Thursday, October 30, 2008
more-bama
can this guy get more inspirational? every time he opens his mouth the right words come out.
i feel like we are all used to politicians that sound too good to be true but it's different this time. this man has been consistent and uncompromised in his message and in his campaign. i remember back in the primaries thinking to myself "you have to attack more, you have to play their game to win!" but i was wrong. i was corrupted in my ideals by karl rove and the political tactics that have ruled washington for the last 8 years and i thought that obama could only win if he stooped to their level. but obama has decided to win on integrity and policy, to appeal to the goodness in people and the genuine desire to make our country a better place. he is a better person that i am because he had a lot more faith in the american people than i did. i am prepared to apologize to america come november 5th. i am looking forward to the opportunity to say "i'm sorry, i was wrong. i lost faith after bush was elected again, i didn't think you all had much between the ears. i thought you were naive fools who would let yourselves be manipulated by fear and lies because you were too complacent to find the truth and too cowardly to step outside of the norm and make a choice that might actually change your lives for the better. i was wrong about you. you decided that enough was enough. you decided to get your scandal in the pages of star magazine and the national enquirer and look to our politicians for leadership, information and genuine policy. thank you for making the right choices in this election and for living up to the expectations of barack obama. he was right to place his faith in you and i am glad it paid off". i vote and i pray to have the opportunity to apologize to america and thank them for making the right choice this time. no matter what happens on the 4th, i can say thank you to obama- thank you for running. thank you for changing the political landscape in america. thank you for proving a person can run for president and be successful for all of the right reasons and do it an honest and respectful way which focuses on what is really important and doesn't resort to smears and lies and dirty politics. thank you for proving that you can beat them without joining them; that you can play their game with your own rules; that you don't have to sink to their level but instead you can rise above and appeal to the decency of people, as a decent person, and win on your terms and on our terms. no matter what happens, you are already an inspirational leader and you have already made history and you have already changed this country. all that said, you better win or i am going to be piiiiiiiiiiiiiiissed.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
open letter to rush limbaugh
dear rush limbaugh,
why are you suck a dick? i find it very off-putting. i wonder how you go home at night and sleep with your day's activities on your conscience. i find it hard to comprehend how you look at yourself in the mirror every morning, not exclusively because you have to look upon your doughy, sour countenance, but also because you are forced to confront yourself and the fact that you make your living lying and attacking people's credibility in order to play to the fears of an ignorant few. i wonder how you can broadcast lies and hate and ignorance; how can you just make shit up and act as though the majority of us are fools for not seeing these ridiculously contrived connections and outrageous suggestions or theories and speculations that you pass off as undeniably true? how come you are allowed to speculate wildly and offer absolutely no concrete evidence to back it up, to corroborate your accusations, and yet state your preposterous musings as if they were fact? i hate how you pretend that just because i do not operate under suspicion and fear of anything that smacks of a liberal approach that must mean that i hate god and loathe this country and i want to destroy it. i am disturbed that you promote division and labeling people and grouping together huge parts of the population and make assumptions about their character as a group based on one or two values that they share. i am disquieted that you do not see this as the makings of discrimination, that these sweeping characterizations of entire groups of the population and your divisive language is the kind of attitude and language employed by racists and bigots and anti-semites: this real americans versus anti-americans is like the real true germany of hitler. how can you talk like this, spread your hate over the air-waves and feed the fears of the sheltered and uninformed right and go home at night and think to yourself "another day, another job well done."? it frightens me a little and disturbs me a lot. so seriously, what is your deal?
p.s. stop calling yourself "el rushbo". it is really irritating and it makes you sound like a pretentious, self-congratulating douche.
why are you suck a dick? i find it very off-putting. i wonder how you go home at night and sleep with your day's activities on your conscience. i find it hard to comprehend how you look at yourself in the mirror every morning, not exclusively because you have to look upon your doughy, sour countenance, but also because you are forced to confront yourself and the fact that you make your living lying and attacking people's credibility in order to play to the fears of an ignorant few. i wonder how you can broadcast lies and hate and ignorance; how can you just make shit up and act as though the majority of us are fools for not seeing these ridiculously contrived connections and outrageous suggestions or theories and speculations that you pass off as undeniably true? how come you are allowed to speculate wildly and offer absolutely no concrete evidence to back it up, to corroborate your accusations, and yet state your preposterous musings as if they were fact? i hate how you pretend that just because i do not operate under suspicion and fear of anything that smacks of a liberal approach that must mean that i hate god and loathe this country and i want to destroy it. i am disturbed that you promote division and labeling people and grouping together huge parts of the population and make assumptions about their character as a group based on one or two values that they share. i am disquieted that you do not see this as the makings of discrimination, that these sweeping characterizations of entire groups of the population and your divisive language is the kind of attitude and language employed by racists and bigots and anti-semites: this real americans versus anti-americans is like the real true germany of hitler. how can you talk like this, spread your hate over the air-waves and feed the fears of the sheltered and uninformed right and go home at night and think to yourself "another day, another job well done."? it frightens me a little and disturbs me a lot. so seriously, what is your deal?
p.s. stop calling yourself "el rushbo". it is really irritating and it makes you sound like a pretentious, self-congratulating douche.
when i think about this show, i don't think of anything negative whatsoever
well that isn't true. in fact, my feelings about the the hills aren't even that lukewarm and non-committal. but then again, i am not an enormous douche-bag who would be caught dead in a sleeveless denim vest.
i have 5 things to say about this week's episode of the hills:
1. brody and lauren are definitely together. seriously this is not just wishful thinking, i have gathered the evidence and i am certain. last week in mexico there was the intimate high-five in the ocean (i know what you're thinking; an intimate high-five? what does that even mean? but it was, go back, check it out. c-h-e-m-i-s-t-r--y). this week, the scene in the bar was totally a triple date and their body language and interaction screams couple. even when lauren scolded brody for trying to be too much of a tough guy and totally subdued him - that was the scolding of a girlfriend and the obedience of a boyfriend. this is the scolding i want to see in the deleted scenes - brody: hey homie! lauren: you're white. they are secretly dating you guys, i swear. i have one thing to say about it: yay!
2. audrina seemed like a real person for the first time and not a vacant, over-tanned, toothy mannequin. she showed (gasp!) emotion! she also showed poor judgment.
3. finally the return of overly obtuse and absurd justin bobby. finally the justin bobby who tries so hard to sound profound or deep he ends up being vague and nonsensical. my favorite was when he described himself and audrina as a "catch-22". ummm.... how? that must have really confused audrina even more who i am not convinced can even count to 22. he is preposterous.
4. lo! and her boyfriend! she looked super pretty. more of her please. (also, donde esta whitney?)
5. i found monday's episode decidedly more pleasant than usual and i know why. we ALMOST had a speidi free show but them spence had to swoop in at the end to be a miserable prick and ruin everyone else's happiness. so close, you guys. sigh.
final thoughts: in case you were wondering, mtv- no, audrina cannot carry her own show. also i cannot wait until heidi gets fired next week. wheeeeeeeeeeeee.
i have 5 things to say about this week's episode of the hills:
1. brody and lauren are definitely together. seriously this is not just wishful thinking, i have gathered the evidence and i am certain. last week in mexico there was the intimate high-five in the ocean (i know what you're thinking; an intimate high-five? what does that even mean? but it was, go back, check it out. c-h-e-m-i-s-t-r--y). this week, the scene in the bar was totally a triple date and their body language and interaction screams couple. even when lauren scolded brody for trying to be too much of a tough guy and totally subdued him - that was the scolding of a girlfriend and the obedience of a boyfriend. this is the scolding i want to see in the deleted scenes - brody: hey homie! lauren: you're white. they are secretly dating you guys, i swear. i have one thing to say about it: yay!
2. audrina seemed like a real person for the first time and not a vacant, over-tanned, toothy mannequin. she showed (gasp!) emotion! she also showed poor judgment.
3. finally the return of overly obtuse and absurd justin bobby. finally the justin bobby who tries so hard to sound profound or deep he ends up being vague and nonsensical. my favorite was when he described himself and audrina as a "catch-22". ummm.... how? that must have really confused audrina even more who i am not convinced can even count to 22. he is preposterous.
4. lo! and her boyfriend! she looked super pretty. more of her please. (also, donde esta whitney?)
5. i found monday's episode decidedly more pleasant than usual and i know why. we ALMOST had a speidi free show but them spence had to swoop in at the end to be a miserable prick and ruin everyone else's happiness. so close, you guys. sigh.
final thoughts: in case you were wondering, mtv- no, audrina cannot carry her own show. also i cannot wait until heidi gets fired next week. wheeeeeeeeeeeee.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
well, my friends, i know my history lessons
there is at least one phrase from the mccain stump that rings true: "they say those who don't learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them." unfortunately not all representatives of his campaign seem to have gotten the memo.
there has been a lot of pro-america versus anti-america talk coming at us these days from our favorite angry mob inciter gov. palin and a slew of other repubs raising the question of who are the "real" americans. too broad? nancy pfotenhauer distilled it further, dismissing the part of virginia that was not the real virginia (and no she didn't mean west virginia). as john stewart aptly put it "what the pfuck?" this talk will no doubt be of enormous assistance when it comes to working across party lines to get us out of the mess this country is in. nothing screams bipartisanship like accusing one half of being anti-american. these offhand remarks by leaders int eh mccain campaign are fluff though really; minnesota rep. michele bachman broke it down to chris matthews, after ranting on about obama's clearly anti-american views.
