The Green Thing

Subject: Green Thing
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 13:33:12 -0400
From: William Leggett
To: 'piper265'

The Green Thing

In the line at the store, the cashier told an older woman that she should bring her own grocery bags because plastic bags weren't good for the environment.


The woman apologized to him and explained, "We didn't have the green thing back in my day."

The clerk responded, "That's our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save our environment."


He was right -- our generation didn't have the green thing in its day.


Back then, we returned milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really were recycled.


But we didn't have the green thing back in our day.


We walked up stairs, because we didn't have an escalator in every store and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks.


But she was right. We didn't have the green thing in our day.


Back then, we washed the baby's diapers because we didn't have the throw-away kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy gobbling machine burning up 220 volts -- wind and solar power really did dry the clothes. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing. But that old lady is right; we didn't have the green thing back in our day.


Back then, we had one TV, or radio, in the house -- not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief (remember them?), not a screen the size of the state of Montana .

In the kitchen, we blended and stirred by hand because we didn't have electric machines to do everything for us.

When we packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, we used a wadded up old newspaper to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap.

Back then, we didn't fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power. We exercised by working so we didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity.


But she's right; we didn't have the green thing back then.

We drank from a fountain when we were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time we had a drink of water.

We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull.


But we didn't have the green thing back then.


Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service.

We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And we didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 2,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest pizza joint.


But isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we old folks were just because we didn't have the green thing back then?

Please forward this on to another selfish old person who needs a lesson in conservation from a smartbutt young person.

Sandra Bullock Movies- Love, Like, Loath

“Actress chosen for me by Val Maas-
My choice of either Francis McDormand or Sandra Bullock”:

This is so not a choice- I have to go with my hometown crush, Sandra Bullock.

Movies of hers I love- Thing Called Love & While You Were Sleeping (When I first developed my celebrity crush and when it was solidified permanently).

Movies of hers I like- Forces Of Nature & Murder By Numbers (When she stretched in the roles she took and displayed her innate talent and charm).

Movies of hers I loath- Speed 2 and In Love & War (Because they suck so bad, despite Sandra’s efforts although honestly, she did suck in In Love And War.)

So, anyone else want to play? “Like” my status and I’ll select someone for you.

Dennis DeYoung Set List (2011)

Dennis DeYoung- (Opening For Pat Benetar)
July 15, 2011 ($70.00- Pier Six Pavilion, Baltimore)

Dennis wore sunglasses & casual, all white clothes, like a rock & roll Steve Martin.

Songs (From Album)

1 Grand Illusion (Grand Illusion)
2 Lady (Styx I)
3 Loreli (Equinox)
4 Blue Collar Man (Pieces Of Eight)

Sung by the Tommy Shaw "clone". It was a thunderous, awesome version!
Kudos to the JY "clone" (even the hair & scruffy beard was the same!)

5 Show Me The Way(Edge Of The Century)
6 Mr. Roboto (Kilroy Was Here)
7 Too Much Time On My Hands (Paradise Theatre)

"Tommy" did all the Tommy parts

8 Babe (Cornerstone)
9 Fooling Yourself (Grand Illusion)

"From Styx's greatest album- Abbey Road" ... Dennis said tongue-in-cheek

10 Rocking The Paradise (Paradise Theatre)
11 Best Of Times (Paradise Theatre)
12 The End (Beatles cover- Abbey Road)

Encore: -------

13 Renegade (Pieces Of Eight)
14 Come Sail Away (Grand Illusion)

Why Feud With Zooey Deschanel? Is She Evil Somehow?

For some reason, an LA Times writer decided to personally attack Zooey Deschanel. She wasn't making a point about spoiled celebrities, she just felt compelled to unload on Zooey for no apparent reason. This just seems mean and spiteful because her "opinion piece" had no point except to call Zooey a cow and dump a load of bile on her. Is this the new kind of journalism that the internet culture is going to bring us?

Downtown L.A.: Good Enough For The Royals, But Not For Zooey Deschanel?
(Patt Morrison, LA Times, July 10, 2011)

I can't believe Zooey Deschanel is really the snobby cow she came off sounding like Saturday evening.
The actress was a guest at the black-tie Hollywood BAFTA gala in downtown Los Angeles for the royal Cambridges, William and Kate. To my friend and former Times colleague Claudia Puig, now the USA Today critic and film writer, Ms. Deschanel worried aloud that the neighborhood around the fabulously restored Belasco Theatre might look shabby to the regal couple. "I just don't want them to see the worst of L.A.," said Deschanel. Excuse me? Downtown, the worst of L.A.?

What, Ms. Deschanel, you don’t have any homeless people there near your Westside home? Or does that not count, because they’re on the beach, not the sidewalks? Of course there are thousands of down-and-out folks in downtown L.A. I cannot apologize enough to Ms. Deschanel that in some places, the sidewalks do not smell like Jo Malone candles. There are also million-dollar lofts downtown -- like the ones in the Eastern Columbia building, not far from the Belasco theatre. There is the venerable Grand Central Market, the spectacular Central Library, the Oviatt Building, the jewelry district and the fashion district and MOCA. The royals might have marveled, "Oooh, what’s that?" as they helicoptered downtown above the splendid Disney Concert Hall.

