Summer means lots of things. It means longer days. It means shorter skirts. For New York it also means lots of tourists AND hellacious experiences on the subway.
I noticed it a couple of days ago but I stopped myself of making it an issue. It's still May I thought. No need to get upset yet. Yesterday it was getting worse though and since this is the last post I will make before June, I will announce it now: THE SUBWAYS ARE GOING TO START STANKING.
Anyone who's been to New York in the summer knows what I'm talking about. It's hot, it's humid and I've got to get from 14th St. and 1st Ave. to 89th St. and Amsterdam Ave. You plan on walking? Fine, assuming you don't need the exercise and you don't want to pay the taxi fare and the bus is too scary (bus riders of any city know what I'm talking about). Ok then. Subway it is:
You swipe the golden (and blue) ticket known as a Metrocard and walk through the turnstile and that's it. You're committed. You walk down the stairs, turn right and you're on the platform.
Dozens of people are on the platform. Not a single one of them is smiling. Girlfriends are resting their matted blond/brunette/red heads on their boyfriends'/girlfriends' shoulders. The boyfriends/girlfriends are totally pitted out and their foreheads are dripping.
A few psychos are wearing long pants. You consider throwing them in front of the train to put them out of their misery. The consideration passes at the thought of time on Riker's Island.
Are you in hell? It's hard to imagine hell being worse. It's so hot that you can see the air. It's easier to grab it with your hands and stick it your pocket than it is to breath it in. How long have you been waiting? Maybe 2 minutes, maybe 10. Whatever it's been, it's been too long.
Finally the train comes. The doors open and you walk in. The cold air on the inside smashes you in the face like a bucket of ice water. It is the happiest moment of your life. You pass 3rd Ave. No one gets off. "Why the hell does the L stop at 3rd Ave?", you wonder to yourself. Union Square. Most get off... Finally some space. But then, oh no...
Off at 6th Ave. Walking to the 1/2/3 uptown train. It's hotter on this platform than it was at 1st Ave. The smell of human is everywhere. People are moving very slowly down the corridor that leads to the Red Line.
You pass the guitar player that marks the half way point. Drop him a dollar. "How on earth can he stand down here all day and play? Wow. He smelled really bad. Can I take my dollar back?"
You descend steeply and finally arrive at the top and turn the corner to go down the stairs to the platform. Made it. Wait a minute. Yes. Still unbearably hot. No trains in sight. The trash is overflowing. It might be the most rancid thing you've ever smelled. Wait, the combination of the trash and the guy that just walked by is the most rancid thing you've ever smelled.
No trains in sight. Damn weekend schedule.
You sit down...Suddenly you awaken! How long have I been asleep? Minutes? Hours? Same person in front of me. No trains. Still hot. Eyes closing again.
Train finally arrives. You're a little groggy but semi-excited about the air conditioning. The car you pick looks relatively empty. Strange. You step on and gauge your surroundings. Wait a minute...The air conditioning isn't working on this car...Doors close.
Express train. 28 blocks until you transfer. 28 blocks of pure hell.
42nd St. sprint off the car and turn around to watch tourists get on a car with no air, and subsequently watch them all get trapped as the doors close. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Laughter passes. It's still god-awful hot. Switch to the 1 train. The air works on this car. Thank you! Eyes close.
Eyes open! At 86th St. Doors open. Still hot. Wander to stairs. Get outside, still hot. Trudge on to 89th St....
Well, that should give you an idea. Hard to say when this will really take hold. I'll keep you updated.
Friday, May 30, 2008
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Shroom Burgers!
One of the best things that I've been lucky enough to experience in my short time here is the Shake Shack. I was first introduced last summer and while the experiences are few and far between for me, no one who ever goes there ever forgets it. The reasons vary from "the line was so long" (check this link at approximately 12 pm EST during the week) to "I'm completely nauseous after all that food" to "that's the best damn thing I've ever eaten".
My personal favorite is the Shroom Burger and I'll get side of cheese fries (with ketchup and mayo) and whatever the custard or shake is that day. That will end up costing me approximately $10-12. Ridiculous you say? Maybe. It's a pretty enduring New York experience though.
They have regular hamburgers/cheeseburgers for you carnivores so don't worry, I'm not recommending a tofu/vegan/no animals harmed restaurant but I do highly recommend the Shroom burger. In which case you will have to order both (I've witnessed this) and then you'll slowly slip into a agonizing food coma.
Madison Square Park is decent place for that though.
My personal favorite is the Shroom Burger and I'll get side of cheese fries (with ketchup and mayo) and whatever the custard or shake is that day. That will end up costing me approximately $10-12. Ridiculous you say? Maybe. It's a pretty enduring New York experience though.
They have regular hamburgers/cheeseburgers for you carnivores so don't worry, I'm not recommending a tofu/vegan/no animals harmed restaurant but I do highly recommend the Shroom burger. In which case you will have to order both (I've witnessed this) and then you'll slowly slip into a agonizing food coma.
Madison Square Park is decent place for that though.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Yet another reason that I love NPR
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90725993#email
Listen to the piece for full enjoyment.
Listen to the piece for full enjoyment.
Survey #1
Please read the article from the link below and vote accordingly.
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/05/23/of-donuts-and-dumb-celebrities/
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/05/23/of-donuts-and-dumb-celebrities/
Straphangers IQ
Most of you know that since I've moved outside Manhattan, I've had to ride the subway daily. This was quite a change for me after walking to work nearly everyday for almost a year. The transition was easy enough although I've become accustomed to cruising in around 9-9:30 a little more often.
As a "straphanger", I started picking up on little tricks and techniques right away. For example, if no seats are available during rush hour, I either stand directly in front of the door that leads to the next car (often taken) or in the space directly in the middle of two sets of doors. This allows you to have plenty of room as the car gets crowded and often no one will stand directly behind you. Also, if a seat does open up and there are no elderly people or ladies around, you can pounce on it (which is actually not that often, unless you're either cold hearted or a misogynist).
Probably the most key strategy that can be followed however, is which car you initially get on. Granted, if the train is arriving when you're flying down the stair around the obese and old, you have little choice but work with me here.
