Nerd Spot

Michael Cera: Close Enough

2007-01-09T23:36:00.000-05:00

With nothing but a sad little dvd collection to slake my thirst for Arrested Development, I tell myself this Michael Cera piece is close enough. Le Roi est mort. Vive le Roi! Thanks CC Insider!

truthiness (noun)

2006-12-10T21:22:00.000-05:00

As I don't feel like belaboring this, here's the info on the Words of the Year from the Merriam-Webster website (www.m-w.com).

Words of the Year 2006
"As expected, there were a few surprises in store for us as we pored through your submissions for our first Word of the Year online survey. Either the vast majority of you out there in the Merriam-Webster online community are big fans of The Colbert Report, or Time Magazine was right on target when it honored the show's host Stephen Colbert earlier this year as one of the most influential people of 2006. By an overwhelming 5 to 1 majority vote, our visitors have awarded top honors to a word Colbert first introduced on 'The Word' segment of his debut broadcast on Comedy Central back in October 2005. Soon after, this word was chosen as the 16th annual Word of the Year by the American Dialect Society, and defined by them as 'the quality of preferring concepts or facts one wishes to be true, rather than concepts or facts known to be true.' Merriam-Webster's #1 Word of the Year for 2006 based on votes from visitors to our Web site:

1. truthiness (noun)

1 : 'truth that comes from the gut, not books' (Stephen Colbert, Comedy Central's 'The Colbert Report,' October 2005)

2 : 'the quality of preferring concepts or facts one wishes to be true, rather than concepts or facts known to be true' (American Dialect Society, January 2006)"

Free Dr. Funke's Thunder!

2006-11-29T21:55:00.000-05:00

So I along with tens, perhaps dozens, of other members have it on the total INSIDER authority of the "Official Arrested Development Fan Club" October newsletter that Scrubs' Zach Braff would like to get David Cross to guest on the show as Tobias Funke. Thenewsletter reports (via TV Guide):

Ausiello: What's this I hear about David Cross coming on as his Arrested Development character?

Braff: That's what I'm trying to broker. I'm a huge fan of his and so is Bill, and our idea was that he would play Tobias in an episode. Obviously, we have to get that cleared by a lot of people, like [Arrested creator] Mitch [Hurwitz] and Fox, but that was my pitch. David wants to do it.

Ausiello: Is it your goal to get the entire Arrested Development cast on Scrubs?
Braff: [Laughs] Yeah, one by one. I was such a fan.

I have been tried, oh Lord. You tooketh away AD before its time, and lo I have wept and gnashed my teeth. Canst not Thou do this teensy weensy favor in this hour of darkness?

And wouldn't Tobias be perfect for the Scrubs sensibility? Bateman's already been on, albeit not as a Bluth. Plus a character cameo would be a delightful homage to AD and its sensibility. "Professor" Munch anybody? This is no less than universe demanding a Lord & Taylor bag full of justice be restored.

And speaking of Professor Munch, a little blurb in Entertainment Weekly recently called to my attention the fact that Richard Belzer has played Detective Munch on seven primetime shows: Law & Order; Law & Order: SVU; Law & Order: Trial By Jury; The X-Files; The Beat; AD and Homicide. 7!! Kudos to that kook!

Bad Luck Blue Eyes Goodbye

2006-11-21T21:17:00.000-05:00

Oh teeming underclass! You're breeding the qualities of us finer folk right out of existence! The Boston Globe reports that roughly "half of Americans born at the turn of the 20th century had blue eyes, according to a 2002 Loyola University study in Chicago. By mid-century that number had dropped to a third. Today only about one 1 of every 6 Americans has blue eyes, said Mark Grant, the epidemiologist who conducted the study." Alas, it appears that universal literacy and democratized higher education have ended the intraethnic gene pool as the perfectly good proxy for suitable mate selection that it has always been. So Grampy Geoghegan got the hots for Nonna Nobilini and next thing you know Mommy is a brown-eyed girl.

Don't worry, though. There's still hope that we truly finer folk are predisposed to find each other. The Arizona Republic has a story about Norwegian researchers who published a study in the rivetingly-titled journal Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology purporting to show that that blue eye color "can provide a highly visible and salient cue to the child's heredity"and therefore blue-eyed men prefer blue-eyed women over those with eyes of any other color.

If we remember our 8th grade science lessons, we know that blue eyes are a recessive trait. and brown eyes are a dominant one. You might have blue eyes, but if your spouse has brown, your baby could have brown eyes or blue eyes, depending on your spouse's genetic background. The only way you're guaranteed to have a blue-eyed baby is if both parents have blue eyes. The researchers reason that "if a child born to two blue-eyed parents does not have blue eyes, then the blue-eyed father is not the biological father." Basically, if a guy can (presumably unconsciously) choose a woman with characteristics that allow him to know whether he is the likely father of any offspring, blue-eyed men should prefer women with blue eyes. Other researchers point out the study leaves out many social factors such as learned dating behavior. Sounds like griping about their betters to me.

Would you like a Colbert with that baloney?

2006-02-01T22:18:00.000-05:00

Don't miss a single one of Stephen's thoughts or you'll wind up Dead to Him.

San Francisco Chronicle has a four-part podcast of their TV critic's interview of Stephen.

Terry Gross had Stephen on Fresh Air in December. The show is available for streaming. An earlier interview is available as well.

The Onion AV Club had a great interview with Stephen Colbert last week.

A.V. Club

Stephen Colbert

Reviewed by Nathan Rabin

January 25th, 2006

By his own admission, Stephen Colbert specializes in playing "high-status idiots," a niche he refined as a venerable correspondent on The Daily Show and perfects as the host of The Colbert Report, a Daily Show spin-off that adroitly satirizes Bill O'Reilly's bullying media-age demagoguery. The Colbert Report is Colbert's fourth Comedy Central show, and his third collaboration with Amy Sedaris and Paul Dinello—the trio appeared together on the sketch-comedy show Exit 57, and co-created and co-starred in the cult favorite Strangers With Candy. By the time Strangers With Candy premièred, Colbert was already contributing to The Daily Show, which has since won four Emmys and two Peabody Awards for writing.

Colbert began his professional career at Second City, where he understudied for Steve Carell; he and Carell eventually ended up writing and acting on the short-lived sketch-comedy series The Dana Carvey Show, where they voiced the Ambiguously Gay Duo, a cartoon team that eventually found a home on Saturday Night Live's TV Funhouse segment. Colbert and Carell were reunited on The Daily Show, and they later appeared together in Nora Ephron's Bewitched. Shortly after "truthiness"—which Colbert made the first "Word Of The Day" on The Colbert Report—was named "word of the year" by The American Dialect Society, and a subsequent Associated Press story neglected to credit him as the man who popularized the term, The A.V Club spoke with Colbert about Bill O'Reilly, fantasy role-playing games, and the plague of truthiness sweeping the nation.

The A.V. Club: What's your take on the "truthiness" imbroglio that's tearing our country apart?

Stephen Colbert: Truthiness is tearing apart our country, and I don't mean the argument over who came up with the word. I don't know whether it's a new thing, but it's certainly a current thing, in that it doesn't seem to matter what facts are. It used to be, everyone was entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. But that's not the case anymore. Facts matter not at all. Perception is everything. It's certainty. People love the president because he's certain of his choices as a leader, even if the facts that back him up don't seem to exist. It's the fact that he's certain that is very appealing to a certain section of the country. I really feel a dichotomy in the American populace. What is important? What you want to be true, or what is true?

AVC: You're saying appearances are more important than objective truth?

SC: Absolutely. The whole idea of authority—authoritarian is fine for some people, like people who say "Listen to me, and just don't question, and do what I say, and everything will be fine"—the sort of thing we really started to respond to so well after 9/11. 'Cause we wanted someone to be daddy, to take decisions away from us. I really have a sense of [America's current leaders] doing bad things in our name to protect us, and that was okay. We weren't thrilled with Bush because we thought he was a good guy at that point, we were thrilled with him because we thought that he probably had hired people who would fuck up our enemies, regardless of how they had to do it. That was for us a very good thing, and I can't argue with the validity of that feeling.

But that has been extended to the idea that authoritarian is better than authority. Because authoritarian means there's only one authority, and that authority has got to be the President, has got to be the government, and has got to be his allies. What the right-wing in the United States tries to do is undermine the press. They call the press "liberal," they call the press "biased," not necessarily because it is or because they have problems with the facts of the left—or even because of the bias for the left, because it's hard not to be biased in some way, everyone is always going to enter their editorial opinion—but because a press that has validity is a press that has authority. And as soon as there's any authority to what the press says, you question the authority of the government—it's like the existence of another authority. So that's another part of truthiness. Truthiness is "What I say is right, and [nothing] anyone else says could possibly be true." It's not only that I feel it to be true, but that I feel it to be true. There's not only an emotional quality, but there's a selfish quality.

AVC: That sort of gets to the essence of the character you play on The Colbert Report. He's appealing because he tells people how to think.

SC: "Don't worry your pretty little head. Open wide, baby bird, because poppa's got a fat nightcrawler of truth for you."

AVC: What about Bill O'Reilly and similar figures makes them so ripe for satire?

SC: Status is always ripe for satire, status is always good for comedy. And they have the highest possible status—and that's what we've tried to amplify with everything on the show. Everything on the show has my name on it, every bit of the set. One of the things I said to the set designer—who has done everything, I mean even Meet The Press, he does that level of news design—was "One of your inspirations should be [DaVinci's painting] The Last Supper." All the architecture of that room points at Jesus' head, the entire room is a halo, and he doesn't have a halo." And I said, "On the set, I'd like the lines of the set to converge on my head." And so if you look at the design, it all does, it all points at my head. And even radial lines on the floor, and on my podium, and watermarks in the images behind me, and all the vertices, are right behind my head. So there's a sort of sun-god burst quality about the set around me. And I love that. That's status.

We just try everything we can to pump up my status on the show. There are no televisions behind me, like the way [NBC Nightly News anchor] Brian Williams has, or even [Daily Showam the source." host] Jon [Stewart]. At certain angles, there are monitors behind Jon that have the world going on, which implies that that's where the news is, and that's where the information is, and the person in front of it is the conduit through which this information is given to you. But on my set, I said, "I don't want anything behind me, because I am the sun. It all comes from me. I'm not channeling anything. I

AVC: It seems like you're actively cultivating a cult of personality on the show.

SC: That's exactly what those are, these are all personality shows. It doesn't matter what they're saying. Doesn't matter what the news is, it's how this person feels about the news, and how you should feel about the news. It is also the personality. I'm not playing it nearly as hard as someone like O'Reilly or [Sean] Hannity does.

AVC: It's kind of a burlesque of that.

SC: Right. Sometimes I feel like maybe we should cut back on the burlesque, and really try to do that in a more sincere fashion, and it would really make it stronger. I find the branding that goes on in real news at times funnier than what I do. It's just so shocking to hear descriptions of [Fox Report anchor] Shepard Smith, you know: "Changing the world! He gives 110 percent!" Our problem is, there's no level of hyperbole that can be associated with me that hasn't at least been approached by the real thing.

AVC: How can you come up with satire more penetrating than the fact that O'Reilly wrote a book called The O'Reilly Factor For Kids at the same time that he was having all those problems with sexual harassment?

SC: Shamelessness is a wonderful part of the character.

AVC: There's an innate appeal to demagogues, and your show plays on that. Is it fun to be playing a character who's so insanely narcissistic? Is there any element of it that's cathartic?

SC: It's hard. It is fun, because mostly it's getting laughs. The audience seems to be responding to it, so that's the fun part. But the character can be tough, because it's hard for me to maintain the level of self-assurance that someone like O'Reilly has all the time. He was so admirable in a way when he was on Letterman, because he really was kind of unflappable. He was bigger than any venue he's in. And that's a hard thing to achieve. I'd love to be able to believe that for short periods of time. I'm afraid if I did that completely well, I'd never be able to turn it off. How great would it be to feel that great about yourself?

AVC: Do you find it constricting to have to be in character throughout the entire show?

SC: There are practical ways in which it's limiting. If something goes wrong on the show, it's not as natural to deal with it in an improvisational way than if I were just myself. If I were just myself, I could just call us on our own ineptitude. There's another layer that you have to lay on top of a mistake on my show, because the show is perfect. From our point of view, there are no mistakes. "This is good, that's a discovery. We don't have the footage? Fine, you know what? I'll just do this. I'll draw a picture of what he looks like." We did that once on the show when we didn't have the footage that we thought, so I drew a picture of the footage that I thought we had, and the graphic that I thought we had that we didn't. And those were discoveries in rehearsal, based on what I thought we had on the show. I'm not sure if I could have done that on the fly during the show. Whereas Jon is Jon, and Jon can name the moment in ways that I eventually will, but this character isn't so much in my bones that I can do it automatically now. It's also a freeing sense. Jon couldn't say on camera that he thinks Rosa Parks was overrated, because that's a hateful thing to say. But this character can get away with it, because the audience on some level knows [he doesn't] mean it.

AVC: When you interview people on the show, you're interviewing them in character. How do the guests respond to that?

SC: Some know what to do and some don't. Some people want to be faithful and kind of making fun, and sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I think it makes guests more nervous than they would be on another show. You go on Charlie Rose, and it's gonna be standard questioning and you can just respond, but people aren't entirely sure whether my character likes what they have to say or not. They don't know whether there's gonna be a moment of attack journalism. I try not to make it that way. I try to make it as comfortable as possible.

AVC: You were into Dungeons & Dragons as a kid, were you not?

SC: Yeah, I really was. I started playing in seventh grade, 1977. And I played incessantly, 'til probably 1981—four years.

AVC: What's the appeal?

