I Hate Candidates

Ever since Obama returned from abroad, all I've been hearing is how presumptuous he is. Apparently, he's acting like he's already president. I personally think it's extremely vain of him, but it's not that big of a deal. So what? It's better than McCain actually calling himself president.
I think most politicians are arrogant bastards, and the McCain campaign needs to come up with a better argument than Obama's 'presumptuousness.'

The problem I have with Obama is that he's kind of a liar. Obviously there's the whole public-financing extravaganza, but for me it's much more deep than that. At the beginning of the race, Obama claimed he wanted to change politics, but he's really just doing the same old crap at a younger age. And it would be nice if the man could deliver a straight answer for something... like giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants or his plan for withdrawing troops from Iraq.

In case Obama wasn't aware, there is a difference between gracefully admitting you were wrong and childishly denying the truth. Example: the surge. By all accounts, the surge worked pretty well. I think Obama's being much too stubborn, insisting that the reduced violence in Iraq is due to political achievements and not the increase in troops. I agree that politics play an important role in decreasing the violence, but the surge also helped.

OK, I've given Obama enough crap. I mean, I almost sound Republican... we need to fix that. Here are my beefs with McCain:

He's boring and psychotic.

Seriously. He doesn't do anything that peaks my interest. The only think I liked about him was that he seemed nice... then I did research. Apparently, he has a bad rep for being hotheaded, which I think makes him kind of risky for the White House. That's right. I called McCain risky. For a man who's based almost his entire campaign on "Well, I'm not that great, but look at that Obama guy... he's a risk," that's seems like a strange thing to say. It is. I wouldn't say he's risky in the same way Obama is risky. But it's still there.

With McCain, there's no doubt that he's a liar. He blames Obama for high gas prices, and accuses his opponent of refusing to visit wounded troops in Germany because he wasn't allowed to bring reporters. FactCheck.org tells the real story:

"A new McCain ad says Obama 'made time to go to the gym, but canceled a visit with wounded troops. Seems the Pentagon wouldn't allow him to bring cameras.' McCain's facts are literally true, but his insinuation -- that the visit was canceled because of the press ban or the desire for gym time -- is false. In fact, Obama visited wounded troops earlier -- without cameras or press -- both in the U.S. and Iraq. And his gym workouts are a daily routine."

Almost every McCain ad seems to be attacking Obama... which emphasizes the fact that this race is Obama's, to win or to lose.

So who am I voting for?

Myself.

This is why I (not Obama or McCain) should be president.
-TS

PS: I researched an insane amount for this, so most of the information is pretty accurate. If it's not, though, I apologize and will fix any fact if you provide me with a link citing the truth.

I Love Real Fiction

You know, the real-life kind. Most of my friends are hard-core fantasy/sci-fi nerds, but nothing makes me happier than reading a well-written real-world novel. Don't get me wrong- I love fantasy. It's just that, personally, I think it takes a certain amount of talent to write a real-world novel that captures readers.

With fantasy and sci-fi, you already have a built-in 'wow' factor. The thing that makes you go, "Wow! This is so cool... nothing like this could ever happen in real life." And I commend writers of these genres for their amzing creativity... I know how hard it is to come up with ideas. But I think it's way harder for other authors, who have to survive without the 'wow' factor.

Take, for instance, the vampire novel. I have many friends who will pick up any book which focuses of vampires. That's their thing. With real-life fiction, though, there isn't a gimmick. You don't have an infinite number of universes to work in. Instead, you have to appeal to a different side of readers, one which is more concerned with character than action (by the way, I'm focusing more on YA literature, as I have more experience in that genre).

Another thing I love about real-life fiction is that it reflects society. As a literature junkie, I have a small obsession with symbolism and social commentary, and both these items are more prevalent in real-life fiction. There are exceptions, of course, but most of these exceptions I am completely unaware of (I'm very bad at recognizing symbols that aren't totally obvious). In real-life fiction, the issues are at the surface, making people aware of things going on in society. The book Candy by Kevin Brooks, for instance, deals with issues such as prostitution and drugs.

So, basically, I read everything. But real-life fiction provides me with added satisfaction, and makes my life a little better.

