We are Borg

A few days a ago, I was reading an article in the New York Times which contained the sentence "She was working as a waitress at a cocktail bar when she met him.".  Upon reading this, I immediately thought of the old's 80's song which starts with the line "You were working as a waitress at a cocktail bar when I met you", or more accurately ...
"You were working as a waitress at a cocktail bar-ah, when I met you-ooooo"

However, the name of the 80's band was escaping me, so I pulled up Google.  By the time I had typed "you were w", Google had auto-completed "you were working as a waitress in a cocktail bar when I met you" and there was a link to the Human League video right in front of me.

By now, most of us already take this kind of auto-complete technology for granted, but when you stop to think of it, it's really remarkable that technology has advanced this to level.  30 years or so I ago, I'd always figured I'd see some amazing computer technology by this point in my life, but I never expected technology of this sort.  I always kind of figured we'd have real artificial intelligence ( AI ) by now.  I thought we would have computers that could think.  That hasn't happened, and I now seriously doubt that I'll ever see anything like that in my lifetime.  However, while computers haven't given us AI, the Internet and Google's search engine have given us a kind of collective intelligence.  The knowledge I have rapid access to extends far beyond my own brain.  I may not know everything, but if somebody else knows something, I can know it too after about 30 seconds on Google ( with the obvious exception of really complicated stuff like string theory ).  This has fundamentally changed the way I think about knowledge.  This has fundamentally changed the way I think about memory.  This has fundamentally changed the way I think about thinking.  I used to take great pride in my memory, but now I hardly bother to remember anything at all.  I know that most of the knowledge I might need is just a few keystrokes away, so I don't really take any time trying to commit stuff to memory ( Sure, I still *do* remember lots of stuff, particular sports statistics, but I don't really *try* to remember anything. ).  Instead, I spend more time making sure my Google Chrome bookmarks are organized in a way the makes it easy to pull up valuable links.  Of course, even if I can't find a link, it seems that Google can practically read my mind to help me find it again.

  I'm sure I'm not alone in this.  I think all vaguely Internet literate people these days use the Internet as a kind of extended memory.  We've all gotten a little more knowledgeable in this way, thanks to the collective knowledge of everyone else on the Internet.  We're gradually starting to develop into more of a global collective mind.  Now, I don't think we are really in any danger of losing our individuality, and I don't think we're looking to assimilate anyone, but in a small way, we are Borg.


Rich

P.S. On a lighter note, why don't pole-vaulters just use poles that are about 10 meters long?  Over the history of the pole vault, the poles have gotten longer and longer, and vaulters have vaulted higher and higher.  So, with that in mind, why wouldn't a vaulter just use a mega-long pole?  Seriously, the world record in the pole vault is about 6 meter.  If showed up in Rio with a 10 meter pole, why couldn't I win the gold in 2016?  OK, I'm sure it's more complicated that that.  I'm sure it has something to do with how flexible the poles are and leverage and upper body strength and the transfer of kinetic energy to potential energy.  But seriously, why hasn't somebody tried this.  I'd *love* to see somebody try this.  I'd love it so much that I just send out this tweet to pole vault world record holder Sergey Bubka:

@sergey_bubka Figure you're the best person in the world to ask:.Why can't a pole vaulter just use a 10 meter pole?
— MoLewis57 (@MoLewis57) August 11, 2012

UPDATE: I gave this pole vault stuff a little more thought, and I've realized that this does have almost everything to do with the transfer of kinetic energy to potential energy.   In order for the pole vaulter to get over the bar, the center of mass of the pole vaulter needs to be raised from a few feet above the ground to about the height of the bar.  This means that the potential energy of the pole vaulter needs to be increased quite a bit, and that energy needs to come from somewhere.  Part of that energy comes from the pole vaulter leaping and thrusting the pole into the ground with his/her upper body strength, but most of it comes from the kinetic energy of the pole vaulter attains by running.  Basically, in order for a pole vaulter to vault 10 meters rather than 6 meters, the pole vaulter would need to run MUCH faster than he/she would run for a 6 meter vault.  With that in mind, I wonder if Usain Bolt could become a pole vault champion with just a few months of training.

A knife in my back

No, I wasn't betrayed - nobody stabbed me in the back  ...
... but I did have a knife in my back today - quite literally.

OK, here come the details ...