"What I would say -- what I would say is that the news media should do a penetrating expose and take a look. I wish they would. I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out, are they pro-America or anti-America? I think people would love to see an expose like that."
where have i heard about something like this before? oh yeah! from this guy:
i'm a link!
there has been a lot of pro-america versus anti-america talk coming at us these days from our favorite angry mob inciter gov. palin and a slew of other repubs raising the question of who are the "real" americans. too broad? nancy pfotenhauer distilled it further, dismissing the part of virginia that was not the real virginia (and no she didn't mean west virginia). as john stewart aptly put it "what the pfuck?" this talk will no doubt be of enormous assistance when it comes to working across party lines to get us out of the mess this country is in. nothing screams bipartisanship like accusing one half of being anti-american. these offhand remarks by leaders int eh mccain campaign are fluff though really; minnesota rep. michele bachman broke it down to chris matthews, after ranting on about obama's clearly anti-american views.
"What I would say -- what I would say is that the news media should do a penetrating expose and take a look. I wish they would. I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out, are they pro-America or anti-America? I think people would love to see an expose like that."
where have i heard about something like this before? oh yeah! from this guy:
i'm a link!
not enough history for you? do you know who else was accused of being a socialist by his critics and opposition? franklin delano roosevelt. i know who i would rather be aligned with.
damn it
where is our remote control? i am sick of standing up every time i need to adjust the volume. it was okay for a while but now i am over it.
dear remote control,
where are you? show yourself.
regards,
bridget
ebony & ivory vs. elderly & ivory: energy
here are the candidates on the issues. drawing from the debates and the campaigns and various news sources i want to talk about the issues facing the country and where the candidates stand on them. i had been toying with the idea of just attacking the character of the 2 candidates until things got really ugly and i was leaning that way for a while but let's give this a whirl.
i'm gonna be a little bit of a maverick here and not start with the economy. we are going to talk about energy. which relates to the economy, and national security and foreign policy and all that of course but we'll try to keep it a little more focused on the topic at hand. we'll just pretend this is any question asked of sarah palin in the v.p. debate and talk, talk, talk about energy. i flipped a coin and casey called in the air over gmail chat and determined that obama's stance will be presented first.
energy is what obama called priority one when asked to list his top 3 by tom brokaw in the second debate. he notes our immediate economic crisis but in the long term he considers the energy question one of the biggest challenges we face- although he sees it as not exclusively so but also as an opportunity. his plan is for a new energy economy that will create over 5 million jobs here in the states. this is a big focus of his economic plan and his efforts towards job creation and rebuilding the economy. we need to shift from importing our alternative energy vehicles from places like japan and south korea and to retool the auto plants in the heartland- in detroit- to create these fuel-efficient vehicles. these will be the plants creating wind turbines and solar panels; this industry of clean energy that will be the driving force of economy for the next century (much like the computer and internet industry has been for the few decades). ever the democrat, obama wants to invest in things. it's like the new new deal. but investing in infrastructure and alternate energy creates jobs, and included in the improved roads and bridges is a new electricity grid that will get alternative energy to the communities that are using it. how will he pay for it? he has a plan, we'll talk about that at another time (ecooonomy!) we have new jobs though, you guys.
i'm gonna be a little bit of a maverick here and not start with the economy. we are going to talk about energy. which relates to the economy, and national security and foreign policy and all that of course but we'll try to keep it a little more focused on the topic at hand. we'll just pretend this is any question asked of sarah palin in the v.p. debate and talk, talk, talk about energy. i flipped a coin and casey called in the air over gmail chat and determined that obama's stance will be presented first.
energy is what obama called priority one when asked to list his top 3 by tom brokaw in the second debate. he notes our immediate economic crisis but in the long term he considers the energy question one of the biggest challenges we face- although he sees it as not exclusively so but also as an opportunity. his plan is for a new energy economy that will create over 5 million jobs here in the states. this is a big focus of his economic plan and his efforts towards job creation and rebuilding the economy. we need to shift from importing our alternative energy vehicles from places like japan and south korea and to retool the auto plants in the heartland- in detroit- to create these fuel-efficient vehicles. these will be the plants creating wind turbines and solar panels; this industry of clean energy that will be the driving force of economy for the next century (much like the computer and internet industry has been for the few decades). ever the democrat, obama wants to invest in things. it's like the new new deal. but investing in infrastructure and alternate energy creates jobs, and included in the improved roads and bridges is a new electricity grid that will get alternative energy to the communities that are using it. how will he pay for it? he has a plan, we'll talk about that at another time (ecooonomy!) we have new jobs though, you guys.
obama's plan is fairly all encompasing. he focuses a lot on alternative energy, calling for investments in solar, wind, biodiesel and geothermal. in obama's plan, alternative energy would further boost our economy as green technologies are developed that we can export to countries like china. this would be a great turn around from the current situation where we are, as the senator observes, borrowing over $700 billion from china to send to saudi arabia. obama summed it up nicely and effectively "it's mortgaging our children's future." yes, well put.
despite claims to the contrary, obama does also support nuclear power, with the caveat that the waste be disposed of in a safe and clean manner. this is a point that mccain loves to ridicule obama about which i actually find a little confusing. i can't figure out why it is so foolish and funny. mccain even goes so far as to chastise obama for holding the views of an "exteme environmentalist" mocking "it has to be safe" with one of his weirdo 'we're in on the same joke' looks. only i am not in on that joke, dude. obama also, despite contention, supports clean coal. again, the insistence that the energy be clean and not contribute to the global warming crisis seems to be the main point of disent between the 2 campaigns. seems like there is an obvious choice there, not sure why the repubs wouldn't be on board with clean energy but then again, as sarah palin pointed out, we don't really know to what extent these problems are man-made so we may not even need to worry how clean our emissions are. phew!
despite claims to the contrary, obama does also support nuclear power, with the caveat that the waste be disposed of in a safe and clean manner. this is a point that mccain loves to ridicule obama about which i actually find a little confusing. i can't figure out why it is so foolish and funny. mccain even goes so far as to chastise obama for holding the views of an "exteme environmentalist" mocking "it has to be safe" with one of his weirdo 'we're in on the same joke' looks. only i am not in on that joke, dude. obama also, despite contention, supports clean coal. again, the insistence that the energy be clean and not contribute to the global warming crisis seems to be the main point of disent between the 2 campaigns. seems like there is an obvious choice there, not sure why the repubs wouldn't be on board with clean energy but then again, as sarah palin pointed out, we don't really know to what extent these problems are man-made so we may not even need to worry how clean our emissions are. phew!
obama also supports expanding domestic production of oil. hey oil companies! yeah you guys, you know the acres you've leased but aren't drilling? hey- use 'em or lose 'em! uuf-ta-face-ta. obama wants to look into limited off-shore drilling (a phrasing that mccain has baby over. mr. fancy pants elitist man with his siren's song- don't fall prey, mccain will break the spell and drop a truth bomb. he doesn't really want to drill!) obama's main concern though is that we cannot drill ourselves out of the problem; we have 3% of the world's oil reserves and use 25%. as the saying goes, do the math. we cannot effectively deal with the climate crisis if the only solution is using more of the fossil fuels that contribute to global warming.
much like his approach to iraq, obama believes in setting attainable goals and deadlines and work towards those. energy independence is, of course, of great concern in terms of national security and obama places us free from venezuelan and middle eastern oil in 10 years. he aptly calls this a realistic goal. in the second debate he allowed us to make the obvious and flattering connection to kennedy's famous leadership qualities, calling back to jfk's statment that we were going to the moon in 10 years. "nobody was sure how to do it, but we understood that, if the american people make a decision to do something, it gets done." he lent a credibility to his plan while inspiring the public to join him in this goal and equating himself to a great leader. iraq is the obvious but not the only national security threaght worsened by the u.s. dependence on foreign oil. obama thinks that energy is also key in dealing with russia, reducing our consumption limits the money going out of america and into the hands of those like russia, intent on "making mischief" around the world. they better not get up to the cold war again or they'll be tremblin' in the kremlin.
