while in columbus i caught a bit of a local weather forecast; the local spin was that columbus was going to miss the impending storms, but i could see the storms would hit indiana.
little did i know that the coming storms would leave us without power. the power cut off shortly after 11 pm last night. i'm writing this from a nearby wifi network. no telling when power will be returned—it could be days or it could already be back on—so i'll be away from computer.
tickets to the wedding show were supposed to go on sale tomorrow (june 1). if i'm still without power, obviously that will have to be delayed.
update: power is finally back, after 37 hours without. also, the unexpected shutdown seems to have fried my tower (i'm writing this from the laptop), so now i have to work on getting that fixed. it's looking like i might have to reinstall windows.
at any rate, i should be ready to start selling advance tickets for the wedding show tomorrow (june 2).¶
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Friday, May 30, 2008
exile on high street
yesterday, we drove to columbus, OH so virago could attend a work-related conference. we got back a couple hours ago.
i had forgotten how much i hate driving in ohio. it's funny because indiana and ohio are virtually indistinguishable in so many ways, yet driving there is far more frustrating, from the awkward 25mph freeway exits to the poor signage to the puzzled, clumsy drivers who meander through its poorly-thought-out roads. but this time we had an experience that took it to the next level.
we were tooling down I-70, on schedule to arrive more than an hour before the conference began. things were going smoothly until we got to dayton, and in between semis i caught a glimpse of an electronic sign. I-70 CLOSED it said. just as quickly, it disappeared from view.
"there's no way I-70 is closed," i said to virago, looking around for more signs. but i was mistaken. sure enough, I-70 was completely closed off, with no detour signs and no warning at all except that one electronic sign that i didn't have time to read. we were shunted off onto I-75N inside a flood of 18-wheelers.
traffic slowed to a crawl as we tried to determine how to get to columbus now that we were heading in the wrong direction. there were no signs to advise us, we who the ohio department of transportation had forced to drive on this road against our will. fortunately, being an old-school midwesterner, i knew that US-40 runs parallel to I-70, so getting onto US-40 would eventually get us back onto I-70. unfortunately, to get to US-40, we had to drive on surface roads in suburban dayton for about a mile. only then did we reach US-40: a stretch of highway fraught with sharp curves and abundant stoplights. it was easy enough to know which way to go: just follow the gridlock. all in all, this added ninety minutes to our commute, so instead of arriving early and getting some lunch before the conference, virago arrived to her workshop 15 minutes late, with an empty stomach.
there were other annoyances as well. the new debt card i had just activated the previous day, which i had been plannning to use for all my purchases while in town, turned out not to be activated after all. our hotel not only lacked an internet connection, but other basic conveniences like an alarm clock or a do-not-disturb sign. (i was forced to buy shampoo from the vending machine for $2 for a travel-size bottle; and when i inserted my $2, the little spiral spun around but my shampoo failed to fall. i tried to insert another $2 only to discover that the machine wouldn't let me put in two $1 bills; i had to go to the office and get change. and of course, though i spent $4, i only got one bottle of shampoo.) i tried to visit two record stores thursday night, but both were closed by the time i found them.
still, all that pales in comparison to the frustration of the state of ohio closing the interstate in the middle of the day, with only one electronic sign at the side of the road informing drivers of the detour. that was unprecedented in all my years of driving. i've seen a lot of road construction and been in a lot of traffic jams, but never have i witnessed such a poor judgment call made by a department of transportation. it figures that it happened in ohio.
the trip wasn't all bad. walking around the OSU campus was pleasant enough. we had a tasty late-night pizza from a local place called gumby's—it even used the gumby character for a mascot (i doubt premavision gave permission). today we had a delicious lunch at an ethiopian restaurant named blue nile. and i did eventually get to spend some time (if not as much as i wanted) browsing the vinyl at lost weekend records. plus, since the conference was work-related, we'll get reimbursed for mileage, so even with $4 gas, most if not all our expenses will be covered.
still, i can't help but think the whole trip would've gone better if we'd arrived on schedule, rather than being rudely forced off course into a 90-minute traffic jam.¶
i had forgotten how much i hate driving in ohio. it's funny because indiana and ohio are virtually indistinguishable in so many ways, yet driving there is far more frustrating, from the awkward 25mph freeway exits to the poor signage to the puzzled, clumsy drivers who meander through its poorly-thought-out roads. but this time we had an experience that took it to the next level.
we were tooling down I-70, on schedule to arrive more than an hour before the conference began. things were going smoothly until we got to dayton, and in between semis i caught a glimpse of an electronic sign. I-70 CLOSED it said. just as quickly, it disappeared from view.
"there's no way I-70 is closed," i said to virago, looking around for more signs. but i was mistaken. sure enough, I-70 was completely closed off, with no detour signs and no warning at all except that one electronic sign that i didn't have time to read. we were shunted off onto I-75N inside a flood of 18-wheelers.
traffic slowed to a crawl as we tried to determine how to get to columbus now that we were heading in the wrong direction. there were no signs to advise us, we who the ohio department of transportation had forced to drive on this road against our will. fortunately, being an old-school midwesterner, i knew that US-40 runs parallel to I-70, so getting onto US-40 would eventually get us back onto I-70. unfortunately, to get to US-40, we had to drive on surface roads in suburban dayton for about a mile. only then did we reach US-40: a stretch of highway fraught with sharp curves and abundant stoplights. it was easy enough to know which way to go: just follow the gridlock. all in all, this added ninety minutes to our commute, so instead of arriving early and getting some lunch before the conference, virago arrived to her workshop 15 minutes late, with an empty stomach.
