<< January 2005 | February 2005 | March 2005 >>
February 28, 2005

Movies: Million Dollar Baby

For a guy who has absolutely no interest in the sport of boxing, I sure loves me some boxing movies. Raging Bull, When We Were Kings, Southpaw. I saw Rocky for the first time a few weeks ago and thought it was fantastic.

So I was predisposed to like Million Dollar Baby -- the "boxing movie" element of it, at any rate. At the same time, I didn't have the highest of expectations for the film. I had been completely underwhelmed by Eastwood's last film, Mystic River. Even while the critics raved, I couldn't help but think that it was just a pastiche of scenes and characters from other, better mob movies, that, when paired with an over-long run time, made for a mediocre movie at best.

That's pretty much all I knew about the movie when I entered the theater last week. And if that all you know about it now, do yourself a favor and skip the rest of this review and just go see it. But I find it almost impossible to believe that anyone can not know more, now that the film has up and won the Best Picture Oscar. So the rest of you, read on.

Maggie is thirty, from the wrong side of town park, certain that she wants to be boxer and certain that Frankie Dunn is the one who should train her. Frankie is seventy, owner of a boxing club, and certain of only one thing: he doesn't want to train Maggie. But Maggie wins him over with perseverance and charm, and, with Frankie in her corner, begins an amazing ascent to the top of first her class, and then the sport of women's boxing itself. meanwhile, the father-daughter bond between the two grows ever stronger.

Boxing movies like to pretend that they are really relationship movies, that the sparring is metaphor for the struggle we must all fight to communicate with others. But for most, this facade is fairly superficial. Million Dollar Baby turns out to be an honest-to-goodness relationship movie, even going so far as to drop the boxing analogy about two-thirds of the way through. I didn't know this was going to happen, and even after it did I kept waiting for the boxing movie to resume. When it finally dawned on me that film had completely metmorphasized from one genre to another, I was pleasantly surprised, and walked out of the cinema thinking it had been one of the best movies I'd seen in a spell.

But here's the thing, folks: I strongly suspect that if I'd known that this was going to be a relationship film from the get-go, I wouldn't liked it nearly as much. I may have hated it, even. Because, I retrospect, it occurs to me that the whole thing was freighted down with lots and lots of cliched sentimental clap-trap, the sort of stuff you found in every relationship movie ever made. I even recognized this at the time, but, thinking that I was watching a boxing movie, gave it a pass -- much as you might excuse the execrable love scenes in The Matrix: Reloaded, thinking, we'll, it's an adventure movie, not a romance. (The rest of Reloaded was, alas, inexcusable.) Were I to see Million Dollar Baby a second time (and I won't), I'm guessing I would have much the same reaction to this film as I did to Mystic River: "I've seen all of this before, and Eastwood hasn't improved it a smidgen."

But all that is speculation. What I know for a fact is this: I expected to like Million Dollar Baby because it was a boxing movie, and wound up loving it because it was not. I'm hesitant to recommended it to anyone who knows more about it than I did going in (e.g., anyone who read this whole review), but if you are one of those people who (like me) just reads the first paragraph and last line of reviews to avoid spoiling movies you have yet to see, check this one out.

February 25, 2005

checkout -d belly burgers fries cola

I was in Washington DC for a few days last week, and noticed that the McDonald's there are under CVS.

I think that's a pretty good idea. That way they can quickly rollback to an earlier version of the menu a few weeks after introducing some abomination like the McRibs.

Note: If you don't get this joke, consider yourself lucky that you're not as big a nerd as the people who do.
February 24, 2005

Books: The Curious Incident Of The Dog In The Night-Time and Vernon God Little

Note: This review is part of the Booklist 2005 Project.

Note: This review contains minor spoilers for Curious Incident ... but you may enjoy the book more for knowing them.

Do you ever do that thing where you make a to-do list, and you intentionally include a few tasks that you have already completed so you can have the satisfaction of crossing them off immediately?

