Freedom Reigns...just not in the Nation's Capital
Here's an interesting story, but not for the obvious reasons: Yahoo! News - House Votes to Repeal D.C. Gun Limits
And here's the quiz: For what other U.S. city can the U.S. House of Representatives enact local legislation? Answer: none.
Here's the second part of the quiz: How many voting representatives from the District of Columbia sit in the U.S. Congress? Answer: same as above - none.
So if D.C. has NO congressional representation, how does the House have jurisdiction? Answer: slavery. Or something like that. As a former resident of the District, I STILL think it's an international travesty that the residents of that city live in what is basically a dictatorship, run not by their mayor or city council, but by people who don't even live there.
'The D.C. handgun ban . . . has failed miserably. This bill is demanded by the people of the United States,' the key sponsor of the bill said.
Of course, no one asked the people of the District of Columbia what THEIR demands were...
More later...
Paul
Thursday, September 30, 2004
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
I support THESE troops...
Check this story out:A strident minority: anti-Bush US troops in Iraq | csmonitor.com Apparently, they've been able to show "Fahrenheit 911" to our men and women in uniform over in Iraq. I've got to give the DoD credit for having the balls to do that. Unsurprisingly, it's not making a whole lot of soldiers feel better about George Bush.
From the article: "We shouldn't be here," said one Marine infantryman bluntly. "There was no reason for invading this country in the first place. We just came here and [angered people] and killed a lot of innocent people," said the marine, who has seen regular combat in Ramadi. "I don't enjoy killing women and children, it's not my thing."
It's LONG past time to get out...
More later...
Paul
Check this story out:A strident minority: anti-Bush US troops in Iraq | csmonitor.com Apparently, they've been able to show "Fahrenheit 911" to our men and women in uniform over in Iraq. I've got to give the DoD credit for having the balls to do that. Unsurprisingly, it's not making a whole lot of soldiers feel better about George Bush.
From the article: "We shouldn't be here," said one Marine infantryman bluntly. "There was no reason for invading this country in the first place. We just came here and [angered people] and killed a lot of innocent people," said the marine, who has seen regular combat in Ramadi. "I don't enjoy killing women and children, it's not my thing."
It's LONG past time to get out...
More later...
Paul
Out of Control?
Yesterday in the Nation's Capital, a pregnant woman was arrested by a transit officer for "socially unacceptable behavior" - talking too loudly on her cellphone:Between Metro and Cell User, a Disconnect (washingtonpost.com)
Now, if all you read was my first sentence, then you might be inclined to agree with the actions of the subway cop. We've all witnessed rude cellphone users and were forced to endure their bothersome conversations. But according to the story, the Metro transit police officer arrested the woman AFTER her phone conversation...and AFTER he pushed her to the ground.
Say what? A police officer pushed a pregnant woman to the ground? Sometimes when I read the news I forget which country this is...but then I remember, this happened in the same city that CONTINUES to re-elect a proven criminal politician, Marion Barry.
Police Officer: "You have to lower your voice, ma'am"
Pregnant woman: "You can't tell me how loud I can talk."
Police Officer: "I can arrest you"
And a scuffle ensues. The officer forced her to the ground, called for backup, and detained the woman for three hours. I guess the officer was in fear for his life. NOT...
All of this happened, mind you, NOT on a subway car and NOT in a subway station, but OUTSIDE a subway station. And according to the article, the 23-year-old woman was charged with two misdemeanors: "disorderly manner that disturbed the public peace" and resisting arrest.
Response from Metro officials: "We need better enforcement to allow people to know we are serious and want to maintain the high-quality level of the system," said Robert J. Smith, chairman of the Metro board, adding that "ranting youth" have become a plague on the subway.
A plague of "ranting youth"? That's a mass transit problem? Sounds like a social problem to me.
Police state, here we come.
More later...
Paul
Yesterday in the Nation's Capital, a pregnant woman was arrested by a transit officer for "socially unacceptable behavior" - talking too loudly on her cellphone:Between Metro and Cell User, a Disconnect (washingtonpost.com)
Now, if all you read was my first sentence, then you might be inclined to agree with the actions of the subway cop. We've all witnessed rude cellphone users and were forced to endure their bothersome conversations. But according to the story, the Metro transit police officer arrested the woman AFTER her phone conversation...and AFTER he pushed her to the ground.