I learned that when returning home in the evenings, I need to be on the second-to-last car and exit out the second set of doors to get to stairs the quickest. My other option is to be in the third-to-last car and exit the last set of doors. I had some initial success employing this strategy and felt pretty good about myself. Other riders were stupid, I reasoned. I've got this figured out already.
Not so fast, Nebrasky.
I must have been fortunate to get some beginner's luck because when I started commuting during the peak hours, not only were these strategic cars full, people lined up at the doors two or three stops in advance to get first shot at the stairs.
DRAT. When did subway riders get so smart? Had I been prematurely overconfident and drastically underestimated them?
But then I figured that many of the people on the subway have been riding it since the Johnson Administration and my science-loving brother would further reason that: "Organisms, when in an environment for a prolonged period, eventually will adapt effectively to that environment or perish."
The other possibility is that I'm still just a beginner at this.
In any case, it definitely isn't as bad as this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axwMxUBL_ws
As a "straphanger", I started picking up on little tricks and techniques right away. For example, if no seats are available during rush hour, I either stand directly in front of the door that leads to the next car (often taken) or in the space directly in the middle of two sets of doors. This allows you to have plenty of room as the car gets crowded and often no one will stand directly behind you. Also, if a seat does open up and there are no elderly people or ladies around, you can pounce on it (which is actually not that often, unless you're either cold hearted or a misogynist).
Probably the most key strategy that can be followed however, is which car you initially get on. Granted, if the train is arriving when you're flying down the stair around the obese and old, you have little choice but work with me here.
I learned that when returning home in the evenings, I need to be on the second-to-last car and exit out the second set of doors to get to stairs the quickest. My other option is to be in the third-to-last car and exit the last set of doors. I had some initial success employing this strategy and felt pretty good about myself. Other riders were stupid, I reasoned. I've got this figured out already.
Not so fast, Nebrasky.
I must have been fortunate to get some beginner's luck because when I started commuting during the peak hours, not only were these strategic cars full, people lined up at the doors two or three stops in advance to get first shot at the stairs.
DRAT. When did subway riders get so smart? Had I been prematurely overconfident and drastically underestimated them?
But then I figured that many of the people on the subway have been riding it since the Johnson Administration and my science-loving brother would further reason that: "Organisms, when in an environment for a prolonged period, eventually will adapt effectively to that environment or perish."
The other possibility is that I'm still just a beginner at this.
In any case, it definitely isn't as bad as this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axwMxUBL_ws
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Carnies
Yes, those. Small hands, smell like cabbage.
I went to Coney Island for the first time over the weekend and I've got to say, it was fantastic! Many memories from childhood came back to me walking amongst all the rides, games, food and big hair rock music (e.g. Journey, Warrant) but I found something knew that I don't remember as a kid: CARNIES.
Anyone that has ever gone to a carnival, either at a state/county fair or to Coney Island knows what I'm talking about. The sketchy, dirty, loud employees of the orgy of fun that is all around you. What's most interesting is why, as an adult, these people are much more noticeable than when I was a child.
For me, carnies were just people that took my ticket for the rides and gave me prizes for the games I won and nothing more. I was more interested in giant stuffed animals, going on rides that went upside down, and cotton candy. I was completely oblivious to the fact that the people selling me the candy and locking me into the rides were junkies, prostitutes, and overall, just plain weirdos.
Figuratively walking around in my childhood out at Coney Island this weekend put things in a whole different perspective. For example, the announcer of the game, "Shoot the Freak". This was a new game for me and it consisted of shooting a paintball gun at a live target approximately 100 feet away. As a child I would have merely been interested in shooting the paintball gun at this silly fool. Now, the Freak was just a guy in paint ball protection clothes that you could shoot paintballs at. The actual "Freak" was the dentally-challenged strung-out employee telling me to "step right up and shoot the freak". If I did that, then who would make the announcements?
And they all say the same thing, "step right up, step right up". I guess it has a nice ring to it but step right up to what? Laying down a devalued $5 to throw faux-softballs at milk bottles that have magnets in the bottom of them so that when you knock them over they don't fall off their metal stands? They make it sound like it's going to be some sort of life changing experience. Like somehow, by filling that clown's mouth with water and popping the balloon is equivalent to finding Jesus or something.
With all its idiosyncrasies, the carnival is a great place to go for some inexpensive fun. I would stay wary of seeking any employment opportunities with these merchants of entertainment, however. I mean, it's pretty obvious they don't even have a dental plan.
I went to Coney Island for the first time over the weekend and I've got to say, it was fantastic! Many memories from childhood came back to me walking amongst all the rides, games, food and big hair rock music (e.g. Journey, Warrant) but I found something knew that I don't remember as a kid: CARNIES.
Anyone that has ever gone to a carnival, either at a state/county fair or to Coney Island knows what I'm talking about. The sketchy, dirty, loud employees of the orgy of fun that is all around you. What's most interesting is why, as an adult, these people are much more noticeable than when I was a child.
For me, carnies were just people that took my ticket for the rides and gave me prizes for the games I won and nothing more. I was more interested in giant stuffed animals, going on rides that went upside down, and cotton candy. I was completely oblivious to the fact that the people selling me the candy and locking me into the rides were junkies, prostitutes, and overall, just plain weirdos.
Figuratively walking around in my childhood out at Coney Island this weekend put things in a whole different perspective. For example, the announcer of the game, "Shoot the Freak". This was a new game for me and it consisted of shooting a paintball gun at a live target approximately 100 feet away. As a child I would have merely been interested in shooting the paintball gun at this silly fool. Now, the Freak was just a guy in paint ball protection clothes that you could shoot paintballs at. The actual "Freak" was the dentally-challenged strung-out employee telling me to "step right up and shoot the freak". If I did that, then who would make the announcements?
And they all say the same thing, "step right up, step right up". I guess it has a nice ring to it but step right up to what? Laying down a devalued $5 to throw faux-softballs at milk bottles that have magnets in the bottom of them so that when you knock them over they don't fall off their metal stands? They make it sound like it's going to be some sort of life changing experience. Like somehow, by filling that clown's mouth with water and popping the balloon is equivalent to finding Jesus or something.
With all its idiosyncrasies, the carnival is a great place to go for some inexpensive fun. I would stay wary of seeking any employment opportunities with these merchants of entertainment, however. I mean, it's pretty obvious they don't even have a dental plan.
