reality show comes to an end

2009-05-12T15:01:00.005-04:00

I'm almost embarrassed to admit I watched the entire season of The Celebrity Apprentice, despite having never watched an entire episode of the show prior to this season.

I skipped part of the 3-hour finale, which was shamelessly dragged out by Trump to give his sponsors more screen time. The winner, Joan Rivers, was not announced until literally 30-seconds before the credits started rolling. I can't help but think this was a conscious move on Trump's part because he's fully aware than after 8 seasons, nobody cares about his afterthoughts and were only staying tuned in to here "You're Hired."

Unfortunately for the few people who may have still had faith in the format, the finale showed just how incapable Trump is of subtlety, not that this should be a surprise coming from the man who has to put his name in big gold letters on everything he is involved with.

The final two competitors were Rivers and poker champion Annie Duke, who over the course of the show developed a bitter rivalry. From an outside observer it was obvious what was happening: Duke, a master of reading people and game theory, clearly outplayed and manipulated people better than anyone else on the show, and she accomplished the most for her charity as well. Rivers took everything personal, and having no real business skills to fall back on, resorted to personal attacks on Duke.

So it wasn't surprising when Trump used trivial criteria to eliminate other contestants so that the finale could showcase the rating-boosting rivalry. It also wasn't surprising when Trump picked his old friend Rivers as the winner despite Duke dominating the entire season. Trump took Rivers side in every dispute, never once asking Joan to tone it down, even when she compared Duke to Hitler and implied Duke's ease at raising money was due to her friends being in the mafia. Whenever Duke would attempt to defend herself, River would interrupt with personal tirades that would go way off subject, and "The Donald" never asked Rivers to let Duke finish. In short, his wore his personal bias on his sleeve.

This would have all be forgivable in the world of reality TV if it clearly didn't rig the show. Unfortunately it did. In the end, Trump picked Rivers despite admitting that Duke greatly outraised her, won more challenges, and had never once been on the chopping block throughout the season. The reason he gave: Rivers is old... but tenacious. That was pretty much all he had to say in her favor at the end, as if being short on the matter would cover how much clearly favored her throughout the season.

The list goes on and on..
- Rivers was absent from parts of challenges because of personal obligations, something Trump fired Khloe Kardashian for.
- Rivers stormed off the show in protest when her daughter was fired, calling other contestants names and leaving Trump Tower (she returned the next day).
- Rivers upset the designer on the final challenge so much that he refused to work with either her or Duke, and even with it caught on tape and shown to everyone, Rivers called Duke a liar for pointing this out during the final board meeting
- Despite the all the previous stuff, in the end, Rivers claimed to have played the game with honor, and like everything else, Trump never questioned her.

So who cares right? Well, this is pop-culture blog at times and unfortuantely a large amount of bad reality TV permeates that culture. As I said before I'm almost embarassed to admit I watched this show, so taking 10 minutes to pick it apart seemed like a good way to push it out of my mind forever.

From what I've heard The Apprentice has been going downhill since the second season, with each episode being little more than a two-hour commercial for whoever was sponsoring it that week. This may be what kills the show off completely though, as Trump, having no poker face apparently, made it clear there is no real competition left on the show. I think a lot of people, myself included, will put up with a lot of the garbage on reality TV if they think the competition aspect is genuine. But now, like The Bachelor, The Apprentice has dug itself a hole from which it cannot get out.

Want to be famous, say something inflamatory

2009-05-05T17:39:00.004-04:00

Carrie Prejean has learned the best way to get instant fame.
Say something that will get the talking heads of TV going on national television and you'll get what you want, even if you come in second.
Now, as we probably all know by now, some photos have popped up of the beauty queen that are far from the wholesome values she espouses.
I could care less about what Prejean's views on gay marriage are. I don't agree with her (if that is truly how she feels), but I respect her opinion. I also don't think the pictures of her (at least what has been shown briefly on television) are all that pornographic.
I just wish we could all move on from it.
I don't think carrying the crown of Miss California puts her in any position to really make any kind of legal decision for or against gay marriage. So lets give her opinions a rest.
Moral judgements on the photos Prejean posed for are no more valid than her own views on homosexuals being married.
We should all just go back to our glass houses.

Filibuster-proof?

2009-04-29T12:56:00.002-04:00

Are Democrats in the US Senate about to become filibuster-proof? It certainly seems that way with Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Spector announcing he is switching to the Democratic party and Al Fraken likely to take a seat soon. Despite an appeal by Franken's opponent, public polling shows the residents of Minnesotta want this election to be over with and want Coleman to concede defeat. I don't see that happening now, especially with this recent development. If nothing else, Coleman may hold on as long as possible to just prevent another Democrat from being seated.

Scrubs needs to go

2009-04-28T16:00:00.002-04:00

I've loved the show "Scrubs" and have been catching the new episodes on ABC.
However, since moving from the peacock and having been on television since 2001, it's time to end it.
Now, there is talk ABC wants to do another season, but without the show's creator Bill Laurence and star Zach Braff.
This last season hasn't been the best but could end in a high note and leave it at that.
"Happy Days" wasn't the same when they changed the core cast.
The best shows know when to call it quits. It just ruins things to throw new characters into the mix in the hopes of breathing new life into a show.
"Scrubs" needs to end.

Jamie Foxx has a radio show?!

2009-04-16T17:15:00.002-04:00

So it's Thursday evening and I'm looking at the entertainment section of Google news and there is some story on there about a feud between Billy Ray Cyrus and Jamie Foxx about the washed-up country star's meal ticket, I mean, daughter.
Come to in find out, Foxx made some comments on his radio show about her.
Usually I could care less about celebrity feuds.
It's about as important to me as, well, orange peels.
But, it just strikes me as nothing more than ego that, not only should we put up with Foxx in movies, but he also cuts albums and apparently has a radio show (called of all things, "The Foxxhole").
I guess he compares the format to what Howard Stern does (which is unfunny, vulgar humor that makes 12-year-old boys chuckle and conservatives squirm).
It's funny how a little bit of fame and money makes people think the rest of the world wants to have them in any way, shape or form.

Tea Parties aren't what they used to be

2009-04-16T12:42:00.004-04:00

So yesterday all the true patriots came out to protest the excessive government spending that has brought us to brink of economic collapse right?

Well, not really. Depending on where you look, it would seem most protests were aimed directly at Obama and the perception that he is a socialist, or by people who just don't want to pay their taxes without giving up any of the benefits from said taxes (police protection, road maintenance, social security, etc.). Sadly, a lot of the protests I saw seemed more like people regurgitating the slogans they had prior to the election that seem at best misguided and at worst instigative. And I'm probably the 9,000th person to point this out, but the original Boston Tea Party was protesting taxation without representation, where as yesterdays' protests were against taxation with democratically elected representation, just not the person they voted for... or just taxation in general.

I'm sure many people went with the idea of protesting excessive government spending funded by our tax dollars, but somewhere along the line that message got lost in inflammatory name-calling, and that's what really bothers me about this kind of thing. When a majority of the dialogue is empty rhetoric, those who actually make a good point largely get ignored. And to be clear, a majority of what got shown from these tea parties was empty rhetoric. That doesn't mean that's all there was, it just means the rest got overshadowed.