SC: It's a fantasy role-playing game. If you're familiar with the works of Tolkien or Stephen R. Donaldson or Poul Anderson or any of the guys who wrote really good fantasy stuff, those worlds stood up. It's an opportunity to assume a persona. Who really wants to be themselves when they're teenagers? And you get to be heroic and have adventures. And it's an incredibly fun game. They have arcane rules and complex societies and they're open-ended and limitless, kind of like life. For somebody who eventually became an actor, it was interesting to have done that for so many years, because acting is role-playing. You assume a character, and you have to stay in them over years, and you create histories, and you apply your powers. It's good improvisation with agreed rules before you go in.

AVC: Did that sort of lead you toward acting?

SC: No, my mom kind of led me toward acting. She wanted to be an actress when she was younger. That made me interested in it when I was a kid, because she and I are very close.

AVC: And then you studied theater at Northwestern?

SC: I did, yes.

AVC: What was that like?

SC: I spent my first two years at a small all-male college in Virginia called Hampden-Sydney. That was like going to college 120 years ago. The languages, a year of rhetoric, all of the great books, Western Man courses, stuff like that. Very regimented curriculum, and a 19th-century emphasis on rhetoric and grammar—and all male. And very conservative. Then I transferred to finish up at the Northwestern School Of Speech, where it was guys and girls on the same floor in my dorm, a quarter of my class was gay, and I was calling my teacher not "Professor," but "Ann," and she was coming over and partying at my apartment and crashing on the couch. It was a completely different experience.

AVC: How did you become involved with Second City?

SC: When I was an undergrad, I met this guy named Del Close, who was sort of a godfather of comedy in Chicago, and a lot of people had sort of a guru relationship with him, which I did not have. I never got to know him well enough. But he and a woman named Charna Halpern were starting the ImprovOlympic, and at the time, it was a competitive, freeform, one-act, long-form improvisation. And they were looking for colleges to do competitions at their theater, the Annoyance Theater by the Belmont el stop in Chicago. And a friend of mine said, "We should go down and check this out," and he already knew something about Del and Charna. And I went and saw it once and was stunned by how much I wanted to go do it. We formed a team—we would go down on Tuesday nights and perform for audiences at the cabaret, and at the same time, I was taking more of a formal theater training. And when I got out of college, I wasn't gonna do Second City, because those Annoyance people looked down on Second City because they thought it wasn't pure improv—there was a slightly snobby, mystical quality to the Annoyance people, the ImprovOlympic people.

But I needed a job when I got out of college, and a friend of mine was box-office manager at Second City, and she said, "Well, just come answer phones." And then I found out classes were free if you work there, and I wanted to do something other than try to go get an acting job… I was so afraid of not being hired. And I found out that I really liked the people who worked there, that they were really trying hard to do something new and interesting. The form there was a little ossified, but it wasn't for lack of trying. It was just sort of like there was an inertia. I met some wonderful people, and it was a happy accident. I hadn't intended to end up there. I meant to be a serious actor with a beard who wore a lot of black and wanted to share his misery with you.

AVC: Were you drawn to Second City's history?

SC: Nope. I knew nothing about Second City. I liked comedy as a kid. When I was a kid, I'd go to sleep to, like, Bill Cosby albums every night. I'd listen to Bill Cosby Is A Very Funny Fellow… Right!, and Wonderfulness, which are two of his most famous albums. Then the next night, I'd flip them over, 'cause it was the old stackable turntable. I loved George Carlin and Dean Martin. I was one of those kids who had every comedy album. But I didn't know anything about Second City at all.

AVC: Was your time at Second City good training for the rest of your career?

SC: Absolutely. Improvisation in general is good, and improvising material into themes, turning the material into something codified and repeatable, taught me scenic structure and dramatic gambits that work and things that are appealing both as a performer and an audience member, like you know, what does "want" really mean in a scene, and how do you achieve your want, and how is that expressed, and how do you achieve closure? Those are all things that I learned after just doing the same scenes over and over and over again over the years, with my own ability to change. Creativeness, and also taking things from improvisation into those things, originally because you learned what had to go and what had to stay, and you learned it in front of a live audience. It was a great education about what I was able to do and what audiences enjoyed, and the limits of self-indulgence, and the need to please and how you balance those. I found out what my strengths were.

AVC: What were they?

SC: I think one of my strengths was my ability to serve other people's ideas. I'm proud of my ability to understand what somebody else is trying to do and help them achieve it, because part of the aesthetic of improvisation is service. We don't lead, we only follow. You never say no. Serve the servant, follow the follower. And that's very valuable in your life, as well as very valuable in your work. I'm damn proud of my ability to help other people achieve their ideas. The weakness I learned about is that I get locked into the high-status game—the teacher, the doctor, the lawyer.

AVC: You were Steve Carell's understudy?

SC: Understudy at Second City doesn't mean what it means elsewhere. When he was out of town, they put me in. But, yeah, that's fine, I'm honored to be his understudy. My first gig on Mainstage, which is the main theater there, was going in for him. He was a great guy whose material was fun to do, and I was happy to pretend that I had written it.

AVC: Did you guys hit it off immediately?

SC: Steve's a very pleasant guy, but he's very private. I can't say that we ever hung out. He's an incredible guy to perform with. I have amazing respect. He always gives absolutely everything he has. I've never seen him phone anything in. And he'll try anything. They needed somebody at The Daily Show, and I said, "You guys should hire this guy named Steve Carell, there's nothing he can't make funny." It startles me how funny he can make things.

AVC: You were a correspondent before and after the Jon Stewart era of The Daily Show. How did the show change after Stewart took over?

SC: It turned from local news, summer kicker stories, celebrity jokes, to something with more of a political point of view. Jon has a political point of view. He wanted us to have a political point of view, and for the most part, I found that I had a stronger one than I had imagined. Before Jon got to The Daily Show, I'd kept myself from having a public point of view. Because I didn't enjoy political humor until I started working on it with Jon.

AVC: Even Mark Russell?

SC: I liked Mark Russell when I was a kid, 'cause so much of it seemed very easy to me—Ted Kennedy jokes, Ted Kennedy drinking jokes, Ted Kennedy fat jokes, or Ted Kennedy womanizing jokes. Most of them seemed flippant, you know, like somebody saying, "Ted Kennedy—enough said." That's not really a joke there, that's just the attitude of a joke. A lot of that passed for political humor, I felt. The Smothers Brothers kind of did it, but that was before my time. People like Mort Sahl…

AVC: George Carlin?

SC: I would say Carlin's not really a political guy. He's very interested in language and is very interested in the way people behave, and social satire, but I wouldn't call him political.

AVC: It kind of depends on your definition of "politics" and "political."

SC: Dealing with what politicians do and specifically dealing with what's happening currently in government is how I would [define] it. And that's about human behavior and the way we deal with each other in political ways. But I mean specifically things about what's happening in government, and what's happening in our name. There isn't a lot of that. Saturday Night Live is very influential, clearly. Weekend Update.

AVC: The Daily Show is a lot more hard-hitting in its satire than Weekend Update ever was.

SC: It's stylistically very different.

AVC: Of all the pieces you've done for The Daily Show, what were your most and least favorite?

SC: Remind me what The Daily Show is again?

AVC: It was a show you were very funny on for about eight years.

SC: The stuff we did in Boston for the 2004 [Democratic] convention was my favorite stuff we've done. The last night of the convention, I had come back from shooting all day, with one of the producers, who's a great guy and used to work at 60 Minutes, and we were kind of beat. We flopped down in our offices at Boston University where we were working. And we had four passes for Kerry's acceptance speech that night, and Jim and I just said, "Well, give 'em to us, we'll do something." And we got a camera crew. At first, they wouldn't let us in because there were too many people in the hall. There were 20,000 seats, and I think they gave out 40,000 tickets, and everyone came. We couldn't stand still at any point inside, or the fire marshals would kick you out. You literally had to keep moving at all times if you weren't sitting. So we shot for the next five hours, and we didn't stand still for five hours. So I had to do everything moving at all times, and it was the worst night of shooting we've ever done, and yet something came out of it. And we turned it around in 24 hours, and it probably was the thing I was most proud of at the show. That was both the worst and the best right there.

AVC: Jon Stewart recently said he sees The Colbert Report as sort of a 30-minute Daily Show segment. Do you see it as an extension of The Daily Show?

SC: I sort of see The Daily Show as a 30-minute preamble. It's like an appetizer before you get to the main course.

AVC: Do you think the sensibility is pretty much the same?

SC: Absolutely. This is a direct extension of the work they did on The Daily Show, and it plays very much the same game as my character, who is a well-intentioned, poorly informed, high-status idiot.

AVC: It seems like it's much more an overt parody of O'Reilly.

SC: Right, sure, O'Reilly, Hannity, there's a little bit of Lou Dobbs, where he rides the same story over and over again, the attention to sartorial detail like Anderson Cooper, absolutely bullheaded holding onto an idea, no matter how shallowly considered, like Hannity, and almost a physical aggressiveness that O'Reilly has. O'Reilly's the easiest one to reference, because he's the most popular. He's the one everyone's gonna understand. And he also does it best. He's an incredibly aggressive performer. We try to include a little bit of all of them.

AVC: On The Daily Show, you're part of an ensemble, and here, you're the whole show. Is that exhausting?

SC: No, it's not like waiting in a diner. It would be more sustainable. I just don't know if I can do 165 more shows this year that way.

AVC: You voice a lot of animated characters. Which one do you identify with the most?

SC: Probably Phil Ken Sebben [of Harvey Birdman, Attorney At Law]. He's a high-status person who's actually kind of a fraud. Very fearful and insecure and vengeful to anyone who will question his authority. It's much like working for me.

Tempted by the fruit of no other

2006-01-31T22:49:00.000-05:00

So the Boston Globe has a story today about the Mass. Dems doing some navel gazing, wondering whither their members? According to the article, the percentage of voters registered as Democrats has fallen from 46% in 1980 to 37% right now, and attendance at caucuses has fallen from about 100,000 in 1982 to estimates of 30,000 likely to show up at the caucuses this coming weekend. The fact that some caucuses are being held on the day of the SuperBowl isn't going to help. Primary participation is way down, too. In '82, almost half of Dems and unenrolled voters showed up for the Ed King/Mike Dukakis primary. Granted that '82 was a watershed year here, primary participation in the last three Dem. gubernatorial primaries wasn't much above 20% of eligibles.

These drops aren't limited to Massachusetts. This is more or less a nationwide trend. There are lots of theories. I'm no social "scientist" so I won't speculate. What I can talk about is why I'm thinking of leaving the party.

No, really, there's nobody else. I haven't fallen in love with another party. The Republican Part still creeps me out in the same way that Celebration, FL does, and the Greens remind me of your supernice, patchouli wearing, vegan roommate who harps about oil dependence, but yet somehow always manages to bum a ride from you. I don't harbor the romanticism for third parties that Jon "isn't there another way" Stewart and others seem to have. This is a winner-take-all democracy, so let's stop with the nonsense. Nope, what we have here is a bad marriage, and I'm deciding whether to make good on my threats about all this philandering going on under my nose and call the divorce lawyer.

#1. Stop playacting about being the party of the common man and get back to your roots. As the little blurb from Center for Responsive Politics above highlights, Dems are the ones raking in the dough from rich folk. I know I don't feel like my $100 is particularly sought or appreciated. Especially true when we see where the lobbying money is being spent. According to this Phoenix article, lobbying expenditures worked out to almost $300,000 per legislator in 2003/2004.

Top spenders on lobbying activity 2003-’04

Massachusetts Teachers Association (teachers’ labor union): $3,941,852
Massachusetts Medical Society (physicians’ organization): $1,245,268
Retired State, County, and Municipal Employees Association of Massachusetts (retired government employees): $1,213,902
Associated Industries of Massachusetts (business groups): $1,165,473
Massachusetts Hospital Association (health-care organizations): $1,117,007
MassEquality.org (pro-gay-marriage group): $932,034*
Life Insurance Association of Massachusetts (insurance industry): $732,442
Competitive Power Coalition of New England (energy industry): $730,000
AFSCME Council 93 (labor union): $615,242
Northeast Utilities (energy industry): $594,026
Eli Lilly & Co. (pharmaceutical company): $587,050
Massachusetts Nurses Association (nurses’ organization): $572,091
MassMutual Life Insurance (insurance company): $514,884
Clear Channel Outdoor (media company): $497,451
Children’s Hospital (health-care organization): $496,403
Philip Morris USA (tobacco company): $489,547
Massachusetts Municipal Association (cities and towns): $463,410
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts (insurance company): $443,799
American Petroleum Institute (oil industry): $426,223
NStar Services Co. (energy company): $420,000
Verizon (phone company): $404,421
Pharmaceutical Research Manufacturers of America (pharmaceutical industry): $401,387*
Massachusetts Association of Health Plans (HMO consortium): $400,725

*Through June 2004; filing for July-December 2004 unavailable
Source: records at the Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth

Top PAC contributions to candidates

Retired Public Employees: $65,150
Massachusetts Corrections Officers: $51,200
Operating Engineers Local 4: $49,000
Boston Carmen’s Local 589: $45,905
Massachusetts Federation of Teachers: $42,885
Fire Fighters of Massachusetts: $42,350
Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 12: $39,275
Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association: $36,200
Massachusetts Laborers’ District Council: $31,750
Beer Distributors: $28,260

Source: Institute on Money in State Politics

Look at 'em. Mass. Medical, Mass. Hospital, Children's Hospital, Pharma, Blue Cross, Mass. Nurses, Eli Lilly and Mass. HMOs. And people wonder why there's no health care reform bill out yet. As for Labor, God love ya, but you're certainly overrepresented here. Sidebar to my own Congressman (I know, I know, state/local yada yada): I've written three letters to you in the four years I've lived in your district, and I've never received even a form response. Should I get a lobbyist? Will a donation get me a form letter?