much like his approach to iraq, obama believes in setting attainable goals and deadlines and work towards those. energy independence is, of course, of great concern in terms of national security and obama places us free from venezuelan and middle eastern oil in 10 years. he aptly calls this a realistic goal. in the second debate he allowed us to make the obvious and flattering connection to kennedy's famous leadership qualities, calling back to jfk's statment that we were going to the moon in 10 years. "nobody was sure how to do it, but we understood that, if the american people make a decision to do something, it gets done." he lent a credibility to his plan while inspiring the public to join him in this goal and equating himself to a great leader. iraq is the obvious but not the only national security threaght worsened by the u.s. dependence on foreign oil. obama thinks that energy is also key in dealing with russia, reducing our consumption limits the money going out of america and into the hands of those like russia, intent on "making mischief" around the world. they better not get up to the cold war again or they'll be tremblin' in the kremlin.
and now, senator mccain - on energy, sir. on energy and- not climate control as he corrected bob schieffer- climate change. thank you, please enlighten us on your plans. first of all; drill, baby, drill. follow up: drill here, drill now. sorry, i jest. let me start out with a direct quote from the 3rd debate "energy -- well, first-- second of all, energy independence". oh stop, i'm terrible.
mccain is a great proponent of nuclear energy, he just loves it. it's great. i can't help it, every time he starts talking about nuclear power plants i picture that 3-eyed orange fish from the simpsons. mccain is so enthusiastic about nuclear power he says that we will eliminate foreign dependence on oil by building 45 new plants right away- yippee! and there is more good news: we can store and reprocess the spent fuel. we know how he feels about obama's concern with safe disposal and he dismisses it further by saying they have been storing and reprocessing spent fuel on navy ships' power plants for years. obama wouldn't know about that, whippersnapper. i may be wrong, but storing and reprocessing fuel does not eliminate waste all together. disposing of the waste in a clean manner remains an issue. but let's just gloss over that shall we?
mccain's opener is nuclear power and then he follows up with the whole shebang: wind, tide, solar, nuclear (again), natural gas, flex fuel, hybrid, clean coal(heartland!) and off-shore drilling. he usually stumbles over one or more of these. he also usually also adds that obama opposes off-shore drilling. um...
mccain also stresses that energy independence will create millions of jobs--millions of jobs in america. we also need to eliminate foreign oil, and mccain says we can "if we put our minds to it" because we are dependent on "places in the world that harm our national security". mccain agrees that we have to stop sending $700 billion to the saudis but he just calls them "countries that don't like us very much" (oh wait, should i save that comment for their approaches to foreign policy?)
now, we must not underestimate the importance of drilling. i know this nuclear power stuff is sleek and sexy but we also have to keep it old school. we have to drill offshore, now. this is muy importanté. it will lower the cost of oil, show the other countries we have out own oil (a "nyah nyah" is not uncalled for here), and we have the technology. what is a little hard for me to reconcile is that despite the republican ticket's enthusiasm for drilling, they seem to really have it in for the oil companies. is this something we pass off as maverickiness? mccain brags that palin negotiated with and faced down oil companies. t hey are some of the old boys that she has shaken up, no doubt there was some tough talk and (proverbial) cleaned clocks. she also showed them by building the $40 billion pipeline of natural gas to "the lower 48". (bonus- if alaska seceded we could charge import taxes!) then mccain - channeling creepy troll mccain- stones 2 birds at once when he criticizes obama for voting for an energy bill loaded down with goodies for the oil companies. oh snap, those greedy oil companies- all your goodies. and mccain got to say pork-barrel and ear-mark which he loves doing. now, admittedly, the goodies were there and obama did support it but he did so because it was the first proper energy bill brought to the floor and he wanted to support that and i take that at face value. mccain claims in contrast he was one of the first to bring energy to senate floor. i have no backup for this statement.
cutting spending also seems to be crucial to mccain's energy plan (and platform in general) because he almost always starts talking about that next.
so in conclusion:
obama supports limited drilling, nuclear power (as long as its safe) and clean coal technology - basically keep the energy sources that contribute to global warming limited and as clean as possible. he really wants to invest in alternative energy and get it made right here in the united states so that we create more jobs and exportable technologies and reduce our dependence on other countries. yay for the economy and national security.
mccain wants to build beaucoup de nuclear power plants and thinks that obama should stop being such a pussy about safe disposal. he also supports clean coal technology (his support of clean coal is more supportive than obama's). he thinks that we need to drill now. he leaves out that drilling won't get us oil now but "drill here, drill now" is much catchier than "drill here, have hold-ups due to a shortage of refineries, have oil in 5 plus years". he also supports all those other energies; whatever it takes to be energy independent. also, he is a maverick who will reach across party lines, fight for reform and eliminate wasteful spending just like he has done his entire career.
both candidates feel that a big problem is that the government has done nothing significant to address climate change for the last 30 years. obama points out that mccain has been in the senate for 26 of those. oh. snap.
so in conclusion:
obama supports limited drilling, nuclear power (as long as its safe) and clean coal technology - basically keep the energy sources that contribute to global warming limited and as clean as possible. he really wants to invest in alternative energy and get it made right here in the united states so that we create more jobs and exportable technologies and reduce our dependence on other countries. yay for the economy and national security.
mccain wants to build beaucoup de nuclear power plants and thinks that obama should stop being such a pussy about safe disposal. he also supports clean coal technology (his support of clean coal is more supportive than obama's). he thinks that we need to drill now. he leaves out that drilling won't get us oil now but "drill here, drill now" is much catchier than "drill here, have hold-ups due to a shortage of refineries, have oil in 5 plus years". he also supports all those other energies; whatever it takes to be energy independent. also, he is a maverick who will reach across party lines, fight for reform and eliminate wasteful spending just like he has done his entire career.
both candidates feel that a big problem is that the government has done nothing significant to address climate change for the last 30 years. obama points out that mccain has been in the senate for 26 of those. oh. snap.
Monday, October 20, 2008
it's literally night and day
i hate it when people say "it's literally something" when it is not literal. literally night and day is literally nighttime and daytime.
what is literally yes and no? obama versus mccain.
obama: yes we can
mccain: nobama
Sunday, October 19, 2008
it's so bizarre and unnatural, but it... it happens
we saw michael and holly's first fight and then last week we have the ex rearing her head; that's a lot of relationship drama for something that isn't a relationship. the office is throwing a baby shower and michael takes a seat on holly's trash can to talk about his concerns for jan's feelings in the terminal stages of her pregnancy. long story short, jan's fat and holly's pretty so he will be acting cold to her- (holly's smile here is reminiscent of one formerly meek receptionist). and he'll be treating ryan the same way. of course.
michael is predictably anxious and wants the perfect party. not everyone is excited, stanley feels pissy that preggers ladies get to bitch about their hunger and varicose veins when he suffers from all the same problems and is not looking forward to listening to is all day.
michael is not impressed with phyllis' effort of balloons and personalized m&ms and thinks she should "get the led out" while a smug angela nods in agreement. in fairness to mrs. vance the party also has activities at the party like guess the baby photo. andy sticks up a pic of "the nard puppy" (ha!) next to the baby he presumes to be his future bride but turns out to be phyllis. angela's response? "pervert". wait no, good question andy, why DOES that make him a pervert.
michael is also anxious for the baby. he loves babies, as evidenced by this montage of him holding and being adorable with babies. he is also ready for the birth, no doubt because of the rigorous prep sessions he has had with dwight. jim breaks it down nicely- jan is having a baby with a sperm donor who will be related to michael (who is having a watermelon with dwight) through delusion. the birthing scenarios were a little over the top right out of the gate but some really great moments that pulled it out like dwight acting like a screaming mother "i'm screaming, i'm screaming, i'm screaming". unfortunately michael exuberance is short lived and he is crestfallen when jan arrives, baby in tow. dwight is also upset, without out michael there to mark with a special mark that only he would know and no baby-snatcher could ever copy means that this child could be ANYBODY'S. except michael's.
with the stage awkwardly set we get the baby shower under way. we also see michael being mean to holly. his strategy seems to basically be 'pretend she's toby' right down to calling her an h.r. weiro. "i'm fine, weirdo". the shower is of course no less awkward.the staff all pitches in and buys jan a cheaper stroller than the one she already has- a $1,200 orbit. i love that oscar knows the name brand and cost of the stroller. dwight thinks this is absurd, wasted money that could have been use to build a bomb shelter, so he feels obliged to test the stroller and measure its worth. funny concept and very dwight but i didn't need to keep seeing it happen, by the time he had it tied to the trans am i had gotten the point. i did however love the mystery he tried to convey over the little something he called "the bumper test". what could the bumper test be, dwight sitting in your car? plus which the time could have been put towards more baby shower footage, which felt too random with so few scenes. between that, jan and michael, holly and michael, jim and pam, dwight and the stroller, and beaucoup d'autre stuff, the baby shower gets a little lost.