I do that. In fact, I did it just last week.

When I recently groused that "I can't say that I read any particularly outstanding fiction books in 2004" and asked for recommendations, so many people mentioned The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time by Mark Haddon that I felt obligated to add it to the Booklist 2005 Project. This, despite the Curious Incident is one of the books I read last year that left me undazzled, thus inspiring the B2K Project in the first place.

Christopher Boon is a 15-year old boy with a form of autism known as Asperger's Syndrome. Unable to relate to human beings, Christopher has a special affinity for animals, who don't baffle him with the subtleties of facial expressions, voice inflections and body language. So when a neighbor's dog is brutally murdered and he is initially accused of committing the crime, Christopher resolves to apply his (overly) analytic mind to the task of deducing the killer's identity.

Curious Incident is written in first person -- at one point, a teacher suggests to Christopher that he keep a journal of his investigation, and this book is the supposed result. Haddon does a remarkable job of showing us the world through Christopher's eyes, while still allowing the reader glimpses of how someone without Asperger's would see the situation. As Christopher interviews his neighbors, for instance, it becomes clear to the reader that many of them know much more than they are telling, even while Christopher -- unable to spot or even suspect deception -- takes their statements at face value. The author does a masterful job of weaving together these two concurrent two stories -- how Christopher sees things and how everyone else sees things -- into a single, cohesive narrative.

So I loved this book, right? Well, I did ... halfway through. At that point I told The Queen that Curious Incident was the best book I'd read in years, and that I couldn't wait to finish it so she could have a crack at it. [Spoilers begin] But shortly thereafter Christopher suddenly abandons the mystery and sets off on a journey by himself, thereby eliminating the two things I had been enjoying most: the aforementioned "parallel stories" (once he's on his own, it's pretty much all Christopher's POV all the time), and my curiosity as to how the crime was going to be "solved". Worse, Christopher's Asperger's becomes heightened as he becomes increasingly anxious during his travels, which means that the story becomes ever more packed with trivia and tangents. I appreciate that Haddon was trying to convey to the reader how the autistic mind thinks (Haddon has real-life experience working with autistics, so presumably knows of what he writes), but at one point Christopher laments about his obsession with minutia, and by then I found myself agreeing wholeheartedly. [Spoilers end]

I didn't dislike Curious Incident, I just felt a little cheated by a perceived bait-and-switch. But if you ignored the spoiler warnings and read the above paragraph, you may be avoid my fate and love the book as much as most other people appear to. (Though, truth be told, I think I would have found the last 50 pages a tad boring under any circumstances.) Recommended, if only because it's well-written and an interesting experiment.

As as long as I'm damning books that invite comparisons to Catcher In The Rye with faint praise ...

Vernon God Little caught my eye because it won the 2003 Man Booker Prize and because a blurb on the cover compared it to the movie Rushmore. It's not a bad book, but by the end I thought both the award and the comparison were unjustified.

Also written in first person, Little follows the adventures of Vernon, a teen whose best (and perhaps only) friend just went on a Columbineesque shooting rampages and killed 16 classmates before turning the gun on himself. Without a living person to blame for the atrocity, the town starts casting about for a suitable substitute, and much of the story revolves around Vernon's efforts to avoid becoming the designated scapegoat.

In many ways Vernon is as inept at dealing with people as Christopher, though his anti-social tendencies seem the result of choice rather than biology. Written in Vernon's voice, Little is full of slang and the obsessions of young males -- at one point the word "panties" appears on eight consecutive pages. This makes for some tough reading -- it's no A Clockwork Orange, but turgid nonetheless. And if it has been the same length as A Clockwork Orange (i.e., 100 pages shorter) it might have been worth the effort. Instead, it feels somewhat rambling and unfocused. And author DBC Pierre can't seem to decide how broad to make his satire, so the book oscillates from subtle social commentary to situations so hyperbolic that they could work as second-half-of-the-show Saturday Night Live sketches.

