Drift Away

I have a keyboard gathering dust despite my perfectly functioning two hands. I am ashamed. [Via Attuworld]

Remembering George Carlin

The first video below has George speaking of death. He seems more interested in working out a few demons than in humoring his audience which is, after all, classic Carlin.

If you'd like to see George at his most famous, view the seven dirty words--just don't do it at work. It doesn't seem as edgy or scandalous as it once did, but that's because George broke the barrier and pop culture followed. Nowadays, half the words on his list are in an average South Park episode.

While it may not be Carlin at his funniest, I'll always have a special place in my heart for his role in "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure." Enjoy this brief, hysterically-dated short film about the flick.

"I'm not left handed either"

The sound and video could be better, but please enjoy one of my favorite scenes from one of my favorite movies: The first sword fight from "The Princess Bride."

Requiem For A Day Off

The fake trailer for the fake movie "Requiem For A Day Off" is terrific. It uses imagery from Ferris Bueller’s Day Off and the music "Lux Aeterna" from the Requiem For A Dream soundtrack.

Ferris never looked so creepy.

Don't blame yourself; blame the Internet!

Sorry for all the ranting today, but this article from Scotsman.com annoyed me. Scotland's exam pass rates are falling, and the Scottish Parent Teacher Council (SPTC) is blaming misinformation on the Internet.

Let me get this straight: the two primary sources of influence in the lives of young people--teachers and parents--are blaming Wikipedia for the fact their children aren't learning? What kind of blame-passing rubbish is that? When a child is sitting in a classroom taking a math test, which do you think is more associated with that child's performance--the way they were raised to value education by their parents, the methods used to mold young minds by teachers, or the information that child found when searching for math information on Wikipedia? (Do kids really go searching for math info on Wikipedia?!?!)

If I sound like an angry old man today with my posts, it's because the two articles I posted--The AP's depressing op-ed piece and the Scotsman's story about parents and teachers--happen to inadvertently hit on two of my biggest frustration with modern culture: The media and an inability to take responsibility.

The media bothers me because it pretends to represent an objective view of the happenings that matter, but never does. I'm not just talking about FOX News here; I'm talking about all of the news media!

The constant focus on news that isn't news is offensive and depressing. Turn on your local TV news tonight and what do you think the lead story will be? Will you learn about something happening in Washington, a change to laws or policy that impact your life, or international changes that will affect the US economy or foreign policy? Or will the lead story be a "breaking news" item from an area of town which you never visit about a murder of someone you don't know and that won't have any impact on the world of you or a loved one? Murders aren't news in modern life; the media's focus on each murder serves no function except to keep viewers in a state of heightened anxiety and glued to their 24-hour-news cycles.

As for the issue of personal responsibility, I am growing weary of people shopping only on price but then complaining when their employers are forced to cut costs; consumers visiting Wal-Mart and McDonald's while lamenting that their local businesses are failing; voters who gripe about falling government services while electing politicians who promise tax cuts; parents who ignore their children as they surf the Internet or watch TV in the privacy of their own bedrooms while objecting to pop culture's influence on America's youth; drivers of gas-guzzling SUVs who criticize the wars and US foreign policy in the Middle East; and people who live 20 miles from their employer who won't be caught dead in mass transit but complain about the price of gas.

Change won't come about by complaining, and it certainly won't happen by blaming others. Change won't even occur simply because you mark the ballot box next to Obama's name in November. Change will happen when you (and I) change our behaviors.

This officially ends my morning of griping. I'm going to change my attitude right now!

Associated Press Depresses Me

This past week, the Associated Press made headlines for trying to rewrite the nation's copyright and "fair use" laws by tell bloggers what they can and cannot do when copying from or linking to their articles. Maybe they should worry a little less about how bloggers are driving traffic to their sites and a little more about whether their news articles are actually news.

This pessimistic, pandering, non-news item ticked me off this morning: Entitled, "Everything seemingly is spinning out of control," two AP writers offer an editorial that isn't labeled as such and a "news" item that contains no news. (Hint to AP: When you need to use the word "seemingly" in the headline, it's a sign to go back and reconsider the objectivity and factual basis for a news piece.)

Their contention is that everything is spinning out of control and Americans are feeling helpless. Of course, there are problems today--such as flooding, gas prices, water shortages, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan without end, and air fares rising--and to AP this all means, "The can-do, bootstrap approach embedded in the American psyche is under assault" from "dour powerlessness." The "article" ends with this: "Maybe this is what the 21st century will be about — a great unraveling of some things long taken for granted."