meanwhile jan is so fantastically self-absorbed that she is holding the entire staff hostage as she performs son of a preacher man which i can only assume started passed off as a lullaby. about losing your virginity next to a church. when that eventually ends andy tries to get a conversation going suggesting "tell my intended about the miracle of childbirth". that conversation turns out to be grosser than i imagined and also opens up michael's wounds over being excluded from the birth. jan tries to sooth him by letting him hold astird which has an unexpected result. nothing. michael feels nothing but shortchanged. he unloads the baby who then falls into the hands of andy and angela. the ann geddes style baby photo shoot in the nature's bounty cornucopia is, in my opinion, the funniest visual joke of the episode. it is also a great reference to angela's beloved saxaphone baby poster. does a photo of jan's baby shrouded in vegtables also make you feel like babies are the true artists and god has a cute sense of humor? michael decides to consult fellow baby daddy darryl about how he felt the first time he held his baby baby. darryl is pretty clear that michael is NOT a baby daddy and suggests he might feel an unwarranted connection to other babies, or weight belts or even darryl if he held him. this turns out to not be a serious offer.
so he jan betrayed him and he feels nothing for the baby he was so excited about. final straw? as he helps her to her car, jan asks that he not date holly. he does a terrible job of being incredulous over the mere suggestion. michael is so transparent about his feelings, but i think that the real motivation for jan's request, nay insistence, that michael not date holly was her interaction with the lovely h.r. lady when holly demonstrated her shared sense of humor with michael. she gave holly the same cold degrading response to "waaaaah, more paper, waaaaahhh! no, she's on a coffee break" as she has given, accompanied by heavy sighs and shaking head, to michael all these years. in that moment she knew that michael is working with an attractive woman who is perfect for him. and that is a very threatening prospect for jan. we saw it in the premiere you guys, cutthroat corporate jan is not gone, she is just channeling that aspect of her personality in weird other ways. michael reluctantly agrees and my heart sinks...but only for a moment. walking to the annex of the office with nervous determination we've seen before, he moves towards holly for a well played...hug. if i am supposed to be disappointed that he didn't go for the kiss, i am not. michael asking out holly was perfect for who they are, which is 2 awkward 14 year olds (who act like 8 yr. olds) who really, really like each other. i really like that michael went in for the hug. it could not be smooth, and mumbling "wanna go out" was the appropriate level of smooth as well (that level being zero). because he isn't smooth and she is a dork. he walked in like jim in casino night, but he finished like michael scott.
jim and pam may no longer be the uncertain love triangle of seasons past but their dynamic last week was distinctly reminiscent of the classic lovesweet tension and i mean that in the best way possible.
they spent this episode playing phone tag and having those frustrating and dissatisfying conversations we have all experienced when distance separates us from loved ones. and, just like a perfectly played season 2 episode, they left us realizing, before the characters do, that they are more in sync than they realize. the simultaneous messages may seen like a bit of a device but i forgive it. it resolved out icky feelings without resolving the issue and that felt like classic jim and pam. bring me more.
overall i like the episode and loved parts of it, but i did not love it as a whole. it felt a little packed and thus a little choppy. i thought the fire was a little choppy upon the first few viewings and then i got used to the pace, i imagine that will happen here to. this may sound weird but it also felt like the cuts to commercial were a little more abrupt but i am nitpicking. they are successfully keeping a lot of balls in the air and i am still interested to see where they all fall.
i'm a mac
and a very lucky girl. for my 29th b-day my dad bought gave me my very first laptop. it technically isn't my first computer although it effectively is because what would be considered my first computer was the desktop my parents got me for college which i rarely used, mostly because it was constantly not working, and felt no particular attachment to whatsoever. not to mention the fact that the tower blew up my freshman year and the electrical smoke in the hallways caused them to evacuate the dorm. as was the norm my freshman year, i was not in my room. i returned home to a note from my kooky roommate on our door's whiteboard "brid- computer blew up, camp sec came. p.s. don't turn it on" (thanks for the tip) and the suspicions of one of my douchebag hallmates that the real source of the smoke was probably nefarious drug related activity on my part. shut up, go run cross country and act cagey with your fellow premeds. anyway these are all disqualifiers, in my opinion, from that being really being considered my first computer. i never felt an sense of ownership with explody the crappy p.c. but today i become the proud owner of my very one apple mackbook pro. so thanks daddy you are an amazing man. i can't wait for you to start writing you're awesome blog with rants and solutions to common engineering equations. when you do, i recommend getting yourself one of these puppies. they are just a dream to type on.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
keith olbermann is piiiiiiiiissed
if you are still in doubt that mccain has been weaselly and downright despicable when it comes to conducting his campaign and the tone that it has taken, you don't have to take my word for it:
road rage on the straight talk express
well mccain blew it. not that i was rooting for him to turn it around nor did i believe he had a shot in hell of doing so but he didn't have to sputter and spit and eye-roll and finger quote his way so far down into the crapper that even joe the plumber would have a tough time getting him out. but that is what he did, all the while speaking to the conservative base and not to the moderate undecideds. its funny, i thought that the terrorist-whisperer was supposed to energize the base, if you are going to go on national t.v. and do that then what the hell IS winking barbie for?
the only word for it all is ridiculous. mccain was snide and obnoxious, constantly interrupting obama and interjecting his derisive and disrespectful digs as if he expected all of us to laugh along with him in that mean-spirited-lets-talk-shit-
about-someone-like-they-aren't-sitting-right-there-and-
hearing-everything-that-we-say kind of way. it is not the way a respectable grown-up professional person should act and it certainly isn't the way i want the person representing us on a national stage to behave. it was gross and embarrassing. i thought he spent most of the time coming across as an angry and disgruntled fuss-pot whining about the fact that he wasn't winning against someone he clearly dislikes and doesn't respect and ended it by pathetically imploring us to give him a shot and vote for him anyway. it came across like a last ditch resort and as if the best reason he could come up with for us to make him the president is that it isn't fair if he doesn't get to be in the white house and he just really wants it, okay? not terribly inspiring.
the real low-lights for me (aside from the afore mentioned general off-putting behavior and attitude) were:
3. joe the plumber. boy did i get sick of THAT. gimmicky and irrelevant. is this one random guy (who, btw, is coincidentally related to charles keating through marriage- if you believe in coincidence), who mcaain chose to exclusively address throughout the entire debate, supposed to somehow offset mccain's 3 for 3 record of not saying "middle class" ONCE in the debates? are we the people supposed to feel attached to joe's story and by relating to joe he therefore relates to all of us? (i will say that my joe was kind of tripped out by having 80 percent of the debate sort-of addressed to him). well let me say this, i do not relate to joe the plumber. joe the plumber is interested in purchasing a business with a profit margin of $250,000 a year. that business has got to cost a least a couple million to buy. i don't know about you, but i could not afford to purchase a business for a couple million bucks and if i could, honestly, i don't think i would really mind paying an extra $900/yr or so to relieve some of the financial stress of the middle/lower class. mcaain said it himself "joe, congratulations, you're rich". mccain, congratulations, you are looking out for the rich. well done, way to be exactly like the rest of the republican party. how maverick-y of you.
2. "health". hey mccain, you're a "dick". oh no wait, you are a dick. no quotes. the idea that the government should scrutinize a woman and determine whether or not her health is in danger enough or her health concerns are legitimate enough to allow her take action and make a medical decision on her own behalf is frightening. and the fact that mccain was so flippant and sarcastic in his response and so political and nit picky in his motivations for saying it was offensive. i want a president who is concerned about my "health", thanks, as stupid as you seem to think that is. (almost as stupid as obama's "extreme-environmentalist" theory that we should dispose of nuclear waste safely. what a liberal moron, am i right?)
1. the number one totally despicable and off-putting moment was mccain's response to bob schieffer's awesome and ballsy question about the negative tone of the campaign. he started out with the classic "she was asking for it" argument by claiming, basically, that if obama had agreed to do a bunch of town hall style debates around the country like he wanted, he wouldn't have HAD to incite hatred and fear amongst the right-wing extremists at his rallies. obama also probably shouldn't have worn that slutty dress. he then went on to not take any personal or political responsibility but instead turn into a 4-yr-old and started whinging about his feelings being hurt by the apparently MUCH more despicable comments by congressman lewis.
"But the fact is that (this campaign) has taken many turns which I think are unacceptable.
first of all, stop being a baby. stop playing the victim. because of things YOU said and PALIN said, people have called for obama's death. an independent statement, not at all aligned with obama's campaign and one about which obama's campaign has put out a statement saying the comparisons are inappropriate is not comparable in the least, never mind being the worse offense as you seem to be implying. obama doesn't need to do anything more and if mcaain needs to be coddled and coaxed out of his sulk that is his problem. he looked pathetic and self indulgent and went on throughout the course of the discussion on this "topic" to defend the people at his rallies(!) and get unreasonably indignant about people suggesting otherwise. it was like how could we possibly think that military wives or veterans would say such a thing and how could we even suggest it!?! um... shut up you dick. second of all, you have repudiated EVERY remark made by a republican? not only is that statement false, it is totally absurd. how could you even possibly do that? every republican? really. you are embarrassing. i was so put off by his behavior in that moment i thought "this is as low as he goes". i hope it is anyway or god help us all.
by contrast obama was the consummate gentleman. despite the fact that he has been the victim of much more incendiary remarks he took the high road and didn't, for want of a better phrase, cry about it. he tried to diffuse mccain's huff over the whole thing, despite mccain's continual interruptions and implications that obama didn't even understand what he was talking about it, and then went on to try and steer them back to the issues, illuminating the fact that running nasty and negative campaigns doesn't do anyone any favors when it comes to trying to work, in a bipartisan effort, to address the challenges our nation faces right now. as opposed to the other candidate, he made this about the american people, not about his personal feelings.