When one political party places all the blame on another it doesn't help because it's obviously not true, but people don't want to hear that. Take this footage from yesterday, note how quiet the crowd gets when Dr. Paul refuses to blame one side over the other for the financial mess the country is in.

And I'm not sure who thought it would be a good idea to call the protesters tea-baggers, but that's a sure-fire way to make sure they are not taken seriously.

The reality of pirates and their importance to the U.S. economy

2009-04-13T16:33:00.003-04:00

What was once old is now new again.
Again.
Pirates are back baby, and this time without Johnny Depp.
Spike TV is in talks with the U.S. Navy to do a reality television show about hunting down pirates.
I wonder how long it will be before a cable movie is created (if it's not already in the works) about the rescue of Capt. Richard Phillips.
All of that aside, this is putting a bad light on buccaneers everywhere.
In these economic times, can we afford to put pirate-themed businesses in such a bind?
Long-time American businesses, such as Long John Silver's, could suffer under such scrutiny.
Avast, I would cross the seven seas in a rowboat for a life time supply of Treasure Chest family meals.
And then there is Harlequin Romance, publishers of such literary classics as "Pirate's Bride."
How many love-starved females are going to want to see pirates for what they are, lice-covered men with rat-like inbred features and greasy, stringy hair.
It's skullduggery!

Levi Johnston on "The Tyra Banks Show"

2009-04-06T18:16:00.002-04:00

I will say this for the Palin clan.
They probably dodged a bullet when their daughter and Levi Johnston broke up following the birth of their child.
Johnston has recently decided the air-headed and always in bad taste Tyra Banks' talk show was the perfect way he could cash in on his 15 minutes of fame by airing his dirty laundry.
The whole mess was a train wreck during the presidential race. Not because the two teens had sex, but because of who Bristol Palin chose to have sex with.
If Johnston is truly unhappy with not being able to spend more time with his three-month old child, then that is for the courts system, not daytime television.
It's just as snarky that the family issued a statement giving their disgust at his choice of going public.
The whole thing smells of Jerry Springer to me.

Is Madonna trying to be a mom, or just promot herself

2009-04-03T16:45:00.002-04:00

It's hard to really think of Madonna as being relevant in the whole pop artist who uses sexuality to shock audiences.
She almost put herself in a situation of self parody, having done almost everything but released a pornographic video of herself to anger up the blood of conservative religious groups.
Now she's attempting to adopt another child from a third-world country and is appealing a court ruling in Malawi to do so.
She's already adopted one child from the country (a practice Angelina Jolie has pioneered).
Critics argue she is using her star power to circumvent the law.
Other people condemn her because of the estimated half-million of children in the U.S. foster care system.
It's almost like some kind of weird celebrity accessory, like you are only the coolest if you can do this.
To me, if Madonna really wanted to so something for the children of this country, she'd use her money to help build schools or even try to establish a place where orphaned children of this country can live.
Instead, she treats it like a chance to get her name out in the media.
After all, how many silver hardcover books chuck full of nude pictures of yourself.

Don't touch the Queen

2009-04-02T12:47:00.003-04:00

England is in shock... SHOCK... that First Lady Michelle Obama broke royal protocol and actually touched Queen Elizabeth during their meeting yesterday. Well, okay, maybe not, but the story is making the tabloids as if it was a big deal, though to whom isn't clear. The Queen herself didn't seem bothered by any of it and was reportedly the one who initiated contact by putting her her arm on Mrs. Obama's back, after which the first lady returned the gesture by putting her arm around the Queen for a few seconds. Aides were shocked but nobody actually seeemed offended.

I doubt this will be news by this time tomorrow but it does seem funny that anyone would care about it if the Queen herself did not.

Watch the moment that shocked the world here

Obama's oddball gifts

2009-04-01T17:59:00.002-04:00

President Obama seems to have learned to stay way from shopping at the White House gift shop and gave Queen Elizabeth an iPod.

I guess the queen is pretty hip, technologically speaking. It's reported she owns a Nintendo Wii so that might not have been such a bad gift.

Although, I would venture a guess to say she probably already had one.

It's still better than the last gift exchange when British Prime Minister Gordon Brown gave the president an ornamental pen holder carved from the timbers of the HMS Gannet, which was an anti-slave ship from the 1800s.

And what did he receive in return?
About 25 DVDs, which, incidentally weren't compatible with British DVD players.
Wow, that's only slightly better than a book of McDonald's coupons.

TI the leader of a generation!?

2009-03-27T17:38:00.002-04:00

Rapper T.I. gave a statement at a press conference Friday (March 27) after being sentenced to one year and one day in prison for felony weapons charges.
He had been arrested in October 2007 on the even of the BET Hip-Hop Awards.
During his statement, T.I. referred to himself as a "leader of a generation."
I'm not going to say the guy's statement was heartfelt or that he is sorry for what he did.
However, as someone who covers police and is familiar with urban crime, I hope he truly does realize his influence.

Ah... Hypocrisy

2009-03-26T16:15:00.002-04:00

So Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck want President Obama to fail.

Who cares?

Apparently many liberal politicians and pundits do.

Who cares?

Apparently many conservative politicians and pundits do.

Why?

Because now, just a few short years after saying questioning the President (Bush at the time) was un-American, those same people are pulling a 180 and attacking anyone who suggests wanting the President to fail is anything but patriotic.

Does anyone think Limbaugh and Beck don't want to see people get their jobs back and see the country flourish? Of course not, they don't want Obama to fail in his objective, they want his methods to fail.

It's absurd for either side to suggest that questioning or outright disagreeing with an elected official is unpatriotic. It's equally absurd to switch stances on the issue depending on who is in office at the time.

I would hope everyone involved with politics has better things to discuss than the patriotic nature of their discussions. Don't we have enough problems to focus on?

"Hillary: The Movie"

2009-03-24T16:58:00.002-04:00

Wow,
I was surprised I didn't know about this. Either I'm that out of touch or this really hasn't been that big of a hot button issue.
Anyway, the Supreme Court is tackling a First Amendment case involving a movie about Hillary Clinton.

A 2008 documentary that is critical of the former presidential candidate and current secretary of state ran into a snag as it is questionable whether the 90-minute flick should be subject to campaign finance laws.
I guess this could determine whether documentaries carrying a political message can be regulated by the government or not like campaign commercials. Interesting, but wouldn't that be a violation of the First Amendment?

Kramer vs. Stewart

2009-03-11T15:12:00.002-04:00

Jim Kramer, host of "Mad Money" on CNBC, is apparently worried about his reputation now that several of his worst bits of financial advice have been showcased on The Daily Show. Kramer has made appearances on several NBC programs in the last few days where it appears they are all throwing him a pity party. They're practically saying "Cheer up Jim, Jon Stewart's a jerk and just a a stupid mean comedian."

Unfortunately for Kramer, all this is really doing is providing more fodder for the writers at The Daily Show. It's wasn't personal the first time they mocked CNBC, but it's quickly turning into that. Kramer can't win either. Rather than admit his mistakes and take his licks, Kramer is trying to fight back, and it's not working. Stewart and The Daily Show writers are very good at what they do, and they don't take themselves seriously like Kramer does. Kramer thinks he's dueling for his honor while Stewart's weapon of choice is a water pistol. The longer this fight goes on, the more Kramer is going to lose.

