Dudez APlenty

2003-10-21T23:11:00.000-07:00

i'm taking a big step in terms of being less materialistic, though it's kind of an empty gesture all the same. i'm giving away my second computer. truth be told, and really why should anything else be, i have a gadget addiction. it all started when i thought building my own computer would be a good project to mention during interviews for jobs when i was graduating. for someone who had not previously cared about cache latencies and over-clocking (in spite of being a computer engineer), suddenly i got all into gigaHertz and dual-boot configurations. i turned into a geek. i'd check out web-sites like anandtech.com and tomshardwareguide.com [i have deliberately not linked these sites lest i should help create another geek] just to get the latest news on chipsets and video cards. i really got into it.

so much so that once i finished building that first computer, it wasn't long before the urge to build a second began. why would i need a second? so that i could still have two windows machines (one windows 2000, one windows XP), and set up a linux box as well. luckily, all i bought were two 80 Gb drives and 512 Mb worth of PC2100 memory. i was trying to decide which processor and motherboard i should get when people i knew started getting laid off, and i thought i would better serve myself by building a little nest-egg. the nest-egg didn't last long when i got laid off, but at least i did not have to try making car payments using a linux box.

the point is: why did i get myself tangled up in this mess? i've mentioned before my old habit of wanting, and sometimes getting, the latest and greatest. but why? i don't really play games on my computer, and i'm not doing much in the way of creating multimedia or engineering of any sort. why do i need this kind of power for surfing the web, email and blogging? the fact is that i don't, but i can't get rid of my computers.

i've given away most of my books, and almost all my CDs (whatever people would take .. not sure what to do with the rest) and i feel happier for it. i have not bought a CD in forever, or a playstation game (though i did succumb to buying a used DVD of 'about a boy'). i'm definitely less materialistic in that my clothing of choice is a white t-shirt and jeans, and you won't catch me buying anything with a brand name.

i'm sorry. this has really turned into rambling. my point is i don't need two computers. i hardly need one. so why does this feel like such a big step for me? it's not, is it? it's not like i'm giving away the machine i built. [that's my little frankenstein, each component thoughtfully selected and attached by yours truly.] the fact is with each possession i bid goodbye to, there's fewer distractions in my life, and i'm not sure i want to face life head on.

isn't that why we buy things? it's not always about necessity. it's about treating ourselves; making ourselves feel good the way our jobs and relationships sometimes fail to. it is about insulation. it's a scary world around us, getting scarier by the second, and we think if we create these little cages and fill them with all sorts of fluff and comfort, we'll feel safe and happy. the truth is that a gilded cage is still a cage, and we're still not prepared for what's waiting for us outside.

2003-10-09T23:19:00.000-07:00

read some humorous quotes today, and just had to share.

"I was not about to stand by and wait and trust in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein," George W. Bush said during a visit to New Hampshire. if there are three things George W. is not an authority on [although i suspect the number is somewhat greater than three], they are
1) trust,
2) sanity and
3) restraint.

i mean, really! how many people hear 'George W. Bush' and immediately think "oh, that would be the paragon of restraint who happens to be commander-in-chief, wouldn't it?"

"Who could possibly think that the world would be better off with Saddam Hussein still in power?" Bush continued. well, let's see. at first, it was just the Baathists and the Fedayeen; then the French and Germans, but lately, it seems to be an increasing number of Iraqi civilians as well. luckily, we don't need their goodwill or cooperation.

more gems. "I acted because I was not about to leave the security of the American people in the hands of a madman," he continued. but, i thought John Ashcroft still was Attorney General.

"We're making great progress (in Iraq). I don't care what you read about," Bush said in Lexington, KY. yeah, he never seemed big on reading, but rightly so -- there's all those 'subliminable' messages mixed in.

2003-10-02T22:59:00.000-07:00

i think it's a corollary of murphy's law – things never go according to plan. not my plan anyway.

we were told the phone would be set up at the new place on the 24th. no such luck. even though we moved approximately seven miles, we had to get a new phone number, and wait another 5 days to get it activated. i don't think we even have long-distance service yet. the worst of it all is that I registered our old phone number for the FTC/FCC’s no-call list. so telemarketers, in the words of the meathead-in-chief – “bring ‘em on!”

speaking of which, I heard the most bizarre thing about that list on the news yesterday. the FTC created the list, but the telemarketing industry challenged the FTC’s authority to enforce the list. the courts agreed saying that the FTC could regulate how the telemarketers called, but not who(m) they called – only the FCC could do that. so congress decided that the FCC will do that. only, here’s the bizarre part – the FTC won’t give the FCC the list for some reason. so the FCC has to enforce a list it doesn’t have a copy of. so what do they decide to do? the FCC figures that the telemarketers have been given a copy of the list by the FTC, so they have asked the telemarketers to provide them a copy of the list. it’s like a cop loaning his gun to a bank-robber on condition that should that gun be used in a theft, the robber is to immediately hand over the gun to the cop so that he can prevent the getaway. isn’t it great when lawmakers can take something really simple and then obfuscate it beyond recognition? ah, it’s a thing of beauty.

and while we’re on the subject of lawmakers, why not discuss the front-runner of the California recall election? Captain speech-impediment himself, Arnold Schwarzenegger. there were reports today that six women have accused him of groping them and otherwise making unwelcome advances. I don’t get it. do they mean to say that it is wrong for a guy to grab whatever he wants/likes just because it is part of another person’s body? well, if that sort of behavior is wrong, I don’t want to live in the Paleolithic era anymore. what? it’s 2003? so I can’t just walk up behind a woman, bash her on the head with my club and drag her back to my cave to have my way with her?

well, in that case, how about we suggest that a black football player isn’t really talented, but that we pretend he is because the liberal media desperately wants an African-American quarterback to succeed? oh, you say a big, fat pill-popping idiot hopped up on OxyContin (why on earth OxyContin when he suffers from constipated brain and diarrheal mouth I don’t know) beat us to it? damn, what luck. I’ll really have to rack my brains to come up with some really bigoted or chauvinistic form of self-expression. actually, if I try hard enough, it could be bigoted AND chauvinistic. way to set that target high!

it has been suggested that Rush Limbaugh is a big, fat idiot [note: see Al Franken’s book ‘Rush Limbaugh is a big, fat idiot and other observations’], but Rush really doesn’t make it seem implausible. as I understand it, there were reports today that his house-keeper was sent on errands to buy prescription drugs without a prescription, and that she bought 4000 pills over a 47-day period. what does Rush say? that he “has not been contacted, directly or indirectly, by" law enforcement. implication being that there is sufficient reason for them to get in touch with him, but that there has been some hold-up. perhaps they are waiting on a warrant to search his cheeks. even squirrels hoard nuts in their mouth. maybe there’s a pill or four hundred in his jowls.

finally, I would like to suggest my entry for super genius of the millennium … no, not you Rush! I nominate the first person to take a high-five and add the windmill-motion of the arm so that there is a subsequent low-five on the downswing. now, that’s a thing of beauty!

2003-09-18T22:43:00.000-07:00

i meant to post last night, to keep up this run i'm on but it was not meant to be. what was (meant to be), however, was one of the best nights of my life ... i got to see my without-a-doubt favorite band, R.E.M., perform live. and thanks to my fanclub membership, my wife and i were only 9 rows and dead-center from the stage.

somehow, maybe because i'm greedy, this still was not close enough. i saw them for the first time 4 years ago in minneapolis. general admission tickets on a baseball field, so my roommate and i followed behind my tall friend JD as far up front as people would let us. i think we were probably about the same distance from the stage then as we were last night. but it meant more 4 years ago because seating wasn't assigned. that night was magical because wilco opened, and i had never before seen my heroes live and every moment was precious. i was taking in all of michael stipe's poses and freaky-cool dance moves and just enjoying the simple pleasure of it all. of course, for anyone who was there, the night was cut short by a thunderstorm that endangered the safety of all gathered. whatever! i would dare a lightning strike to hear all of R.E.M.'s set.

no such trouble last night. perfect weather. for whatever reason, i drank a lot of water at home before leaving for the concert so that by the time opening act ed harcourt was done (fantastic job by the way ... really cool set that did a wonderful job of warming up the crowd), i was wondering whether to hold it in for god knows how long or to brave a visit to the restrooms. i hate public restrooms in case that needs to be spelled out. this is where having a brainy wife comes in ... she was like 'are you kidding me? guys get done in restrooms so fast ... you'll be out of there in no time.' and, she was mostly right. i plucked up the courage and searched for the restrooms, and there was a line, but boy did it move quickly. of course, one i got to a stall, i realized i had put on my button-fly pants. great! nothing like having a long line of drunks behind you watching your ass struggle to un-do and re-do a button-fly. but i was a new man after that visit. my enjoyment of that evening went up 300%.

there's something about the feeling of really liking a band, and listening to their music for so many years and memorizing lyrics and singing along on road-trips or whatever else, and then suddenly one day, there they are a few yards away. and since they weren't promoting a new album, they had asked fans to email them with requests for the show. i didn't want to be selfish, so i emailed the one song my wife and i just HAD to hear... nightswimming. a night later, i wish i had been greedier. i should have also asked for talk about the passion ... who knows, they may have played it. but what an amazing set ... 'world leader pretend' and 'drive' and other songs i had never expected to hear live but some intelligent souls had thankfully requested. and 'electrolite,' i am determined to learn how to play that on the piano. i don't even play the piano, but this is how great that song is. and they had a couple new ones, 'bad day' and 'animal' ... i hadn't heard either before (i know, some fan i am) but i especially loved 'animal.' for whatever reason, i immediately thought of the muppet. [typing that now reminds me of the long john silver's shrimp muppet, pepe. happy thoughts.] i saw them on aug. 21, 1999 and then on september 17, 2003 ... i wonder if i'll have to wait another 4 years. i sure hope not.

anyway, to any friends that still check this blog out, i miss you 'migo and kellybean and i'll try and email/call soon. we're moving to a new apartment this weekend, and we're not supposed to get phone service transferred till the middle of next week, so this may be it for blog-posts for a short while. i hope to get into it regularly after that. also, not that they read this as far as i know, but i hope jd is doing well in spite of being in the path of hurricane isabel, and i hope d.e.p is doing well ... he had a sad anniversary this week ... i wanted to call, but wasn't sure if he'd rather be left alone.

2003-09-16T22:10:00.000-07:00

i think i'm just loving msnbc.com or something. before i dish out the link, i used to get all my news from CNN on my iPaq. at least twice a day, sometimes thrice (i believe that is a word, so there!), i would sync it and then sit and read. of course, for whatever reason, CNN and CNN/Money decided to leave Avantgo (that's the syncing service on my iPaq). the cool part was that i had been thinking about getting rid off those channels myself because of the new rules passed by the FCC and my hatred/distrust for AOL Time Warner. i realize that msn and nbc aren't much better, or better at all, but i need my news from somewhere.

and about 'thrice', has anyone seen that one commercial for some chrysler car where hurricane celine dion sings the background song? i swear the lyrics go something like this: 'don't you think it's ironical? that love is all we need.' the first time i heard it, i thought, i must be crazy, because i realize i do not like the hurricane and i thought i must be giving myself reasons to continue my dislike for her. i thought "no sensible person would use the word 'ironical.'" but then i saw the commercial a second and third (not thriced) time, and between bouts of teeth grinding, i realized i was right. 'ironical'? why not just 'ironic'? even atlantis morrisette had it right ... 'isn't it ironic?' of course, she had it half-right because the ironic thing was that all the things she mentioned were just unfortunate, not ironic.

why is the concept of irony so hard for the human race? let me see if i can help. a commercial is meant to get someone to buy something. but because of the word 'ironical' in the chrysler ad, i will NOT buy their product. i may have otherwise, but now i definitely will not. so is it ironic that their commercial turned me off buying the product? no! that's just bad advertising.

i remember when i saw this episode of friends (back when i could stand the show) and chandler was whining about this girl that said 'supposably' instead of 'supposedly.' i could identify with him. god, i abhor celine. this is a milestone for me ... i don't believe i've ever abhored another person before. [note: 'abhor' comes from the Latin abhorrere = to shrink back in horror ... sounds like i hit the nail on the head there]

finally, the msnbc.com link i promised ... how you sleep may reveal your personality. i have not slept the same way throughout life ... as a young child, i slept on my back with my hands above my head. according to the article, this is the starfish position -- for unassuming, good listeners. in high school, i slept on my back with hands folded over my chest. this isn't mentioned in the article, so i assume it was too freakish. my favorite position though is flat on my stomach, or as the article calls it, the freefall position. apparently, it's the most unusual position with only 6.5% of the populace picking it -- it's only for the 'brash and gregarious.'