The Associated Press can go screw themselves. I get angry when, in times of challenge, the media accelerates anxiety by focusing on every piece of iffy news and glossing over positive signs. For example, we all know the doom and gloom in the economy, but did you know there's been positive news as of late? Keep in mind "good news" is relative, but in the past month or two came word the US economy is not in a recession (at least not yet) by any definition used by economists and the government, that manufacturing is showing surprising strength, that construction spending was stronger than expected, that the US Service Sector is still growing (albeit by a small amount), and that first-time claims for unemployment fell.

Part of the reason I get angry about this media fixation on negativity is that consumer expectation is its own self-fulfilling prophecy. If we feel anxious about the future, we stop spending and this feeds a poor economy. If we feel optimistic about our futures, we spend and live as if tomorrow will be better than today.

Perhaps it isn't Americans that feel helpless, as the AP claims, but instead are news organizations that feel helpless. Newspaper subscriptions are dropping, TV ratings are down, more people are getting their news online where ad revenues are a challenge, and the AP is lashing out at bloggers. Must be sorry times to be an AP employee!

My greatest gripe is that there are always reasons to be concerned. My grandfather lived his life assuming the very foundation of the American economy and way of life was always about to crumble. His pessimism pervaded his entire life, and while he may someday be proven right--maybe decades from now, maybe centuries from now--he could have lived a better life if he didn't think the end of our culture was imminent.

Perhaps the two AP writers who find that today is so much more uncertain and fearful than the past are young and do not remember 9/11, stagflation, the cold war, race riots, and other dark periods in American history. The Associated Press can ring its hands and worry that the country and the world are unraveling, but if Americans and other citizens of the globe would ignore the pandering and alarmist media, we'd all be much better off.

True Love: 84- and 87-Year-Old Lesbians Marry

Here is an article about a happy, monogamous, lesbian couple who have been together for 55 years. That's right, 55 frickin' years! Why--that's longer than John McCain's been in the planet, which is a really long time.

And this couple, now age 84 and 87, are going to be legally wed today.

Conservatives are crying and ringing their hands (and filing petitions with the supreme court) over the legal same-sex marriages in California, but Lyon and Martin are living proof that the whiners' arguments are as empty as their minds are closed. Here is a couple who've been dedicated to each other and active in the community. They've owned and maintained a home together. And long after so many heterosexual couples are on their second or third marriages, Lyon and Martin are still together.

It makes me very happy on this, the occasion of my own 24th wedding anniversary to my wife, to welcome Lyon and Martin and other same-sex couples to legal, equal-under-the-law, marriage. Congratulations and best of luck for the future!

Obama's Father Day Speech

I normally don't watch 24-minute videos online. Who has the time or the patience?

But I started watching this one and was riveted. This is Barack's Father's Day speech--instead of pandering to dads, he demands more of them, particularly in the black community. I wish every voter in America could take the time to see this.

"Yes, we need fewer guns in the hands of people who shouldn't have them. Yes, we need more money for schools and more outstanding teachers in the classroom... Yes, we need more jobs and more job training and more opportunities in our community. We know all that... We know we need to bring about change in America. We know that. But the change we need is not just going to come from government; it's not just going to come from a president; it's going to come from us... We need families to raise our children. We need fathers to recognize that responsibility doesn't just end with conception. That doesn't just make you a father. What makes you a man isn't the ability to have a child. Any fool can have a child--that doesn't make you a father--it's the courage to raise a child that makes you a father."

Happy Father's Day! [Via 37Signals]

Is It Important for the President to Know How to Use a Computer?

I find it hard to believe in this day and age that just about anyone--even a 70-year-old presidential candidate--especially a 70-year-old presidential candidate--doesn't know how to use a computer. In this video, McCain is asked whether he uses a PC or a Mac, and he responds he is "illiterate." (He then is asked what his favorite movie was "this year", and he answers "Viva Zapata,"a 56-year-old, black and white, monophonic movie. Hell, at least it was a talkie!)

Much debate will occur this election season about John McCain's age. I'm less concerned that he's 70 than that he'd be 78 at the completion of two terms, should he win. More concerning than his age is whether he can understand the way the world is changing. Sure, he can rely on assistants to check the news and correspond with advisers via email, but how can John McCain understand the social and political implications of Internet trends such as social media, user-generated content, and blogging?