Reality TV's new star

2009-03-10T14:12:00.007-04:00

Well, that was fast. A week after being dumped on national television, Melissa Rycroft, who turned down being the next Bachelorette, ended up being a last minute replacement for Access Hollywood Host Nancy O'Dell on Dancing with the Stars, who was injured during pre-show training.,

Now this is a stretch of the word "stars." Melissa seems like a good enough person, and she really did get screwed over by the producers of The Bachelor, but I'm shocked to see her back on TV so quickly, and in such a capacity, and on ABC of all networks. She obviously was stung by ABC enough to turn down being the Bachelorette, but Dancing with Stars is a safer show to join. No heartbreak, just fun, no real drama. Plus now she has been categorized as a "star" even though her claim to fame is extremly tenuous.

Some people may be surprised to learn this is actually Rycroft's third experience on a reality TV show. The former Dallas Cowboy Cheerleader was featured on a CMT show about women trying out for the cheerleading squad prior to her appearance on the Bachelor.

Her quick leap between shows is proof Rycroft is definitely not shying away from the spotlight, and it seems the viewing public is happy to see her. It would seem we have a new reality TV star like Rob and Amber of Survivor/Amazing Race fame. The only question is... what show will she be on next?

Off the deep end...

2009-03-10T13:51:00.004-04:00

On his radio show, conservative commentator Glenn Beck says removing the ban on federal funding for stem cell research will lead to the creation of a "master race." Chuck Norris thinks Texas will secede from the Union. Beck has joined Rush Limbaugh in saying he hopes Obama will fail, but for different reasons. Beck thinks stem cell research is opening the door for eugenics (it's not) and Limbaugh thinks Obama is a socialist (he's not).

What is going on here? One of the great things about this country is everyone can make their voice heard, but how do people like Beck and Norris get in positions to say the things they are saying without someone tapping them on the shoulder and suggesting they tone down the crazy? Are conservatives so bitter from their losses in November that they'll give credence to any anti-Obama argument no matter how far from reality it may be?

This is almost as bad as all the liberals who were saying they would move to Canada if Bush was reelected in 2004. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, conservatives are acting just as bad. Why are the conservatives calling for the GOP to reorganize and find a solid voice being overshadowed by those who are practically hoping for the worst to happen?

Stem cell debate about to explode

2009-03-07T22:53:00.005-05:00

President Obama is expected to sign an executive order on Monday reversing the Bush administration's ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. The debate has, if anything, gotten only hotter over time, and this will only likely throw gas on that fire.

Michigan voters also recently repealed a state-wide ban on stem cell research. Public opinion seems to be shifting in favor of research, but those who remain against it continue to strongly voice their opposition. Monday will start things on new course, with one side celebrating and the others planning counter-moves. What will happen next? States will not be able to vote on local regulations for nearly two years, and a lot can happen in that time. Will the research be able to make enough progress in that time to silence some of the critics? Will public opinion shift once again? Your guess is as good as mine, but I'm really curious to hear what people think on the matter.

Limbaugh as the voice of the GOP

2009-03-07T20:55:00.005-05:00

I think anyone who supports President Obama loves the fact that Rush Limbaugh is suddenly becoming the voice of the GOP, with many conservatives quickly rallying behind him. But why?

Pundits like Rush are school-yard bullies who act tough only when they know nobody around will actually challenge them. Here's an old video from the 90's when Rush had a short-lived TV show. See what happens when people can actually talk back to the loud-mouth?

So why would conservatives rally around someone like Rush despite groups like FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) finding numerous inaccuracies in his coverage and has quotes like these attributed to him:

"One of the things I want to do before I die is conduct the Homeless Olympics... [Events would include] the 10-meter Shopping Cart Relay, the Dumpster Dig, and the Hop, Skip and Trip." (L.A. Times, 1/20/91)

On NAFTA: "If we are going to start rewarding no skills and stupid people--I'm serious, let the unskilled jobs, let the kinds of jobs that take absolutely no knowledge whatsoever to do--let stupid and unskilled Mexicans do that work." (Radio show quoted in FRQ, Fall/93)

Speculating on why a Mexican national won the New York marathon: "An immigration agent chased him for the last 10 miles." (USA Weekend, 1/26/92)

This is asinine! A Caesar Chavez Day in California? Wasn't he convicted of a crime?" (Quoted in FRQ, Winter/94)

"Kurt Cobain was, ladies and gentleman, I just--he was a worthless shred of human debris..." (TV show, 4/11/94)

"When a gay person turns his back on you, it is anything but an insult ; it's an invitation." (Quoted in FRQ, Summer/94)

"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream." (Quoted in FRQ, Summer/93)

"Militant feminists are pro-choice because it's their ultimate avenue of power over men.... It is their attempt to impose their will on the rest of society, particularly on men." (Ought to Be, p.53)

"Why is it that whenever a corporation fires workers it is never speculated that the workers might have deserved it?" (Ought to Be, p.275)

These quotes are just some of the many questionable things about Limbaugh listed in detail on Fair.org.

So again... why would anyone rally behind someone like Limbaugh? Who else are they going to get behind? Republican leaders seem unable to shake bad habits that have hurt their image over the past few years. Rudy Giuliani mocked community organizers at the RNC like community betterment was something to be embarassed about and Sarah Palin... well, was herself. Most recently the "up and coming star" of the GOP, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal's condescending response to Obama's first congressional address was deemed a disaster even by conservative commentators. Consevatives need a face to unite behind. Limbaugh is certainly not the right person for the job, but he'll do it if it boosts his rating and sells his books. In the long run, however, much like his "Operation: Chaos," this will probably do nothing but ensure Democrats more victories in 2010.

Octomom to marry Batboy

2009-03-05T11:47:00.002-05:00

Is it just me, or is this Octomom feel like something "The World Weekly News" would have splashed across their front, underneath a massive picture of Hitler and Saddam for a story about their gay love spat while sharing lakeside condo in Hell.
From politicians fighting to sponsor bills that would limit the number of embryo implants to daytime television hosts who tout themselves as health gurus, it's all really bizarre.
It's as if circus sideshows of the 1800s have never gone away.

For better or for worse... Celebrity Apprentice is back

2009-03-04T12:41:00.004-05:00

Donald Trump is back with another group of "celebrities" who have come together to raise money for charity and crawl back into the spotlight, if only for a moment. I've only ever caught partial episodes of The Apprentice before, but I decided to watch the season premiere of the new celebrity season this past Sunday because I wanted to see what celebrities were trying this time around. Of course it's obvious why Trump went with celebrities again instead of going back to the original formula of the show. Rating have dropped consistently between seasons 1 and 6, but the celebrity season was a big boost. After all, the winners of the other season never really got the dream jobs they were promised. That's not surprising though, since Trump pretty much uses the show to promote himself and his children now while looking for sponsors to pay for everything. Can you believe this guy has filed for bankruptcy numerous times and is currently hundreds of millions of dollars in debt, yet still tries to present himself and one of the best businessmen in history?

Needless to say, this season's roster is somewhat disappointing. The show is really using the term "celebrity" loosely. Sure, there are few people who are still popular and famous in their own right, but there are plenty of D-listers or otherwise nobodies who look like they are just trying to some attention.