2003-09-15T23:33:00.000-07:00

an old joke which i like goes like this ... how can you tell if a _____ is lying? his/her lips are moving. today, i fill the blank with the word 'republican.' and, i have two in particular in mind: dick cheney and ahnold schwarzenbugger.

cheney for his part was spouting more bullshit this weekend. really wonderful reading if you have the time, or even if you don't but you do give a rat's ass about what people are being sacrificed for like lambs. an excerpt:
"Should we get out entirely and turn the whole thing over to the U.N. (and maybe NATO)? Jeffrey Sachs sure thinks so, and I am beginning to agree. Sachs writes: “This year Bush asked for only $200 million for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB, and Malaria, a sum equal to 1.5 days of spending on the US occupying forces in Iraq. The US annual contributions to fight malaria are less than the costs of one day’s occupation, and as a result, 3 million Africans will die needlessly from that preventable and treatable disease. But who is talking about $87 billion for the 30 million Africans dying from the effects of HIV/AIDS, or the children dying of malaria, or the 15 million AIDS orphans, or the dispossessed of Liberia and Sierra Leone, or the impoverished children of America without medical insurance?" cue crickets chirping in the stillness.

then, i caught a bit of ahnold on oprah today. [what can i say? lots of free time on my hands. i used to dislike oprah. then when dr. phil appeared on tuesdays, i liked both oprah and dr. phil. i ended up hating dr. phil because he's a little too smug -- yeah, we get it ... you're successful, you have EVERYTHING figured out, and we're all idiots.] i don't think i could hate oprah more.

now, before you say 'i told you that bitch crazy', she had her lips superglued to the posteriors of maria and captain speech-impediment for the whole hour. i realize 'oprah' is not tim russert's 'meet the press.' but, she can at least pretend to be objective. no, she pooh-poohs about captain s.i.'s past [he bragged about group sex and smoking pot] by focusing on the fact that he gave the interview 26 years ago. she said it twice "26 years ago!" by her logic, if saddam had lasted another 10-15 years, we should just forget that he gassed the iraqi kurds. the simple fact is that speech-impediment is an idiot. but the idiot is married to a long-time friend of ho-prah. speech-impediment claims that a) he doesnt remember what he has said in his interviews because he has given thousands of them and b) he was trying to create controversy to raise the profile of bodybuilding. apparently, the general public has a higher opinion of something when gang-bangs are involved.

a couple of sidenotes of interest ... to me, anyway ... the WUSA folded today $16 million in debt. to those not in the know, this was the women's professional soccer league in the US. i love soccer, and to those who know me, that is a huge understatement. after 3 years, they couldnt come up with any more funding or sponsors. considering that the US is spending $1bn+ per week in iraq, i wish a few pennies of that could have found it's way to help young women develop an interest in soccer, and consider it a viable career option. and don't say the government shouldn't be interfering in such matters. in that case, the government shouldn't be bailing out airlines that are mismanaged into debt either. i'm just happy that mia hamm got a founder's cup medal, and that i had the pleasure of watching abby wambach and siri mullinix for at least one season. the women's world cup starts this coming weekend, and i hope to catch at least one game on network television before it's done. it's in the US, and given the state of the domestic women's game, this might be the last time the US hold on to the trophy for a while.

also, i'm an asshole. i readily admit this. i caught the opening montage of dr. phil and his 'ultimate weight-loss challenge' and it featured a severely obese woman on a bicycle lamenting the fact that she was so obese, her bike tires blew out when she got on. i guess the purpose was to elicit my sympathy ... instead, i laughed my ass off. i'm sorry, but if it takes tires blowing out for you to realize you need to do something about your burgeoning weight and girth, then obesity is the least of your problems. i'd first find something to tighten that screw in your head ... before the remaining 5% of your brain leaks out.

2003-09-12T23:49:00.000-07:00

read a great op-ed piece at msnbc.com on george w.'s request for an additional $87 billion for iraq and afghanistan. even if you consider that $21 bn is going directly towards reconstruction, it's interesting to see exactly what the total defence budget of $466 bn is being spent on. it's really not surprising ... at least, not to a cynic like myself since peace is not economically feasible. boo! hiss!! i know, not words people like to hear, but i believe it's the truth.

let's start with some basic assumptions:
1. human beings are lazy -- they usually take the path of least resistance.
2. human beings are selfish -- on average, they won't do something unless they profit from it.
3. human beings are easily bored -- you've quit reading by now, so it doesn't matter what i type. perhaps i'll expand on this some other day.

johnny cash passed on last night. i only listened to his music after he sang with U2 on their album, Zooropa. but a definite gem of a human being with a unique style. if nothing else, he actually played an instrument and didn't need backup dancers. and his version of reznor's 'hurt' -- i was speechless when i first heard it.

2003-09-11T22:05:00.000-07:00

yet another september 11. are we any safer? in airports, perhaps, but few other places. are we just as free? really doubtful, thanks to mr. ashcroft and the patriot act. i understand restricting certain freedoms in the name of security, but what are we securing when we curb everything and give the government the right to snoop as they please? life in a police state? i love this country, but i'm not sure everything the government has done post-9/11 is correct or wise. of course, a republican would question my patriotism because any sort of criticism means i only wish evil on america.

this will be another short post, but as an aside ... i was watching the nightly news with peter jennings yesterday with my better half, and they showed the clip of bin laden and his right-hand man traipsing [i believe this is the most appropriate word for what i saw] through the mountain tops and i had two thoughts: 1. are they on a date? 2. which one is going to start with a rendition of 'the hills are alive (with the sound of music)'?

only i understand my sense of humor every single time.

2003-09-05T00:14:00.000-07:00

watched the first democratic debate on pbs tonight. dean seemed a little too rigid, but he did alright. i was somewhat impressed by kerry ... i think he could do a'ight. lieberman just seemed out of sorts, but not as much as graham. mosely-braun had some good ideas, but i dont think she's really presidential material. gephardt though ... i dont know what his strategy is ... just keep repeating 'george w. bush is a miserable failure' like a broken record? i was most impressed by kucinich though ... hadn't heard anything about him, and i thought he did well. somehow, i doubt he has a chance. but then again, people said the same about dean some months ago.

oh, and i'm sure you're all wondering about sharpton. well, he missed the plane. somehow, i dont think someone like that can 'lead the free world.' i'm going to watch as many of these debates as i can. i guess my front-runners are [in alphabetical order] ... dean, kerry, kucinich. honorable mention: sharpton.

2003-09-03T23:31:00.000-07:00

is the world fair? now this should be a brief post. at the risk of sounding like a victim, i'll say the world isn't fair. but i'm not complaining, as someone who is a 'victim' would do. i'm just making an observation.

one of today's big headlines was that some anti-abortion protester, who killed a doctor who performed abortions, was executed today. i'm not sure why this was such big news because thousands of people die each day. my guess? some lives are more valuable than others. oh shame! what a horrible thing to say!! but what else do we demonstrate when some people can earn $42 million in one year for shaking their asses and giggling [i'm sorry, cameron diaz ... even if you broke your nose] and others have to sell a kidney to pay off debts.

no, we like to think each and every life is precious; but if it was, the anti-abortion guy would NOT have killed the doctor. even if it saved more lives in the process. there is no way to justify something inherently wrong, as murder definitely is. collateral damage isn't a concept God came up with. otherwise, sodom and gomorrah wouldn't have been a negotiation.

so how do people justify bending the rules? my better half got a book about wal-mart and how it is destroying america, and she no longer wants to shop at wal-mart. not that we go there that much anyway -- we prefer the target chic -- but she said she would rather pay more elsewhere than let wal-mart or sam's club get any of her money.

i actually found myself playing devil's advocate on behalf of wal-mart. but not because i like wal-mart -- i just like a good discussion. let's face it ... they use their size in the same way microsoft or intel or any other corporate behemoth does, or the way america kind of sits on countries till they gasp for air and agree with us. so, in the world of might makes right, why pick only on them? i dont see any books like 'how microsoft is the death of all things sacred' [note to self: there may be money in such a book] or 'how intel is a succubus in the computer hardware world.' so why just wal-mart? because mom and pop aren't into building software apps or fitting a few billion transistors on a chip the size of a fingernail, but they are into operating little stores that can't compete with wal-mart.

my argument? blame people who go to wal-mart -- people who only focus on low prices and pinching pennies. people for whom it's all about the benjamins. if these people had a conscience ... if they chose to avoid such a company like the plague, then wal-mart would go bankrupt. instead, they flock to a superstore like carnivorous beetles to a rotting corpse [by the way, i am particularly fond of this analogy]. and then they blame wal-mart because mom and pop have to close shop. hypocrites. yeah, just blame wal-mart.

i've come to the conclusion that this is a 'take what you can get while the getting is good' world. they did it at enron, global crossing and worldcom, and they'll do it for as long as the worst they have to face is confinement in some cushy club-med-type prison for execs. a guy mugs someone and makes of with a wallet, he probably gets 2 years without parole. but a guy steals a few hundred million ... it's like our legal system admires his cojones. so we just lock him up for like a year and then let him out early for good behavior. nevermind that the second guy robbed a larger number of people of their pensions and livelihoods.

now, the reason i mention all this is because i said something in the moment that, on reflection, i'm scared came out of my mouth. i said i can't decide what i'll teach any kids we have ... i want to teach them that there is no excuse for not doing the right thing, that morals and ethics aren't a matter of convenience, that they mean the most when you risk losing the most. but, since leaving college, i've realized that morals and ethics don't get you far, that nice guys do finish last, and that in a dog eat dog world, vegans get chewed up and spit out. at the time, i found myself hating anyone who ever told me that hard work is its own reward, that i should turn the other cheek, that . and i dont want my children hating me later for spoon-feeding them this same hogwash when i know it's all a lie.

in the cold light of day, i know in my heart that i don't want my kids thinking they have to screw someone over before they get screwed themselves. that only breeds the criminals who become CEOs later on. but i also want to spare them that moment when they realize this is a miserable life. i figure this is why people take up religion -- because if this life is all we have and we piss it away in forgettable jobs and relationships, then we're better off putting a gun to our heads. but we don't want to die, so we tell ourselves it's okay to suffer and sacrifice -- because there is a reward in the hereafter. sure, anything to keep breathing. anything to maintain our sanity.

but here we come to yet another dilemma for me -- why is it people like me who have things and opportunities are so jaded, yet the poorest of the poor struggling with illness, famine and whatever else cling to life when it would be so much easier to give up?

send me feedback -- dudezaplenty@hotmail.com

2003-08-28T22:03:00.000-07:00

I’ve been watching some depressing television in the last couple days. I watched 60 minutes deux on Wednesday night, and there was a piece on food lines. It started with the camera starting at the head of the line and moving back. Only there weren’t 25, or 50 or even 100 people in the line. The producers counted 896 people! The really depressing thing was that a lot of people in the line had at least one person working a full-time job.

One mother came up with this trick of buying a gallon of whole milk and adding a gallon of water to it to make it last longer. She had one child and then had her tubes tied because she didn’t want to worry about feeding another child. Is this what comes from living in a nation that is a super-power?

Then I watched an episode of Wide Angle (a fascinating show on PBS) where tonight’s episode was about South Africa, ten years after the end of apartheid. And really, what I saw showed me that nothing has changed fundamentally. There’s cosmetic changes in that, while 10 years ago all the wealth was held by the white population, today there are a few black faces in the mix. But, the majority of people who were poor under apartheid are still poor today. Maybe poorer because food is more expensive. One lady earns $40 a month working part time jobs, and for some maize meal, oil, a cabbage, some candles and matches and maybe a couple other minor things, she had to pay $8.