Want to check some of this stuff out for yourself:
Center for Responsive Politics

Federal Election Commission

Institute on Money in State Politics

Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance

Fundrace

And Dems, how about talking to what's left of your base once in a blue moon? The Republicans do this. Get off your asses. I know it's annoying. The people, after all, revolt. However, as Dukakis pointed out in the article, "'My rant on this, and it's not just Massachusetts, is that Democrats have forgotten what it means to organize at the grass-roots level, and I don't mean parachuting kids in before the election,' Dukakis ... said in a telephone interview. He rejects the notion that people today are too busy or too removed from politics to invest that much effort. 'This is not too complicated, going to people's doorsteps, into their homes and connecting with them.'" SEIU certainly got this grassroots message. In 5 years, they'll have a much more politically robust membership and AFL will be reduced to whithered husk if it hasn't changed.

#2. Defend Yourself, Poindexter! The only way to defeat a bully is to stand up to them. The other guys have both houses, the executive and the courts. You literally have nothing else to lose. When Republicans attack government, don't concede that it is a horrible beast to be tamed. Government is police and fire, schools for your kids, clean drinking water and immunizations for babies. And guess what? Liberal wasn't on George Carlin's list of 7 dirty words. Warrantless domestic spying isn't terrorist surveillance. The estate tax is not the "death tax", and no family farms have been saved because of its repeal. Republicans don't have a monopoly on values. Where in the New Testament does Jesus speak about Social Security privatization or drilling in ANWAR. What would Jesus do about letting children get through that strep infection without seeing a doctor because their parents don't have insurance? When Republicans attack you for representing the liberal elite, why do you hide that tasty microbrew behind your back? Imagine what they're hiding in their "average joe" income tax returns. And why is it that only liberal elitists can care whether their friends are killed overseas or whether Alberto Gonzales knows what you're googling ("mandatory gay marriage", naturally). Defend yourselves! No one else is going to.

#3. Give me a reason to spend my time with you. Having done time in Democratic Town Committee meetings, I know that I wasted several hours of my life that you're never going to pay me back. There surely must be something more meaningful for us to do than argue over PC terminology and strategize outreach to left-handed bi-sexual bus drivers. The conventions are just as painful. Let's do some real work.

#4. Let the Democratic Party be the Democratic Party again, to paraphrase Langston Hughes. What was with the cowardly and mean-spirited immigrant tuition vote earlier this month? If you play your cards right, those are your future voters. Again, SEIU gets this and you don't. Why are you acceding to Romney's tax cuts (they'll be HIS after all, no matter what you do)? Yeah, yeah, I know the people almost voted to repeal the income tax, but the people don't always get it right, especially when voting on a question utterly divorced from any other issues or larger policy (or reality for that matter). The electorate needs someone to smack 'em and let them know there is a connection between tax cuts and the higher property taxes/fewer services/less local aid they're getting. Why did you ever start listening to these DLC turkeys? People who wax on about "centrist" Clinton's victory tend to conveniently write H. Ross Perot out of their memories of the 1992 election. Notice who showed up to the caucuses in 2002? Newbies showed up for a kooky, unabashed liberal named Reich. Moving center got us Shannon O'Brien and nothing else. If I may digress for a mo', in The West Wing's Short List, the following exchange between Bartlet and departing Justice Crouch sums it up better than I can:

CROUCH
You ran great guns in the campaign. It was an insurgency, boy, a sight to see. And then
you drove to the middle of the road the moment after you took the oath. Just the middle
of the road. Nothing but a long line painted yellow.

BARTLET
Excuse me, sir...

CROUCH
I wanted to retire five years ago. But I waited for a Democrat. I wanted a Democrat.
Hmm! And instead I got you.

It would be more accurate to say we Dems keep chasing the center rightward. Ford, Nixon and Ike look more liberal than many so-called Democrats today. Don't believe me? Check out Eisenhower's farewell speech which has resurfaced due to the new documentary Why We Fight. Link to text. Link to audio. If I wanted to be a Republican, I'd join them.

As for your grey hair problem. I don't have any answers. Hoping for the right cult of personality isn't really viable. Talking to them is a good way to figure out the answer to "what's in it for me?" Advancement or support based on merit is another radical option.

We've had some good times. Remember Atlanta in '88? You were so adorable back then. Young, optimistic, on the verge of conquering the nation. It would be a shame if we have to go our separate ways, but I'm afraid the time may have come. What's it going to be?

Next Stop Hermit Junction

2005-11-19T02:15:00.000-05:00

So i found a valediction encouraging mourning of the loss of Arrested Development by a writer who appears to be even more bitter and wrathful than i am. the most amazing part is that someone is willing to publish the venting of this guy's inner Howard Beale. Kudos to The East Carolinian for allowing a fellow fruitcake a public forum. Be sure to check out some of the entertaining feedback from the paper's eloquent readership (Aristotle, zen therapist/tv historian, Mr. Hyde/Dr. Jekyll, Walter Winchell).

OPINION

Stupid people watch stupid television shows

I hope you're happy watching "According to Jim"

Gary McCabe, Staff Writer

November 17, 2005

I hate the Midwest. I hate the South. I hate anyone who doesn't watch Arrested Development. What? You've never seen Arrested Development? Then I hate you, too. You're the reason the best television program since Seinfeld was given the axe last week. Well, it wasn't exactly axed... yet. The writing is on the wall. Nonetheless, you've let me down and I'll never forgive you for it.

I apologize - maybe that's a tad too far. It's just that I'm going through a rough time right now. Here's what's going on: The major networks are going through their "sweeps" period. Basically, the point of these periods is to determine how much the networks can charge advertised based on the ratings during the months of November and May. Did I lose you? Even more basically: the higher the ratings, the higher the price.

So it's during these two months that networks pull out all the stops during their primetime lineup. Cliffhanger endings, marriages, deaths, plot twists - get ready for a ton of them in the coming weeks. In fact, I read somewhere that the big twist on "Desperate Housewives" is that the Marcia Cross character is actually a tranny. Shocker.

On Nov. 7, "Arrested Development" came back after a short hiatus with back-to-back episodes. To call these episodes great would be an insult to the show. They were nothing short of sheer brilliance.

There is a scene in the second episode of that night is quite possibly the funniest thing that I have ever seen: Tobias, dressed as a giant mole, fights George-Michael, who was equipped with a jet pack for some reason, over a miniature town in front of a group of frightened Japanese businessmen - a magnificent Godzilla parody.

Of course, it makes no sense to most readers. You didn't watch "Arrested Development" and you didn't catch that episode. Don't worry, though, apparently nobody else watched it either. Only 4 million people watched "Arrested Development" that night - a paltry sum of people for a major network show let alone a major network show that has won the Emmy for "Best Comedy" and a slew of other important awards. It's sad.

It's sad that people are completely ignorant to this amazing show but, even worse, it's even sadder when you look at what they're watching instead. More people watch "That 70s Show" than "Arrested Development." I had no idea "That 70s Show" was still on television. What year is it on that show now? It has to be at least 1991 by now.

"According to Jim," "Still Standing" and "King of Queens" - more people watch all of these shows and they're all the same show! It's the misadventures at home of a homely, fat husband and his super-hot wife.

In the real world, the only way these guys would ever interact with these women is when he lecherously slips dollar bills in their G-string while "Girls, Girls, Girls" blares in the background. And don't get me started on Jim "my brother's death is the greatest thing to happen to my career" Belushi. What a hack.

"Num3ers" is a show so pretentious that it uses a "3" in place of the "b." I've got a different name for it: "CSI with Math." You can even replace the "i's" with "1's" if you really have to. It's such a stupid concept. The characters are like, "Someone killed Mr. Weathers - get me my calculator."

But the worst abomination on television, and I'm not the first or the last to say so, is reality TV. People go out of their way to watch shows about people that they wouldn't find interesting enough to hang out with in real life. All of the sudden Donald Trump s a reality star? There's nothing real about him. Look at his hair. It looks like he ran over some sort of furry animal with his Bentley and instead of burying it, he just put it on top of his head.

Now I understand that "Arrested Development" isn't the most accessible show. It's filled with inside jokes and callbacks that will go over your head if you haven't been with the show since the beginning. But the show goes out of its way to keep newcomers up to speed with narrator Ron Howard constantly giving the back-story and hand-feeding them explanations to the jokes.

And the jokes come at you pretty fast and furiously. I think that's the problem. "Arrested Development" is not a typical show. It has all sorts of humor. A lot of it is overt, popcorn movie jokes like the Godzilla parody. But most of it is very subtle, intelligent humor that you'll miss if you don't pay attention. And the show doesn't have a laugh track so it doesn't have the crutch of telling people when something funny happened. If it did, the track would never stop running.

I just think we're becoming too lazy and - okay, I'll say it - stupid. Every journalist in the country seems to love the show. Everybody in the industry loves the show. But because it doesn't appeal to the "common man" in the Midwest and the South, the show has been cut to 13 episodes and will surely never be seen again on network television.

I don't want to get to stereotypical but now I understand why those shows about fat guys who live normal, boring lives do so well. Eh, who cares? They like those shows because they can relate. And they don't have to think too hard watching them. It's like the presidential election last year - the ignorant masses always outnumber the enlightened few. So we'll never win.

I'm glad I don't watch those shows and I'm glad I'm not one of those people. I hate the Midwest and I hate the South. I've got to get out of here.

J'accuse

2005-11-16T21:56:00.000-05:00

Oh sure I could turn this into a rant about how my fellow Americans blow. Allow me to summarize the bill of indictment. You

vote for a lying war criminal;
consider auto racing and wrestling to be "sports";
revel in your ignorance about science, history, international relations, governance, politics, maths, languages, geography, oh forget it, there is nothing that you won't choose to know nothing about with glee and without shame;
adore reality television;
cover your oversized, over-egoed, self-indulgent SUVs (i guess the "sport" in sport utility vehicle also includes driving to the supermarket in your upper-middle class Oranian neighborhoods) with yellow ribbons and consider yourself patriots;
order freedom fries at mcdonald's;
held strong opinions about janet jackson's nipple at one time or another;
believe that behemoth corporations need to be protected from lawsuits that those same companies call frivolous (i guess if a phrase gets repeated enough times it becomes true);
don't know anything about the Patriot Act other than its title;
think that the da vinci code belongs in the non-fiction section;
can't name more than 3 of your elected officials;
have your vcr tape the war at home
can't name more than 2 supreme court justices;
can't wait to get your hands on that new lindsay lohan cd;
never miss the apprentice.......

.....oh i could go on and on with my elitist screed. But your worst crime is failure to watch Arrested Development, and for this, there is no forgiveness. I concur with the Boston Globe's critic:

A quality show fizzles, and it's your fault
By Renée Graham, Globe Staff November 15, 2005

Television's checkered history is littered with smart, inventive critical gems that never managed to find an audience, at least ones sizable enough to continue to justify the shows' existence on a prime-time schedule. The latest casualty is Fox's ''Arrested Development."

A surprise best comedy winner at last year's Emmys, the deliriously offbeat sitcom was booted from the schedule during the all-important November sweeps. Then last week it was announced that the network had declined to order the season's final nine episodes, meaning the program will probably be done after airing 13 shows this season. Going into this TV year, network execs wanted to see if the show, in its third season, could finally catch on with viewers, but it never happened.

Moments like this would usually warrant criticism of Fox's network gurus for being more concerned with making money than making quality TV shows. After all, shows from ''All in the Family" to ''Seinfeld" to ''Everybody Loves Raymond," all now considered sitcom classics, took years to find and hold the devoted audiences that eventually propelled them into the top 10.

Yet it's not as if ''Arrested Development" was yanked after its initial 13 episodes. Though the show had previously come close to cancellation, the network, realizing it had something special, stuck with it for 2 1/2 seasons. In the bottom-line business of TV programming, ''Arrested Development" just didn't garner enough of an audience. From a paltry average of 6 million viewers last year, the show had slipped to 4 million this season.

So maybe it's time to blame the viewers.

See, while everyone loves to condemn TV as a wasteland filled with lowbrow programs such as ''Trading Spouses," also on Fox, there's often a struggle when something like ''Arrested Development" comes along. Yes, the show is challenging, with bizarre characters and labyrinthine subplots, but any single episode was laugh-out loud funnier than an entire season of ABC's ''Freddie," which, by the way, was picked for the entire season.

Oh, and did I mention that ''Freddie" draws about twice as many viewers as ''Arrested Development"?

I came late to ''Arrested Development." While I am wont to complain about the dearth of worthwhile TV programs, (which translated means shows I might like), I initially resisted watching the Fox comedy about the selfish and scheming Bluth family. I feared that, like HBO's ''Six Feet Under," the show would buckle under too much forced quirk and that compelling storytelling would be submerged by wackiness run amok.

Still, after numerous friends and colleagues crowed about the show, I began renting the first season on DVD. Yes, the show was quirky and wacky, but it was also innovative, provocative, and ridiculously funny. Truth be told, it was so good, I was hard-pressed to believe it was on Fox. Thoughtful television has never been the strong suit of a network that has inflicted on the world ''The Simple Life," ''Temptation Island," and ''Totally Outrageous Behavior Caught on Tape."

Yet after years under the dead weight of increasingly stupid reality shows, ''Arrested Development" reminded those willing to tune in that network television was still capable of producing smart, scripted comedies. Why the show never found an audience is anyone's guess; then again we're talking about a national viewership content to overdose on three different versions of the ''CSI" franchise a week.

If only Fox could have hung in there, as NBC did with ''Homicide: Life on the Street," arguably the best police drama in TV history. From 1993 to 1999, the show anchored the network's Friday night lineup with a stellar ensemble cast, led by Andre Braugher's brilliant performance as the difficult, erudite Detective Frank Pembleton. Yet, the show was never a hit, never won a best drama Emmy (it was never even nominated), never received the attention of such contemporaries as ABC's long-running ''NYPD Blue." Still NBC brought the show back season after season, perhaps realizing the show deserved to be judged by more than top 10 finishes and shiny industry trinkets.