Friday, May 23, 2008
The Dynamic Duo?
So it's Memorial Day weekend and rather than try to come up with something ground breakingly interesting, I'll go back to a reliable subject.
Barack Obama is all but certain to be the Democratic nominee for President. There are only three primaries left and he is only 61 delegates away from securing the nomination. The Mass Media, in all it's wisdom, is skipping the formalities and getting right to the Vice President talk (NYT).
With such a hard fought nominating process, it's no surprise that Hillary Clinton's name is being thrown into the hat as possible candidates for the VP slot. There are some (namely Dick Morris) in the blogosphere that consider this a huge mistake because Obama will be constantly looking over his shoulder to find the Clintons (and all their baggage) screwing things up.
My personal feelings (after consulting with a political guru) are that this is pretty much malarkey (aka bullshit). Sure the Clintons have baggage but isn't this like saying "Saddam Hussein didn't have weapons of mass destruction"? No politician is without his/her baggage. Look what they did to Obama and the Reverend Wright thing. They took comments made by a seemingly ridiculous clergyman (aren't they all) and made those comments into an issue (which specific political issue the comments represent as it relates to Obama I don't know).
The Republican spin machine will do whatever it takes to demonize any Democratic nominee and his/her running mate. We're talking about the likes of Dick Cheney and Karl Rove after all.
The bottom line is, that if Barack Obama chooses Hillary Clinton as his VP, this election may be over before it gets started. I like John McCain very much and I think he would make a decent President but there is simply no way he could defeat the team of Obama/Clinton. He could have Ronald Reagan as his running mate and he wouldn't be able to win.
Is the Obama/Clinton team a polarizing duo? Possibly. But if it causes Sean Hannity to lose his mind and Bill O'Reilly to do more of this then it's totally worth it. And if you can't get enough of that, try this.
Have a great weekend everybody!
Barack Obama is all but certain to be the Democratic nominee for President. There are only three primaries left and he is only 61 delegates away from securing the nomination. The Mass Media, in all it's wisdom, is skipping the formalities and getting right to the Vice President talk (NYT).
With such a hard fought nominating process, it's no surprise that Hillary Clinton's name is being thrown into the hat as possible candidates for the VP slot. There are some (namely Dick Morris) in the blogosphere that consider this a huge mistake because Obama will be constantly looking over his shoulder to find the Clintons (and all their baggage) screwing things up.
My personal feelings (after consulting with a political guru) are that this is pretty much malarkey (aka bullshit). Sure the Clintons have baggage but isn't this like saying "Saddam Hussein didn't have weapons of mass destruction"? No politician is without his/her baggage. Look what they did to Obama and the Reverend Wright thing. They took comments made by a seemingly ridiculous clergyman (aren't they all) and made those comments into an issue (which specific political issue the comments represent as it relates to Obama I don't know).
The Republican spin machine will do whatever it takes to demonize any Democratic nominee and his/her running mate. We're talking about the likes of Dick Cheney and Karl Rove after all.
The bottom line is, that if Barack Obama chooses Hillary Clinton as his VP, this election may be over before it gets started. I like John McCain very much and I think he would make a decent President but there is simply no way he could defeat the team of Obama/Clinton. He could have Ronald Reagan as his running mate and he wouldn't be able to win.
Is the Obama/Clinton team a polarizing duo? Possibly. But if it causes Sean Hannity to lose his mind and Bill O'Reilly to do more of this then it's totally worth it. And if you can't get enough of that, try this.
Have a great weekend everybody!
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Openness on the Bathroom Wall
As you may recall, a certain chef equated blogging to the writing on the bathroom wall. Today I read an article on the NYTimes website (appearing in the Times Magazine) written by Emily Gould, who makes her living blogging (read it here) most notably and formerly at Gawker. Most of what I read on this person (in the blogosphere) gives me the impression that she is another shameless self-promoter (mostly New York Mag).
I have to say though that reading the article gives me pause to think about the millions of people out there putting their thoughts out there and how exposed they (and I) really are. This girl ends up in a huge fight with her boyfriend (who she eventually breaks up with) over a post, has panic attacks, goes through big mood swings, and many other issues, both personally and professionally.
Ultimately she admits that the addiction to blogging is the attention that she received from those that disagreed with her and even chastised her. She was extremely open about herself and what she was feeling in every aspect of her life. While I can relate in the sense of wanting to share thoughts and opinions with others, the complete opening of your entire life seems to be a risky proposition at the very least.
I certainly don't know if I am able to share every going-on in my life with the whole world having access and then opining on my personal feelings. Clearly this girl doesn't consider enough of a concern to filter herself. That brings up the point, is blogging so openly about your own life therapy or just plain stupid?
I for one, wouldn't necessarily share details of therapy sessions on my blog. I don't think anyone out there would be that interested in my rantings inside of a small room with a stranger. I think it's important for everyone to maintain a certain amount of anonymity in their lives in order to keep their sanity in check. This girl had people recognizing her on the streets after appearing on Larry King and that's what started her panic attacks.
Now, it's fairly obvious that I or most of the millions of other bloggers out there that will never enjoy the readership that Emily has/had but even so, there are certainly things that are for myself and few others. Nothing personal readers, but privacy in our country is getting more scarce every day so I figure I'm taking enough risk just blogging about politicians...
I have to say though that reading the article gives me pause to think about the millions of people out there putting their thoughts out there and how exposed they (and I) really are. This girl ends up in a huge fight with her boyfriend (who she eventually breaks up with) over a post, has panic attacks, goes through big mood swings, and many other issues, both personally and professionally.
Ultimately she admits that the addiction to blogging is the attention that she received from those that disagreed with her and even chastised her. She was extremely open about herself and what she was feeling in every aspect of her life. While I can relate in the sense of wanting to share thoughts and opinions with others, the complete opening of your entire life seems to be a risky proposition at the very least.
I certainly don't know if I am able to share every going-on in my life with the whole world having access and then opining on my personal feelings. Clearly this girl doesn't consider enough of a concern to filter herself. That brings up the point, is blogging so openly about your own life therapy or just plain stupid?