Beyond the polo and the Hollywood glam events in California, in their less than 48-hours here, the royals may have seen more of "real L.A." than many Angelenos have. Just as William’s aunt, Princess Anne, the princess royal, visited Para Los Ninos on Skid Row a generation ago, and put that program on the map, the Cambridges went to an inner-city arts school downtown and to a jobs program for unemployed veterans on the Sony studios lot. This was a working trip for William and Kate; it was, in the main, about good deeds, not good times. And isn’t it possible the royals get tired of red carpets and roses? People naturally want to spiff up for a royal arrival -– there’s the story of an old English lady who got down on her hands and knees with a toothbrush and a bottle of ink to spiff up a carpet for the Queen Mother’s visit.

Maybe these young royals probably actually want to get a look at real reality once in a while. For decades, the royals have had to put in very public good-deed time to help to justify who they are and how they live. Queen Mary, the present queen’s grandmother, supposedly told her daughter, when the girl complained that she was so tired of visiting all those icky hospitals, "We are the British royal family. We all love hospitals, and we are never tired." Prince William has spent time at British charities for the luckless; a couple of years ago, he stayed out a night, "sleeping rough" among London’s homeless, to get a taste, and a smell, of living on the street. Of course it was a staged event. Of course he had security, and of course he could walk right back into a luxurious life the next day, which his fellow street dossers could not. But he did it.

Ms. Deschanel’s remarks are all the more gob-smacking because the success of her 2009 film "[500] Days of Summer" is chiefly thanks to … downtown L.A. The Times said the architecture is the star of the film, from the Music Center to the towering California Plaza and the haunting [and maybe haunted -– it was built on the advice of a Ouija board] Bradbury Building. Did Ms. Deschanel not look any farther than her trailer door? Maybe spending a little time at the inner-city arts school, or at the downtown women’s shelter, might do her even more good than it could do to help out those laudable places. I mean, if it’s not too hard for her to set foot once again in "the worst of L.A."

http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2011/07/downtown-la-good-enough-for-the-royals-but-not-for-zooey-deschanel.html

An Open Letter To Los Angeles Times Writer Patt Morrisson
(By Zooey Deschanel, HelloGiggles website, July 11, 2011)

This is an open letter in response to a piece entitled Downtown LA: Good enough for the royals, but not for Zooey Deschanel?, written by columnist Patt Morrison, which appeared in the publication on July 10, 2011.

Dear Ms. Morrison,

I feel compelled to respond to your recent blog post regarding comments I “allegedly” made outside the BAFTA dinner on Saturday night. I never spoke to you at this event; in fact, you weren’t even there. I am completely and utterly shocked that a professional journalist, whom I have never met, would take a partial quote out of context and use it as the basis for a misguided personal attack. Further, I find it appalling that you would resort to name-calling to get your point across. In a court of law this would be called hearsay, and in journalism, I believe this should be the beginning of an investigation, not the end of one.

Let me be clear: the quote from USA TODAY that you used as the foundation of your piece was taken completely out of context. I NEVER said that Downtown LA was “the worst of LA”. I did make a reference to a parking lot adjacent to the theater that had a lot of trash in it in an attempt to be humorous. I simply said, “It’s funny they brought royalty here, there is a parking lot with trash around the corner.” It wasn’t an opinion. It was true. There was indeed a parking lot with trash around the corner. I thought that the juxtaposition of British Royalty and trash was amusing in a high-brow + low brow sort of way, but I never said that I, personally, didn’t like downtown, the Royals, or even trash.

I LOVE DOWNTOWN LA and I relish any opportunity to spend time there. I have pride in my city, that’s the reason why I thought it was kind of funny that they didn’t clean up the immediate surroundings before the Royals came through. In the end, of course, it didn’t actually matter since those two crazy kids were flown in by helicopter anyway. Silly me. Regardless, I don’t even think I need to defend my love of Los Angeles. I am a native Angelino, and had you done any research at all, you would have found that I have been quoted in the press on numerous occasions talking about how much I love Downtown.

In your piece, the character you’ve created of “me” is actually pretty funny. I don’t know who this person is, but it seems as if you’ve borrowed her from the Susan Lucci repertoire. You make so many far-fetched conclusions; for one thing, you state, “go back to your house on the Westside.” Well, I can’t do that because I do not live on the Westside. You also open your piece by calling me a “cow”, which might be your opinion, but I wish a journalist for the Los Angeles Times and KPCC had found a more sophisticated way of sharing a difference in perceived opinion.

It’s hard for me to comprehend why you launched such a vile and toxic blow in my direction over a sentence fragment that you did not even hear for yourself. I do hope that in the future when writing about something, especially a human being, you will consider both the facts and context before publishing your opinion.