Say what? A police officer pushed a pregnant woman to the ground? Sometimes when I read the news I forget which country this is...but then I remember, this happened in the same city that CONTINUES to re-elect a proven criminal politician, Marion Barry.
Police Officer: "You have to lower your voice, ma'am"
Pregnant woman: "You can't tell me how loud I can talk."
Police Officer: "I can arrest you"
And a scuffle ensues. The officer forced her to the ground, called for backup, and detained the woman for three hours. I guess the officer was in fear for his life. NOT...
All of this happened, mind you, NOT on a subway car and NOT in a subway station, but OUTSIDE a subway station. And according to the article, the 23-year-old woman was charged with two misdemeanors: "disorderly manner that disturbed the public peace" and resisting arrest.
Response from Metro officials: "We need better enforcement to allow people to know we are serious and want to maintain the high-quality level of the system," said Robert J. Smith, chairman of the Metro board, adding that "ranting youth" have become a plague on the subway.
A plague of "ranting youth"? That's a mass transit problem? Sounds like a social problem to me.
Police state, here we come.
More later...
Paul
Poll Dancing
Read this article and then tell me if your faith in American politics has been restored...or destroyed: Yahoo! News - Campaign Puts Polling Methods Under Microscope
The very sad truth of the matter is that political opinion polls are almost never used to gauge opinion, but to INFLUENCE opinion. If you were able to audit the two major parties' campaign budgets, you'd find that an almost obscene amount of money is spent on polling. And the number of polling "styles" and methods is about as varied as the number of polling organizations. Truth be told, each organization makes up its own rules...and to a very troubling extent, the American media reports those results as the gospel truth, without EVER questioning the accuracy.
From a hard number standpoint, most polls are wildly inaccurate. To explain what I mean by this, I'll use the Presidential approval poll, the poll used to judge whether the American people feel the current President is doing a good job. Setting aside the subjective nature of the question (what, exactly, is a 'good job'?), there is NO WAY for any polling organization to question enough Americans to get an accurate read on this. Statistical experts, of course, beg to differ. And that's their job, so they have to protect their turf. But how can a poll of 20,000 people accurately reflect the thoughts of 250 million?
It cannot.
That's why I choose NOT to pay any attention to these wild-assed pre-election polls about who's "leading" who....they have no way of knowing or predicting what's actually going to happen at the REAL polls in November. And as we all learned last election, even THOSE polls can be compromised.
More later...
Paul
Read this article and then tell me if your faith in American politics has been restored...or destroyed: Yahoo! News - Campaign Puts Polling Methods Under Microscope
The very sad truth of the matter is that political opinion polls are almost never used to gauge opinion, but to INFLUENCE opinion. If you were able to audit the two major parties' campaign budgets, you'd find that an almost obscene amount of money is spent on polling. And the number of polling "styles" and methods is about as varied as the number of polling organizations. Truth be told, each organization makes up its own rules...and to a very troubling extent, the American media reports those results as the gospel truth, without EVER questioning the accuracy.
From a hard number standpoint, most polls are wildly inaccurate. To explain what I mean by this, I'll use the Presidential approval poll, the poll used to judge whether the American people feel the current President is doing a good job. Setting aside the subjective nature of the question (what, exactly, is a 'good job'?), there is NO WAY for any polling organization to question enough Americans to get an accurate read on this. Statistical experts, of course, beg to differ. And that's their job, so they have to protect their turf. But how can a poll of 20,000 people accurately reflect the thoughts of 250 million?
It cannot.
That's why I choose NOT to pay any attention to these wild-assed pre-election polls about who's "leading" who....they have no way of knowing or predicting what's actually going to happen at the REAL polls in November. And as we all learned last election, even THOSE polls can be compromised.
More later...
Paul
Monday, September 27, 2004
Would You?