I for one, wouldn't necessarily share details of therapy sessions on my blog. I don't think anyone out there would be that interested in my rantings inside of a small room with a stranger. I think it's important for everyone to maintain a certain amount of anonymity in their lives in order to keep their sanity in check. This girl had people recognizing her on the streets after appearing on Larry King and that's what started her panic attacks.
Now, it's fairly obvious that I or most of the millions of other bloggers out there that will never enjoy the readership that Emily has/had but even so, there are certainly things that are for myself and few others. Nothing personal readers, but privacy in our country is getting more scarce every day so I figure I'm taking enough risk just blogging about politicians...
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
$27 Gas?
Sort of...
Ok, so gas is expensive, that's pretty obvious. What's not so obvious is why it is so expensive. Petroleum, you say? Ok, that's pretty obvious too but why is oil so expensive? It's anybody's guess. Some say it's because of China and India's unquenchable demand and others say it's speculators (i.e. futures traders) pumping up the price. Maybe it's a combination of the two.
Then again, maybe it's due to the hot air coming out of Bill O'Reilly and Keith Olbermann. The point is, no one really knows. Oh sure, people say they know but there's just as many people arguing against that particular point of view (whatever it may be).
What's the point of all this you ask? Should we all pick a date on the calendar and refuse to buy gas on that day in order to bring the mighty oil companies to their knees?
SIDENOTE: If anyone reading thinks that this is a good idea, please explain to me how this will work.
The only thing we can do is consume less. Is this going to do anything to the price of gas? Probably not but at least it will ease our individual pain a little bit. Buy a bike, take the bus (whenever reasonable), walk, carpool. I don't know but do something besides complain about it. "Gas is so expensive". You think so? Buckle your seatbelts. Hopefully in a hybrid...
I'm continuing with the jokes until I run into major resistence:
What did one casket say to the other casket?
Is that you coffin?
First Question of the Day
Why do people still run for the train when there is no chance of them catching it?
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Strangers and the Weather
It's raining in New York today and it makes me think about the weather and how crucial it is to our functioning society. Not in the sense that it affects commuting, agriculture, or industry but in that it binds every single person in the world and that any two people can find commonality in the sun, rain, snow, sleet, hurricane, wind, whatever.
It would be a complete breakdown in society if two people, finding themselves in an awkward silence, were to not make mention of how (enter current weather) it has been. Of course many people can handle the silence with no problem (myself included) but as luck would have it, two of those people have never crossed paths. One party will invariably make comment of how (enter current weather here) it is.
Of course the weather isn't the only subject to come up between two strangers but as previously mentioned, it is, seemingly, the easiest thing for two humans to discuss.
The discussion obviously varies from place to place and is all relative to the actual location. For instance I imagine that residents of Anchorage are quite ecstatic when the temperature achieves heights north of 60 degrees (Fahrenheit obviously). Likewise, if the temperature goes south of 60 in San Diego, people start FREAKING OUT.
Will I ever mellow on the weather small talk? Possibly. But for the time being, I'll still simply just observe the weather and wait for my Starbucks in silence.
I'll offer you another joke today as this particular posting might be WEAK.
Why are there so many Jones's in the phone book?
Because they all have phones.
It would be a complete breakdown in society if two people, finding themselves in an awkward silence, were to not make mention of how (enter current weather) it has been. Of course many people can handle the silence with no problem (myself included) but as luck would have it, two of those people have never crossed paths. One party will invariably make comment of how (enter current weather here) it is.
Of course the weather isn't the only subject to come up between two strangers but as previously mentioned, it is, seemingly, the easiest thing for two humans to discuss.
The discussion obviously varies from place to place and is all relative to the actual location. For instance I imagine that residents of Anchorage are quite ecstatic when the temperature achieves heights north of 60 degrees (Fahrenheit obviously). Likewise, if the temperature goes south of 60 in San Diego, people start FREAKING OUT.
Will I ever mellow on the weather small talk? Possibly. But for the time being, I'll still simply just observe the weather and wait for my Starbucks in silence.
I'll offer you another joke today as this particular posting might be WEAK.
Why are there so many Jones's in the phone book?
Because they all have phones.
Monday, May 19, 2008
Dr. Jones
My new urologist you ask? No.
This is Dr. Henry Jones, Jr. You probably know him best as Indiana (named after the dog) Jones, everyone's favorite archaeologist. He returns this week in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and I'm not ashamed to be excited about his triumphant resurrection after nearly 20 years.
I was 10 when the Last Crusade was released. I went on to watch a bootlegged video tape countless times. I eventually saw Raiders of the Lost Ark and The Temple of Doom numerous times as well and loved all of them.
Indiana Jones adventures, as cheesy as they be, with all the whips, hats, hocus-pocus, and whatnot, are definitely a guilty pleasure of mine.
As most of the reviews state, the dialogue isn't riveting, the story isn't that great, and there is little, if any, depth to the movie franchise as a whole, making it a certain class of "spoon-fed Hollywood".
I, for one, do not watch Indiana Jones movies for any artistic, cinematic revelations. This is for adventure and to enjoy watching Harrison Ford embody an old friend that we haven't seen for the better part of two decades.
With all the bad news out there: Wars, Phony Politicians, Earthquake, Cyclones, etc., it's a perfect time for our hero to return even if it doesn't increase our cinematic sophistication.
This is Dr. Henry Jones, Jr. You probably know him best as Indiana (named after the dog) Jones, everyone's favorite archaeologist. He returns this week in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and I'm not ashamed to be excited about his triumphant resurrection after nearly 20 years.
I was 10 when the Last Crusade was released. I went on to watch a bootlegged video tape countless times. I eventually saw Raiders of the Lost Ark and The Temple of Doom numerous times as well and loved all of them.
Indiana Jones adventures, as cheesy as they be, with all the whips, hats, hocus-pocus, and whatnot, are definitely a guilty pleasure of mine.
As most of the reviews state, the dialogue isn't riveting, the story isn't that great, and there is little, if any, depth to the movie franchise as a whole, making it a certain class of "spoon-fed Hollywood".
I, for one, do not watch Indiana Jones movies for any artistic, cinematic revelations. This is for adventure and to enjoy watching Harrison Ford embody an old friend that we haven't seen for the better part of two decades.