there were other annoyances as well. the new debt card i had just activated the previous day, which i had been plannning to use for all my purchases while in town, turned out not to be activated after all. our hotel not only lacked an internet connection, but other basic conveniences like an alarm clock or a do-not-disturb sign. (i was forced to buy shampoo from the vending machine for $2 for a travel-size bottle; and when i inserted my $2, the little spiral spun around but my shampoo failed to fall. i tried to insert another $2 only to discover that the machine wouldn't let me put in two $1 bills; i had to go to the office and get change. and of course, though i spent $4, i only got one bottle of shampoo.) i tried to visit two record stores thursday night, but both were closed by the time i found them.
still, all that pales in comparison to the frustration of the state of ohio closing the interstate in the middle of the day, with only one electronic sign at the side of the road informing drivers of the detour. that was unprecedented in all my years of driving. i've seen a lot of road construction and been in a lot of traffic jams, but never have i witnessed such a poor judgment call made by a department of transportation. it figures that it happened in ohio.
the trip wasn't all bad. walking around the OSU campus was pleasant enough. we had a tasty late-night pizza from a local place called gumby's—it even used the gumby character for a mascot (i doubt premavision gave permission). today we had a delicious lunch at an ethiopian restaurant named blue nile. and i did eventually get to spend some time (if not as much as i wanted) browsing the vinyl at lost weekend records. plus, since the conference was work-related, we'll get reimbursed for mileage, so even with $4 gas, most if not all our expenses will be covered.
still, i can't help but think the whole trip would've gone better if we'd arrived on schedule, rather than being rudely forced off course into a 90-minute traffic jam.¶
Thursday, May 29, 2008
indy steps in it
the indy star is reporting that, thanks to our sprawling geography and prodigious use of coal, indianapolis has the second-largest carbon footprint in the country, per capita!
we're number two!
what's more, all the rest of the top 5 are within a 2-3 hour drive from here: lexington, ky; cincinnati; toledo; louisville. this is one dirty, hard-drivin', coal-burnin' region. ¶
we're number two!
what's more, all the rest of the top 5 are within a 2-3 hour drive from here: lexington, ky; cincinnati; toledo; louisville. this is one dirty, hard-drivin', coal-burnin' region. ¶
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
shorter ruth holladay
shorter ruth holladay: if hillary has a penis—and i think she does—then that makes her and bill both fags! ha ha, bill and hillary are fags! ain't i hilarious?¶
Friday, May 23, 2008
fact handling
if you were expecting the indy star to follow up on its lousy reporting about panhandlers with some fact-checking, then you haven't been reading the star for very long.
on the contrary, they double down: not only does today's follow-up repeat mayor ballard's lie that "most panhandlers are not homeless", but today's editorial takes it even further:
the editorial doesn't mention who these advocates are, or how this misinformation got to the ed board. did the homeless advocates speak directly to the ed board? did they talk to reporter brendan o'shaughnessy, and the ed board took the lie from his article? or did someone on mayor ballard's staff say, "you know, many advocates say that most panhandlers are just scan artists" and it was accepted uncritically?
as i pointed out yesterday, every study i've been able to turn up has found that most panhandlers are indeed homeless. if anyone has any real evidence that this isn't the case, rather than scurrilous lies and anti-panhandler slurs, i would love to see it.
as it stands, it appears that either the indy star was duped—in which case, don't hold your breath for a correction—or, even worse, our city's homeless advocates have been duped and are out there spreading malicious lies about the people they think they're trying to help. the former seems a lot more likely, but perhaps only because the latter is more unsettling.
naturally, we can't count on political columnist matt tully to set the story straight. instead, he delivers yet another column of butterfly kisses for his man-crush, mitch daniels. you could program a bot to write tully'c columns by this point. no, if this lie is ever going to be corrected in the pages of the star, the only place it might happen is in a dan carpenter column. ¶
on the contrary, they double down: not only does today's follow-up repeat mayor ballard's lie that "most panhandlers are not homeless", but today's editorial takes it even further:
Many advocates working with people on the streets argue that most panhandlers aren't truly homeless. Instead, their "job'' is to stake out a street corner and shake a cup, collecting money from passers-by.
the editorial doesn't mention who these advocates are, or how this misinformation got to the ed board. did the homeless advocates speak directly to the ed board? did they talk to reporter brendan o'shaughnessy, and the ed board took the lie from his article? or did someone on mayor ballard's staff say, "you know, many advocates say that most panhandlers are just scan artists" and it was accepted uncritically?
as i pointed out yesterday, every study i've been able to turn up has found that most panhandlers are indeed homeless. if anyone has any real evidence that this isn't the case, rather than scurrilous lies and anti-panhandler slurs, i would love to see it.
as it stands, it appears that either the indy star was duped—in which case, don't hold your breath for a correction—or, even worse, our city's homeless advocates have been duped and are out there spreading malicious lies about the people they think they're trying to help. the former seems a lot more likely, but perhaps only because the latter is more unsettling.
naturally, we can't count on political columnist matt tully to set the story straight. instead, he delivers yet another column of butterfly kisses for his man-crush, mitch daniels. you could program a bot to write tully'c columns by this point. no, if this lie is ever going to be corrected in the pages of the star, the only place it might happen is in a dan carpenter column. ¶
Thursday, May 22, 2008
brother, can you spare some facts?
