Static and Distortion

Snow White, Or...

2011-04-27T13:38:00.007-05:00

This is lovable Disney character, Snow White.
This is a ballerina.

This is Snow White Disney Princess Ballerina Doll.

So, what I have gathered from this is:

Snow White + A Ballerina =

Katy Perry

Actual Text Message Conversation

2010-12-13T15:42:00.005-06:00

The following takes place between 3:10 and 3:39 p.m.

Paul: I bought Up & Up laundry detergent

Me: It's good stuff

Paul: I've never used anything but Tide before.

Me: I like it. What scent? I think Tide fades clothes sooner.

Paul: Fresh. It smelled more like Tide. I only got the $8 size.

Me: We just had a discussion about laundry detergent

Paul: Kill us now.

Yoko Remembers John

2010-12-08T22:17:00.001-06:00

I was going to write a lame tribute to John Lennon today. But Yoko Ono did a much better job.

Elizabeth Edwards, 1949-2010

2010-12-07T16:48:00.002-06:00

"The days of our lives, for all of us, are numbered. We know that. And yes, there are certainly times when we aren't able to muster as much strength and patience as we would like. It's called being human... But I have found that in the simple act of living with hope, and in the daily effort to have a positive impact in the world, the days I do have are made all the more meaningful and precious. And for that, I am grateful."

- Elizabeth Edwards
July 3, 1949 - December 7, 2010

The Next 20 Minutes of Your Life

2010-12-01T23:18:00.004-06:00

Click on a square:

Corn is Good

2010-11-28T22:10:00.003-06:00

Andrew Osenga is one of my favorite singer/songwriters living in Nashville. In addition to his excellent songwriting, awesome guitar shredding, and mad production skills, he is also a playwright.

Read his first production, Corn is Good.

Dancing with the Palins

2010-11-22T23:16:00.009-06:00

Last week, when Bristol Palin advanced to the finals of Dancing with the Stars, Steven Cowan, a 67 year old man from Wisconsin shot his television set with a shotgun.

Why? He said he was tired of politics, and Bristol Palin wasn't a very good dancer.

As Brisol has advanced through the show with reportedly less than excellent dancing skills, (admittedly, I haven't watched a minute of the show) the anger seems to be escalating. There have been death threats made, white powdery substances mailed to the show, and they are considering moving the finale indoors because of security should Palin make it to the final two.

I thought to myself, isn't this ridiculous? Surely people must have gone crazy to care this much about someone who is barely star worthy to begin with. Had she not been a pregnant high schooler when Sarah Palin ran for vice president two years ago, I doubt we'd have given this girl a second thought.

It is buzz worthy that a family values republican running for vice president had a pregnant teenage daughter, and the younger Palin has attempted to capitalize on that fame ever since.

There was talk of a reality show featuring Bristol and Levi Johnston. She was featured in tabloid magazines. She became a public face for speaking out for teen pregnancy prevention. And then she started dancing.

All because it was supposedly shocking that a family values politician's daughter was pregnant.

Her fame is questionable, but in an era of shows like "Sixteen and Pregnant" and the subsequent "Teen Mom" series on MTV, I guess I kind of get it. Here's the biggest cliched statement of the night: You can be famous for anything these days. I guess you can even become famous enough to be worthy of a dancing competition just by being an unwed teen mom. And because your mom is Sarah Palin.

So where do shooting televisions and death threats come from in all of this?

I've always been of the opinion that if you don't like something or someone, you ignore it. You don't let it affect you to the point where you shoot inanimate objects over it, because then you are the one making it a big deal. If it shouldn't be a big deal, don't make it one. Then, you are the one perpetuating the thing you despise and validating it with your dislike.

Initially I did not understand why someone who possibly shouldn't be famous at all was the focus of such negative energy. Just ignore her. Vote her of the island, so to speak. Revoke the fifteen minutes of fame and move on.

Then it hit me.

In one week's time:

1.) A man shot a television set with a shot gun over a silly dance competition featuring questionably famous people. Over a Palin's performance.

2.) Willow Palin, the next youngest daughter in the Palin clan, took to Facebook in defense of her mother's reality show (yep, the O.G. Palin has a show of her own too...) by using homophobic slurs and bad language to berate someone who said the show "failed." Over a Palin performance.

3.) That wasn't enough: Bristol had to jump in on the bashing too. Also chiming in on a Palin performance.

4.) Barbara Bush laid the proverbial smack on Larry King when she said Sarah Palin was beautiful and was happy in Alaska... "and I hope she stays there." See below:

Ouch!

Then it hit me. Two things happen when you discuss the Palins: They incite inflammatory responses wherever they go, or they dish out inflammatory responses whenever someone criticizes them.

They are polarizing figures in the most extreme way possible.

So yes. Maybe Bristol Palin is just a girl who is kind of bad at dancing and not really famous for anything fame worthy. Maybe just on those grounds alone, men in Wisconsin shouldn't really be shooting their television sets over a dance competition. But it isn't just those grounds alone.

There is a greater context to anything and everything the Palins do. It is a context of inflammatory polarization. Some might argue that it is created by others - by those who oppose Palin and her beliefs validating the thing they dislike by making it a big deal. Some might argue that it is self-created as they have made very big gestures to remain in the limelight over the past two years. Plucked from relative obscurity in chilly Alaska and brought to the main stage, they have remained there by using fame rather than by creating relevance.

Maybe the two go hand-in-hand.

I don't know why this polarization exists. I only know that it does exist.

It is also why I have concluded that I do not want Sarah Palin anywhere near the White House.

I'm tired of politics. And Bristol Palin isn't a very good dancer.

UPDATE:Here's more.

Old Years Resolutions

2010-11-22T00:27:00.003-06:00

Perhaps you have noticed that there was a severe nose dive on this blog that occurred sometime after February in the quality and quantity of posts.

I'd like to blame this occurrence on my now 9-month-old daughter. I can find the energy to blog with one kid, but two kids younger than three takes the energy right out of you.

That being said, my friend, Jason, has endeavored to post his thoughts in the blog format as well, and this has caused me renewed interest in my own poor, neglected blog.

What better time to kick it into high gear again but the end of a year? Just in time for my Top 10 Favorite Albums and Top 10 favorite songs from the grand year of Twenty-Ten.

Lists are being compiled, ideas are beginning to flow for topics, and I cleaned up my work space in "The Cave" where I do the most of my writing.

New logo, new format, new ideas, (old ideas), a new beard and a little more time to think.

Expect more posts to come.

Cobwebs

2010-09-23T00:01:00.002-05:00

I felt inspired so I sat down to write a few lyrics tonight.

(When I say write, I mean actually write. Pen and paper.)

I got about 8 lines done, had some random thought about work tomorrow, proceeded to make a snack, and forgot what direction I was going with the next verse.

I thought to myself "This is why you never finish anything."

Then I remembered I had a blog.

So... yeah...

Friends

2010-08-16T00:19:00.003-05:00

I was driving several weeks ago with my family somewhere when I spotted a 3-4 year old Toyota Corolla sporting a rather ridiculous spoiler on the back of the otherwise stock vehicle.

I sent a picture message to my friend Caleb of this car with the following statement:

Definition of Optimism

The joke was, this Corolla owner had left his vehicle completely stock, yet decided to put a ridiculously large wing on his car, somehow indicating performance necessitating a spoiler that will keep the wild and crazy car from going airborne from speed.

Anyone who has ever owned a Corolla will know, they are no sports car.

Later the next day, I receive the following picture message on my phone from Caleb:

He had noticed this Corolla was equipped with a trailer hitch, compliments of U-Haul. Again, anyone who has ever owned a Corolla would know, there's not much you can tow with less than 150 horsepower.

Caleb's comment mirrored my own about the optimism of this Corolla owner to have such faith in his car's ability to haul stuff.

As soon as I saw the Corolla with the silly spoiler, I immediately thought to send it to Caleb. Why? Because I knew he'd get it.

When I received his picture message the next day, I thought to myself "See, this is why we are friends!"

Caleb and I have been friends for 10 years, which is kind of hard for me to believe. We are both married now, and we both have children. We live states away from each other. We don't see each other as often as we'd like. Even if I haven't talked to him in a few months, I know I can send him a picture like this and he'll get it.

Thanks, my friend.

Conversations with a Two Year Old

2010-05-25T13:06:00.003-05:00

"Bob bob?"

"You want to watch SpongeBob?"

"Woo-hoo! Yeah!" (Fist pump in the air)

"SpongeBob isn't on, Elliott."

"Bob Bob?" (restated just in case he wasn't cute enough the first time)

"You slept in too late today and we missed Sponge Bob."

"Bob Bob." (More of a demand now than a question.)

"Sorry, Bubby, we don't have OnDemand, so I can't make Nickelodeon turn on SpongeBob.."

"Bob Bob!" (Volume heightened, sensing frustration.)

"Elliott, SpongeBob isn't on now."

"Bob Bob Bob Bob Bob Bob!!" (Crying now)

"No, we can't watch SpongeBob."

(crying)

"Let's watch Blue's Clues."

"Woo-hoo! Yeah!" (fist pump in the air)

Album of the Day: She & Him Volume 2

2010-05-03T15:47:00.003-05:00

I just obtained and listened to M. Ward and Zooey Deschanel's latest album as the duo She and Him, Volume 2.

More polished, possibly less interesting than the charming Volume 1, yet completely delightful. I have not spent a lot of time to dissect the album - I just put it on and went about my day. It is great music to have on while you are doing something else. All I know is that it was good "mood music" and my two year old did a lot of dancing.

How's that for an album review?

It would be the perfect album for a hipster barbecue.

Initial Rating: 3.5/5 stars

New Baby...

2010-02-15T21:39:00.001-06:00

New baby in this blogger's house. My wife and I welcomed our second child and first daughter Madelyn to the family Saturday.

So that means I'll blog, like, whenevah...

Joe Biden on Larry King

2010-02-11T14:05:00.003-06:00

Read this interesting Opinion post by Andrew Malcolm at the L.A. Times.

And that's all I have to say about that...

Thoughts on the Democrat-Republican Summit

2010-02-10T13:18:00.003-06:00

So I’ve been wondering…

The Democrats have had a super majority in the Senate, majority rule in the House of Representatives, and a Democrat in the White House.

Yet, there still seems to be a lot of focus on what the Republicans are doing. The left has cleverly coined the GOP as the “Party of No,” as the Republicans have opposed and attempted to stall every piece of legislation proposed by the House, Senate or President – sometimes even before it has been proposed.

In fact, these Republicans have been blamed for stalling the administration from moving forward with almost everything. This has prompted Obama to meet with Republican leadership about working together to accomplish legislation. But these same Republicans are the ones being lambasted for being the “Party of No.” They are status quo – they are old ideas. They are inhibiting change we can believe in.

I’m not sure there is any real belief in the “change” proposed by the President in his landmark campaign and election to President.

The Democrats do not need the Republicans. The Republicans are rendered quite ineffective by the majority stake the Democrats hold in the major offices of the Federal government.

So why is there a need to “bring the Republicans on board” in order to get anything accomplished? At the same time, there is also a huge push to discredit the Republicans by calling them the Party of No. If they are so irrelevant to the Democrat agenda, why must the Democrats reach out to them to accomplish their own agenda? Likewise, if they are so necessary to the majority party’s ability to accomplish their own agenda, how can they be called irrelevant?

This does not make sense.

What is really going on here is the Democratic Party is not unified and cannot agree on enough to get anything accomplished. At the least, they are distracted by the need to have Republicans on board, and at worst, they are ineffective because they are not unified.

But again, why do they need to reach out to Republicans? Why wouldn’t they focus on unity of message and agenda?

It simply has nothing to do with Republicans at all. It is either a distraction from the fact that they cannot accomplish anything even with a majority, or an attempt to shift the blame onto Republicans for their own ineffectiveness.

Despite the attempt to paint the GOP with the brush of being inhibitors to any real change, Republicans are gaining in polls, offices, and supporters. The Tea Party movement – while controversial even among conservatives – is gaining momentum and focus, attracting higher profile advocates on its behalf.

The Democrat’s attempt to paint the GOP as the inhibiting Party of No is a diversion for its own party more so than it being a real and actual criticism of the Republicans. Why is this so? Because Republicans and conservatives want to be in opposition to the President and the Democrat’s agenda. This attempt to lay the blame at Republicans for stalling their efforts solidifies and validates the conservative’s point of view.

Republicans and conservatives do not believe in the “change” proposed by Obama and the Democrat majority. They will not work along with Democrats to accomplish and push forward a Democratic agenda that needs no input from the GOP to pass in the first place. And apparently the Democrats don’t believe in the “change” either, as they have not been able to pass legislature promised as change to their voters. Blaming the GOP and reaching out to work together in an extension of unity is all political posturing by the Democrats for the benefit of Democrats to detract from failure on bad policy.

So who does believe in the “change we can believe in?”

Testing Testing 1...2...3...

2010-02-07T01:56:00.001-06:00

Ok.

Assuming this works, I have just entered the new phase...

Friends, I am writing this post from my iPod Touch.

For a person who remembers the days of the Gen I iPod mini with the non-color screen, (you know, 2005), this is almost as cool as ordering pizza from my iPod, paying for it and having it delivered while listening to Prince.

I love technology.

Expect more blog posts I have typed using only my thumbs.

I need to go Tweet this...

Taylor Swift and the 2010 Grammys

2010-02-01T12:44:00.001-06:00

Before we begin, let’s have full-disclosure here.

I did not watch the Grammy’s. It has been at least 5 years since I have done so.

I also did not watch Taylor Swift receive her prestigious awards, nor did I see her perform.

Everything I know I have heard passively through the media or social networking. So right off the bat, let’s understand that I realize I am talking about something I have not seen first hand. I do not intend to comment on the actual performance, and I won’t.

I am talking about what I heard. What I heard was not good.

I did not seek out any information about the Grammy’s, but through osmosis, I saw people’s Facebook posts and Twitter feeds and Yahoo! news stories as I logged into my email.

Generally speaking, most that I saw were pondering why Taylor Swift cannot sing. Some suggestions were made that she jump to the Auto-Tune bandwagon.

(I find this especially ironic in light of her winning Best Female Country Vocal Performance.)

I do not, however, find this at all shocking. I remember thinking long ago, before Taylor’s banner year, that she was a pretty girl with a decent voice who didn’t know how to use it. I commented myself “I wish someone would teach Taylor Swift how to sing.”

Even though the comments were critical of her live performance, generally speaking, they were still a bit candy-coated. They were soft barbs. They were critical of Taylor’s performance, but there was still an undertone of positivity surrounding her.

This makes perfect sense to me.

Taylor Swift does not make music geared to my demographic. Not in the least. I don’t prefer mainstream country music. I do not prefer mainstream pop music. I do not even really like her voice so much and I know it is a weakness during live performances. Cute songs about Romeo and Juliet sung by a cute 19 year old girl are not my cup of tea. Yet, inexplicably, “Love Story,” one of Taylor’s big hits of 2009, is well-played on my iPod.

Why? The song is pure genius. It is a deftly well-written country-pop blend. It has a great hook, great lyrics, a well-developed story, and she sings it in a way that is believable. It is completely age-appropriate for Taylor Swift, and it is all of these things because Taylor actually penned and performed the song herself.

She wrote an authentic song. That is why this dude pushing 30 can enjoy a song that is clearly not written for him to enjoy. It may not be a universal theme, but its authenticity makes it relatable to all.

It goes beyond that. Even the Taylor Swift naysayers will generally admit that she is a nice person. She is wholesome and sweet personally authentic. Authentic music by an authentically wholesome person. How could she fail?

No one ever believed that Britney Spears was innocent when she tried to play off as wholesome because Britney Spears was manufactured to be wholesome. That is why she could switch gears and be not-so-wholesome at a moment’s notice, within the same album or even within the same song.

Ten years later, Taylor Swift is just being Taylor Swift, and we believe her because she is real.

I did not see her Grammy performance – I only saw the comments of people who did see it. But none of the comments surprised me. The criticism of her vocal performance was not surprising, and the undertones of support in spite of criticism do not surprise me.

People don’t want to see their Sweetheart fail. Kanye be darned.

Dear Toyota

2010-01-27T12:25:00.004-06:00

Dear Toyota,

What the heck, man?

First you have to recall 2.3 million cars due to fiery deaths, but now you have also suspended sales and production of practically all of your best selling vehicles?

So you’re telling me I cannot buy a new RAV-4, Corolla, Matrix, Avalon, certain Camry models, the Highlander, Tundra or Sequoia?

What happens to the resale value of these models, even when they are fixed? Not only will new car sales slip with the bad brand image, but what of the cars already on the road. Fixed or not, will that affect the price of used models and the trade-in value of vehicles currently owned?

The consequences of this engineering flaw/recall are hard to fathom. For a company with a reputation for being the epitome of quality and longevity, this is an incredibly difficult point to overcome.

What I think bothers me more is the approach to public relations in the wake of all of this. Public knowledge of this problem has been present for months, as the brand has deflected the problem rather than deal with it head-on.

This reminds me of another recent recall of the 2000-2003 Tundra models, which have a problem with extreme rust on the frame, causing spare tire and brake line issues, not to mention the bigger problem of frame failure. You issued the recall, but then they shifted the blame to your own dealers for not putting an added measure at the dealer level to prevent the rust from occurring.

In each case, (whether it is a dealer issue or not,) shifting the blame to faulty floor mats and dealers not putting a rust-proofing coat on the frame does not make up for the inadequate engineering of these vehicles in the first place. I expect more. Instead, the V6 Camry was taken off the Consumer Reports “Reccomended” vehicles list, a Tundra might rust to pieces before the end of its use, and half of your vehicle lineup may speed uncontrollably and catch fire.