Sincerely,
Zooey Deschanel

http://hellogiggles.com/an-open-letter-to-los-angeles-times-writer-patt-morrisson


In Zooey Deschanel Feud, L.A. Times Writer Sticks To Her Guns
(By Jen Chaney, Washington Post Celebritology column, July 12, 2011)

First L.A. Times columnist Patt Morrison wrote an opinion piece slamming Zooey Deschanel for making what she characterized as snobby comments about downtown Los Angeles during Saturday’s BAFTA gala featuring Prince William and Duchess Catherine. Then Deschanel wrote an open letter on her Web site slamming Morrison for writing a column that Deschanel described as inaccurate (she noted that she does not live on the Westside of L.A., as Morrison contended) and a “vile and toxic blow in my direction.” Morrison has issued a response to that, via an e-mail to Celebritology and an open letter of her own. The upshot: she stands by what she wrote. In the open letter, posted to the L.A. Times Web site yesterday evening (July 11, 2011), Morrison writes:

Because I love downtown L.A., warts and all, and because Zooey Deschanel is a talented and charming actress, I am happy to hear that she really does love downtown Los Angeles. After all, my post on Deschanel's observations began with my surprise at what she said to reporters Saturday evening at the Belasco Theatre, where the British Academy of Film and Television Arts, or BAFTA, hosted a party for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. In addition to her saying "I just don’t want them to see the worst of L.A.," she said, "This is such a big deal and there are, like, parking lots filled with trash all the way here. I hope they helicopter them in past that."

Downtown can be a tough place to love, but as I wrote, I think the royals, with their insulated lives, may actually appreciate getting a whiff of something other than roses once in a while. I also wrote that Deschanel lives on the Westside -- not so, say her people. But it's not like it wasn't checked: Voter registration records show that as of last November's election, she was registered to vote at an address in Pacific Palisades. I hope Deschanel will head back to greater downtown L.A. one of these days. The vegetarian breakfasts at the Homegirl Cafe? I can't recommend them enough.

In a response to my e-mail request for comment, the L.A. Times issued this statement, “As a Los Angeles Times Op-Ed columnist, Patt Morrison’s job is to voice opinions. Like our other columnists, her tone and choice of words reflect her own feelings.” As for Deschanel, she has not responded to Morrison’s response but she has tweeted thank yous to several of her Hollywood colleagues who voiced their support for her open letter. Among them: Jonah Hill, Mindy Kaling, Minka Kelly and “Glee’s” Lea Michele.

What I'm Checking Out This Month (June 2011)

Here are the various entertainment things I’m listening to, watching or reading this month.

Movies:

Pirates Of The Caribbean- I wasn’t expecting much when I went to see this because the reviews weren’t very positive but I was bored and wanted to see something. Turns out it was the right choice for that day because it was loads of fun. The story was pretty basic- searching for the Fountain Of Youth- and much simpler than the convoluted plotlines of the second and third Pirates. Apparently Johnny Depp worked with the producers on getting the script right. It works because the movie highlights what you like about the series- quests for enchanted items, Captain Jack Sparrow improvising amazing escapes and dropping saucy comments and colorful secondary characters keeping things lively. Here, Ian McShane’s Blackbeard is a compelling character and pretty terrifying and Geoffrey Rush is back as the amusing Barbosa. No Orlando Bloom though. Not that I care though that does mean no Keira Knightley either and I always enjoy watching her. The one disappointment is the swordfights but I’m always disappointed by sword fights these days, in any movie. They all suffer from ADD editing. There is no build up in tension or sense of danger. It’s 5 seconds of fighting, then a cut to some other angle or incident, then back to another series of clanging swords. I want to see drama in the fighting, I want to see close calls and strategy. I want a real sword fight, like in the movie Rob Roy. If you aren’t going to play it seriously, at least make it protracted and visually stirring like in the 1974 version of The Three Musketeers.

Kung Fu Panda 2- No, I didn’t see this. I was just seeing if you were paying attention. Why would I pay to see 1) A movie with Jack Black in the lead, 2) An animated kid’s movie not made by Pixar, 3) Um, I think the first two items pretty much say it all. I’ll watch this on cable just like I did the first one. I don’t need to pay $10 to see it now. Even if it is in 3-D.

Super 8- The trailer for this made it seem more like Cloverfield than The Goonies but in reality it is a movie made for kids. This is not to say it is a kid’s movie. A kid’s movie is one that is specifically designed to contain the elements a producer thinks kids want to see, like cute animals or wisecracking sidekicks or slapstick and bathroom humor or simplistic plotlines. Super 8 is a normal movie that will be appreciated the most by ten-to-fifteen year-olds. Adults will find it too simplistic and predictable, little kids will find it too scary while teenagers will find it to be too sincere. It’s a combination of modern day monster movie and boy meets girl story- kind of E.T. meets Stand By Me meets Platoon.