As with Curious Incident, I didn't dislike Vernon God Little. But I finished both in 2004, and my assessment that I read no "outstanding fiction" that year stands.

February 23, 2005

The GOP Plays Hardball


It's Not Too Late ...

... to Make Your own Oscar Pool Page.

[ link | dy]

February 22, 2005

One Down

The Squirrelly is one year old today. So says the calendar, at any rate. If I had to guestimate how long I've been father, based on how quickly/slowly time has flown/crawled by since Birthday #0, I'd reckon about ((F-5) + ((S*3) / (W2 - A)) - C) months, where F is my current frustration level on a scale from 1 to 10 (with 0 as "child asleep" and 10 as "in the middle of trying to change diaper while child simulates a paint shaker"), S = my current sleep debt (in hours), W = number of times in the past four weeks the kid has successfully prevented The Queen and I from wrasslin' by employing one of his many Sibling Prevention Techniques, A = number of alcoholic beverages I've consumed prior to contemplating the question, and C = his cuteness constant of 210.

Recently The Squirrelly has begun taking steps. He will stand up and take a tottering lurch toward something before giving up, resuming his quadrapedic lifestyle, and crawling to his destination in a flash. Grandpa Baldwin thinks that he will start walking-for-real by the end of the month, but, if he's anything like his father, that might be overly optimistic. I can hunt-and-peck about 70 words a minute, and although I have tried to switch to touch-typing countless times over the last 15 years, I inevitably get frustrated in mid-email and revert to my two-fingers method. Given the speed at which The Squirrelly can crawl and the genetic material he carries, he may be crawling up to receive his diploma at 18.

Still, he's a little ahead of the game, locomotion-wise. But he appears to be behind the curve in the language department. Other kids his age have said their first words, or, at the very least, wave bye-bye with a little prompting. The Squirrelly, meanwhile, has given no indication that he will be conjugating verbs anytime soon. Apparently this is normal: at one year of age there are walkers, and there are talkers, but there are very few walkie-talkies. Given a choice we would have opted for a kid who could charmingly exclaim "duck!" rather than one who can wander into the laundry room and eat "Tide" straight from the box, but it's becoming increasingly obvious that our desires and The Squirrelly's development belong to mutually exclusive sets. We wanted a kid who could clean gutters by now, for instance, and that hasn't panned out.

But he's healthy and super-fun and completely normal. We have to keep reminding ourselves of this latter fact, because, like all parents, we are constantly (and often subconsciously) comparing our child's development with that of his peers and fretting about any differences, real or imagined. It doesn't help that most parenting books focus almost exclusively on Things That Can Go Terribly, Terribly Wrong. That's why I'm going to write a book for new parents called Your Child Is Completely Normal, to serve as a counterweight to the "guides" that trade in wanton fearmongering. My book will read like this:

All the books we're read say that infants will roll over by themselves by week 14 but our baby is 14 weeks, four days old and still can't do it! Should we be concerned?

Your child is completely normal.

Our baby used to make eye contact with us all the time, but now he won't ever look at us when we speak to him. Is he becoming antisocial?

Your child is completely normal.

Junior is only four months old, but he already says sentences, like "get out!" and "Captain Howdie says no!" Also, he floats above the bed and can rotate his head 360 degrees. Is this unusual?

Your child is completely normal.

As Telly Savalas as my witness, I think this would be a best-seller.

Happy Birthday, Squirrelly -- the best years are yet to come! For your mother and I, I mean. Once you figure out that gutter-cleaning thing.

February 16, 2005

The Booklist 2005 Project

In the past, this has been my method for determining my reading list:

  1. Go to library
  2. Wander over to "new releases" section
  3. Judge books by cover
This has led me to some great stuff. Unfortunately, it has also resulted in long stretches of mediocrity.

One of those stretches was the year affectionately known as 2004, and I said as much in my annual recap. But then, as an afterthought, I asked readers to send me recommendations for future reading.