Akio Toyoda, grandson of the founder of the Toyota brand has ascended to the top and has made it his mission to inject a bit more passion into Toyota’s future brand lineup. Instead, he is overseeing one of the biggest safety and public relations debacles I’ve seen since the bankruptcy of General Motors and Chrysler.

Maybe new leadership will provide a new direction in the Toyota lineup.

I’ve owned and driven several Toyota models over the years and I have always been impressed with both the quality and longevity of every model. Quite honestly, a Ford Fusion isn’t looking so bad right now.

UPDATE: Toyota failed to mention in their press release that the Federal Government forced the halt in sales and production of these models. Thanks, Jalopnik.

UPDATE 2:General Motors offers incentives to Toyota owners to make the switch.Thanks, again, Jalopnik.

Texting While Driving

2010-01-26T12:51:00.003-06:00

In a mandate signed August 6, 2009, by Blago-replacing Illinois Governor Pat Quinn, texting, emailing and surfing mobile web is now illegal in Lincolnland as of January 1, 2010.

(It also bans talking on the phone through highway construction projects as well. Phone-based GPS systems are allowed.)

I’m all for safety, and texting while driving certainly is not a safe activity.

At the same time, I have about a bazillion questions about how this law will actually work.

1. If I get a ticket or in an accident, will they suspect texting? In what cases will they determine texting may be the cause of a traffic infraction? Will they take my phone and check? Under what grounds can they do that? Is my personal phone with its personal data protected under warrants? What if I did text 5 minutes ago – how will I prove I was not driving when I sent the text? If I have no text messages in my sent or received folders, will they suspect I scrubbed my phone before they got to the car? And if they do suspect I scrubbed my phone, can they pull my phone’s data records with my provider. And again, how does this fall under search and seizure laws? Also, what if in the event that they do check my phone they run across personal data/ information/ pictures or potentially questionable or embarrassing information? This is all boiling down to … who is the authority on what is a texting case and how can they go about managing probable cause/ search and seizure, etc?

2. GPS use is allowed, but how will the police differentiate me searching for an address and me texting? They look exactly the same when I am driving by or sitting at a red light. And for that matter, I have an iPod Touch, which looks awfully like an iPhone. What if I am flipping through my songs and it looks like I am texting and I get pulled over? Will they then take my cell phone, which I was not using, and search it for texting? (See point #1.)

How do you make a law like this work without being too intrusive and Big Brother-esque? There is a lot of room for error and (loss of rights) in this law. And fact of the matter – just like any law – laws do not prevent people from continuing to conduct the behavior the government wants you to modify. People are still going to text and people are still going to cause accidents and people will still die from these accidents.

Except now, there will be plenty of people who will be ticketed for skipping past Christina Aguilera on their iPod, or for sending that text two minutes ago when they stopped off at the gas station. There will be plenty of incidences of sensitive personal information being seen by law enforcement as they will be given free rein to inspect your device at the mere suspicion of the offense.

There is no disputing that texting while driving is dangerously distracting. I can also think of several other things that can be as distracting (or more distracting) than texting. Should we outlaw car stereos and navigation devices (in-dash or suction-cupped to the windshield)? What about the aforementioned iPod and music player devices? What about just talking on the phone in the car in general?

Should we all be forced to buy Jupiter Jacks?

Good Luck, Conan

2010-01-22T21:53:00.002-06:00

Well, tonight is Conan's last night as host of the Tonight Show.

What a shame.

Best of the Internet, Vol 3

2010-01-14T07:30:00.000-06:00

Internet Roundup for Thursday, Jan. 14, 2010.

My favorite sites/videos/stories/events from the Internet this week.

New Honda CR-Z: Not the real heir to the CRX name?

Free, Legal, Downloadable David Bazan concert tracks

The Art of Intrapreneurship (Thanks Keller Graduate School)

...and Nobody can deny the General

Pants on the Ground

Static is with CoCo

2010-01-13T23:14:00.000-06:00

Conan O'Brien's Statement

2010-01-12T21:28:00.003-06:00

People of Earth:

In the last few days, I've been getting a lot of sympathy calls, and I want to start by making it clear that no one should waste a second feeling sorry for me. For 17 years, I've been getting paid to do what I love most and, in a world with real problems, I've been absurdly lucky. That said, I've been suddenly put in a very public predicament and my bosses are demanding an immediate decision.

Six years ago, I signed a contract with NBC to take over The Tonight Show in June of 2009. Like a lot of us, I grew up watching Johnny Carson every night and the chance to one day sit in that chair has meant everything to me. I worked long and hard to get that opportunity, passed up far more lucrative offers, and since 2004 I have spent literally hundreds of hours thinking of ways to extend the franchise long into the future. It was my mistaken belief that, like my predecessor, I would have the benefit of some time and, just as important, some degree of ratings support from the prime-time schedule. Building a lasting audience at 11:30 is impossible without both.

But sadly, we were never given that chance. After only seven months, with my Tonight Show in its infancy, NBC has decided to react to their terrible difficulties in prime-time by making a change in their long-established late night schedule.

Last Thursday, NBC executives told me they intended to move the Tonight Show to 12:05 to accommodate the Jay Leno Show at 11:35. For 60 years the Tonight Show has aired immediately following the late local news. I sincerely believe that delaying the Tonight Show into the next day to accommodate another comedy program will seriously damage what I consider to be the greatest franchise in the history of broadcasting. The Tonight Show at 12:05 simply isn't the Tonight Show. Also, if I accept this move I will be knocking the Late Night show, which I inherited from David Letterman and passed on to Jimmy Fallon, out of its long-held time slot. That would hurt the other NBC franchise that I love, and it would be unfair to Jimmy.

So it has come to this: I cannot express in words how much I enjoy hosting this program and what an enormous personal disappointment it is for me to consider losing it. My staff and I have worked unbelievably hard and we are very proud of our contribution to the legacy of The Tonight Show. But I cannot participate in what I honestly believe is its destruction. Some people will make the argument that with DVRs and the Internet a time slot doesn't matter. But with the Tonight Show, I believe nothing could matter more.

There has been speculation about my going to another network but, to set the record straight, I currently have no other offer and honestly have no idea what happens next. My hope is that NBC and I can resolve this quickly so that my staff, crew, and I can do a show we can be proud of, for a company that values our work.

Have a great day and, for the record, I am truly sorry about my hair; it's always been that way.

Yours,

Conan

Conan Breaks Down the Drama

2010-01-08T23:19:00.006-06:00

"NBC has come up with an exciting new idea -- They want me to follow Jay Leno."

- Conan O'Brien

Best of the Internet Vol 2

2010-01-03T21:54:00.002-06:00

I've run across some cool music-y blogs lately by way of them running across my blog. Largehearted Boy is a music blog with free, legal downloads, and lots of links and commentary about music, books, and pop culture.

Also new to the Static link sidebar is Baby Indie, featuring "the gentle side of indie."

Check them out!

Adventures in Facebook Vol 3

2010-01-03T15:57:00.001-06:00

Names and faces have been obscured to protect the hilarious.

New Years Resolutions: Kanye West Edition

2010-01-02T00:14:00.003-06:00

Very simply, I will recap the basic career arc of rapper, producer and MTV Awards pariah, Kanye West:

2004: Kanye releases College Dropout and blows away everything you think about what hip hop can be and sound like.

2005: Kanye releases Late Registration, as if to say "Oh, you thought the first one was good? I just did it better times infinity."

Later in 2005: "George Bush doesn't care about Black people." Inflammatory? Yes. Made Mike Myers look like a deer in headlights? Sure. Controversial? Absolutely. But at least it was a perspective that, right or wrong, many people felt and that is why Kanye got a pass on that, even if it did make you cringe.

2007: Kanye releases Graduation, the last in the "college-themed" albums, showing that he has completely transcended hip hop music to be one of the innovators of all that is pop music.

Later in 2007: Kanye's mom dies.

2008: Kanye releases 808's and Heartbreak, which is definitely a different creative direction for Kanye, but with the overuse of Auto-Tune just as it was becoming played out in pop music, Kanye comes across like sad computer.

2009: Kanye steals the stage from first-time VMA winner Taylor Swifts, humiliates her and Beyonce, and disgraces himself. Unlike the George Bush comments,

A few weeks later: Jay Leno has a fatherly talk with Kanye about the incident on his new talk show and almost makes Kanye cry.

So what happens now? There are two outcomes - Kanye is over and he will never get back to where he was before, or this could be the greatest opportunity of his career.

I was ready to write off Kanye. I recall saying after the Taylor Swift incident that I would never buy another Kanye West album again.

I'm ready to give Kanye another chance, but things look bad for Kanye right now.

If I could give Kanye some unsolicited advice, I would say - just keep your head down for a while. Stay out of the spotlight. Get your life in order and spend some time not being Kanye West. Then, you focus. Attack music like you did before you had a track on the Blueprint or a record deal with Roc-A-Fella. Earn it like you earned your fame in the first place. This time will be even better because you have experience to grow on.

I am anxiously awaiting the return of Kanye West - older, wiser, humble, but at the top of his game.

Good luck, Kanye. I hope 2010 is a good year for you.

Rose Bowl Champion Ohio State Buckeyes!

2010-01-01T20:20:00.002-06:00

Static Picks: Favorite Songs of 2009 Playlist

2009-12-30T23:07:00.003-06:00

I decided to do another end-of-year compilation, this time my favorite songs of 2009. Of course there are plenty of songs that could have fit the bill but did not make the cut this time. So here, in no more order than how I placed them in relation to each other on the playlist, is the playlist:

1. White Winter Hymnal by Fleet Foxes
2. Chasing Pirates by Norah Jones
3. Kicked In by Death Cab for Cutie
4. Audience by Cold War Kids
5. Lisztomania by Phoenix
6. The Fixer by Pearl Jam
7. The Spirit vs. The Kick Drum by Derek Webb
8. All in One by Ben Gibbard and Jay Farrar
9. The Man in Me by David Bazan
10. Belated Promise Ring by Iron and Wine
11. Train Song by Ben Gibbard and Feist
12. All We Ever Do Is Say Goodbye by John Mayer
13. Why I Am by Dave Matthews Band (Yes, this one surprised me...)
14. Epistemology by M Ward
15. Pistola by Mos Def
16. One Wing by Wilco
17. Cloud Nine by Ben Howard

Thoughts? Post them to the comments!

Static Picks: Favorite Albums of 2009

2009-12-21T23:32:00.013-06:00

As 2009 is winding to a close, I'd like to take a look back on my favorite albums of 2009:

Stockholm Syndrome by Derek Webb:
"I love... hate... you..."

I'm a giant Derek Webb fan. I've seen him perform live 4 times and I'm about to go see him for a fifth in February. I've been a fan from the Caedmon's Call days. I used to rip his songs off Caedmon's albums and burn "All Derek" albums before he ever went solo. I know my Derek Webb music. This one threw me for a loop - the best kind of loop.

I hated the album at first. I thought it was heavy handed in every way possible. It wasn't the change in musical style or the "cursing" or anything like that which deterred me from liking this album. I can handle all that. I love when an artist I love switches things up.

I hated that the album was most famous due to the controversy surrounding its release. I hated the marketing ploy to promote the album while it was in limbo. I hated that everyone I know who doesn't know Derek Webb's catalog only knew about his use of profanity on the album. And I hated that Webb sided on the "critical artist" side of the spectrum rather than the "challenging artist" side established early on in his career.

How do you point out someone for being critical? By being critical. I can't even accuse Webb of being critical of people who are critical without being critical myself.

I kept listening to the album even though it made me unsettled. Not unsettled about it's content -- unsettled about my feelings on a piece of art performed by one of my favorite artists. I didn't like not liking it.

This is not an album you can listen to initially and just "get." You have to get to know it. Something about it draws you in and keeps you there and catches your interest in spite of the conflict it creates inside you. Once you know, then you can understand. Once you understand, then you can love.

Many said that "I See Things Upside Down" was Derek's "Wilco" album mostly because of the experimental sonic landscape that was reminiscent of Yankee Hotel Foxtrot. I say this album is Derek's "Foxtrot," as it came with the label controversy, content controversy, media coverage, and ultimately the respect of the critics that matches Wilco's ride through Yankee Hotel Foxtrot.

I now love this album. And for the entire spectrum of the ride I went through to get to this point of love, I call it my favorite of the year.

Favorite Tracks: Cobra Con, The Spirit vs. The Kick Drum, I Love/ Hate You, American Flag Umbrella

Favorite Lyric: "Right and wrong were written on my heart/ And not just in the laws that condemn me/ But now with Ceasar satisfied/ I can even do the things that should offend me..."

One Fast Move or I'm Gone by Ben Gibbard and Jay Farrar:
This album is a gem. It's for a documentary about Jack Kerouac with music provided by a dream team of Ben Gibbard (Death Cab for Cutie, Postal Service) and Jay Farrar (Uncle Tupelo, Son Volt). Each are avid fans of Kerouac's work. I am less familiar with Farrar's work outside of Tupelo, but I know Gibbard references Kerouac in much of Death Cab's music over the years. The lyrics are Kerouacian, the arrangements are amazing and sound distinctly American, and I think both Gibbard and Farrar are at their vocal peak.

Favorite Tracks: California Zephyr, These Roads Don't Move, All In One

Favorite Lyrics: "These roads don't move/ You're the one that moves..."

Wilco (the Album) by Wilco:
I'm as shocked as anyone that Wilco would be third on my list of Favorite Albums of 2009. It is no reflection on the quality of the album. There is something for every type of Wilco fan on this album. There is a perfect blend of throwback sounds, touch points to past Wilco albums, and new, fresh sounds pushing the band forward. It definitely deserves to be their self-titled album.

Favorite Tracks: One Wing, Bull Black Nova, Country Disappeared, You and I, You Never Know

Favorite Lyric: "One wing will never every fly/ Neither yours nor mine/ I fear we can only wave goodbye..."

Curse Your Branches by David Bazan:
David Bazan loses the band, upgrades his label, lets the studio production be a part of the sound, and tries singing with new tones and textures. The result is ground-breaking and yet familiar. His cynicism with religion is still in tact, and his bark has a bit more bite while and yet it strangely feels less frustrated as in past Pedro the Lion/ Headphones albums. Agree or disagree with Bazan's religious views -- the album is spectacular.

Favorite Tracks: Please, Baby Please, Harmless Sparks, The Man in Me, When We Fell

Favorite Lyrics: "When I woke up the next moring/ You looked right through me/ Through your eyes crying/ I could finally see..."

Wolfgang Amadeus Phoenix by Phoenix:
I know very little about this band. They are French. That is the extent of it. I heard and loved one of their songs (Everything is Everything) from 5 or 6 years ago that I heard on some CMJ Music Sampler and I promptly forgot about them. Wolfgang Amadeus Phoenix is power pop music at its finest. Bright and tight arrangements, cool production, and great melodies make a great "vibe" record. I don't think about the lyrics. I don't pick apart the musical elements. I don't even think about the band behind the music. It just feels right.

Favorite Tracks: Lisztomania, 1901, Fences

Favorite Lyrics: Um...

Swoon by Silversun Pickups:
One part Smashing Pumpkins, One Part My Bloody Valentine, One part something else. I love Silversun Pickups' first album "Carnavas," but I honestly saw it as a one-off success. I did not expect a solid sophomore effort like they delivered with Swoon. Panic Switch alone sold this album for me. It's louder and more aggressive than "Carnavas," and this is a good thing. The album has teeth, and it rocks. It is one of those albums that sound better louder. This is a good thing. It's the best album the 90's never produced.

Favorite Tracks: There's No Secrets This Year, Panic Switch, Surrounded (Or Spiraling)

The Ecstatic by Mos Def:
Forget the tight flows. Forget the "new time signatures." Forget all the creative approaches to beats and tracks. All of these things make the album one neat surprise after another.

To me, though, this album is summed up best by the brilliance of some of Mos Def's rhymes from "Pistola."

"If you want to fall in love
Then where should you stand to begin with?
And when the fall is done
How bad should you plan to get injured?
And if you land on your feet
Do it count as a fall or a jump?
And do it feel like a fall
When the hands that pushed you
Were holding you up?"

Genius.

Favorite Tracks: Life in Marvelous Times, Casa Bey, Pretty Dancer, Pistola

The Open Door EP by Death Cab for Cutie:
This EP is only 4 new songs from the Narrow Stairs recording sessions with one demo from that album. This is clearly Ben's "fear of commitment" album. Little Bribes is a catchy song that belongs nowhere in their catalog sonically, lyrically or otherwise. The other three "new" songs are almost a trilogy of the aforementioned "fear of commitment" songs and each deal with different aspects of confronting reality and realizing you have/had a good thing and you're only getting older.

Funny how shortly after this album was released, Ben married girlfriend Zooey Deschanel.

Guess he worked it all out.

Favorite Tracks: A Diamond and a Tether, My Mirror Speaks, I Was Once a Loyal Lover

Favorite Lyrics: "All my friends are forward-thinking/ Getting hitched and quitting drinking/ I can feel them pulling away/ As I'm resigned to stay the same/ And you can't even begin to know/ How many times I've told myself I told you so..."

Hold Time by M Ward:
I don't recall when this album came out, but it definitely feels like January/February. I listened to this album during and after we moved. I was unemployed, home with a six month old baby, unpacking my belongings and creating a new home, while feeling completely disjointed and out of sync with life. This album made me feel better. Sonically, it's innovative in its ability to create atmosphere, and it is kitschy without any negative connotations. I just like this album.

Favorite Tracks: Epistemology, For Beginners

Favorite Lyrics: "Cause I just rolled and I tumbled/ Down a long road I stumbled/ While shooting in the dark as to what's best/ And finally I found you/ Without ever learning how to/ I put the right foot in front of the left/ And beyond that is anybody's guess..."