X-Men: First Class- Awesome. This is a great looking, engrossing X-Men movie. I was appalled with the previous one (Last Stand) by director Brett Ratner, mainly because it royally screwed up the Dark Phoenix saga. Yes, this movie screws with the Marvel Comics storylines too but does it properly. The essence of the back history remains the same, just some of the events and characters are adjusted. The tone of the story is true its’ source material. Besides, none of the movies were entirely faithful to the comic books. This movie follows a young Charles Xavier, before he becomes Professor X, and how the X-Men came to be. The interplay between Xavier and the future Magneto is interesting and the Cold War backdrop fits well with the ethos of the series. The exploration of the characters and their motivations was fascinating and engrossing. I wouldn’t have minded another half-hour added to this movie, which is already two and quarter hours long. If I had any complaint, it would be that there isn’t enough action. I wanted to see more fighting and the mutants using their powers in action, not just learning how to use them. I’m really looking forward to the next movie and hope it builds on this one.

Green Lantern: I enjoyed this for what it was. It didn’t have any of the gravitas you’ve come to expect from The X-Men movies, but at least it wasn’t as stupid as Thor. From reading the comic books as a kid, I don’t recall Green Lantern/Hal Jordan being as flippant and dissolute as he’s portrayed in the movie. I think that was done to “modernize” the character or maybe to make the goofy ring projections seem less jarring than if they were juxtaposed with a serious character. The sets and special effects worked, and the sstory was a bit stronger than I thought it would be although the ending was pretty perfunctory. I expected more visual fireworks and drama after all the build-up. Props to the director too- Martin Campbell (Goldeneye, Casino Royale, Zorro)- for making it work. He got good performances from the actors- especially the guy playing Sinistro- and kept the special effects from overwhelming the more dramatic parts of the movie.

Hangover 2: If you liked the raunchy humor of the original movie, you’ll like this. If you liked the “WTF” moments from the original, you’ll be less enamored with this iteration. Rather than shocking you with unexpected plot twists and bizarre humor, this time the filmmakers try to shock you with just plain disturbing scenes. In the first movie, when Ken Jeong jumped naked out of the trunk of a car, you were surprised and astonished. In the second movie, he jumps out of an ice chest but you see that coming from a mile away and the nakedness is done by transsexuals in a club, also something you see coming from yards away (not quite miles but at least a few feet away). Both of these are in here just to recreate what worked well in the first movie and since it is gratuitous (on so many levels) it doesn’t work as well. It’s not a bad movie it just not original, something that should not surprise me considering there is a 2 in the title of the movie.


Plays:

Venus In Fur (Studio Theatre)- I loved this play. It was an examination of the treatment of women in the theatre, and by extension how they are treated in life by the men they interact with. Are they whores or submissives or equal partners or superiors? Are people only what they seem like on the surface or if you look deeper will you find their real essence? The plot is straight-forward- a women arrives late to an audition for a part in a play and the director is so tired of seeing the same pathetic actresses vying for the role that he just wants to go home. The late-arrival seems like a stereotypical actress but every time the director is about to leave, she surprises him by showing another layer to her character and her acting ability so he stays a little longer. The actress impressively switches between her characters Marisa Tomei-like “real” personality and her Kate Winslet-like acting ability. Right there you know I would like the play since the main character is channeling the wonderful and adorable Marisa Tomei. What hooks you though is how she controls the situation even though she is the aspirant, the one trying to win the role and keep the director from leaving. It reminded me of Edward Albee’s The Zoo Story, the way one person kept drawing the other back into conversation.

TV Shows:

French Open- Going into the first weekend of June, we have the top four players in the world competing for the men’s title. Oops- Nadal just beat Murray in straight sets, no tiebreaks either, to get to the finals. I’m not sure if I want Federer to beat Djokovich and then lose to Nadal in the final or if I want him to lose now and be forced to watch two other people play for the title. Either way, I ultimately want Federer to lose in a painful way. About the only scenario that would make me unhappy is if he won the whole thing. (Hope God wasn’t listening just now. Although God can’t be a Federer fan, can He? Even so, I’m too insignificant for Him to waste time making me unhappy or else He would already have gotten me a shrew-ish wife to torment me.) [Editor’s note- Nadal won. Stomped Federer in 4 sets and took his record tying 6th French Open win.]

Breakout Kings- This isn’t a bad show considering it is on A&E but it is so derivative of so many other things, particularly Leverage, a TNT show about cons with special individual skills working together to help stop bad guys. That’s the premise of Breakout Kings as well, except that the main characters are just criminals, not specialized criminals and I’ve watched three episodes now and none of them were compelling enough to make me seek out this show.

NBA Finals (Miami Heat vs. Dallas Mavericks)- Mavericks sucker-punched a Heat team that got lazy in the 4th quarter and went on a 22-5 roll to sneak out a win on Miami’s home court. Now we have a real series going on and the Heat better watch out. I kind of want them to lose although not for the reason everyone else has (hating LeBron James). I am disappointed that they beat the “new Utah Jazz”, i.e. the Chicago Bulls- home to Carlos Boozer, Ronnie Brewer and Kyle Korver, all Jazz players last season.