After watching Wide Angle, I picked up the latest issue of National Geographic which I received earlier in the week but had tossed aside without even looking at. As luck would have it, there just HAD to be a story on slaves in the 21st century – bonded laborers, girls sold into prostitution by their families, child laborers.

I never thought the world was fair, but now I feel this anger building up in me. I’ve volunteered at homeless shelters and food lines and I thought I was doing something to help. But, I don’t think I could do enough of that to feel satisfied now. There needs to be change … not the band-aid measures we have today but radical, systemic reform.

By the way, today was the __th anniversary (I don’t remember the exact number) of MLK Jr.’s ‘I have a dream’ speech. He had a vision, and it was snuffed out way before it had an opportunity to manifest itself completely.

Which brings me to something I’ve thought about for weeks now, if not months. I don’t get Jesus. Yeah, I complain about the church and organized religions, but I still admire this person Jesus, whether he is a characted or a historical person. But, I’ve been thinking about this one part, Matthew 26: 6-13 [also repeated in Mark 14:3-9 & John 12:1-8 -- except in John, the lady anoints his feet whereas in Matthew and Mark, she anoints his head – which is it? Feet or head?] that troubles me to no end, and it popped into my head again today. For those without access to a bible, a quick synopsis -- a woman anoints Jesus with expensive perfumed oil, and his disciples ask if the money spent on the oil would not have been more worthwhile were it spent on the poor. Jesus reprimands them saying that the poor will always be with us, but he will not.

It bothers me on a couple levels. This is not the Jesus I like to remember … I like to think of the guy that washed his disciples’ feet. [Still, he said in that same passage that the lady was preparing him for burial, so I can accept that in ordinary circumstances, he would probably have agreed with his disciples]. But the second issue I have is that Jesus seems a little too cavalier and matter-of-fact about the poor. Yeah, he’s probably being realistic and yes, the truth hurts; but I can’t help but wonder. The poor will always be around, so it’s okay to ignore them sometimes? If so, we seem to be doing a real good job of it.

Fucking depressing, all of it. Humbug!

2003-08-25T13:49:00.000-07:00

i am vindictive. i keep grudges. in my defence, this applies only to corporations and entities, not family and friends. all the same, here is a compendium of companies that have crossed me for the last time.

sprint. my first job after i graduated from college. mid-june of 2002, my manager offered me a promotion and a raise. six weeks later, he called me in to an office where he and a manager of another group were waiting. i was told that i was being laid off for business reasons, that it had nothing to do with my work-rate and that it was nothing personal. still, i took it personally. i'd rather he had told me i was the lousiest contributor in his group -- telling me it's not my work-rate which is behind the decision to can me doesn't spare my feelings ... it just tells me they retained someone more incompetent than me for "business reasons." at any rate, i cancelled my long-distance and cell-phone service at the end of that billing period.

citibank. i had an american airlines mastercard for which i paid $85 per year. it was to expire in 5/03, but i got a replacement card in 4/03 which i activated and used. the replacement card came with an agreement which stated that i would be refunded the entire annual membership fee so long as i cancelled within 30 days -- even if i had used the card. about 15 days after activating the card, i decided to cancel the membership and request a card with no-annual fee instead. got the diamond preferred mastercard. however, i only got a refund of $77.91. i called and spoke to a customer-service bastard, er, i mean representative. i read the lines off the agreement i got with the new card and asked why i was not refunded the entire amount. to sum up a long, somewhat tedious and rather boring story, she accused me of 'twisting' the language of the card holder agreement to my advantage. i told her that until i got the full refund i was promised, i would refrain from using my diamond preferred card. she said she was sorry to hear that i was cancelling that account. i interrupted her right there and said that i never suggested i wanted to cancel my account. later, i wrote a letter to the citibank customer service department with 5 issues i had concerns about. they refunded me $7.09 and ignored my four other concerns. all i know is, i have yet to use that diamond preferred mastercard -- they keep spending money on statements and postage to let me know i have a zero balance due -- and that discover is sure making a good commission of my hip lifestyle.

smuckers. now what could i possible have against j. m. smuckers? nothing personally, but i watched a story on 60 minutes in which it was reported that the goliath smuckers filed an injuction against a bakery in michigan that was selling crustless pb&js. this is because smuckers has a patent on 'uncrustables' -- the awful pot-pie looking pb&j sandwich they market. nevermind that the little bakery in michigan was making and selling their version before the uncrustables came out on the market. i no longer buy any products of smuckers -- neither their preserves nor Jif [which incidentally is George W. peanut-butter of choice] nor Crisco -- on the principle that something is fundamentally wrong with this world when a company can patent the idea of removing the crust off sandwiches even though people have been doing it since the early 20th century. for more, go here.

anyway, the reason i brought this up is that i hate the Fox network ... there is nothing redeeming for me about Fox EXCEPT for the reruns of 3rd Rock from the Sun [hereafter referred to as TRFTS]. that is the only show my spouse and I watch on Fox. so i made the following proposal to her ... why not remove Fox from our television and VCR? we can still use the remote to enter in the channel number when we want to watch TRFTS. the benefit is that when we channel-surf on other days, we wont have to waste any time on Fox. she didn't go for my suggestion.

2003-08-19T21:12:00.000-07:00

okay, let's try this again. i've blogged for a couple days in a row now, and if i can keep it up, well, i don't know what it will prove but i'm willing to find out.

i forgot to mention yesterday that i won an auction on ebay. simcity 3000 for $3 + $4 shipping. who da man? i'm da man. it was an amazing, exciting, nail-biting finish and all. who needs seabiscuit?

Aug-17-03 23:36:07 PDT - I enter a bid of $1.00. The auction ends at Aug-18-03 10:05:42 PDT. A little over 10 hours to go.
Aug-18-03 09:32:05 PDT - Assmonger enteres a bid of $1.25. Way to flash that cash!
Aug-18-03 10:04:41 PDT - I'm having none of this bullshit. I enter a maximum bid of $3 ... I know how to wallop my wallet! Winning bid currently $1.50.
Aug-18-03 10:05:10 PDT - Punk-ass bitch bids $1.75, only to be immediately outbid by yours truly ... that's right! Rejected!! $2.00 to me!
Aug-18-03 10:05:25 PDT - Bitch-ass punk waits 15 seconds to bid $2.25 ... only for history to repeat itself! Get that shit outta here, mofo! $2.50 to the champion!
Aug-18-03 10:05:36 PDT - Loser 3000 bids $2.75 in one last ditch attempt with 6 seconds to go ... will it work?
Aug-18-03 10:04:41 PDT - Buzzz!! Sorry, no one shows up the Dude with less than $3 in their pocket. I know, it's sad that that's all it takes, but I have my standards too.

After all, there's a reason I'm getting Simcity 3000 when it has been followed by Simcity 3000 Unlimited, AND Simcity 4. I've had it with being on the leading edge. For a while I was on the bleeding edge, getting shit as soon as it could be pre-ordered and paying premium. But, wisdom has now prevailed and I realize that good shit comes to those who wait. And, for a lot less. But, wait too long and the game has passed you by [as the punk-ass bitch / bitch-ass punk on eBay found out]. It's very zen, this game of balance I'm trying to perfect. But, for a second, at 10:04:41 PDT on Aug-18-03, I WAS KING!

Send any feedback to dudezaplenty@hotmail.com

2003-08-18T22:07:00.000-07:00

in these days of 6%+ unemployment, i am amazed by one person's longevity in show business. and that person is vanna white. maybe it's just me, but what the fuck does she do exactly? touch screens when they light up? because it's painfully obvious when someone solves the puzzle that the covered letters can be revealed automatically. it's not like she has to run across the board real quick getting all the hitherto-hidden letters. so she has a 'non-essential' function. pat sajak on the other hand ...

this weekend, another 9 months of misery began for me -- the english premier league's opening weekend of the 2003-04 season. liverpool fc's first game was on sunday, against chelsea ... the very team that beat them on the last day of the season in may and pipped them to that coveted fourth place. this was going to be a big game. liverpool had to prove they are better and improved over the summer. chelsea, of course, have access to roman abramovich's billions and spent over 70 million euros on transfers. anyway, all this is crap anyway because liverpool lost. jimmy floyd hasselbaink scored the winner two minutes from time. that's when you know you're screwed ... when someone with a middle name like floyd can stick it to you. one down, thirty-seven more to go. feels like it will be a long season.

2003-08-17T22:53:00.000-07:00

I think I offended some friends this weekend. Last week, I read an article about how Fox News was suing Al Franken for trademark infringement. The title of Franken's new book includes the words 'fair and balanced' -- which is the trademark or motto of Fox News -- but I suspect he used the words more for mockery than homage. So, Fox News is just bitter that he can use its own words to make fun of it and wants to prevent him from doing so. I don't think Fox News helped its cause. I doubt I would have heard of this book but for the lawsuit, and now I am determined to read it at some point in the future. Not right now though, because I proceeded to read a previous book of his 'Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot and other observations.' I get the feeling Franken uses controversy to increase book sales -- a truly Republican ploy if I ever heard one.

Anyway, I had the book with me at a parade this past weekend, and my friend's wife peeks at the cover to see the title. I hold the book prominently so as to make the reading of the book's title much easier, and my friend says [speaking of Rush Limbaugh] 'I used to hate him, but I listen to his show now'. And I'm thinking, used to? How could anyone actually like Rush? That's akin to someone saying they like amoebic dysentery and grab every chance they get to contract it. Rush Limbaugh is someone I would describe using one of the best descriptions I have ever heard -- "he suffers from constipation of the mind and diarrhea of the mouth." My friend goes on to ask if I've read the book and I say I only just got it, which I did -- but I so badly wanted to ask what value he found in Limbaugh's show. I didn't. If there is one thing I adhere to, it's an awareness of a time and a place for everything.

I don't have a problem with conservative values, and until a few years ago, was extremely conservative myself. But, I kept an open mind because I was never conceited enough to think that I know everything, and that anyone with a differing opinion was wrong. That's what I dislike about people like Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Chris Matthews, and any number of highly-opinionated loudmouths -- they have an opinion [not necessarily ignorant in basis, but definitely selective in which facts they will use as a basis], they have a voice and they use volume to drown everyone else out. It's not the person with the logical argument who wins on their shows; it's the person who can out-yell and drown out every other voice. They don't present opinion as opinion; rather they present opinion as fact.

At any rate, in honor of Limbaugh, I wrote the following haiku:

excruciating
like an infected pustule
such is rush limbaugh

2003-08-05T20:46:00.000-07:00

Okay, it's been a while, but I am trying to get back in to the routine of having nothing to do. [Achtung! Smoove segue coming ...] And speaking of doing a whole lot of nothing, first George W., and then the Vatican, decided to speak out against the most evil incarnation of the devil -- homosexual marriages.

The main argument against giving homosexuals the right to marry is that it has a negative impact on the institution of marriage. The institution of marriage! Man, them is fighting words, huh? Suddenly the right to marry isn't simply a right like the right to bear arms or assemble peacefully. No, now it's an institution. Like applie pie, the presidency and golf.

Let's just take a closer look at this institution.
1. Over half of all marriages in the US end in divorce.
2. Three years ago, a bevy of women paraded before a man they could not see, and one of them even married him at the end of the hour live on Fox's special -- Who Wants to Marry a Multimillionaire? Their marriage lasted a matter of hours really, and Rick Rockwell turned out to not have nearly as many millions as he claimed. His one-time bride ended up pozing for Playboy.
3. Recently, another show called 'Married by America' aired. The purpose of the show was to have a man and a woman marry -- not as they would prefer, but as millions of Americans [telephoning their votes in] saw fit. An amalgam of Who Wants to Marry a Multimillionaire and American Idol, if you will. [If you won't, come up with your own fucking amalgam.]
4. Morning shows like Today on NBC and Good Morning, America on ABC continue to have summer weddings where the audience votes for a couple, then continues to select the dresses, rings, cake, et cetera for the couple. In spite of it being their wedding, all the couple get to pick is their spouse. They might end up hating everything about their wedding day, yet the network foots the bill, so it's all good.