And boy-howdie, did I get 'em. And it would be a shame to let them go to waste. So this year I'm going to try the Booklist 2005 project, and try and plow through the majority of the books that were endorsed by dy readers. And although I was terribly lax about writing book reviews last year, I intend to comment on every B2K Project novel I read on these virtual pages.

Here is my current list of a dozen (Update: now 20) books. Below it are some 25 more, that I will add to the list if they receive seconds from commenters. And if you know of something that really, really ought to be on here but isn't mentioned at all, you can put that in the comments as well. (Although, given the rate at which I read books, the list as it stands is probably sufficient to keep me in fiction until 2008).

The Current List
(i.e., books that received a second and/or intrigued me)

  • Annals of the Black Company, Glen Cook [Read first 20 pages, didn't like. May try again later.]
  • Civilwarland in Bad Decline, George Saunders [Done!]
  • Cloud Atlas, David Mitchell [Done!]
  • The Corrections, Jonathan Franzen
  • The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, Mark Haddon [Done!]
  • Eastern Standard Tribe, Cory Doctorow [Done!]
  • The Elementary Particles, Michel Houellebecq
  • Freedom & Necessity, Stephen Brust and Emma Bull
  • Game of Thrones, George Martin [Have -- trying to find a sufficient block of time to read]
  • Gilead, Marilynne Robinson
  • Gringos, Charles Portis [Don't like -- abandoned.]
  • Hardboiled Wonderland And The End Of The World, Haruki Murakami
  • House of Leaves, Mark Z. Dainielewski [Done! One of my favorite books of all-time!]
  • An Instance of the Fingerpost, Iain Pears
  • Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell, Susanna Clarke
  • Oracle Night, Paul Auster [Done!]
  • Oryx and Crak, Margaret Atwood
  • Thief Lord, Cornelia Funke [Yeah, it was okay ...]
  • The Shadow of the Wind, Carlos Ruiz Zafon [Enjoyable, but not fantastic]
  • The Time Traveler's Wife, Audrey Niffenegger [Done!]
  • Wicked: The Life And Times Of The Wicked Witch Of The West, Gregory Maguire

(i.e., books in need of a second)

  • The Age of Innocence, Edith Wharton
  • Brideshead Revisited, Evelyn Waugh
  • Dirt Music, Tim Winton
  • The Coyote Kings of the Space-Age Bachelor Pad, Minister Faust
  • Facing the Music, Larry Brown
  • The Fermata, Nicholson Baker
  • Little Children, Tom Perrotta
  • The Lovely Bones, Alice Sebold
  • McCarthy's Bar, Pete McCarthy
  • The Namesake, Jhumpa Lahiri
  • Pattern Recognition, William Gibson
  • Pest Control, Bill Fitzhugh
  • The Plot Against America, Philip Rothv
  • Seven Types of Ambiguity, Elliot Perlman
  • Sock, Penn Jillette
  • Star of the Sea, Joseph O'Conner
  • Sunshine, Robin McKinley
  • The Towers of Trebizond, Rose Macaulay
  • When the Nines Roll Over, David Benioff

P.S.1. These are all fiction recommendations, because that's what I specifically asked for in my recap. But, if suggesting brand new titles, non-fiction is also welcomed.

P.S.2. Feel free to warn me away from any books I am considering if you're so inclined. You guys are picking these, so the more input the better.

Love Of Flatulation Humor Is Found On Chromosome Y

The Squirrelly recently discovered that he can press his mouth into the crook of his elbow, blow vigorously, and generate impressive farting noises. He has been doing this ever since, laughing uproariously after every performance.

Any lingering doubts that this child is mine have now been dispelled.

February 15, 2005

No Good Deed

Sunday I went to my local electronics store to browse for a new computer, and a $500 laptop caught my attention. It lacked the massive amounts of memory and storage space that come with the $1000-and-up models, but I chalked that up as a virtue rather than a fault. I intend to use the laptop for my writing, and anything that prevents me from installing or enjoying City of Heroes is a boon.