i've written before about mayor ballard's anti-panhandling initiative, a plan inspired not by compassion for his fellow man but by revulsion toward them. the mayor doesn't want to help the homeless or panhandlers; he simply doesn't want to have to look at them. this attitude was nicely summarized in the comments by abdul, who wrote, "The panhandlers are a pain! Someone whould get a giant broom and sweep them all away!" in other words, panhandlers are inhuman filth, fit only for the trashheap.
today, the mayor announced the latest piece of his plan, downtown donation boxes for the homeless, so people can "give at the box" rather than give money directly to panhandlers. the idea is that if everyone gives at the box, panhandling will become ineffective and people will stop doing it. this might work, but i think the key question is whether the folks who really need the money will actually get it. if people stop panhandling because they no longer need the income, that's great. but if they still need the money but no longer have a legal way to get it, that only makes things worse.
but my reason for posting was this quote from the indy star article:
wow, most panhandlers aren't homeless? that struck me as a bold claim. it would've been nice if the star had thought to fact-check this assertion, but since no fact-checking was done, i decided to take it upon myself. and what did i find?
in this study of winnipeg panhandlers, 60% were homeless. this study found that the typical pandhandler "is a homeless, white male who is likely disabled". this toronto study found that "the majority of panhandlers in Toronto are homeless and living in extreme poverty". a more recent toronto study found that "three in four beggars are homeless".
contrary to what mayor ballard claims, the majority of panhandlers are homeless. of the ones who aren't, the vast majority are still poor and struggling to get by. the myth of the huckster who panhandles all day then goes home to a middle-class house is just that: a myth, propagated by those who want to justify their disgust toward and dehumanization of the poor, specifically the homeless.
i understand why some "homeless advocates" might want to support a donation-box program like this one, and to curb panhandling. but if i were CHIP or one of the other unnamed homeless advocates who were in attendance, i would be grossly offended by the lies told in my name by the mayor, and then attributed to me in the newspaper. (i'm giving CHIP the benefit of the doubt and assuming they were not the source of this false information; if they were then shame on them for not knowing what they're talking about.)
there's supposed to be more coverage in the star tomorrow; we'll see if that includes fact-checking this time. ¶
today, the mayor announced the latest piece of his plan, downtown donation boxes for the homeless, so people can "give at the box" rather than give money directly to panhandlers. the idea is that if everyone gives at the box, panhandling will become ineffective and people will stop doing it. this might work, but i think the key question is whether the folks who really need the money will actually get it. if people stop panhandling because they no longer need the income, that's great. but if they still need the money but no longer have a legal way to get it, that only makes things worse.
but my reason for posting was this quote from the indy star article:
Ballard and homeless advocates said most panhandlers are not homeless. Instead, they are scam artists betraying people's trust and good intentions, he said.
wow, most panhandlers aren't homeless? that struck me as a bold claim. it would've been nice if the star had thought to fact-check this assertion, but since no fact-checking was done, i decided to take it upon myself. and what did i find?
in this study of winnipeg panhandlers, 60% were homeless. this study found that the typical pandhandler "is a homeless, white male who is likely disabled". this toronto study found that "the majority of panhandlers in Toronto are homeless and living in extreme poverty". a more recent toronto study found that "three in four beggars are homeless".
contrary to what mayor ballard claims, the majority of panhandlers are homeless. of the ones who aren't, the vast majority are still poor and struggling to get by. the myth of the huckster who panhandles all day then goes home to a middle-class house is just that: a myth, propagated by those who want to justify their disgust toward and dehumanization of the poor, specifically the homeless.
i understand why some "homeless advocates" might want to support a donation-box program like this one, and to curb panhandling. but if i were CHIP or one of the other unnamed homeless advocates who were in attendance, i would be grossly offended by the lies told in my name by the mayor, and then attributed to me in the newspaper. (i'm giving CHIP the benefit of the doubt and assuming they were not the source of this false information; if they were then shame on them for not knowing what they're talking about.)
there's supposed to be more coverage in the star tomorrow; we'll see if that includes fact-checking this time. ¶
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
indana someplace: indy gets the super bowl
the super bowl's coming to indy in 2012!
WRTV's norm cox writes:
apparently cox hasn't been reading the right-wing blogs, where the reaction has ranged from insisting it's not that great to minimizing the contributions of former mayor bart peterson. but cox is an old tv newshound, and at least he's trying to be a good blogger, so perhaps he can be forgiven for, you know... not reading blogs.
the essence of norm's post is that only fatcats get to attend the super bowl in person, so who cares? to wit:
what norm neglects to mention in his lament is that some of the major recipients of that money will be media and television companies, such as the one that employs him—though to be sure, more of that money will go to the local NBC affiliate than to WRTV 6. and, as a minor local celebrity who works for one of those media outlets, norm has far better chances of scoring tickets (and being invited to VIP parties) than those of us who aren't on television regularly.
but let's take his question at face value. why should the average hoosier, who won't get to attend the big game in person and doesn't sling drinks or fluff pillows downtown, care about indy getting the super bowl?
perhaps some people are pleased about the hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue the game will bring, even if they won't see any of it personally. maybe others are psyched about the plans for a huge new facility at tech high school that will benefit tens of thousands of kids over the years.