"I don't mind being attacked for the next three weeks.
so there you go, if that doesn't shine a light on these 2 candidates i don't know what else does. for shame, mccain. you have fallen from grace.
the only word for it all is ridiculous. mccain was snide and obnoxious, constantly interrupting obama and interjecting his derisive and disrespectful digs as if he expected all of us to laugh along with him in that mean-spirited-lets-talk-shit-
about-someone-like-they-aren't-sitting-right-there-and-
hearing-everything-that-we-say kind of way. it is not the way a respectable grown-up professional person should act and it certainly isn't the way i want the person representing us on a national stage to behave. it was gross and embarrassing. i thought he spent most of the time coming across as an angry and disgruntled fuss-pot whining about the fact that he wasn't winning against someone he clearly dislikes and doesn't respect and ended it by pathetically imploring us to give him a shot and vote for him anyway. it came across like a last ditch resort and as if the best reason he could come up with for us to make him the president is that it isn't fair if he doesn't get to be in the white house and he just really wants it, okay? not terribly inspiring.
the real low-lights for me (aside from the afore mentioned general off-putting behavior and attitude) were:
3. joe the plumber. boy did i get sick of THAT. gimmicky and irrelevant. is this one random guy (who, btw, is coincidentally related to charles keating through marriage- if you believe in coincidence), who mcaain chose to exclusively address throughout the entire debate, supposed to somehow offset mccain's 3 for 3 record of not saying "middle class" ONCE in the debates? are we the people supposed to feel attached to joe's story and by relating to joe he therefore relates to all of us? (i will say that my joe was kind of tripped out by having 80 percent of the debate sort-of addressed to him). well let me say this, i do not relate to joe the plumber. joe the plumber is interested in purchasing a business with a profit margin of $250,000 a year. that business has got to cost a least a couple million to buy. i don't know about you, but i could not afford to purchase a business for a couple million bucks and if i could, honestly, i don't think i would really mind paying an extra $900/yr or so to relieve some of the financial stress of the middle/lower class. mcaain said it himself "joe, congratulations, you're rich". mccain, congratulations, you are looking out for the rich. well done, way to be exactly like the rest of the republican party. how maverick-y of you.
2. "health". hey mccain, you're a "dick". oh no wait, you are a dick. no quotes. the idea that the government should scrutinize a woman and determine whether or not her health is in danger enough or her health concerns are legitimate enough to allow her take action and make a medical decision on her own behalf is frightening. and the fact that mccain was so flippant and sarcastic in his response and so political and nit picky in his motivations for saying it was offensive. i want a president who is concerned about my "health", thanks, as stupid as you seem to think that is. (almost as stupid as obama's "extreme-environmentalist" theory that we should dispose of nuclear waste safely. what a liberal moron, am i right?)
1. the number one totally despicable and off-putting moment was mccain's response to bob schieffer's awesome and ballsy question about the negative tone of the campaign. he started out with the classic "she was asking for it" argument by claiming, basically, that if obama had agreed to do a bunch of town hall style debates around the country like he wanted, he wouldn't have HAD to incite hatred and fear amongst the right-wing extremists at his rallies. obama also probably shouldn't have worn that slutty dress. he then went on to not take any personal or political responsibility but instead turn into a 4-yr-old and started whinging about his feelings being hurt by the apparently MUCH more despicable comments by congressman lewis.
"But the fact is that (this campaign) has taken many turns which I think are unacceptable.
One of them happened just the other day, when a man I admire and respect -- I've written about him -- Congressman John Lewis, an American hero, made allegations that Sarah Palin and I were somehow associated with the worst chapter in American history, segregation, deaths of children in church bombings, George Wallace. That, to me, was so hurtful.
And, Senator Obama, you didn't repudiate those remarks. Every time there's been an out-of-bounds remark made by a Republican, no matter where they are, I have repudiated them. I hope that Senator Obama will repudiate those remarks that were made by Congressman John Lewis, very unfair and totally inappropriate."
first of all, stop being a baby. stop playing the victim. because of things YOU said and PALIN said, people have called for obama's death. an independent statement, not at all aligned with obama's campaign and one about which obama's campaign has put out a statement saying the comparisons are inappropriate is not comparable in the least, never mind being the worse offense as you seem to be implying. obama doesn't need to do anything more and if mcaain needs to be coddled and coaxed out of his sulk that is his problem. he looked pathetic and self indulgent and went on throughout the course of the discussion on this "topic" to defend the people at his rallies(!) and get unreasonably indignant about people suggesting otherwise. it was like how could we possibly think that military wives or veterans would say such a thing and how could we even suggest it!?! um... shut up you dick. second of all, you have repudiated EVERY remark made by a republican? not only is that statement false, it is totally absurd. how could you even possibly do that? every republican? really. you are embarrassing. i was so put off by his behavior in that moment i thought "this is as low as he goes". i hope it is anyway or god help us all.
by contrast obama was the consummate gentleman. despite the fact that he has been the victim of much more incendiary remarks he took the high road and didn't, for want of a better phrase, cry about it. he tried to diffuse mccain's huff over the whole thing, despite mccain's continual interruptions and implications that obama didn't even understand what he was talking about it, and then went on to try and steer them back to the issues, illuminating the fact that running nasty and negative campaigns doesn't do anyone any favors when it comes to trying to work, in a bipartisan effort, to address the challenges our nation faces right now. as opposed to the other candidate, he made this about the american people, not about his personal feelings.
"I don't mind being attacked for the next three weeks.
What the American people can't afford, though, is four more years of failed economic policies. And what they deserve over the next four weeks is that we talk about what's most pressing to them: the economic crisis.
Senator McCain's own campaign said publicly last week that, 'if we keep on talking about the economic crisis, we lose, so we need to change the subject'.
And I would love to see the next three weeks devoted to talking about the economy, devoted to talking about health care, devoted to talking about energy, and figuring out how the American people can send their kids to college. And that is something that I would welcome. But it requires, I think, a recognition that politics as usual, as been practiced over the last several years, is not solving the big problems here in America."
so there you go, if that doesn't shine a light on these 2 candidates i don't know what else does. for shame, mccain. you have fallen from grace.
ha ha jokey time
mccain needed a real game changer in the debates last night. hopefully he can change the game to golf where the lowest score wins.
paraphrased from stephen colbert
the colbert report
paraphrased from stephen colbert
the colbert report
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
it's exhausting, being this vigilent
last thurday's episode continued the classic office feel that has been re infused this season. so much so, in fact, that by the end of the episode i felt like "that's it? nothing happened". but that is just in contrast with season 4's plot pushing character developing big happenings and the action packed 8-weeks-of-summer premiere. in reality last week's episode could have slipped right in between office olympics and conflict resolution. and, much like the episodes of yesteryear, i feel like this episode will improve with age and context. it wasn't "big" enough to become an instant classic, the appeal was much more subtle and the focus was specific: deepening the dynamic between holly and michael. we are used to watching the conflicts and developments of star-crossed office lovers after 4 seasons of the jim and pam story but that story was always played out as a b-plot line, with the antics of michael in the office taking center stage as the a-story. having the relationship conflict come to the forefront and lead the episode felt different and it definitely took me a second viewing to look past this anomaly and connect with the episode. once i did adjust to the slower pace (once the norm of the show) the snappy dialog and witty repartee that this show does so so well shone and the significance of what transpired between michael and holly came into clearer light.
we saw their first fight. and even though it centered around the ridiculous scenario of meredith sleeping with the hammermill rep in order to get discounted supplies, it illuminated some fundamental differences between michael and holly and their perspectives on right and wrong. the conflict was real and when holly said that this was not a family but a workplace it hit michael right in his heart bone. we have almost never seen michael so deeply upset, not even after the deposition or the dinner party. these things in his relationship with jan that were much more monumental did not wound him so much.