Cosmic Egg by Wolfmother:
This album rocks. It takes the throwback sounds of Zeppelin and Sabbath from Wolfmother's debut and reveals what Wolfmother sounds like apart from its influence. Andrew Stockdale has never sounded better vocally, and aside from production that is a tad too bass-heavy, the album sounds incredible.

Favorite Tracks: Sundial, 10,000 Feet, California Queen, New Moon Rising

Culture of Narcissists?

2009-12-15T12:58:00.002-06:00

Day 2 of Tabloid Media criticism.

Do you ever look at a celeb-centered TV show or gossip magazine and ask yourself “Why are they famous again?”

I do this constantly.

I understand who Paris Hilton is – an heiress to the Hilton Hotel fortune. But ask me why she is famous, and I couldn’t tell you.

I know who the Kardashians are, but I don’t know why they are famous. I just know that they are.

I do not see news media covering these people. I see tabloid media covering these people. Are you really famous because MTV put you on a show 5 years ago and now TMZ tracks your every move?

Now, you don’t even need to be relevant or popular to be famous. I know very few people who actually have positive opinions of people like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. Even the more-than-ridiculous Heidi Montag and Spencer Pratt are famous for no reason, yet there is a general hatred for them anywhere they appear.

So I guess my question is this: If you are only famous because TMZ followed you to the dry cleaner or E! gave you a reality show, are you really famous?

These “celebrities” are creations of the tabloid media, who then cover them as legitimate celebrities. Sometimes even the tabloids that cover these people criticize them for being famous for nothing.

Isn’t this just the tabloid media validating itself with its own created stars?
This is bad. But the effects are worse.

Now we have crazy nuts like Richard Heene making it his life’s goal to be famous for something – anything – to the point that he was willing to fool the nation into thinking his 6 year old was possibly dead and flying across the plains in a handcrafted balloon.

We have Tareq and Michaele Salahi crashing a White House State Dinner for fifteen minutes of fame.

The media, mainstream and tabloid, spend countless hours covering these attention-seeking idiots. So why would they care if their fame came not from something they earned, like being the best golfer in history?

The reason they are willing to stoop to the lowest depths to become famous is clear: There are plenty of famous people who aren’t particularly good at anything (Jessica Simpson), aren’t particularly interesting (Frank McCourt), and who don’t contribute anything to culture (Heidi and Spencer).

So, why would these people want to be shameless fame whores?

Why not?

They can receive validation from the tabloid media for anything they do, positively or negatively, to seek fame.

The question for debate is: Is this “reality” culture we live in creating a culture of narcissists?

It's Time to Back off on Tiger Woods

2009-12-14T12:35:00.002-06:00

Dear Tabloid Media,

What did Tiger Woods ever do to you?

Are we this invested in people’s failures that we must have up-to-the-minute accounting of who comes and goes at his homes? Which person’s car is in what driveway? Now, this isn't just about covering Tiger Woods. It's an invasive scrutiny of anyone who comes and goes at his home.

Granted, this is a man who has clearly screwed up. Big time. But had Tiger not had a bizarre car crash in the middle of the night under sketchy circumstances, would all of this “coverage” be warranted?

Tiger has never sought out the media or tried to manipulate the media to capitalize on his fame. He made his swings, collected his money, did his endorsements and went home.

He never created a “public persona” and Tweeted his life away to create a fan base. He simply was good at golf.

If Tiger had not crashed his car, I suspect he would have been able either to patch things up with his wife, or he would have gotten a quiet(er) divorce. You, the tabloid media, would have reported on his divorce, of course, but it would fade into the gray background of all the other celebrity breakups in history.

I fear all this coverage and scrutiny has made it impossible for Tiger to overcome this with his wife, and perhaps his career.

Tiger made the gross errors in judgment, but this perpetuation of it in the media may be what actually kills his career and marriage.

In Tiger’s original statement, he said something very interesting:
“Personal sins should not require press releases and problems within a family shouldn't have to mean public confessions.”

I realize that in this information age, the TMZ’s and E! News of the world will have a field day with anything. This is the stuff that keeps them in business. However, regardless of whether you think Tiger deserves the scrutiny he is receiving from the press or not, the sentiment of his statement is true.

This is by no means a justification of Tiger’s actions or choices. I’m merely pointing out that this is a personal matter and it’s none of our business.

It’s time to move on.

Sincerely,

John

John Mayer Battle Studies: Album Review

2009-11-30T22:36:00.002-06:00

(OK... Seriously, I'll write a real album review soon. Still spending some time with Battle Studies...)

Billy Mays: Auto-Tuned

2009-11-14T23:07:00.002-06:00

Everyone needs to see this video.

Slice O' Twitter: David Letterman Apology Edition

2009-10-05T23:14:00.005-05:00

Fifteen minutes after David Letterman's apology...

@askforgivness says it best.

Death Cab for Cutie - Cath... (Live at the Hall of Justice)

2009-10-05T00:21:00.001-05:00

Death of Saturn

2009-10-02T00:04:00.003-05:00

Roger Penske has rescinded on his plan to take over the Saturn brand from the "old," pre-bankruptcy General Motors.

I can't say that I'm sad.

When I think of Saturn when they were a "unique" brand, I think of plasic body panels, loud and buzzy interiors, and plastic dashboards that make Rubbermaid trash cans feel luxurious. Then, when GM started allowing Saturn to share a few of its other platforms, the brand became just another generic, badge-engineered division of General Motors, even if the cars were good.

It essentially became Oldsmobile. Good cars, but not very interesting.

When GM introduced Saturn, it was meant to be different - to make an American car to compete with imports.

This premise alone speaks volumes about where Detroit went wrong.

Rather than make modern, competitive vehicles under the Chevy, GMC, Buick, Pontiac, Cadillac and Oldsmobile brands, the savior of the division was Saturn. Saturn was positioned as the "American import fighter" and Geo was positioned as the "if we can't build them better, lets sell our own version of other successful cars."

Neither of these approaches worked to make General Motors competitive with imports. Slapping a new upstart GM division's badge on a Corolla and selling it alongside terrible Cavaliers cheapened any equity the car had by association with its Toyota roots. There was no brand equity in Geo products, despite the fact that cars like the Prizm were actually pretty great cars.

Saturn always seemed like a ruse to me. It appeared as if GM were forward thinking with new product, but it ended up as disappointing, bland, subpar cars - which is what GM was making at the time anyways. So what was the difference? Saturn represented the veneer of different over more of the same.

By the time GM gave Saturn some better products through badge engineering, it was too little too late. The Sky was awesome, the Vue (better in its most recent form) was the right product at the right time, and the Aura was a sharp looking car with a decent interior. The current Saturn line is a far cry from the S and L series popular in the 90s.

By this time, though, no one was showing up at Saturn, or GM for that matter.

I can't help but think that if General Motors had done more to improve its core product rather than spin-off divisions and buy and invest in brands like Saab and Hummer, maybe they could have avoided this whole mess. In the end, look at what happened: Saturn is dead. Pontiac is dead. Hummer is sold. Saab is sold. Oldsmobile and GEO are long distant memories.

By hook or by crook, GM was boiled down to what they should have remained focused upon in the first place: Chevy, Buick, Cadillac, and GMC. It just took years of lackluster products, hemorrhaging money problems, millions from the government, and bankruptcy for GM to learn to focus on its core brands.

(I must admit, I was a bit upset when I heard Pontiac, which has a rich automotive history, was being phased out and Saturn was going to survive. This seemed quite unfair.)

So Saturn is dead. Would it have been better for GM if it had never been born?

Where is the Next Mr. Rogers?

2009-10-01T13:33:00.002-05:00

Interesting blog post by my mother:

Where is the Next Mr. Rogers?

Pearl Jam - The Fixer (Video)

2009-09-29T22:59:00.004-05:00

Go Ahead. Save the Planet. Just Don't Take My Spot

2009-09-28T22:49:00.004-05:00

I ran across this on my new favorite website, Jalopnik, which features crazy tidbits about all aspects of automobiles.

Yes. That's right. Special parking for people driving Hybrid vehicles. At a hotel.

The first place I saw this was not on the web, but at my local IKEA store. (Finding something like this at IKEA was not at all surprising.)

This begs the question: What is this really about?

On the surface, I'm sure the justified reason for giving preferential treatment to the "hybrid community" is to show a reward for being a good citizen of the earth.

Good. This is what they want you to believe.

To me, the true reason is obvious.

The hotel chain in the picture wants to appear to be a "green" business. "Hey - you want to save the planet? We're cool with that. Here's a closer parking spot!"

Its marketing in a different direction. People who choose to drive hybrid vehicles tend to be very passionate about all things "green." Marketing departments understand this loyalty and have found a way to capitalize on it.

In all things retail/service, perception is reality. Cleaning product manufacturers don't come out with "green" cleaning products because its good for the environment. Food product companies don't suddenly come out with natural and organic lines because they want to promote healthier food. They change their product lines to capitalize on market trends and to change public perception to match those trends. If processed food and chemical cleaning agents are suddenly considered bad, and a company makes said products, they change the game to produce something that is in line with demand and what the public considers to be "good." If a hotel can brand itself as the "green" hotel, it will be guaranteed a certain loyal cliental.

I'm not saying any of this is bad. Being "green" is good. If given the chance, I'd be very happy owning a hybrid vehicle, especially after I got to spend a week with a Toyota Prius while my car was in the shop. Conservation and being friendly to the earth by the products we use and the way we live is good. It shouldn't be a political issue. We should all care about the planet and be careful with our environment.

So, hybrid owners: Enjoy your parking spot. You may feel rewarded for being green, but that business is really after your green.

Ryan Adams - Fix It

2009-09-23T22:34:00.001-05:00

Best of the Internet

2009-09-23T11:49:00.003-05:00

Here is your Wednesday, September 23, 2009 edition of the Best of the Internet! (Or at least the Internet that Static reads.)

Canadian Garages

Death Cab in a Cab

If You Printed the Internet

Drug Raid or 9 Hours of Wii?

And of course… taking the internet by storm…

People of Wal-Mart

Slice 'O Twitter: Mosters of Folk Edition

2009-09-22T23:52:00.004-05:00

Monsters of Folk appeared on the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien tonight. Approximately 15 minutes after the show concluded, here is what people were Tweeting about:

Geek Out Moment

2009-09-21T21:27:00.003-05:00

Ok. Total geek-out moment.

Ben Gibbard and Zooey Deschanel got married this past weekend.

Big event? Paparazzi? Made the headlines on TMZ?

Nope.

But Death Cab fans and Zooey fans (and there seems to be a lot of cross-over among these groups) are in "indie rock" heaven.

For me, it goes a little deeper. This is where my fantasy world gets waaaay real.

I love Death Cab for Cutie. I would call them my favorite band, inching past even Wilco, which is probably a better band. If I made music, it would sound like Death Cab. If I were a singer, I would want to sound like Ben Gibbard. In my little fantasy world, I would be Ben Gibbard.

At the same time, I have kind of developed a movie star crush on Zooey Deschanel ever since I saw her in Elf several years ago. This is a well-known crush. My wife will call me from the other room when she sees her on a movie commercial or the stray episode of Frasier in which she guest-starred.

"Hey, it's that actress you like..."

My little crush on Zooey got even bigger when she teamed up with M. Ward to form She & Him, a little indie rock outfit singing Zooey's retro-sounding, recorded-on-analog songs. A cute girl who can act AND sing AND write her own songs? And record them in one take? Genius.

When I ran across the news that Ben had proposed to Zooey shortly after Christmas, I went crazy. The guy I essentially wanted to be was marrying the girl I had a crush on.

This made perfect sense.

As I have read some blogs and news reports about the nuptials, the awesome thing that occurred is -- I am not the only one with these admirations/crushes on this just-at-the-radar couple.

Everywhere, fans of both are rejoicing.

(Perhaps this means Ben will stop writing the "fear of commitment" songs he's been cranking out lately.)

Congrats to the happy couple!

Health Debate Definitions

2009-08-31T12:58:00.004-05:00

Let's just clarify something:

Health care is the care administered by doctors and nurses in order to cure a person's medical issue.

Health Insurance is a private, for-profit entity that provides coverage and defrays the cost of health care based on the client's desire to pay for coverage.

We use the words "health care" too loosely, particularly in this debate. I can not stand politicians who say "the health care system in America is deplorable." No, sir. The health care system is staffed with some of the best doctors, nurses, staff and technology in the world. The problem is not our health care system. Please do not insult our doctors and nurses.

I also can not stand to hear politicians infer that people without elective coverage, patients can not get medical care. This is simply not true. If I break my arm and I'm uninsured (which I am,) no hospital will turn me away with a broken arm.

The emotional debate stems around this blurred and confusing jargon. Politicians are quick to paint the picture that our health care - your health care - is in peril. You might be turned away from care. This is simply untrue. There will always be health care, and there is nothing wrong with our health care system. Our politicians are quick to use the "grandma won't be able to get health care" illustration, and we are quick to side with grandma. But grandma will get the care she needs. The issue is how much she can and will have to pay for it.

The topic of debate is not about health care. It is about insurance, and whether the government should further regulate the private, for-profit companies, or provide a government run alternative. It is also a debate about the consequences, intended or unintended, of having a government run, controlled and regulated system.

These are topics that are debatable.

To me, it is not a debate over emotional hypotheticals. It is not a matter of "rights." We all have the right to health care and we will receive health care if we need it.The debate concerns whether government should have control over our well-being and our health more so than it already does. The debate is over the costs of health care and who should have to pay for it. The debate is over health care as a right or entitlement.

There is plenty to debate. But lets keep our language and definitions clear.

On Blogging, etc.

2009-08-17T12:25:00.001-05:00

Ladies and gentlemen who read this blog, allow me to herald my return to blogging!

(The sporadic sprinting of blog posts that will inevitably be followed by a two month lapse in posting.)

Things will be different, this time. I swear.

(They probably won’t be.)

I have tons of new ideas and lots to comment on in the world of politics and pop culture.

(If I don’t decide to play Mob Wars for 3 hours instead.)

I’m sorry. I’m a bad blogger. (Did I ever mention I have A.D.D.? No. Seriously.)

A while ago I was perusing my Facebook page, catching up on my own status messages and I thought to myself, I am wasting a lot of good ideas for blog posts by boiling them down into statements that will fit into a status message or a Tweet.

Maybe I should start expanding this stuff.

Then I started looking at this very blog and the vignettes I post on here and I thought to myself – I’m short-changing a lot of these posts by keeping them brief, light and readable.

Maybe I should start expanding this stuff.

Then I remembered what I love about being a writer in the first place: Essays. Essays are my specialty. A good 3-5,000 word essay delving into a topic with a defined story arc and lesson learned is what I do best.

So why has it been almost three years since I’ve actively written one?

I’m using my ideas on my blog, Twitter and Facebook and calling them complete when there is so much more ground to cover and meaning to mine.

So what does this mean for this blog?

I have no clue.

I’m not sure it will really impact the frequency of my posts, which are quite sporadic as previously mentioned. Hopefully it will impact the quality of the posts for the better, not the worse. I’m sure I will still Tweet and update my status on Facebook too. The difference will be to look around me and what I’m already thinking about and mine the gold.

That’s what a good writer does. All the other things I do are what a lazy writer does.

Let’s see what happens.

More on Stockholm Syndrome (From someone who is paying attention....)

2009-07-04T14:07:00.004-05:00

Here is more information on the Derek Webb Stockholm Syndrome game from someone who has been paying attention and can explain what has been going on.

I just went to Paradise is a Parking Lot and downloaded all the "stems" and I'm going to try to decipher what is going on here.

Also, @ssyndrome on Twitter today says"

THE END 07/07 THE BEGINNING.

Album finally due out Tuesday?

Perhaps.

Suffering from Stockholm Syndrome

2009-07-03T00:26:00.003-05:00

Derek Webb's album Stockholm Syndrome was supposed to be released sometime in May, but according to Webb, his typically open-minded record label would not release this album in finished form for an undisclosed reason.

Derek then went underground, Tweeting only as ssyndrome on Twitter, and leaving cryptic messages on his website. After this, a game ensued city to city with clues revealed on different cryptic messages and scavenger hunts for "stems."

I'm honestly not quite sure how it all works, as I'm watching from the sidelines.

I have been wondering, though, is this for real?

Is he really having trouble with the label? Is this game just drumming up interest? Is this the creative, innovative and daring Derek Webb being creative, innovative and daring? Is he attempting to take the concept of an album and make it into an interactive experience in a way like no other?

Is he just proving some point that some people will follow whatever he asks to get the album?

I have no idea. Maybe yes to all.

I have wondered, though, how this game will be received by his fans. All of his fans that I've met are pretty much people like me. (and I've seen him live 5 times, so I have a pretty good idea of the type of people make up his audience.) I can not help but wonder -- if and when Derek's audience will get tired of this "game" and if anyone will play.

I (sort of) got my answer this morning as Derek posted a status on his Facebook page:

You can find Derek Webb at the Rutledge in Nashville, TN tomorrow night (friday, july 3rd @ 6pm). Questions will be answered. The beginning is the end is the beginning.

Initially, a lot of the responses in the comment box were negative, expressing frustration about "the game" and demanding the music. Some expressed a bit of anger if they find out this was all a publicity stunt. Strangely, (or perhaps not strangely) those comments have since been deleted.

I have no idea what is going on, and I'm kind of over trying to figure it out. Apparently a few others are too.

Derek, will we really get the answers tomorrow night, and when we do have the answers, will the game be worth it?

We shall see.

Here's another commentary on the hoopla from our friend at Lux Venit.

The beginning is the end is the beginning...

Buy Elliott Smith's Car

2009-07-01T14:05:00.004-05:00

After a week of celebrity deaths and breakups, here is a bit of good news.

The late singer/songwriter Elliott Smith's 1999 Volkswagen Passat was just sold by his sister Ashley for $4,000 in Austin, Texas. The original ad appeared on Craigslist.