There's a possibility that ''Arrested Development" could return. Last year, the show's episodes were cut from 22 to 18, but it was still renewed for its third season. This time around, however, that scenario is remote.

So if this is goodbye, here's props to the Bluths of ''Arrested Development" and its wily creators. This is less about failure than about a show that succumbed to the bitter reality of an uncompromising TV universe where millions of viewers tune in each week to pedestrian dreck but can find no enduring place for a series that had already become one of the best of the past decade.
Renée Graham's Life in the Pop Lane column appears on Tuesdays. She can be reached at graham@globe.com

I also direct your attention to the proposition of EW's Dan Snierson:

Save This Show
An EW writer asks cable to save the critical darling from an early death by Dan Snierson

Dear Powers that be on Cable,
What up? I know I've written to you many times before (props for retiring Taildaters, MTV), but I come today with a most heartfelt plea: Would one of you please pick up Arrested Development if and when Fox decides to drop it at the end of this season?

Despite critics' raves and industry validation (an Emmy for Outstanding Comedy; Jason Bateman's Golden Globe), this bizarro series about the ultra-dysfunctional Bluth family still hasn't managed to attract a mass audience (ranked No. 100, it averages a mere 6 million viewers per week). And now Fox has trimmed the show's episode order to 18, which makes me a little nervous. An incredibly limber cast, mathematically intricate story lines, brainy-bawdy laughs — you can see why this thing has broadcast-network disaster written all over it!

But wouldn't it feel oh-so-right for you, cable guys? It's already got a loyal fan base that could spell H-I-T in your ratings universe. HBO, couldn't you use a twisted companion comedy for Curb Your Enthusiasm? Showtime, isn't it time you started competing with HBO in the funny department? USA, you're scoring with material both weird and neurotic on Monk, so why not double your pleasure? FX, you're nailing the edgy dramas, so why not try the only comedy that's brave enough to concoct a plot twist about a photo of a man's private parts being confused for WMDs in Iraq? Look, this isn't about you and your bottom lines — it's about saving one of the first great comedies of the new millennium. I know you'll make the right decision. Thanks (and keep up the nudity and swearing)!

Love,
Dan Snierson
(Posted:03/07/05)

Captain von Schnapps

2005-11-16T21:35:00.000-05:00

Entertainment Weekly did an interview this week with Christopher Plummer. In it, the actor let loose with some refreshing honesty on the joys of boozing it up. Check it out:

EW: You did a rapid-fire string of movie roles after Sound of Music, and they weren't terribly successful. Oedipus the King, with Orson Welles. A Tom Jones knockoff called Lock Up Your Daughters! — you were some ninny called Lord Foppington. And you also appeared in a disappointing World War II mystery, The Night of the Generals, with Peter O'Toole and Omar Sharif — two other blockbuster refugees.

CP: I didn't enjoy that time. I drank very heavily — as we all did, throughout the '50s and '60s. I drank myself through those bad parts, until I became a character actor. Thank God — at last! It gave me a much freer range, and I began to do versatile things on the screen. See, I always want to be different in everything I play. I don't want to bore the audience with the same performance twice. Or bore myself. Or the crew. That's what acting, to me, was all about. I got stuck because of Sound of Music for a while. I've also been very grateful to it. I have a good time sending it up, and I have some affection for it.

EW: The whole idea of inebriation-as-pastime is passé now. There isn't a bar on every corner anymore — there's a Starbucks.
CP: I know! Isn't it awful? We're back to puritanical times. So many people don't understand, we didn't necessarily drink because we had problems. We drank 'cause we adored it! We adored getting drunk, you a--holes! Don't tell me that it isn't fun! I can't bear that. ''Oh, you must have had some awful childhood, that you drank like that.'' Nonsense! Actually, I was taught as a child to drink. I came from a family that loved wine. I was 12, I think, when I was drinking wine with dinner. I'm glad I had fun and lived in a fun time.

Speaking of Justice

2005-10-22T02:00:00.000-04:00

Hiddly-ho, Neglecterinos! The first things that came to mind when re-reading my last post that rambled far into Old Man Simpson territory ("My story begins in nineteen dickety-two. We had to say 'dickety' because the Kaiser had stolen our word for twenty. I chased him down the road but gave up after dickety-six miles...") re: Justice Thomas were these:

Chris Noth's return to Law & Order
Justice Scalia's visit to Boston
Justice Breyer's new book
Recent supreme court news
Justice, Maggie Lizer's dog, on Arrested Development

The hardy or foolhardy will now suffer the consequences.

Chris Noth on L&O

The next best thing to Jerry Orbach rising from the dead to assume his rightful place as Lennie Briscoe (fingers still crossed, though). I've never been a Criminal Intent fan and don't get the appeal of D'onofrio's porcine performance. Now that they've brought back Noth, I actually watch it. Det. Logan is still very much the same man (although I swear I spotted a wedding ring when he was sitting in a car -- not a thing one would expect on Mike Logan), but as the New York Times puts it, "older, wiser, wearier." Partnering him with with the subdued Annabella Sciorra (ahem, I'm looking in your direction, Mr. D'onofrio) shows good casting instincts. It's not Scully and Mulder, and thank heaven it's not Olivia "Elliott, why won't you talk to me about your feelings..." Benson and Stabler. So far, so good.

Justice Antonin Scalia: Demonic Genius or Genius Demon?

Justice Scalia holds few opinions that I share, but his is the first voice that comes to mind when thinking about Supreme Court jurisprudence. His dissents in particular may be caustic, but they linger with you long after you've forgotten the majority opinion that you agree with.

Justice Scalia will be in Boston to speak at the New England School of Law Law Day Banquet on March 15, 2006. If you want to get to know more about him and cases are too boring for you, check out his book A Matter of Interpretation. It's under 200 pages, witty and very accessible.

Breyer's Book: Naturally Good

Justice Stephen Breyer's new book, Active Liberty: Interpreting Our Democratic Constitution, which many view as a response to A Matter of Interpretation, has just been released. You can listen to him talk about the book with Terry Gross of NPR's Fresh Air.

Supreme Court Scuttlebutt: Roberts, Miers, Takings, Anna Nicole

Given that I can't come up with an original thought about Law & Order, there is nothing I could say about the Sturm und Drang that would add anything. However, in the interest of maintaining my nerdliness, I will point out that according to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the word scuttlebutt first appeared around 1805, coming from "water cask kept on a ship's deck," from scuttle "opening in a ship's deck"+ butt "barrel." Earlier scuttle cask (1777). It's meaning as "rumor, gossip" was first recorded 1901, originally nautical slang. Folk etymology has it that the meaning evolved because of custom among sailors of gathering around the scuttlebutt to gossip.

Justice is Blind

As I enjoy opportunities to make gratuitous references to Arrested Development, the whole justice theme begs me to say "Mr. Bluth, Justice is blind." How can you go wrong with a show that has a woman feigning blindness being led around by a guide dog that is, in fact, blind? I command thee to watch this show, dammit! It’s like the Ten Commandments say, you know? “Be true to thine own self, and to thine own self...”

If oonuh ent kno weh oonuh dah gwine, oonuh should kno weh oonuh come f'um

2005-06-19T15:59:00.000-04:00

According to a story in The Beaufort Gazette, which I again found through the daily headlines on the Archaeology magazine site, archaeologists are using radar in an attempt to find slave cabins on Coosaw Island, South Carolina. If any of evidence of the cabins remains, they most likely were part of plantations owned by the Bull or Butler families, although the families rose to prominence about a century apart. What makes this project especially interesting is that the project directors hope it will be driven by local volunteers and that oral history will be given a prominent role. Research through the state archives and the Library of Congress will also supplement the archaeological record. To date, archaeologists have uncovered slipware pottery, daub, nails and tobacco pipe stems. No cabins have yet been located, but a likely trash put has been located. Trash pits are excellent sources for determining how people actually lived, what they ate, what kinds of material resources they possessed, etc.

The story also tickles another my more nerdly interests, i.e., linguistics. The South Carolina Sea Islands – of which Coosaw Island is one – are home to the Gullah language and culture. Census data show that the language is fast disappearing. In 1979, 100,000 South Carolinians were speaking Gullah, but 1990 Census data show only 180 listing it as the language they spoke at home.

Here are some links on Gullah language and/or culture:

Because I am such a ginormous nerd, I found that the story tickled another nerdly interest of mine: law-talking guys. Justice Scalia, who most assuredly deserves to be a cartoon villain or superhero depending upon one’s point of view, authored the opinion in Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council a few years back that had to do with a South Carolina barrier island and the Takings Clause. Now I know you’re thinking, “this could not possibly get any more exciting. I best buckle my seat belt, stow away my tray table and return my seat to an upright position so that I can safely handle all of the turbulence.” And you would be right. This will not get more exciting.

It seems that in the mid-80s, this guy named Lucas bought two residential lots on a barrier island in order to develop them. The adjacent lots already had residences on them. At the time, the lots were not subject to state coastal building permit regulations. Alas for poor Lucas, the legislature then enacted a law that prevented him from constructing residences on his parcels. No doubt having a clever, free-markety, laissez-faireish lawyer, Lucas filed suit against the state, arguing basically that the construction ban was an act by the state that robbed him of all “economically viable use” of his land and effectively worked a taking under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. So the state could no show him the money, so to speak, as the takings clause requires just compensation to people like Lucas. The case winds through the courts for a few years and eventually makes it to the Supreme Court. So Justice Scalia dons his shiny black helmet, affects an asthmatic wheeze and tells the plaintiff “Lucas, I am your justice.” (Yeah, that was bad, I admit it. Humor me. I’m tired.) To make a long story somewhat shorter, Scalia basically agrees with Lucas. State regulation that acts to deprive a property owner of all economically viable use of his land is one of the types of takings that require just compensation. To allow otherwise would be inconsistent with “the historical compact” supposedly undergirding the Takings Clause. For those awake or truly interested, there is also an entertaining exchange between Justices Scalia and Blackmun. See footnote 15 for a paradigmatic example of Justice Scalia both eating his cake and having it, too.

Incidentally, Justice Thomas grew up speaking Geechee (which what the Gullah language is called in parts of Georgia and North Florida). Check out his brief comments.

Today's Least Shocking News: People Hate Finneran

2005-06-15T02:15:00.000-04:00

So today's Least Shocking News that people hate Tom Finneran came in the release of a 7 NEWS/Suffolk University poll which showed that 43% of Massachusetts likely voters believe that former House Speaker Thomas Finneran should go to jail, and 54% belive that he should lose his license to practice law, a peculiarly specific question if you ask me. But then again, you didn't ask.

The best part of the release was this:

"'Voters believe that justice is more responsible than politics for this indictment,' said David Paleologos, Director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center. 'It's surprising that while people haven't heard any of the evidence, they still want to throw him in jail and never let him practice law again.'"

I'm not sure to whom this would be surprising. Even my self-involved Gen X friends know who he is and vaguely hate him, even though they can't name their own legislators at any level of government. Given the media coverage of him over the past several years, I would not have been surprised to see the above completely unadulterated, unedited and untampered photo in the paper -- and the Globe at that (I hear they have a photographer with a True Soul camera -- patent pending).* The Herald would have him eating babies, too, or perhaps wiping his backside with Clean Elections petitions.

Poor Mr. Finneran, fallen from heaven like so much lightning. It probably doesn't help that the Finneran series of questions in the poll start off like this:

Former Speaker Tom Finneran has been indicted for allegedly lying under oath and obstructing justice. Some people argue that the charges against Finneran, a prominent Democrat, were politically motivated from the Republican US Attorney. Others say that if Finneran broke the law he should be punished accordingly. Which is closer to your view?

This is like the questions that candidates get from every interest group under the sun. **

Do you support interest group's x bill that will save babies and the rainforest while lowering cholesterol by ending burdensome regulation by Big, Mean Agency that Regulates Interest Group x's industry or do you support the continued unjust, inequitable, and possible heretical regulation of Interest Group x's industry by Big, Mean Agency whose employees we hear like to kick puppies for fun?

When the candidate doesn't answer the survey with 100 similarly-framed questions, there will certainly be some media coverage pointing to his/her arrogance for not answering a simple survey about key issues that the public is burning to know about. But as usual, I digress.

Of course, that wasn't the only interesting thing in the survey. There were questions about health care coverage and affordability which everyone on Beacon Hill is hoping to solve and take credit for in the coming months. These are the health care questions and the results:

Should the Commonwealth of Massachusetts provide health care for every resident?

Yes 67%

No 28%

Undecided 22.6%

Can the Commonwealth of Massachusetts afford to provide health care for every resident?

Yes 34%

No 52%

Undecided 14%

Should people who can afford health care be compelled to pay for it?

Yes 69%

No 20%

Undecided 12%

The press release contains a quote on this point: "'These numbers show the confusion that people feel,' said Paleologos. 'They want it, but they can't pay for it.'"

If anyone can appreciate these poll results, it would be former Speaker Finneran, a man who spearheaded the Coalition Against Taxpayer Funded Political Campaigns, in order to prove a point about the electorate or perhaps about interest groups. When styled "Clean Elections", the people voted for it. (text). When asked"Do you support taxpayer money being used to fund political campaigns for public office in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts?" four years later, they rejected it. (text).

There's other stuff about Romney running for President, Kerry Healy v. Charlie Baker, all of the Democrats running for Governor, Hillary Clinton v. Aquaman, etc. but I'm already bored of those stories. You can check them out yourself here.