Do the enumerated points above describe a thriving institution, or one that resembles more of a farce? Let's be honest. No one gives a flying fuck about marriage as an institution. It's just that people like Pres. Bush and the Pope are running out of arguments against letting homosexuals live with all the rights and freedoms the rest of us take for granted. If we really cared about the institution of marriage, why would we not enforce laws enacted against unmarried heterosexuals fornicating or committing adultery? It's not like the laws don't exist in enough states. No, we don't enforce such laws because that would be absurd, and the majority of America would revolt against such a stance. Yet, somehow, it's completely sensible to forbid homosexuals from doing the same, because it is deviant and a threat to another institution: the Family! I say 'horseshit!'

The first argument was that homosexual sexual activity was deviant. All 50 states in the US had, at one time or the other, legislation making it illegal for homosexuals to have sex ... even if it was consentual, involved only adults and took place in the privacy of a home. Recently, the Supreme Court struck down a Texas anti-sodomy law. That's when you heard Pres. Bush state that he would like marriage defined to be between a man and a woman, and the Vatican warned Catholic politicians that support of same-sex unions is "gravely immoral".

So, the second argument now seems to be that allowing homosexuals to marry threatens the institution of marriage for heterosexuals. It may just be me, but I give as much of a rat's ass about marriage between homosexuals as I do about marriage between heterosexuals -- namely, it doesn't affect my marriage. I feel as justified by heterosexual marriages as I feel threatened by homosexual marriages, which is to say: not at all. The only people that matter to my marriage are my wife and I.

But, I have reason to believe I am not alone in this thinking. According to a poll by The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, only 30% of respondents in July, 2003 strongly opposed gay marriages compared to 41% in June, 1996. The more important finding in the same report was that 47% of Catholics favor gay marriages in July, 2003 compared to 31% in June, 1996. Why do I claim this is of more value? For two reasons. First of all, a greater percentage of Catholics support gay marriages compared to the general population -- 47% to 38%. And secondly, more Catholics support gay marriages today than did in 1996. Is the Vatican behind the times? Perhaps, perhaps not. Though I do suspect many Catholics think pedophile priests constitute a more definite threat of violence against children than allowing a gay couple to adopt [as the Vatican contends].

My point is this: if we really have a logical opposition to homosexuality, let's hear it. Let's not hide behind antiquated notions of morality, or 'institutions' like marriage or the family. On the other hand, if we're just scared/disgusted/horrified by the thought of homosexuality, let's admit that [and get counseling for it] but let homosexuals live with all the rights and freedoms we expect and demand for ourselves. Doing otherwise amounts to sticking our heads in the sand and pretending the tide isn't turning. As an aside, I think it's fascinating how many Christians [usually fundamentalists] conveniently forget parts of the Bible that don't support their cause. They'll quote any number of verses where St. Paul said a man should not lie with another man, or something similar, yet they'll forget where Jesus said that he without sin should cast the first stone [John 8:3-11].

2003-07-29T07:35:00.000-07:00

No, I'm still alive. Well, we're still alive. It's no longer just me. I have a spouse now, I'm part of a forever couple. Hopefully forever. I wonder if this is how people see married couples though. And by 'people', I mean my single friends.

I remember when I was, technically-speaking, 'still a bachelor' when my friends got married. A few times I thought, that's it, he/she will no longer be the same. And, a couple times, I was right. They morphed into this new [and therefore obviously better and improved] himandher-creature. But, I don't think the same applies to me and mine. I sure hope my friends don't see it that way. Last week, we completed four years since we started dating, and I know I've changed in that time -- hell, you can only hold out for so long -- but, I like to think that both she and I have retained a lot of our individuality.

Marriage is this weird institution ... and not just when Liza and David partake of it for a few months. It's beautiful and symbolic and all that, but there's a death involved of a previous life. There has to be that dying for the new life together to start, and yet, amidst all the celebration, who really mourns the life before? I think a lot of people probably see the past life as something worth leaving behind in this 'thank goodness I'm no longer single' attitude. But, the new life means everything is done by committee. Maybe not EVERY single thing, but a lot. It's like this bizarre socially-accepted, or rather socially-expected, schizophrenia.

I have a friend who is open to the idea of a relationship but also capable of accepting life as a bachelor, and I find myself telling him 'come on, amigo, you're only 25, you have a lot of time.' I'm not sure why I tell him that, because that may seem to imply that I feel he'll be missing out unless he gets married. So, I'll say right now that I believe a single person can live just as fulfilling a life as a married person. I hear you say 'bullshit! way to be PC!' but I mean it. I don't have this condescending attitude toward my single friends like they're missing out. I remember being single, and it wasn't all bad. And there have definitely been times during the dating part of my relationship when I thought, hell, things were so much simpler when I was single. So why get married? It's because when you meet that one person, you know you won't be able to live as good of a life without him/her. It's not because you wake up in a cold sweat one night and realize you don't want to be alone for the rest of your life. If that happens, you either get a goldfish, or cat, or for a good time, both.

It's because people see marriage as this great rite of passage that the divorce rate is so high. I think society, and probably married people most of the time, have this rubbish 'oh, it's such a shame he/she is still single' attitude. A lot of people might be marriage material but they don't prepare enough and that's why things head south. But, a lot of people aren't ready for marriage, and never will be, and yet they get married because they either fear a single life, or just do what society expects of them. I say kudos to people who think of a bachelor or spinster life as a viable option, because they are AWARE of themselves, and what they want and they aren't just going to be sheep and do what people think they should do. I don't think of it as swimming against the stream. I think of it as swimming a different channel or tributary.

So, to my friend, I hope you weren't offended when I said either 'you're so young' or 'you still have so much time left.' I don't mean to suggest you'll miss out on anything. I mean to suggest that there are women out there who will miss out on knowing a gent like yourself. And maybe kids who will miss out on having a fantastic father. It's not always about you!

2003-07-12T21:32:00.000-07:00

When a sperm whale dies at sea, it rots until it becomes a ''skeleton suspended in a semi-liquid mass within a bag of skin and blubber,'' the scientists said. Eventually, the skin tears and the bones sinks while the skin and blubber float.

''This washes up and has the appearance of an octopus because the spermaceti organ keeps its bulky shape,'' they added. The spermaceti is a large bulbous organ that forms a sort of forehead and contains a milky wax which early whalers likened to sperm fluid.

This is the type of drivel you discover when you promise to learn something new everyday.

2003-07-10T23:28:00.000-07:00

"Today is a gift -- that's why it's called the present." I guess today must be shocking too, because it's current as well.

I hate sap. I'm not without emotion or against displays of affection, but I am against anything cheesy, corny or sappy. Anyone who has to wipe a tear away after reading something like 'today is a gift' ... well, let me say the only present they deserve is an electric chair.

I intensely dislike forwards. I hate people who send forwards because they think that if they really do send that bullshit out to 8 people in the next 15 minutes, they will
a. be asked out by their crush
b. get money from bill gates
c. have good luck for the next week
d. any other retarded thing these damned forwards promise.

I don't send forwards ... I consider it doing my part to preserve bandwidth on the internet for something useful. I also dislike it when people forward things where you have to scroll for the next ten minutes to get to the moronic bullshit that supposedly matters. I think the next time I get a forward, I am going to block that person from ever sending me mail ever again. I won't tell them, because they'll probably forward that email too.

I dont feel guilty blocking anyone because there are two types of email I receive [from people I know]. There are the people who email irregularly, or maybe even regularly, but what they have to say is definitely of consequence and interesting. And there are the others whose email subjects always begin with 'Fwd: Fw: FWD: Re: Fw: Pass this on!" Usually, people who send forwards never send anything besides forwards, so they must think this is an appropriate way of keeping a relationship alive and well. They need to know they are wrong. This isnt even a relationship on life-support. This isnt even a relationship. This is SPAM from people you know -- and wish you didn't.

I like the idea of 'Pay it forward' but not in the sense of the movie. I think people should have to pay to forward email, or maybe even to send any email whether a forward or not. Maybe a penny or nickel per recipient. Something! Anything has to be better than this bullshit where I check my email and there's all these commands of email for me to send in the next 20 minutes or running the risk that I'll have my head lopped off.

I say "if today is a gift, why are you making me waste it reading this horse-crap?" [I'm sure you are thinking the same thing right now!]

2003-07-08T22:01:00.000-07:00

The big news of the last 24 hours? Depends what one considers newsworthy. The choices are 'conjoined Iranian twins die during surgery to separate their brains' or 'Britney acknowledges she's not a virgin.' I think one is inherently newsworthy, and the other ... well, I'm not sure why we give a rat's ass.

Today, every newsanchor was asking his/her network's chief medical correspondent about the ethics behind the decision to operate on the twins. Funny, I didn't really hear these questions 3 days ago when the surgery began. It's only after the unfortunate end to their story that they need to create a new angle to keep the story alive that they start questioning the ethics. That's what ethics have become these days ... an afterthought.

It's a tragedy of our times that we consider people who are doing the right thing to be 'heroes'. We're so depraved that no one expects the best of us. No, we're expected to mug each other and look the other way, so if someone actually goes out of their way to help, they become heroes. The parable of the Good Samaritan, in my opinion, is often misunderstood or taken out of context. It isn't about a stranger going out of his way to help someone. It's about someone detestable [as a Samaritan was to a Jew] actually being a better person than the Jews [with their rules and laws] who just walked by. Jesus wasn't saying 'if someone can do the right thing for a stranger, how can you Jews not help one another?' No. He was saying 'if someone you consider beneath you can do the right thing, in what way are you superior to them?' At least, that's the way I see that story. Otherwise why say the do-gooder was a Samaritan?

What about me? I'm no better than Britney. I'm not that innocent either.

2003-07-03T14:09:00.000-07:00

I remember hearing an old Chinese fable or parable many years back. Basically, it's about the way a chef cuts meat off a carcass -- he doesnt just hack where he likes with a cleaver hoping that brute force will do the trick. No, he finds the parts between joints, the cartilage and whatever else that gives way much more easily to a blade than bone does. The moral of the story? That brute force is great, but using your head can save you a lot of trouble.

Yesterday, I saw a headline that said "Bush: 'Bring 'em on!'" Good ol' George W. is back to simian-like chest-thumping and idiot-like machismo, daring Iraqi subversives to attack American soldiers. A point worth noting is that he does NOT have any kids in the military out in Iraq, and he himself is secure in the White House ... thousands of miles away from downtown Baghdad or Tikrit. Centuries ago, kings led their soldiers into battle and fought alongside them. If something was worth dying for, then it didnt matter who died. How we got from that to false bravado by Presidents and Generals hundreds/thousands of miles away from the frontline is beyond me. I'm sure it had something to do with "Oh, he's too important for the War to risk for a single battle." No one is that important. No battle is that important. And certainly no war is that important. I guess all I have to say is that President Bush should quit making stupid statements that he is not backing up himself. Don't challenge people you are not going to be fighting yourself.

Also, I'm tired of hearing every evening on the world news of yet another American soldier injured, or worse yet killed, in an ambush in Iraq. Every time they report the news, the next sentence is "this is the __th American soldier to die since President Bush declared an end to major hostilities in Iraq." We're idiots if we thought that just because he declared an end to major hostilities, everything was going to be fine and fucking dandy. Bush is an idiot if he thought anything other than the fact that the real war would start from then on. No one fights an enemy on their enemy's terms. I mean that just because the American army was ready to start battle in March, it doesnt mean that the Iraqi army had to fight back in March. Why not wait till May? There are increasing reports of ordinary Iraqis -- people who just weeks ago were celebrating as statues of Saddam were toppled -- now wishing for his return. Why the flip-flop? They don't have reliable electricity, or water, or work or anything. They had all those things under Saddam. As horrible as it is to hear, they say that democracy doesn't mean a thing if you don't have the essentials of life.