Andrew Dice Clay? Really? Has he done anything in the last two decades? While it was annoying to see him walk and talk like he's still a big shot, it was funny to see his reaction upon seeing that both Joan and Melissa Rivers were on the women's team. He said what I, and I'm sure a lot of people were thinking at the time. Why is Melissa Rivers a "celebrity?" Her mother at least had some big deals in the past, though now she is just a reminder of what too much plastic surgery can do to a person. Melissa, on the other hand, is just a tag-along who has no discernible accomplishments apart from appearing alongside her mother. Having them both on show just made this even more painfully obvious.

Then there's Claudia Jordan. I bet you're thinking... "who?" I was too. You've probably never heard her full name before because Howie Mandell only says her first name when asking her to open case 17 on Deal or No Deal. Yep, that's what passes for a celebrity on this show, being one of two dozen models on a gameshow whose entire job consists of opening a briefcase an reacting to the contents.

I'm fairly certain the rating for this season will be pretty good. Heck, I might even watch again. There's something strangely comforting about watching celebrity trainwrecks, though by the time

I have a bridge to sell you...

2009-02-27T13:04:00.001-05:00

If you're a fan of reality TV, a part of you has to know there isn't that much reality left in it anymore. When there were just a few shows and they were in their early seasons, the concepts alone were enough to draw in people, but evetually the hook gets dull and they need something to sharpen it with.

I used to be a fan of Survivor. I admit the first few season really had me addicted. I even watched up through the "All-Stars" season. What made me finally give up (cold turkey, I might add) was hearing that the newest season would divide the "tribes" by race. That was it. The shark had been jumped. At that point it was clear the show was no longer about the contest and was about shock value and ratings.

Now the same thing is happening again to another long standing reality show: The Bachelor. The current season is scheduled to end this Monday, as this season's bachelor Jason must make "the hardest decision ever." Problem is... word has leaked there's nothing difficult about this decision at all, Jason has known who he wants to pick for a long time, but it only gets weirder.

I've heard through the series of tubes known as the internet that Jason decided a long time ago that wanted to propose to contestant Molly. However, on Monday's episode he is going to propose to the other final contestant... Melissa.

Confused? Well, apparently in an effort to give the audience "the most shocking finale" in bachelor history, Jason agreed to propose to Melissa and then dump her at the "After the Final Rose" show (which immediately follows the finale). The show's host has repeatedly promoted the show by saying this will be the first after-show without a studio audience out of "respect" for everyone involved. Now why would they think to do that? It's almost like they knew ahead of time what he was going to do...

So why do this?
1) It's never happened on the show before (+ ratings)
2) It gives them shock value (+ ratings)
3) It allows them to have a second "After the Final Rose" show a week later where he will almost certainly bring back Molly and propose to her there. (+ ratings)

If nothing else, this should hopefully garner some sympathy for Melissa. She's almost certainly an unwilling participant being forced onto an emotional rollercoaster for the sake of boosting a drab show's ratings. I doubt she would be in on it, as the thing they are almost certainly hoping to capture is genuine shock and heartbreak on camera. Nice huh? People will tune in to see though, that's for sure, and that's all the producers really care about. Kind of odd that Jason (who had his heart broken in the finale of last season's Bachelorette) would be okay with leading someone on like this, but then again ABC pays for his outfits, dates, travel expenses and even buys the engagement ring for him to use in the finale. At least we know he can act, because he certainly is good at pretending to be having a hard time deciding and not wanting to break someone's heart.

So IF all of this is true (and we'll know in just a few days if it is):

- ABC Wins because everyone will be "shocked" and their ratings will get a big boost.
- Jason wins because he gets to propose to the girl he wanted to all along with an insanely expensive ring he didn't have to pay for
- Melissa... well, she loses and the crap they are going to put her through for the sake of ratings is despicable. Maybe they'll offer to make her the next Bachelorette as a consolation prize for being their emotional guinea pig.

Are you shocked to learn that the Bachelor might be completely staged? If so, make me an offer on that bridge.

Should Conan grow up?

2009-02-26T13:43:00.002-05:00

On his last night as host of Late Night, Conan O'Brien told his audience he's aware that critics are saying he needs to "grow up" before taking over the Tonight Show on June 1. Conan, however, said this isn't going to happen.

Quite frankly, it's shouldn't. Conan's success and humor come from his sometimes low-brow humor and "unrefined" style. It may not be Jay Leno, but who cares? If they wanted the host of the Tonight Show to act like that they should have extended Leno's contract. If Conan changed his ways to accommodate his new time slot, he would lose what made him this great to begin with.

Personally, I can't wait to see him take over the Tonight Show and I hope to see him be the same guy who has made me laugh for years.

Was Ledger's Oscar nod just out of sympathy?

2009-02-24T17:27:00.004-05:00

First off, I think Heath Ledger did a fantastic job as the Joker.
He was frightening and almost unrecognizable as the mad clown prince of crime and perfect foil for the famous caped crusader.
All that said, I thought it was an Oscar winning performance.
Sure, I'm probably in the minority, but I don't think it was all that much of a stretch for someone with his talent to dive into a role like that.
The guy was a talented actor chewing on the scenery and did a damn good job at it.
How is that any different that what Johnny Depp did in any of the "Pirates of the Caribbean" flicks?
I would argue Ledger showed his Oscar winning acting chops in 2005's "Brokeback Mountain," not in "The Dark Knight."

Jessica Simpson fat? Who cares!

2009-02-06T14:10:00.002-05:00

I was at the checkout at a pharmacy when I noticed not one but three celebrity magazines with the now famous picture of pop star Jessica Simpson in a pair of what can only be described as mom jeans.
These same magazines advertised scathing articles on what they say are lurid tales of her weight gain.
Seriously? Who cares!
Are we that hungry to tear people down when they pack on a few extra pounds?
She's not an athlete. She's a singer.
And personally, she didn't look like someone who was in need of medical attention due to excessive weight gain.
I guess I don't understand what it is about our society that makes the lifestyles of the rich and famous so fascinating.

So Bale lost his temper

2009-02-05T15:48:00.002-05:00

Christian Bale's angry tirade against the director of photography on the set of Terminator: Salvation has quickly become the hottest gossip item out there. The entire rant can be heard on YouTube along with a techno-remix. Interestingly enough, the story has people sharply divided on whether Bale had any business losing his temper with the guy in the first place. Just in case you haven't heard about it, Bale got upset because the DP was adjusting lights while they were filming a scene and was being distracting.

While I don't necessarily condone the extensive rant Bale went on, I completely understand why he did it. Though it may be hard to see justification in some of Bale's insults, they rang true to me. One of the most basic things I learned in film production was not to tinker with things while the camera is rolling. Wait until there is a cut. This was something you learn almost on Day 1. As parodied on the Colbert Report last night, this is the professional equivalent of walking in front of the camera. This guy was the director of photography, not a grip or production assistant. To get to that point, he must have worked for years in the business. To ignore this basic rule of on-set etiquette (numerous times if you believe some accounts) is extremely unprofessional and amateurish.

Bale didn't need to verbally destroy the guy like he did, but he most certainly had a good reason to upset with the man.

Phelps is human, should be treated like one

2009-02-05T12:20:00.002-05:00

The world is now shocked... SHOCKED... to learn a 23-year-old college student has smoked pot. Since he won 8 gold medals for swimming, Michael Phelps is supposed to be different right? Yes and no. His recent fame does give him some added responsibility, and to his credit Phelps took responsibility for what he did and apologized almost instantaneously.