With all the bad news out there: Wars, Phony Politicians, Earthquake, Cyclones, etc., it's a perfect time for our hero to return even if it doesn't increase our cinematic sophistication.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
The Countdown is On!
250 days until 1/20/2009 (Bush's last day) in case you were wondering.
Last night I heard someone call the President "George Fucking Bush". Now, I'm as big of a Bush unsupporter as anyone but can't we just remember that his tenure is coming to an end?!? C'mon people, positive thinking!
I was anti-Bush a long time ago, long before the President achieved his now record disapproval rating. I'd like to think I was a trailblazer of some sorts (ok, maybe not so much).
In any case, I'm tired of hearing people complain about the President like it's breaking news that he's a bad President. I know it, you know it, EVERYONE knows it. How about we move on and get someone elected? I mean, I don't want summer to go by too fast but we need a new President about as badly as Gossip Girl viewers need lives.
Will John McCain be a third George Bush term? Likely not. I mean, John McCain actually served in Vietnam and is much, much older than GWB. Gosh, and to hear Senator McCain talk about it, we'll be out of Iraq by 2013! I'll be 33. Holy crapola. Now that's a COUNTDOWN.
Last night I heard someone call the President "George Fucking Bush". Now, I'm as big of a Bush unsupporter as anyone but can't we just remember that his tenure is coming to an end?!? C'mon people, positive thinking!
I was anti-Bush a long time ago, long before the President achieved his now record disapproval rating. I'd like to think I was a trailblazer of some sorts (ok, maybe not so much).
In any case, I'm tired of hearing people complain about the President like it's breaking news that he's a bad President. I know it, you know it, EVERYONE knows it. How about we move on and get someone elected? I mean, I don't want summer to go by too fast but we need a new President about as badly as Gossip Girl viewers need lives.
Will John McCain be a third George Bush term? Likely not. I mean, John McCain actually served in Vietnam and is much, much older than GWB. Gosh, and to hear Senator McCain talk about it, we'll be out of Iraq by 2013! I'll be 33. Holy crapola. Now that's a COUNTDOWN.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
My Writing on the Bathroom Wall
I read today that Mario Batali equated blogging to "writing on the bathroom wall". Now, I'm not if that's what he said verbatim but it's an interesting enough analogy that I thought I would comment on it. Plus, it's a slow day.
When I was growing up and anytime I saw writing on the bathroom wall, it seemed somewhat frightening. Since I was raised in a religious household, I'm sure that I thought this vandalism was a sin. I mean, what scofflaw would dare deface this public restroom? This is public property! I can't believe anyone would have the audacity to perpetrate such behavior! Why would some write "wipe hands on pants" directly on the automatic hand dryer?!? That would get your pants wet!
Now that I'm older I've come to realize that all this graffiti has purpose. Some angry, spiteful person has got to let out some frustration. No better place than a public bathroom to do that. Now EVERYONE can see how I feel about a certain someone. Usually in the form of a phone number preceded by "FOR A GOOD TIME CALL..." or a one-word expletive.
I had plenty of good times growing up but I never did muster up the nerve to call one of those numbers. But then again, that was before cell phones...
Since the joke I included at the end of yesterday's post was so well received, I will include another today:
A grasshopper hops into a bar and jumps up on the bar stool and says, "I'll have a scotch and soda."
The bartender whips around and says, "Hey, we've got a drink named after you."
The grasshopper says, "You've got a drink named Irving?"
When I was growing up and anytime I saw writing on the bathroom wall, it seemed somewhat frightening. Since I was raised in a religious household, I'm sure that I thought this vandalism was a sin. I mean, what scofflaw would dare deface this public restroom? This is public property! I can't believe anyone would have the audacity to perpetrate such behavior! Why would some write "wipe hands on pants" directly on the automatic hand dryer?!? That would get your pants wet!
Now that I'm older I've come to realize that all this graffiti has purpose. Some angry, spiteful person has got to let out some frustration. No better place than a public bathroom to do that. Now EVERYONE can see how I feel about a certain someone. Usually in the form of a phone number preceded by "FOR A GOOD TIME CALL..." or a one-word expletive.
I had plenty of good times growing up but I never did muster up the nerve to call one of those numbers. But then again, that was before cell phones...
Since the joke I included at the end of yesterday's post was so well received, I will include another today:
A grasshopper hops into a bar and jumps up on the bar stool and says, "I'll have a scotch and soda."
The bartender whips around and says, "Hey, we've got a drink named after you."
The grasshopper says, "You've got a drink named Irving?"
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
The Faux-World Brooklyn
Ok, so I'm not happy to writing about TV but I can't resist this particular topic.
Apparently the next installment of the Real World will be filmed in Brooklyn, where I currently reside. Now, having been a watcher of the show in the past, I suppose there is a tiny bit of interest but I am pretty confident that it primarily consists of contemptuous interest.
I mean how many cities on Earth can we watch 8 (or 7 or 10 or whatever) strangers get drunk and naked and arrested and not take care of an ostentatious residence? I suppose new viewers are constantly recyclying but can MTV really be still making money on this franchise? All right there are spin-offs as well (e.g. the Gauntlet, Battle of the Sexes, etc.) that probably have brought in some advertising dollars but COME ON.
These people are going to live in Cobble Hill (allegedly) and not have jobs and get drunk and do whatever else (i.e. drugs) and they will COMPLAIN ABOUT IT. People will have breakdowns and tantrums and bitch and it will be ridiculous as usual.
Is it possible that I just described why this show is still on TV? Possibly. But I think it would be much more interesting if the producers of the show had the cast members find their own apartment, pay their own rent, and let them wander into places that they know nothing about (e.g. Jamaica, Queens or Bushwick, Brooklyn). That seems more real doesn't it?
Granted, I haven't been a resident of Brooklyn very long but I definitely can sense when ungrateful people are planted down in a place they don't really deserve.
Sorry about the seriousness of the posting. To reciprocate I offer the following joke:
What did Batman say to Robin before they got in the car?
Robin, get in the car.
Apparently the next installment of the Real World will be filmed in Brooklyn, where I currently reside. Now, having been a watcher of the show in the past, I suppose there is a tiny bit of interest but I am pretty confident that it primarily consists of contemptuous interest.
