Saturday, July 07, 2007

Dowd and Rich and Gore and Live Earth and Celebs and Music and Chickens!!
































I just damned Maureen Dowd to Hell because anyone that obsessed with someone else's haircut at a time when there is so much juicy goodness going on should really get a life, or go directly to hell. Its really getting pathetic and boring already, and...who cares what kind of ice cream John Edwards eats or if he likes Andie McDowell or not? If she has access to Edwards, lets hear some of his plans...is this fuckin' Tiger Beat?
Once again the NY Times barely squeaks by with another excellent Frank Rich piece, but how long can he carry Dowd? It seemed to me like she had been moved to Sunday because she wanted a coveted top spot, but now Im thinking that it might have been more about her needing to be bolstered by Rich, Friedman, and all the other glossy offerings in there on Sundays because of a lack of readership or something....who knows?.
I feel sort of bad for her...words like grasping and pathetic come to mind.

To catch these wonderful columns online (because without having Times Select or a friend with it who is willing to email you the articles, you wont be able to read them unless you buy the paper,) check out Free Democracy, where they are not posted yet but they will likely be...not that its even worth it to look at Dowd...but the Frank Rich is an excellent read about the cowardice of the President, and Friedman has a semi-clever piece about applying the concept of carbon offsets to all sins....ha, ha...if he had known about the damned to hell site linked above, he might have had it, but as usual, poor old Tom is just sorta lacking; almost there, but not quite.

















So, I watched the Live Earth concerts yestersay... or I should say, what was shown of them on CNBC and MSN online, and various stations here and there. I kept turning it off because I was struck over and over at the vapid new music and the music of the 80's, in its repetitive lack of real message.
A few pieces of it got me, though, and maybe its all just subjective in that I still have a VHS tape of Live AID, which I watched nonstop on network TV over a weekend, as I recall.... and I was actually at many of the NYC No Nukes shows (including right up front with Springsteen kneeling at the edge of the stage.) I don't know how I feel about Al Gore quite yet because I think that while this is good work that he is doing (as in any work in this direction is good work,) but I still have welfare reform and NAFTA stuck in my craw...and I'm not exactly sure with how he really feels about the war. Anyone can say to pull out now, and anyone can criticize what has been done, but where was he all along? This has not been a popular subject from the get go, and I'm not recalling exactly what he said and how he said it....and I don't hear him saying now that he was wrong. Its a measured response when you are possibly in line to take over an ongoing war and occupation, I know, but I still am not so sure that he is really willing to pull us out and let the chips fall on his own legacy. Im interested in courage and candidates who break out and take chances. I dont see alot of that, and I dont consider it courageous to come out loudly when the coast is clear. I so much prefer a candidate like Edwards who was dead wrong but who comes out and admits it.
Anyone could do a better job than Bush, and with the right advisors, any democrat will probably do, as long as they understand that the immediate work is diplomacy, reversal, and clean-up.

Musings about Gore aside, I was pretty impressed at how well it went off. It was delayed all over the place, which I was just as happy for, because who wants to sit and watch set changes anymore?...Im just not that young and I've got work to do, so lets get to the meat of it.
I was very impressed with young cutie John Mayer, who I usually dismiss as pilates music, in that my instructor often plays him in class, and his records dont much show how talented he is in their slickness. I downloaded some live stuff of his and it never quite got into my ipod, but maybe I will bump it over there now. Why cant I get jessica Simpson out of my head? Too much time in line at the supermarket!

James Blunt is obviously heavily influenced by Elton John, and I cant listen to him without hearing Tiny Dancer in my head...which isnt my favorite song, so its sorta annoying.
I wish that someone had told Blunt that the real Cat Stevens was gonna appear because he tore Wild World apart (which I found to be a totally condescending thought at the time, and now when the real Cat sings it as a Muslim, I just find it to be ...oh, I don't know....the perfect end spot for the "little girl" culture...and it and it's brethren only made me want to be a "bad girl."
In a world where Cat might stand by his death condemnation of Salman Rushdie for his metaphorical book about the Koran, its nice to hear him doing peace train, but I think that opening a dialog about extremism in its many forms might be nicer.
















I feel for Madonna. I think she gets a bad rap in general, when she means well. I'm not at all into her music, except for a few really well written songs that are great as done by other artists and acoustically, but I do like to watch her dance and I like how she metamorphosizes and shows the world some interesting and edgy influences. She is also a good example of the proper use of plastic surgery and all that, I guess, but at some point, it seems like maybe she should let herself slide just a little into over 39-hood. That said, I was not impressed with what she did yesterday and I find the gypsy music thing a little squeaky and agonizing. Its like the Vivaldi of country music...almost bluegrass...and I just cant take much of it at all. The dancing was good though and she looks great.






