or maybe we're just pleased that the hometown many of us grew up calling "indiana noplace" has come so far. sure, getting around downtown will be a pain for a couple weeks in january/february 2012. but some of us remember a time when there was no reason to go downtown, unless you worked at a tv station or a law firm—it was a ghost town, a cultural dead zone. now, downtown is one of the most vibrant, exciting neighborhoods in the metro area, and i'd want to live there if there were better supermarkets. (someday...)
when i was young, we used to joke that indianapolis was nothing but a racetrack in the middle of a cornfield—not because we felt that way, but to mock out of towners who had no conception that indianapolis was a real city. indianapolis had the size and population, but what it didn't have back then was a real cultural identity... it was just a nondescript, sleepy little burg in the bible belt. things have changed vastly since those days, and getting the super bowl is symbolic of that. so yay, go us.¶
WRTV's norm cox writes:
The universal reaction to Indianapolis getting the Super Bowl has been one of pure ecstasy.
apparently cox hasn't been reading the right-wing blogs, where the reaction has ranged from insisting it's not that great to minimizing the contributions of former mayor bart peterson. but cox is an old tv newshound, and at least he's trying to be a good blogger, so perhaps he can be forgiven for, you know... not reading blogs.
the essence of norm's post is that only fatcats get to attend the super bowl in person, so who cares? to wit:
Yes, the Super Bowl will bring lots of money to the city. And the hotels, restaurants, and bars who will gather most of it in should be ecstatic. So should their employees who will enjoy a tip bonanza. But for you and me, I ask again, why exactly should we be celebrating?
what norm neglects to mention in his lament is that some of the major recipients of that money will be media and television companies, such as the one that employs him—though to be sure, more of that money will go to the local NBC affiliate than to WRTV 6. and, as a minor local celebrity who works for one of those media outlets, norm has far better chances of scoring tickets (and being invited to VIP parties) than those of us who aren't on television regularly.
but let's take his question at face value. why should the average hoosier, who won't get to attend the big game in person and doesn't sling drinks or fluff pillows downtown, care about indy getting the super bowl?
perhaps some people are pleased about the hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue the game will bring, even if they won't see any of it personally. maybe others are psyched about the plans for a huge new facility at tech high school that will benefit tens of thousands of kids over the years.
or maybe we're just pleased that the hometown many of us grew up calling "indiana noplace" has come so far. sure, getting around downtown will be a pain for a couple weeks in january/february 2012. but some of us remember a time when there was no reason to go downtown, unless you worked at a tv station or a law firm—it was a ghost town, a cultural dead zone. now, downtown is one of the most vibrant, exciting neighborhoods in the metro area, and i'd want to live there if there were better supermarkets. (someday...)
when i was young, we used to joke that indianapolis was nothing but a racetrack in the middle of a cornfield—not because we felt that way, but to mock out of towners who had no conception that indianapolis was a real city. indianapolis had the size and population, but what it didn't have back then was a real cultural identity... it was just a nondescript, sleepy little burg in the bible belt. things have changed vastly since those days, and getting the super bowl is symbolic of that. so yay, go us.¶
Monday, May 19, 2008
obama-bayh 2008?
indiana senate bayh was an early supporter of hillary clinton; conventional was that he was angling for the VP nomination, and that the ascendancy of obama has doomed the chance of that. but now bayh's name is being bandied about as a possible running mate for obama precisely because he's a clinton surrogate. here's yesterday's washington post:
i understand the logic here, but don't see much benefit in obama choosing another midwesterner like bayh. obama is from illinois; he doesn't need a running mate from an adjacent state.
on another note, if bayh were to be elected VP, who would get to choose his successor? the governor—in other words, mitch daniels. (even if jill long-thompson wins the governorship, i believe daniels would still get to make the appointment, though i'm happy to be corrected on that.)
fun fact: we had a special election in the 7th this year. the last time we had a special election in indiana was 20 years ago. indiana senator dan quayle had just been elected VP, and governor orr appointed then-4th-CD representative dan coats to fill quayle's spot in the senate. a special election was held to fill coats's vacancy in the house. who won that special election? a woman named jill long, who later married some dude named thompson.
so, if bayh were to become the VP candidate, there would be some very interesting parallels between the elections of 1988 and 2008. then again, i really don't want mitch daniels picking our next senator. ¶
In addition to the fledgling attempts to merge the fundraising operations of Obama and Clinton, there is growing talk that the best -- and perhaps only -- way to truly mend the rift is for Obama to pick a top Clinton surrogate as his vice presidential nominee.
"There's gale-force pressure for Obama to choose a Clinton loyalist as a running mate to heal the party but avoid putting her and her formidable baggage on the ticket," said one Obama ally in Washington. "You hear the names [Ohio Gov. Ted] Strickland, [Indiana Sen. Evan] Bayh, and [retired general] Wes Clark almost constantly, and it's no secret that Jim Johnson and Tom Daschle are purveyors of that wisdom."
i understand the logic here, but don't see much benefit in obama choosing another midwesterner like bayh. obama is from illinois; he doesn't need a running mate from an adjacent state.
on another note, if bayh were to be elected VP, who would get to choose his successor? the governor—in other words, mitch daniels. (even if jill long-thompson wins the governorship, i believe daniels would still get to make the appointment, though i'm happy to be corrected on that.)
fun fact: we had a special election in the 7th this year. the last time we had a special election in indiana was 20 years ago. indiana senator dan quayle had just been elected VP, and governor orr appointed then-4th-CD representative dan coats to fill quayle's spot in the senate. a special election was held to fill coats's vacancy in the house. who won that special election? a woman named jill long, who later married some dude named thompson.