in this episode the illusion was shattered and the blind admiration - the crush, the infatuation, was no longer allowed to be the lens through which michael viewed holly. she was no longer perfect. it also served to shatter our illusions a little bit and we worried, has he not met his match after all? but in the end, corporate's h.r. rep agrees with michael (not that meredith should be given a belt with a key. not a chastity belt but an underwear garment that has little spikes like made of, sometimes they are made of metal. you know what i am talking about you unlock a little door that... down... where you, where you put, where you put the...) and the issue is swept under the proverbial rug and, despite his supposition that the best way to say "i told you so" is with humour, he responds by helping holly to rally the staff to complete the training and sign a waver. this episode is significant because his feelings towards holly have turned the corner and are no longer based in his perception of who holly is (because let's face it, his perceptions aren't exactly trustworthy or necessarily based in reality) but are grounded in the fact that she went against something he believes in and he still cares about her and does not want to see her hurt or embarrassed. his feelings are true enough to see past their differences and despite the awkwardness of the business/romantic lunch and acting on his anger (cutting in front of her to then photocopy the staff picture off the wall was a priceless moment) at the end of the day he cares about her on a deeper level than we are used to seeing from him.
other than over thinking the holly/michael relationship there were 2 other things in this episode worth mentioning. the first was the awesome reveal of the engagement. it was perfectly reflective of the ensemble and the dynamic they have with pam and jim; from angela's inappropriate reference to roy, to dwight's even more inappropriate reference to pam's 'sexual status' to michael's misguided expression of enthusiam. i loved that pam tried to dismiss jim's wariness only to see with her ears the worst expectations unfold before her. we as the audience are so attached to jim and pam we forget that their fictional co-workers are no doubt over it. i thought it was a well timed and pitch perfect opening to the show.
the second is the prank on dwight. between this and the in-office setting fan boys who know the show better than the writers and won't ever shut up about how "this isn't the office and that isn't the office" must have imploded thursday night. to be honest, i did think the prank started a little slow and forced and i thought "oh dear, has jim lost the magic?" but as it progressed and manifested itself in various ways (namely the amazing "recap" of battlestar gallactica that had nerds everywhere suffering acid reflux and dwight's brain exploding with the desire to interject; and the talking head where jim is stunned by dwight's work ethic and, exhausted by his vigilant observation, muses he might go home early) it soon joined the ranks of future dwight and gaydar. in a nice twist the final joke is on jim as dwight, having returned 20 minutes later from a warehouse romp with angela, shows a sly grin to the camera and supposes that perhaps he ISN'T completely ethical after all. because remember, this isn't season 2 and things aren't a straightforward as they once were.
final word? not my favorite episode right out of the gate but one that i am confident will grow in my favor over time and will truly be appreciated for all that it is when seen within the context of the rest of the season. not much happened but i feel that what did occur will be significant as the story moves forward and the episode has plenty of subtle biting moments that will emerge with more viewings. i like the direction of this season so far so, onward ho! (did you just call me a ho?)
Monday, October 13, 2008
berfday
i'm 29 now, you guys. my birthday was on saturday and we went to aptos for the weekend with joe's parents and a few friends. there was something for everyone: capitola's endless candy selection for amy, bar-be-que for steve, push-ups contest for sean, stuff to throw for asheke... a cornucopia of activities and treats to delight one and all. and the icing on the cake? literally it was a rich and sweet creamcheese with little carrot decoratives that perfectly complimented the decadent, moist (sorry "moist"-haters) carrot cake. yum. but the figurative icing on the cake was the fireworks. man oh man, i love fireworks. about a year and a half ago, i realized i love baby carrots. i mean, i have always eaten a lot of them and i always enjoy them but i had sort of taken my enjoyment of them for granted. then, to quote joe biden, i had "what the catholics call an epiphany". i love baby carrots. about a year ago, i had the same revelation about fireworks. i just love them. i'll take this moment to thank miles and trip for the fireworks at our wedding. that kicked ass.
so did the fireworks on saturday night in aptos. wow. what a show. it was like the christian siriano of fireworks displays. they had all the faves, some i have never seen before and this ridiculously opulent finale where they lit up the cement ship and had a stream of sparking light shooting upwards with the whole arsenal of fireworks exploding out of the top like a fake pistol that shoots a bouquet of flowers. it was literally awesome.
amy was able to identify a number of common types of fireworks and, along with others of us, christen a few new ones:
so did the fireworks on saturday night in aptos. wow. what a show. it was like the christian siriano of fireworks displays. they had all the faves, some i have never seen before and this ridiculously opulent finale where they lit up the cement ship and had a stream of sparking light shooting upwards with the whole arsenal of fireworks exploding out of the top like a fake pistol that shoots a bouquet of flowers. it was literally awesome.
amy was able to identify a number of common types of fireworks and, along with others of us, christen a few new ones:
sparklemania
dreadlock rasta
sea anemone insanity
fallen angel
dreadlock mania
party in the sky
sea anemone insanity
fallen angel
dreadlock mania
party in the sky
they also had the fireworks that are shaped like stuff. there were 3-d planets, stars and hearts; which mostly looked like weird abstract hearts. one of them, however, was a perfect heart, aimed right at us that throbbed out of the sky and touched my heart. for reals. i felt love from the sky.
that experience was a manifestation about how i feel about fireworks. also, how i feel about family and friends so, thanks for being one of those. or a stranger i guess, this is the internet. and hello 29 years old. i am you now, we are one. let us begin.
p.s. dear people next door to us: sorry we kept yelling out the "names" of the fireworks throughout the entire show. that was probably kind of annoying. or *fingers crossed* funny?
that experience was a manifestation about how i feel about fireworks. also, how i feel about family and friends so, thanks for being one of those. or a stranger i guess, this is the internet. and hello 29 years old. i am you now, we are one. let us begin.
p.s. dear people next door to us: sorry we kept yelling out the "names" of the fireworks throughout the entire show. that was probably kind of annoying. or *fingers crossed* funny?
Thursday, October 9, 2008
montag in the middle
we can't always be blogging about inspirational feminist heroes. sometimes we just have to talk about the hills. but before we delve into that can i ask one question? wtf? where was the new gossip girl last trash t.v. monday? they were going to yale, blair was going to throw a shoe, chuck had a bag over his head, it was going to awesome. q'est-ce que c'est? i will not lie, i was a little crestfallen. luckily, the gang at mtv was there to cheer me up.
so, the question of lauren and heidi ever repairing their friendship looms large and its seems that everyone on the show thinks it is their biznas. lauren expresses her concerns to lo that heidi's sister, holly, is among those trying to matchmake their friendship and invites her along to meet holls for drinks that night. lo is already cutting out magazine pics for lauren homework assignment (lauren is in kindergarten) so why would she say no to this request?
meanwhile in camp montag, holly is taking the liberty to inform heidi that lauren misses her over lunch. heidi starts talking about what it's been like to lose lauren as a friend and as she starts to tear up i find that i am sooo surprised that i realize i had actually started thinking that heidi was a fembot. seriously. like vicki, from small wonder. she's fantastic, made of plastic... but no, it all comes back to me, she is actually a human person and i start to feel sorry for her again. i have been thinking that heidi needed to be put down but in this moment i feel like she is just a lost puppy with those big, sad, vacant, confused eyes. holly reassures her about lauren "when it comes to your friendship, she knows who you are. she knows your heart" (be glad it isn't contingent on her knowing your face, you would be in trouble). heidi, trying to reconcile this with the current situation suggests "maybe she just forgot?". sure, maybe.
holly enters phase 2 of stephanie pratt's abandoned mission 'reunite heidi and lauren'. she arrives at the bar to meet lauren and lo and, holls, can i be frank? homegirl, your hair looks a little dixie chicks. bless you. she delivers the "heidi misses old times" stump speech. too bad drines isn't joining them, she loves the "remember when we all used to hang out and be friends" conversation. lauren starts to speak and you realize how hard she has been trying to concentrate as she slurs "iss water unner the bridge..." she is WASTED! now the ridiculous eyes she was making at the bartender before holly's arrival make sense. lo just keeps commenting about how much holly reminds her of heidi. lo is clearly being incredibly blunt but about what?
heidi has taken holly's advice and decided to write lauren a nice old-fashioned letter which lauren unceremoniously drops on the desk of whitney, who acts as laurens friend/co-worker/dispassionate psychiatrist. whit reads the letter and makes an awesome face. whit thinks that heidi must be really lost and lonely. nailed it! lauren is skeptical (good girl) and observes that heidi continues to be unwilling to blame spence. whit observes "that's loyalty" and lauren responds "chya" with an awesome raised-eyebrow face. awesome faces, girls.
we now join a much more vacant face, as audrina goes on a second date with the guy i couldn't figure out why she was on a first date with. i mean they do have a lot in common (like being happy drunks - love connection!) but i would have thought that the fact that she talked non-stop about justin bobby and the fact that he even looked boring in comparison to her would have prevented date number 2. i mean, isn't audrina super sensitive to "weird vibes"? newsflash- date number 1 was weird vibe central but apparently drines had more stuff about jb that she wanted to tell this guy so here we are again. she suddenly realizes that perhaps he doesn't want to hear about jb (lightbulb!) and tries to explain and reassure "i like your company" which is like a care-bear stare coming from cold-fish patridge. then she says "it's weird". classic. that makes him feel like shit so she offers "sorry". yikes.