Virgin's head madman Richard Branson is at it again, as always, in a big way:Telegraph | News | Branson promises to send tourists into space by 2007
The funny thing is, he sort of has the credibility to pull this off, even though the three-year timetable seems awfully short. Branson has proven to be the kind of man that does what he says he's going to do. And if anyone has the pulse of the ultra-rich adventurer market, it would be Sir Branson. I can't wait to see if he can make this happen. In the meantime, I'll just settle for one of those posh Virgin Atlantic flights...
More later...
Paul
Virgin's head madman Richard Branson is at it again, as always, in a big way:Telegraph | News | Branson promises to send tourists into space by 2007
The funny thing is, he sort of has the credibility to pull this off, even though the three-year timetable seems awfully short. Branson has proven to be the kind of man that does what he says he's going to do. And if anyone has the pulse of the ultra-rich adventurer market, it would be Sir Branson. I can't wait to see if he can make this happen. In the meantime, I'll just settle for one of those posh Virgin Atlantic flights...
More later...
Paul
Thursday, September 23, 2004
The TSA is Idiotic
Hot on the heels of the Yusef Islam (formerly known as "Cat Stevens") story is this sober news about airline security...or the lack thereof: USATODAY.com - Airport screeners missed weapons
As someone who flies on a weekly basis, and has to endure the whole "empty your pockets, take out your laptop, remove your shoes, is that a belt?" ordeal at least twice a week, it finally hits me that this is all an elaborate ruse to coddle the American public. The entire TSA sham has nothing to do with actually improving airline safety...it's all about giving the APPEARANCE of improved safety...that's all.
Think about it. What is needed to hijack a plane? A bomb? A gun? A box cutter? A nail file? I have to put my nail file in my checked luggage, because they will definitely confiscate it (six inches of stainless, nail-filing steel!) should I be so bold as to carry it in my carry-on. The point is, the only thing that's needed to hijack a plane is INTENT...and a good poker face. One could crumple up a airline-supplied coffee cup with a couple bags of airline-supplied peanuts, stuff it into an airline-supplied vomit bag, then hold it up and yell "I'VE GOT A BOMB! EVERYBODY DO AS I SAY!" and successfully bluff a hijack. You don't need to have real explosives or weapons with you to do that.
The alleged 9/11 hijackers didn't have guns or explosives (so we're told), and look how much damage they did. Why on earth would you bring explosives on board what is already a flying bomb full of explosive jet fuel? That's like bringing sand to the beach.
The truth of the matter is this: if someone is determined to commandeer an airliner, NO amount of luggage pre-screening will stop them. The TSA already knows this, and they will even admit it if you back them into a rhetorical corner. No, the TSA is in existence for two very specific reasons: 1) to project a veneer of increased security and 2) to make someone a lot of money. Guess who?
More later...
Paul
Hot on the heels of the Yusef Islam (formerly known as "Cat Stevens") story is this sober news about airline security...or the lack thereof: USATODAY.com - Airport screeners missed weapons
As someone who flies on a weekly basis, and has to endure the whole "empty your pockets, take out your laptop, remove your shoes, is that a belt?" ordeal at least twice a week, it finally hits me that this is all an elaborate ruse to coddle the American public. The entire TSA sham has nothing to do with actually improving airline safety...it's all about giving the APPEARANCE of improved safety...that's all.
Think about it. What is needed to hijack a plane? A bomb? A gun? A box cutter? A nail file? I have to put my nail file in my checked luggage, because they will definitely confiscate it (six inches of stainless, nail-filing steel!) should I be so bold as to carry it in my carry-on. The point is, the only thing that's needed to hijack a plane is INTENT...and a good poker face. One could crumple up a airline-supplied coffee cup with a couple bags of airline-supplied peanuts, stuff it into an airline-supplied vomit bag, then hold it up and yell "I'VE GOT A BOMB! EVERYBODY DO AS I SAY!" and successfully bluff a hijack. You don't need to have real explosives or weapons with you to do that.
The alleged 9/11 hijackers didn't have guns or explosives (so we're told), and look how much damage they did. Why on earth would you bring explosives on board what is already a flying bomb full of explosive jet fuel? That's like bringing sand to the beach.