But a salesperson approached me and, without preamble, declared the laptop to be steaming mound of uselessness. "That thing ..." she said, letting the sentence trail-off and shaking her head ruefully. "If you're even considering that, you should be looking at that Sony over there." She gestured toward a model across the aisle that sold for about three times as much. "This thing is so slow, you won't be able to use it for anything."

Irritated, I adopted my msot cheerful tone and said "I'll be the judge of that. Abruptly uninterested, the saleswoman squirted off without another word.

Then as I turned back to reading the system specifications, I was waylaid by seniors.

"What do you know about this here computer?" the old man demanded, in that tone of volume of voice that I'm wont to hear from the row behind me in the movie theater.

"I don't work here," I said, "but it looks ..."

"I just want to play my games," the woman interjected.

The man confirmed. "We just want to play our games. But these salespeople, they say this computer is no good for games. They say it won't work."

"It says in the ad that this computer is $500," added the wife. "And now they tell us it doesn't even work."

She held up an insert from a newspaper, on which this very laptop was touted as an bargain on par with the Louisiana Purchase. Apparently that was this store's business model: they advertise some item as being the greatest thing since oral sex, and then station salespeople around it to snort derisively at anyone stupid enough to even glance in the featured item's direction.

"What kind of games?" I asked, suspecting that weren't talking World Of Warcraft, here.

"I like to play poker," said the man. Then he cocked his thumb back to point as the woman behind him and said "She likes to play the slots. And they say we need a thousand dollar computer to do it."

"That's ridiculous. We are in our seventies," said the woman, as if there was a well-established, scientific prinicple correlating the age of a user to his required amount of RAM.

"If you're just playing casino games, I think this computer will be just fine," I told them.

"I knew it." The man said to his wife, vindicated. "What about AOL? Does this thing have AOL?"

"Our son told us not to have a computer with AOL on it," the woman said. "He says AOL runs a lot of programs on your computer and makes it run slow."

"Well, it's not a matter of a computer 'having' AOL or not, because AOL is an ISP not a ..." I stopped and restarted. "This computer might have, like, a little AOL picture on the desktop? But if you don't want to use it you can just get delete it."

"How do we do that?" asked the man.

"Just drag the icon into the Trash," I said.

The woman looked confused. "Won't that delete the hard drive?"

This astoundingly stereotypical "technologically clueless old person" statement, combined with the phrase "hard drive", actually made me wonder if they were having one over on me, like maybe I was being featured on "Geriatric Punk'd!" or something. Or perhaps this was an modern day version of that fairy tale where the King disguises himself as a pauper and goes out amongst his subjects, rewarding those who offer him charity with riches beyond their wildest dreams. Perhaps these people were actually sent out by the store management, and by helping them out I would receive a free CDR/DVD drive.

Alas, our subsequent banter conclusively disproved the latter hypothesis.

"We're getting this computer," the man announced at last, and set off to find a salesman. The woman followed, leaving me a little irked that I hadn't even got thanked.

But there was one bright side: despite brushing off the saleswoman earlier, she had got me wondering if I really wanted this laptop, instead of that $1500 Sony over yonder. In explaining to the elderly couple that they didn't really need more than this model offered, I had also talked myself into saidsame.

Resolved, I opened my mouth to address the salesman who was approaching me. "Excuse me," I said.

"Hang on a sec," he replied. Then he reached around me and put a bright red card on the laptop I was going to buy. It read "This model is sold out." I looked over at the register and saw the old people handing over their credit card and looking satisfied that they had seen through the store's bait-and-switch scheme.

"Okay," the sales guy said. "What can I get you?"

February 14, 2005

Trials and Tribulations

A recap of my recent (and previous) jury duty adventures appears in The Morning News today.