One hundred percent of the proceeds have gone to the SIMS Foundation, which offers Austin-area musicians with mental health and addiction recovery. Elliott Smith struggled with drug addiction and mental health issues while he was alive which may have prompted his alleged suicide by stabbing himself in the heart.

What is cool to me is that his sister, who has driven the car since Smith's death in 2003, is not auctioning the car off for profit or for more than its worth and stands to gain nothing from the transaction. It has gone 100% to the SIMS foundation.

What a cool piece of history for a fan of Elliott Smith (or just a great ride for anyone, really). The other cool thing is that the local Volkswagen dealer heard about the story and were inspired to offer their services for free to fix the remaining problems of the vehicle.

Good deeds breed more good deeds.

What a nice story after a week of tragedy and heartache in the world of pop-culture.

Billy Mays 1958-2009

2009-06-28T14:16:00.005-05:00

Unfortunately, another one bites the dust.

Billy Mays is dead.

Billy Mays is interesting because this guy was famous just for being an effective pitchman. He was pitching a product, but in the same motion created himself as a brand.

I remember almost every product I have ever seen Billy Mays pitch to me.

Long live your laundry.

Michael Jackson 1958-2009

2009-06-25T23:08:00.003-05:00

Michael Jackson is dead at age 50.

There isn't much I can say that others won't say much better.

Unfortunately, by the time I started paying attention to Michael Jackson, he was well into his crazy/creepy years. One thing I can say is that in spite of all of his wacky behavior and allegations of pedophilia, nothing usurps his magical reign at the top of the charts during the peak of his career. In the eyes of a lot of his fans, nothing trumps his musical genius.

My heart goes out to his family and children.

I think its time to bust out Thriller.

Jon and Kate Plus Hate

2009-06-22T23:12:00.002-05:00

Jon and Kate broke up. No big surprise. Even in the happy times, their world was far from perfect.

I'm not going to fault Jon Gosselin for standing up to Kate after all these years and becoming his own man. I'm not going to fault him for the new sports cars and earrings and the other things he wanted. Its something he would have been well-served to have done long before any kids were born.

I'm not going to fault Kate Gosselin for becoming a personality and parlaying that into a career as an author and speaker and becoming glamorous to fit the part. There are plenty of other women we all love and respect who have gone from being a housewife to being a media mogul or Speaker of the House or something like that. They are respected for their achievements. Kate is criticized.

Neither of those things are what their marriage breakup is really about. Whatever the reasons are and will be, where there is anger and resentment, there is problems in the marriage. Its not about who they are or what the show has made them become, its about the people involved.

Everyone has an opinion on Jon and Kate, but very few people really know what its like to be Jon and Kate. Sure, from the comfort of our living rooms we can see what we think is their life and we all have them figured out and have divided ourselves (the viewers) into "Team Jon" and "Team Kate." But what we all forget is these are real people dealing with real issues in front of the camera.

We feel like we know it all, but we really don't. And I'm sure out on the Internet, there is going to be a lot of backlash.

I enjoy being a critic, but in this case, I am having a hard time being critical of their decision and the events leading up to it. I have opinions, but I don't have any real information. I just have a bunch of information that makes me feel like I know enough about the situation to have opinions, but watching a marriage unravel on television is very different than knowing the details.

Who am I to feel qualified to make judgments on how they handled their marriage or careers? Because I watch a TV show? Not so much...

Reality TV is not the same as reality just like a photograph is not the same thing as a place or event. It is entertainment, and I am feeling sad that we are all being entertained by the dissolution of someone's marriage.

My best to both Jon and Kate as they sort this out.

Sandra McCracken: Live Under the Lights and Wires

2009-06-17T14:26:00.004-05:00

Nashville-based independent artist Sandra McCracken just released her live collection Live Under the Lights and Wires which features songs from her various studio albums.

The cool thing about this album (in addition to Sandra's amazing songwriting) is the fact that this album and concert was recorded live in Sandra and husband Derek Webb's living room in front of a small audience. This all gives her very personal songs a much more intimate feel, including backing guitar and vocals by Webb.

There are plenty of songs from her last two albums, 2006's Gravity | Love and 2008's standout Red Balloon, which was one of Paste Magazine's Top 50 albums of 2008. (Definitely check it out!) There are also songs from all six of her studio albums from the past 10 years. One of my favorites actually comes from her 2008 release Ampersand EP with Derek Webb "When the Summer's Gone."

This album is available on iTunes and other download sites or from Sandra's website. You can also download a free 6 song sampler from this album on NoiseTrade or by clicking the widget on the sidebar of this page.

Check out this performance from Under the Lights and Wires, "Halfway" originally from Red Balloon.

Enjoy!

Jay Bennett 1963-2009

2009-05-26T15:04:00.004-05:00

I was sad to hear yesterday of the passing of Jay Bennett, formerly the guitarist and multi-instru mentalist of my favorite band Wilco.

While I will always believe Jeff Tweedy is the leader and main idea guy in Wilco, I think a lot of credit to Wilco becoming a creative force in music should go to Jay. His creativity and production skills brought a new vibe to Tweedy's music.

I've always thought Jeff Tweedy was at his creative best when he had a strong collaborator, and Jay Bennett was the man for a long time. His influences are all over the dark-pop masterpieces Summerteeth and Yankee Hotel Foxtrot (although the latter also has a heavy Jim O'Rourke influence as well, as O'Rourke toned down where Bennett went too far with ambiance.) These two albums took Wilco to new creative heights and allowed them to transcend being another alt-country bar band.

Jay Bennett loved Wilco. However, just like Paul McCartney and John Lennon, Tweedy and Bennett's creative energy turned into creative conflict, and Bennett left the band knowing it was for the best.

As I listen to the Wilco albums that came after Bennett's departure, I can not envision him having a place on those albums. Wilco became refined in a different direction with fresh blood and a new vision.

I have listened to a couple of Jay Bennett's post-Wilco solo albums and there is a lot of the signature magic Bennett brought to Wilco, but it sounds sad and lonely without the rest of the band. On some of the albums, Bennett sounds like a man who went through a terrible breakup and is putting on a brave face.

Bennett was a talented musician who was at his peak when producing or collaborating with other artists. His contributions to Wilco were amazing, and it is sad to see someone with such talent pass so young.

My favorite Wilco track with Tweedy and Bennett at the top of their collaborative energy is the song Summer Teeth from the album Summerteeth. Check it out below:

Meet Brite Revolution

2009-05-19T23:55:00.004-05:00

I very much enjoy the music of Andrew Osenga (The Normals, Caedmon's Call). Also, I have developed a Facebook Friendship with Andy over the past several months (yes, he does personally interact with his fans and responds to emails, etc.)

Through Andy, I discovered Brite Revolution, a website dedicated to a combination of supporting artists monetarily, getting music to the fan (and getting money from the fan), and supporting charities.

I took the next step and became a "fan" of Brite Revolution after wondering what this new site Andrew Osenga had joined.

Check out the core values of Brite Revolution from their "about" page:

"Brite Revolution is more than a subscription-based, DRM-free music download site. We created Brite Revolution to respond to needs.

Artists need to be able to make music again without going into debt or losing ownership of their music.

Fans need more music from their favorite artists on a regular basis and feel like a part of an event again.

Philanthropic organizations need more opportunities to connect directly with people to make a difference in the world."

That pretty much sums it up. For about $5 a month, you can download tons of music from Brite Revolution-affiliated artists.

I am fascinated at the different methods artists can use to get their music out to fans and make a living doing it. The album concept for releasing music is changing, record labels and their support of acts are dwindling, and downloading is becoming the new record store. These new avenues (iTunes, eMusic, NoiseTrade, Brite Revolution and others) all have their unique niche and address different ways to get music out to fans old and new.

What I like about Brite Revolution is its support of the artist, and the focus on giving back through charity work. I'm still working out how it all works (as far as the actual subscription and downloading and whatnot) but I am very excited about the possibilities.

I agreed to help spread the word about Brite Revolution to help out, so as I get updates from BR, I will pass them along!

Please check out Brite Revolution and tell me what you think.

Dear Miss California

2009-05-13T11:41:00.002-05:00

We're going to have a little lesson on the First Amendment and the Freedom of Speech. But first, lets read the actual words of the First Amendment from the Constitution itself:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

To boil it down -- you have the freedom to say whatever you want in America and not be punished for it by the government.

This does not mean that this freedom afforded by the Constitution gives a person the freedom from responsibility for what you say.

Miss California, Carrie Prejean, has taken a lot of heat for declaring her disapproval of gay marriage. This lead to a cat fight with gossip blogger Perez Hilton. (The bigger story probably had to do with the public fight between the two rather than over her comments about gay marriage.)

Now that she has come under fire for the racy underage modeling photos about which she mislead the pageant judges, in her statement, she made the gay marriage comments a First Amendment issue.

Please watch the following video clip of Miss California's statement:

She feels she was punished for speaking her beliefs? Was she arrested or jailed or fined or brought to justice by any government entity because she spoke her support of traditional marriage (which generally happens to be the law of the land)?

No.

She was not punished. She was criticized. She got in a public spectacle with Perez Hilton, who asked a loaded question out of his own personal agenda.

She exactly had the freedom to express her views -- the freedom for which her grandfather fought in World War II.

What Miss California can not seem to deal with is the consequences of what she said. I do not say this to mean that her views on gay marriage are right or wrong or have inherent positive or negative consequences. The consequences I am talking about are the effects of making herself a public figure and making bold statements. She does not want to deal with the negative press and criticism she is facing, therefore, she is attempting to make it a first amendment issue and inferring that her critics are infringing on her rights.

This is simply not true. Just as she has the freedom to express her views on gay marriage, her critics have their equal right to voice their criticism or opposing viewpoints. Should they be polite and do this in a manner that is not attacking Miss California for having her own opinion? Yes. Should the discourse be respectful? Sure. But this doesn't mean they are infringing on her rights just because she feels attacked.

Freedom of Speech does not absolve you from the responsibility to live with the effects of what you say. People get confused about this all the time. They think that Freedom of Speech allows them to say whatever they want at any time and any opposition or criticism is infringing on their rights.

At the end of the day, words mean something, and you must live with the consequences of what you say. That doesn't mean the consequences are always fair (I don't think the criticism of her comments is warranted) but personal responsibility is the price we pay to say whatever we like. Passing the buck and twisting the First Amendment to scold critics is not the way to handle the responsibility.

Death Cab for Cutie - The Open Door EP

2009-03-26T15:23:00.002-05:00

Hi Everyone --

Been on a little mini "vacation" for the past few days, but I'm back rested and no longer sick.

While I'm thinking of something to write about, check out the songs from the new Death Cab for Cutie EP, "The Open Door" on Stereogum. It will be available as a digital download March 31, and as a standard disc a week or so later.

Death Cab for Cutie - The Open Door EP

Music Lessons with John Mayer Part II

2009-03-18T22:00:00.001-05:00

Sorry, kids. Wednesday is a sick day, so you get part II of John Mayer recording his new album and talking about writing music.

Music Lessons with John Mayer

2009-03-17T08:00:00.000-05:00

Fascinating exposition on guitar technique from John Mayer. Enjoy!

Technosocial Corner: The "New" Facebook

2009-03-16T08:00:00.000-05:00

Ok, I admit it.

When they changed Facebook again -- the third switch since I joined the site in April 2008 -- I complained.

I was disoriented. I couldn't figure out what the new version improved over the old version.

Of course, outrage and anger was spewing forth throughout my friends list immediately. Status messages echoed each other along the lines of "Johnny Q. Public hates the new Facebook! Why do they keep changing it?"

After a day or two to orient myself to the revised features, I think I like it best of all the versions I've seen since joining the site.

With every "improved" version of Facebook, things become less cluttered and more streamlined.

I am amused, however, with the people who automatically equate change with bad. I have heard very few real criticisms of the nuances the new version displays. The knee-jerk reaction is "I hate it because it is different."

It also cracks me up how many "1,000,000 Strong Against the New Facebook" groups crop up after any change.

In my opinion, with all the added features -- uploading notes, videos, Pieces of Flair, applications, comments, "likes" and whatnot -- Facebook can be a cluttered place. It seems to me that this revision of the classic formula addresses the overload one can suffer from all the possibilities the site provides.

So, don't hate, appreciate! Step outside of the reaction to hate change because it is different and try to make the new Facebook your own.

Almost Famous

2009-03-15T23:08:00.007-05:00

Here's my pitch for a new "reality" TV show:

Young, first time dad loses his job and decides to stay home and watch his 9 month old child to save on babysitting. The show features the overworked teacher wife and the fascinating things that happen when the roles in a relationship are reversed.

Alright, camera crews, you can start immediately.

No? Sounds boring? Ok, let's throw in a few extra kids and document a real "Daddy Day Care."

No?

I'm sure I can come up with some other way to become famous.

I've been thinking lately about what angle I could use to gain 15 minutes of fame. Apparently, it is not too hard. Unfortunately, though, I am not a pregnant man, I have not given birth to octuplets, and while my name is John, my wife's name is not Kate and we do not have twins and sextuplets.

Nope, just me, my son, and my wife. But less interesting situations have managed to catapult people to (briefly) rich and famous status. (See the aforementioned situations.) And trust me, I can find ways to make my seemingly common and mundane existence utterly fascinating to a certain group of television watchers. I could totally make my reality into TV gold.

Let's look at the OctoMom, Nadya Suleman. All she did was get impregnated with 8 or more embryos and give birth to 8 children. What would be utterly overwhelming to the average person (particularly one with 6 existing children) was a moment upon which to capitalize for the OctoMom. What show has she not appeared upon? She's currently shopping around a tape of herself giving birth to the baseball team of children before they have even been released from the hospital.

I've seen reports where the cash-strapped mother-in-foreclosure is getting cash in waves after all of her television appearances -- $20,000 here, $30,000 there. She has probably made more cash off this than I have in the 5 years I've been in the professional world after college. I'm not saying she and her brood don't need the cash, but all she did to get it was pop out some kids and capitalize on the media attention. This woman doesn't need a reality show -- the entertainment media has made her life a reality show by default with 24/7 coverage. Her story is so prevalent that many of my friends refuse to watch any show featuring her story. I feel almost wrong to further tell her story on this blog.

The reality success story I just can not understand is Jon and Kate Plus 8. This is the TLC show featuring Jon and Kate, their twins and their sextuplets. I have yet to find anything remotely interesting about their show. (Not for a lack of trying -- I have been watching episode after episode on a marathon today trying to figure it out.) It is literally the most common, mundane existence I can imagine there would be under their situation.

While most of the recent reality flavors-of-the-month feature children, (and this would certainly apply to my pitch) this need not be the case. You could just appear in the audience at Late Night with Jimmy Fallon and have your Twitter name passed out in an experiment to see how many people will follow you.

This was the case with Bryan Brinkman, who now has 34,125 followers (including myself) as a result of this appearance on the Jimmy Fallon show. Now I can follow this guy's every movement via his Twitter account as he Tweets occurrences of his life nearly hourly.

Have any of these people done anything special to warrant fame and fortune? Not particularly. And neither have I. All they had to do was utilize their situation and package it into an angle. I'm not sure if that makes these quasi-celebrities smart, or if it says more about the fact that there are people who create a market for people who just want to be famous.

So who is going to pick up my TV show? I'm ready to see my name in lights!

The Twitter Experiment

2009-03-14T13:15:00.000-05:00

I write this blog and a lot of my friends and family read it, but a I get a lot of hits referred from Google and other people just browsing other Blogger blogs. These people interest me because I know absolutely nothing about them. You may be one of these phantom people reading this right now.

I'm in the midst of an experiment/ study of the use of Twitter, both as a personal device, and as a way to promote and create a buzz for this very blog you are reading.

Here is my challenge: If you are reading this blog -- friend or phantom -- and you have a Twitter account (or want to start one) please consider following Static and Distortion on Twitter. Search for username staticdistort for updates on this blog directly from the editor himself!

Let's see what happens!

Thanks,

John

Concerning the Renaming of Sears Tower

2009-03-14T08:00:00.000-05:00

"Hey Steve, want to go check the Chicago skyline from the observation deck at Willis Tower?"

"The what tower?"

"Exactly."

How do you rename a historic landmark? This kind of thing happens a lot in sports fields, but a landmark building like the Sears Tower? And they want to paint it silver to show off its "green advances?"

Silver? Really?

Say it ain't so.

Reinvention

2009-03-14T00:24:00.004-05:00

I have realized that I am making this too hard on myself.

Maybe its my background as a journalist, or perhaps it is my love for the short essay format. I am making blogging too difficult, thus resulting in writer's block, thus resulting in no blogging.

I like to have complete, concise topics and issues in a fully-formed essay, rather than quick commentary, which is what I think this blog really should be.

I will still pepper in longer pieces (ironically they are the short essay style) but I will focus more on quicker commentary on things as I observe them. That takes the pressure off the essays (which I will probably write offline and import them to Blogger) and give me more time to flesh out and develop them.

That being said, I am going to introduce some specific blog types for Static and Distortion:

LUNCH TIME MUSINGS: These have been in effect for a while now and consist of my thoughts on topics written over my lunch hour. Seeing as I am unemployed at the moment, these will be fewer and farther between, as I have no imposed lunchtime routine.

BLOGGING FROM THE BASEMENT: My basement is my sanctuary. It is always neat, tidy and welcoming. I have my office down there, my library, my music library, the Internet and television -- all the accoutrements needed to be a pop culture observer and critic. These blog posts typically will be written in the wee hours of the night, since this is the usual time I retreat to "The Lair" for some solitude.

ADVENTURES IN ENGLISH: Posts of this nature will be examining the uses of the English language in culture today, their history in the English language, and other tidbits of knowledge concerning this fine language of ours.