The truth of the matter is this: if someone is determined to commandeer an airliner, NO amount of luggage pre-screening will stop them. The TSA already knows this, and they will even admit it if you back them into a rhetorical corner. No, the TSA is in existence for two very specific reasons: 1) to project a veneer of increased security and 2) to make someone a lot of money. Guess who?
More later...
Paul
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
And it just keeps getting worse
Our borders are like sieves, and we let all types of nasty people in this country. But every once in a while, we prevent REALLY dangerous people from entering: Yahoo! News - Ex-Pop Star Cat Stevens Deported from U.S.
Of course, I'm being facetious. There are a lot of strange and unsettling things about this story, not the least of which is the fact that the U.S. news media continue to identify Mr. Islam by a name he left behind DECADES ago...
But even worse is the fact that because he was simply on the airplane, U.S. authorities diverted the flight from it's original destination of Northern Virginia and forced it to land in MAINE. Why Maine? Ostensibly to protect the Northeast corridor, but when did Maine stop being in the Northeast?
Then after being illegally held and questioned - oops, my bad: under the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act they can detain and question at will WITHOUT proof - U.S. authorities transported Mr. Islam to Boston, where he was put on a plane back to London (from whence he originally came).
Isn't Boston in the Northeast, too? So much for "protecting" the Northeast...
As to the issue of WHY the artist formerly known as Cat Stevens was treated like a terrorist, well, read the article. But also note this quote that I pulled out of said article: "United Airlines spokesman Jeff Green said airline staff in London had cross-checked all the information on Islam and found nothing to stop him getting on the U.S.-bound flight. 'All I can say is that we followed all of our procedures and we came up with nothing. To suggest that the blame lies on a United employee is incorrect and unfair,' said Green. "
Well hell, if the airline didn't find anything objectionable about the presence of Mr. Islam, what did U.S. authorities find? Well, they're not saying exactly, but just mumbling something about something that might be something that has something to do with possible terrorist activities.
It's a slippery slope we traverse...
More later...
Paul
Our borders are like sieves, and we let all types of nasty people in this country. But every once in a while, we prevent REALLY dangerous people from entering: Yahoo! News - Ex-Pop Star Cat Stevens Deported from U.S.
Of course, I'm being facetious. There are a lot of strange and unsettling things about this story, not the least of which is the fact that the U.S. news media continue to identify Mr. Islam by a name he left behind DECADES ago...
But even worse is the fact that because he was simply on the airplane, U.S. authorities diverted the flight from it's original destination of Northern Virginia and forced it to land in MAINE. Why Maine? Ostensibly to protect the Northeast corridor, but when did Maine stop being in the Northeast?
Then after being illegally held and questioned - oops, my bad: under the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act they can detain and question at will WITHOUT proof - U.S. authorities transported Mr. Islam to Boston, where he was put on a plane back to London (from whence he originally came).
Isn't Boston in the Northeast, too? So much for "protecting" the Northeast...
As to the issue of WHY the artist formerly known as Cat Stevens was treated like a terrorist, well, read the article. But also note this quote that I pulled out of said article: "United Airlines spokesman Jeff Green said airline staff in London had cross-checked all the information on Islam and found nothing to stop him getting on the U.S.-bound flight. 'All I can say is that we followed all of our procedures and we came up with nothing. To suggest that the blame lies on a United employee is incorrect and unfair,' said Green. "
Well hell, if the airline didn't find anything objectionable about the presence of Mr. Islam, what did U.S. authorities find? Well, they're not saying exactly, but just mumbling something about something that might be something that has something to do with possible terrorist activities.
It's a slippery slope we traverse...
More later...
Paul
What Year is This Again?
I read this article and had to re-read the dates involved: Yahoo! News - Millions Blocked from Voting in U.S. Election. I have trouble believing that these types of activities are still occurring in the United States of America.
What's next, the return of Jim Crow?
More later...
Paul
I read this article and had to re-read the dates involved: Yahoo! News - Millions Blocked from Voting in U.S. Election. I have trouble believing that these types of activities are still occurring in the United States of America.
What's next, the return of Jim Crow?
More later...