Now the world wants America to intervene in Liberia and send a military force there to stop the conflict. Funny, I didnt know Liberia had oil or natural gas reserves. Bush doesn't mind sending a few hundred troops there, but he isn't going to do that until an exit strategy is defined for the troops -- i.e, conditions under which they will leave. Suddenly he's all about exit strategies? What is the exit strategy for Iraq? Oh right, we'll never really exit Iraq 100%. If we still have troops in Germany and Japan more than 50 years later, why expect that American soldiers will leave Iraq in 5 or even 10 years?

I guess I'm just tired of seeing Bush with his stupid-ass Cheshire-cat grin patting himself on the back for a poor job terribly done.

2003-07-01T00:29:00.000-07:00

Here's an article on overseas call centers - http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/xml/uncomp/articleshow?msid=53233. This article just begs to be read for it's quote-worthiness. For example, "British English is spoken with a neutral accent, similar to the Indian one, and in American English, the 'T' is not audible -- 'interview' becomes 'inner-view,'" she says." Hilarious! Let me give it a try - 'Innerconninennal', not 'intercontinental.' 'Inconninence', not 'incontinence.' Me speech American real good now.

Here's another gem from the article - "People in the US are informal and you can call them any time, while in Britain, it is rude to call during tea and dinner time," she says. Hmmm, not so sure on this one. If people in the US could be called anytime, then why has the Federal Trade Commission opened up registration for a National Do Not Call List for telemarketers? By the way, to register, go to http://www.donotcall.gov.

One last nugget of humor. Sameer Nath, of IEnergiser, sums it up: "There is no rule, it is all about connecting the words together and how you pronounce them. Each word is unique." You don't say! How about 'roll' and 'role'? Or 'plain' and 'plane'? Or any other set of homonyms?

I remember when I was on the phone once and I spoke to a 'Cedric' with a faux-American accent. I thought to myself- "Is he serious? Cedric? No one names their kid fucking Cedric unless they want the kid to be on Prozac or Zoloft for the entirety of their adult lives." Then again, Michael Jackson makes his kids wear masks and dangles them over balconies, so I suppose anything is possible.

Now that I think about it a little more, celebrities really go overboard in selecting bizarre names. Frank Zappa has a daughter named 'Moon Unit' and a son named 'Dweezil'. Demi Moore's daughter is 'Tallulah Belle.' But the best example has to be Michael Hutchence [deceased lead-singer of INXS] who named his daughter Heavenly Hirani Tiger Lily. I wonder if she'll grow up longing for a name like Cedric. Imagine the introductions at a party where these kids are guests.

"Oh, Moon Unit. Welcome! How splendid of you to come. You remember Tallulah Belle Moore-Willis. And this is Heavenly Hirani Tiger Lily Yates-Hutchence."

feedback? mail me at dudezaplenty@hotmail.com

2003-06-27T00:14:00.000-07:00

Okay, so I was trying to journal more regularly, and Blogger screwed me over last night. I was being upgraded to a new version of blogger, though I thought the last version was just fine. I used to be one of those people who just had to have the newest and best, or at least the newest. I got Windows XP soon after it came out, but really, how much better was it than Windows 2000? Certainly not enough for the premium price difference. (It really was more of an upgrade than a whole new OS, but it does make certain tasks easier -- networking computers, digital media creation, et cetera.) I think I'm done with that phase of my life. Now I'm going to be one of those people that love vintage, that talk about how old skool shit was better, how the Atari 2600 was the pinnacle of video gaming. Okay, I won't. That's lame too.

But, that's what the world is like. No one has anything new to offer. Flat screens? Oh, they save valuable desk real-estate. And consume less power. But, do they justify the markup? Global navigation systems? What was wrong with maps? Nothing really, we're just too stupid to figure them out and too lazy to keep trying. How much of a Luddite do I sound like? But seriously, I looked at the available updates for Windows XP today, and one was Windows Media Player 9 series. Over 100-some features like faster startup. So, let's make something suck, speed it up in the next release, and that counts as a new feature?

The last big purchase I made was my iPaq in December 2000 when I graduated from college. I thought I just needed something to keep me organized (I never claimed I was not lazy or stupid), and I think it has paid for itself in the amount of late fees I have avoided. But will I ever upgrade it? Buy a newer version with Wi-Fi or Bluetooth access? Hell no! It does everything I need it to already. I remember when I was deciding what to buy in 2000 ... Palm claimed their models could hold 5000 addresses and phone numbers. If only I knew 4963 more people ...

That's the problem with new features ... only 1% of the population can use 99% of the features, I would guess. No, that's just baseless opinion, but I'm sure it's closer to the truth than not. But the beauty of marketing is that 99% of the people are convinced they could use 100% of the features. Not me. I'm going to try and be satisfied with what I have. My iPaq 3630. My Windows XP 800 MHz (really a 700 MHz but I just had to overclock it to see if I could). No Playstation 3.

But come 2007, when television stations are scheduled to stop analog transmissions and go digital, I'll have to buy a digital television right? No. I'll just quit watching TV. Maybe that will be just the event that forces me to do it too. And right there, I'll probably cut the source of 90% of the advertising (propaganda) that enters my home. Actually, that's the only new feature I'd be interested in ... something that makes me not want anything I don't already have, but that's as likely as a perpetual motion machine, eh?

2003-06-24T23:23:00.000-07:00

On his blog, the life and times of me (Link at left), my buddy recently asked his readers to reply with their 10 favorite movies. I thought about it, and I could not really narrow it down to ten. But, let me just give it a try. 1. Trois Coleurs Rouge, 2. Trainspotting, 3. American Beauty, 4. Life as a House, 5. The Usual Suspects, 6. Chocolat, 7. Reservoir Dogs, 8. What's eating Gilbert Grape?, 9. Amelie and finally, 10. About a Boy. I probably like some others too, but for the sake of having something down, these are the ones that leap to my mind and so that's what I'm sticking with.

Rouge just blew me away the first time I saw it and kept amazing me on each subsequent viewing. It was the final part of a trilogy of French movies, the other two being Blue and White -- obviously for the colors of the French flag. There was something bittersweet about the story, but I think I've come to realize that the emotion I love best from stories is something bittersweet. Like an O. Henry story. I hope I spelled that right.

I'll admit that I was in a state of mild shock the first few days after watching Trainspotting. I remember seeing it in a theater, and there were 5 other people besides me at the start of the movie. Right after the scene on 'the worst toilet in Scotland', a couple left. Then after the Baby Dawn crawling on the ceiling scene, another 2 people left. I'm not sure when the final person besides me left. Oh, I almost forgot. I really was in a state of shock because I just walked out the first door I saw, and of course, it had to be the emergency exit that sets off the fire alarm. I just waited there, and when someone came along to shut it off, I just apologized repeatedly. On the bus ride back home, I just sat like a zombie and looked through people if they came into my field of vision.

About a Boy' just had an endearing story I thought ... Hugh Grant plays the shallow cad so well, so it's too bad he's type-cast in that role. But I do think he gave his best shallow cad performance in About a Boy. "Amelie' was just charming. I wish I had a creative or interesting way to look at the ordinary things in life the way she did. There's other movies too, of course, like 'Dude, Where's my car?', 'Zoolander', 'Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon', 'Mickey Blue Eyes' and something else I just can't remember now. Oh, the Matrix. And Fight Club. Not exemplary, but good bets for a slow afternoon.

How do I pick movies? I'll write more on that later, but here's my simplest method: does Harrison Ford star in it? Or Sandra Bullock? If the answer to either question is yes, then I make an about-face and walk away. In my book, neither Ford or Bullock count as actors. Acting implies being someone other than yourself. Both Ford and Bullock play pretty much the same character with the same personality in every movie. I'm sure other people do too, but I really don't care for the personality they portray. One is a brooding mess, the other is the klutzy meathead. How they have made careers out of this, I'll never understand but always marvel at.

Today I saw a really wonderful movie called 'My First Mister' starring Leelee Sobieski and Albert Brooks. I don't remember hearing about it being in theaters, so I don't know if it went straight to video/DVD, but I thought this was a movie that had many parallels to Trois Coleurs Rouge. But, why haven't I heard about it? Why do actually good movies not get the attention they deserve? Instead, you hear more than you care to about 'The Real Cancun' or 'Boat Trip'. What the hell has happened to Cuba Gooding Jr.? Boat Trip? Snow Dogs? Rat Race? How about Sinking Career? Anyway, I highly recommend 'My First Mister'. Leelee did a fantastic job. I can't remember seeing any other movie of hers, but now I'll look out for her.

2003-06-23T20:52:00.000-07:00

The scene: a live taping of the Oprah show; Alan Dershowitz is a guest.

Alan Dershowitz is talking about men in business and how different their experience is to women in business, and how both of those groups have a different experience than the black woman in business. He asks a question I do not remember, but for some reason, I am the one giving the answer, even though I am in the audience.

At first, Dershowitz is not confident that I am heading the right way. But then I point out something about Oprah being a black woman in business, much to the delight of Miss Winfrey herself, who then goads the audience into hooting and hollering for me. I also somewhat recall yelling ‘you go, sistas!’ Oprah looks pleased. Dershowitz, by this point, is so overwhelmed by the genius of my answer, and it’s rather high comical content, that he gives me a Gateway laptop on the spot. HIS Gateway laptop.

He notices that I am not duly impressed and asks if something is wrong. I reply, again to much hooting and hollering but also guffawing this time, that I would have preferred a Dell. But really, the brand isn’t as big of a problem as how I’m going to explain to my better half why I need a third computer in my home. Camera pans the audience, where many members turn to one another as if to say, “That’s true! Women aren’t much for computers.”

And that’s all I remember of a dream from last night. Awfully bizarre. Very detailed on people and brands, but I can’t make out what it’s all about. Oh well, worth a laugh anyway.

2003-06-20T01:11:00.000-07:00

'Under-promise and over-deliver.' I heard this phrase at my first job after college. It was the answer to the question "how do you make a customer happy?" Apparently people these days are so cynical or jaded that they don't expect much. So promise them the least it takes to get their money, deliver them a little more than you promised and voila! They will be so shocked and grateful that they actually got what they paid for and you will have a loyal customer.

I bring this up because George W. started his fund-raising efforts yesterday with a dinner. [For $2000, you got to stand and listen to him speak, while munching on hotdogs, nachos and hamburgers. Methinks Georgie is single-handedly trying to ease Mr. Greenspan and the Fed's deflation concerns. But, I digress.] Some of his people estimate he should be able to raise $200 million altogether for his 2004 campaign. Does he really need that much? The Democrats don't really have a challenger worth the time, but more importantly, Georgie Boy's approval ratings are amazingly good. Maybe it has something to do with all the 'subliminable' messages on the backdrops when he gives a speech, but a higher percentage of people than who voted for him think he is doing a good job. Let's face it -- the popular vote was split 50/50, yet his approval numbers are consistently higher than that. So he's won a few converts for sure. But, how does he do it? Or a better question is what has he done? If anyone has made an art of under-promising and over-delivering, it's President #43. What has he promised? It's best to start at the White House website itself, to take a loook at his policies and initiatives. There's three main headings there, namely National Security, Homeland Security and Economic Security. It's pretty obvious that security is an underlying theme.

Afghanistan and Iraq are works in progress, and he's only just begun on the roadmap to peace in the Middle East [though, to be fair, he was ready months ago: he just had to wait for the Israelis and Palestinians to take a 20-second timeout]. So, let's move on. The department of Homeland Security is a definite accomplishment. I mean, it's not every government that can conjure up a 5-colored yardstick for how vigilant we should be. And there are rumors a sixth color may be added soon. I think 'teal' is the current front-runner, but it may well end up being 'aquamarine'. Next!