WORD STUDY: These posts will kind of be similar to Adventures in English but will be specific to specific words and their meaning.

POP CULTURISTS ANONYMOUS: Commentary on interesting (or not-so-interesting happenings in pop culture.

POLITICAL SCIENCE: Blog posts about happenings in politics/ current events.

TECHNOSOCIAL CORNER: Blog posts about inventions and ideas pertaining to how we communicate with each other using technology and social networking.

All entries in these categories will be of the shorter variety.

Let us see how this goes. I will attempt to be more diligent in blogging and you tell your friends!

Honey Bunches of What?

2009-01-25T16:18:00.002-06:00

I have always been a big fan of the cereal Honey Bunches of Oats. My favorite part of the cereal is, of course, the honey bunches of oats. I love the bunches so much that I wished for years that they would make a cereal of just the bunches.

They do. It is called Just Bunches. In fact, I am eating some as I type this. Honey Roasted Just Bunches, to be exact.

But I got to thinking, if these bunches are the bunches of oats, and they are honey roasted, then isn't what I am eating actually Honey Bunches of Oats in its most pure form? Then why is it called Just Bunches? Shouldn't THIS cereal be called Honey Bunches of Oats, and the original recipe with the flakes and whatnot be called Honey Bunches of Oats Plus?

Is this new cereal a return to simplicity, or a strange and confusing concept of deconstruction?

Who cares. Its tasty!

Blogging Blagojevich

2008-12-09T14:49:00.001-06:00

Album Madness

2008-11-23T16:11:00.002-06:00

What do you do when you have more than 1,000 compact discs?

I don't know.

Today is categorization day. This is the breakdown:

Group A: These are my main CD collection. This is the music I actively listen to on a regular basis. These artists are on my iPod. This is the collection I show friends, and they are alphabetized by artist, then are placed in order of album release. If my house burned down and I lost these CDs, I'd be very sad.

Group B: These are largely burned CDs and CDs without cases. There are 3 wallets that hold 240 CDs each, and one that holds 64. Yes, they are full.

Group C: Christian "rock" music I listened to in the 1990s when I was in high school. They go in a drawer in my closet.

Group D: Albums I consider "nostalgic classics" such as Hootie and the Blowfish, Blues Traveler, and Collective Soul: Stuff I want to remember and not get rid of, but I only dust them off occasionally. They also go in a drawer in the closet.

Group E: Chaos. Unfiled. Burned CDs, albums without cases, mixes, I don't even know what else is in here, but I'm about to find out.

Now on Shuffle

2008-11-22T23:22:00.003-06:00

One of the things that fascinate me the most in this world is my iPod and its many capabilities. I can surf the web, play black jack, sync my calendars and contacts, write notes, check the weather and stocks, and, oh yes -- listen to music.

The best part about owning an iPod is the shuffle feature. I can put my iPod on shuffle and its like listening to the radio, only there are no commercials and I know I will like ever song. Also, my iPod on shuffle amuses me greatly when I can hear Norah Jones, Rage Against the Machine, Mos Def, Blue Oyster Cult, Colin Hay, and Johnny Cash in succession. Throw in the Dixie Chicks in there and its a very strange party.

Last weekend, my iPod played the following three songs in succession:

1. What's Been Going On by Amos Lee
2. What's Going On by Marvin Gaye
3. What Goes On by the Beatles

In an iPod with 1,255 songs on it, how does this happen? It was clearly messing with my head. (And kind of blowing my mind.)

Later that same night, the magical iPod played "Wind Cries Mary" by Jimi Hendrix, followed by John Mayer's cover version of the song. Oddly, this completely changed my feelings about the John Mayer version. The Wind Cries Mary is one of my favorite songs by Jimi Hendrix and I had always thought the John Mayer version was pretty good -- certainly a respectable cover of the classic tune. However, I had formed this opinion when the songs were played independently of each other. Following the original, John Mayer's version sounded quite a bit more amateurish to me and now I barely like the song.

Recently, Apple introduced the "Genius" feature to iTunes 8. This is an apt title, as this feature frequently makes genius connections. Now, you are no longer responsible for making your own mixes and playlists. Pick a song, click genius, and see what happens. You will have a mix of songs that are similar by artists, feel and sound. Click a classic rock song? You'll get a classic rock mix pulled from the classic rock songs found in your music library. If it's 70's rock, you'll get mostly 70's rock and maybe one or two modern classics in the vein of 70's rock.

My new game with this version of random music is to pick a song I know several artists cover from my iTunes library. (The Jimi Hendrix and John Mayer versions of the same song are a prime example.) I then choose one of the various versions of the same song and click the genius feature and just see if any of the other versions of the song appear.

I did an experiment with this idea. I took Amy Millan's (from Stars and Broken Social Scene) version of the Death Cab for Cutie song "I Will Follow You Into the Dark" and hit the Genius feature to see if the Death Cab original appeared in the same mix. I did this 15 times and never once did the original appear in the same playlist with the cover. The Genius knows the song has already appeared on the list.

Technology is fun.

And life is more fun when its a little bit random.

Traversing a Weird Commercial

2008-11-12T22:37:00.003-06:00

A few weeks ago, I discussed my least favorite car commercial ever, Toyota's "Saved by Zero Campaign."

Here's another one that has me puzzled:

A few things come to mind:

1. Isn't this dangerous? If shoes started falling from the sky, I'd probably stay in my car for fear of...

2. Why isn't anyone standing outside getting hit on the head with shoes? Can you imagine what a stiletto would do to a skull falling from the heavens? And not just your skull...

3. Why isn't the pretty brand new Chevy getting the crap dented out of it?

4. So the lady runs out and fills the large cargo area of the truck with shoes. How does she know if she is getting pairs of shoes. How does she know they are her size? Wouldn't the shoes be potentially scuffed (or bloodied) from their journey from the sky?

5. What part of this has ANYTHING to do with this car? And what part of this dream world of shoes falling from the heavens with no consequences is supposed to lure me into a Chevy dealership?

I really think too hard when watching commercials.

Lunch Break Musings: Economic Crisis

2008-11-12T12:56:00.003-06:00

Let me preface this post by saying that I am not an economist, neither am I a political scientist. I'm a rank amateur. I'm just a dude with a blog.

But I have been thinking about the current economic crisis, and more specifically, the way the government is dealing with it.

What is not clear is how it is possible that the republicans are blaming the democrats for setting up the fall, and the democrats are blaming the republicans (and Bush) for standing idly by while it happened.

It can't be the fault of both sides, at least not in the way it is depicted in the fighting between parties. It is possible that both sides could have done a better job at anticipating the collapse and attempt to do something about it. Ultimately, though, this is supposed to be a free market, and further regulation by the government would have hampered that.

Who doesn't get the blame in all of this? The consumer feeling the pinch. The company about to go under. They are the victims, while each political party calls the other the corrupt bully.

Something no one is able to explain to me is how the consumer who took on more debt than they should have should have no fault in the problem. Also, the companies that overextended their lending to people who could not afford to pay it back seem to be surprised they are in the financial state they are in.

I understand that there are allegations of corrupt companies luring people in maliciously and extending credit to them, but is there no responsibility on the part of the consumer to know their stuff before signing on the dotted line?

The government can not blame the consumer in the end because these are the constituents who vote them into office and keep their campaign coffers flush with cash. Government is the savior, and if they save the consumer, they will be reelected.

The government is supposed to be the best and brightest making decisions that impact an entire nation. What I have seen in the cross-fighting over the blame for the economic crisis is not the best and brightest attempting to fix what is wrong, but two parties casting blame on each other and trying to tailor a plan that will appeal to their constituents. This clearly shows that the government is not out for the country (and ultimately not for the consumer) but out for themselves and their party.

Electioneering on Behalf of the Election

2008-11-03T18:40:00.003-06:00

The polls will open in less than 24 hours.

Oh wait – I take that back. The polls opened months ago. People have been “early voting” for weeks now.

So let’s try this again:

The polls will close in a mere 24 hours.

Shortly thereafter we will know who will be our next president.

Oh wait – I take that back. We already know who will be our next president.

At least that was the conversation this morning on the Bill Press radio show.

I caught about five minutes of his show this morning on my way to the office and I was able to catch a brief interchange between Press and CNN correspondent John King. I am grossly paraphrasing, but it went something like this:

Press: “If John McCain had done one or two things differently, could he have won this election.”

King, after explaining why the odds were stacked against McCain, said: “He couldn’t have won this election.”

If you listened to this show this morning, you might think it was the morning of November 5, the day after the election, not November 3, the day before it.
There are many things I find disturbing about the two scenarios I have discussed in the first part of this post.

While I see and understand the benefit of early voting (shorter lines on election day, flexibility for those who have a hard time voting because of work and life commitments), to me, there is something unsettling about starting the vote a month in advance.

I don’t understand how someone – even the most loyal partisan – can be so entirely sure of their candidate that they can pull the trigger on their vote a month in advance. A lot can happen in a month in politics. Despite the fact that this campaign cycle seems to be never ending, a month in a presidential campaign is a lifetime. Campaigns rise and fall within a month. Campaigns rise and fall within a day. Campaigns rise and fall on a single word.

Two months ago, had you asked me to cast a vote, I may have voted for someone other than who I intend to vote for tomorrow. Even a month ago, I was still uncertain. For the first time in my adult life, I have been an undecided voter. I was in the primaries, and I have been in the general election. (This is taking into account a potential third party vote, not between Republican and Democrat.)

So, while I understand what early voting does for the logistical problems with everyone voting on one day, I think there is something lost in the process. There are people jumping to their conclusion before the race is won.

That being said, there also is the problem of people declaring the election won before the election “deadline” of November 4 has come. This has been done for almost a month, and with increasing intensity over the past few weeks, and the blame goes to the polls.

Don’t get me wrong – polls have their place. And you’d better believe the candidates know exactly how they are polling and exactly what they need to do to fill in the gaps in their support. But in the past week, the polls are causing people to declare Barack Obama as president, despite the fact that the polls are largely within the margin of error. The polls that are wide are also erratic: Up one day, and down another. The state-to-state polls are pretty damning for McCain if you are counting up the Electoral College votes. Even still, the polls are meant to predict where the campaigns are, not the outcome of an unfinished election.

The biggest problem with the polls calling one candidate or the other the inevitable winner is the effect is has on the psyche of the voter. Obama’s supporters may not come out because they feel as if he is going to win big with or without them and vote for Nader. Likewise, McCain’s supporters may feel as though it’s a lost cause and cast a vote for Bob Barr or not come out at all.

What is the answer that trumps all of the problems and cuts clear through the hazy areas of this election? Vote your conscience. Vote for the candidate who you believe is the best for the job. Educate yourself on the candidates and their positions and filter out all of the political rhetoric.

Happy Halloween. I Guess.

2008-10-31T14:36:00.003-05:00

Happy Halloween.

Today is Halloween in the United States of America. Tonight children all over will be knocking on doors asking for candy with the veiled threat of vandalism if their request is not honored. Teenagers skip the asking for candy part and go straight to eggings, TPing houses, and smashing pumpkins. (Which always leads my dad right into his annual joke when he sees smashed pumpkins everywhere: "Looks like Billy Corgan has been in the neighborhood!"

This is a holiday we celebrate with increasing exuberance. In the past five years, I have noticed a large increase in the size and elaboration of Halloween decorations.

One thing I have never understood, even as a child, is why we take so much joy in celebrating mummies and skeletons and decapitated zombies and spiders and tomb stones and cobwebs and... death.

Why does your fifth grader want to trick or treat with an axe in his head and pieces of his brain oozing down his cheek? I doubt most people even think about how disturbing this is because, well, its expected. It's Halloween after all.

As a child, I never even thought about the goulish parts of Halloween. The few years we did celebrate Halloween by carving pumpkins and going trick or treating, the focus for me always was on the getting free candy aspect. When we stopped celebrating Halloween, it was kind of over for me. I reluctantly dressed up for one costume party at a fraternity in college, but I gained no enjoyment dancing around to Jay-Z songs dressed as a dude who had just gotten out of bed.

I don't know why we want to celebrate the trappings of Halloween at all. Maybe I'm a party pooper, but I just don't get it.

So, Happy Halloween. I wish you all joy as you celebrate creepy stuff.

Synchronized Debate

2008-10-30T10:44:00.001-05:00

In the Wake of the Jennifer Hudson Murders

2008-10-29T12:30:00.003-05:00

Late last week, American Idol runner-up and Academy Award winner Jennifer Hudson lost her mother, brother and nephew to a heinous murder at her family home in Chicago. It is suspected that her brother-in-law may be involved.

This is an unthinkable tragedy. I do not like to use cliches like "unthinkable tragedy" but it certainly applies. The way this case went down reminds me of the type of storyline that only seems plausible on an episode of C.S.I. or Law and Order.

Jennifer Hudson has endured the worst kind of grief and horror. From reports I have read, she personally identified the bodies of her three family members, each who died from multiple gunshot wounds.

Several very interesting Chicago reactions have come out of this tragedy that have left me completely baffled.

One came from a caller on the Roe Conn Show on 890 AM WLS on Monday. This caller questioned why Jennifer Hudson had not moved her family out of that neighborhood now that she is a successful actress and musician. Upon rebuttal by Mr. Conn informing the caller that Hudson had reportedly offered this to her mother, but her mother turned her down to live in the family home, the caller then asserted that Ms. Hudson should have hired bodyguards for her family.

By implication, this whole thing would have been avoided had Jennifer Hudson just opened her purse and paid for her family to get our or be protected. The focus of this person's comments were not on the person who committed the crime, but on the victim of the crime not doing enough to prevent the crime.

The second incident came from Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, using the Hudson family murders to promote his agenda to ban firearms. His claim was -- had there not been guns available, this murder would not have happened. Again, the focus is not on the person who committed the crime, but this time on the method by which the crime was committed.

But what is more disturbing about Daley's comments is his inability to recognize that not having a gun would not have prevented these murders. If the killer did not have a gun, he could have used any other way imaginable to murder these people. Yet, for Daley, the problem is the gun, not the intentions of the murderer. For Daley, the murders were just another chance to promote an agenda.

Something else Daley might not realize, but there are already laws on the books that make crimes like this illegal, yet those laws and regulations have done nothing to prevent a crime from occurring. (I have first hand knowledge of this, as my wife was injured by a gun that was supposed to be illegal to own and possess in the state we lived in at the time. Also, it was illegal to discharge a firearm of any kind in the city, legal or not, and that didn't stop anything either.)

Another scenario criticizes Julia Hudson, the remaining sister. Her son was murdered along with her brother and mother. Julia is being criticized for marrying William Balfour, the persons suspected of the crimes and who was out on parole for eerily similar charges from 1999. (Let it be noted, that Balfour has not yet been charged with any crime relating to the murders, although it seems likely. Innocent until proven guilty.)

Now it's Julia's fault for marrying the guy, but still nothing on the murderer for murdering.

I do not understand a society and media who think this way. Are we just supposed to take for granted that everyone abhors what the murderer did, so let's talk about something else? Are we so tied to a constant media cycle that now every story has to have fifteen different angles?

If there was clear negligence on the part of the family to protect themselves, or there was clearly something that could be done to prevent the crime, then maybe it is worth a second look. But in this case, you had three unsuspecting and undeserving victims of a crime who did nothing wrong and nothing to encourage or promote crime against themselves.

It seems like in this case, just like politics and culture, we end up talking about things that aren't really the issue. The issue here is, someone murdered three family members in cold blood in a ruthless manner, but we're talking about guns. (And concurrently, we are talking about the Mayor talking about guns.) What appears to be the big story usually is a step or two off the actual event. The news angles and the opinion angles become the story, and the actual narrative of the event is secondary. In some cases, the news and opinion angles modify the significance of the event itself.

What is the real story here? There was a person who murdered a family. That is what happened, and that is what the story is about. News is reporting the event, and reporting the updates as they come. Everything else is an angle.

**UPDATE**

Another odd note on this case.

Lifted from Facebook

2008-10-28T01:04:00.003-05:00

Killed by Zero

2008-10-21T22:58:00.002-05:00

Toyota has unleashed a commercial so terrible, it makes me groan every time it comes on.

It may be the very computer-generated cars skittering across the screen in a very generic way. It may be the fact that in the turn, the cars wheels do not move. It could be when the cars pull away, their tires spin so fast, if they were not computer-generated vehicles, they would have smoked their tires off.

It could be the fact that it is played every commercial cycle in every show watched on every television everywhere.

Or it could be the lame version of an already lame song by the Fixx.

Whatever it is, people absolutely HATE this commercial.

Several nights ago, I sent a text message to my brother Jake saying that if I saw that commercial again, I'd probably hurt myself.

Someone has even founded a Facebook group to rally the troops against this commercial. The group is called "Get Toyota's "Saved By Zero" commercial off the air before I harm myself." (At least I know I'm not alone!)

I first heard about this group while listening to 890 AM WLS in Chicago the other day. They did a news story about the hatred of this commercial and the subsequent Facebook page. I immediately joined.

In the description of the group, the purpose is described this way:

"This is the official Facebook support group for victims of the "Saved By Zero" Toyota commercial. Together, we can bring support. Together we can be strong. We can be united. We can fight for the greater good - with the greatest good being to never subject someone to this type of pain anymore."

I rely upon the support of my fellow sufferers.

I do not know why this commercial drives me crazy. There is nothing particularly interesting about it at all. Most of the elements of the commercial are entirely bland and should vanish into the white noise of all of the other commercials I ignore.

But the bland elements combined has created a maddening commercial, and now we're all talking about it.

I guess its working.

Click here for the Facebook Group

Sarah Palin on SNL

2008-10-19T14:01:00.000-05:00

The Ballad of Joe the Plumber

2008-10-17T11:09:00.000-05:00

"Hey Joe, where you going with that wrench in your hand..."

