Category Archives: imho is just a polite way to say I know you don’t give a hoot what I think but I’m going to say it anyway

Confession time: I have a crush on Rachel Maddow…

Leave a reply

and I am not gay!

I think the crush is the kind that you have for an extremely intelligent and articulate person who you know you will never be able to win a debate against, so you simply capitulate and give her all your admiration, starry eyes and all.

So far, I have only seen her shows twice since we do not have cable at home. Now I want it!! Or, I can manage to travel more frequently so I can watch her show while eating a quart of ice cream in the hotel room. (Shhh, don’t tell my kids!) I have never seen a cable news show where I laugh out loud almost through the entire show. He wry sense of humor is superb. Simply divine.

It is so strange: I have never even heard of her before until one day, she was a guest on Conan O’Brien. (Conan is another one of my favorites, deceivingly simple and anti-intellectual, yet I believe that there are lots of well-functioning brain cells under that coif of his…) Even just chit chatting, she exudes intellect, wittiness, and grace. (I know, “grace” is an odd word of choice to describe a butch lesbian… But that’s exactly the word came to mind when I saw her…)

Am I gushing?

But she also decidedly has that “girl next door” charm. Only that girl has a Doctorate from Oxford and is extremely well versed in world politics and any cultural subject you can throw her way, that you just want to shut up and listen to her, and be entertained.

Below are some of my favorite parts from the New York Magazine article on her published this November:

This well-written article started with Dr. Maddow’s 12-second explanation of what Dadaism is to the cable audience (as she was trying to make an analogy between Dadaism and McCain’s fixation on Joe the Plumber. Try that at home, I dare you!)

Ever heard of something called Dada?”

Rachel Maddow is trying to make an analogy. It’s mid-October, two weeks before the election, and the MSNBC host is comparing the McCain campaign’s recent fixation on “Joe the Plumber” to the anti-bourgeois cultural movement of the early-twentieth century. But this is prime time, and Maddow first has to define Dadaism in as colloquial a way as possible. This is something of a challenge considering she only has about twelve seconds.

“Deliberately being irrational, rejecting standard assumptions about beauty or organization or logic,” she begins. “It’s an anti-aesthetic statement about the lameness of the status quo … kind of?” She twists her face into a cartoon grimace that morphs into a wide smile. “Why am I trying to explain Dadaism on a cable news show thirteen days from this big, giant, historic, crazy, important election that we’re about to have?” she asks with a self-deprecating laugh, as she recognizes the Dadaishness of her own quest. “Because that’s what I found myself Googling today, in search of a way to make sense of the latest McCain-Palin campaign ad!”

As I was trying to figure out WHY I immediately gravitated towards her show, New York explains on my behalf:

“There’s something about the mix of personal details that is—to a young, educated, left-leaning, cosmopolitan audience—instantly recognizable. As one New York acolyte told me, “She is more like one of my friends than anyone else on television.” And her ratings have been astounding, especially in the coveted 25-to-54-year-old demographic. Maddow averaged a higher rating with that group than Larry King Live for thirteen of the first 25 nights she was on the air, enabling the network to out-rate CNN in that time slot for the first time. It’s an impressive feat, even given the fact that the show started two months before the election when political interest was at a fever pitch.”

Cliche: History repeats itself OR I am really really pissed

Leave a reply

Or is it?

From NPR:

“In 1979, Chrysler avoided collapse by getting $1.5 billion in loans from the government. Charles Hyde, professor of history at Wayne State University and author of Riding the Roller Coaster: A History of the Chrysler Corporation, says in return Congress insisted that the company come up with some $2 billion in cost-savings and concessions.”

I mean, is it a cliche if history DID repeat itself?

Or maybe not, since it seems that at the last bailout of Chrysler, the Gov. actually came out ahead (to the tune of $500 million). How about this time? People have changed in the last 3 decades. 30 years ago people did not grow up with such a sense of entitlement, corporate greed was not openly a norm, and personal responsibilities were taught and valued.

Fast forward to today. Ok, fine, Tuesday. The Big 3 Automakers’ CEOs flew on their own private jets, not ONE, but THREE, to Washington today to make the case for their needing to be rescued. Seriously? You can’t make this stuff up.

Here is more of this priceless gem from ABC:

“The CEOs of the big three automakers flew to the nation’s capital yesterday in private luxurious jets to make their case to Washington that the auto industry is running out of cash and needs $25 billion in taxpayer money to avoid bankruptcy.