An apology is not really enough, but what else do they expect the guy to do? It's the responsibility of others to prosecute him (if' they're even going to try). Yeah, he should lose some of the 8 billion sponsor gigs he has gotten in the last 6 months, but that was something he probably should have cut back on anyway. I know he can swim really fast, but why should I care what internet service provider he uses?

During the Olympics the American media had a massive love-affair with Phelps, cutting away from other sports just to watch him stretch, showing features on how long his legs are. Phelps never seemed too comfortable with all the added attention, but he never turned away from it either. When the media has you under a magnifying glass, you really do need to watch every step you take. Now that he's made a mistake, the media seems quick to turn on him.

I'm not a religious person but perhaps the lesson in this for everyone is to avoid worshiping false idols. Humans make mistakes, building them up to be something above all that only leads to a fall from grace.

Blagojevich and the softer side of media?

2009-01-29T13:21:00.003-05:00

Lately, embattled Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich has been making the rounds to defend himself.
He's appeared on day-time talk shows like "The View" and "Good Morning America," all the while saying he is innocent. He's also made a stop to talk to CNN's Larry King.
I'm not saying the Democratic governor is guilty or not, but he's obviously decided to avoid programs that have much more aggressive reputations when it comes to asking the tough questions.
Sure he has every right to defend himself and should be afforded that right. I would think, however, if I were a resident of Illinois, I'd like to see him hit the curve and fast balls from reporters willing to throw them.
Any politician with the ability to become governor surely has the stuff to knock the softballs out of the park lobbed by daytime television's brain trust reporters.
As for King, his relevancy as a reporter has pretty much fizzled like his marriages.
The sugar coated statements Blagojevich makes about his children asking if "daddy" will be governor are so sickening, it's as if he's clinging to any kind of sympathy he can get.
A far cry from the foul language he's accused of using.
Probably the only thing a resident of Illinois has to look forward to is when the whole mess is over and the state can move on from the entire mess.

House votes not to delay digital transition/end to annoying commercials

2009-01-28T17:24:00.006-05:00

If, by some chance, you own a TV but never use it, you might not have seen the daily reminders that analog TV is coming to an end next month. At least that's been the plan for several years until the sudden and recent push to delay the transition to digital because an estimated 6.5 million Americans are still not ready, according to Nielsen. These 6.5 million have not either bought a new TV or a digital converter box for their current set, but at this point I don't think delaying the transition a few months is going to help them. The government and television networks have bombarded the viewing public with information about the switch and coupons were available over a year ago to pay a majority of the cost of a converter box. The coupons were good for $40 of the roughly $50 cost. It's hard to believe that 6.5 Million Americans that own TVs did not have $10 to convert them.

But the push to delay the transition faltered in Congress, so unless something changes soon 6.5 Million people will be without TV in 3 weeks. Call me a cynical but if all this time and effort has not been enough, a few more months won't change anything. It's time to get this transition over with. Some people will not make the switch until the moment they absolutely have to and no amount of delaying will change that.

What are you really selling?

2009-01-07T17:07:00.004-05:00

Monday night the newest season of The Bachelor started on ABC. This time, the bachelor is the man who was rejected on the finale of the last season of The Bachelorette. Ironically, the woman who rejected him was herself rejected on the finale of a prior season of the Bachelor. Not that it really seems to matter, since whoever "wins" doesn't really have much of a chance either. The guy she did end up choosing proposed, she accepted, and they set a date... four months later they broke up.

It's sad for them, but honestly, what did they think would happen? There have been 12 seasons of the Bachelor. Of those, only two couples are still together. Neither has gotten married, yet. Out of the four Bachelorette seasons that have aired, only one has resulted in a successful relationship.

Brett Michaels has failed twice to find love, if that was what he was actually looking for, on his show Rock of Love and is coming back for a third season, this time on bus. Apparently the McMansions they normally use are booked up with the two spin-offs series being filmed right now.

Likewise, after three seasons of Flavor of Love, Flavor Flav decided instead of dating whatever attention seeker won he would stay with the mother of his child. So while he was looking for "love" he was fathering a child with someone who was not part of the show, yet he kept going with the show anyway.

I'm sure you'll be surprised to learn that the spin-off series "I Love New York" ended after two seasons with only broken engagements. The spin-off of that spin-off (I'm not kidding) Real Chance at Love, has not had its reunion show yet, (it airs Jan. 19). I'm not holding my breath on hearing wedding plans.

Tila Tequila's bi-sexual Shot of Love series ended after two seasons. After parting ways with the man who won the first season, Tequila chose a woman as the winner in season two. Unexpectedly, the woman turned her down after admitting she wasn't ready for a relationship with a woman. Weird that she didn't think about that before deciding to participate in the show.

There are spinoffs and spinoffs and its all the same recycled garbage. Attention seeking B-list celebrities or previous reality show rejects agree to fool around with 15-25 attention-seeking strangers in a random McMansion until only one is left, collect their money, part ways, rinse, rinse, rinse, repeat.

These shows are spreading like a virus, which each new one having less and less pretense the previous ones. But with a success rate of about 2%, does anyone actually believe that real relationships are formed like this? I doubt even the participants do, but it doesn't seem like that is why most of them are doing it anymore either. So why do so many people tune in? At this point I can only assume it's because we like watching emotional trainwrecks because they make us feel better about our own relationship issues or lives in general.

How fickle are we?

2008-12-17T12:10:00.003-05:00

Toyota is, at for now, halting construction on a new plant (even though it is 90% complete) because they have seen Prius sales drop significantly since gas prices dropped a few weeks ago.

Seriously? Is the American public so fickle that we only care about reducing dependence on oil and better fuel economy when gas is over $2.00 a gallon? I honestly hope the drop is sales more a result of the slumping economy and not a knee-jerk reaction gas prices. For one, hybrid technology is a major step forward for the auto industry and we need to continue to support ways to improve our vehicles. But more importantly, these low gas prices are not going to last. Today again OPEC announced they are slashing production. Prices have already gone back up $0.30 a gallon in my neighborhood. I expect them to be back over $2.00 by mid-January at the latest. I'm hardly an economics expert, but it seems obvious the price plunge was more the result of the sudden stock market collapse than anything else.

The fuel crisis our nation faces has not passed, the coast is not clear from here on out. Believe me I am just as thankful for the lower gas prices as everyone else. I can't remember the last time I got by for two weeks with only $20 worth of gas, but I know realistically things won't stay this way for long. A permanant solution is still a ways off, and we need to keep working towards it.