*Compare with yesterday's nigh hagiographic coverage of US Attorney Michael "Maximum Mike" Sullivan replete with obligatory "I'm an Average Joe just like you, Joe Voter, and I am the incarnation of the American Dream, because my dad was a _________ (insert working/middle class job here)" tidbit. Of course, he couldn't hope to top Barack Obama's son-of-a-goatherd narrative. Who could, though?

**I don't use "interest groups" in a pejorative sense. I'm a member of many interest groups.

Yaarrgh! Get yer hands off me ... stemware??

2005-05-29T21:02:00.000-04:00

Ah, Blackbeard. Now who wouldn't love a guy with fuses in his beard? Sure, it might seem a little heavy-handed since the perfection of bullying, intimidation and dishonesty by Lee Atwater and Karl Rove, but let's not forget that in the 1700s, "sign aboard or walk the plank" was one hell of an effective push poll. But I digress. Thanks to the delightful daily headlines from Archaeology Magazine, I found this interesting (to me) story in which archaeologists have linked stemware found with the wreck that some presume is the Queen Anne's Revenge to the early 18th century. Based on the craftsmanship, a specialist dated the glass to 1710-1720. The wine glass is missing part of the bowl and its base, but the remaining four-sided stem has diamonds and crowns embossed on it in honor of the coronation of England's George I. According to the article, this type of glass was never popular with the English. Further, the leaded glass helps in dating the glass, because finer crystal glasses were not developed until later. Blackbeard's ship ran aground in Beaufort Inlet, North Carolina in 1718.

Other sites of interest:
North Carolina Maritime Museum page on Blackbeard and Queen Anne's Revenge
The Queen Anne's Revenge Shipwreck Project site

W.O.W.

2005-05-06T00:34:00.000-04:00

So here's my new semi-regular feature: Whackjobs of the Week. I'm calling it such because Whackjobs of the Fortnight or Whackjobs of the Month in Accordance with the Lunar Calendar produce less satisfying acronymic outcomes. Criteria include delightfully insane rants, use of cheesy graphics (unlike the style I bring to my template blog), and aggressive use of font options. LOTS OF CAPS and bold italics always convey a message to your readers. That message being that you're as crazy as a rat in a coffee can. Of course, it helps if there is zealous adherence to some particular cause, and obviously flawed reasoning is always a plus. I realize some of these will be the equivalent of clubbing baby seals, but I'm a mean son-of-a-bitch so that's the way it goes.

For the Whackjobs of the Week, Week of May 2nd, I give you

Citizens for Limited Taxation

CLT is an anti-tax advocacy group in Massachusetts. Motto: Every tax is a pay cut...A tax cut is a pay raise. Now I grant that whipping up support for "tax relief" in a legislature so overwhelmingly Democratic that if a Republican goes to use the bathroom, they won't have enough votes for a roll call is not an easy task. Still, you might think that if you want to be taken seriously, you should at least pretend not to be hostile. My favorite this week are the titles they chose for their updates. Hit a pothole, thank a teacher is a fair and balanced look at public pensions for teachers (Massachusetts public employees don't pay into Social Security). It's filled with your usual conservative-type language manipulations like

"the Boston Globe's out-of-touch editorial board elites would only read their own newspaper they might tumble down out of their ivy tower" (emphasis in original)

"over half of that $1.2 BILLION extracted from us taxpayers annually for public employees' platinum parachutes -- $682 million of it every year -- goes directly just to "retired" teachers, much of it to cover this newest scam." (emphasis in original)

A reference to the "Education-Industrial Complex" (I admit I laughed at that one).

"[R]apacious teachers unions"

Poor roadway maintenance inspired the author to suggest " that we need a bumper-stickers of our own that reads: 'Hit a pothole, thank a teacher!'"

The secret ticking time bomb: "public service" pensions, health insurance giveaways is another lovely human interest piece on the the "'public service' gravy train [that] is soon to utterly bury us, especially the younger generations coming up who'll have to pay the staggering bill for government first and foremost taking care of itself as usual."

The public service in quotations certainly is endearing, because we all know that NOBODY could possibly be interested in making a difference in public life or their community. They're all in it for the massive salaries (except for the Mittster who doesn't take one, because he doesn't need one) and the exclusive perks. In fact, last time I checked, Weston's population is 88% teacher. They drive around in Lexuses with low-numbered license plates on their way to the secret yacht club for public employees. Their cars aren't powered with gasoline either. They were specially developed to run on taxpayer dollars. Hundreds, preferably.

In addition, both updates bizarrely and appprovingly reference a Fortune article that bitches about public employees retaining pension benefits when the private sector is junking them with the rest of the social compact. I guess if it's ok for the private sector to screw our parents, government should be doing it, too. Bring back the poor house! The article disingenuously discusses local/state government cost offloading to the federal government under Medicare D when in fact many states, including Massachusetts, will end up picking up more of the cost of care for the elderly and disabled than they already do. Nor is there any mention of looming multi-billion dollar private pension bailouts by and through the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. Savings & Loan ring a bell? It should to Neil Bush.

However, now that the proposition 2 1/2 generation has faded away, CLT is in large part sending their message to a bunch of public servants. Many of these same public servants have children, often in public schools, and happen to like teachers. Because of the nature of their work, they interact with many public employees whom they also tend to like.

But reasonable people can disagree, n'est-ce pas? How about when you call your political opposition evil? I think the Nixonesque enemies list is a nice touch, too.

"How despicably evil is the Gimme Lobby. When it needs to advance their agenda, without hesitation they trot out the sick, the halt and the lame on cue and scare the living bejesus out of the unfortunates in the process.

Yes, evil.

We've seen it in every campaign where an attempt is made to let taxpayers keep more of their hard-earned income ... every time, without exception, unless it's done their way.

Evil incarnate.

Whether it's "cutting school lunches" when it's an increase in spending ("investment" in PC-Speak) that's not as much as the Gimme Lobby demands, "throwing the elderly out into the streets" or the perennial "roads and bridges are crumbling all around us," when they can't get even more of our money -- there's always a prefabricated and timely "dire crisis" that never explains what all our already "invested" money has purchased.

We eternally need to "invest" more, but we never seem to get any return on the "investments" we've already made -- the goal post just gets further and further out of reach the more that's taken from us ... oops! ... "invested."

Yesterday's news release from the governor's office (full text below) is another example. It noted:

"Massachusetts has been nationally recognized for leading the way in providing health insurance for families and for children in particular. Last month, Governor Cellucci and Swift released a report on the uninsured population in Massachusetts. Since 1998, there has been a significant drop in the number of uninsured, from 8.2 percent to 5.9 percent, with an even more dramatic reduction in the number of children without health coverage, from 5.8 percent to 2.8 percent."

The evil Gimme Lobby's response: State Sen. Richard Moore (D-Utopia), at its dog-and-pony show yesterday, observed that "while progress has been made during the economic boom of the last decade, much more remains to shore up a fragile health care system."

Even though the state budget has doubled in just the last dozen years, "much more remains" to be done.

"More Is Never Enough!" (MINE!)

More never will be until they have it all.

And they won't stop until they do.

Barbara reports that Sen. Birmingham threatened yesterday that the promised tax rollback would destroy dental care and even housing for children! She calls it his "teeth and home" scare.

There is no morality too sacred, no compassion for the less fortunate too revered, beyond which the shameless Gimme Lobby will not transgress when its stranglehold on our wallets and its power is threatened.

Drag an unfortunate wheelchair-bound child and his stressed mother, terrified by lies and misinformation, into their news conference as a sympathetic prop to advance their agenda?

Nothing new. They do it all the time and, after all, they did vow to do "whatever we have to do" to defeat Question 4. They do "whatever we have to do" all the time, and there isn't much if anything they won't do.

Remember the elderly seniors around the state they terrified then subpoenaed into a Boston court when they desperately needed to disqualify signatures on our first rollback petition?

Compassion? Caring? Honesty?

Not from that crowd. Not when their power is at risk.

Evil. Selfish, stark and heartless evil."

WOW!

Corporate Whore

2005-05-05T23:25:00.000-04:00

So I admit I'm a complete corporate whore. I have no principles. I am shilling for The Man. Yet, I implore you. Watch Arrested Development. You''ll laugh. Out loud. Without prompting from a laugh track. You don't need tv to tell you what's funny. Watch it before it's cancelled. My heart still remains empty from the loss of such late greats as Mr. Belvedere, Blossom, Parker Lewis Can't Lose, Silver Spoons and Hunter. O, Michael Stoyanov, at which dinner theater are you thespiating?! Christopher Hewitt, I hope you're butling up in heaven! Hey, Corin Nemec, watch out for Mansquito! Fred Dryer, oh when will you back in force?! Michael Bluth, I mean, Jason Bateman, loved ya in Dodgeball. The point: life is short. Your beloved(s) will leave you. Grab that remote firmly and don't let go.

Breathtaking Tykes

2005-05-04T04:09:00.000-04:00

"Nobody ever called me breathtaking before."
"I've never been called breathtaking either."

The New York Times
New York Times.com

May 3, 2005

Ugly Children May Get Parental Short Shrift

By NICHOLAS BAKALAR

arents would certainly deny it, but Canadian researchers have made a startling assertion: parents take better care of pretty children than they do ugly ones.

Researchers at the University of Alberta carefully observed how parents treated their children during trips to the supermarket. They found that physical attractiveness made a big difference.

The researchers noted if the parents belted their youngsters into the grocery cart seat, how often the parents' attention lapsed and the number of times the children were allowed to engage in potentially dangerous activities like standing up in the shopping cart. They also rated each child's physical attractiveness on a 10-point scale.

The findings, not yet published, were presented at the Warren E. Kalbach Population Conference in Edmonton, Alberta.

When it came to buckling up, pretty and ugly children were treated in starkly different ways, with seat belt use increasing in direct proportion to attractiveness. When a woman was in charge, 4 percent of the homeliest children were strapped in compared with 13.3 percent of the most attractive children. The difference was even more acute when fathers led the shopping expedition - in those cases, none of the least attractive children were secured with seat belts, while 12.5 percent of the prettiest children were.

Homely children were also more often out of sight of their parents, and they were more often allowed to wander more than 10 feet away.

Age - of parent and child - also played a role. Younger adults were more likely to buckle their children into the seat, and younger children were more often buckled in. Older adults, in contrast, were inclined to let children wander out of sight and more likely to allow them to engage in physically dangerous activities.

Although the researchers were unsure why, good-looking boys were usually kept in closer proximity to the adults taking care of them than were pretty girls. The researchers speculated that girls might be considered more competent and better able to act independently than boys of the same age. The researchers made more than 400 observations of child-parent interactions in 14 supermarkets.

Dr. W. Andrew Harrell, executive director of the Population Research Laboratory at the University of Alberta and the leader of the research team, sees an evolutionary reason for the findings: pretty children, he says, represent the best genetic legacy, and therefore they get more care.

Not all experts agree. Dr. Frans de Waal, a professor of psychology at Emory University, said he was skeptical.

"The question," he said, "is whether ugly people have fewer offspring than handsome people. I doubt it very much. If the number of offspring are the same for these two categories, there's absolutely no evolutionary reason for parents to invest less in ugly kids."

Dr. Robert Sternberg, professor of psychology and education at Yale, said he saw problems in Dr. Harrell's method and conclusions, for example, not considering socioeconomic status.

"Wealthier parents can feed, clothe and take care of their children better due to greater resources," Dr. Sternberg said, possibly making them more attractive. "The link to evolutionary theory is speculative."

But Dr. Harrell said the importance of physical attractiveness "cuts across social class, income and education."

"Like lots of animals, we tend to parcel out our resources on the basis of value," he said. "Maybe we can't always articulate that, but in fact we do it. There are a lot of things that make a person more valuable, and physical attractiveness may be one of them."

Adhesion contract (n.) --

2005-05-04T01:45:00.000-04:00

Adhesion Contract (n.) -- A standard-form contract prepared by one party, to be signed by the party in a weaker position, usu. a consumer, who adheres to the contract with little choice about the terms. Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004).

Being an all-around bully-hater, I thought this site was pretty amusing. I breathlessly await my kid's activation code. I also confess to a bias against microsoft as I especially loathe their annoying self- and cross-promotion in every product issued (for the love of God, leave me alone MSN Messenger! Get your corporate detritus off of my screen!)

So the site also tickled my interest as i have been forced to imbibe entirely too much economics in the law recently and need some mental ipecac to get it out of my system. For a particularly enraging opinion (in a dry, law-talkin' guy, sort-of-way), see Hill v. Gateway 2000. In that case, a couple ordered a Gateway computer (i'm a dell person myself) over the phone with a credit card. Like any other electronics or software you've purchase, a bunch of papers with terms and conditions in miniscule font that no one ever looks at came with it.* Those papers set out terms and conditions that said the couple was bound by the terms unless they returned the computer within 30 days (paying shipping, of course). When their computer broke a few months later, Gateway wouldn't repair it, and they sued. Gateway said, "ha ha! (nelson munce-style), now's the time to take a good look at those tiny terms on the papers in the box. You have no right to sue us, you toothless hicks (i paraphrase, of course)! You gave up your right to sue in that tiny-fonted insert. You've won a trip to arbitration!"**

The court said that there was no sale when the couple called Gateway and forked over their credit card number after which gateway agreed to ship their white elephant. Nope, gateway shipped the computer (which, i would think, your average person would assume he has already purchased) with an "accept-or-return offer" to sell the computer. The sale wasn't made until the couple didn't return the computer within 30 days (the only way to avoid the arbitration terms). It didn't matter that the supposed offer wasn't explained in any meaningful way or within a reasonable period of time.