Paul
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
You Tell 'Em, Ralph
Ralph Nader called the Democrats "gutless, spineless, clueless and hapless" today. Get down, Ralph! Ain't it a pity that neither of the Johns has the courage to speak out as strongly as Ralph Nader does. And it's a REAL pity that the DNC chooses to subvert our democracy out of fear of losing votes to a viable, third party candidate: Yahoo! News - Nader Blames Kerry for Ballot Access Fight.
The "Anybody but Bush" strategy was ill-advised in the first place. For me, it's getting to be "Anybody but Kerry"...
More later...
Paul
Ralph Nader called the Democrats "gutless, spineless, clueless and hapless" today. Get down, Ralph! Ain't it a pity that neither of the Johns has the courage to speak out as strongly as Ralph Nader does. And it's a REAL pity that the DNC chooses to subvert our democracy out of fear of losing votes to a viable, third party candidate: Yahoo! News - Nader Blames Kerry for Ballot Access Fight.
The "Anybody but Bush" strategy was ill-advised in the first place. For me, it's getting to be "Anybody but Kerry"...
More later...
Paul
Friday, September 17, 2004
The Brown Bunny.
So I was falling asleep in the middle of Vincent Gallo’s new movie “The Brown Bunny”, when all of a sudden Cheryl Tiegs appeared on the screen. It was actually kind of a shock, because just as my mind began to recognize her famous features, her damaged goods, alcoholic, highway rest-stop whore character became visible as well. Wearing cheesy clothes and little to no makeup, Tiegs bravely tossed away her glamour girl past in order to wordlessly make out on a picnic table with Gallo. This is a woman who sold more pinup posters than Farrah Fawcett. She once had her own signature clothing line at Sears! Of course, the big question is why did she agree to it? That’s an even bigger mystery than the rationale behind Chloe Sevigny’s fateful decision to participate in this production.
This movie is kind of like a Jackson Pollack splatter painting: at first glance it just looks like a random mess, but then real art starts to peek out at you, leaving you to wonder if the artist deliberately arranged the aesthetic, or just got lucky. To be sure, there are moments in “Bunny” when most people would give serious consideration to walking out, but most people are sexual voyeurs, and so we sit and impatiently endure the questionable parts of the film in order to see what we all came for: Chloe Sevigny giving head to Gallo.
Now, blow jobs in the cinema are not all that remarkable. If you have watched ANY porn at all, you’ve seen at least one workable dick-sucking. Way back in the less-obvious ‘70’s, Marilyn Chambers became notorious for the movie “Deep Throat”. Imagine that: a whole movie devoted to head. So the early buzz around “The Brown Bunny” was that a semi-famous actress allows herself to be filmed sucking off the lead character (who also happens to be the writer/producer/director/DP). As a way to sell tickets, apparently fellatio has few peers.
But what’s truly interesting is what happens AFTER the act. That’s when the movie shifts into another gear and in fact, makes the whole thing worthwhile. Gallo almost comes off as some sort of low-end M. Night Shyamalan, with a little Gaspar Noe tossed in for flavor. He certainly gives you something to talk about when the lights come up.
There are a few things to like in this movie besides the end. Gallo’s character Bud is the motorcycle racer as cowboy, and he even treats his race bike like a mechanical steed. You never see him working on it or preparing for his next big race, not even to fill it with fuel, but he does take it out of his black van to exercise it. Even when he finally arrives at his mechanic’s shop in L.A., instead of performing any type of maintenance or prep, they just strap the machine to a stationary roller (actually, a dynamometer), and ride the bike on THAT for a few minutes. Then they herd it back into the van. I guess all his bike needs is a little attention.
And there are moments of, perhaps not exactly cinematic beauty, but interesting mixes of sound and picture as the road winds ever westward. But it really is the ending that makes the whole exercise worthwhile, and leads to further thought. At least for me. Don’t just go for the sex scene, go for the surprise. You’ll feel better about yourself when it’s over.