Unless you live under a rock, and probably even IF you live under a rock, you most certainly have heard the tale of Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher, also known as "Joe the Plumber," of sudden political fame.

Joe encountered Senator Obama on the campaign trail last week and asked him a question about Obama's tax plan. (See video)

Plumber: Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?

Obama: Its not that I want to punish your success, I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they have a chance at success too. When you spread the wealth around, its good.

(I am hereby dropping the "the" from Joe the Plumber so it sounds more like Joe Strummer, lead singer of the Clash, which also better represents Joe Plumber's sudden rock star status.)

The premise of Joe Plumber's question was simple. If he purchased the company he works for and made more that $250,000 a year from it, would Obama tax him more?

The answer also could have been as simple -- Obama could have said "yes" and couched the answer in many different ways to make it sound less bad. Yet Obama explained how he wanted to "spread the wealth around" and let slip a very socialist plan without buffering it at all.

While the candidates have used Joe Plumber's story to advance their campaigns (McCain on the offensive, and Obama a bit more on the defense) the media is only talking about Joe Plumber, the man.

Some things that have been reported about Joe Plumber:

-- He is not a licensed plumber.

-- He only makes $40,000 and thus can not afford to buy his company.

-- His company makes somewhere between $100,000-$150,000, which is under the $250,000 cutoff of Obama's tax plan.

-- He owes back taxes.

This is what I have learned from the media. (One headline said "His first name isn't Joe; He's not a licensed plumber.")

The media has not talked about Obama's overt socialist statement. The media has torn apart the buzzworthy Joe Plumber's life and career rather than the consequences of or the significance of Obama's tax plan.

I still believe the important thing in all of the Joe Plumber chaos is the words of Barack Obama.

He wants to spread the wealth around. He wants to take from who he determines is wealthy and give it back to those who he considers are not wealthy.

I have already given my opinion on the topic in my last post, but what I propose to you is this: Do you want your government to assign value to how much you make and determine when enough is too much? Or, do you want to control what you do with your income? Which of these scenarios is a slippery slope? Which of these scenarios allow you to keep your personal liberty and which takes it away?

Another question: Are you able to look past the media's distraction about Joe Plumber the man to see the bigger issue in the first place?

It doesn't matter that Joe Plumber might not be a "real plumber." Discounting facts about his life and career do nothing but distract from his pointed question and Obama's candid answer. If Joe Plumber had asked it as a hypothetical question, there would be no difference in the effect of the answer. What is important is what it tells us about the candidate running to be the President of the United States.

Lunch Break Musings: Socialism

2008-10-14T11:59:00.005-05:00

Plumber: Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?

Obama: Its not that I want to punish your success, I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they have a chance at success too. When you spread the wealth around, its good.

What does Senator Obama's plan and comments tell me?

-- People who aren't successful are owed something.

-- People who are successful owe people something.

-- There is an arbitrary pre-determined idea of what is success and what is failure, using the $250,000 income cutoff as the watershed.

-- The government will assign worth to a person's position in life, their wealth, and make adjustments as they see fit.

The justification is - this is right because it is "fair."

This is socialism. Pure and simple. Its very easy to look at Obama's policies and cry "socialism," but this is from the man's mouth directly. No spin, no resetting the parameters to make it sound less socialist.

How is this fair? If I work hard for a living and become successful at my job, it is not out of the realm of possibility that I will someday be considered what Barack Obama has determined as wealthy. Thus, he will also determine that I should owe more taxes so he can cut the taxes of the people who are less successful.

This is not fair. In three years, if I have worked hard and overcome my low income from just starting out to becoming successful, why can't other people? Why do I have to bankroll it?

I suppose they would call this "greed." You know, me wanting to keep the money I worked hard and overcame obstacles to get.

I won't have anyone's help to be successful but my own, and I need help from no one but myself to do it. Right now, I have nothing. But I know I can overcome my situation through hard work and doing what it takes -- not from the government robbing from the rich and giving me their proceeds because I'm owed it.

Senator Obama, I do not need your help to "have a chance at success." I have a chance at success.

Should this not be insulting to those, who, like me, are struggling now? Should this not be utterly insulting to view myself as Barack Obama views me -- unable to do it on my own without the help of the government? I am insulted.

This philosophy is just as ludicrous as Joe Biden telling us that having the wealthy paying higher taxes is the patriotic thing to do.

This philosophy will never work. If the government makes it easier for me to be unsuccessful, it takes away the incentive to be successful. What do I have to overcome when the government is providing offsets to my lack of success? They call it providing opportunity, but I have the opportunity without their help. All they do is give me a chance to squander my opportunity because I no longer need an opportunity.

It punishes those who are successful, and rewards those who are not.

Socialism and liberal social programs create a dependence on government and not a reliance on self. Its a power grab for politicians. The voters need the government to provide for them. They will remain perpetually static because they have no need for an opportunity and thus will not take opportunities.

I do not want to be made to feel more comfortable about where I am now. I want to overcome my position in life.

I encourage everyone to think critically about the consequences of the things that seem "fair" and feel like the right thing to do.

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel or envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill

NoiseTrade

2008-10-09T12:29:00.003-05:00

I decided I am going to add a dimension to this blog based on my recent post about Peter Bradley Adams and his single for free download.

One of the topics I am going to be tracking and blogging about is the emerging changes in the music industry and music consumption.

In this day and age, you have a large number of high profile artists abandoning record labels to self-release or go on indie labels. You see more artists giving away their music for free in the hopes that it will bring in a wider audience.

Perhaps you have noticed on my sidebar, I have advertisements for Derek Webb and Sandra McCracken's albums that allow you to click right from my site to download their albums and either pay what you want, or download it for free by telling 5 friends. I am not getting paid for these advertisements, I simply grabbed them from the site, www.noisetrade.com and embedded them like I would a YouTube clip.

NoiseTrade is one of the new type of music release concepts in today's market. Derek Webb was one of its creators based on his success with www.freederekwebb.com. Derek allowed his album, Mockingbird, to be downloaded free of charge for a limited amount of time. He saw more copies of the album reach fans and newcomers to his music than his former albums saw in the store. Also, his previous albums' sales increased as new fans discovered his music and bought his back catalog. He gave away his album for free, but saw greater gains and revenues from creating new fans who would take his album for free but may not have gone out and bought it themselves.

Thus, NoiseTrade was created. The concept behind NoiseTrade is simple. Go to the site, browse the available catalog of artists and albums, pay whatever you want for the album, or get it for free by sharing a link with 5 friends.

I have tried many artist's albums purely because it didn't cost me anything to try it. All of the music is available for preview by clicking the album cover before you download it, so you can feel confident recommending it to your friends.

I think its a neat technology and a cool way to share music and still control the outcome better than having fans burn CDs and give them to their friends. It invests the fan in the music and gives them something for telling others about it.

Give it a try, see if you like it.

Here is the link: www.noisetrade.com

Lunch Break Musings: Oct 8, 2008

2008-10-08T13:16:00.003-05:00

Its amazing how people's opinion shapes how they look at things.

Last night's Presidential debate is a great example.

I listen to both conservative and liberal radio and read opinion articles from both sides. From what I've heard, my friends who are staunch conservatives think McCain won the debate. From what I've heard from my liberal friends and on liberal talk radio, they think Obama knocked it out of the park. Personally, I thought it was a draw and actually quite boring, but then again, I try to look at both sides of everything. (My more moderate friends leaning to either side mostly agree with my view of the debate.) This is the typical span of opinion after every debate thus far.

All sides are informed by their opinions. We all see things through our worldview.

Having a strong worldview is not necessarily a bad thing. Obviously, both sides have very distinct and opposing views on many hot-button issues, and we fall on the side that most closely agrees with our values. I wouldn't expect my liberal friends to agree with John McCain after a debate. But I do not understand how a debate can happen and there can be three opinions on how it ended.

But this blog is not about the issues. I feel like we're looking for the wrong thing when deciding who won a debate, which renders the debate kind of pointless.

If we only see a debate through our worldview, we know who we will agree with ahead of time, and we have a great idea -- barring any blunders too obvious to ignore -- who we think will win. We'll also go into a polling booth and cast our vote this way.

But, when looking at who won a debate, you have to look at the debate more objectively. You have to look past the issues (which should be very well established previous to the debate) and look at the art of the debate. It's not about the issues; it's who articulates the issues most effectively. It's about who can make their issue appeal to the most people. Its about the ability of the debater to counter his or her opponent and effectively communicate their point and rebut the point of their opponent. Also, a lot of the debate should be about making distinctions between positions, not necessarily proving which is most right.

So, based on debate tactics, who won the debate? Can we look past issues we already agree or disagree on and look at who was the most effective debater?

Now on Shuffle

2008-10-06T22:49:00.004-05:00

Same idea as before, but with a twist...

Step 1: Put your iTunes or equivalent on random.

Step 2: Post the first two lines from the first 10 songs that play, no matter how embarrassing.

1.) "Every night my dream's the same/ Same old city with a different name"
-- Keep the Car Running by Arcade Fire

2.) "Please remember me, happily, by the rose bush laughing/ with bruises on my chin in a time when we counted every black car passing your house"
-- The Trapeze Swinger by Iron and Wine

3.) "Times ain't now, nothing like they used to be/ Times ain't now nothing like they used to be/ I tell you the truth won't you take my word from me?"
-- James Alley Blues by Jeff Tweedy, Roger McGuinn and Jay Bennett

4.) "Sometimes I think this cycle never ends/ We slide from top to bottom then we turn and climb again"
-- Expo '86 by Death Cab for Cutie

5.) "She's posting all the time, but the boards are down. It's a burned out building. He's spending all this time on his back. Staring at the ceiling."
-- Non-photo blue by Pinback

6.) "Take to the highway, won't you lend me your name?/ Your way and my way seem to be one and the same."
-- Country Road by James Taylor

7.) "Oh! Darling, please believe me, I'll never do you no harm."
-- Oh! Darling by the Beatles

8.) "Looking for my place on assembly lines, Fake prizes risin out of the bomb holes /skeleton boys hyped up on purple, smoke rings blow from across the disco"
-- Hell Yes by Beck

9.) "God that was strange to see you again, introduced by a friend of a friend/ Smiled and said yes I think we've met before, in that instant it started to pour"
-- Your Ex-Lover is Dead by Stars

10.) "When the devil came, he was not red/ He was chrome and he said... come with me... we must go... so I went..."
Hell is Chrome by Wilco

Political Science

2008-10-04T13:16:00.000-05:00

It does not matter that John McCain (or his wife) have 9 homes and 13 vehicles.

It doesn't matter that Barack Obama and family have one of each.

It doesn't matter that Joe Biden supposedly has the least wealth of all the candidates and rides the train home every night.

It does not matter that Sarah Palin is "folksy" or a "reverse elitist."

Yet these are the things that I seem to be constantly debating with people.

Now, do not get me wrong. I am not saying that these things don't matter to people. Unfortunately, perception is reality in life and politics. I believe this is a main reason John McCain picked Sarah Palin to be a part of his ticket -- she appealed to people's need to have a candidate to whom they related. She is everyman/everywoman. She appeals to the people who wanted to have a beer with Dubya eight years ago. I also believe that Obama picked Biden to shore up those in his party that wanted a touchstone to the old school amongst all the hope and change.

Are either of them the best candidates for Vice President? Maybe. Maybe not. Sarah Palin has plenty of executive experience, but not on any kind of national scale. And Biden got less than 1% of the vote in Iowa before dropping out. Despite this, their selections to their respective tickets serve the purpose.

What is important in choosing a politician is the issues -- where they stand, and their voting record. Character also comes into play -- how have they conducted themselves ethically while in office and what organizations have they made priority. To a certain extent also, the people they put around them matter because it speaks to character.

Still, whether they have 13 cars or no cars -- what bearing does trivial matters such as cars and houses have on the candidate's ability to lead or on their stand on the issues?

Of course, these things are debatable, but to what end? The interesting part of politics is discussing and debating issues and character and the candidate's readiness for the job.

Meet Peter Bradley Adams

2008-10-04T00:07:00.003-05:00

The other night, I was contacted via email through this blog by a person from Sarathan Records in Seattle.

They provided a link to check out a track by artist Peter Bradley Adams.

I'm not sure I want to get into the music review business, but if I run across a song I like enough to put it on my iPod, I'll link it and let you be the judge.

Czech it out.

Lunch Break Musings: Oct 2, 2008

2008-10-02T12:47:00.004-05:00

I am in the middle of a battle I know I can't win.

I posted a comment after an article on my former newspaper's Website.

Foolish.

The article is about two detectives on the local police force who have been suspended for inappropriate conduct, further characterized by inappropriate touch. They have been suspended from their detective duties and have been put back on street patrol. They cannot apply to become detectives again for a year.

The comments after this rather simple newspaper article have run rampant with innuendo, allegations and overall nasty comments about these two shamed detectives, with very little evidence upon which to make their assumptions.

The comment section after the article online has basically become a free-for-all for the typical kind of gossip and backbiting for which small towns are known -- except now it is public.

I have always had my reservations about the comment section after a news article. I went to college for journalism and worked in newspaper as an editor. (In fact, I worked at this particular paper.) I do not see the journalistic value to adding these. I know the reason they are added to a newspaper's Website is to add an interactive feature to make the reader feel invested in the paper and to keep eyes on the page.

The eyes are on the page (albeit a Web page) but what now is the focus? The article? Or is it the comments the locals are making, and the accusations therein? Very quickly, these unregulated comments take steps further and further away from the facts that were delicately researched for the article and switches the focus to the unfounded allegations and fighting between comment posters who are relatively anonymous behind their user name handles.

Call me old school, but I believe that news should be news and opinions are best left for the editorial page. (Or to blogs.) When you combine the two, you invite people to be nasty.
javascript:void(0)
At least on the editorial page, there is some accountability. A person has to include their full name and city, and typically, they have used some form of restraint and self-editing before submitting their opinion to the paper for publication. (I can't say this always is the case, as I used to edit the letters to the editor.) When news articles are turned into an Internet forum, people use poor judgment, poor taste, and virtually no self-editing.

I entered into the conversation to make the very points I have just made, and now people are putting words in my mouth and making assumptions about me.

Its a war I can not win.

More on this later... Lunch break is over.

Follow the article here.

Britney Spears and OK Magazine.

2008-08-14T23:50:00.003-05:00

Apparently, OK! Magazine did a story on Britney Spears getting her life back together.

This article featured pictures of Britney with her estranged children, and from my overall impression, is putting the troubled pop tart in a positive light.

And yet, how do I know this? I don't think the issue featuring Ms. Spears is even available for purchase.

I have seen spots run for it on the Insider and shows like it.

I have read articles in my local newspaper discussing this article.

Yes, that's what I said. I have read articles about the article. (That would effectively make this blog post an article about the articles about the article, if you are keeping track.)

This is troubling to a former journalist such as myself.

Now, is Britney Spears so important to pop culture that the mere fact that there is an article about her is enough reason to write an article about the article? Or did OK! Magazine just pull a really great advertising stunt by marketing an article about Britney Spears as breaking news to the media? I believe it is the latter.

When I worked in newspaper, I very quickly learned the difference between something newsworthy and something posing as something newsworthy. As lifestyle editor, I would often get urgent press releases from people just trying to get a line in the paper without paying a dime for advertising.

I'm sure notice of this article was circulated throughout the media as newsworthy because it is Britney Spears' first interview in 2 years, and she's been a whole extra crispy bucket-o-crazy during the last two years. However, had the media begun covering the article after it was on the newsstand, I'd possibly see an article about the article as more newsworthy.

This is different than the New Yorker magazine cover with the Barack and Michelle Obama cover. This was newsworthy because it was controversial. Hyped up, nonetheless, but certainly controversial. The media coverage of the New Yorker scandal could have either enhanced sales (people wanting to see the scandal) or detracted from sales (people refusing to purchase the magazine with that content). The coverage of the Spears article, while not nearly reaching that of the New Yorker scandal, seems to be clearly aimed at selling more magazines.

The ironic thing to me, is , whether or not OK! Magazine is attempting to drum up some readers by tricking the media into covering their article, the fact remains that the incessant media coverage of Ms. Spears may a contributing factor to her recent bout of the crazy. Now that she is somewhat better, its another media event.

Now, not only has OK! Magazine exploited the story of Ms. Spears to sell magazines, they have co-opted my newspaper to sell magazines too.

The Candidates Top Ten

2008-08-13T17:17:00.003-05:00

Barack Obama and John McCain have given Blender Magazine their top ten favorite songs. The results are interesting.

BARACK OBAMA
1. Ready or Not Fugees
2. What's Going On Marvin Gaye
3. I'm On Fire Bruce Spingsteen
4. Gimme Shelter Rolling Stones
5. Sinnerman Nina Simone
6. Touch the Sky Kanye West
7. You'd Be So Easy to Love Frank Sinatra
8. Think Aretha Franklin
9. City of Blinding Lights U2
10. Yes We Can will.i.am

JOHN McCAIN
1. Dancing Queen ABBA
2. Blue Bayou Roy Orbison
3. Take a Chance On Me ABBA
4. If We MakeIt Through December Merle Haggard
5. As Time Goes By Dooley Wilson
6. Good Vibrations The Beach Boys
7. What A Wonderful World Louis Armstrong
8. I've Got You Under My Skin Frank Sinatra
9. Sweet Caroline Neil Diamond
10. Smoke Gets In Your Eyes The Platters

(Please click here to see the original article and graphic from Blender Magazine.)

Procrastination: A Research Study

2008-08-13T09:36:00.002-05:00

This is from the archives, circa 2003. This was by far the most fun paper I have ever written for a college class.

Procrastination: A Research Study

It's the day my research paper is due and like so many papers from so many times in my college career, I'm waiting until the last minute to write it.