so, if bayh were to become the VP candidate, there would be some very interesting parallels between the elections of 1988 and 2008. then again, i really don't want mitch daniels picking our next senator. ¶
Sunday, May 18, 2008
speed racer review
the new speed racer movie didn't do as well as expected on opening weekend. in today's movie market, movies that don't have a massive open don't stay in the theaters for long, so i knew if i wanted to see it on the big screen, i had to do it soon. virago was a good enough sport to tag along.
i wanted to follow designer john gaeta's recommendation to see it in a theater with digital projection, so we went to the new AMC at castleton, which is only the second all-digital theater in the metropolitan area (the other's in plainfield). the theater is nice, with stadium seating and all the other frills that come standard on multiplexes these days.
on to speed racer: the visuals were spectacular. you could pause the film at almost any frame and have something worthy of being your desktop wallpaper, if not an actual poster on your wall. that alone made it worth seeing in the theater: this movie will still look wonderful at home on HDTV, but not as fantastic as it looked on a full digital movie screen.
so, on the level of something beautiful to trip out to, speed racer excels. this is definitely one to get on blu-ray and play on mute during parties. but what if you haven't been tossing back brews or bong hits all night? is it a good movie?
in terms of plot, storytelling, character development, and the usual metrics for critiquing film, speed racer does okay but not great. the plot is predictable. (care to guess who wins the big race at the end?) many of the characters come off as one-dimensional and (surprise) cartoonish, and the dramatic scenes have a tendency to drag.
then, there's spritle and chim-chim, speed's little brother and the family's pet chimp. as i feared, there is too much spritle and chim-chim in the movie. i understand that they were important characters in the show and thus needed to be included, but their screen time could have been cut significantly. that said, there were a few very nice scenes with these two, like the scene early on when they're watching kung-fu cartoons and visualize themselves as part of the action.
the movie had lots of cute scenes like that, from the opening scene of young speed at school fantasizing about racing to the heart-shaped flashbulbs during the big kiss at the finish line as the movie ends. but in between all the cute scenes and the whiz-bang graphics, there was stuff that wasn't as good—it moved slowly, was poorly acted, or was just silly.
so overall, a bit of a mixed bag. much better than i feared, but not as good as it could've been with a stronger script. virago called it "pretty but dumb", which sums it up nicely. the original cartoon was much the same—awesome yet absurdly campy and contrived—and the movie is very faithful to that spirit.
the kids who were sitting behind us loved it, and if i were 10, it would be the coolest movie ever. as an adult, i still had a lot of fun, but would've preferred more character development and less spritle. A+ for special effects; B- for storytelling. ¶
i wanted to follow designer john gaeta's recommendation to see it in a theater with digital projection, so we went to the new AMC at castleton, which is only the second all-digital theater in the metropolitan area (the other's in plainfield). the theater is nice, with stadium seating and all the other frills that come standard on multiplexes these days.
on to speed racer: the visuals were spectacular. you could pause the film at almost any frame and have something worthy of being your desktop wallpaper, if not an actual poster on your wall. that alone made it worth seeing in the theater: this movie will still look wonderful at home on HDTV, but not as fantastic as it looked on a full digital movie screen.
so, on the level of something beautiful to trip out to, speed racer excels. this is definitely one to get on blu-ray and play on mute during parties. but what if you haven't been tossing back brews or bong hits all night? is it a good movie?
in terms of plot, storytelling, character development, and the usual metrics for critiquing film, speed racer does okay but not great. the plot is predictable. (care to guess who wins the big race at the end?) many of the characters come off as one-dimensional and (surprise) cartoonish, and the dramatic scenes have a tendency to drag.
then, there's spritle and chim-chim, speed's little brother and the family's pet chimp. as i feared, there is too much spritle and chim-chim in the movie. i understand that they were important characters in the show and thus needed to be included, but their screen time could have been cut significantly. that said, there were a few very nice scenes with these two, like the scene early on when they're watching kung-fu cartoons and visualize themselves as part of the action.
the movie had lots of cute scenes like that, from the opening scene of young speed at school fantasizing about racing to the heart-shaped flashbulbs during the big kiss at the finish line as the movie ends. but in between all the cute scenes and the whiz-bang graphics, there was stuff that wasn't as good—it moved slowly, was poorly acted, or was just silly.
so overall, a bit of a mixed bag. much better than i feared, but not as good as it could've been with a stronger script. virago called it "pretty but dumb", which sums it up nicely. the original cartoon was much the same—awesome yet absurdly campy and contrived—and the movie is very faithful to that spirit.
the kids who were sitting behind us loved it, and if i were 10, it would be the coolest movie ever. as an adult, i still had a lot of fun, but would've preferred more character development and less spritle. A+ for special effects; B- for storytelling. ¶
Thursday, May 15, 2008
california love
the california supreme court has struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage:
"There can be no doubt that extending the designation of marriage to same-sex couples, rather than denying it to all couples, is the equal protection remedy that is most consistent with our state's general legislative policy and preference," said the 120-page ruling.
It said that the state law's language "limiting the designation of marriage to a 'union between a man and a woman' is unconstitutional, and that the remaining statutory language must be understood as making the designation of marriage available to both opposite-sex and same-sex couples."