A couple months ago, a protester being imprisoned sent a brief Twitter about his plight, and he was released thanks to the political pressure and publicity generated by his brief broadcast SMS. Tell that story to McCain, and he won't be able to make any sense out of it! If McCain were told that the RedCross was informing people about its Iowa flood relief efforts by using a blog, Twitter, Flickr, RSS feeds, and Utterz mobile audio, he'd need every last one of those terms explained to him!

We're moving into a new age of communication, information sharing, and collaboration. Shouldn't we expect our president to have some experience with the tools we Americans use every day? To me, this isn't a trivial thing like the first George Bush being amazed at a grocery store scanner 10 years after they became common in stores. The president's knowledge or ignorance of grocery technology won't impact his decisions; but to me, the Internet is so integral to daily life and to international politics, it's hard for me to imagine our president will lead us into the second decade of the millennium thinking a pocket calculator is the latest and greatest in personal technology.

What do you think? Should our next president have at least passing knowledge of blogging, email, the Drudge Report, LiveLeak, and way international borders are becoming less relevant as data, information, news, and collaboration spreads across the globe?

FOX News Issues Three Apologies in Two Weeks

FOX News is very, very sorry. According to the New York Times, the "news" division has had to issue repeated apologies related to the way they're covering Barack Obama. They called Michelle Obama “Obama’s Baby Mama,’’ they called the Obamas affectionate fist bump during the senator’s victory rally “a terrorist fist jab,’’ and Fox News analyst Liz Trotta made a joke about a possible assassination of Mr. Obama.

What I love is that FOX addressed the latest incident by noting “A producer on the program exercised poor judgment." Why not just tell the truth and say that the producer was following the network's well-known and established practice of providing slanted coverage of the Democrats.

Why is it that a network that shows a second of a nipple or bare buttocks gets fined millions of dollars by the FCC, but a "news" network or program that regularly misreports or insinuates falsehoods in a way that could adversely impact an election gets a free ride?

I'm Voting Republican

Sure, it's a little shallow and heavy-handed, but it is awfully funny (and sadly, more true than not).

This message goes out to Debra Bartoshevich, the bitter Wisonsin delegate to the Democratic National Convention who has announced that since her preferred candidate didn't win the nomination, she's voting Republican.

GOP Again Proves Why It Cannot Be the Party of Change

Here's one of those ads that says more about the person who sponsored the ad than it does the person the ad attacks. The ad is a tiresome rehash of bad Internet rumors spread from ignorant person to ignorant person, but apparently the GOP is fine with collecting votes by spreading disinformation, encouraging ignorance, exploiting fear, and using smear techniques.

I know this is not an official GOP ad, but we've seen this dirty swift-boating tactic before from the Republicans. A GOP-affiliated group launches a dirty campaign, and the candidate and party act as if they have no ability to control, influence, or react to it. This ad comes from Floyd Brown - of Willie Horton fame - through his National Campaign Fund PAC.

Come on McCain and GOP leadership! Prove to us you support a clean campaign. Show backbone, integrity, and a commitment to honesty. Your silence will only prove why the Democrats and Obama are the only answer to the need for change in Washingon, D.C.

Famous Photos Recreated with Legos

An interesting way to reconsider classic photography? A waste of time? Sacrilegious? Brilliant? Maybe all of the above.

Here is a Flickr slideshow of classic photos recreated with Legos.

One Voice Can Change the World

Call it rhetoric, spin, marketing, or propaganda. Call it whatever you wish. I call this inspirational.

Movies About Which You and I Disagree

Do you have movies that you love that everyone else seems to hate? Or vice versa?

I thought I'd share two lists: movies I hated but everyone else loved, and my top movies I loved that everyone else hated (or at least they were indifferent to.)

Which movies have prompted you to have a contrary opinion?

Movies I loved that others hated (or almost hated)

• Titanic: I know it was the biggest movie of all time, so perhaps it's odd to have it in the "others hated" category, but it's become quite fashionable in the decade since Titanic reigned at the box office to deride it as a shallow love story pasted onto a disaster flick. Sure, the romance charted no new territory (although it was enlivened by DiCaprio's and Winslet's terrific chemistry), but the lovingly crafted ambiance of the era and the spectacular realization of the ship, not just as an amazing setting but as a character whose loss is deeply felt, won me over. I believe this is the only movie that I've seen in the theater three times, at least in my adult life.


• The Abyss: Yes, I'm a James Cameron fan. And yes, the ending of this movie was a letdown. But up until it's final couple of minutes, The Abyss is a spooky, tense, exciting, and surprising thrill ride. It never caught on at the box office and I know people who dismiss it with a shrug, but this one of my favorite films of the late 80s.