Under economic security, there's a link for judicial nominations [why it's there is beyond me because I don't see what it has to do with economic security]. But, the Democrats have filibustered their way to preventing anyone he nominated from taking office. So, that doesn't count. There's also a link for 'compassionate conservatism.' I'm not sure what that means [even after clicking on the link -- 'It is compassionate to actively help our citizens in need. It is conservative to insist on accountability and results.'] but the words do sound good. Who would rather be a heartless liberal? Other topics finding place are 'encouraging economic growth and job creation', 'improving corporate responsibility' and 'strengthening healthcare'. He's only just had another tax-cut passed, so you have to give that time. As far as improving corporate responsibility, not one person from Enron or Worldcom is getting the kind of attention Martha Stewart is getting [though they stole millions and she supposedly profited to the tune of a few hundred thousand dollars. Po-ta-to. Po-tah-to]. On the topic of healthcare, there's been a lot of activity the last couple weeks with Republicans and Democrats both working on their own versions of legislation for Medicare-reform. Oh, and 'healthy forests' was another topic on the 'policies and initiatives' page of the website, but is that entirely unexpected from someone named Bush?

So, he's been pretty busy. But, I'm more of a results kind of guy [I'm at least conservative, if not compassionate]. I think there's precious little to show for all the spin and buzzwords. But I must have it all wrong, because the majority of Americans are pleased with his performance. Maybe people aren't as cynical or jaded as I had come to believe. Maybe it's just me.

2003-06-10T23:09:00.000-07:00

Is there someone you envy? Do you suspect people envy you? My mind attached itself to this subject when I saw a promo on TV for a show where the prize is to be Donald Trump’s assistant. Donald, bad hair and all, says “do you want to live like this, which is really living?” or words to that effect. I’m sorry, I don’t. And I feel for anyone who does. If for no other reason than the fact that the guy was recently hawking McDonald’s with the Hamburglar. Now if the prize was to be the Hamburglar’s assistant …

Envy. I think it’s the most useless emotion a person can have. I used to envy people, but part of maturing is seeing the whole picture – not just zooming in on the good bits. I don’t envy anyone anymore. There’s no reason to. And the simple reason behind my lack of jealousy: no one has it all.

A couple of years ago, I’m sure people hated Martha Stewart because she had the Midas touch. But who would want to switch places with her today? Even if she proves her innocence vis-à-vis the ImClone scandal, she’s still one of the most despised women in the world. I don’t hate her [far from it in fact], but neither do I want what she has. Her husband left her for another woman, and popular legend has her playing the part of ‘anal-retentive ogre’.

It’s the same with any person one might think of. Nobody is perfect, and however sparkling clean their image may be, you have to wonder if they can manage a good night’s sleep, especially without the aid of drugs and pills. That’s my measure of fulfillment – if I can go to bed at night with a clean conscience and sleep like a babe-in-arms, then I have everything I need. Actually, there might be a better gauge of satisfaction – if you can smile when there’s no one around to see you.

2003-06-07T18:49:00.000-07:00

On your deathbed, what would you regret more? Words you uttered, or those that never left your lips.

In this day and age, with ongoing searches for weapons of mass destruction, it seems to me that words are no less weapons of mass destruction than chemical or biological agents. One word out of place can irreparably change a relationship or break a heart. Words can even seal the fate of an entire nation or people. Yet, not only are we not encouraged to be more careful with speech, we’re encouraged to talk with even less abandon as we’re offered unlimited minutes and everywhere access. For all the speech taking place in the world today, at this moment, how much is relevant? And how much is just people exercising their maxillo-facial bones?

It begins early, this emphasis on words. Parents watch their little babies who are at a certain age for various things … the first time they turn over, the first time they stand up only to fall back down almost instantly, the first steps and, without a doubt, their baby’s first words. Then come the years of education, of building a vocabulary so you can learn several words to convey the same meaning. Words can even be rites of passage, as simple as saying ‘I do.’ So it goes, till one day, we’re remembered for the last thing we were known to say. Todd Beamer, one of the passengers on the airplane that crashed in Pennsylvania on 9/11, will be remembered for saying ‘let’s roll.’ What words will you be remembered for?

I believe I would regret words I uttered more than ones that remained as thoughts – you can take back thoughts when you change your mind.

2003-06-04T17:50:00.001-07:00

Rrring! Rrring! That's what I heard at 2:15 a.m. today. I don't know how the average person reacts to a phone ringing at such an hour, but my reaction was, simply put, "I hope no one died." Thus far, every single phone ring at a weird hour has been followed by the news that this grandparent or that uncle has died. Besides, it's not like people call their friends at 4 a.m. to say their fiancee accepted the proposal. This tells me that good news can wait, but bad news is like an ill-tempered child throwing a tantrum -- you need to give it your immediate attention because ignoring only makes it worse. In the end, no one died ... it was a wrong number, but what a refreshing change.

Though I did realize this morning that my mind went further than that. Here is the detailed version of how my mind works:
Rrring!
Oh fuck! What time is it?
Rrring!
2:15 am? I hope no one died!
Rrring!
Crap ... I hope it's not one of my parents or my
Rrring!
grandmother. It's probably uncle _____ who
Rrring!
died. This really sucks. I guess I had better answer it.
Silence
Damnit! This sucks. I'm awake now. I hope I can fall
Rrring!
asleep again. HELLO? WHO? You have the wrong number! WRONG NUMBER!!

What is scary is that I was okay with the fact that so-and-so might be dead ... that so long as it wasn't my parents or grandmother, then I can take the news that someone else didn't make it. I wish I had more of a heart. But, what can you do when you have unlimited wants and limited resources? Which brings me to [What a segue!] a book I started reading today on microeconomics titled, oddly enough, 'Microeconomics'.

It begins with a brief introduction to basic concepts and principles of economics. Maybe it's the way economists see the world, but this is what the authors Boyes and Melvin had to say: "People want more goods and services that they have or can purchase with their incomes. Whether they are wealthy or poor, what they have is never enough." I don't know about anyone else, but that's pretty depressing.

Never enough? I like to think I've got a pretty good handle on what I think I want or need out of life. In high school, I was fixated on the Lexus GS300 -- I thought it was the greatest car ever designed. Now, I don't think I really even want a car, and I'm trying to come up with ways to reduce my dependence on one. Worrying about accidents, insurance premiums, gas prices, oil changes and other maintenance -- it never ends. It's the same way with other things -- the more you have in life, the more you have to be worried about ... will it get stolen, or damaged, or blown away in a tornado and so on. The less you have in life, the less you have to be worried about losing, and the more you can concentrate on what you do have. And what should one have? I'm not sure ... intuitively, I think what one should replace these material possessions with is relationships with family and friends. But, how different is that? Aren't friends and spouses possessions of a sort? After all, anyone who has lost a family member or pet, or been lied to or cheated on can say without a doubt that those feelings hurt more than having a car break down or losing a wallet.

I know that all the money in the world won't make someone happy if they can't find a true friend for free. I know that all the friends and well-wishers won't make someone happy if they cant be sure where their next meal is coming from. But, between not having any and having too much, there has to be a point where you have just enough. That's where I disagree with the authors of 'Microeconomics.' I think the key to life is realizing what it will take for you to be at that point.

We're educated to think that improvement is always possible. You can always make a process more efficient, and if you can't, it's only because we don't have the technology or the knowledge yet -- it's only a matter of time. If that's not greed, I don't know what is. In theory, socialism seems to be the answer -- rather than some having too much and others having too little, everyone has basically the same amount. Capitalists like to point out that there is no incentive or reward for individual brilliance or the entrepreneurial spirit. I don't think that's why socialism fails. And, it's certainly not why capitalism prevails. Capitalism's only reward is ego and status. Life isn't any more fulfilling just because you're tangibly above someone else. We're taught to think that it is, but really, if we're all in a pit of crap, does it really matter who's standing in the crap and who's closest to the top? We're all in a stinking mess! No, socialism fails as well due to the ego and status issues. There's a joke I heard when I was little that demonstrates this.

A tourist is walking around Tianenmen Square in China with a guide when he sees thousands of people on bicycles going every which way. He asks the guide who they are. The guide replies "these are the hard-working Chinese people going off to work." They walk a little further when the tourist spots a line of vehicles making its way down the same street. He asks the guide who the passengers are. The guide replies "those are the servants of the hard-working Chinese people!"

Capitalism or socialism can never be the solutions when the problem is greed. One has to figure out what it takes to be content. Personally, so long as I don't get a call at 3 a.m. telling me that someone dear to me has passed away, I'll never have a bad night again.

2003-05-30T23:18:00.000-07:00

This day in 2003, there's bad news -- I was fined $0.45 by my library. What makes it worse is that I feel it was unjustified because I swear I renewed the DVD the day it was due for another week, and a week later, for yet another week. Though the worst part of the whole mess is that the DVD in question was 'Happy, Texas'. A more contrived movie there could not be -- two convicts escape from a prison and end up being mistaken for a gay couple that prepares little girls for pageants. I'm sure this happens every day, so it's very true to life. But, in Texas? If there's two things Texans know, it's steers and queers.

Yesterday on the nightly news with da man, Peter Jennings, there was a report that millions of low-income households won't benefit at all from the $350 billion tax-cut that George W. signed into law earlier in the week. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer explained this easily, saying that since those low-income households probably don't pay any federal taxes, there really is no way to cut federal taxes and send them a refund for money they haven't paid to the government. You can't argue with that.

But, it got me thinking [and I'll readily admit I have no formal training in micro- or macro-economics and this is all worst-case scenario paranoia]. Unemployment is now at 6% in the US. This rate, while a lagging indicator, is a key to the economy turning the corner because consumer sentiment, and consequently, consumer spending are tied to it. If jobs are being created, thereby reducing the unemployment rate, then people with jobs don't worry as much about the security of their jobs and spend freely. Obviously, people who get the newly-created jobs now have money to spend as well. George W. claims his tax-cut will create jobs. But, a fact of this economy is that a lot of the jobs will never return to the US. Corporations have found that one way to cut costs is by relocating factories and call-centers abroad, to countries like India and the Phillipines where there is an abundance of highly-skilled lowly-paid workers. So, while the unemployment rate may improve in the short-term, the relocation of jobs to other countries means the unemployment rate will never return to where it was in the late 90s. Especially not when colleges are pumping out more graduates every semester, and there are not jobs being created for every graduate. The more qualified persons in a pool of candidates for a position, the less incentive an employer needs to provide for a job. Forget signing bonuses and raises, you'll be lucky if your employer doesn't ask you to take a pay-cut; especially if the option is to lose your job altogether because they'll just hire someone half-way around the world to do it for less than you. The result? With rising unemployment and lower salaries for those with jobs, more and more people will join the ranks of those low-income households who got nothing out of this tax-cut.

Is there a way out? I can see only one, and a steady income is a prerequisite. Invest in stock. But, not just any stock. Invest in stocks that pay dividends. In fact, if you select stocks wisely, your dividend income should grow to the point where you possibly will no longer require a 40 hour per week job. That's the new American dream.

The majority of people should not expect to live like people who retired in the 80s did. That kind of luxury will never be theirs. In fact, if they avoid penury itself, they've done well. Because even if corporations move their employees abroad, they will still depend on homeland consumers to buy their products. But, how much can low-income households buy? Corporations will then have to find foreign consumers for their products. But the way George W. has alienated America worldwide, good luck to those corps. trying to find people to buy their products. Remember all those idiots pouring French wine down the drain before the 'war with Iraq' part deux? Well, they won't care if it's Freedom or French fries they're eating.

Even all this is wishful thinking. Really, if fewer people are paying taxes, or paying less in taxes than they were, then the budget deficit will increase and government will have a choice: shrink itself or raise taxes. Being an organism like any other, government will never choose to shrink. So, expect taxes to rise.

It's amazing when a tax-cut leads to a rise in taxation later, and it's still called a tax-cut. Why aren't more people calling this the tax-deferment that it is? Because idiots think that getting a few hundred dollars of their own money back to "put into their kid's college fund" is a good thing. First of all, odds are it's not going into any college fund or 529 plan. Secondly, if it is, it may buy your kid maybe a week of college ... tops! Finally, if you have to pay it all back years later when taxes are raised, what the fuck are you celebrating now? Yet, the tax-cut will work as the bribe that it is to win Bush the 2004 election. And, it doesn't help that he doesn't have a challenger worth the time. He can alienate America, ruin the economy, make us more vulnerable to terrorists by 'winning' wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and anything else his pretty little fuzzy-Washington-math-hating head can dream of, but so long as we get a check in the mail in the next couple months, what does all that stuff matter?