Jay Leno in prime time and Fallon at late night, give me a break

2008-12-11T17:44:00.002-05:00

I've always liked Letterman better than Leno.
It's not that I don't find Leno funny.
I guess I just associate him too much with those Doritos commercials from the late 80s and early 90s.
But Letterman, when he was at the top of his game doing late night at NBC, the guy was hilarious.
I was among the fans championing him to get Carson's spot when he retired.
Alas, it went to Leno.
But that is all old news.
The new news is that NBC is going to cut back on their costs by throwing Leno at 10 p.m., giving his show to Conan O'Brien and then, of all people, Jimmy Fallon takes on the late shift.
FALLON?!! What, was Father Guido Sarducci busy?
Fallon has some big shoes to fill, and it's my guess his turn at late night will last about the same as Chevy Chase's rotten talk show.
But what does this all mean for NBC?
It means they won't have to pay for prime time dramas, which are a bit more costly when compared to a talk show.
It's an interesting idea, just not one I would bank on.
I don't follow who is the king of late night ratings, but I'm sure Conan is more than able to handle himself against Letterman.
I'm just not convinced Fallon is the right candidate to take the helm of a show that has been great for so long.
Other than the cost, probably a big reason for the move is the utter lack of good prime time television on NBC's part.
I'm probably in the minority of people who think "Heroes" is still good.
But then take a look at some of its other newest editions: An awful remake of "Knight Rider," and a terrible variety show starring Rosie O'Donnell?
I'd rather watch a PBS documentary on the manufacturing of marbles.
These are just two stink bombs the peacock trucked out like they had just reinvented the wheel.
I guess "Law and Order: Keweenaw County Sheriff," can't be too far behind.
I'll still watch Letterman after the nightly news when Leno takes his new spot in prime time.
And I'm sure I'll flip to Conan on the commercials.
But it looks like I'll be going to bed right afterward, like many other people.

Five reasons we all lose on Black Friday

2008-11-28T13:26:00.008-05:00

Well, it's here. The most anticipated day of the year by bargain hunters and retail corporate CEO's. Black Friday. Now the Christmas season has officially officially been officially made official, every thing's great, right? No, unfortunately. Black Friday is nothing to get excited over. In fact, it's something worth despising. Here's why:

5) It's not enough... it never is...
Even if the stores make big profits today, it's not nearly enough. Then all we hear for weeks is whether or not these companies are making enough money. Are we buying enough? If not, we're made to feel guilty. Anyone who decides not spend their entire paycheck on Christmas gifts is told they are contributing to the collapse of the global economy. Unfortunately this will probably never end as long as so many companies over-invest in expansions and marketing throughout the rest of the year and then depend on big holidays sales to pay for all of it.

4) Cuing has become a sport
A few years back, big sales might get dozen or so dedicated shoppers waiting outside a store. But in recent years, something has changed. Waiting in line has almost become a sport, with some showing so much competitive motivation as to get there days ahead of time. And why is this news? It's not. But sure enough we see on the news every time a new videogame system comes out, every time a new iGadget is released, and now, every Thanksgiving. Tents, space heaters, laptops, blankets, camping chairs, all in a neat line wrapping around the front of the local Best Buy or department store, with people anxiously willing to give up hours, sometimes days of their lives, to save $100 on a computer. I get the impression some do it now for the attention, knowing there's a good chance a local news crew with be out there to film a fluff piece. They seem to like being first in line for some kind of bizarre bragging rights. But I guess you have to admire the dedication of some, willing to give up a holiday with their loved ones to sit outside in the cold. I couldn't do it. I wouldn't want to. I've never seen a sale on anything worth it.

3) The stuff you're waiting for isn't worth it
I worked in retail for years. Books, electronics, movies, music. You name it, I sold it. And if I didn't, odds are a friend of mine did. A plethora of sources can confirm a lot, if not all, of the "doorbuster" items being sold for crazy prices, are garbage. Whether they're last years models or off-brand products, odds are these items are inventory surplus trying to be unloaded. Now that Black Friday rabid shoppers have become an anticipated yearly staple, what better way to get rid of the cheap junk than to mark it down to clearance prices and call it a deal? Guess how much of it gets returned. Sure, there are some decent items that get a discount, but nothing you couldn't find on Amazon or sites like Newegg.com.

2) So much for the holiday spirit
It never fails... Every year there are stories about the long lines, followed by stories about the fights that break out when there aren't enough ePods or SUNY flatscreens to go around. As fun as some people make waiting in lines in the cold for hours, it seems to grate on the nerves of most. Then things explode. Shouting matches, fist fights. And all over Christmas gifts?

1) People die.
Two people shot in a Toys R' Us in California, while in New York, a Wal-mart employee was trampled and a pregnant woman injured by shoppers who even pushed their way passed emergency workers trying to help. How can an obsession with consumption be so absorbing that even the death of a man cannot stop people from pushing to try and get a cheap TV? This isn't a game. This isn't a competition. Lives have been destroyed or ended entirely because we're hyped up to shop today.

IS ANYONE PAYING ATTENTION!?

Should there be a Dark Knight sequel? Five reasons the answer is "no"

2008-11-21T15:26:00.007-05:00

I doubt anyone can really argue that The Dark Knight is not a phenomenal movie. As far as sequels go, it's all anyone could ask for. It took the story established in Batman Begins and took it to the next level. Christian Bale was at his best. The story pulled no punches, and it showcased what it quite possible Heath Ledgers greatest performance. The ending leaves the door wide open for a third film, but should one be made? Director Chris Nolan is not committing just yet. For what it's worth, Nolan is one of my favorite directors, and has been since I first saw Memento. As rumors of potential villain casting persists and fan-made posters begin to fill the Internet, Nolan himself has been quoted as saying "I have to ask the question: How many good third movies in a franchise can people name?”

He has a good point. Movies that were perhaps not originally intended to be a trilogy end up running the story into the ground by the third time around. It's not just that the first or second film may be too hard an act to follow, sometimes everyone, from the cast to the fans, grow tired of the same thing, and a lack of creative energy results in films that may succeed commercially, but are ultimately regarded as failures.

Even though I really enjoyed The Dark Knight, here are five reason why a third Nolan-Bale Batman film should not be made.

5.) Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
The original director drops out, only one cast member returns, and the plot completely contradicts the previous film, which just happens to be legendary. A perfect example of when well enough should have been left alone. Now there's a TV series which complete ignores the story in the third movie, much like the rest of the world.
Fatal Flaw: Pointless sequel with gimmicky characters

4.) The Matrix Revolutions

Okay, so the second one wasn't all the great either, but it could have been had the third not dragged this groud-breaking film series into the depths of crappiness. Love it or hate it, nobody can deny the influence the first film has had on film making. So what went wrong? The sequel turned the notch up, adding increasingly complex plot devices and characters into an already convoluted story. The subtle symbolism and allegory presented in the first film ended up being a club the Wachowski brothers beat the audience over the head with by the time the trilogy wrapped up. And what are we treated to for the grand finale? After an entire film building up the idea that Neo and Smith are equals, we get to watch them fight... and fight... and fight... just like we did in the first film... and the second film. With all the pretension stripped away, all we've got is a bunch of complicated philosophical and moral conflicts settled by another long, CGI-powered fistfight.
Fatal Flaw: A shallow story trying to appear deep

3.) Spider-man 3
Speaking more directly to comic book films, Spider-man 3 really shows how a good thing can go bad fast. The first two Spider-man films were great adapatations. Despite the relative absurdity of the plots, the characters were convincing in context. Then the third film rolled around... and Sam Raimi made the same mistake that has condemed other comic book films: TOO MANY VILLIANS!!! The first two films built up a major conflict between Peter Parker and Harry Osborn, but the third threw in the Sandman AND Venom as well. Venom deserved his own movie, to be played by someone other than Topher Grace and not the afterthought treatment he got in this film. Taking a legendary villian and royally screwing them up is the easiest way to allienate fans. And of course there was dancing Emo-Peter...
Fatal Flaw: Too much of everything