i guess holly decided that vaguely referencing the past was not enough to convince lauren to rekindle her friendship with heidi so she meddles further by dropping by the house to order dinner from take-out menus and continue to beat a dead horse. she asks about the letter (awesome lauren eye roll) and relates that heidi is so bummed about how things went down. i feel like that is the feeble "apology" you give to the guy who got caught and had to take the fall on the joint heist you both pulled. the thing is, lauren forgave heidi a long time ago. she seems genuinely concerned about her past bff when she asks "does heidi have any girlfriends?" no, besides her older sister. you don't count. then she finally straight up says that spence is the only real thing coming in the way of their reconciliation (he would be a deal-breaker for me too, dawg) lauren line! "it's not about her, you know? it's about the person she's always with".
its time to fill in the empty vessel on what's been going on. lauren tells drines that she forgives heidi and wants to look back fondly on their friendship. drines asks all the relevant questions: what if spence wasn't in the picture? does holly make her miss heidi?" (good job drines, earned that paycheck). then lauren throws out a crazy hypothetical: what if heidi had never met spencer? i think we all ask ourselves that question, and i think we are all talking about the same spencer. meanwhile, audrina can't imagine that hard.
audrina meets jb and tells him about her date. her what? jb says something hilarious about wishing he could have met the nice old chap which doesn't really make sense (quelle surprise) but still makes me laugh. then he proceeds to totally call her out (in comparison to drines, jb is an intellectual giant) and points out that she doesn't seem to have really thought through what she truly wants in terms of their dating other people and that "there's ways to go about things, you know, maturely — and maybe immaturely sometimes". what i love/hate/love about jb is that even when he starts to say something totally relevant he manages to immediately follow it with what needs to be said in order to make his previous statement totally nonsensical. its a weird internal checks and balances system that allows him to never really make any sense. then he says "you're a heart breaker" and they kind of flirt and jb is being really cute! who is this guy? seriously. donde esta the real jb?
back at the aryan apartment, holly is talking to heidi about politics. no, j/k, lauren. oops, robot heidi is a stand-in in this scene. see how her arms don't bend like human arms when she tucks her hair behind her ears? spence comes in and starts bitching about them talking about lauren. look out, it's fierce mama holly! uh oh, can't manipulate her so easily, can you spence? spence tries to make heidi feel guilty and small by accusing her of 'keeping secrets' about the letter she wrote lauren. heidi fires back "it's not her fault if she feels like she can't talk to you". true. holly thinks that since friendship with lauren does not involve spence at all it sounds like a great idea. oh snap. spence storms off in a huff, presumably to grow his weird beard and look at his cell phone in another room. holly checks to see if heidi is okay. don't worry, holls, it's robot heidi. she can't feel.
next week holly will raise the excellent point that in a proper relationship you shouldn't have to chose between it and EVERYTHING else. meanwhile, audrina will play the field really aggressively and i will continue to figure out what her deal is. most importantly, all this will happen after a new episode of gossip girl (yay).
so, the question of lauren and heidi ever repairing their friendship looms large and its seems that everyone on the show thinks it is their biznas. lauren expresses her concerns to lo that heidi's sister, holly, is among those trying to matchmake their friendship and invites her along to meet holls for drinks that night. lo is already cutting out magazine pics for lauren homework assignment (lauren is in kindergarten) so why would she say no to this request?
meanwhile in camp montag, holly is taking the liberty to inform heidi that lauren misses her over lunch. heidi starts talking about what it's been like to lose lauren as a friend and as she starts to tear up i find that i am sooo surprised that i realize i had actually started thinking that heidi was a fembot. seriously. like vicki, from small wonder. she's fantastic, made of plastic... but no, it all comes back to me, she is actually a human person and i start to feel sorry for her again. i have been thinking that heidi needed to be put down but in this moment i feel like she is just a lost puppy with those big, sad, vacant, confused eyes. holly reassures her about lauren "when it comes to your friendship, she knows who you are. she knows your heart" (be glad it isn't contingent on her knowing your face, you would be in trouble). heidi, trying to reconcile this with the current situation suggests "maybe she just forgot?". sure, maybe.
holly enters phase 2 of stephanie pratt's abandoned mission 'reunite heidi and lauren'. she arrives at the bar to meet lauren and lo and, holls, can i be frank? homegirl, your hair looks a little dixie chicks. bless you. she delivers the "heidi misses old times" stump speech. too bad drines isn't joining them, she loves the "remember when we all used to hang out and be friends" conversation. lauren starts to speak and you realize how hard she has been trying to concentrate as she slurs "iss water unner the bridge..." she is WASTED! now the ridiculous eyes she was making at the bartender before holly's arrival make sense. lo just keeps commenting about how much holly reminds her of heidi. lo is clearly being incredibly blunt but about what?
heidi has taken holly's advice and decided to write lauren a nice old-fashioned letter which lauren unceremoniously drops on the desk of whitney, who acts as laurens friend/co-worker/dispassionate psychiatrist. whit reads the letter and makes an awesome face. whit thinks that heidi must be really lost and lonely. nailed it! lauren is skeptical (good girl) and observes that heidi continues to be unwilling to blame spence. whit observes "that's loyalty" and lauren responds "chya" with an awesome raised-eyebrow face. awesome faces, girls.
we now join a much more vacant face, as audrina goes on a second date with the guy i couldn't figure out why she was on a first date with. i mean they do have a lot in common (like being happy drunks - love connection!) but i would have thought that the fact that she talked non-stop about justin bobby and the fact that he even looked boring in comparison to her would have prevented date number 2. i mean, isn't audrina super sensitive to "weird vibes"? newsflash- date number 1 was weird vibe central but apparently drines had more stuff about jb that she wanted to tell this guy so here we are again. she suddenly realizes that perhaps he doesn't want to hear about jb (lightbulb!) and tries to explain and reassure "i like your company" which is like a care-bear stare coming from cold-fish patridge. then she says "it's weird". classic. that makes him feel like shit so she offers "sorry". yikes.
i guess holly decided that vaguely referencing the past was not enough to convince lauren to rekindle her friendship with heidi so she meddles further by dropping by the house to order dinner from take-out menus and continue to beat a dead horse. she asks about the letter (awesome lauren eye roll) and relates that heidi is so bummed about how things went down. i feel like that is the feeble "apology" you give to the guy who got caught and had to take the fall on the joint heist you both pulled. the thing is, lauren forgave heidi a long time ago. she seems genuinely concerned about her past bff when she asks "does heidi have any girlfriends?" no, besides her older sister. you don't count. then she finally straight up says that spence is the only real thing coming in the way of their reconciliation (he would be a deal-breaker for me too, dawg) lauren line! "it's not about her, you know? it's about the person she's always with".
its time to fill in the empty vessel on what's been going on. lauren tells drines that she forgives heidi and wants to look back fondly on their friendship. drines asks all the relevant questions: what if spence wasn't in the picture? does holly make her miss heidi?" (good job drines, earned that paycheck). then lauren throws out a crazy hypothetical: what if heidi had never met spencer? i think we all ask ourselves that question, and i think we are all talking about the same spencer. meanwhile, audrina can't imagine that hard.
audrina meets jb and tells him about her date. her what? jb says something hilarious about wishing he could have met the nice old chap which doesn't really make sense (quelle surprise) but still makes me laugh. then he proceeds to totally call her out (in comparison to drines, jb is an intellectual giant) and points out that she doesn't seem to have really thought through what she truly wants in terms of their dating other people and that "there's ways to go about things, you know, maturely — and maybe immaturely sometimes". what i love/hate/love about jb is that even when he starts to say something totally relevant he manages to immediately follow it with what needs to be said in order to make his previous statement totally nonsensical. its a weird internal checks and balances system that allows him to never really make any sense. then he says "you're a heart breaker" and they kind of flirt and jb is being really cute! who is this guy? seriously. donde esta the real jb?
back at the aryan apartment, holly is talking to heidi about politics. no, j/k, lauren. oops, robot heidi is a stand-in in this scene. see how her arms don't bend like human arms when she tucks her hair behind her ears? spence comes in and starts bitching about them talking about lauren. look out, it's fierce mama holly! uh oh, can't manipulate her so easily, can you spence? spence tries to make heidi feel guilty and small by accusing her of 'keeping secrets' about the letter she wrote lauren. heidi fires back "it's not her fault if she feels like she can't talk to you". true. holly thinks that since friendship with lauren does not involve spence at all it sounds like a great idea. oh snap. spence storms off in a huff, presumably to grow his weird beard and look at his cell phone in another room. holly checks to see if heidi is okay. don't worry, holls, it's robot heidi. she can't feel.
next week holly will raise the excellent point that in a proper relationship you shouldn't have to chose between it and EVERYTHING else. meanwhile, audrina will play the field really aggressively and i will continue to figure out what her deal is. most importantly, all this will happen after a new episode of gossip girl (yay).