With the ruling, California becomes the second state to allow same-sex couples to legally wed. Massachusetts adopted the practice in 2004, and couples don't need to be state residents to wed there.¶
what can brown do to you?
the new-and-improved BMV website offers more online services than ever before. it now provides every BMV service except the one you actually want:
banned? that's odd. BMV commissioner rod stiver says he's working on getting the ban overturned. a previous attempt to do so failed. and why did it fail?
that's right: fear of brown people is why hoosiers can't renew their driver's licenses online. i fail to see how a tool for renewing identification for license-holders will allow people who don't have licenses to get them, but then i'm not pathologically afraid of immigrants, either.
i shouldn't be surprised, especially considering what's going on in missouri. in a not-quite-related story, missouri right-wingers are trying to pass a new voter ID law similar to indiana's but with an extra twist: voters would not only need to show ID but proof of citizenship. this is a double-whammy that merges paranoia regarding voter fraud and fear of brown people for devastating effect: the secretary of state has calculated that 240,000 missourians could be impacted by the law if it passes. (missouri already passed a strict voter ID law in 2006 that was struck down by the state supreme court, so now they're trying to change the state constitution in order to pass the new restrictions.) ¶
But the one online service drivers say they want most -- license renewal -- is still not available over the Internet.
In fact, online license renewal is banned by Indiana law.
banned? that's odd. BMV commissioner rod stiver says he's working on getting the ban overturned. a previous attempt to do so failed. and why did it fail?
Bill sponsor Sen. Earline Rogers, D-Gary, said House members were debating a contentious immigration proposal at the time, and some worried that illegal immigrants would see online license renewals as an easy way to get identification.
that's right: fear of brown people is why hoosiers can't renew their driver's licenses online. i fail to see how a tool for renewing identification for license-holders will allow people who don't have licenses to get them, but then i'm not pathologically afraid of immigrants, either.
i shouldn't be surprised, especially considering what's going on in missouri. in a not-quite-related story, missouri right-wingers are trying to pass a new voter ID law similar to indiana's but with an extra twist: voters would not only need to show ID but proof of citizenship. this is a double-whammy that merges paranoia regarding voter fraud and fear of brown people for devastating effect: the secretary of state has calculated that 240,000 missourians could be impacted by the law if it passes. (missouri already passed a strict voter ID law in 2006 that was struck down by the state supreme court, so now they're trying to change the state constitution in order to pass the new restrictions.) ¶
Sunday, May 11, 2008
belated post-election post
tully has a column today that, were i to summarize in "shorter" form, i would condense thusly: "jill long thompson won and jim schellinger lost, therefore long thompson's campaign was great and schellinger's campaign was teh suck." but i don't want to do that, because frankly this is the first tully column that's even been worth reading in at least a month, as recently he's been phoning it in while chasing the national spotlight.
the column has some good insights into the schellinger campaign's missteps, and i recommend it for those who're interested in that topic. what bugged me about it was the implication (both in the column and elsewhere) that JLT campaign hadn't made the kind of missteps schellinger had—of course, tully already showed his colors last month in that regard. the fact is that both candidates ran lousy campaigns. both candidates wasted 2007. both struggled to be seen and to articulate a vision. and yes, the race was completely overshadowed by the presidential race, but only because both candidates failed to make themselves known months ago, back when everyone assumed indiana's primary would be meaningless as usual. (JLT had built-in name recognition from her past service in congress, which helped her greatly.)
in the end, i went with schellinger, as did most liberal bloggers. it's weird; i can't think of a single liberal blogger who was on record as a JLT supporter, aside from a couple pseudonymous commenters on blue indiana. schellinger wasn't just the candidate of choice for party insiders; he had the support of the blogs as well.
why is that? there are a few reasons—resentment about JLT's negative campaigning was a big one—but perhaps the most important was blogger outreach. the JLT campaign did none that i'm aware of. her online presence is weak overall and her campaign's attitude toward bloggers has ranged from indifference to hostility. in contrast, schellinger struggled with this for awhile, but eventually turned it all around when he hired jen wagner. by the end, his blogger outreach was excellent, but it wasn't enough to put him over the top.
so jill long thompson is now the nominee for governor. i'll be happy to vote for her come november, but she's really going to have to step up her game if she wants to beat mitch daniels. mitch's unpopularity makes him vulnerable, but he's still a strong campaigner sitting on a lot of money, and is going to be a lot more difficult to beat than schellinger was.
in election other news, how about that andré carson? it might have been a very different race if it had been between two or three candidates, but instead there were a nonillion of them all attacking each other, dividing the hater vote. pity the poor haters: they thought they had a shot this year.
and for president, hillary squeaked out ahead, but not by enough to really matter. it's been apparent for awhile that obama will be the nominee. in fact, that was apparent before indiana's primary, but the media politley pretended that indiana's primary was actually going to matter for the first time in 40 years. you never know... come 2048, maybe indiana will be the tie-breaker between robama and hillbot. ¶
the column has some good insights into the schellinger campaign's missteps, and i recommend it for those who're interested in that topic. what bugged me about it was the implication (both in the column and elsewhere) that JLT campaign hadn't made the kind of missteps schellinger had—of course, tully already showed his colors last month in that regard. the fact is that both candidates ran lousy campaigns. both candidates wasted 2007. both struggled to be seen and to articulate a vision. and yes, the race was completely overshadowed by the presidential race, but only because both candidates failed to make themselves known months ago, back when everyone assumed indiana's primary would be meaningless as usual. (JLT had built-in name recognition from her past service in congress, which helped her greatly.)