I mean how many cities on Earth can we watch 8 (or 7 or 10 or whatever) strangers get drunk and naked and arrested and not take care of an ostentatious residence? I suppose new viewers are constantly recyclying but can MTV really be still making money on this franchise? All right there are spin-offs as well (e.g. the Gauntlet, Battle of the Sexes, etc.) that probably have brought in some advertising dollars but COME ON.
These people are going to live in Cobble Hill (allegedly) and not have jobs and get drunk and do whatever else (i.e. drugs) and they will COMPLAIN ABOUT IT. People will have breakdowns and tantrums and bitch and it will be ridiculous as usual.
Is it possible that I just described why this show is still on TV? Possibly. But I think it would be much more interesting if the producers of the show had the cast members find their own apartment, pay their own rent, and let them wander into places that they know nothing about (e.g. Jamaica, Queens or Bushwick, Brooklyn). That seems more real doesn't it?
Granted, I haven't been a resident of Brooklyn very long but I definitely can sense when ungrateful people are planted down in a place they don't really deserve.
Sorry about the seriousness of the posting. To reciprocate I offer the following joke:
What did Batman say to Robin before they got in the car?
Robin, get in the car.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Temptation and Ikea
I am going to resist the urge to talk about the election today since we have more than five months to droll on about how high our taxes will be under a Barack Obama presidency and why under a John McCain adminstration that our troops will still be in Iraq after Manhattan is under water.
Let's move on to a different urge. Over the weekend I made my first every trip to the Swedish paradise known as Ikea. Yes, I know it's unbelievable but I had not ever set foot inside an Ikea before Saturday afternoon.
As I walked amongst the copious shapes and sizes of furnishings and looking at the corresponding prices, I'm thinking to myself, this is best utopia of capitalism EVER!
Everything is sleek and hip and inexpensive. I'm sure there are many homes throughout Scandinavia, North America, and countless other homes all over the world that are adorned entirely with Ikea products.
But questions remain: 1) is this a temptation to delve into mediocre, unoriginal, and omnipresent interior decor? 2) Should we reject temptation and attempt to strive for more originality and character? 3) Does a large multi-national corporation offering mass-produced furniture and other accessories just have it's roots ground in making billions of dollars?
The answers are as follows: 1) Perhaps 2) Maybe 3) Indubitably
Regardless of other peoples' or corporations' motivation, I live in New York and am currently a marginal employee at a Big 4 Accounting firm so I'll be caving to temptation for the time being.
Friday, May 9, 2008
And the winner is...
John McCain.
OK. So I'm really bored at work and I need to get this post done so I cut out early. I guess I'll talk about the election. That should be easy enough, right?
Yes, yes, I know most you probably don't want to hear about it. Don't worry, I'll keep it short.
John McCain is the winner for a couple of reasons:
1) He's been able to rally his the GOP base while Clinton and Obama have been focusing on each other (although Obama had been this doing less and less).
2) The Republicans don't have to think about how they are going to attack Obama during the general election because the Clintons have come up with everything possible.
Ok, maybe not everything. I suppose they could have opened up a little more on Obama's connection to these so-called terrorist organziations in the U.S. but for the most part, the Jeremiah Wright thing has done the most damage.
The question is, will McCain be willing to get down and dirty and keep it up with the mud slinging? Time will tell but it's getting testy already (read here).
However agressive McCain decides to be you can bet that the non-profit groups (think swift boats in 2004, sorry I can't remember the tax code citation they fall under and I don't feel like researching it at 3:30 on a Friday) are going to implement the "kitchen sink" strategy.
I guess that brings me to the point that, if there was no mud-slinging, would anyone vote? I mean we love all the ugliness and bickering and going back and forth. It gets a rise out of people (I won't name names) so they feel like they should get out there and VOTE because how dare he/she say that about ______ (insert candidate's name here)!
So I guess what I'm trying to say is get the garden hose and a big pile of dirt and let's get to it people! This is American politics! The last one in the mud puddle is probably going to be the first eating mud pie!
OK. So I'm really bored at work and I need to get this post done so I cut out early. I guess I'll talk about the election. That should be easy enough, right?
Yes, yes, I know most you probably don't want to hear about it. Don't worry, I'll keep it short.
John McCain is the winner for a couple of reasons:
1) He's been able to rally his the GOP base while Clinton and Obama have been focusing on each other (although Obama had been this doing less and less).
2) The Republicans don't have to think about how they are going to attack Obama during the general election because the Clintons have come up with everything possible.
Ok, maybe not everything. I suppose they could have opened up a little more on Obama's connection to these so-called terrorist organziations in the U.S. but for the most part, the Jeremiah Wright thing has done the most damage.
The question is, will McCain be willing to get down and dirty and keep it up with the mud slinging? Time will tell but it's getting testy already (read here).
However agressive McCain decides to be you can bet that the non-profit groups (think swift boats in 2004, sorry I can't remember the tax code citation they fall under and I don't feel like researching it at 3:30 on a Friday) are going to implement the "kitchen sink" strategy.
I guess that brings me to the point that, if there was no mud-slinging, would anyone vote? I mean we love all the ugliness and bickering and going back and forth. It gets a rise out of people (I won't name names) so they feel like they should get out there and VOTE because how dare he/she say that about ______ (insert candidate's name here)!
So I guess what I'm trying to say is get the garden hose and a big pile of dirt and let's get to it people! This is American politics! The last one in the mud puddle is probably going to be the first eating mud pie!
Thursday, May 8, 2008
The Slim to None Scenarios for Hillary
Just thought everyone would enjoy these:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/trailhead/archive/2008/05/08/obama-doomsday-scenario-contest-results.aspx?GT1=38001
http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/trailhead/archive/2008/05/08/obama-doomsday-scenario-contest-results.aspx?GT1=38001
Who hates NPR and quantifying popular culture
Have I mentioned that I love National Public Radio? There are several reasons why I do. Regular readers will learn this so we won't get into that now. I developed a label specifically for NPR because I am predicting that I will blog about many things about or sourced from NPR.
What popped into my head today as I was listening to the Bryant Park Project ("BPP"), is: is there anyone that hates NPR? I mean, there has to be someone. So, using the miracle known as Google, I searched "who hates NPR?"