Miami threatened to pull away in the second game and go up two games to zero but they got stomped by Dirk Nowitzki in the fourth quarter when the Mavericks went on a 22-5 run to win the game on the final shot and even the series at one game each. The third game ended with a decisive last second shot but this time it was Miami to win at the last second on the Mavs home court. For the fourth game, the Heat had a decent lead going into the fourth quarter. Then they floundered again and the Mavericks caught up, got ahead, and Dirk kept them ahead by three points with 5 seconds left. The last second shot by Miami…missed so it’s two games each. Wondered what will happen in game five tomorrow?

Apparently, the same thing that happened in the first game- the Mavericks came from behind in the fourth quarter to win the game. It was tied with about two minutes left and then after Jason Kidd- yeah, that old guy- the Mavs pulled away to get 9 point lead with a few seconds left. Three games to two is a good place to be if you are playing the last two games on the road. And in game six, the Dallas Mavericks took it all and won the championship. The only bad part of that is that Jason Kidd now has a ring and John Stockton doesn’t. Stockton is still the better point guard though, by far. No ring for LeBron either and he has to spend the off season defending himself. I wouldn’t care so much about him getting stomped except for the fact that he felt like he was entitled (a state of mind that always bothers me) to a championship but most of all, when Dirk mentioned he was a little bit sick, LeBron and his teammates started coughing in interviews and making fun of Nowitzki. Acting like bratty little kids didn’t endear the Heat to me at all. So it was a great series and I’m thrilled with the winner. It’s the first championship series in the last three years that I actually watched consistently.

Wimbledon- Tennis season is in full swing and I’m ready to see who wins this tournament. All I’m hoping is that it isn’t Federer. And it isn’t because the semi-finals just wrapped up today. Things almost went as expected- Nadal beat Mardy Fish, the lone American left (Roddick fizzled, like usual), in four sets so it wasn’t a rout. Djokovic beat someone and Andy Murray beat Feliciana Lopez. So you would figure the top four ranked players moved on right? Especially since Roger Ferder started out his match up two sets to none and his record is 178-0 when starting a match up by two sets.

Nope- he wasn’t inspired and didn’t seem to play hard in the last set. No energy at all so Jo-Wilifred Tsongasgot a break and held onto it to make it a surprise upset of the six-time Wimbledon winner. Now I don’t care who wins- I’d be happy with any although I’ll root for Nadal because it will make Roger more upset than if Djokovic wins because Nadal is starting to challenge Federer’s Grand Slam record. Okay, just watched the final and Djokovic won in four sets. Good tournament and Novak has now only lost one match the entire year (to Nadal at the French?) so it will be interesting to see how he does the rest of the year and in the US Open come August. I think he’s gonna accrue the best winning streak in tennis history.

Women’s World Cup: It just started the last week of June so the big matches are yet to come but it will be a good tournament because all my favorites are there- the U.S., Sweden and Norway, with Australia, Germany, China and Brazil thrown in just to make it interesting. From the looks of things so far, Norway won’t get far, so I’ll be rooting for the U.S.A. and Sweden but basically anyone but Brazil or Germany.

Books:

Outwitting Trolls (by William G. Tapply)- This is his final finished mystery story and I was quite sad to get to the end. First because there are no more Brady Coyne stories coming and also because the character didn’t get a fancy send off. It was an optimistic send-off though. I’m not sure if that’s how the author wrote it or if the editor tweaked it after the fact but here’s a quote from the last page.

She said, “Tomorrow this time you’ll be here tucked in with me.”
“If we can outwit the trolls”, I said.
“I’m not sure I believe in trolls,” said Alexandra. “I’d rather believe in fairies.”
“I think we can have it both ways.”
“Trolls and fairies?”
“And wicked stepmothers and fairy godmothers,” I said. “It’s a more interesting world with all of them, don’t you think”
“A more complicated world, anyway.” She chuckled softly. “I’m at a good place with my novel. I’m not going to think about it all weekend. I’m just going to hang out with you and the dog. Walk in the woods, paddle our kayaks, cook good food, watch some old movies, and snuggle in bed. I can’t wait.”
“I’m at a good place too,” I said.

Food Rules: An Eaters Manual (By Michael Pollon)- I can see why people would stop buying books if they had to pay $15 like the list price on this slim little tome suggests. There is nothing of any interest here to someone who has read his “In Defense Of Food”. Basically, Pollon takes that previous book, removes all the science, social critique and background history to present some 60 food rules which are really common sense rules anyway. Without understanding why we should do them, there is no impact and hence no reason for this book to exist. Other than to make more money for Pollon by repackaging his previous efforts.