February 07, 2005

Odds and Ends

Posting may be sporadic for the remainder of the month, as I am working on a Sooper Secret Side Project. I can't provide any specifics, except to say that it involves raw bacon and ducks.

Also, this may well become review week, as a I have a backlog of Things To Critique. So watch for those. Assuming I post anything at all this week. Which I may not.

[ link | dy]

February 04, 2005

Putting the S.S. Into S.O.S.

I received my quarterly Social Security statement today. And while I usually file these things away unread, watching Bush's SOTU address last night made me wonder if his administration had sneaked any fearmongering language into the standard boilerplate.

Shore 'nuff:

The Social Security system is facing serious future financial problems, and action is needed soon to make sure that the system is sound when today's younger workers are ready for retirement ... Unless action is taken soon to strengthen Social Security, in just 14 years we will begin paying more in benefits than we collect in taxes. Without changes, by 2042 the Social Security Trust Fund will be exhausted ... We will need to resolve these issues soon to make sure Social Security continues to provide a foundation of protection for future generations as is has done in the past.
I searched Google for the phrase "by 2042 the Social Security Trust Fund will be exhausted" and found the whole text here, along with a few news articles about the controversy.

As I understand it, the next step in the reform is to outfit all Social Security offices with flashing red lights and klaxons, and replace the personnel with 50's era robots that wave their arms above their heads and cry "Danger! Danger 803-64-7707!!"

Ah, Homophones

We bathe The Squirrelly after his dinner, and the foodstuff he is invariably covered in eventually accumulates in the basin, leading to conversations like this:

Me: Can you watch the baby for a few minutes? I want to clean the bathtub.

The Queen: Is it dirty?

M: Yeah, it's full of pea.

Q: The Squirrelly peed in the bathtub?

M: Hah. No, I mean the other kind of pea.


Q: You peed in the bathtub?

February 03, 2005

Thoughts On The SOTU

I used to write about politics fairly often on this site. And then a funny thing happened: Bush got re-elected. Please note that, by "funny," I don't mean funny "hah hah" or funny "strange," but funny "GODDAMMIT WTF??!!!"

But while the reaction of a lot of progressives to the election was to withdraw from the system and become apathetic about politics altogether, I decided to do something about it. I wrote this rousing essay, where I urged democrats to "dig in your heels, roll up your sleeves, gird your loins and get ready to fight, like the rest of us intend to do." And then, several seconds after having raged against the machine by hitting "Post," I withdrew from the system and became apathetic about politics altogether.

I didn't mean to. But on the following morning I decided that I was sick of post-election analysis and opted to forego NPR and instead listen to KEXP during my morning commute. The problem here, ladies and gentlemen, is that KEXP rocks the fuck out, and after after a few days of listening to it even a married and beinfanted guy like me starts to feel like he's kind of cool, and will continue to remain cool as long as he never, ever listens to "Morning Edition" again. I have therefore spent my mornings since listening to "Pretty Girls Make Graves" instead of Steve Inskeep. And this, combined with the fact that I never watch TV and stopped reading political blogs, has left me fairly ignorant (and blissful) about the current state of the body politic.

But since yesterday encompassed both Groundhogs Day and the State of the Union address, I figured I'd poke my head out of my hole, take a look around, and decide how many more weeks I was going to hibernate. So I watched the SOTU.

Overall I thought it was a pretty good speech: specific at times, poetic in others, well-written and well-delivered. I have no doubt that it was essentially an hour of ad copy chock full of distortions and exaggerations that stop just shy of out-and-out falsehood, but I expect that of any SOTU, regardless of who's on the dais. I mean, c'mon: what President is going to get up there and say "members of Congress, fellow citizens: the state of our Union is fair-to-middling."