Strangely enough I found one blog with a entry entitled "Oh How I hate NPR" (read here). While I respectfully disagree with this poor chap, he makes some points that are pretty hilarious and that I can identify with, for example: "NPR is popular culture for people that are too good for popular culture."
Sorry to say, but this is right on the money for me. Being too good for popular culture has been a goal of mine for quite some time now. Does this mean that I am completely opposed to it? Of course not. I watch popular television shows, go to popular movies, listen to popular music, read popular magazines, visit popular websites. But I also enjoy independent films, independent music, websites and the like, as do many others.
Wait a tick... does everything on Earth fall into the "popular culture" bucket? You could easily make the argument. I mean every genre in every type of entertainment/art/activity has a following and there will always be dissenters in each group that say "they've/it's gone commercial". I think even homelessness has gone commercial. They are getting press everywhere and probably make more money peddling than the cops that have to wake them up in the park every night.
In short, it appears non-conformity is popular now. Probably more popular than it is to be popular. Drat! I guess I'll go back to being normal. Maybe that isn't popular any more...
PS - KSH, this is NPR: National Public Radio.
What popped into my head today as I was listening to the Bryant Park Project ("BPP"), is: is there anyone that hates NPR? I mean, there has to be someone. So, using the miracle known as Google, I searched "who hates NPR?"
Strangely enough I found one blog with a entry entitled "Oh How I hate NPR" (read here). While I respectfully disagree with this poor chap, he makes some points that are pretty hilarious and that I can identify with, for example: "NPR is popular culture for people that are too good for popular culture."
Sorry to say, but this is right on the money for me. Being too good for popular culture has been a goal of mine for quite some time now. Does this mean that I am completely opposed to it? Of course not. I watch popular television shows, go to popular movies, listen to popular music, read popular magazines, visit popular websites. But I also enjoy independent films, independent music, websites and the like, as do many others.
Wait a tick... does everything on Earth fall into the "popular culture" bucket? You could easily make the argument. I mean every genre in every type of entertainment/art/activity has a following and there will always be dissenters in each group that say "they've/it's gone commercial". I think even homelessness has gone commercial. They are getting press everywhere and probably make more money peddling than the cops that have to wake them up in the park every night.
In short, it appears non-conformity is popular now. Probably more popular than it is to be popular. Drat! I guess I'll go back to being normal. Maybe that isn't popular any more...
PS - KSH, this is NPR: National Public Radio.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Michelle Malkin, the New York Post, and other "Media"
So I'm going about my Google Reader list, per my usual routine lately, and notice and an article entitled: Barack Obama's Bitter Half (read here) listed under Real Clear Politics. The author is a woman named Michelle Malkin.
After reading approximately half of the article, I decided I had to start complaining, starting with:
How does this woman make a living doing this? I mean, is she writing anything that is all that interesting? Does she have regular readers, and if so, who are these people? Do they think she is smart and that she knows what she is talking about?
She just goes on and on about much Michelle Obama complains and gripes and whatever other synonyms the Microsoft Word Thesaurus could come up with. I've seen this woman on Fox News in the past and she is just loud and opinionated with no real substance to any of her commentary.
Wait a minute...Loud, opinionated, no real substance, Fox News...
I guess that makes her perfect for Fox News. I guess my concern is why would a website like Real Clear Politics is doing posting this person's rants. I mean George Will's columns are also posted on this website. They might as well post my brilliant comments if they are going to include both Michelle Malkin and George Will. I mean you've basically got the two ends of the spectrum in terms of perceived intellect here (regardless of how smart George Will actually is, he is accepted by the masses as "smart"). I easily fall in between the two of them (where exactly that may be, feel free to comment).
Now, to be fair, another regular obnoxious contributor on Fox News is Ann Coulter. Now, while Ms. Coulter is both loud and opinionated, much like Ms. Malkin, at least she is FUNNY. Yes, I am admitting that Ann Coulter has talent. Whenever I read something she writes, I disagree with probably 99.9% of what I'm reading. But, at least she writes in such a way that will make me laugh a little. It's the same way I laugh at my friends with similar points of view when they go on similar rants but hey, I like laughing...
Ms. Maulkin isn't funny AT ALL. If I'm going to be listening to dumb-downed media (I just finished a Noam Chomsky documentary, forgive me) I better get some laughs out of it. Don't try and come across all serious and act like you're a legitimate journalist giving me the "truth" about what's going on.
Which brings me to my second topic for the day: the New York Post. I picked up a copy on my way home yesterday to read on the train. The Post is owned by News Corp. Which, also owns Fox News. Fine. Effectively, the same tyrant runs both. But at least the Post isn't trying to hold itself out as legitimate news. I mean seriously, do you think the editors at the Post really care if anyone takes them seriously?
I mean, "HO NO". How great is that? That pretty much sums up the feelings of the Post: "We know you're dumb, so we are going to put headlines on our paper that you can understand".
Sure, it's filled with celeb gossip and plenty of other nonsense but at least it's not pretending to be something it's not (i.e. a legitimate news source but what is a legitimate news source? Drat, save that for another day).
I guess what I'm attempting to say is that most media is a joke. Now, as I said, I recently watched a documentary on Noam Chomsky so this topic is fresh in my mind but I guess that's what blogs are for...Hang in with me readers, I'm still new at this...
After reading approximately half of the article, I decided I had to start complaining, starting with:
How does this woman make a living doing this? I mean, is she writing anything that is all that interesting? Does she have regular readers, and if so, who are these people? Do they think she is smart and that she knows what she is talking about?
She just goes on and on about much Michelle Obama complains and gripes and whatever other synonyms the Microsoft Word Thesaurus could come up with. I've seen this woman on Fox News in the past and she is just loud and opinionated with no real substance to any of her commentary.
Wait a minute...Loud, opinionated, no real substance, Fox News...
I guess that makes her perfect for Fox News. I guess my concern is why would a website like Real Clear Politics is doing posting this person's rants. I mean George Will's columns are also posted on this website. They might as well post my brilliant comments if they are going to include both Michelle Malkin and George Will. I mean you've basically got the two ends of the spectrum in terms of perceived intellect here (regardless of how smart George Will actually is, he is accepted by the masses as "smart"). I easily fall in between the two of them (where exactly that may be, feel free to comment).