The Police....well, what can I say about Sting? I don't exactly hate him, but I really dont understand him and what he seems to like. He is a hack, and thats about the only thing I can say. I am in awe of how scary he looks in his perfectly sculpted and yoga-ed physique, and his tantric sex honed country gentleman persona, superimposed on his Celine Dion-boring music. So, it was with recognition of that repetitive boringness that I reconfirmed what I always thought: The things that were/are great about the Police are centered around the brilliant Copeland drumming, which is so impressive as to be breathtaking, (and he is still the cute one, as far as I'm concerned,) and Summer's fantastic guitar hooks that became some of the most recognizable anthems of their time.
As far as Sting's ability to write "well-crafted pop songs," or whatever, I don't buy it. he wheezes and whines and repeats the same phrase over and over until you're numb. I cant imagine wanting to see them in concert, but it was a nice blast to have a look there...
And of course Sing has been very involved with the rain forest movement, so I have to at least appreciate his social work.

Kids these days....My 13 year old drummer of a son who is starting to look like a tall rock god on is good days, was temporarily caught up in AFI and whoever else was spouting that noise with those funny haircuts and...god, I don't know...I don't know. They just SUCK!! ...and not in the Elvs wiggling his hips sort of way...they just really suck....But after arguing serious music theory and the importance of drummers like Pete Thomas and Ringo Star, and lyricists like Lennon and McManus, well, I can't go there anymore. The thing is that the drummers are not as FAST as Joey Jorgeson of Slipknot; the lyrics of days gone by do not speak to a disaffection that us old folks couldnt ever appreciate...please! Even I could see the pathos of the Cookie Monster and the OCD of the Count all these years...Why can he not at least defer on a certain snippet of what may be the entire popular music canon, fer Christ's sake...
So, when he gets up maybe I will scan through the clips on MSN entertainment and show him old Copeland saving his band and the world in his own little way.

Give me short, sweet and non-repetitive anytime...Elvis Costello in his prime, The Beatles...hell, even the Stones...and if its gonna be long, make it insightful, like a young Springsteen or Dylan doing Sad Eyed Lady of the Lowlands, which took up a whole side of vinyl!

Sam Seder is on today at 4-ish, and I am so happy to not be in the city...and maybe have a chance to listen to him live and blog along or whatever...depending on how much I get done beforehand. This dearth of good liberal voices during the week is really dispiriting and wearing.
How did it come to this? Why is it that so few entities control the output of so much information?








Back to work for me...I am going to post the pictures from origami and gay pride very soon...It seems like its been a long time and sooner than I know it I'm gonna be at YearlyKos hanging around doing not much...wasting carbon apparently

















And yes, I finally ordered my specialty chicks!! I got around 9 of the most interesting types that will winter well, and that are especially friendly and cuddly. Im less interested in the laying, but I'm sure that we will get plenty of eggs. One chick will even lay light blue and light green eggs. Im just not sure how big they will be...but considering that I just made easy over Japanese quail eggs for the boys (an experiment from the Japanese grocery store,) I'm sure it wont matter....
I'm concerned with the security of these guys when they move outside, so when my friend brings the coop (that he built for someone else who has since sold the his house and moved,) I am goign to have it doubled up on the heavy wire and have a cement floor and sunken fence put in...Im hearing alot of horror stories abotu feet and beaks flung about and weasels who suck the blood and leave just the body...So I am getting a special security light and building a fucking wall if I have to! So much for the natural farm life of mini goats and chickens running round...I need a shotgun! (just kidding!)




















Labels: , , , , ,

2 Comments:

Blogger Jill said...

John Mayer is much more talented than his material would indicate. Sure, he fascinates because of his Mark Ruffalo Really Cute In An Ugly Kind of Way looks and because he so clearly still thinks with the wrong part of his anatomy...I mean, Jessica fucking Simpson? Or fucking Jessica Simpson, as the case may be? You gotta be shitting me.

I'm glad someone else finds Sting as annoying as I do. A guy who has spawned six children and has a $35,000/month house in Malibu Colony has nothing to say to ME about "learning to be happy with less." This is the kind of guy that gives credibility to people who bash John Edwards' concern for the poor.

But therein lies my problem with this whole event, and trying to reconcile my annoyance at being lectured to by rich rock stars with my support for John Edwards. And trying to tie it all in with Angelina Jolie, whom I really ought to hate. I mean, this is a woman that if she's working with your husband, you'd better get your financial house in order because he won't be by the time she gets through. But say what you will, the woman walks the walk, she doesn't just talk the talk (*cough* Madonna *cough*).

There's clearly a blog entry in here somewhere....

Good points about Al Gore, too. Funny how everyone has forgotten that he thought Joe Liberman would be a great vice-president.

12:54 PM  
Blogger Melina said...