This is so law schooly, I should be ashamed of myself, but i can't help it: One author noted that the case is particularly astonishing, because it revives "the principle that dominant contracting parties can use standard forms and manipulate the mode of agreement to bind their customers without meaningful assent, notice, or opportunity to pursue other terms. It transforms the normal into the unexpected--giving a credit card number on the phone is not really a sale. Then the unexpected becomes normal; more and more, companies like Gateway can dictate the terms on which their products are purchased and used with only the barest illusion of consent. As [a law professor explained] explained, under Hill, 'misrepresentation is the oil that lubricates capitalism.'"

And now, for an awkward transition, riddle me this,

Q: when can a credit card company charge you 28.49%, the highest possible rate?
A: when the cardholder is late making a payment to any creditor, including phone and utility bills and car payments. this can happen even if the cardholder paid the credit card company on time.

You know all that stuff that comes with your credit card statement every month? wouldn't you like to know what you agreed to in those tiny terms? Check out a really comprehensive overview from frontline: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/credit/

*the papers stated that they were bound by the terms unless they returned the electronic doodad within 30 days, paying for the shipping themselves. Did you even get to these tiny terms? do you know where all those pieces of paper that came in the box for grand theft auto: vice city that you bought awhile back? how about for your iMac?

**arbitration is a topic of venting for another day, but the first question i always ask myself as a consumer is "why is industry x, or industry in general so keen to do y?" generally, the answer has nothing to do with benefits for their employees or consumers, although that won't stop them from framing it that way. wouldn't you be suspicious if your opponent picked the judge hearing your case who happened rely on your opponent for more business.

O Captain, I'm Captain

2005-01-29T15:28:00.000-05:00

O Captain, I'm Captain. At least according to the goofy pirate quiz at TLAPD. Never mind that it makes me out to be a man and a self-involved one at that -- qualities that redundant anyway.

You are The Cap'n!

Some men are born great, some achieve greatness and some slit the throats of any man that stands between them and the mantle of power. You never met a man you couldn't eviscerate. Not that mindless violence is the only avenue open to you - but why take an avenue when you have complete freeway access? You are the definitive Man of Action. You are James Bond in a blousy shirt and drawstring-fly pants. Your swash was buckled long ago and you have never been so sure of anything in your life as in your ability to bend everyone to your will. You will call anyone out and cut off their head if they show any sign of taking you on or backing down. You cannot be saddled with tedious underlings, but if one of your lieutenants shows an overly developed sense of ambition he may find more suitable accommodations in Davy Jones' locker. That is, of course, IF you notice him. You tend to be self absorbed - a weakness that may keep you from seeing enemies where they are and imagining them where they are not.

What's Yer Inner Pirate? brought to you by The Official Talk Like A Pirate Web Site. Arrrrr!

A name generator gave me the name Pirate Blair the Staggering Drunk which would have applied perhaps 10 years ago in my tender years but now more aptly applies to Wonkette. Instead, I'll go with Iron Mary Read from fidius.org, but you may call me Iron Read.

Speaking of the Interweb...

2005-01-08T02:08:00.000-05:00

So if you want to encounter a truly humorless sector of the public, try this Google search: interweb verizon commercials.

A brief sample of what comes up --

To the staff at Verizon, I am writing in regard to your anti-male/anti-father commercials for Verizon. I will give a brief description of the ads which I’m referring to. The ads for the Elliotts feature a bumbling clueless father (Tom) who gets yelled at by his wife to leave his daughter (Christina) alone in “Homework.” It seems he’s only suited for washing the dog. In “Parental Control” Tom gets the First and Sixth Amendments mixed up, and is condescendingly corrected by his older daughter. In “Phantom” an older male relative (presumably grandpa) is portrayed as ignorant of wireless technology, as he thinks his grandson’s laptop is connected to the “interweb” by wires.....
A mother attempts to help her son with his homework, and fails. The son is annoyed with his mother's ignorance, and turns to his father with a look which says "obviously females can't do math--get her out of here." The father tells the mother to go wash the dishes. When she is slow to comply, he orders her away from her son, and then he yells at her. Is it a Public Service Announcement from the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence? A clip from a documentary about life in the 1880s? No, it is a regularly aired commercial from one of America's largest companies. The difference is that in the real ad it is the father who is portrayed as ignorant and useless as he tries to help his daughter.This week 2,000 of my radio show listeners sent letters to Verizon Communications protesting the insulting portrayal of the father in its commercial "Homework." Our protest has been covered by over 250 newspapers and media outlets. The Verizon ad's message is clear, and it's a common one on the TV screen--dad is dumb, dad is useless, mom is smarter than dad, hell, even an eight year-old girl is smarter than dad.One ad would not elicit such fervent responses from so many men and women of all ages were it not symptomatic of a larger problem in our society--the denigration of males in popular culture, and the decline of fatherhood....
Menstuff® has compiled the following information to make it easier to take action against Verizon and their television commerical we call "Leave Her Alone" about minimizing and shaming a father, who wants to be involved with his daughter, in front of his daughter and the entire television audience.
Sample e-mail or letter: This letter concerns Verizon's anti-father 'Leave her alone!' commercial. In the commercial a father is trying to help his young daughter with her homework when he is belittled and scolded by his wife, who orders him to 'leave her alone!' I believe that such anti-father messages are harmful to our sons and daughters, and I respectfully request that you withdraw this commercial....

Shaming a fictional character in front of the entire television audience? The horror!! The make-believe wife is a scold just like the wives of medieval England...Let's have a public ducking! But guess what? Verizon pulled its "homework" ad. Tyranny of the minority. Let's check out how these easily-outraged culture warriors treat others, particularly their wives and Verizon staff, with a deep and abiding respect. I am including numerous quotes as I find them so entertaining, although the constant repetition of misandric gets a bit tiresome. I have edited the profanity for the delicate and the name of one maligned Verizon employee, but I emphasized the best parts for a prurient thrill just like kids would do to the dirty parts of Ragtime in high school. You can read the messages in their full poetic bloom at http://www.mensactivism.org/articles/04/11/08/1816232.shtml

"I called and talked to some entry level paeon."
"the day that my wife is smarter than me about using the computer or the internet is the day I hand over my balls. Not gonna happen." (She's one lucky gal.)
"This pisses me off. I'm a college graduate, hard working professional, Navy Veteran, independant man, etc. etc. What more do I have to prove?" (It does prove that he doesn't use spell check.)
"Where did feminazis get the idea that we as viewers have become obliged to to receive hate politica and propaganda. Since you have seen fit to insult me over a flux of many thousands of watts of electromagnetic force, I feel no obligation whatsoever to respond to you with politeness or civility. I address the following poem to whoever the queenbee feminazi was who came up with this ad concept, and to whoever the queen bee feminazi was who saw fit to purchase this ad and disseminate it on behalf of Verizon: "I will speak frankly I will be blunt Jesus might love you But I think you're a c--- A boor and a biggot A "bee" with an "itch" And Lower West Oz's Laureat witch If you can't share this planet with a Martian with a penis Then hop on your broomstick and fly the Hell back to Venus But don't push your luck I'm a member of F*CK*** ( this is an acronym for 'Fed Up C--- Kickers') "
"Based on the information you provided regarding TLC, I contacted them and requested that they no longer accept misandric advertising. We all have to get much more active and vocal if we are going to overcome the culture of male hatred that grips Western Civilization. "
"Although I applaud the Verizon campaign, these misandric advertisement are showing up everywhere. We must target the advertising companies and trade associations that are producing this misandric filth. I would encourage everyone to contact Glenn and see if he can help us stop this attack on males which I have no doubt is caused by the feminist propaganda that permeates are society."
"I was planning on making a truck sign soon and cruising Hollywood It would say, ADVERTISING IS SEXIST & HATEFUL AGAINST MEN "
"After years of abuse and taking this kind of crap just for being born male, I can't think of anything I'd enjoy more than giving misandrist bigots their long overdue performance evaluations from the men's movement, in person, on a protest sign. "
"I'd guess that in the next scene the woman will call the cops, who will come and throw Tom in jail because he didn't "leave her alone" fast enough when ordered to do so by the fem-chief. "
"Here is the reply I got from some ratlike a--hole....at Verizon."

And they say that chivalry is dead. Yes, ads play into stereotypes sometimes. I am particularly tired of all the ads where women get really excited about cleaning products, but I would rather direct my energy toward things that matter like health care for poor children, universal early education and the new season of The O.C. I laughed out loud the first time I saw the Verizon interweb ad. It reminds me of my dad, an oppressed, upper-management white guy who only recently learned how to cut and paste in Word and who does not understand how to download from the web. I'm guessing he probably spent most of his old-school career oppressing underlings and assistants who would do the typing for him and never learned for himself. If you want to see the ad to make up your mind, it's here. Click on the ad called "Phantom".

Greatest American Hero

2005-01-08T01:21:00.000-05:00

Oh where, oh where, is Photoshop when I need it? If anyone deserves a cape, tights and a superhero letter on his chest right now -- all of the entirely hetero variety, of course -- it is Justice Stephen Breyer for showing up to jury duty in Marlborough District Court the other day. As the glorified abacus that is my computer can't handle the program, this nifty undoctored pic will have to do. The Justice is wearing something vaguely capelike, after all, and it is more flamboyent than your standard office attire. Given that your average A/R representative tries to weasel out of jury duty -- apparently unaware of the meaning of the word duty -- because he is "too busy" or has "other priorities" like Dick Cheney did during Vietnam, Mr. Justice, of whom it could be said has rather weighty professional obligations, deserves superhero status for fulfilling his obligations as a citizen of this fantastic country. Who better to lead the Justice League of America? When the official results are announced, presumably by a group of pasty guys in their early 20s, I hope he gets extra points for doing so without self-congratulation.

Lennie Briscoe, Requiescat in Pace

2004-12-31T02:19:00.000-05:00

Lennie, we hardly knew thee.

According to the New York Post, "Orbach's family is suggesting that fans who want to pay tribute to the actor can do so by making donations to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Just write "prostate cancer research" on the memo section of a check, and send it to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, PO Box 27106, New York, NY 10087 "

Gothamist Tributes

To Viewers and Police, Jerry Orbach was Briscoe

In praise of Lennie Briscoe

Jerry Orbach, 1935-2004

A Star is Gone

Orbach Conveyed Humor, Frustration of Daily Life

Link to Older Terry Gross Interview with Mr. Orbach

National Institutes of Health:
Information on Prostate Cancer Prevention, Treatment and Research

Are we on the interweb?

2004-12-16T13:35:00.000-05:00

In the interests of customer service, I figured I'd let people in a big secret that can prevent them from losing their jobs, being arrested, harassment by neighbors, indefinite detention without charges under the Patriot Act and other inconveniences of modern life. When you have pictures of possible prisoner abuse and/or sensitive intelligence-gathering techniques, DON'T POST THEM ON THE INTERNET. (Text only below). This means any website, including commercial photo-sharing websites like smugsmug, shutterfly, ofoto, picasa/hello, etc. The same goes for your photos of loved ones engaging in bestiality, animal cruelty, unnatural acts with inflatable people, amateur adult videos, etc. Yes, I know you thought that the fact you needed a password to access them meant that they were private -- after all, who would guess that your secret code is PookyBear? It would take the NSA years to crack that. The notion that you thought the pictures were private is one thing, but why on earth would you want to post these photos of your husband hanging out with hooded and bleeding prisoners for your friends and family to see? When you think of an answer consistent with humanity, let me know. Until then, this has been a helpful tip from MM to you.

washingtonpost.com
Navy SEAL Photos Trigger Inquiry Images May Be Earliest Evidence of Prisoner Abuse in Iraq
By Seth HettenaAssociated PressSaturday, December 4, 2004; Page A15
CORONADO, Calif., Dec. 3 -- The military has launched a criminal investigation into photographs that appear to show Navy SEALs in Iraq sitting on hooded and handcuffed detainees, and photos of what appear to be bloodied prisoners, one with a gun to his head.
Some of the photos have date stamps suggesting they were taken in May 2003, which could mean they are the earliest evidence of the possible abuse of prisoners in Iraq. The far more brutal practices photographed at the Abu Ghraib prison occurred months later.
An Associated Press reporter found more than 40 of the pictures among hundreds in an album posted on a commercial photo-sharing Web site by a woman who said her husband brought them back from Iraq after his tour of duty. It is unclear who took the pictures, which the Navy said it was investigating after the AP furnished copies when it sought comments for this story.
These and other photos found by the AP appear to show the immediate aftermath of raids on civilian homes. One man is lying on his back with a boot on his chest. A man is shown with an automatic weapon pointed at his head and a gloved thumb jabbed into his throat. In many photos, faces have been blacked out. What appears to be blood is shown dripping from the heads of some. One photo shows a family huddling in a room, while others show debris and upturned furniture.
"These photographs raise a number of important questions regarding the treatment of prisoners of war and detainees," Navy Cmdr. Jeff Bender, a spokesman for the Naval Special Warfare Command in Coronado, said in a written response to questions. "I can assure you that the matter will be thoroughly investigated."
The photos were turned over to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, which instructed the SEAL command to determine whether they show any serious crimes, Bender said Friday. That investigation will determine the identities of the troops and what they were doing in the photos.
Some of the photos recall aspects of the images from Abu Ghraib, which led to charges against seven soldiers.
Though they have alarmed SEAL commanders, the photographs found by the AP do not necessarily show anything illegal, according to experts in the laws of war who reviewed the photos at the AP's request.
Gary D. Solis, a former Marine Corps prosecutor and judge who teaches at the U.S. Military Academy, said the images showed "stupid" and "juvenile" behavior -- but not necessarily crimes.
Retired Rear Adm. John D. Hutson, who served as the Navy's judge advocate general from 1997 to 2000, said the photos suggest possible violations of the Geneva Conventions.
Those international laws prohibit the taking of souvenir photos of prisoners of war.

Hell hath no fury like a Stewart scorned

2004-10-24T02:14:00.000-04:00

I promised myself that i would leave this well enough alone, especially as every blogger and mainstream media commentator in the english-writing world appears to be waxing on about what Wonkette styles Tuckergate. but as im a serial bullshitter, i should have known better.