Now, to be fair, another regular obnoxious contributor on Fox News is Ann Coulter. Now, while Ms. Coulter is both loud and opinionated, much like Ms. Malkin, at least she is FUNNY. Yes, I am admitting that Ann Coulter has talent. Whenever I read something she writes, I disagree with probably 99.9% of what I'm reading. But, at least she writes in such a way that will make me laugh a little. It's the same way I laugh at my friends with similar points of view when they go on similar rants but hey, I like laughing...
Ms. Maulkin isn't funny AT ALL. If I'm going to be listening to dumb-downed media (I just finished a Noam Chomsky documentary, forgive me) I better get some laughs out of it. Don't try and come across all serious and act like you're a legitimate journalist giving me the "truth" about what's going on.
Which brings me to my second topic for the day: the New York Post. I picked up a copy on my way home yesterday to read on the train. The Post is owned by News Corp. Which, also owns Fox News. Fine. Effectively, the same tyrant runs both. But at least the Post isn't trying to hold itself out as legitimate news. I mean seriously, do you think the editors at the Post really care if anyone takes them seriously?
I mean, "HO NO". How great is that? That pretty much sums up the feelings of the Post: "We know you're dumb, so we are going to put headlines on our paper that you can understand".
Sure, it's filled with celeb gossip and plenty of other nonsense but at least it's not pretending to be something it's not (i.e. a legitimate news source but what is a legitimate news source? Drat, save that for another day).
I guess what I'm attempting to say is that most media is a joke. Now, as I said, I recently watched a documentary on Noam Chomsky so this topic is fresh in my mind but I guess that's what blogs are for...Hang in with me readers, I'm still new at this...
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
An Unexpected Debut/TriBeCa Review
Hello and welcome readers!
This debut comes unexpectedly but due to the recent drought of activity at my job I have decided to start my blog today. Those of you that know me well know that griping is something that I excel at and I felt that most of my postings would probably center around that particular pastime.
I guess I'll start by talking about the TriBeCa Film Festival. I attended five films last week and while I enjoyed watching the movies very much I have come to find out that there are TONS of people out there that take movies WAY TOO SERIOUSLY. I seriously doubt Robert DeNiro had this seemingly bureaucratic and proper event in mind when he started it.
My bro Z came out to NYC to see a few films and we went into a latenight screening (a little late, admittedly) and we were informed that there were not two seats together left in the theatre. I noticed some folding chairs in the back and inquired about us using them. I received not a "no" but a "hell no" response to my query. Not literally, mind you, but I was surprised by the "program coordinator" (whatever the hell that is, there was a new one at each movie) giving such a straightforward refusal.
I mean would our use of the chairs breached some kind of quota for asses on seats for the theatre? Were there national security issues that were undislcosed to the movie patrons? Whatever the reason, the desire for two tall blonde men to sit together to watch the movie on cheap folding chairs couldn't possibly be accomodated.
AND, as a result I had to sit in the last seat of a row WAY down front. I had to climb over every person in the row, my ass bumping into the heads of each person I walked by. All that being said, the movie An Omar Broadway film was good but seemingly had mixed viewpoints. Z and I discussed at length and decided ultimately that convicted criminals belong in jail regardless of their ability to covertly become filmmakers.
One other note on another film, Empire II. I can honestly say that this was art on a level that I may not be capable of understanding or appreciating and I'd like to think that I'm not that aesthetically challenged.
I came up with the genre as possibly being an "art epic". THREE HOURS of the same 6-10 shots of Manhattan in various speeds, color schemes, time of the day and year. Does grueling do it justice? I don't know. I do admit, it could be considered, in the words of my friend that joined me, "avant-garde" but for me it was challenging (I only fell asleep twice and he slept through about half of it).
All in all, the festival was a good experience and I may attend again next year but I certainly won't dare to ask about the availability of any folding chairs.
For all readers, I would love to hear your comments and suggestions for topics. I've been told by more than one loved-one that I'm pretty opinionated so I imagine anything you suggest I will easily find that I am able to rant about it.
This debut comes unexpectedly but due to the recent drought of activity at my job I have decided to start my blog today. Those of you that know me well know that griping is something that I excel at and I felt that most of my postings would probably center around that particular pastime.
I guess I'll start by talking about the TriBeCa Film Festival. I attended five films last week and while I enjoyed watching the movies very much I have come to find out that there are TONS of people out there that take movies WAY TOO SERIOUSLY. I seriously doubt Robert DeNiro had this seemingly bureaucratic and proper event in mind when he started it.
My bro Z came out to NYC to see a few films and we went into a latenight screening (a little late, admittedly) and we were informed that there were not two seats together left in the theatre. I noticed some folding chairs in the back and inquired about us using them. I received not a "no" but a "hell no" response to my query. Not literally, mind you, but I was surprised by the "program coordinator" (whatever the hell that is, there was a new one at each movie) giving such a straightforward refusal.
I mean would our use of the chairs breached some kind of quota for asses on seats for the theatre? Were there national security issues that were undislcosed to the movie patrons? Whatever the reason, the desire for two tall blonde men to sit together to watch the movie on cheap folding chairs couldn't possibly be accomodated.
AND, as a result I had to sit in the last seat of a row WAY down front. I had to climb over every person in the row, my ass bumping into the heads of each person I walked by. All that being said, the movie An Omar Broadway film was good but seemingly had mixed viewpoints. Z and I discussed at length and decided ultimately that convicted criminals belong in jail regardless of their ability to covertly become filmmakers.
One other note on another film, Empire II. I can honestly say that this was art on a level that I may not be capable of understanding or appreciating and I'd like to think that I'm not that aesthetically challenged.
I came up with the genre as possibly being an "art epic". THREE HOURS of the same 6-10 shots of Manhattan in various speeds, color schemes, time of the day and year. Does grueling do it justice? I don't know. I do admit, it could be considered, in the words of my friend that joined me, "avant-garde" but for me it was challenging (I only fell asleep twice and he slept through about half of it).
All in all, the festival was a good experience and I may attend again next year but I certainly won't dare to ask about the availability of any folding chairs.
For all readers, I would love to hear your comments and suggestions for topics. I've been told by more than one loved-one that I'm pretty opinionated so I imagine anything you suggest I will easily find that I am able to rant about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