The CEOs of GM, Ford and Chrysler may have told Congress that they will likely go out of business without a bailout yet that has not stopped them from traveling in style, not even First Class is good enough.

All three CEOs – Rick Wagoner of GM, Alan Mulally of Ford, and Robert Nardelli of Chrysler – exercised their perks Tuesday by flying in corporate jets to DC. Wagoner flew in GM’s $36 million luxury aircraft to tell members of Congress that the company is burning through cash, asking for $10-12 billion for GM alone.”

Here is a Christmas present idea: Joe the Plumber book!

Leave a reply

I am never one to abandon people when they are down in their luck. I do genuinely worry about people who enjoyed their 15-minute of fan and then never to be heard/seen again. I want the follow-up news, the updates. I want to make sure that they were not thrown over the wall like a piece of used tissue. I want to know how they are doing, and I wish them well.

William Hung of the American Idol fan: did he go back to school? Did he graduate and get a job? Did he finally land a girlfriend?? Look at him! He’s all grown up and spruced up and look quite dashing now!

Bill and Jim, the twin brothers from the Biggest Loser: have they been able to keep the weight down, and are they still liking each other? How about their wives?

So, naturally, I thought about Joe the Plumber amidst the widespread euphoria over the election of Barack Obama. What happened to him? Anything exciting going on? Last I heard he was going into the studio to make a country music album. As luck would have it, I checked and there it is, updated merely 12 hours ago, the news that his book would be out on December 1!

See? He has not been forgotten. And I do hope that Republicans rally to buy Joe’s books since they sort of used him for their political purposes, and now it is payback time!

I also hope that Joe sells more copies of his book than the one that’s reportedly coming out by Sarah Palin. (Oh, truly, this has got to be the greatest week of 2008 for the American publishing industry!) At least Joe seems to need the extra income more than Miss Thing here. But I guess it really does not matter since they both received (or would) advanced payments at any rate.

And if I have to choose between Sarah’s book (May I call you Sarah?) and W’s book, I would have to say Sarah. After all that’s said about her, she is after all a working mom of five who is a Governor. No mean feat by any measure. I am sure she would have something to say and something to teach us about juggling demanding work and crazy family life. On the other hand, come to think of it, I am curious, and afraid, to find out what W has to say about himself for the past eight years!

What I learned from my 5th grader’s homework this weekend…

Leave a reply

My 10-year-old came home with a 10-page homework packet last week, a research report on this presidential election. (Let me not start with the fact that the packet is from 1997 and asks for an example of a printed ad in newspaper or magazine. I don’t remember the last time I saw any candidate spending their money on a printed ad, at least, not in publications that we read at home, e.g. The Economist…)

Here is what I learned:

1. It is not easy to find out what exactly the Democratic party and the Republican party stand for.

We went to both parties’ websites and we ended up frustrated and confused. The “party platform” manifestos put out by both parties read so similar: they both use the same vague, generalized statements to show that they are THE party that will watch out for the little guys, the working American families. Both parties believe in education, better teachers, and the freedom for parents to choose the best education for their children.

I had to explain to my son that nobody will come right out to say, “Oh, yeah. We are going to raise your taxes, and we are not going to do anything about the education system nor the health care crisis.”  You just have to read between the lines.

Here is one great example from the “Republican Party Platform 2008” document:

“It is not enough to offer only increased access to a system that costs too much and does not work for millions of Americans. The Republican goal is more ambitious: Better health care for lower cost.

First Principle: Do No Harm

How do we ensure that all Americans have the peace of mind that comes from owning high-quality, comprehensive health coverage? The first rule of public policy is the same as with medicine: Do no harm.

We will not put government between patients and their health care providers.

We will not put the system on a path that empowers Washington bureaucrats at the expense of patients.”

(By the way, how many people actually read this document?  It is entirely fascinating the wordsmith effort that went into this…)

The GOP certainly did not state that they are against “health care for all” since that, on the surface, will certainly provide bad PR and negative sound bites.

2. The symbol for the Democratic Party has been a donkey since the 19th century:

nast_gop

The donkey has its origin in Andrew Jackson‘s campaign in 1828 when he was called a Jackass, and Jackson, true to his larger-than-life persona, adopted the image of the strong-willed donkey for his campaign. The symbols of elephant and donkey were later popularized by Thomas Nast’s political cartoons, (in which neither animal was portrayed in a positive light, therefore, it’s indeed curious that both parties readily adopted the images!)