I tell myself so many things before getting to this point. Yes, well, I have spent the last three weeks researching! I have been taking great care organizing my thoughts before I start writing! I have been productive! Yes! I work well under pressure—I do my best work under pressure! If I don't have a deadline I'm working against, I have no motivation to write! So why try starting a week early, or even a day early? What's the point when my best stuff comes at the end of the line when the pressure is on and the deadline is coming on like a screaming train?

Then I think about the way I spend my time leading up to writing. I know what is REALLY going on. I talk on instant messenger to my friends. Sometimes I get so desperate, I talk on instant messenger to people I don't even like. I check their profiles and their away messages and make stupid small talk with people I could hardly care less about. As I write right now, my friend Erin is psychoanalyzing me via AOL instant messenger.

The biggest draw upon my creative time is the Internet and a particular online message board for one of my favorite bands. It is intriguing, as I see from posting and reading posts on the board that many people come there to avoid lots of things—their real lives, homework, whatever their poison may be that day. It's a virtual safe haven for procrastinators. I log on and post on the boards while doing homework or writing. I even went so far as to prod the other posters on the board to tell me why they procrastinate. I call it multitasking—doing more than one thing at a time. In reality, it's just a diversion, but that is what I crave—a escape. Something to take up the time I would ordinarily sit staring at the wall. Anything to fill in those moments where my focus starts to wane, my thoughts start to dry up, and I have to think of new ones. It's such a difficult process with so much pressure, so I avoid it. Seems pretty simple. This is a science I have perfected over three years of college.

Procrastination is as much a part of college life as student centers and cafeterias. According to the University of Buffalo's website providing counseling tips for their students, "William Knaus, a psychologist estimates that 90% of college students procrastinate. Of these students, 25% are chronic procrastinators…" On Ohio State University study found that there is a direct correlation between students who procrastinate and their grades. On a 4.0 scale, "severe" procrastinators score a 2.9, while "moderate" procrastinators score a 3.4 and "low" procrastinators score a 3.6. OSU researcher Bruce Tuckman notes that rationalizations like the ones I have made—I work best under pressure—are "nothing more than wishful thinking."

And there is a true dichotomy when it comes to what I tell myself when I am not writing and what I actually do when I'm not writing. The things I call periods of thinking while writing the two pages thus far have been, in reality:

1. Making copies for work.
2. Getting psychoanalyzed by my friend via Instant Messenger.
3. Checking my email.
4. A phone call.
5. Updating my posts on the "FrenzyBoard"
6. Going to get a soda and some chips from the vending machine.

None of the things I mentioned on my list of things I do when "thinking between thoughts" seems very productive in comparison to my mission— completing a well-written paper. I use them as diversions to keep myself from getting frustrated with my lack of progress or my stalling of thoughts. I do other things that need to be done, and some that do not need to be done, to take breaks from my work and pace myself.

While Bruce Tuckman I may have doubts about my method of getting writing done, John Perry, a professor of philosophy at Stanford would agree that my method can be a good method. He is one that would do things that are beneficial to him—writing an essay or playing ping-pong with students when he has papers to grade. Perry says;

"Tasks that seem most urgent are always on top. But there are also worthwhile tasks to perform, lower down on the list. Doing these tasks becomes a way of not doing things higher up on the list. With this sort of appropriate task structure, the procrastinator becomes a useful citizen. Indeed, the procrastinator can even acquire, as I have, a reputation for getting a lot done." (Perry, 1995)

Perry does what I do not do. He structures his procrastination in a manner that is productive. He fills his time of avoidance or slacking from his required activities with things that need to be done—things that he will benefit from accomplishing, even if it is not the task he needs to finish. My tasks to alleviate the pressure of writing (or not writing) seem to lack in this aspect. I fill my time with menial tasks that have no real value on my life and do not provide me with any sense of accomplishment. Perhaps I will ponder the significance of this after I run to the drinking fountain for a break.

John Perry seems to have the right idea. I know I do better when I wait until the last second to type up a paper. The motivation of a deadline is a powerful driving force in my academic undertakings. But Perry notes "Procrastinators often follow exactly the wrong track." (Perry, 1995.) He describes the circle a procrastinator can fall into when they try to avoid having many things to do because they think with less things to do, they will get more done. This only allows the procrastinator to have more time to procrastinate. I am a testament to this fact.

A quick search on the Internet (which is a great time waster in itself—researching the internet for information) reveals that most colleges take the same approach when dealing with procrastination in their student body. The University of Buffalo takes this more traditional and direct route when helping their students identify and overcome procrastination. They take a psychological approach to dealing with procrastination and relate its psychological and physical effects upon a student. They state that procrastination can "lead to feelings of guilt, inadequacy, depression and self-doubt among students." They demonstrate a list of identifiers for procrastination, as well as provide the traditional responses to those identifiers. They suggest to students things such as "eliminate noise and distraction" and "discipline yourself to use time wisely" as well as "reward yourself after taking a break."

I see these suggestions as all well and good, but they go against the nature of a procrastinator. A procrastinator may benefit from having a clean desk and proper lighting and small incremental goals to reach, but they can also adapt to procrastinate within those smaller bounds. I know myself well enough to know that no matter how micromanaged my schedule becomes, I will still find ways around getting things done. No matter how clean my desk becomes or how much I attempt to reward myself, I will still find things to think about or look at or do that will completely hamper my productivity. I can completely leave my work environment altogether.

I tend to side on the wisdom of John Perry, the Stanford professor. Even Tuckman admits "the results show that procrastinators don't work better under pressure, but it may be the only way they work." (Tuckman, 2002) It would make sense to me, one who knows procrastination well, that structuring it by mentally faking yourself out or dividing up the problem into subsections doesn't really solve the problem. If the procrastinator can procrastinate by accomplishing smaller tasks in between the breaks on the big task, then true productivity is attained. Even my English professor John Stratton has raised this point in our discussions on the topic. He alluded to the idea that when I am stalled on a paper that is going nowhere, to keep another project ready to be worked on so that my downtime is used being productive in another aspect.

My stomach is telling me that it's ready for lunch. I have been holding off on lunch until I finished this paper. Yes, I am attempting to trick myself into getting something done. I am falling into the traditional sense of "rewards" and such to make myself productive. But even Perry says tasks have to "seem to have clear deadlines (but really don't)" and they have to "seem awfully important (but really aren't)." I guess a little trickery to get things done isn't so bad after all.

I'm off to lunch…

Word Study: Currently

2008-08-11T20:52:00.000-05:00

"Currently"

You should only use this word in very rare cases.

Here is an example of an unnecessary usage of the word:

"I am currently watching television."

"I am" indicates present tense, so "currently" is unnecessary and redundant. I assume that if you are doing something in the present tense, you are doing it currently.

If someone asks you if you are watching television, you can answer appropriately by stating "currently," although you might sound snobbish.

A good example of another misuse of this word comes from an obituary I edited when I worked at the Times-Gazette. The obit stated something along the lines of "Mr. Davis was currently working in auto repair at the time of his death" (Severe paraphrase).

First of all, Mr. Davis is deceased, so he was not "currently" working anywhere. But also, "was currently" is inappropriate in most uses because "was" is past tense, and "currently" means, well, currently. As in now. Presently.

And now we learn...

The Soundtrack to Your Life

2008-08-10T23:02:00.003-05:00

This unconventional survey was passed by Andrew through the bulletin system on MySpace. Ordinarily, I hate when people use the bulletin system to post surveys and I usually ignore them, but since Andrew never posts surveys, I figured I'd check it out.

I did follow the rules and kept it completely random. Its kind of creepy how well the songs fit into most of the categories. The results were kind of creepy cool how much it worked.

IF YOUR LIFE WAS A MOVIE, WHAT WOULD THE SOUNDTRACK BE?

So, here's how it works:
1. Open your library (iTunes, Winamp, Media Player, iPod, etc.).
2. Put it on shuffle.
3. Press play.
4. For every question, type the song that's playing.
5. When you go to a new question, press the next button.
6. Don't lie & try to pretend you're cool.

Opening Credits:
Bands with Managers by Pedro the Lion

Waking Up:
Vertigo by U2

First Day Of School:
Hallelujah by Jeff Buckley

Falling In Love:
Fade Into You by Mazzy Star

Fight Song:
Prayer for the Dying by Seal

Breaking Up:
Fell in Love with a Girl by the White Stripes

Prom:
Carolina by Benjamin Gibbard

Mental Breakdown:
Come on! Feel the Illinoise! by Sufjan Stevens

Driving:
Love is Different Than You Think by Caedmon's Call

High school flashback:
Your Bruise by Death Cab for Cutie

Flashback:
Calm Like a Bomb by Rage Against the Machine

Getting Back Together:
Of Minor Prophets and their Prostitute Wives by Pedro the Lion

Birth of Child:
No Such Thing by John Mayer

Wedding:
Celebration Guns by Stars

Final Battle:
Wrapped Around Your Finger by the Police

Death Scene:
Scar Tissue by Red Hot Chili Peppers

Funeral Song:
Hurt by Johnny Cash

End Credits:
A Movie Script Ending by Death Cab for Cutie (and I'm not lying about this one -- it really came up!)

The Lenoman Experience

2008-08-09T22:08:00.003-05:00

One of the great benefits of moving to an area that is on Central Standard Time is the fabulous thing it does for those of us who enjoy late night television. Leno, Letterman, Conan and Craig Ferguson all come on an hour earlier than they did when I lived in Ohio, where they came on too late for those of us who had to get up for work early the next morning.

Now, even if I go to bed at my usual time (around midnight), I can still catch at least half of Conan, and if I stay up a little bit later, I can see the whole thing.

The way I watch these shows is most likely the way most people watch them: Unless there is a strong favorite in a particular time slot, or unless you strongly dislike one or the other hosts, you pretty much watch whoever has the most interesting guest. My late show viewing experience is much like a strange Jay Leno/ David Letterman hybrid. We'll call it the "Lenoman Experience."

It's slightly different when we get to the post late show shows. I prefer Conan's show, even though it's exactly the same each night. His show is in a perpetual rut. It happens to be a particularly strong and hilarious rut, so that is fortunate, but that's kind of the point. Craig Ferguson, on the other hand, has a much less interesting show than Conan's rut, but I find him to be funnier. I have no idea how Ferguson can be funnier and less interesting at the same time. I guess Conan wins out on the charisma quotient. So, when I watch these shows, I typically tend to flip away from Conan less, unless he has on a terrible guest, or I happen to catch Ferguson when he's being significantly funnier than Conan.

Me being me, though, I started wondering why I watch these shows in the first place. I realized that I never care if I miss them. I almost never know any guests each late show has booked before I tune in, so I almost never think to myself: "Oh man, I have to watch fill-in-the-blank's show tonight because so-and-so is on!!" If I do sit down to watch a show, I do try to catch the beginning of the show to see who the musical guest is for the night.

The purpose of any television show, if you ask anyone at the network, is to entertain the audience. But when you examine the Tonight Show or its peers, what is the real point? Aside from providing their respective hosts with a lucrative vehicle for their comedy careers, they are nothing more than an advertising service for actors and pop culture icons to promote their work. And at the end of the day, if the host does his job well, and the guests make interesting work of promoting their respective projects, this is all to the gain of the network.

Everybody is selling something and trying to gain from it. We call this entertainment.

This really is the nature of television, though. I buy a black or gray box (or now, a nice flat panel) and place it in the center of my living room in a big wooden thing called an "entertainment center." Then I strategically position my furniture to create an orb around the entertainment center so there are no bad vantage points. By doing this, I have agreed to center the entire purpose of my living room around an object that only wants to sell me things. They hope that if I see Jamie Foxx on Ellen, and Letterman, and Leno and Conan and Martha Stewart and whatever other show he could possibly be on – TRL for Pete's sake – so that the interest in seeing his stupid new movie would be planted in my skull and grow the more often I see his mug on TV.

This is the accepted agreement.

It occurs to me, though, that these shows are rather pointless. Upon realizing this, I find myself being less motivated to watch them than my apathetic feelings towards the shows motivated me to already. But I'll probably keep watching them on my typical sporadically regular basis. It's routine.

I find that I still spend a lot of time keeping up on music and pop culture, and thus I watch these shows that blatantly want to mess with my mind for their profit to keep up with pop culture. (This would be a good time to go back in the blog archives and read my entry titled "Pop Culturists Anonymous," which I will repost some other day.) However, I do not get caught up in the celebrity aspect of it. I don't care about what Britney Spears really is doing with her life. Ultimately I do because I don't want anyone to live a narcissistic life of chaos and danger. But practically, I really don't. My actual concern for her is the same concern I have generally for all mankind. And since she falls under this large umbrella, I guess I care. What I am more interested in is seeing how the media handles her debacle of a life and how the consumers of the entertainment value and the holders of the commercial purchasing power of it respond to it. What is the pop-cultural significance?

But what does this interest in pop culture really gain me? Nothing, really. I've just made observations about it for my own personal amusement, and then I write a blog about it for your entertainment value. But really, I want to entertain you because I want you to read my blog. I want to log on to my blog and see ever increasing numbers of readers in my stats. I want someday to build such a following for my music and pop culture blog that will attract the attention of someone influential who will offer to pay me large sums of money to write for a highly visible publication or Website.

I have now deconstructed the entire reason for existence for this blog, as well as my hopes and dreams.

Ha!

Thanks a lot, Lenoman.

Change is Inevitable (From the Archives)

2008-08-08T09:56:00.002-05:00

Best quote I've heard in a while:

"Change is inevitable. Except from vending machines."

Once in a while you do win. Dimes became my vending machine cohorts.

Now, typically, dimes are a pain in the butt to use in vending machines. Not only do you look like a poor schmuck while you are inserting nickels and dimes, but dimes notoriously are consumed by the machine and no credit is given to you.

This was not the case at my last job.

This vending machine was magical. I would insert a dime, it would click the little credit button, and yet somehow it would still slip into the coin return. Score! My $1 Mountain Dew is now 10% off. Sometimes, I'd use the same dime again and it would happen a second time. 20% off! I didn't always get lucky, but I'd say I had a good win-loss ratio with this particular vending machine and dimes.

Once in a while I could trick it into taking a Canadian quarter, but I think the machine just gave up under my persistence.

This was a great change of pace from the vending machine at the Times-Gazette, which always seemed to eat dollar bills. Particularly Megan's.

Vending machines can be belevolent creatures though. The vending machine at the newspaper would eat my dollar every once in a while, yet, not to be unfair, it would occasionally spit out two Mountain Dews. This was particularly more likely to happen on the rare occasion that I chose Diet Pepsi. (I always assumed Megan had just been to the machine, put in her dollar, gotten angry that it didn't dispense her beverage, and then I walked in behind her and got her prize.)

Ah, vending machines. The memories.

Thanks for the quote, Nancy!

(Reposted from the MySpace blog archives, Oct. 19, 2007)

Political Insanity

2008-08-07T00:28:00.002-05:00

I have decided never to give money to any political cause ever again.

Back last winter, I gave John McCain $25 when all the other republican candidates were still in the race for the nomination, and McCain was pretty much written off as having no chance of winning the nomination. I wasn’t a fan of Romney, Thompson, Gulliani, or any of the other lesser-knowns. I thought my favorite candidate out of a pool with which I was generally unimpressed needed some support. So I donated.

I had always liked McCain because he wasn’t a typical republican. He still had conservative values without being tied to a party line or talking points. (Half the time, I fully agree with the positions of the republicans, but I can’t stand the way they go about executing things.)The whole “he’s a maverick” thing was working for me. The republicans didn’t like him because they thought he was too liberal. The liberals were calling him Bush Term Three. And as I saw the Republican Party moving further and further into the extreme right throughout the Bush administration, I though of McCain as a good alternative.

That is, until I started getting multiple letters in the mail from his campaign every week.

Now, I’m no fool. I know that when you donate to a campaign, you are on their radar and they will keep coming back with their hand out for more. I expected a fair amount of literature and requests for further donations.

I grew increasingly unhappy with John McCain for many things he has flipped on in order to become president. I grew even more disenchanted when I realized that it surely cost his campaign more than my $25 just to send me letters asking for more money.

The last straw came when I got another letter from the McCain campaign that included a Republican National Committee Victory 2008 card. This card looks like a standard credit card and came emblazoned with my full name and a membership number. The back side has a place for me to sign my name, and says the following:

“The bearer of this card is recognized as a Charter Member of RNC Victory 2008. This card is a symbol of the bearer’s support for the Republican candidates and the Republican Agenda of a better, safer more prosperous future for America.

RNC Victory 2008 Charter Members provide direct campaign support to Republican candidates for office at all levels of government throughout the nation.

This card is non-transferable.

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE VICTORY 2008
310 First Street Southeast
Washington D.C. 20003
202-863-8747 GOP.com/Victory2008”

So, to break it down, I’m now a charter member of Victory 2008. This card recognizes me as a member.

Also, this card gets me absolutely NOTHING. (And it’s non-transferable, so I can’t even give it away.)

I can not buy groceries or gas with this card. I can not get in to events with this card. I can’t use this card as a form of I.D. There is no situation in which this card will present any worth to me.

And now I have paid John McCain’s campaign my hard-earned and stretched dollar so they can send me this worthless piece of crap.

Shortly after I got this worthless reminder of my stupidity, I got another letter from McCain asking for more money because they were being out-fundraised by the Obama campaign and were short on cash.

Because they spent all their money on useless cards sent to people who have already given them money to pay for it.

This is just an example of what is broken about politics in America. Politicians have to raise an unreasonable amount of money just to get off the ground before they even begin to run a successful campaign, and they need that money to create a means to ask for money. How does this make sense?

Not one piece of mail from McCain that I have received has anything to do with the issues or his positions. It is all rhetoric about Obama and even Nancy Pelosi, who last time I checked – isn’t running for president. And whenever issues are brought up, it is only to charge people up with inflammatory rhetoric so they will give money.