Zombie Spaceship Wasteland (By Patton Oswalt): I was curious to see what Oswalt would write about. I’ve kind of disliked him for years and only part of that is a result of jealousy. Yeah, we graduated the same year from the same college and he went on to become rich and famous and I didn’t. Discounting that pettiness though, I still don’t find him to be funny in the least. (It’s not just because of jealousy either- Jon Stewart also graduated from my college and is rich and famous but I think he’s funny. Yeah, I’m still jealous of him but I think he has real talent and I admire his success.) So what Oswalt writes about is a little of everything. He does some “comedic” essays, he does some memoir type stuff, he writes some spoofs of wine reviews, he does a short comic book, he makes lists. Basically he does the same stuff I do but for a lot more money. I was surprised to find that I liked some of the stuff he wrote. He doesn’t seem to be too much of an egotist, he has a good grasp on story-telling and he likes some of the same comedians I do (e.g. Maria Bamford). Most of the things were well-written and enjoyable. I found my distain for Patton Oswalt softening quite a bit. I don’t recall really laughing much while reading the book though so maybe I’m not sophisticated enough to appreciate his humor. Or maybe he just isn’t that funny! Still, I’ve developed some empathy for him and think he might be a decent human being after all. One I’m still jealous of, by the way. More so now that he’s a published author.


Songs/Albums:

The Cars: Move To This- The reviews were right; this sounds like classic Cars stuff. The problem is that it is classic Cars album cuts, and not even the good ones. It’s the Cars stuff you skipped past to get to the best songs that were not released as singles. If you loved the song “You Might Think”, you won’t particularly like this. If you loved the song “Since You’re Gone”, you will hate this.

Black Keys- Brothers: A two man band playing minimalist sounding music but injecting it with intensity to make up for the lack of sonic layers. Kind of like the White Stripes do. Or did. I’d heard the song Tighten Up on the radio but was reluctant to buy the album because it’s just one song. The rest could suck. After getting the album as a gift for my birthday, I was thrilled to find several other great songs on there. I also liked the rootsy stomp of Howling For You and the songs The Only One and Ten Cent Pistol.

Whitesnake: Forevermore- Don’t ask me why I bought this or their previous album because I never bought any Whitesnake albums during their heyday. How is it? It’s Whitesnake. It sounds just like you expect it to sound. It’s knuckleheaded arena rock songs that have lots of guitar solos and go on for two minutes too long. It’s harmless fun. Nothing as good as Slow And Easy or Here I Go Again but nothing that embarrassing either, aside from being Whitesnake in the first place.

Mom's Mixed Message

Sometimes I wonder about my parents and what message they are trying to send me. Below is something my Mom emailed me on Valentine’s day. I’m not sure where she found it and at first, I thought she was sending me another “subtle” hint to get married (like it is just that easy- Mom prompts me, I snap my fingers, and a marriage happens.) Then I read further along and the article started talking about socioeconomic advantages of marriage. Okay, I suppose that makes sense…. Then it moved on to political policies and welfare statistics and I started getting confused. Am I supposed to get married or run for political office? Then it wrapped up with a knock on ObamaCare. Huh? How the heck am I supposed to interpret this email? I am very confused. What exactly is my Mom saying? Yes, I’m an unmarried loser but is that my fault or is it somehow now the government’s fault? I like that answer but I don’t think that’s what her intention was. Does anyone else have any ideas?

Here's what she emailed me:

On Valentine’s Day, Share the Word About the Benefits of Marriage
Posted February 14th, 2011

As millions of rose bouquets grace kitchen tables and office desks across America and dozens of chocolate delicacies are savored after candlelight dinners, card companies, jewelry stores and candy makers will be singing the praises of St. Valentine and raising their own glass of champagne to love.
But the economic benefits of celebrating lifelong love are not simply for card stores and florist shops once a year. Marriage not only pays emotional dividends as men and women commit themselves to each other, focus on their children, and face the challenges of life together. The institution that forges unique personalities and lives together in the hearth of loving commitment can also provide notable economic benefits. Married couples tend to have a higher average income, more assets, and a greater likelihood of owning their own home than families led by single adults.

Men and women aren’t the only ones to benefit from lifelong, married love. Children raised in families headed by a married couple have a greater chance of experiencing economic stability, high academic performance, and emotional maturity. Children living under the promise of marital commitment are six times less likely to experience poverty and can display the positive social effects of having both parents in the home, potentially avoiding the many hindrances to social mobility that tend to plague children raised in single-parent households.

Unfortunately, the personal joy and socioeconomic advantages of marriage are often lost on those who arguably need those benefits the most. With the national unwed birth rate reaching 41 percent in 2009 and almost three-quarters of African-American children alone born outside of marriage, millions of children are at risk of experiencing the financial difficulties and social challenges of living in single-parent households. The same children (and their parents) are also more likely to need government financial assistance. Of the nearly $400 billion in annual welfare funding spent on low-income families, three-quarters goes to those led by single parents.
Financial assistance alone will not help needy families avoid poverty and long-term dependence. Demonstrating the personal fulfillment of healthy relationships, which no government check can provide, and the economic benefits of marriage to low-income communities can increase the chance of self-dependency and more stable families.