This is why I should be president (or a book critic):
-TS

I Hate This Crap

I know, I know. It's the oldest trick in the book- link to another article to avoid actually writing anything of value. But since BJ is officially on her way to Texas, I'm kind of unmotivated. So here it is:

Crap Article of the Week

In the article, the author, Anna Pasternak, discusses how engaging in masculine activities - such as paying bills and whatnot- makes women feel unfeminine, which makes them unattractive to men. First off, I hardly think that taking on normal responsibilities makes me any less of a woman, and I hope every other woman out there agrees.

Apparently, one of the men Pasternak dated complained that she was unfeminine because she "didn't flirt or wear much make-up." So, instead of addressing how completely sexist he was being, the author agreed.

Later in the article, Pasternak talks about the Botox injection she had, explaining that "far from looking taut or frozen, I looked like me, only less worn and haggard. I look fresher - and because I look softer, I feel softer." Because the only thing that matters is that a woman look "soft."

I think this article could have been much more enlightening than it actually was... I'm not quite sure how, though.

Let's see... stay tuned for "I Hate Candidates," in which I will explain the flaws of both McCain and Obama.

This is why I should be president.
-TS

I Hate Heath Ledger!

Why so dead, Ledger? Why so dead? Now the next "Batman" can't possibly measure up.

SPOILERS! (Not that it matters, you've probably already gone to see it)
If you can't guess, this is a review for the phenomenal summer blockbuster "The Dark Knight". Everyone loved it, and I am no exception. Talks of a shitload of Oscars are already buzzing around the grapevine (particularly for Ledger's performance, someone will start a riot if he doesn't at least get nominated). And summer blockbusters are rarely even considered for Oscars! I know that even though the movie came out about 5 days ago, I am seriously behind on reviewing this sucker. By now, literally everyone has seen it. My friend and I went to a small theatre that doesn't get a lot of attention around here and we STILL had to order tickets in advance. I can't imagine how crazy IMAX theatres still are. Many theatres, including the one we went to, added extra showtimes just to make more money on the crazy success. There were talks of 3a.m. showings. 3a.m.!!!

Anyways, back to the review.

All of the male characters had terrific (understatement of the year) actors to bring them to life on the big screen. My personal favorites were Gordon and Harvey. Harvey's makeup after the fire just blew me away, and my friend noticed small details like blood on his pillow. Accidental or no, it's endearing to see minor details like that, and it made the movie that much more endearing.

The whole psychological theme they added in was brilliant, and I almost teared up. Almost. I'm not a total nerd. Many, after actually evaluating the movie saw it as Bruce Wayne going "I don't wanna be Batman anymore! Waaah!!!" Which I don't find true at all, because every character had some kind of trauma to face. Even the Joker was given a more macabre and psychologically conflicting backstory for the movie. The way his stories about the scars contradicted each other showed how humans are able to supress or create "fake" memories at will.

Onto the action. Don't even get me started on the "Bat Pod". When I hit my midlife crisis and buy a motorcycle just like it, I will be the coolest damn 30 year old in the world. It was a bit heavy on CG explosions, but the suspense was absolutely breath-taking and I didn't find myself nitpicking at the CG (which is normally the first thing I notice).

Lastly, my favorite part was the way they mixed in dark humor that managed to horrify us and make us giggle at the same time. So few directors know how to actually use it when it's appropriate, so the jokes are either too malicious or don't come across at all (or both).

I mean the Joker's "pencil trick" managed to rank right above a scene in Hard Candy I couldn't help but laugh at. (A fourteen-year-old informs her would-be pedophile that she's going to castrate his -ahem- and that she was doing a favor to society.) By the way, if you haven't seen Hard Candy, rent it. Oh yeah, and the Joke also puts on a nurses' outfit and we get to see nice hairy man legs.

Every movie, no matter how amazingly amazing, has flaws. The audio wasn't that great and I didn't understand them until about thirty minutes into the movie. However, I blame the theatre. Also Batman's voice was a bit overdone, and could've been toned down. Still, Christian Bale is amazingly amazing and provided some nice 'tainment. Rachel is just kind of there, and doesn't have as much an impact. But it didn't deter from the movie.

10/10-- I've become a walking advertisement. That's a promotion money can't buy.

This is why I should be President.

-BJ

PS- Can't wait to get my hand on the DVD.

PSS- RIP Heath Ledger

PPSS- Was anyone else worried about Ledger? The running joke about him was the whole "Brokeback Mountain" thing and that the Joker would be gay for Batman. He really proved himself. Too bad we can never see him again. Also, I didn't go just to see him <--- disclaimer.