2.) X-3 (X-Men III)
Sequels are expected to up the ante, but when the series already involves nearly two dozen characters, it is very easy to go overboard. This movie did just that, adding dozens of nameless characters as well as so many well-known ones that the real fight ends up being one for screentime. Then they took the Phoenix Saga, one of the most well-known stories in Marvel Comics history, and cram it into the film with everything else. Then there's characters like Nightcrawler, an awesome addition to X-2, that inexplicably disappeared in the third film without even a moment's notice. The finished product is just a big mess sold on the premise that people would pay just to see live-action versions of other famous characters, and nothing else.
Fatal Flaw: New characters trying to make up for a terrible story

1.) Batman Forever
It only got worse from here. So bad they had to reboot the entire series. It's unlikely Nolan would let go of the new Batman series now anyway, but this, like Terminator 3, shows what happens someone takes over for a more talented director. Rumor has it, the Riddler will be the next villain if Nolan makes a third film. With the darker tone these movies have taken, Jim Carrey's take on the role should be completely abandoned. I'm confident that would happen, just look how the two handled Two-Face in different ways.

And if nothing else, one word could ruin everything like it did here: ROBIN
Fatal Flaw: New director, cheesy characters, Robin, Robin, Robin and Robin

But I could be wrong. Just because the series goes on does not mean it will only get worse. Sure, it helps if you keep the same cast/director and have a story in mind long before production begins... but if you need movies that argue "yes" to making a third Batman, how about:

- Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
- Return of the Jedi
- Lord of the Rings: Return of the King
- The Good, The Bad and the Ugly
- Army of Darkness (Evil Dead 3)
- Once upon a time in Mexico (Part 3 of "El Mariachie" trilogy)

An unearthed Beatles' track?!

2008-11-17T18:44:00.003-05:00

I was born too late to experience the onslaught of The Beatles to America.

My earliest memories of the famous four pretty much are relegated to hearing my mom play Rubber Soul (still my favorite album) and Revolver on the record player (and then CD player when I was a teenager).

I was hooked.

Now comes news of the 14-minute "Carnival of Light" track and that it will finally see the light of day, at least, according to Paul McCartney.

According to reports, it is said to feature distorted electric guitars, discordant sound effects, a church organ, and gargling sounds, as well as McCartney and John Lennon screaming phrases like "Barcelona" and "Are you all right?"

I can't help but wonder if it's truly a piece of avant-garde experimentation or just a bunch of noise that was combined following an acid trip.

I can't wait to hear it, although, there is a sneaking suspicion I have that maybe there was a good reason this track wasn't released.

Snoopy on the Web

2008-11-10T18:34:00.004-05:00

It's amazing how much content is being transferred or finding new life on the Web these days.
In recent weeks, it's been announced by Craig Schulz, Charles Schulz's son, that 20 Peanuts digital shorts will be made available online.
Schulz is president of Creative Associates, which approved and manages all of the licensing for Peanuts-related products.
In interviews, he said the webisodes are an attempt to get children to turn to the comic strip in books and newspapers.
I can't help but be happy about that. I just hope enough kids are willing to get their mom or dad to pay the .99 per webisode or $7.99 for the season pass.
Another positive move toward the Internet and the entertainment world is MGM talking to the folks at YouTube about featuring some of their flicks on their site.
Not a bad way to get some of the best and brightest stars of yesterday to an audience who might not know just how great some of those old musicals from the 40s and 50s are.
These types of marketing initiatives that show just how much technology has changed our lives in the last 20 years.
It's also nice to know more is being done to showcase the best artistic efforts of our culture, rather than just thinking of the Web as a quick way to get porn or order airline tickets.

Did Oprah rock the vote?

2008-11-07T12:34:00.005-05:00

Yesterday I got an e-mail with pictures of celebrity houses.
One of those homes was Oprah's mansion.
Later that night, she was guest starring on "30 Rock."
Then today, I see the transcripts from an interview on Fox News' Web site questioning if Oprah is turning red states blue.
I always find celebrities stumping for politicians to be annoying.
I'm sure there are people out there who base their political views on what their favorite actor, actress or entertainer does or promotes.
I just can't understand why.
While I hold nothing against Oprah, I do find her hard to stomach and can't understand the attraction people have toward that type of programming.
So, for argument's sake, let's take a celebrity I do like.
Bruce Springstein is a favorite of mine. I enjoy his music. I'd pay to see him in concert.
However, I wouldn't base my vote on what he has to say politically (that is in no way to say I'm a card carrying member of the GOP either).
Celebrities to me are just people who got lucky in life.
Some have worked hard and benefited from that work.
Others, i.e. Paris Hilton, were born into wealth and privilege. That has led them to get record deals and television shows.
Either way, we don't know them personally. We don't know what they are like when the cameras are off.
How many of them know what it is like to struggle with bills in an economy that is going down the tubes?
How many of them care about their fans that pay through the nose to see their movies or listen to their music?
How many of them take the time to read a newspaper or go online to study up on the issues?
And how many of them just blindly cast their support behind a candidate because it's the fashionable thing to do?
I'm glad to hear so many people went out and voted, but I hope they did so by really digging into the issues, rather than what Oprah or Chuck Norris had to say.

Excuses, Excuses

2008-11-05T12:54:00.012-05:00

Well, the election is over. Finally. No more robo-calls, no more attack ads, no more solicitations for donations.

The big story is obviously the historic victory by President-elect Barack Obama, but on a local level there were a few surprising upsets. The biggest of these was Democratic candidate Gary Peters' victory over incumbent Republican Joe Knollenberg to represent Michigan's 9th District in the US House.

With Obama's sweeping victory throughout the state and open support of Peters (who had participated in numerous events for Obama prior to the election), the election took a quick turn and Peters ended up with a comfortable 9-point lead. What struck me as odd though was the reaction following Knollenberg's concession:

“This wasn’t about Joe Knollenberg,” his aide Nate Bailey said. “It was about people not voting for Republicans this year.”

Really?

What about...

Peter Hoekstra (2nd District, won by 27 points)
Vernon Ehlers (3rd District, won by 26 points)
David Camp (4th District, won by 26 points)
Frederick Upton (6th District, won by 20 points)
Mike Rogers (8th District, won by 17 points)
Candice Miller (10th District, won by 35 points)
Thaddeus McCotter (11th District, won by 6 points)
L. Brooks Patterson (Oakland County Executive, won by roughly 18 points)
Michael Bouchard (Oakland County Sheriff, won by roughly 20 points)

All Republicans, all incumbents.

As an example, Miller won her district by 121,329 votes when the included counties sided with Obama by a total of 35, 158 votes. That's a lot of people who voted for a Democrat for President but had no problem voting for a Republican as their district's rep.

So make no mistake about it, Knollenberg's loss was all about him.

Figures from CNN and WXYZ.

Five Worst Halloween Costumes 2008

2008-10-29T17:19:00.018-04:00

Welcome to the first installment of what I hope will become a weekly entry in this blog. I was going to call it the Friday Five, but since I am posting this one on a Wednesday, that will have to wait until next time perhaps.

Halloween is almost here, and both children and adults have literally hundred of options when it comes to store-bought costumes. Fly-by-night costume shops pop up all over the place, and there are numerous quality websites making it easier than ever to find the perfect costume for a party or trick-or-treating.