2003-05-29T22:27:00.000-07:00

This day in 1453, Ottoman forces under Sultan Muhammad II stormed Constantinople, capital of the Byzantine Empire; the empire fell and the city became the capital of the Ottoman Empire. The upshot of all this? The city's name ultimately gets changed to Istanbul, which in and of itself is nothing but a footnote in history; but when an American band makes a song about a city named Istanbul that used to go by Constantinople, that's when you realize how important this shit is.

Okay, I've been in a funk lately, and I'm not sure what I can do to get out of it. That's why there haven't been any posts lately. I guess you can only make fun of George W. so much.

I've been watching a lot less TV though, which is good because the less propaganda one has entering one's home the better off one is. That's all that television has become for me ... I quit watching the local news a few years ago because all it reported was fires, robberies, murders and maybe a high-school athlete of the week. I think it would have been interesting to keep a record of all the news-stories in a week, and sort them by topic just to see how much happy or good news there is, and how much bad news there is. I think it would be overwhelmingly skewed towards bad news. Yeah, you can argue that they are reporting on what actually happened, so it reflects the world as it is. And, I can agree with that because I know and accept that it's an ugly world out there. But, if all you ever hear about is people being robbed and killed, how likely are you to step outside and take a chance? I think the average person will give in to the fear, move about outside the home as little as necessary, and stay home and watch the local news to see what happened to the schmucks that dared to live their lives. It's another one of those fucking vicious cycles ... you watch local news, you hear about all the shit that happens to people in your area, you decide you don't really need to go jogging or whatever, you stay home watching more news, getting more scared, and finally you place yourself under house-arrest. Fuck the local news. I'd rather watch the world news so that I can be glad that I don't have tanks rolling through my streets. Wait ... that's not entirely true ... there's all those fucking SUVs. Oh hell!

2003-05-21T22:45:00.000-07:00

This day in 1881, Clara Barton established the American Red Cross, a counterpart to the European humanitarian agency founded in Switzerland in 1864. Why did it take 17 years? Why are there no straight bananas?

2003-05-20T22:48:00.000-07:00

This day in 1506, Christopher Columbus died in poverty in Spain. To me, this is justice served.
a. Contrary to popular notions, he was not trying to prove that the earth was not flat -- that was common knowledge by then.
b. He wasn't all that nice either if you consider that his ship's crew consisted almost entirely of convicts from Spanish prisons who were forced to go with him against their will.
c. Next up, the guy didnt even realize he was lost. He actually thought he had made it to India.
d. Finally, he didnt discover crap -- there were already people living in America.
Not brave, not kind, not bright, not pioneering and not rich ... and yet America celebrates Columbus Day. What exactly are Americans commemorating?

2003-05-19T21:48:00.000-07:00

This day in 1900, the Tonga Islands are made a British protectorate; they become an independent nation in 1970. But, their true significance comes shining through in late 2002 - early 2003 when they constitute an integral part of George W.'s 'coalition of the willing.' That's Tonga: defenders of peace, justice, freedom and low gas-prices for all.

This day in 2003, (accomplished dead-pan comedian and) White House spokesman Ari Fleischer announced that he is resigning his post.

"I will leave being able to say that I love my job. I believe deeply in President Bush, the man and his policies. But it is my time to go."

Fleischer said he decided that this period of time was the "last off-ramp" for senior staffers -- meaning those who stayed beyond the summer should also be committed to staying on through the campaign year. He expects to leave the White House in July.

In 28 months as White House press secretary, Fleischer has had generally positive relations with the press corps, but there also have periods of contention about access to the president and the credibility of some White House statements.

In the past few weeks, for example, Fleischer told reporters there were no problems with Saudi cooperation in the war on terrorism. Hours later, it was reported that the White House deputy national security adviser took a secret weekend trip to Saudi Arabia to appeal for more help protecting residential compounds housing Americans and other Westerners.

Fleischer also was questioned by reporters about Bush's trip earlier this month to the USS Abraham Lincoln. Fleischer had consistently said Bush was flying out to the aircraft carrier on a Navy jet because the carrier was too far out at sea for a helicopter landing. By the day of the visit, however, the carrier was within helicopter range and other White House officials said Bush had made the decision in advance to fly with a pilot who made a tailhook landing, so that he could experience what the pilots experience.

What's that saying about rats deserting a sinking ship?

2003-05-16T23:30:00.000-07:00

This day in 1929, the first Academy Awards are presented in Hollywood, California; the film Wings wins best picture. This was back in the day when an Academy Award actually meant something and wasn't just an excuse for every half-wit to wear a gown and act pretty.

This day in 2003, a man sues Fox Television Network claiming that 'American Idol' was his idea.

Harry Keane filed the suit -- which alleges copyright and trademark infringement and misappropriation of his work -- in U.S. District Court Wednesday, said his lawyer, Ryan Bormaster. In the suit, Keane seeks a temporary restraining order against the program and its assets, and asks that it stop airing immediately. Keane's suit alleges that he came up with the idea for a show called "American Idol" in 1994 when he lived in Marshalltown, Iowa.

"When he saw the show... he saw his work on air," Bormaster said.

I'm not exactly sure why Mr. Keane wants credit for this abomination, but I do agree with his plea that the show stop airing immediately (admittedly for very different reasons than his). Maybe it's a Frankenstein complex ... even if the brainchild is a monster, it's his creation.

2003-05-15T22:36:00.000-07:00

This day in 1930, United Airlines introduces the first stewardesses on a flight from San Francisco, California to Cheyenne, Wyoming. Prior to this event, passengers had no idea where the exits were or how to use their seat-backs as a floatation device.

This day in 2003, a woman said she had an affair with John F. Kennedy, an admission that comes after a new biography alleges a liaison between JFK and a White House intern. In a statement handed to media outside her East Side apartment, Mimi Fahnestock said, "From June 1962 to November 1963, I was involved in a sexual relationship with President Kennedy.

"She is the least likely person I would have expected to have had a romance, but I think probably Jack Kennedy would have gone to bed with anybody," said Joan "Bitsy" Tatnall, a friend of Fahnestock.

She quickly indicated she wasn't being dismissive of Fahnestock, saying her friend is attractive, smart and athletic.

"I mean, I think she's really fabulous. I've even considered really giving it to her myself on many an occasion, " said Tatnall, hoping that this bit of lesbian flattery would placate Fahnestock. Okay, she didn't say that.

2003-05-14T22:20:00.000-07:00

This day in 1796, British physician Edward Jenner tests the first smallpox vaccine on an eight-year-old boy. A few centuries later, mankind manages to eradicate smallpox, but for some reason, a few countries decide to keep just enough of the germ for use in biological weapons. Because ridding the world of something so deadly to make the world a better place, well, there's just no need for extreme steps like that. Besides, we all sleep better at night knowing that we've lost track of those few samples of the virus, and that they're available for use by any half-wit terrorist on a divine mission.

This day in 2003, a charter jet carrying troops home from the war with Iraq flew low over the Manhattan skyline, stirring fears that another terror attack was under way.

"The FAA regrets any negative effect this flight had on some New York City residents. The FAA has since issued an order that future, similar requests will not be granted," the Federal Aviation Administration said in a statement late Wednesday.

Continental Airlines Flight 3021, bringing military personnel back from Operation Iraqi Freedom, buzzed the skyline around 8:30 a.m., flying near the Statue of Liberty and lower Manhattan, where the twin towers of the World Trade Center were destroyed in the September 11, 2001, terror attacks [detail added by CNN for anyone who has been hiding under a rock for the last 3 years].

Attempting to pass the buck, the FAA said the pilots of the plane had requested the fly-by and it was approved "to provide a special homecoming for members of our armed forces." It said such requests had been approved in the past for troops coming to and from the Afghanistan war theater.

Astutely blocking the buck-pass, Mayor Michael Bloomberg blasted the FAA for allowing the flight.

"Considering the world we live in and New York City's recent history, one would expect a little more concern, sensitivity and notice from the FAA when they authorize a plane to fly at that altitude over lower Manhattan," he said in a statement.

Several residents called 911, reporting the plane flying low overhead.

One resident said he immediately thought of September 11 and the recent terror attacks in Saudi Arabia and wondered, "Could it be happening again?" [While you may think he was referring to the 9/11 attacks as 'it', he was actually talking about the pulses of electrical activity showing use of his brain. Sadly, it was a false alarm.]

"It was a terrible, terrible feeling," he said. [He continued, "I thought to myself -- after so many years, it would have been nice to feel like I have a brain, but I'll have to keep walking down this yellow-brick road. I hear there's a wizard in these parts who works miracles."]

2003-05-13T22:23:00.000-07:00

This day in 1940, Winston Churchill, as new Prime Minister before the House of Commons, rallied his country to war saying , "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat." Over a half century later, George W. uses this as the basis for his inaugural address when he says, "I have nothing to offer. No, really." That's not entirely true. He did manage to choke on a pretzel, and then offer the sage advice "chew your food." Keep in mind he was 54 years old at the time.

This day in 2003, a San Francisco lawyer took the maker of Oreo cookies to court seeking to ban them because they contain trans fat. Stephen Joseph, the lawyer, wants Kraft Foods to stop using hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated oils to make the cookies.

"That's what's so shocking; that it has been so well hidden," said Joseph, who has set up an advocacy group called BanTransFats.com Inc. "I hope if nothing else comes of this lawsuit that more people know about trans fat than before."

Kraft boasts that people have eaten 450 billion Oreo cookies since they introduced the chocolate wafer sandwich cookies with a creamy filling in 1912.

"We've been ... exploring ways to reduce trans fat in Oreos and those efforts are continuing," Michael Mudd, Kraft's senior vice president for corporate affairs, said in an interview. "You can make a cookie without trans fat but what you're trading off is the unique taste and texture that people have come to expect."

I hate to admit it, but I can see the lawyer's point here. It's one thing when people scald themselves with McDonalds' coffee, which any half-wit knows is hot. It's another when people eat Oreos ad nauseum and suffer heart problems because they did not know that hydrogenated oils were so dangerous. It's kind of like Big Tobacco adding nicotine to their cigarettes to keep people addicted, and we know who won when that issue was settled in court. [Hint: if we have to see those God-awful 'Truth' ads, it probably wasn't Big Tobacco that won.] You might think that I'm reaching with my analogy to cigarettes, but perhaps you will reconsider when you keep in mind that Kraft Foods was, until a couple years ago, part and parcel of one Philip Morris USA, and is still majority-owned by Altria, the new moniker for Philip Morris USA.

2003-05-12T22:02:00.000-07:00

This day in 1949, Soviet troops ended their 11-month blockade of Berlin, Germany; the blockade was deemed useless since Western powers airlifted food and supplies to the city. One may think that 11-months is a long time to admit that a land blockade does nothing against air transports, but it is especially quick thinking when one considers how many decades it took the Soviets to realize that Communism and high-stepping while marching don't work. Wait ... maybe they still do the high-step.

This day in 2003, author Robert Dallek revealed that JFK had an affair with a 19-year old intern.

"She had no skills," the author of "An Unfinished Life," told "Dateline NBC" in an interview that aired Sunday. Then, contradicting himself, he added "She could answer the phone." Contradicting himself further, he finished with "Apparently, her only skill was to provide sexual release for JFK on those trips and maybe in the White House."

In order to save everyone some time, I recommend that you put this book on your "don't bother" or "must miss" list. Why? The guy says she has no skills, then lists two skills and finally gives her credit for one. If he writes as well as he thinks, he'd get third-place in a contest for which he is the only participant.

2003-05-09T21:32:00.000-07:00

This day in 1926, American aviators Richard E. Byrd and Floyd Bennett allegedly become the first to fly over the North Pole; evidence later indicates that they may not have reached the pole. More recently discovered evidence indicates that this was a huge waste of time and proved nothing.