More later…
Paul
So I was falling asleep in the middle of Vincent Gallo’s new movie “The Brown Bunny”, when all of a sudden Cheryl Tiegs appeared on the screen. It was actually kind of a shock, because just as my mind began to recognize her famous features, her damaged goods, alcoholic, highway rest-stop whore character became visible as well. Wearing cheesy clothes and little to no makeup, Tiegs bravely tossed away her glamour girl past in order to wordlessly make out on a picnic table with Gallo. This is a woman who sold more pinup posters than Farrah Fawcett. She once had her own signature clothing line at Sears! Of course, the big question is why did she agree to it? That’s an even bigger mystery than the rationale behind Chloe Sevigny’s fateful decision to participate in this production.
This movie is kind of like a Jackson Pollack splatter painting: at first glance it just looks like a random mess, but then real art starts to peek out at you, leaving you to wonder if the artist deliberately arranged the aesthetic, or just got lucky. To be sure, there are moments in “Bunny” when most people would give serious consideration to walking out, but most people are sexual voyeurs, and so we sit and impatiently endure the questionable parts of the film in order to see what we all came for: Chloe Sevigny giving head to Gallo.
Now, blow jobs in the cinema are not all that remarkable. If you have watched ANY porn at all, you’ve seen at least one workable dick-sucking. Way back in the less-obvious ‘70’s, Marilyn Chambers became notorious for the movie “Deep Throat”. Imagine that: a whole movie devoted to head. So the early buzz around “The Brown Bunny” was that a semi-famous actress allows herself to be filmed sucking off the lead character (who also happens to be the writer/producer/director/DP). As a way to sell tickets, apparently fellatio has few peers.
But what’s truly interesting is what happens AFTER the act. That’s when the movie shifts into another gear and in fact, makes the whole thing worthwhile. Gallo almost comes off as some sort of low-end M. Night Shyamalan, with a little Gaspar Noe tossed in for flavor. He certainly gives you something to talk about when the lights come up.
There are a few things to like in this movie besides the end. Gallo’s character Bud is the motorcycle racer as cowboy, and he even treats his race bike like a mechanical steed. You never see him working on it or preparing for his next big race, not even to fill it with fuel, but he does take it out of his black van to exercise it. Even when he finally arrives at his mechanic’s shop in L.A., instead of performing any type of maintenance or prep, they just strap the machine to a stationary roller (actually, a dynamometer), and ride the bike on THAT for a few minutes. Then they herd it back into the van. I guess all his bike needs is a little attention.
And there are moments of, perhaps not exactly cinematic beauty, but interesting mixes of sound and picture as the road winds ever westward. But it really is the ending that makes the whole exercise worthwhile, and leads to further thought. At least for me. Don’t just go for the sex scene, go for the surprise. You’ll feel better about yourself when it’s over.
More later…
Paul
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
I Don't Care
I'm still voting for Nader, even though this story pretty much seals the deal against him:Yahoo! News - Democrats Score Win in Fight Over Nader in Florida.
Call me a fool; many have already. But I am still not satisfied with the words and so-called "ideas" that have been issuing forth from the Democratic camp. At this late date, the Dems are still acting as if the election is all about Bush losing, instead of their team WINNING. If the Democrats were serious about winning this damn thing, they would have never picked the two incredibly unexciting men that are John Kerry and John Edwards.
I mean, it's mid-September already: when are the debates going to start? When are the issues going to be discussed? Kerry's bullshit about providing "incentives" for health care is weak. I'd really like to see him debate Ralph on health care. Hell, Al Sharpton could smoke John Kerry in a debate on health care! Because Kerry is in the industry's pocket already, just like lil' Bush.
More later...
Paul
I'm still voting for Nader, even though this story pretty much seals the deal against him:Yahoo! News - Democrats Score Win in Fight Over Nader in Florida.
Call me a fool; many have already. But I am still not satisfied with the words and so-called "ideas" that have been issuing forth from the Democratic camp. At this late date, the Dems are still acting as if the election is all about Bush losing, instead of their team WINNING. If the Democrats were serious about winning this damn thing, they would have never picked the two incredibly unexciting men that are John Kerry and John Edwards.
I mean, it's mid-September already: when are the debates going to start? When are the issues going to be discussed? Kerry's bullshit about providing "incentives" for health care is weak. I'd really like to see him debate Ralph on health care. Hell, Al Sharpton could smoke John Kerry in a debate on health care! Because Kerry is in the industry's pocket already, just like lil' Bush.