Not all costumes are created equally however, and I'm not talking about the quality of material used. It would seem in an effort to fill more shelves, some costume makers will mass produce any idea suggested to them.

After spending some time looking at several costume vendor websites and visiting a few stores, I have found a few of the worst mass-produced costume ideas out there. Yes, there are certainly worse, more offensive, tasteless, or downright poor quality costumes out there, but many I have come across are home-made or one-of-a-kind and not likely to be available at a Halloween USA.

There are certainly other costumes that could be on this list, but in keeping with a top five, I had to pick only one from each of the follow categories: adult male, adult female, youth male, youth female, infant.

Adult Male: A Fork
What's the joke here? You're a kitchen utensil. Sure, there is a matching spoon costume, but how is that any better? I can't image anyone going into a costume store, walking along the many aisles and stopping in front of this and saying "Okay, this is it, I found my costume. I am being a fork this year!" Besides a Broadway musical about the magic that happens on the dinner table every night, I can't picture a scenario that would call on anyone to don this costume without becoming an instant punchline. I don't know if there is a medical condition that causes people to develop an unnatural attraction to generic-looking cutlery, but if there is, the person who made this costume may suffer from it and should probably get themselves checked out.

Adult Female: Sarah Palin
Yeah, this is probably the only year this costume will even be slightly relevant, but Tina Fey already has the market cornered on this one. To make matters worse, somebody thought it would be hilarious to make a wig with miniature versions of the Alaska Governor's most repeated talking points spread throughout. Yeah, that'll be really funny to have to constantly sit still while people examine your hair up close and ask you to explain what each piece means, that is, if they're held on by anything stronger than cheap glue and don't sporadically fall off throughout the party. Mark my words, you wear this thing and two months from now you're going to wonder why there's a tiny moose under your couch.

Youth male: "Tighty Whitey"
I'm not sure who is supposed to be offended the most by this one, but if your son doesn't get mocked enough at school this might help. Of course, what does it say about you if you buy a "costume" that consists of baggy pants and an oversized t-shirt? Is it really funny to see a kid walking around with his underwear showing? No, it's not. This is the costume that inspired me to make this list, as it fails on all fronts.

Youth female: "Pop Stars"
Are we even paying attention anymore? Who wants their daughter to grow up and be like Britney Spears? Is it the two failed marriages before age 30 or the circus of a child custody battle that followed? How about the random headshaving, car attacking, underwearless partying, or drastic weight shifts? While adult females are bombarded with nothing but "sexy occupation" costumes anymore, it's really disturbing to see how costume makers are marketing risque clothing to kids these days. The costume pictured is just one of many examples out there today. Costume stores should be required to contact child protective services whenever someone purchases one of these.

Infant: Pizza Slice
Nothing says Halloween like wrapping your baby in a giant slice of pizza. Wait... what? How are you supposed to carry them around with this thing on? I guess they won't mind having their arms and legs stuck inside the costume all night either. When it comes to baby costumes, there are a lot of absolutely adorbale ones available that don't constict your child's abilty to move on their own.

So that's it. Hope everyone enjoys Halloween, just with better costumes!

The Purple States of America

2008-10-29T16:52:00.010-04:00

I'm writing this now because I don't want anyone to think I am doing this because "my guy" won.

No matter who wins on Nov. 4, this country needs to get behind them. The last two elections have deeply polarized this country, so much so that terms like "blue state" and "red state" may as well mean Mars and Venus. No matter who our President is, we are all part of this country and need to work together for the good of all of us. No doubt there will some gloating from whatever side wins while the others wring their hands in protest, but it has to stop there.

The politics of late do nothing to help solve our nation's problems, it creates new ones. The idea that if "your candidate" wins, everything will be perfect, but if "the other guy" wins, the world will end seems to be permeating so many aspects of this election it's disgusting. Despite what some of the attacks ads may imply, I have no doubt both Obama and McCain want good things for the people of this nation, they just disagree on how to achieve those things.

Regardless of who wins, we have to stop looking at people who voted for someone else as the enemy and be the United States we once were.

Palin's GOP funded shopping spree

2008-10-22T16:46:00.003-04:00

I don't think I'd be very happy right now if I was one of the people who donated to John McCain's presidential campaign.

Like most average folks, I work hard for my money and the announcement of $150,000 being spent on clothing, hair styling, makeup and other "campaign accessories" in September after Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin hopped on the GOP ticket seems, well, idiotic.

Fifteen years ago, McCain was the dude complaining that restrictions on political contributions for personal use were too broad. I guess his tune has changed what with his most successful attempt to date at capturing the spot of commander in chief.

In Palin's defense, our culture places far too much importance on what a person is dressed like or how they look.

I'm sure more people would be screaming about physical appearance rather than qualifications had McCain and the GOP trucked out Martha Wash of the 1980s music group The Weather Girls instead of a former beauty queen.

All someone has to do is look at a magazine rack and they'll see nothing but beautiful people on the covers. I wouldn't be surprised if even the editors at American Woodworker are pressured to sex it up once in a while.

Still, they should be the ones setting the example. But, once again, our supposed leaders are falling prey to the superficial trends and spending money that isn't their own.

Christmas in October

2008-10-14T15:30:00.008-04:00

Well, we're not even half-way through October yet, and already you can go to department stores and see their Christmas decorations filling aisles, some more than their Halloween supplies. Christmas music being playing way too early on the radio can't be far behind.

Seems like every year, the start of the Christmas season is moved up a little. Last year, local station WNIC 100.3 FM went "all Christmas, all the time" on Halloween. I remember how irritating it was to hear that because prior to this, Halloween seemed like a big enough holiday to keep the Christmas season contained to the months of November and December only. Apparently that is no longer the case, as stations like WNIC seem to think you would rather listen to "Frosty the Snowman" instead of "Monster Mash" on Halloween.

For the record, WNIC has not switched formats yet this year, but they are already asking about it on their homepage. WMVN 101.1 FM in St. Louis, MO, however, has already made the switch, which means we can't be far behind. Now that a precedent has been set for Halloween as an afterthought, when we will start hearing Jingle Bell Rock? I'm guessing we'll see WNIC go all-Christmas no later than the 31st for the second year in the row.

This has gone well beyond the point of absurdity now and despite the large irritant this seems to be to a lot of people, it only gets worse every year. I don't get it.

New Blog

2008-10-14T14:14:00.002-04:00

In a world where everyone has their own blog, what's one more?

Well, with a majority of the blogs from The Oakland Press focusing on sports, I thought it would be nice to have one that focused on... well, everything else. The plan is for this blog to run the gamut of topics with a local spin. Shaun and I are both big movie buffs, so don't be surprised to see some film references in blogs that are not even about a particular movie.

Truth is I have an opinion on almost everything, and I'm never shy about voicing it, but what I'm hoping to do besides having the usual soapbox most blogs are, is shine a spotlight on the local angles to stories that might not otherwise be featured.

I also like lists, so every Friday I plan to to post the "Friday Five," which is pretty self-explanatory. Every Friday, my entry will be "Five things that..."

Hopefully, once people actually read this, I'll be able to get some feedback from readers. with blogs being a place to showcse opinions, I'm hoping readers will be willing to share theirs as well.