• Children of Men: I thought this film was a masterpiece. Critics agreed, but almost no one to whom I've recommended the film liked it. I was swept away in the somber mood of a society in mourning and barely hanging onto its sanity because women are unable to conceive. I think the handheld camera work (which for me added urgency and realism) bothered many. Others had difficulties with Clive Owen's anti-hero, Michael Caine's eccentric, and the discordant jolts of humor sprinkled throughout the tense film (which to me felt like real life). Others complained that no explanation was offered as to the sudden human infertility or questioned why the protagonists' strove so greatly to find "The Human Project," a group about which they knew nothing but myths and stories, but to me these are what made the film so realistic--it's the story of real people facing problems they cannot solve and clinging to any hope they can. Children of Men is a very vivid and evocative film.


• Artificial Intelligence: A.I.: Many consider this one of Steven Spielberg's worst movies (although that distinction is well earned by the dreary, unfunny 1941), but I found this a challenging, thought-provoking, moving, and beautiful movie. The multiple endings, somewhat uncertain finale, and perceived sappiness of the film's conclusion turned off many, but I felt the themes of humanity, love, and loss were intense and deeply felt.
  
• Into the West: No, this is not the TV miniseries. Nor is it a western. This small Irish film was released in 1992, and then because the studio so believed in it, it received a rare second release. Alas, neither time did audiences catch this heartfelt movie, which follows two Irish children and a mythical horse on a journey across modern Ireland. This is one of those children's movies that really wasn't made for kids and should appeal to any adult with a heart.

Movies I hated that others loved

• Adaptation: Normally, I'm a fan of Spike Jonze and Charlie Kaufman. (Being John Malkovich and Eternal Sunshine are brilliant!) But Adaptation felt mean-spirited and achingly obvious. It's a one-joke movie: the writer doesn't want his movie to become a shallow Hollywood film, which is exactly what the film itself becomes. How very meta. The random violence and characters who change personalities as quickly as they change outfits left me very cold.


• Forrest Gump: Normally, I'm the first guy to love an allegorical fantasy, but I could barely sit through this film. Over time, the coincidences stacked one upon another didn't seem ironic or funny; they just seemed obvious and clumsy.


• Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby: Many people seemed to love this movie. Perhaps I am the wrong person to critique this film considering I'm not a NASCAR fan. That said, this seemed like a very thin movie with very few funny bits. Sure, I love the scenes around the family dinner table, but just about everything else failed to live up the sorts of hilarious antics I've come to expect from Will Ferrell.


• Jerry Maguire: To me, this is the king of movies I don't understand. I walked out of the theater thinking Cameron Crowe had just perpetrated one of cinema's greatest acts of cynicism--he'd created a love story without love and a tale of inspiration without inspiration. It slowly became apparent to me he intended it (and others found it) to be heartfelt. I still don't get it. From the very first scene when Zellweger's mousy character falls in love with the sound of Cruise's voice (as he is trying to pick up a woman by telling her how he was embarrassed into getting engaged to his fiance) to the final scene (the unbelievable and hammy transformation of a fallen and injured athlete into an acrobat doing flips off of the stand), this movie seemed faker than a $3 bill. "You complete me," my butt; you didn't even start me!

So, what are some movies you've seen where your opinion seems to differ with just about everyone else's?

I Can Spell Numnut!

Of course, I'd have no idea how to spell numnah, but why would I need to?

See more funny videos at CollegeHumor

Indiana Jones Joins the X-Men

I saw Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull tonight. I liked it, but I didn't love it. It's fun, but as with all things George Lucas has touched in the past decade, it should've been much better.

My problem with the latest Indiana Jones flick is that the title character, although once very human, has now become a cartoon super hero. Maybe Steven and George got tired of seeing others make blockbuster films about men in tights and decided to make their own. But whatever the reason, the inability of the movie makers to create any sense that the protagonists are in danger really drains the movie of much of its excitement.

Speaking of spoil, don't read on if you haven't seen the movie and care about spoilers, but here's a short list of the things that happen to the newly indestructible Indy: Falls through windshields without a scratch; frequently is shot at with machine guns without being struck; is a passenger in a vehicle that speeds off a cliff, only to be gently set down after getting caught in the branches of the world's most improbable tree; gets thrown by a nuclear blast hundreds of yards while hiding in a refrigerator and immediately tumbles out of it in one piece; survives not one, not two, but three falls of hundreds of feet down waterfalls with jagged rocks at the bottom; and stands in a maelstrom of boulders the size of houses--including one that strikes his viewing perch--but remains standing in harm's way rather than taking shelter.