This day in 2003, as many as 140 soldiers, wives and their children were sucked out of a Russian-made cargo plane when the aircraft's rear door opened during a flight over the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Details of what happened are still unclear. The government said seven people flew from the IL-76, but wire services are reporting a much higher death toll.

Daniel Wangisha, a Reuters cameraman, told CNN that one of the surviving passengers reported that as many as 140 passengers were missing. Immigration officials at the airport told him later Friday that as many as 400 people boarded the plane Thursday night.

Why is it that governments of countries in the third world have such difficulty with math? Is it 7 people or is it 140? There's only a 2000% difference!

2003-05-08T22:46:00.000-07:00

This day in 1794, Antoine Lavoisier, a French scientist who is considered the founder of modern chemistry, found out that the French authorities had discovered a cure for his dandruff problem -- the guillotine.

This day in 2003, the White House rewarded countries of the 'coalition of the willing,' which ousted Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq, by arranging meetings and state dinners for George W. with leaders of those countries.

From breakfast with Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, to lunch with the Emir of Qatar, who offered U.S. troops a base in his country, and a mid-afternoon East Room ceremony with seven Eastern European foreign ministers, Bush paid tribute to his Iraq supporters. In between, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer announced that "good and reliable ally" President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo of the Philippines would be treated to a State Dinner on May 19, just the third of Bush's presidency. He also said Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi had been invited to the U.S. president's Texas ranch for an overnight stay on May 22.

Conspicuous by its absence from White House arrangements was the lynchpin of the 'coalition of the coalition' ... that's right, Eritrea. But, there's no need to fear they will be overlooked.

As White House spokesman Ari Fleischer declared: "You don't measure right and wrong by a nation's GDP (gross domestic product), you measure it by the amount of oil in their control that the US does not have access to ... uh, I mean, the decisions they make to defend freedom."

2003-05-07T22:05:00.000-07:00

This day in 1919, Eva Peron was born. If it wasn’t for Eva, we would have only had ‘Shanghai Surprise’ to judge Madonna’s acting talents, and we would have suspected she couldn’t act. But, without ‘Swept Away’, we could not have known for sure.

This day in 2003, Microsoft Corp.’s MSN division announced in Britain the development of the iLoo -- a standard portable toilet with a wireless keyboard and extending, height-adjustable plasma screen in front of the seat.

But, that’s not the most disturbing part. Here it is:

MSN officials say they're negotiating for the manufacture of toilet paper imprinted with Web addresses that users may not have tried.

Where do I start? I can’t imagine that portable toilets in Europe are that much different from portable toilets anywhere else. So, I will assume that they are not places to “hang-out” or “chill” for the cool and hip. They are usually disgusting enough that one tries to avoid them at all costs, but if one must resort to using a porta-potty, then it becomes like a military special-ops mission -- namely, one does one’s business as quickly as one can, and then gets the hell out.

But, for argument’s sake, let us assume the toilets are clean enough that one can actually stand occupying a toilet for longer than is absolutely necessary, long enough to do some casual web-browsing. Let’s assume the average Joe suddenly has a website they want to browse – what are the odds it will be email or stock-quotes versus porn? Yeah, that’s right … suddenly even the fact that the keyboard is wireless isn’t enough to get me to touch it.

2003-05-06T21:09:00.000-07:00

This day in 1954, British athlete Roger Bannister became the first person to run a mile in under four minutes. While this is amazing in and of itself, what makes it truly remarkable is that this was also the first time someone in the watching crowd yelled "fucking overachiever!"

This day in 2003, human rights groups criticized the US policy of detaining prisoners captured in Afghanistan without being formally charged with a crime, or being allowed access to a lawyer. The human rights groups argue that the prisoners should either be charged or freed.

"Allowing prisoners to challenge the lawfulness of their detention in a court of law is a fundamental human right that protects against arbitrary arrest and detention," Amnesty International, U.S., said in a statement Tuesday:

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, in reply to a question on the subject, said "Exactly! That is exactly why we are not allowing the prisoners to question the legality of their detention. Obviously if they were able to challenge their arrest, then we would have to admit it was arbitrary and we'd have to let them go. And, if we let them go, then we'd have even less to show in terms of progress in this 'War on Terror' that we're waging. Don't these human rights groups get it? It's all about results! If a few million Americans feel safer with a few hundred people being held in Guantanamo Bay for no reason, then that's just ... well, the military term is collateral damage ... and we've never had a problem with that before."

Okay, so he did not say that; but if he did, that would be even more amazing than someone runnning a 4-second mile.

2003-05-05T23:16:00.000-07:00

This day in 1921, perfumer Ernst Beaux creates Chanel No. 5 for Coco Chanel. This was back in the day when every half-wit ‘celebrity’ (J. Lo, Liz Taylor, Celine Dion, etc) wasn’t launching their own brand of bottled stench, so it meant something.

This day in 2003, people in the US midwest are recovering from a string of deadly tornadoes. Some people lost everything, and they didn’t insure what they had; so they’re left wondering how to pick up the pieces and start over again. Watching the coverage of the tornadoes, and listening to the people left in their wake, it occurred to me that we all experience tornadoes in our lives at one point or another. There we are, living life as we do, according to some routine, and taking things for granted when out of nowhere, with very little warning, a little private tornado rips through our existence leaving destruction and shattered hearts behind. These tornadoes can be the death of a loved one, being laid off, being robbed, whatever. But, immediately after they strike, we’re left in this state of shock. "What just happened? Is this for real? Why? Life was just getting good, and now I don’t know where to begin." It’s easiest if you just have a 1-800 number to call for federal emergency assistance, you have insurance, and everything can be replaced. But, if you find out your best friend has cancer, and you don’t know if they are going to make it or not, where do you begin?

2003-05-02T23:04:00.000-07:00

This day in 1863, Confederate General "Stonewall" Jackson is accidentally shot by his own men and dies shortly after. From this event arose the current practice of sending soldiers off to war, while their 'leaders' hide in reinforced bunkers. Because they're more valuable to the war effort, and we don't want any accidents.

This day in 2003, it was one of those 'triumph of the human spirit' stories that seemed to dominate the news. A Colorado rock-climber survived being pinned under a 200-pound boulder by using his pocket-knife to amputate his right arm below the elbow. He had been trapped under the boulder for five days, and realized that his survival depended on taking drastic measures.

This man deserves some kind of award or recognition. More than just being a news-story for the day. More than a 20/20 Babawa Wawa special. I cannot imagine cutting off my own arm to save my life. Yeah, people do amazing things when their life or the life of a loved one is at stake. Yeah, there's prosthetics and whatever else. Yeah, animals chew off their limbs if they are caught in traps and don't die. But, no, humans in my opinion would rather be victims than do something to save themselves. We'd rather blame fate, or circumstance or any number of things for what happens to us rather than take responsibility for how our lives turn out. This man took charge and so he still lives. He is truly super-human. I guess the off-color joke to make right now would be "let's give him a hand!"

2003-05-01T22:24:00.000-07:00

This day in 1967, Elvis Presley married Priscilla Beaulieu dashing the dreams of millions of naïve, hormonally-raging, young women; but only just making things more challenging for the sluttier ones.

This day in 2003, Australian investors snapped up shares of a brothel celebrating the IPO of its stock. The whorehouse managed to raise $2.36 million dollars by selling 7.5 million shares in the property arm of its business.

The Daily Planet, based in a Melbourne suburb, has a bar lounge and 18 themed rooms with names like Venus and Xanadu. Some of the rooms have beds and heavily chlorinated spas large enough for several guests at a time.

I don’t know if I’m the only one bothered and disgusted by the ‘heavily-chlorinated’ spas, but I do know you could not pay me enough to step inside a place like that. Even for a second. Because you have to realize that, according to evolution, those STD germs will develop a tolerance for chlorine, and then there will be no stopping them hopping from person to person, competing in their infectious olympics. If you believe in creation, then you’re already convinced that God will create some illness to smite these obnoxious perverts, so why say anything?

In Japan, people are flocking to bathhouses to relax. Apparently, they’re staying home in Japan this year due to SARS and war concerns.

Relaxing in the buff in an outdoor hot spring bath has been a favorite Japanese pastime for the last 400 years.

I wonder if bathhouses in Japan are ‘heavily-chlorinated’?

Finally, more evidence that people have a hard time letting go – Unabomber Ted Kaczynski’s cabin was spared demolition today.

"I have a very hard time comprehending why it is not being put in the Smithsonian. That's where it belongs," Beau Friedlander said. "It is a curio, and at that a rather macabre one, but nonetheless I am sure you will see many a macabre curio in the Smithsonian collection. I mean creepy, creepy stuff."

So, there’s at least one person who thinks turning the Smithsonian into a year-round Halloween Horror House is a can’t-miss idea.

But I have a solution that should please everyone. What I propose is this: the Daily Planet whorehouse uses its new-found wealth to purchase the Unabomber’s shack to add it to their other properties. That way, they can offer their patrons a wide variety of choices in fornication-friendly environments … Venus, Xanadu, backwoods Montana. Their slogan could be “do it like a hermit!”

Send feedback to dudezaplenty@hotmail.com.

2003-04-30T22:24:00.000-07:00

This day in 1803, the US doubled in size by completing the Louisiana purchase for $15 million from France … a fact which only goes to show that poor judgment is not a recent French attribute.

This day in 2003, a myriad of news-worthy events occurred. Let’s start with a letter, purportedly by Saddam Hussein, which was published in an Arabic newspaper based in London. The author exhorts his compatriots that "there are no priorities except kicking out the infidel, criminal, murderous and cowardly occupier." Of course, this is written by someone scurrying around the country in secrecy, so cowardice is obviously one of those sliding-scale thingies.

Next, and I absolutely cannot believe this is even an issue, but Florida is trying to decide what to do with the 6 million ballots they have been storing since the 2000 election. According to CNN.com, ‘Trash is one option; preservation another.’ Today must be bleeding-obvious byline day. At any rate, Florida has been spending taxpayer money storing the ballots with their hanging chads in warehouses all over the state. There is also no available estimate on what it would cost to store the ballots in a single repository.

Separation anxiety, anyone? Is it not enough that we have history record the events of that election? Will future generations lack the ability to comprehend a hanging chad that they need the actual thing for reference? Julian Pleasants, a University of Florida professor, seems to think so.

"I'm sure a lot of people would just like to forget about it," he said. "But this is the only presidential election decided by the Supreme Court. If you don't have a ballot, how do you understand the difference between a hanging chad and a three-corner chad, or between a pregnant chad and a dimpled chad?"

Perhaps it’s just me, but I could think of worse things that might befall me than dying without being able to distinguish between various types of chads. Furthermore, he’s wrong about it being the only presidential election decided by the Supreme Court. The election was still decided by the people – the Supreme Court just clarified for the people what they decided.

And, in Scotland today, researchers disclosed that they have found evidence that fish have feelings, including stress and pain. Serves the bastards right! There’s no reason fish should coast through life without knowing pain.

But, I digress. Apparently, the animal rights people are using the study as propaganda against angling. Anglers are drawing plans to hook the lips of PETA activists instead. Pescetarians the world over are just crapping themselves.

2003-04-29T22:46:00.000-07:00

This day in 1945, Adolf and Eva got married in a Berlin bunker. For their honeymoon, they took a one-way trip out of this world.

This day in 2003, the US walked out of a United Nations vote that re-elected Cuba to the Human Rights Commission. "Having Cuba serve again on the Human Rights Commission is like putting Al Capone in charge of bank security," White House spokesman (and dead-pan comic extraordinaire) Ari Fleischer said. How many people actually understood that reference? Enough people think that New York City is the capital of the US, so I have my doubts.

What might Ari have said instead? How about "having Cuba serve again on the Human Rights Commission is like putting ..."
a. Saddam Hussein in charge of weapons inspections.
b. the US presidency in the hands of Florida voters.
c. Joe Millionaire in charge of anything.

It's amazing that any country still storms out of a UN meeting in a huff. Don't they know by now that a vote at the UN is like selecting which lunatic to put in charge of the asylum for the week?

Send feedback to dudezaplenty@hotmail.com