More later...
Paul
They must do a lot of drugs there...
Once again, the residents of Washington, D.C. have spoken...and once again, they have chosen the notorious B.A.R.R.Y., also known as "Mayor for Life" Marion Berry, for City Council: Yahoo! News - Barry In, 3 D.C. Council Incumbents Out.
Running and winning a council seat for the city's poorest (and blackest) Ward, Barry, at the grand old age of 68 (!) is once again on the City Payroll. Which prompts me to ask:
Where are all of the young leaders? It's the city council of the Nation's Capital, but it's also probably the most impotent city government in the Nation. Where are the men and women of the future? Who will answer the call to defeat the dinosaurs and take back the city? And who the heck is voting for Barry?
More later...
Paul
Once again, the residents of Washington, D.C. have spoken...and once again, they have chosen the notorious B.A.R.R.Y., also known as "Mayor for Life" Marion Berry, for City Council: Yahoo! News - Barry In, 3 D.C. Council Incumbents Out.
Running and winning a council seat for the city's poorest (and blackest) Ward, Barry, at the grand old age of 68 (!) is once again on the City Payroll. Which prompts me to ask:
Where are all of the young leaders? It's the city council of the Nation's Capital, but it's also probably the most impotent city government in the Nation. Where are the men and women of the future? Who will answer the call to defeat the dinosaurs and take back the city? And who the heck is voting for Barry?
More later...
Paul
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
You Go, Girl!
Okay, I gotta give Oprah MAD PROPS for pulling off the television stunt of all time yesterday (PONTIAC | WILDEST DREAMS). Pontiac deserves kudos for going along with it, too, but wow! What a GREAT IDEA! Giving brand new cars to every single person in the studio audience!
Now, the cynic in me immediately thought about the fact that all of those winners will have to pay sales tax and registration and insurance and all of that other stuff, so the cars are not entirely free. But the rest of me has to yell SO WHAT!? Not only did Oprah make a TON of people (276, to be exact) ecstatically happy, but she virtually guaranteed her show will remain atop the daytime ratings for at least another season. And if you thought it was hard to get Oprah tickets BEFORE...
Seriously, this was not only an extremely cunning promotional move, it was also the kind of thing that only a big-hearted person would even think about doing. Just when you think she can't get any more impressive, Oprah knocks it outta the park. I am very, very impressed.
More later...
Paul
Okay, I gotta give Oprah MAD PROPS for pulling off the television stunt of all time yesterday (PONTIAC | WILDEST DREAMS). Pontiac deserves kudos for going along with it, too, but wow! What a GREAT IDEA! Giving brand new cars to every single person in the studio audience!
Now, the cynic in me immediately thought about the fact that all of those winners will have to pay sales tax and registration and insurance and all of that other stuff, so the cars are not entirely free. But the rest of me has to yell SO WHAT!? Not only did Oprah make a TON of people (276, to be exact) ecstatically happy, but she virtually guaranteed her show will remain atop the daytime ratings for at least another season. And if you thought it was hard to get Oprah tickets BEFORE...
Seriously, this was not only an extremely cunning promotional move, it was also the kind of thing that only a big-hearted person would even think about doing. Just when you think she can't get any more impressive, Oprah knocks it outta the park. I am very, very impressed.
More later...
Paul
Friday, September 03, 2004
Terror takes on a New Face: White
This is truly a sad day in Russia, and the rest of the world: Yahoo! News - Russians Storm School; 100 Bodies Found.
Sad because innocent people have died, once again for political reasons. Yesterday, the media labeled the instigators "rebels"; today, they are called "terrorists". In any case, they were willing to kidnap and kill supposedly for their nation's independence. Should we call them freedom fighters? Or murderers?
More later...
Paul
This is truly a sad day in Russia, and the rest of the world: Yahoo! News - Russians Storm School; 100 Bodies Found.
Sad because innocent people have died, once again for political reasons. Yesterday, the media labeled the instigators "rebels"; today, they are called "terrorists". In any case, they were willing to kidnap and kill supposedly for their nation's independence. Should we call them freedom fighters? Or murderers?
More later...
Paul
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)