in the end, i went with schellinger, as did most liberal bloggers. it's weird; i can't think of a single liberal blogger who was on record as a JLT supporter, aside from a couple pseudonymous commenters on blue indiana. schellinger wasn't just the candidate of choice for party insiders; he had the support of the blogs as well.
why is that? there are a few reasons—resentment about JLT's negative campaigning was a big one—but perhaps the most important was blogger outreach. the JLT campaign did none that i'm aware of. her online presence is weak overall and her campaign's attitude toward bloggers has ranged from indifference to hostility. in contrast, schellinger struggled with this for awhile, but eventually turned it all around when he hired jen wagner. by the end, his blogger outreach was excellent, but it wasn't enough to put him over the top.
so jill long thompson is now the nominee for governor. i'll be happy to vote for her come november, but she's really going to have to step up her game if she wants to beat mitch daniels. mitch's unpopularity makes him vulnerable, but he's still a strong campaigner sitting on a lot of money, and is going to be a lot more difficult to beat than schellinger was.
in election other news, how about that andré carson? it might have been a very different race if it had been between two or three candidates, but instead there were a nonillion of them all attacking each other, dividing the hater vote. pity the poor haters: they thought they had a shot this year.
and for president, hillary squeaked out ahead, but not by enough to really matter. it's been apparent for awhile that obama will be the nominee. in fact, that was apparent before indiana's primary, but the media politley pretended that indiana's primary was actually going to matter for the first time in 40 years. you never know... come 2048, maybe indiana will be the tie-breaker between robama and hillbot. ¶
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
nuns disenfranchised
the number of people disenfranchised by indiana's voter ID law is small, but these people do exist:
these nuns live in convents where they are taken care of by their sister nuns. they have no use for government-issued identification, and acquiring valid ID is a major hassle for them. also:
About 12 Indiana nuns were turned away Tuesday from a polling place by a fellow bride of Christ because they didn't have state or federal identification bearing a photograph.
Sister Julie McGuire said she was forced to turn away her fellow sisters at Saint Mary's Convent in South Bend, across the street from the University of Notre Dame, because they had been told earlier that they would need such an ID to vote.
The nuns, all in their 80s or 90s, didn't get one but came to the precinct anyway.
"One came down this morning, and she was 98, and she said, 'I don't want to go do that,'" Sister McGuire said. Some showed up with outdated passports. None of them drives.
They weren't given provisional ballots because it would be impossible to get them to a motor vehicle branch and back in the 10-day time frame allotted by the law, Sister McGuire said. "You have to remember that some of these ladies don't walk well. They're in wheelchairs or on walkers or electric carts."
these nuns live in convents where they are taken care of by their sister nuns. they have no use for government-issued identification, and acquiring valid ID is a major hassle for them. also:
One newly married woman said she was told she couldn't vote because her driver's license name didn't match the one on her voter registration record, said Myrna Perez of the Brennan Center Justice at New York University's law school, coordinator of the 1-866-OUR-VOTE hot line. Another woman said she was turned away from casting her first-ever ballot because she had only a college-issued ID card and an out-of-state driver's license, Perez said.¶
middletown
you know we're living in interesting times when the washington post writes a whole article about muncie, indiana and it ends up on atrios. it's a good piece about how hard muncie has been hit by the worsening economy, and a much better read than that awful new york times article on kokomo a couple weeks back.
i don't need to mention that today is the indiana primary, currently being marketed as the primary to end all primaries. i voted around 10:30 this morning (usually i don't vote until late afternoon after work) and already more ballots had been cast in my precinct than in the last couple elections. this one should be interesting. ¶
i don't need to mention that today is the indiana primary, currently being marketed as the primary to end all primaries. i voted around 10:30 this morning (usually i don't vote until late afternoon after work) and already more ballots had been cast in my precinct than in the last couple elections. this one should be interesting. ¶
Saturday, May 03, 2008
mashup accomplished!
in just two days of release, more people have downloaded my post-mashup EP mash smarter not harder than my previous release, wack cylinders. if you're not one of those people, you can be! download mash smarter not harder now, before all your friends get it first. this is probably my most accessible (and dance-friendly) work ever, and perfect for those who found previous stAllio! or AWIA releases too abrasive. you can even go all out and download mash smarter desktop wallpapers (more coming soon).
i'm in the process of converting this material into a more improvisation-friendly format for live shows, so that i can basically remix the stuff live rather than just press play like some plunderphonic acts... the live debut of the new style will be friday, may 23, in niles, michigan. and of course, i'll be playing this stuff and (hopefully) some new stuff at my wedding show in october... if you can wait that long.
i've also updated the stAllio! discography, both to include the latest releases and to match the new design (though entries for older releases still have the old look). the entry for wack cylinders even lists all known samples in the album. as for mash smarter not harder, i haven't released a sample list yet... i've been toying with having a trainspotter contest to see who can be first to name all the samples, but i don't know what i'd give away for a prize. ¶
Friday, May 02, 2008
who dares question the great and powerful doctor myers?
i hadn't intended to post today. i'd planned to leave my post about mash smarter not harder on top to draw more attention there. but i can't go with commenting on this.
david orentlicher unveiled the season's first negative ad in the 7th, attacking both andré carson (the incumbent) and woody myers (whom all the polls have in second place). not too surprising, since i'm pretty sure the orentlicher campaign was already doing push polling. what was surprising was what happened next.