As a capitalist democracy we are supposed to embrace the inequities of the system because that rich person could be us if we win the lottery(and then we would WANT the tax cuts and the lax regulations...so, just in case...)...but it seems to me that the whole thing works better if the gap between the worker and the ceo isn't as wide as its become. Who could have ever thought that the difference would become so wide after deregulation?
This fact alone should be some indication that deregulated capitalism does not work. It is flawed because it depends on the presumption that humans have innate morality and ethics without actually learning them through religion or education. I remember so clearly Reagan explaining how there was no reason to have the sort of regulation we have because people and corporations are perfectly capable of regulating themselves.
That said, I don't know if we can blame those who profit fairly in this system . We don't know the particular charitable donation records of these examples, but one thing we do know is that all of them have put alot of their time towards causes. Maybe the difference would be the gap between what we know they have to give away for tax reasons and what they freely give beyond that. And surely time is probably the hardest thing to give as a busy adult with kids and a busy career.
Im not ready to condemn any of them for living one way or another because they made the money honestly and they give alot of time and money to causes.
I just cant hold it against them that they make an obscene amount of money for what they do...but then, the oil brokers also do, and there is evidence that their industry hurts the planet, even as maybe they give money to causes.
I don't know how to judge anyone anymore because the system is so broken and its hard to tell if its the fault of the individual or the whole society. Clearly we need changes in the entire society and system or the whole thing is gonna fall apart.
Sting may live in the Malibu colony, but I would expect that he needs the security and...hell, he can...its beautiful there and he has the money to do it.
I'm personally not too comfortable in a huge house...but I would like a little more space than what I have right now. Where do I draw the line and what does it mean?
I dont want to have to walk a mile to get some ice cream at night....Ive been in houses like that, and I figure that if you cant hear the doorbell ring from your bedroom, its too big.
But the thing is, what message do you give if you drive a Hummer where you will never need a 4WD, or if you live alone in the hugest castle? Should we spend alot of time worrying about what other people think? How much should we give before we allow ourselves that huge house if thats what we've always wanted?
Some people get $1000 haircuts and eat discount food, some people spend $1000 on a bottle of wine or a piece of art...how can we judge if its better to buy a quiet stock certificate or invest in our house?

For what its worth, I grew up in the film business, in a family of directors and artists, and my experience with the business and with actors in particular, is that
each job and set is a tiring and intense experience for everyone involved, and that relationships tend to be formed and fall apart very easily. Anyone who travels knows how hard it is to go home and reestablish relationships...imagine doing that all the time.

Anyone married to Billy Bob Thorton, or Angelina Jolie or any "star" or alpha ego person must realize that they have to be ...er...there, if they want to be sure that no one is swept up in what happens and the separations involved. Im not so sure that relationships between actors (or anyone for that matter) can work in the long run without one and then another making the sacrifice for the other in turn...and that seems to be what Brangelina are doing now. I don't know if its fair to call her a homewrecker for being young and for doing what a million people do every day, especially when theyre young.... which is being stupid, young, and falling in love with one person then another then another...
at least along the way she is trying to do good works...and hopefully growing up, so that her insane amount of kids are not drawn into her drama.
I like Angelina (named one of my dogs after her, even,)...the rest, I dunno...but Im not ready to be knee jerk about anyone who is living in a fishbowl and held to a higher standard the the rest of us.
Even Madonna (who may be a bitch in real life, as Ive heard, but who really knows?) has done quite a bit as far as orphans and orphanages and charity. She has always been there for charity events and the like...

The real important question is about John Edwards, and can we have a President who earns his money as a percentage of a settlement...as opposed to say, a rich guy who is a stock owner and makes his money as a...um, percentage of earnings, or whatever....
I dont see the difference, except that he supposedly picks cases he cares about and goes for it as an all or nothing proposition. As far as it being a gamble, he works harder to make sure that the settlement is huge, not just for the point of the case and the plaintiff, but because then he earns more.
I think that the bad lawyer thing comes when a lawyer takes cases with no merit and cases that they don't believe in, just to earn the money.
I don't see that in Edwards. And I don't understand why the difference between bad and good lawyers and cases is not spelled out or argued more clearly.
Again, its a system that depends on the honesty and ethics of the players and without some sort of regulation its hard to know where the line should be drawn. I guess its hard to lump it all together because not all rich people are bad and not all lawyers are bad...
This is a very important subject because the entire field of candidates is made up of rich people, yet we hold Edwards richness against him and to a different standard...
If he is giving a huge amount of money and time, and he can still afford the house, should he not build it? because its unseemly?
Thats the question.

This whole society needs some sort of disgustingly over the top offsets...which we call, here in CT, a luxury tax...in that, if you're going to have the fanciest car in town, you need to pay a big tax on it. And that tax should go to poor people who have no cars. but I don't think it works that way;-)
I think that we used to have a corporate version of that and it was called the windfall tax...I don't know if it exists anymore, but if it does its greatly reduced.

does any of that make sense?...if not, I plead exhaustion and confusion!

8:54 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

<< Home


Site Counter