here you go, america
if america is looking for a strong and empowered female leader; a woman who serves as a role model and who is inspirational in her achievements and in the example that she sets as a person for all of us, not just women; a woman you can respect and aspire to, then we have another option. between you and me, i don't have a lot of respect for governor palin and i certainly don't think that she is a good feminist role model or, frankly, anything but a disservice to the achievements of women against all odds. michelle obama has hillary clinton's grasp on the issues, princess diana's genuine connection with the people, and jackie kennedy onassis' grace and class and presence. she is a natural leader and an inspirational woman.
of course we have another choice for first lady, but can you honestly say that you really WANT cindy mccain to be the first lady? that's like saying you really want heidi montag to be first lady. so the choice is yours, america, do you want first lady option a as shown above, or first lady option b, as shown below:
of course we have another choice for first lady, but can you honestly say that you really WANT cindy mccain to be the first lady? that's like saying you really want heidi montag to be first lady. so the choice is yours, america, do you want first lady option a as shown above, or first lady option b, as shown below:
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
can you feel the love tonight?
seriously, mccain looks sublime as he breaths in presidential mojo from the cowboy president (not to be confused with a maverick president. that would be totally different). the juxtaposition of these photos comes courtesy of linus ingoldsby (yes, that is his real name and yes, you should be jealous cause yes, that is the most awesome name ever). the questions come courtesy of me. and the photos themselves: they come courtesy of who these men are at their very core.Monday, October 6, 2008
take your daughter to work day
and i have to say that wittle sawah pawin is really picking up on what daddy does at work all day quite quickly. smear, smear, lie, smear and above all else, NEVER say anything specific. just remember these few key words and phrases:
"when i am sitting around the kitchen table"
"shore up the economy"
"the umbrella of job creation"
"guys and gals" or alternatively "joe six-packs and hockey moms"
"up there in alaska"
"put the country first"
and a few key 'equations':
more taxes = loss of jobs
john mccain = maverick (feel free to use this whenever and to even apply the maverick term to yourself. the more maverick the better)
palin/mccain = america lovers
and apparently the newest one: obama = terrorist
the idea that she should even be allowed to suggest this is appalling. the notion that she is passing this off as a favor to americans, that we need to know the "truth" about the other candidate and she is just passing along the info is sickening. the fact that the source of this "evidence" about obama is a new york times article that examines the relationship between him and william ayers and concludes that "the two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers, whom he has called “somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8.”"(ny times 3oct 2008) is completely laughable.
this woman is a disgrace and an embarrassment to our country and most of all to our political system. the idea that we should consider her performance in the debates successful because she defied expectations and didn't wet herself on-stage is insulting. since when were debates graded on a curve? all palin defeated on that stage were the embarrassingly low expectations that she set up by making a total fool of herself in the softball interviews with katie couric. i am amused (amused in the way where you laugh at something really horrific to dispel the uncomfortable feeling you have from being exposed to it) to note her "subtle" attacks on the media since that particular shit show. in her stirring rally where she slung slanderous false accusations at obama she also noted that she may have been "flippant" in her interview with couric but she didn't think the questions were very relevant. "Oh, come on, let's start talking to the American people about the issues that you guys want to know about". i agree, like maybe the bailout perhaps? would the bailout count as an issue americans want to know about? because i am pretty sure couric asked you about that and i am pretty sure you responded by vomiting a jumbled nonsensical mess of the catchphrases listed above (with a few hundred "also"s and "though"s thrown in). (alchohol poisoning tip: play a drinking game while watching the v.p. debate. take a drink every time palin says "also". you probably want 911 on standby). when snl can mock you by literally repeating what you said verbatim, that probably means you sounded like a moron.
the level of desperation from the mccain/palin campaign has reached new heights. or more appropriately, new lows. the repubs have openly said that in this month leading up to the election they are going to focus more on attacking obama's character (aka character assassination) to take the focus away from the economy (aka the issues). i feel like somebody warned me about this coming from the republican camp... tall guy... into change...can't quite place it. well, whoever it was, it looks like the prophesy has come to fruition, the "gloves are off" and its clear there is no interest from that side that this be a fair fight.
so this is what it has come to? the grand old party? well, at least they nailed the old part.
"when i am sitting around the kitchen table"
"shore up the economy"
"the umbrella of job creation"
"guys and gals" or alternatively "joe six-packs and hockey moms"
"up there in alaska"
"put the country first"
and a few key 'equations':
more taxes = loss of jobs
john mccain = maverick (feel free to use this whenever and to even apply the maverick term to yourself. the more maverick the better)
palin/mccain = america lovers
and apparently the newest one: obama = terrorist
the idea that she should even be allowed to suggest this is appalling. the notion that she is passing this off as a favor to americans, that we need to know the "truth" about the other candidate and she is just passing along the info is sickening. the fact that the source of this "evidence" about obama is a new york times article that examines the relationship between him and william ayers and concludes that "the two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers, whom he has called “somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8.”"(ny times 3oct 2008) is completely laughable.
this woman is a disgrace and an embarrassment to our country and most of all to our political system. the idea that we should consider her performance in the debates successful because she defied expectations and didn't wet herself on-stage is insulting. since when were debates graded on a curve? all palin defeated on that stage were the embarrassingly low expectations that she set up by making a total fool of herself in the softball interviews with katie couric. i am amused (amused in the way where you laugh at something really horrific to dispel the uncomfortable feeling you have from being exposed to it) to note her "subtle" attacks on the media since that particular shit show. in her stirring rally where she slung slanderous false accusations at obama she also noted that she may have been "flippant" in her interview with couric but she didn't think the questions were very relevant. "Oh, come on, let's start talking to the American people about the issues that you guys want to know about". i agree, like maybe the bailout perhaps? would the bailout count as an issue americans want to know about? because i am pretty sure couric asked you about that and i am pretty sure you responded by vomiting a jumbled nonsensical mess of the catchphrases listed above (with a few hundred "also"s and "though"s thrown in). (alchohol poisoning tip: play a drinking game while watching the v.p. debate. take a drink every time palin says "also". you probably want 911 on standby). when snl can mock you by literally repeating what you said verbatim, that probably means you sounded like a moron.
the level of desperation from the mccain/palin campaign has reached new heights. or more appropriately, new lows. the repubs have openly said that in this month leading up to the election they are going to focus more on attacking obama's character (aka character assassination) to take the focus away from the economy (aka the issues). i feel like somebody warned me about this coming from the republican camp... tall guy... into change...can't quite place it. well, whoever it was, it looks like the prophesy has come to fruition, the "gloves are off" and its clear there is no interest from that side that this be a fair fight.
so this is what it has come to? the grand old party? well, at least they nailed the old part.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Thursday, October 2, 2008
captain's blog stardate 2.10.2008
there are two main ruling parties in the world of the uber geeks: the trekkie and the renaissance nerd. sure there is the comic book nerd but these days you get way too much hipster credit for being into comics so their position in the geek world is not as strong as it once was. this leaves the trekkies and the renaissance nerds to duke it out for top dog.
i am sure one could argue the merits of either and i am sure there are plenty of fanboys out there that do, fervently. i am not here to make a case for one over the other, per say, i just wanted to share what i see as a possible advantage of one of them.
i think one reason it is better to be a trekkie is that star trek is set in the future, so you don't have to think about "authenticity" as much. sometimes a guy wants a corn dog and a flush toilet (infer from that what you will) and, sorry buddy, methinks there be no breaded be-sticked meats in the time of our king henry.
all i'm saying is, you pull out your cell phone at a renaissance fair and everyone's like "witch! witch!" or whatever and running you out with pitchforks. at the star trek convention you're like "oh, look! a human cellular communication device. i wonder does it still work?" and you're set.
may i state for the record that i have never actually personally attended either one of these conventions or engaged in any renaissance or star trek related activities. i have, however, been to the civil war festival 3 times. actually lets make that last bit off the record. what can i say, a girl loves american history.
i am sure one could argue the merits of either and i am sure there are plenty of fanboys out there that do, fervently. i am not here to make a case for one over the other, per say, i just wanted to share what i see as a possible advantage of one of them.
i think one reason it is better to be a trekkie is that star trek is set in the future, so you don't have to think about "authenticity" as much. sometimes a guy wants a corn dog and a flush toilet (infer from that what you will) and, sorry buddy, methinks there be no breaded be-sticked meats in the time of our king henry.
all i'm saying is, you pull out your cell phone at a renaissance fair and everyone's like "witch! witch!" or whatever and running you out with pitchforks. at the star trek convention you're like "oh, look! a human cellular communication device. i wonder does it still work?" and you're set.
may i state for the record that i have never actually personally attended either one of these conventions or engaged in any renaissance or star trek related activities. i have, however, been to the civil war festival 3 times. actually lets make that last bit off the record. what can i say, a girl loves american history.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