I think raising money and then spending it all asking for more money is the definition of insanity.

Word Study: Chocoholic

2008-06-24T15:29:00.002-05:00

An alcoholic is someone who abuses alcohol.

And yet, a chocoholic is not someone who abuses chocohol.

To my knowledge, there is no such substance to abuse.

Chocoholics just really love chocolate.

We use this mismash word "chocoholic" to describe someone who overindulges in (or just really loves) chocolate. It is a play on the word "alcoholic," carrying over the entire "holic" part.

A more accurate play on the word would not carry over the "hol" part, only the "ic" part, making someone not a chocoholic, but a chocolatic.

Example:
Alcohol is to alcoholic as chocolate is to chocolatic.

However, this then ruins the play on words.

Here is what started this whole madness:

I heard a commercial today claiming that a certain pizza company in Chicagoland has been turning Chicagoans into "pizzaholics" for over 40 years.

I was amused at the concept of a person being able to become a pizzaholic. To me, that meant they were abusing a substance called pizzahol, if you follow the play on words directly.

Sometimes I think too hard.

Stalemate

2008-05-06T22:29:00.006-05:00

We are in the middle of a heated political debate as the Democrats have no clear front runner, and after today's primaries in Indiana and North Carolina, a front runner going into the convention seems even further from possible.

This race is historic. The Democratic candidate -- in spite of which of the remaining is chosen as the nominee -- will be a ground-breaking candidate. In one way or another, a woman or a black man will have gone further in ascension to the White House than at any other point in history. Add to that, it really is a toss up -- any of the candidates, Democrat or Republican, has an equally reasonable shot at becoming President of the United States.

This election seems to be about anything other than business as usual. But what is markedly different besides the historic nature of the candidates (first black man, first woman, oldest man) is the manner in which no one seems to be winning on issues, but rather on points of strategy.

All mention of issues seem to be from a generic standpoint. All of the candidates have generically similar views on topics that don't seem to be strictly matters of conservative or liberal weight. Discussing topics of abortion or gay marriage or social issues still are typically easy to peg; we know what conservatives and liberals think on this topic. Today, we are talking about things like gas prices, mortgages, economic downturns, and environmental issues tied to fuel costs. These are not strictly split based on conservative or liberal viewpoints. Even the war is no longer a splitting issue (and certainly not the way it was in the 2004 election between Bush and Kerry) as everyone of both parties is experiencing war fatigue and is wondering what we should do next.

Obama talks the cost of high gas prices, then objects to a suspension of the federal gas tax for the summer. Hillary is anti-war in Iraq, but then threatens to annihilate Iran if they attack Israel. McCain worked for immigration reform, and now he has ramped up his conservatism on the issue to be more in line with the party. Whether perceived or real, these all seem like some form of contradiction, and are simple examples of many other complex instances.

At this point, we are electing personalities, rather than candidates. What I find myself saying is, "I like (name a candidate) for (name an issue) but they (said or did something) and I just can't get behind that."

Obama is a fresh voice, but I seriously believe he is not ready. He reminds me of a talented young businessman who has rapidly moved up the ranks of a corporation. When he gets to the top based on his whiz kid skills, he has no idea how to handle things the way a less talented but more seasoned executive would. I would probably feel different about this he were running four years from now.

Clinton is a brilliant mind and a hard-working politician who has worked quietly during her time in the senate, but she would prolong the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton dynasty, and it kills me to perpetuate that. Also, I think some of her campaign blunders speak volumes, and do not do justice to her capability as a candidate. I have heard for years that in person and one-on-one, Senator Clinton is charming and personable and clearly brilliant, but in public settings, she comes across as calculating and is only as good as her "handlers." I believe that capable person is there -- I just wish it was more apparent.

McCain has always been a favorite of mine, mostly because he holds on to his conservative core values while managing to think outside the cloistered Republican status quo. He works with Democrats and takes occasional unconventional stances on issues to get things done. He has always stood as his own man and never compromised -- until he lost the nomination in 2000 because he was his own man and never compromised. Now he has shifted to cater to the think-in-the-box Republicans on many issues seemingly in order to get elected.

At this rate, I honestly have no way to predict who will win this election in November. With my background as a journalist, I attempt to look at all sides of every issue with great care and objectivity. I can see scenarios in which Hillary wins the Democratic nomination. I also see scenarios in which Obama wins. And in the November match-up, I can see McCain beating or losing to either one of them.

I know passions run deeper for some others who are dyed-in-the-wool for whichever party they support who will feel differently, but personally, I feel like I am in the middle of a political stalemate. I no longer hold that optimism that the guy I choose to support will win because I just believe it's possible. I also do not swing the other way into pessimism -- that I will support my candidate, but I feel like it's a hopeless chance.

I have fallen into objectivity to the point where I can't even make a solid prediction anymore because I realize that this is a game of strategy, not of policy or issues. Anyone can run a solid campaign until they mess up. Every politician (or by association, someone close to them) is capable of messing up.

We have already seen these ebb and flow in this election. McCain and his lobbyist friend to whom he may have been a bit too close. Hillary and her "misstatement" about sniper fire in Bosnia. Obama and the Rev. Wright. All of them have had scenarios like this and all have survived them to varying degrees of success. And that is what it is all about. These are the things that Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh and Ed Schultz talk about constantly.

These situations are the nebulous criteria from which voters choose their candidate: What is their scandal, and how successful were they at recovering from it. And this success or failure is judged by the shifting and varying moral compass of the voter sitting at home watching CNN or Fox News or who reads a particular political journal or who listens to talk radio.

Getting beyond all of this is where the heart of the matter is: Who will be the best candidate to earn the honor and responsibility of becoming the President of the United States of America?

To voters who follow talking points, political platitudes, and rhetoric, their choice will be made clear.

To me, it's a political stalemate.

Barack Hussein Obama

2008-03-04T23:28:00.002-06:00

In case you live under a rock, we have very historic election prospects for our next president this year.

To sum up, Hillary Clinton could be the first woman president, Barack Obama could be the first black president, and John McCain could be the oldest president elected.

(Granted, Hillary and Barack have slightly more exciting "firsts" than McCain. Breaking the gender or race barrier to the Oval Office is far more significant than just being the oldest guy, but still, let's give the guy some credit.)

This is a significant election and possibly ground breaking to one degree or another.

So why is it that all I hear in the media is trivial crap about all three candidates?

I don't care that Barack Obama's middle name is Hussein. That means absolutely nothing to me. Yes, I realize that it is the same as the last name of the recently-ousted-and-quickly-executed Saddam Hussein. You know -- the guy who's country we invaded a couple of years ago? Maybe you've heard of him.

So Obama's middle name is the same as Saddam's. My first name is the same as John Wayne Gacy and no one has ever accused me of killing people because of it. (I realize this is kind of an apples to oranges argument, but that only further illustrates my point.) And God help us if his last name doesn't rhyme with Osama, which is the first name of another guy we kind of don't like who lives in Afghanistan.

Is this what we are going to make an issue of in this historic election? His name that kind of sounds like one guy, and is the same as another guy?

And I actually feel bad for Obama. Not much, but for a little bit, I do. Campaigns are using his middle name as a fear-mongering tactic to scare stupid people who can't tell the difference between a crazy and evil world leader, and a guy who's middle name happens to remind them of him. That is dispicable enough, but what is worse is that Obama has to respond to this -- people using his own name against him. And when he does so, he also validates their racist or bigoted cooption of his name. He has to acknowledge that his name sounds like one guys and is shared with anothers and this is somehow bad. If we were all decent human beings, this would not be an issue, and a person's name certainly wouldn't be used to impose fear.

It's just his name. Yet this is one of the distracting false issues we are hearing about in this election cycle.

This is just an example among countless others. Why are we spending so much time talking about how "unfairly" Hillary is treated in the press as compared with Obama? Why are we spending so much time talking about when and if Hillary should drop out? Why are we making issues about Obama dressed in a Somalian traditional garb? Why are we even giving Bill Cunningham the time of day for saying inflamatory comments and then throwing a hissy when it backfired on him? Why are we focusing on trading barbs and trading apologies?

We are discussing political strategies and blunders like we are watching football analysis on ESPN.

What about health care? What about the Iraq war? What about the economy? What about social issues? What about international issues? What about environmental issues? It doesn't matter what side of the fence you are on these issues -- you need to know where your candidate stands on all of them.

If I relied on the media -- and I will be broad here -- I would have no idea where any candidate stood on anything.

We are talking about the peripheral issues -- the strategy of winning an election. We are not discussing the issues that will educate the voter and allow them to make a free choice as to who they believe will represent their values and who would be the best for the job.

We are discussing a popularity contest, and a strategy to achieve most popular -- and neither has anything to do with actually being president.

I don't want you to vote for Barack Obama because he makes you feel hopeful. I want you to vote for Barack Obama because you know where he stands on the issues and you feel he best represents you. I don't want you to vote for Hillary because she is a woman and it's about time a woman is in the White House. I don't want you to vote for Hillary because Bill comes included at no additional charge. I want you to vote for Hillary because you know where she stands on the issues and you feel she best represents you. I don't want you to vote for John McCain because it's his turn, or because he is an honored veteran. I want you to vote for John McCain because you know where he stands on the issues and you feel he best represents you.

If you don't know where your candidate stands, then you don't truly know why you are voting for them. If you don't have a reason that it matters that your candidate is elected, then you are participating in a popularity contest and nothing more. You are following someone else's reason for supporting that candidate, and you are most likely falling for the political rhetoric.

We can't be lazy thinkers here. We have to know the difference between a distraction that looks like something that matters, and what really matters.

We need to debate issues, not a person's middle name.

(Originally posted on my other blog)

Johnny Bravo Meets Poor Production

2008-01-31T19:02:00.001-06:00

When I was in college, I spent a great deal of my time, spare and otherwise, working at the college radio station. In addition to being the news director and producing two newscasts a week and a daily top of the hour news brief, I was a disc jockey for as many as three shows a week.

I loved every minute of it.

This station had pretty much no limits. There was no format we had to follow. In the same hour, I could play the Talking Heads, Norah Jones, Ween, Parliment Funkadelic, and P.O.D. in the same show. I use that example because I actually played all of those artists in a show I cohosted with Krystal once.

One semester I had a show in which I played moderate alternative rock music. After that, a guy played a solid hour of Celtic and Gaelic music.

Those were the days.

I tuned in to one of the top 40 stations in the greater Chicago area the other day -- 97.5 WZOK out of Rockford, IL.

Typically, I can't stand top 40 music because everything sounds like pitch-corrected, computer synthesized, lowest common denominator music. Most of the "artists" might as well be Johnny Bravo -- nothing special, but they "fit the suit."

Even Timbaland, who makes a pretty infectious pop song these days with his synthesizers and computer blips and glitches, sounds like he wants to actually become a computer.

Everyone on Top 40 radio sounds like a ripoff of Akon, who himself sounds like a ripoff of pop music anyhow.

When you talk to the kids that listen to this music, its ridiculous how fast these songs come and go. A song that was out six months ago is "old." A song that was a major hit today will be looked back on as a corny fad tomorrow.

Its disposable because it is plastic. And people recycle plastic, so today's crappy pop song makes tomorrow's crappy pop song.

I knew the state of top 40 music was bad, but I didn't know the quality of top 40 music was equally as bad. More than once as I've scanned past 97 ZOK on the dial, I have heard music that sounds like a really poorly ripped MP3.

The music already seems hollow, plastic, and full of production tricks -- now I have to listen to music that sounds like the cymbals were recorded under water?

Seriously, I bet the MP3's the station is using is ripped at about 96kbs. That is not good. People complain about the 128 kbs music available on iTunes as causing the production of the song to suffer, but for normal use on an untrained ear, most don't notice. At 96kbs, the music sounds like it was run through a bad filter. It sounds water-logged. This is considered acceptable to play on the public airwaves? It sounds like I'm listening to the music on some teenager's MySpace page!

It grates me.

(I could start in on how since the introduction of the iPod and the rise of digital music -- both things I love -- has destroyed good audio production and engineering, but that's a topic for another blog.)

I love the purity of music. I love the good mix and excellent production of music performed by talented musicians and singers. Every part of it is an art. Listen to any Zeppelin album at the intricacies of the music. Listen to Wilco's latest album. These are supurb albums produced and engineered by people who are just as talented as the band.

I also love the purity of old school radio. I love hearing new music rather than listening to a station that is trying to milk a popular artist. I love the variety. There just aren't many stations out there anymore that are flexible or not following a corporate playlists that fit the brand.

College radio is that last frontier. As long as they don't start ripping their MP3's at really high compression rates.

Heath Ledger is Dead

2008-01-22T22:56:00.000-06:00

Being an addict to AM talk radio, I heard the news of Heath Ledger's death pretty close to when it was released. This is a good thing about AM talk radio stations -- most of them are news-based and have updates on the quarter hour.

I heard the news sometime around 3:30 p.m.

I started thinking about Heath Ledger and realized I know nothing about the guy other than the fact that he starred along side Jake Gyllenhaal in Brokeback Mountain a few years ago. This fact was regurgitated in every news cycle for the next few hours, typically in the form of "Brokeback Mountain Star Heath Ledger was Found Dead in his apartment..."

I figured there must be more to his career than Brokeback, but off the top of my head, I couldn't think of anything. I can't recall ever watching any of his movies. If I have seen a movie with him in it, I certainly don't remember it.

When I got home from work an hour later, I logged on to Wikipedia to find out more about his career and movies he had starred in.

Of course, the man probably wasn't even cold yet and his Wikipedia entry already had been updated to include the sketchy details of his untimely death.

I wondered -- who was the person who heard of Ledger's death who's first thought was , "man, I better get on Wikipedia and update!"

I tuned into the Insider and TMZ tonight to see what their coverage of the death would be, but apparently Mr. Ledger died too late in the show's production to get coverage today.

But in the Internet world, almost instantaneously, a man's life is brought to a close in an entry that defines for the reader his life and career.

The Internet truly operates faster than life.

Hillary Clinton on the Tyra Banks Show

2008-01-18T19:32:00.000-06:00

If you were to ask me which daytime talk show I would guess Hillary Clinton would appear upon during this juncture in the election process, I think my last choice would be the Tyra Banks Show.

My first guess would be on Oprah Winfrey's show, but since "the Oprah" has endorsed Barack Obama and has done extensive campaigning on his behalf, it should be no surprise this was not her stop this time around.

But Tyra Banks?

As those of us who have watched the Tyra show know, she is slightly above unbearable as a talk show host, yet she appears to be quite successful. I pretty much hate her interview style and her down home, everyone-is-just-one-of-the-girls style. It pretty much strikes me as the type of show a former supermodel would host. Maybe it's just because I'm not in her audience demographic -- being a 26 year old male -- but I pretty much can't stand the show.

I watched the episode today mostly because I try never to miss a presidential candidate's TV appearance no matter which side of the fence they are on. I also watched it because of (and perhaps in spite of) the hype surrounding it. This appearance was billed as Hillary's "open and candid interview about Bill's infidelity and other such things that are of little importance to how well a person can run a country.

My guess is that Senator Clinton wanted this spot on Tyra to relate to young women voters, and to be in an atmosphere that gives the illusion of being open and candid -- where she can just talk with her girlfriends. This is my guess because this is how the interview was hyped in the days running up to it. (Although some talking heads on both sides speculate it has something to do with her comments about Martin Luther King Jr., but I think that whole thing was overblown.)

To me, this Tyra appearance was more of the same. It was more carefully placed words and carefully emphasized phrasing -- everything I've come to expect from Hillary Clinton. I didn't feel like I got to know the Senator from New York in any new light whatsoever.

I've always heard from people who love the Clintons and from people who hate them that outside the public eye, Hillary is a delightful and engaging person. She has the magnetism and power win over people who are staunchly opposed to her policy. I wish I could see this person in her public persona.

I can't help but wonder how many people watching felt like they got to know her on a human level because of the way the show was hyped. I suspect some did. But agreeing to talk about personal topics is not the same as revealing anything about who you are, especially when you triangulate every phrase.

When you worry too much about what you are saying and how it portrays you, you end up saying nothing and portraying nothing about yourself. A person who is genuine doesn't have to spend so much time monitoring themselves.

So was Hillary's mission successful on Tyra? Its hard to call. I think people who don't think critically will think so, and if that's who she is trying to sway, she just may.

(At the same time, this week, Mike Huckabee went on television and discussed frying squirrels in popcorn poppers in college. Why anyone would think this was relevant to discuss amid a candidates race in which you won the first race and lost the second two is beyond me. But I supposed you can call it "candid.")

TMZ

2008-01-06T00:03:00.000-06:00

TMZ is a phenomenon that boggles my mind. It is perfect crazy celebrity -- journalism?

Of course, their purpose is no different than any other celebrity outlet. People, InTouch Magazine, and TV's The Insider and Extra, like TMZ, all go to the bank on people's fascination with celebrities.

But what TMZ does is different. They don't bill their information on rumors and innuendo. They get actual video evidence, court documents and concrete evidence before they show a celebrity as they really are.

Shows like the Insider will tease a story that is completely false throughout the entire half hour show. This is your incentive to watch their show. There is no useful information being conveyed. Most of the celebrity "coverage" is their updates, which are nothing more than thinly-veiled pimping of the celebrity's current projects.

TMZ isn't pimping anyone's show or DVD box set. They are not relying on "a source close to the star," the method InTouch seems to prefer. They have real celebrities doing real things and usually looking stupid in the process.

Even though TMZ has more journalistic integrity than most, I still seem to feel like they are dirtier than the other venues because there is no fluffy filter packaged to sell albums or tickets. The reason I watch is because I enjoy watching celebrities making fools of themselves.

And maybe I feel like they are down and dirtier because I feel dirty for watching.