Just as the greatest Valentine will not be the most expensive diamond or the richest three-course meal, the greatest gift of compassion and justice for poor families is not more money and federal handouts. It is the opportunity to learn about the emotional, social, and economic advantages of marriage and potentially share in the promises of lifelong, married love. Rather than continue a cycle of dependence with streams of anonymous government checks, policymakers can take steps to remove disincentives to marriage and demonstrate how healthy marital relationships can lead to self-sufficiency.

For example, lawmakers could remove penalties on marriage imposed by Obamacare by repealing the legislation once and for all. Obamacare could cost certain married couples upwards of $10,000 a year. Congress must immediately reduce or eliminate the welfare marriage penalties that punish low-income recipients who choose to marry. And they can work to ensure federal programs adequately explain the economic and social benefits of marriage to communities who have a high risk of having children out of wedlock.

If they do so—and President Obama’s budget released later today will offer some initial clues to the tenor of this year’s debate—our nation can experience a springtime of marriage. More personal happiness and smaller government will make a very attractive couple.

Quick Hits:
• The White House projected Monday that the federal deficit would spike to $1.65 trillion in the current fiscal year, the largest dollar amount ever.
• According to the Treasury Department, interest payments to service the national debt are poised to triple to 3.1 percent of gross domestic product by 2016.
• According to The Hill, 77% of likely voters believe Social Security is in trouble.
• The real estate crash is not over and is now spreading to previously unaffected cities like Minneapolis, Atlanta, and Seattle.
• Cities in southern California are beginning to crack down on illegal immigration by using E-Verify

What I’m Checking Out This Month (May 2011)

Here are the various entertainment things I’m listening to, watching or reading this month.

Movies:

Bridesmaids- Imagine if Jim Carrey circa Liar Liar had boobs and starred in Superbad. That is the tone of this flick about two chicks who are best friends but whose connection gets a bit strained when one of them gets engaged and makes a huge step up in social class and wealth while the other remains barely employed, barely avoiding a breakdown and barely noticed by her late night booty-call. It sounds depressing but it isn’t. Kristen Wiig does an amazing job making you feel empathy for her character and the screenplay throws in plenty of Judd Apatow-style raunchy humor (I enjoyed this movie despite a “bathroom scene” of epically vulgar proportions) and bizarre improv moments.

Fast Five- There have now been five Fast & Furious movies of which I’ve seen one of them (I think; I know I didn’t see the last two) so I’m not sure why I was interested in seeing the latest one. It might have been the cool looking preview, it might have been the fact that The Rock is in it, or it might have been a dearth of action movies lately. Yes, despite the title, this is an action movie not a car movie. I could care less about cars- they are a way to get around and don’t express my personality (otherwise I’d be driving the Batmobile. Or the Weinermobile.)- but I love action flicks. This was a really enjoyable movie because not only was it an action movie and a car driving movie but they threw in several other fun elements. It opened with a prison break, became a chase movie and then finished up as a heist movie- all genres I love, which is good because it wasn’t quite up to snuff as an action movie. The gunfight/chase in Brasil was decent, but the Vin Diesel/Rock fight was lame. It was fun.

Hanna- A revenge flick that almost succeeds. Despite the main character being a 14 year old girl who is supposed to be an unstoppable assassin, I almost believe in her. The acting is excellent, the fight scenes are marvelous- especially the one with Eric Bana in the subway, and the story keeps you engaged up until the very end, when everything unravels and the movie loses its’ grip. Imagine the character of Hit Girl from last year’s awesome movie Kick Ass but without much of a sense of humor and you’ll have an idea of what Hanna is like.

Paul- Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, two of the three principals from the fantastic Shaun Of The Dead and Hot Fuzz, take a road trip through Area 51, met an alien who loves to party, and try to rescue him from the government agents trying to recapture him. Lots of pop culture references and lots of good comedic setups but it doesn’t quite work overall. I think if they had also had their third principal, direct Edgar Wright, they might have succeeded in their effort at a third masterpiece but instead they come up with a shaggy dog- lovable but a bit too stupid and running all over the place chasing its’ own tail/tale.

Scream 4- This didn’t really feel like a movie. It felt more like a bonus disc on the Scream trilogy box set, with commentaries on the social relevance of the series themes, how the hunger for fame is warping young kids’ minds, and how the original Scream set the standard in horror movies for the next decade or more. As a movie, it wasn’t very scary or thrilling which was odd because the cinematography felt right. Maybe the choreography was off or the editing and camera angles were wrong choices? It had no edge or surprises, even during the surprising scenes. It was funny though.

Sucker Punch- Imagine watching a really good videogame player play a fantasy fight game as a sexy female character. Imagine the game has really cool special effects. Imagine watching this for an hour and a half. Now pay $10 for this. Did you enjoy that or did it feel like a sucker punch? This determines how much you will enjoy the movie. I gave it a 7 (out of 10) because I always play female characters in videogames and I can be swayed by cool special effects. You may not be.