Some notes:

  • Words into the speech before Bush boasts about getting re-elected: 19. Words into the speech before Bush boasts about the successful election in Iraq: 54.
  • "When action was needed, the Congress delivered -- and the nation is grateful." I hate it when politicians get up in front of the nation and announce what the nation feels. Do they think they can just bully the weak-minded into adopting the specified emotion? "My fellow Americans, these are not the droids the nation is looking for."
  • So let me get this straight: we reform Social Security by gradually phasing in a system where people can voluntarily invest a portion of their money into the stock market in preparation for retirement. But people can already voluntarily invest in the market, for retirement or otherwise. The difference, here, is that people will be paying less into S.S. (with the rest going into the market) -- and, consequentially, getting less of a payout directly from S.S. So am I wrong in thinking that this reform basically amounts to massive scaling back of Social Security, with the Administration trying to disguise this fact by claiming that any profit a person makes investing his own money in the market is, in fact, a S.S. benefit? I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but that's got to be one of the most convoluted ways to avoid admitting you're gutting a program in recent history.
  • "I have a message for every American who is 55 or older ... for you, the Social Security system will not change in any way." Wow, that sucks for Morgan Fairchild, who turned 55 today. I guess she missed out.
  • Apparently the First Lady is going to personally "take on gang life". It will be just like West-Side Story.
    Snap! Snap! Snap! Snap!
    When you're a Bush
    You're a Bush all the way
    From your fake Texas twang
    To your three naps a day ...
  • "As we update this important law, we must focus our efforts on fellow citizens with the highest rates of new cases [of HIV], African American men and women." Honestly curious: I wonder what the rationale is for having him say "African American men and women" instead of just "African Americans". Just a better cadence?
  • "We will pass along to our children all the freedoms we enjoy -- and chief among them is freedom from fear." Oh, we're free from fear now? You guys spent that last three years sounding the terror alert every Thursday and insisting that Saddam Hussein was 14 minutes away from acquiring Giant Carnivorous Robots, but now that Bush is re-elected I guess we're in the clear.
  • Two paragraphs later: "The al Qaeda terror network that attacked our country still has leaders ... there are still governments that sponsor and harbor terrorists ... there are still regimes seeking weapons of mass destruction ... our country is still the target of terrorists who want to kill many, and intimidate us all ..." Wow, that freedom from fear was awesome while it lasted!!
  • "Thank you, and may God bless America." Wait, don't you usually say "and may God continue to bless America"? Did God stop blessing us at some point in the last few months? Was it because of the Ashlee Simpson debacle?
  • This seemed the least macho and jingoistic of the SOTUs Bush has given, no doubt because it's the first in a spell that wasn't almost entirely devoted to one war (Terror) or another (Iraq). You can't really say "we're gonna hunt down opponents of social security reform, and we ... will .. kill them."
One last observation. I'm not a knee-jerk Bush-hater (I have to work at it), but whenever Bush would deliver some guaranteed applause-generating line and then smile smugly at the predictable results, I found myself profoundly irked. As Johnathan Chait points out in this New Republic essay, the thing that infuriates many people about Bush is the way he seems to honestly believe he worked his way to the top, despite all the strings that have been pulled on his behalf over the years. Or, as Jim Hightower succinctly put it, "He is a man who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple." And that smile, throughout the SOTU, just reinforced this impression in the minds of people like me. Here's Dubya, delivering a amply-rehearsed speech that he didn't write in front of a aggressively receptive and obsequious audience, smarming out unarguable platitudes like "taxpayer dollars must be spent wisely or not at all," and when people whoop and applaud he beams like he just ad-libbed an exceptionally clever riposte at a cocktail party. Drives, me, nuts.

But, man, don't even get me started on the Democratic response:

"I'm Harry Reid, and when I was your age you could buy horehound candy at the Searchlight general store for a ha'penny."


February 01, 2005

Alone In The Dark

defective yeti has apparently become the Bad Alone In The Dark Review clearinghouse, so if you haven't reread my initial entry on the movie since it was posted, you might want to take another gander -- it's been revised several times and the abysmal rating continue to pour in.

Daddy Types = Fact-Checked

Today I do some record straight-setting over at Daddy Types.