I dig “Really? Really??” “Are you serious?!”

Leave a reply

I don’t understand why there was not more bluhaha around the AIG retreat. For those of you who haven’t heard of it, AIG brought all their top executives to St. Regis Resort in Monarch Beach, Calif for a week-long retreat. The $443,000 tab includes $23K for the Spa. Here is the breakdown for a vacation of the lifetime:

(See Washingtonpost.com for the full report)

Washingtonpost.com

Most of the attendees at the convention between Sept. 22 and Sept. 30 stayed in premium “pool view” rooms at the 400-room hotel, with 47-inch LCD TVs and marble bathrooms furnished with a “Deep Roman” bath and shower. The rate: $375 per night.

The group also booked 17 “ocean view” rooms, at $425 each, and one “presidential suite,” discounted from its usual $3,200 a night to $1,600.

Another $9,982 was spent on food and drinks at the StoneHill Tavern, the Monarch Bayclub, in-room dining and the lobby lounge; $6,939 on golf; $1,488 at the Vogue Salon; and $1,450 on no-show and cancellation fees.

An invoice dated Oct. 3 said AIG still owed the resort $40,543 in charges after a $402,701 deposit. The itemized bill does not show what executives specifically ordered at the spa and salon, but a look at the hotel’s spa menu shows 75-minute “intuitive massages” at $215 a pop (most of the executives spent $210 each for a spa treatment on Sept. 25) and men’s and women’s haircuts and styles starting at $50 and $75, respectively. Executives also spent $147,302 on banquets at the hotel and $23,380 at the Spa Gaucin, which features three-story waterfalls…”

The kick is, they went on the retreat IMMEDIATELY AFTER receiving the Fed’s Bailout package of $85 Billion.

Talk about reinforcing bad behaviours! And I got dirty looks from the storeckerk when I bought my child a lollipop after he threw a tantrum???

I cannot believe that there were not more reports on this. Weren’t people outraged? I surely am. I am utterly disgusted. Are people simply tired? Or have we been so thoroughly disgusted that we simply don’t want to talk about it any more? This fall has been great for SNL. You cannot make these stories and characters up. Most people weren’t alerted of this outrage until they saw the Weekly Update skit on SNL. (Fastforward to the 2:15 mark if you must…)

If I had written a story like AIG and the beyond-comprehension inconceivable shamelessness in a creative writing class, I would have been criticized for being contrive, buying into the archetype, for catering to cliches. This is real life! In one’s wildest creative dream, one would never have been able to conjure up a character such as Sarah Palin. I wonder whether people on SNL should consider voting for Republican this time to make sure that Palin stays in the limelight for four more years. With her in the White House, they can probably get rid of half of their writing staff and simply replay whatever is going on in real life.

I am beyond outraged. I am actually for once, speechless.

Is Sarah Palin firing her Body Language consultant?

Leave a reply

Sarah Palin apparently winked one too many times at the Veep debate (or five, according to some pundits. The uptight ones may have even said six!) Come on, give the old girl a break! It’s all the consultant’s fault. I am sure she has on staff many different kinds of consultants: one for Body Language, one for Image, one for Fashion, one for Hair Styles (ok, maybe not this one), one for Diction, and oh, I won’t be surprised if they have hired her an acting coach. It is important to get those important stage pauses just right. It is their job, not hers, to convince us that Sarah is right for the job. To be the Veep of the US of A. (May I call you Sarah?)

There are two things I want to point out in defence of Sarah’s Winkgate:

1. All the consultants do this. Real-life experience, mine nonetheless! Wowyee! Business Consultants that I used to work with have honed this skill to an art form. I am convinced that they teach you this at B-School, after you take The Intro to Effective Networking and How to Rate Each Person by their Network Worth that You Will Ever Meet for the Rest of Your Life. The higher their position, the more they wink at ya. Like so many have discussed, this is truly deemed as a quick and easy way to say, “Hey, I am one of you! We are all in this together!” Works wonders when you go into a client’s office to be the “Two Bobs” (seen Office Space?) and need to gain trust quickly.

2. Old women do this all the time. Old women who know that they’ve still got it at least. Or who THINK they’ve still got it…

Note to Self: Do not EVER EVER pull the “Consultant Wink” again. See #2…

Now, how come there’s no post out there discussing the lipstick color she used for the Veep Debate? Or is the mentioning of “lipstick” completely banned from this presidential campaign on both sides? Jeez.