I get a kick out of the "real" media weighing in, chastising JS for his appearance on Crossfire. The subtext, or in lesser cases the text, is "just where the hell does Yorick get off telling Polonious how he should carry out his commentary? My, my, the hubris, the chutzpah. Doesn't this fellah know his place??" (Now is the point where I imagine that flashback scene from zoolander where the photographer is throwing bananas at stiller in a monkey suit.) At best he gets a "yes, but..."

Here's a sample:
"Given a choice of serving as an entertaining "monkey" or lecturing on the ills of modern politics and journalism, comedian Jon Stewart opted for serious talk last week. He would have done better to stick with what he knows, such as rolling his eyes, mugging in front of a camera and grinning while cracking sarcastic. That's how he earns his money. And he's good at it......And his Crossfire rant has been hailed as the ultimate in reality programming — unscripted, unvarnished and unflinching. Sadly, it was also uninformed."

--- Leslie Papp from The Toronto Star (Papp certainly is the right name. you'll note he/she actually turns to the fool's role.)

"Each side is still uneasy with the other because they have a self image that is different from the reality," he said. "Tucker was complaining that Stewart wasn't being funny. He wasn't wanting commentary, he wanted entertainment. And Stewart wanted to take advantage of the show to make some serious statements."

--Damien Cave quoting Darrell West of Brown University in the NY Times.

Perhaps Stewart was edging toward sanctimony at this point. But then again, he was on a show whose hosts are so punctured by conflicts of interest none of them thought to point out that Novak's constant hyping of the Swift boat story might have been influenced by the fact that his son is a publicist for the book's publisher.

And has anyone else on "Crossfire" ever even noted Novak's central role in the scandal surrounding the outing of CIA agent Victoria Plame, apparently functioning as a tool in a partisan campaign to punish her husband's criticism of the Bush administration?

-- Peter Ames Carlin of The Oregonian (at least accepts that the criticism is legit.)

In taking down hosts Paul Begala and especially Tucker Carlson, Stewart offered some sharp criticism of the mainstream media and political discourse - criticisms with which I largely agree. But Stewart seems not to realize his own place in the modern media firmament.

--Dan Kennedy, Boston Phoenix media blog, 10/16/04 (emphasis supplied by MM.)

But that doesn't mean I have to like what he did on Crossfire. To wit:

1. Stewart picked the wrong targets. By directly challenging Tucker Carlson and Paul Begala, the hosts of a tired old show that no one watches, Stewart came off - as I said earlier - as something of a bully and a bore....

2. Stewart needs to be more self-aware. By offering serious media criticism, and then throwing up his hands and saying, in effect, "Hey, I'm just a comedian" every time Carlson took him on, Stewart came off as slippery and disingenuous. Sorry, Jon, but you can't interview Bill Clinton, Richard Clarke, Bill O'Reilly, Bob Dole, etc., etc., and still say you're just a comedian.

3. Stewart endangered the franchise. By stepping out of character the way he did, Stewart runs the risk of being seen as less of an inspired subversive and more of an activist with an agenda he's trying to push....If he starts taking himself too seriously, then he's just another Bill Maher...

4. Stewart became what he criticized. Everyone's favorite moment was when Stewart called Carlson "a dick." (For the record, I know Carlson a little, and he's not a dick, although I'll admit that he often plays one on television.) Quite a closing for someone who had just spent an entire interview lamenting the confrontational nature of political talk shows...

--Dan Kennedy, Boston Phoenix media blog, 10/19/04 (emphasis supplied by MM.)

What JS and The Daily Show have been fantastic about -- and for which they richly deserve their Emmys -- is showing you how ineffectual the media has been during the course of this Administration (one of the main takeaways i got from Fahrenheit 911 wasn't necessarily the war stuff but the self-censorship going on by US media organizations -- you really get a sense of what we aren't seeing on tv.)

E.g., The repetition of talking points by administration surrogates without ever being challenged. The fact that the President so rarely deigns to give interviews that when someone inveigles one he/she -- oh who are we kidding? he -- makes an ass out of himself a la Tim Russert's painfully deferential interview in February. (Check out Russert disclaiming any influence due to his participation in White House functions. More info.) No doubt the interview of bush on Good Morning America on monday will be hard-hitting. Signed loyalty oaths at bush/cheney events and arrests of those wearing kerry t-shirts (In Massachusetts, check out the Governor cum Senate/Presidential Candidate Romney barring the distribution of leaflets.) "Town Hall" debates in which questions are submitted in advvance so that the moderator can determines which questions are appropriate and decide when to cut off questions that differ in a "material" way from those submitted. Ad infinitum and nauseum.

I admit that i find JS sometimes appears naive about hostility in political discourse as if there were some golden era of enlightened idea exchange. Does he think that the founding fathers (i suppose in this P.C. age we might say founding parents, but then we wouldn't want to exclude single people or couples without children. founding forebears?? hmm, revolutionaries sounds too bloody. i'll get back to you) sat around at debate parties sipping rum cordials and debating the merits of the Extent and End of Civil Government. (There are, of course, people who would have us conduct the affairs of government this way. You can call Pam Wilmot at Common Cause at 617-426-9600.) Hamilton killed Burr in a duel. Rep. Brooks (D-SC) beat Sen. Sumner (R-MA) almost to death in the Senate chambers after an anti-slavery speech. Monopolies and combines, the Pentagon Papers, the S&L scandal, heck, even Free Silver, these things are worth getting red in the face about because they are about the future of the country. All that aside, it doesn't mean that he isn't entitled to talk about what he sees as threatening to this great republic but rather should remain confined to his monkey role. The pundits come irritatingly close to suggesting that he doesn't have a right to participate in our democracy and that he shouldn't worry his pretty little head and just leave this tough "thinking" to the experts. And if he doesn't, imagine what they think about us?

Big Blotchy Bully

2004-10-02T01:59:00.000-04:00

As has been widely reported, Bill "Never Let the Truth Stand in the Way of a Good Story" O'Reilly tapped his his fathomless reserves of warmth and hospitality to start his interview with John Stewart thusly:

JON STEWART, "THE DAILY SHOW": How are you, sir?

O'REILLY: OK. You know what's really frightening?

STEWART: Uh oh.

O'REILLY: You know what's really frightening?

STEWART: You've been reading my diary.

O'REILLY: You actually have an influence on this presidential election. That is scary.

STEWART: If that were so, that would be quite frightening.

O'REILLY: But it is. It's true. I mean, you've got stoned slackers watching your dopey show every night, OK, and they can vote.

STEWART: Yeah.

O'REILLY: You can't stop them.

STEWART: Yeah, I just don't know how motivated they would be, these stoned slackers.

O'REILLY: Yeah, it just depends if they have to go out that day.

STEWART: What am I, a Cheech and Chong movie? Stoned slackers?

O'REILLY: Come on, you do the research, you know the research on your program.

STEWART: No, we don't.

O'REILLY: Eighty-seven percent are intoxicated when they watch it. You didn't see that?

(You can read most of the interview at Fox News -- also be sure to check out Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism, no surprises but nice synthesis nonetheless. If you're really jonesing (who says that anyway?) for S&D re: Fox's lies and distortions, check out http://www.newshounds.us/.)

Anywho, as also widely reported, Comedy Central was a tad irritated with O'Reilly's characterization of The Daily Show's advertiser-bait audience as comprised of stoned slackers, so they issued a release on the matter citing two studies showing the greater education, political knowledge and affluence of the Daily Show audience versus Fox viewers and/or average Americans. The release itself was interesting and had quite a few little factoids. All the pertinent info including links to the original source material can be found in the release.

Arrr, I hate the sea and everything in it.

2004-09-17T01:17:00.000-04:00

Talk Like A Pirate Day is on Sunday. Bust out your island and pirates of the caribbean dvds, visit www.talklikeapirate.com, dust off treasure island and start practicing your pirate speak.

If you're like me and extremely lazy, here are some links to video and sound clips and miscellany to get you in the mood. POTC corporate; POTC fan; POTC script; A General History of the Pyrates; New England Pirate Museum and All Hands on Deck. Drink up me hearties, yo ho!

Another Reason Why I Love the Herald

2004-08-20T23:20:00.000-04:00

It's good to see that the Herald is giving the NY Post a run for its money in the Enquirer-style front page department. The Herald is utterly disingenuous, hypocritical, and masterful at manipulating language. Really, it's a thing of beauty. Here's the formula. Put "speaker's conference" in quotes and it becomes sinister. For the people at State Street, it's a business trip. For Finneran (or any other elected official), call it a junket and now you've taint it with the whiff of corruption without any effort. Let's open the Herald's books and see what's in there. I'm sure there isn't even a penny spent unnecessarily.

And paging Willard M. Romney. Let's talk about the $6.1 million of his own dough he spent in 2002 to buy himself a governorship (Utah? Massachusetts? What's the difference? For someone who isn't interested in a Senate or Presidential run, he sure spends a lot of time getting his op-eds in the Wall Street Journal and cultivating coverage on MSNBC and CNN.) No doubt he has the interests of you and your $35K a year job at heart. Isn't it nice that he balanced the budget without cutting core services by eliminating what he called almost $2 billion in "waste, fraud and mismanagment" (Globe, "A Look at the Facts Behind the Exchanges," Rick Klein, October 2, 2002) -- you know, denying 15,000 kids health care, kicking 36,000 unemployed people off health insurance, too, cutting funding for AIDS treatment, cutting pharmacy assistance for seniors, cutting $100 million from cities and towns (btw, how did your Representative and Senator vote on the roll call to pass the buck to romney? how much did your community lose out on?) and eliminated the school health program that put nurses into schools in 106 communities.

Mmmmm mutton gruel

2004-08-20T22:22:00.000-04:00

Everything a girl could want in a story -- Robin Hood, the Black Death and recipes! Where is G. Chaucer when we need him?

The Guardian

Bones reveal chubby monks aplenty

Martin Wainwright
Thursday July 15, 2004

The full truth about one of Britain's favourite historical fatties has been tracked down by a three-year study of overweight medieval monks.

Robin Hood's companion Friar Tuck had hundreds of real-life counterparts, according to a newly published analysis of skeletons in three monastic burial sites in London.

Suet, lard and butter were wolfed down in "startling quantities" by the closed communities, whose abbots often depended on arranging large and regular helpings to keep their flocks under control.

"The way to a man's heart is through his stomach and this seems specially to have been the case with monks," said Philippa Patrick, of the Institute of Archaeology, at University College, London. "They were taking in about 6,000 calories a day, and 4,500 even when they were fasting."

Arthritis in knees, hips and fingertips showed that the often under-employed monks were seriously obese.

Ms Patrick, whose findings were revealed to the International Medieval Congress, meeting in Leeds, said: "Their meals were full of saturated fats. They were five times more likely to suffer from obesity than their secular contemporaries, including wealthy merchants or courtiers."

The reckless scoffing was in clear breach of St Benedict's austere rules laid down probably in 530, which warned: "There must be no danger of overeating, so that no monk is overtaken by indigestion, for there is nothing so opposed to Christian life as overeating."

Critics, such as Peter the Venerable, who slated monks for "wearing furs and eating fat", were advised however that Benedict had also warned about grumbling: "Brethren would indeed grumble if deprived of the food to which they are accustomed."

The skeletal data, from 300 sets of bones found at Tower Hill, Bermondsey, and Merton abbeys, includes information on a medical condition known now as Dish (diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis) triggered by overeating and a rich diet. "The marks of Dish keep appearing on their skeletons. It forms a coating on the spine like candlewax dripping down the side," said Ms Patrick.

The findings tally with satire that developed a keener edge after the Black Death and food shortages. Friar Tuck was only one of many fat fictional characters based on medieval churchmen by resentful lay storytellers.

The new evidence backs records from Westminster Abbey, showing that six eggs a day was normal for monks. In the middle ages, monkish obesity was Europe-wide. The Portuguese Cistercians had a test: monks unable to squeeze through a certain doorway at Alcobaca monastery's dining room had to fast while slimmer colleagues tucked into "pastry in vast abundance".

Friar's tucker

A 13th century Cluniac friar's possible daily intake based on Ms Patrick's studies:

11am-1pm Three eggs, boiled or fried in lard. Vegetable porridge with beans, leeks, carrots and other produce of monastery garden. Pork chops, bacon, and mutton. Capon, duck and goose with oranges. Half pound of bread, to use as sop. Peaches, strawberries and bilberries with egg flan. Four pints of small (watery) beer.

4-6pm Mutton gruel with garlic and onions. Posset of egg, milk and figs. Venison with rowanberries, figs, sloes, hazelnuts and apple. Stewed eels, herring, pike, dolphin, lamphreys, salmon, cod and trout. Half pound of bread as sop, sometimes soaked in dripping or lard. Syllabubs of fruit. Four pints of ale. Flagon of sack or other French, Spanish or Portuguese wine.

Faux Pal

2004-08-15T11:49:00.000-04:00

So ACT has a pretty funny ad with Will Ferrell mocking our President for his pretensions. What will SNL do without Will during the debates? On a similar vein, Maureen Dowd was on OnPoint last week selling her book Bush World, and she drove home the observation that the Bushes deny that their class, status and advantages have influenced their success with the comment that they don't appreciate the difference between "wanting to clear brush and having to clear brush."

Related: See Porter Goss make an ass out of himself on the front page of Michael Moore's website. (why would these people ever say these things on camera???)

If you want to see some excellent coverage of the media's Election 2004 coverage (i know, i know...) and find some stories you may not have seen, check out the Columbia Journalism Review's Campaign Desk.

I've penn walken the streets at night just trying to get it right...