Thor (in 3D)- This movie wasn’t that great and it is easy to pinpoint where the blame lies. It wasn’t with the special effects, which made me believe that Thor wasn’t a ludicrous hero (A hammer? Really? I’d prefer a sword if I was a Norse god.) It wasn’t with the director- Kenneth Branagh did a good job for the type of movie it was. Nor was it the actors- the guy playing Thor did a good job, Natalie Portman was adorable as always and I liked seeing Kat Dennings once again (Doing the Zooey Deschanel type role). So what does that leave? Exactly- the screenplay. The story was so basic and predictable I could have told you what would happen before I saw the movie. Plus, Thor and Jane (Natalie) are supposed to have fallen in love for no discernable reason. He takes his shirt off, they sit on the roof talking, they have breakfast together, along with her friends, and they break into a government facility together. It all seems to take place in a 24 hour period too so how do they fall in eternal love? Because the screenplay says they do. There is no emotional investment in the romance nor the other relationships because they aren’t developed enough to make me care. Then throw in the fact that there aren’t enough fight scenes and you have a fairly dull movie. This movie actually needed to be about 2o minutes longer so it could address these lapses and make a worthwhile movie. All I can hope is that Captain America and Green Lantern will be a lot better. The most depressing thing about the movie? This screenwriter also did the script for X-Men: First Class which I had been really looking forward to until I saw Thor.

Plays:

The Walworth Farce- imagine a play about a family performing the same slap-stick play in their house every day because they have nothing else to do since they are afraid to leave their house. Throw in a murder, a delusional father, a cross-dressing son and a girl from the grocery store the other son timidly ventures out to for the family’s daily food supplies. Now make it mainly a drama instead of a comedy. Sounds fun, right? I didn’t enjoy it so much as I survived it mentally unscarred.

TV Shows:

Off The Map- Is one thing I won’t be watching anymore, mainly because it has been cancelled. I realize it wasn’t the best show on TV but everyone should have watched it if for no other reason than Caroline Dhavernas. She is everything good about an actress- talented, funny, believable and cute. I mourned the loss of her previous show Wonderfalls some 5 years ago and was thrilled when Off The Map came along to fill the void. Now this is gone after just 13 or so episodes. How will I get my fix of this amazing actress now?

The Voice- I’m enjoying this singing contest and it might even be a better show than American Idol.

All the usual suspects, which are now ending their seasons, like Big Bang Theory, Castle, How I Met Your Mother, The Simpsons, Community, 30 Rock, Survivor, Amazing Race and Celebrity Apprentice plus newcomers Fairly Legal, Chicago Code and Justified. Now I’ll have a chance to catch some other things on reruns, like NCIS, Rules Of Engagement, The Office, and Fringe and see the new seasons of USA Channel’s summer shows like Burn Notice, Psych, Royal Pains, Covert Affairs and White Collar.

Books:

Outwitting Trolls (by William G. Tapply)- One of my favorite mystery authors passed away two years ago but I didn’t realize it until now, when his final book came out and the dust jacket mentioned it.
( http://sowhatelseyougot.blogspot.com/2011/05/robert-b-parker-passes-away-while-work.html )
That means he passed around the same time as Robert B. Parker, one of my all-time favorite mystery writers. I devoured his Spenser series all through college and afterwards and now the last one is coming out. At least with both of these authors they wrote at least one other series which I hadn’t really delved into yet, because I didn’t want to dilute the purity of their main series. So I still have some more of their work to look forward to, although it is a more finite amount than I thought two years ago. I haven’t finished Outwitting Trolls yet, in fact I don’t even know what the title means yet so I can’t tell if it was a fitting finale. Parker’s final Spenser book arrived from Border’s today so I’ll check that out next month.

Songs/Albums:

Emily Osment- Amazon had her second album for $5 so I downloaded it. Her first one was a soft rock / Disney Channel type album and this one is more of a dance-pop album. It’s got three songs that could be (but won’t be) hits so it was worth the $5 to me but probably no one else will feel that way.

Foster The People: Pumped Up Kicks- It’s a really catchy song, one that totally rips off Peter Bjorn & John’s Young Folks but is good nonetheless. I think of it as a song sequel.

Bee Gees @ 10:00 AM and 3:00 to 5:00 PM- At work we’ve recently started playing the radio in the office and the radio station we have set plays a Bee Gees song everyday at about 10:00 AM and then sometime between 3:00 and 5:00 PM. I love the Bee Gees but I’m starting to get annoyed by how often they get played because it “wears out” the song to me. The same thing with Madonna’s Into The Groove and Benny Mardones’ Into The Night (Is this a theme?) which get played a lot too. The same with Bruno Mars but Bruno Mars is always being played on every station, not just the one we listen to. At least it isn’t the crappy song, um…I mean, The Lazy Song, that they play all the time.