PPSSS- Stop comparing Ledger to Nicholson, they were two completely different Jokers and it's like comparing blue nail polish and pink nail polish. It's ridiculous, leave it alone and enjoy the movies!

I Love My Mother

First, I'm happy to announce that Pan is back from her trip to Boston and Florida, so my life is a little more interesting now. I'll be a happy camper until the end of the month, when BJ leaves for Texas. But that's irrelevent-- I need to talk about my mom.

I respect my mother for many things: she's a good cook, she's a single mom, etc. But the one thing I've never put any faith in is her politics. I mean, in 2000 she supported Gore. Not because she agreed with him on the issues, but because "he's cuter than Bush." Now, in the midst of election season, she is anti-Obama.

I guess I should first say that I don't really love Obama. He's okay, and the main reason I support him is that he's not McCain. But my mother's logic baffles me. Her reason for not supporting Obama?

"I don't want to see his face everyday."

I could have taken offense to this; looks certainly aren't my top priority on the list of Qualities That Make a Good President. But instead, I decided to try to understand where she's coming from and figure out how to fix the problem. Here's what I came up with.

Plastic surgery. Not a lot, just a nip here and a tuck there. With a few hours in a hospital, I guarantee you that Obama will gain hordes of supporters.




Or, you know, get him arrested.

I'm pretty sure that my mother's real problem is that Obama's black. So, a simple operation to make him white would gain him the votes of racist pricks everywhere... and lose him the votes of most other people like myself. But whatever.

At least my mom would be happy.

This is why I should be president.

-TS

I Love MSN

I mean, who wouldn't? MSN is the epitome of American society... as seen through this article:

http://lifestyle.msn.com/relationships/couplesandmarriage/articlecosmo.aspx?cp-documentid=8361787&GT1=32001

I just looked at the top of the page, which told me that this was a Cosmopolitan article. I'll save that rant for a later date.

Back to why I love MSN. In this article, the author tells women that it's okay if they are not married by the age of thirty. Victoria Lucia explains that women need to trust that the right guy will eventually show up, that everything will work out happily ever after. Now, that's all fine and dandy, since it is every woman's goal in life to marry (that's beside my point). My problem with the article has very little to do with the content... it's the premise.

I went to the main page of MSN's "Relationships" section, and guess what I found? A slew of articles directed towards women. Because, as we all know, relationships are for women only. Sure, guys can be a part of them, but women are the only ones whose lives revolve around them. I'm going to bring up the classic double-standard: women who never marry are old maids, meant to be pitied; men are lucky--they don't have to deal with the old ''ball and chain." Of course, I'm happy to say, this point of view is becoming out-dated. We still see remnants of it, though, which the MSN article represents. I have never seen an article (they could exist) that tried to console unmarried men.

A little disclaimer here: I did no research on this subject, so everything here is based on what I've seen of society through the internet, magazines, movies, books, etc. I'm also aware that this issue is kind of dated, but I had to point it out. Bare with me.

Oh, and the title is semi-sarcastic. I mean, I do use MSN for a lot of news stuff, and their health and fitness section rocks.

This is why I should be President.
TS

I originally intended to write a political blog, but as soon as I got on the internet I saw this article and felt I had to comment. So, I'll probably post an actual political blog tomorrow when BJ comes over. The topic: I Love My Mom.

I REALLY HATE STEPHENIE MEYER!

Because she spells her name weirdly.

Kidding. It's just that I was reading this other blog where she replied to a negative review for 'New Moon'. That woman had the GALL to categorize Twilight haters, as if she knows each and every one of us individually.

Apparently, we either hate Bella, or her vision of a vampire. Well, what if I hate both? What if I just abhor her writing style? What if I think my grocery list has more literary value then what she can spew out to please her fans? What do you think of THAT Miss Meyer? Hm?

Also, it's beyond tacky for a big shot author to criticize someone on the internet who simply has an opinion. It makes me look down on her.

Alright, then I get to categorize people who actually like Twlight.

1. Stupid pre-teens.
2. People who unknowingly put themselves in Bella's shoes. (Though I'm not sure why you'd WANT to, besides the fact that a hot vampire "loves" her.)

So shut up. Not everyone likes your book. Get over it. She needs to grow up and take criticism with some grace.

This is why I should be President (alongside TS)

-BJ