the myers campaign hit back, insisting the ad was inaccurate. but here's where it gets crazy: they threatened to sue the orentlicher campaign if the ad wasn't pulled immediately.
naturally, the orentlicher campaign told him to shove it. so now woody's stuck: either he doesn't file suit and loses face, or he does and gets laughed out of court—because even if the ad is inaccurate, there's no way he'll be able to prove malicious intent, which is required to win a libel case.
and that's just the start of it. not only did woody threaten to sue david o, but he started threatening bloggers who'd written critically of him. he threatened suit against bil browning, and not even for anything bil had written, but for something written on bil's blog by tyrion (who had posted the same content at two other blogs that somehow escapted threat of legal action).
when bil asked what in particular the campaign objected to, the lawyers refused to tell him, which isn't just odd but obstinate. they also threatened to sue sheila suess kennedy, but at least in her case the campaign was nice enough to say what the problem was:
i imagine the issue with tyrion's post and david o's ad is similar... though i'm only guessing because they refuse to say. i can see why the campaign would upset at this misattribution of his comments, but can't fathom how anyone thought this was worthy of litigation. you hit back, you post comments about how it's inaccurate, but why threaten to file a lawsuit you can't possibly win? orentlicher is a lawyer for crying out loud; you won't scare him that way. this is foolish, unproductive blundering. it only serves to draw more attention to the orentlicher attack ad, and it damages woody's appeal, because it makes him look like a spoiled, petulant child.
it was already clear that the myers campaign doesn't grok the internet. that was clear from the fact that they let their official blogger joh padgett run around making unprofessional comments at blue indiana and other blogs. but a congressional candidate threatening to sue bloggers for negative coverage? is that a first? it has to be, for indiana at least.
i wasn't planning to vote myers anyway, but if i had, this would make me seriously reconsider. ¶
david orentlicher unveiled the season's first negative ad in the 7th, attacking both andré carson (the incumbent) and woody myers (whom all the polls have in second place). not too surprising, since i'm pretty sure the orentlicher campaign was already doing push polling. what was surprising was what happened next.
the myers campaign hit back, insisting the ad was inaccurate. but here's where it gets crazy: they threatened to sue the orentlicher campaign if the ad wasn't pulled immediately.
naturally, the orentlicher campaign told him to shove it. so now woody's stuck: either he doesn't file suit and loses face, or he does and gets laughed out of court—because even if the ad is inaccurate, there's no way he'll be able to prove malicious intent, which is required to win a libel case.
and that's just the start of it. not only did woody threaten to sue david o, but he started threatening bloggers who'd written critically of him. he threatened suit against bil browning, and not even for anything bil had written, but for something written on bil's blog by tyrion (who had posted the same content at two other blogs that somehow escapted threat of legal action).
when bil asked what in particular the campaign objected to, the lawyers refused to tell him, which isn't just odd but obstinate. they also threatened to sue sheila suess kennedy, but at least in her case the campaign was nice enough to say what the problem was:
A few days ago, I posted testimony given by Dr. Woody Meyers in the late 1990s, which had been sent to me (and presumably others)anonymously. (I assume it was sent to me because I write for the Indianapolis Star.) I checked the source cited for the testimony, saw it was accurate, and posted it. Subsequently, a commenter from Dr. Meyers' campaign posted a response, to the effect that the testimony was indeed correct, but that it had been offered in response to a different amendment to ERISA than the later amendment familiarly known as the Patients' Bill of Rights.
i imagine the issue with tyrion's post and david o's ad is similar... though i'm only guessing because they refuse to say. i can see why the campaign would upset at this misattribution of his comments, but can't fathom how anyone thought this was worthy of litigation. you hit back, you post comments about how it's inaccurate, but why threaten to file a lawsuit you can't possibly win? orentlicher is a lawyer for crying out loud; you won't scare him that way. this is foolish, unproductive blundering. it only serves to draw more attention to the orentlicher attack ad, and it damages woody's appeal, because it makes him look like a spoiled, petulant child.
it was already clear that the myers campaign doesn't grok the internet. that was clear from the fact that they let their official blogger joh padgett run around making unprofessional comments at blue indiana and other blogs. but a congressional candidate threatening to sue bloggers for negative coverage? is that a first? it has to be, for indiana at least.
i wasn't planning to vote myers anyway, but if i had, this would make me seriously reconsider. ¶
Thursday, May 01, 2008
stAllio! - mash smarter not harder out now!
mash smarter not harder isn't just an EP. it's an audio manifesto, a roadmap to a mashed-up future. the goal of this EP isn't just to generate downloads or make you shake your ass—though it promises to do both—but to spawn a new golden age of mashups.
with this EP, stAllio! introduces a brand-new style that takes the mashup aesthetic to the next level. samples shuffle in and out, then back in again before you even notice them. the music flips, skips, and hops between your favorite hits so effortlessly you could be forgiven for thinking it was all meant to be this way. this new style—whatever you call it: post-mashup, dance collage, new-school bootleg—mixes the energy and danceability of Girl Talk with the subversive wit of Negativland and Cassetteboy.
if you love mashups, if you used to love mashups but nowadays find them a bit boring, or if you're just interested in remixing, sampling, audio manipulation, and the like, you need to download mash smarter not harder immediately. get it now and get on the bandwagon while there's still room.
is this EP as good as we say it is? is it even possible for a record to live up to this much hype? the only way to find out is to download it right now! you've got nothing to lose, because the download is FREE!¶