2004-08-06T23:54:00.000-04:00

So I happened to catch At Close Range on some basic cable station last night. Now I have always been a Christopher Walken fan -- he is by far my favorite SNL host. I still smile when i think of him rubbing jimmy fallon's stomach during an opening monologue where they're singing tomato, tomahto together. not to mention as the producer who just wants a little more cowbell in blue oyster cult's don't fear the reaper. But holy f-g sh-t is he unbelievable in this movie. i literally could not take my eyes off of him. sean penn is fantastic as always, but walken steals the show. riveting. he pulls off charm, sexuality, ruthlessness, quotidity. Proteus the shapeshifter. dang! anyway, MGM has some trailers and sound clips for it online.

Senator, the people are revolting!

2004-08-06T03:16:00.000-04:00

"What's your name? Elizabeth? Elizabeth is the name of my new running mate's wife, too." -- Candidate for President U.S. Senator John F. Kerry (D-MA) in a touching moment of bonhomie with a member of the great unwashed.

I can talk like a dolphin, I can talk like a dolphin

2004-08-06T02:08:00.000-04:00

So, as one would expect, The Daily Show had some excellent moments during the week of the convention. One of the best mo's was when whackjob Theresa was pandering in Spanish, French and "Portugues", John Stewart breaks in with dolphin noises to speak with our Delphinidae friends. (Incidentally, Maureen Dowd did a fantastic column on don't call me Thereesa, it's Theraysa on the 19th, delightfully titled Out of Africa. It's archived on the NY Times site, but i was able to find a version here. As I'm quite tired and rambling, this, of course, reminds me of the recent Onion story about Kerry. "KERRY MAKES WHISTLE-STOP TOUR FROM DECK OF YACHT — Democratic frontrunner Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) began a seven-day, eight-state whistle-stop tour Monday, addressing a group of Frigidaire factory workers from the all-teak deck of his 60-foot luxury motor cruiser. ‘George W. Bush put tax cuts for the wealthy and special favors for the special interests before our economic future,’ Kerry told the crowd gathered below the starboard side of The Real Deal II." Sadly, the Onion has moved the article into its premium (i.e., pay) content, but at least for right nowthere is a cached version available.

As for the convention itself, while i chose to absent myself, i hear that they gave away 35,000 tickets for 17,000 seats, stairwells were literally crammed with people who couldn't get onto any floor, because security wouldn't let them. if you left your seat for food (because we couldn't possibly allow a threatening object like a pretzel onto the floor of the Fleet Center), there was a good chance you lost it. Typical of our affairs. The '02 state convention was a worse disaster, although certainly less inconvenient for the people of that fair city of the seven hills, by which i mean...worcester. (one of my favorite things about america is our gumption. for the rest of the universe, the city of seven hills? rome. for us, it's wistah. city of lights, you say? paris? nay, nay, silly fool, it's lowell. everyone knows that.)

Anyway, the best characterization of the two parties I have come across is from Dave Barry. "The Democrats seem to be basically nicer people, but they have demonstrated time and again that they have the management skills of celery. They're the kind of people who'd stop to help you change a flat tire, but would somehow set your car on fire. I would be reluctant to entrust them with a Cuisinart, let alone the economy. The Republicans, on the other hand, would know how to fix your tire, but they wouldn't bother to stop because they'd want to be on time for Ugly Pants Night at the country club."

Stay Classy, America!

2004-07-16T12:27:00.000-04:00

Today's Morning Edition did a great piece on political cartoonists and the 2004 election. You can check out the interviews and more cartoons at their site.

Darth (Maybe) Later

2004-07-10T01:42:00.000-04:00

Ok, so I happen to think that House Speaker Finneran gets a bad rap from the Boston media. His intentions are good, but from time to time he heeds darker instincts, particularly those that whisper to him to tell people off. (If you look closely in photos, you can see the good angel on is shoulder vanishing in a poof while the devil whispers some antagonizing statement in his ear. "Call the Clean Elections advocates 'pathetic.' Call failed teachers 'idiots.' You know you want to tell Bob Kraft he is nothing but a whiny fat-ass millionaire.") The Globe won't be satisfied until the man is actually burned at the stake and his leadership team sent to the Iron Maiden.

However, Jon Keller's interview with Speaker Finneran in which the Speaker complained about Reps trying to "stampede" him on an emergency contraceptive bill really frosted my cookies, and i prefer them unfrosted (South Beach...) The Speaker then went through a litany of priorities including overrides and bond bills -- granted, all good initiatives deserving of policy priority, except for his paternalistic constitutional amendment on the rainy day fund -- that he wants to do before the legislative session closes and concluded "the notion that everything is supposed to stop in its tracks strikes me as absurd." Oh by the way, the Senate sent the bill to the House two weeks prior to Finneran complaining about the "stampede."

I am fairly indifferent to the bill, but give me a break. Imagine 60 elected representatives -- more than 1/3 of the body -- having the temerity, my heavens, the hubris to ask for a vote on a piece of legislation at the end of the 2-year session. A session in which only about 340(ish) laws have been enacted, many having to do with land takings or fascinating local topics such as the statute "designating a certain parcel of land in the city of Boston as the Guido Salvucci Bocci Court." (Check out what they've been up to at www.mass.gov/legis and then scroll through the Acts of 2003 and the Acts of 2004.) Perhaps I am being uncharitable.(ok I am.) Perhaps the emergency contraceptive bill and others cannot be addressed due to preoccuption in figuring out who keeps diming him out relative to his legal woes.

I hasten to add that were this an anti-abortion matter and that legislative leadership declined to take up the bill, the Globe would be editorializing about the courage of convictions, leadership, etc.

Oh Boy! Sleep! That's where I'm a viking!

2004-07-10T01:36:00.000-04:00

Cool game, if you're a complete nerd like me. Sack the monastery at Lindisfarne, all while remaining seated on your lazy, lazy ass. See the equally nerdly but fun archaeological dig game. The BBC website is a geek's parafise.

Let's have some UNITY, Biatch!

2004-07-09T22:58:00.000-04:00

According to the Sacramento Bee (the link is to the cached article because I am tired of registering for sites that I never plan to visit again), "Dave Chappelle got so angry with the crowd Tuesday night at Sacramento's Memorial Auditorium that the stand-up comic walked off the stage for nearly two minutes. Upon his return, he told the audience, 'You people are stupid.'" Somehow I missed the coverage of this. This week's EW claims it's because of Chappelle's reported conversion to Islam, but if you read other coverage, it sounds like he just got irritated with people acting like jackasses. Anyway, pretty good coverage of his act, too.

And speaking of UNITY, here's a random link to Charlie Murphy's True Hollywood Story about Rick James.

Shirts vs. Blouses

2004-07-03T20:13:00.000-04:00

I was psyched to see Charlie Murphy on Entertainment Weekly's 2004 Must List. (Sorry, I couldn't find a picture of him). Charlie Murphy's True Hollywood Stories help make Chappelle's Show. I almost wet my pants with the re-enactment of Rick James grinding his filthy boots into Eddie's new couch. Of course, the Prince one was just as good. "Blouses."

Have a nice life, Elisabeth

2004-07-03T19:39:00.000-04:00

We'll be Serena around.

Ding Dong the Witch is Dead!

2004-07-03T19:21:00.000-04:00

Which old....? I was going to use a naughty word, but then I remembered that Elisabeth Rohm's Serena Southerlyn wasn't interesting enough to deserve it. E!online reports that Elisabeth Rohm, someone who makes me miss, I swore I'd never say it, Angie Harmon, will be leaving Law & Order in the middle of next season. And as I clearly have enough free time to check out other useless entertainment spots, New York Daily News reports that Carey Lowell (A.D.A. Jamie Ross) will make appearances on the Trial by Jury spinoff. Finally, Gothamist has its usual entertaining coverage on her departure.

Was There a Trojan War?

2004-06-08T22:53:00.000-04:00

Link to a cool story on whether there was a Trojan War, and if so, whether the war was that of the Iliad. Was There a Trojan War?

Hasselhoff arrested

2004-06-07T16:30:00.000-04:00

Just when you thought there was no more Hasselnews, he gets busted for DUI. See the sad, sad story: CNN.com - Hasselhoff arrested for alleged DUI - Jun 7, 2004

Buckle Up, 80s Junkies

2004-06-03T16:57:00.000-04:00

Here is what has to be the Best Picture Ever. Plus, my personl feeling is that there are just not enough times in the day when you can say "Hasselhoff." A few years ago E! did a True Hollywood story double feature of Baywatch and Jaws. Life has been no better since that golden day when i viewed hasselhoff singing in a blinking electric jacket on the berlin wall AND richard dreyfuss making a complete ass out of himself before the release of Jaws, talking about what a disaster the movie would be. well worth the time if you can track them down. And if you haven't had enough HASSELHOFF yet, check out his delightful website for all you need to know about the comings and goings of Mister David Hasselhoff.

Close Second

2004-06-03T16:52:00.000-04:00

This is a close second as World's Best Picture. For those who missed The Surreal Life with a weepy corey feldman, run, do not walk, skip or meander, to find a copy of the season! The best drama this side of king lear!

Subservient Chicken

2004-05-20T22:28:00.000-04:00

Try explaining this to your parents....

2004-05-20T22:19:00.000-04:00

Subservient Chicken Is this the most bizarre website you have ever seen? If someone can explain to me why this should make me want to buy a BK sandwich, I'd love to hear it.

And speaking of BK, Dane Cook does some great standup on working at BK. You can listen to it for free on his website www.danecoook.com. "Where do I go?" (currently clip #4 on his site) is hilarious.

2004-05-16T23:50:00.000-04:00

Nobody puts Lennie in a corner!

Adventures in Briscoe County

2004-05-16T23:46:00.000-04:00

So Friday and Saturday were the glorious kinds of days that make you wonder why it is that people stay in New England when other parts of the world have this weather all the time, and we settle for a few short weeks. The sun was bright and warm, almost too warm. They were the kind of days that make you thankful to be alive and fill your heart with hope and happiness. Then, of course, today was cool and rainy. Fitting as we mourn the weekend and prepare for drudgery of work tomorrow.

as i am geriatric in attitude if not so in years, i stayed in watched the season finale of SNL. I am quite heartbroken that Jimmy Fallon is leaving. Farewell Sully and Denise! Good Night and Have a Pleasant Tomorrow, Tina & Jimmy. You're welcome, Nick Burns. (yeah, i know he's not kenneth branagh and his tendency to laugh during sketches borders more on annoying than cute sometimes, but he is adorable.) Also waiting with mixed emotions (again, i know they're only t.v. shows) for the last law and order with jerry orbach as lennie briscoe. even though he supposedly will be on yet another l&o spinoff, the 2-7 just won't be the same without him, although jesse martin is fantastic. Check out some really cool pictures of Mr. Orbach as he films his last scene from Gothamist.

So in a totally awkward transition, i found a really cool turn of phrase that i have never heard before when i was looking up Troilus and Criseyde after watching a show on Troy today. "What really concerns us is that, in this poem, Chaucer, though still playing the part of hermit-crab—in a manner strange to modern notions, but constantly practised in medieval times and by no means unusual in Shakespeare—has quite transformed the house which he borrowed and peopled it with quite different inhabitants." How cool is that?

I also stumbled upon a cogent commentary on the media's fear of being labeled as biased driving reporters to abandon investigation, reflection and analysis of basic factual assertions by the Kerry and Bush campaigns. Check it out at the Columbia Journalism Review.

2004-05-16T23:17:00.000-04:00

Why do I look so serious when I'm going to be so rich?

Opportunities at Wernham Hogg

2004-05-15T01:21:00.000-04:00

Even though the BBC and BBCAmerica sites for The Office are actually pretty good, I found a great site that has plenty of downloads including Free Love Freeway and some deep thoughts from Gareth Keenan on knobrot and sharks. Check it out before NBC ruins this great show (even with the stupendously talented Steve Carrell).

This American Life

2004-05-15T00:34:00.000-04:00

From WBEZ in Chicago | This American Life This American Life is some of the greatest radio you will ever hear. Every week they choose a theme for a one-hour show and ask different writers and performers to contribute stories about it. There is usually some fiction, some documentary. It may sound boring but it's not. It's where I first heard David Sedaris who is so funny I had to pull over in my car from laughing. You can listen for free with realone player. Try "How to Win Friends and Influence People." (Episode 198, aired 11/2/01)

Oh Lydia, oh Lydia, say, have you met Lydia?

2004-05-14T21:42:00.000-04:00

Lydia the Tattoed Lady, that is. Excavating a Nubian cemetery at Hierakonpolis (400 miles south of Cairo), archaeologists discovered the remains of a 30-to-50-year-old woman that is tattooed virtually everywhere her skin is preserved. This is what the tattoos they were able to discern looked like. Researchers noted that tattoos are associated with entertainers in Egyptian culture, but are unsure whether that holds true for the Nubian culture at Hierakonpolis. Check out Archaeology Magazine's interactive dig for more.

Tiny Dancer

2004-05-14T21:15:00.000-04:00

According to Archaeology's Interactive Dig Hierakonpolis, "musical entertainers and acrobats are often shown with tattoos in New Kingdom Egypt. This drawing of an acrobatic dancer (Ramesside period, ca. 1300 B.C.) is of especially interest. Note the tattoos on her lower arm and across her rib cage, and take a good look at her "loin cloth.'"

2004-05-14T03:12:00.000-04:00

Nerdliness is next to godliness

ahem

2004-05-14T01:30:00.000-04:00

www.m-w.com
Main entry: nerd
Pronunciation: 'n&rd
Function: noun
Etymology: perhaps from nerd, a creature in the children's book If I Ran the Zoo (1950) by Dr. Seuss (Theodor Geisel)
: an unstylish, unattractive, or socially inept person; especially : one slavishly devoted to intellectual or academic pursuits (computer nerds)