The invincibility doesn't stop with Indy. The new, young version of Indy, played by Shia LaBeouf, manages to straddle two speeding jeeps as they race across a jungle floor smoother than any highway. Later, he gets caught in a vine that mysteriously lifts him to the tree top where he instantly befriends monkeys who show him how to swing from vine to vine more confidently than Tarzan ever managed. (Heck, even Peter Parker had a couple of mishaps the first time he tried to navigate by swinging around.)

I don't expect or want realism in my Indiana Jones adventure, but when the characters become invincible and face no danger, there is little reason for moviegoers to invest themselves in the characters' cinematic challenges. In this movie, the only thing missing on Indiana Jones is a cape and pair of tights.

Worse yet, Harrison Ford plays Indy like a guy who knows he can't be so much as scratched no matter what happens. In the earlier movies, you saw fear and sensed danger when Indy was clinging to the sagging hood ornament of a speeding Nazi truck, facing a raging fire while tied to a chair, or fleeing from an oncoming boulder. In Crystal Skull, Ford can't be bothered to show much of anything but a bemused and confident swagger; it's like Indy started hanging with the dudes of Ocean's Thirteen.

Crystal Skull is a wild ride and worth the price of a ticket for some laughs, a few jolts, and a lot of nostalgia. It's just too bad the humanity has been drained from Indy. Maybe for the next movie (and you know there's going to be another), it's time for Lucas and Spielberg to step aside and see what some fresh blood can do for the series. I wouldn't mind seeing what kind of excitement might be crafted by a filmmaker like Peter Jackson, Guillermo del Toro, Alfonso Cuarón, Martin Campbell, Sam Raimi, or Paul Greengrass.

Hillary Wants Obama to Bail Her Out

Let's see if I get this straight: Hillary knew many weeks ago that she would be unable to secure the Democratic nomination, yet she persisted. She continued to solicit donations from Democratic supporters that could've gone into Obama's coffers to help pay for the general election. And, instead of being able to save money for the general election, Obama's campaign had to spend their funds to battle the negative-tinged campaigning (such as the now famous "3 a.m. ad") waged by Clinton's team.

You might think she'd done enough damage, but apparently not. She is now looking to broker a deal with Obama to have him pay her campaign debts. That's right--she wants him to pay for her bad decisions! And in doing so, his campaign will have to tap even more of his funds that should be used campaigning against McCain in fall.

I don't know who annoys me more: Hillary, for acting in a way that damages her party's chances to win in November? Bill, for some of the embarrassing and paranoid things he's been saying as his wife's chances dwindled? (Funny how when the Clintons were stacking the deck to aid Hillary's campaign it was fine and dandy, but once the party leadership demonstrated they could think on their own, Bill cries foul.) People like Bill Maher who acted like there was nothing wrong with Hillary continuing to run long past her ability to win, despite the financial and other adverse consequences to the party? Or maybe it's the voters who claim to care about the war in Iraq, the environment, education, civil rights, and other core issues who decided to continue to fund Hillary's damaging campaign rather than to rally around the future party nominee.

Oh heck, maybe I'll just be annoyed at all of them. But my annoyance will turn to anger if Hillary drains Obama's campaign funds to cover the debts she incurred waging a campaign that should've ceased tens of millions of dollars ago. Rumors are that Clinton's campaign is as much as $40 million in the red. CNN reports Obama's campaign has just over $50 million cash on hand. If the Obama campaign permits Hillary to further damage the Democrat's chances of beating the GOP this fall, I'll be angry at just about all of them--Hillary, Bill, Dean, Obama, all of them.

Here's what I'd suggest: Bill and Hillary can lick their wounds and spend the rest of their lives living with the ramifications of their poor decision to continue and to loan money to a doomed campaign. Considering the kind of money Bill pulls down for speaking engagements, he should be able to pay off Hillary's campaign debt in about eight years.

I understand this opinion is being colored by frustration, but I think Obama should let Hillary find her own way out of her mess. He's going to sew up the nomination soon with or without Clinton's withdrawal, and it's time he starts concentrating on what he needs to do to lead the Democratic Party to victory in November. Paying for Hillary's lack of judgment isn't going to help the Democratic party or his campaign.