I've had a dime sized cyst on my back for about 3 years ( Specifically, between my right shoulder blade and spine, probably about an inch from my spine ).  It never gave me any trouble, but about a month ago, it started to hurt and swell.  By the time I saw the dermatologist about 4 PM today, the thing was all maroon and kinda looked like half a small plum.

The dermatologist ( who was a dead ringer for Rob Reiner ( the current bald Rob Reiner - not Meathead Rob Reiner )) told me he was going to numb the cyst first, and then squeeze out the contents of the cyst ( OK, perhaps that was TMI, but if ya don't like it, you can stop reading now ).  Well, I don't know what your definition is of "numbing" something is, but apparently Dr. Reiner's definition of "numbing" is "inflict ridiculous amounts of pain".

Now, I'm not really blaming Dr. Reiner.  I really doubt there was a painless way to do this procedure, but I would have liked a little bit of a warning.  The problem with getting a medical procedure done on you back is you have no idea what the doctor is going to do or when the doctor is going to do it.

So, I'm sitting there on this bench/chair type thing, fully expected to feel the pinprick of a needle administering a local anesthetic.  Well, I feel the pinprick, followed by a deep piercing pain, followed by about a 1 second of diminished pain.  At this point, I figure he must be pulling the needle out.  I'm guessing that we'll now wait a few minutes for the anesthetic to take hold, and that the worst was over.  How WRONG I was.  After the one second of slightly diminished pain, I feel a TREMENDOUS amount of pain - more pain that I've ever felt before.  What the hell is he doing?  Is he slicing into the cyst with a scalpel?  What the hell? Clearly, the anesthetic can't start working after only one second.  We're doing this without any real anesthetic?  Where the hell is the numbing I was promised?  OK Rich, don't be a wimp.  You got weekly allergy shots for 10 years starting at the age of 4.  You can get through this.  Just grit your teeth and clutch your knees hard.  It can't get worse than this.  CRAP, it just did!  Don't scream!  Don't scream!  Hold it in!  Don't be a wimp!  Good!, the cuttings is over.   OK, you can exhale.  Maybe you'll get a few seconds of re - WOAH!  What was that?  Why is he pressing his thumb into the cyst?  For the last few days it hurt a bit when my shirt would brush again the cyst.  This pressing with the thumb is not good.  It almost makes me miss the cutting pain.  I guess he's trying to squeeze the innards of the cyst out of the hole he cut in it.  I guess the hole must be on one side of the cyst because he keep running his thumb over the cyst, as if he's trying to squeeze the last bit of toothpaste out of a tube.  OMG!  OMFG!  Please be done soon!  Don't scream!  Don't give him any reason to stop.  If he stops, he'll just have to start again later.  I want to get this over with as soon as possible.  Pain ... pain stopping ... exhale  .. look over my shoulder, he's getting some kind of bandage ready.  It's finally over.

Well, the wasn't fun, but it had to be done.  Doc Meathead told me that he thinks he got all the cyst out and that it probably won't come back.  I guess all there is to do now it sit around and wait for the throbbing pain in my back to subside.  It's times like this when I'm really glad I'm married to a doctor.  Redressing the wound is not going to be fun tomorrow morning, but at least my wife knows what she it doing.

Anway, time to go to bed ( Thank goodness I typically never sleep on my back ).

Rich

It Finally Happened

I'd been doing the same thing for at least 10 years.  Each time I watched a Mets game ( and I watch almost every Mets game ), and the Mets pitcher got out of the first inning without surrendering a hit, I'd say the following to my wife ( or my brother, or my son Michael, or whoever else was in the room, and often, just to myself ) ...

"24 outs to go!"

Friday night, June 1st, 2012 was no different.  Johan Santana retired the Cardinals 1-2-3 in the top of the first.  The no-hitter watch was on again.

It might seem odd that I would regularly start a no-hitter watch after one inning of no-hit ball.  It might seem odd, that is, unless you know the history of the Mets and no-hitters.

When Johan Santana strode to the mound on Friday night, the Mets had still never had a no-hitter in their 50-year history.  Every other franchise in baseball, except the Padres ( who have not existed as long as the Mets ), have had at least one no-hitter in their history.  This includes the Rays ( started in 1998 ), the Diamondbacks ( 2 no-hitters since starting in 1998 ), the Rockies ( started in 1993 ) and the Marlins ( 4 no-hitters since starting in 1993 ).  With the exception of the Mets and Padres, no baseball franchise had gone as many as 5000 games into their franchise history without having at least one no-hitter.  Going into the Friday night's game, the Mets had gone 8019 games without a no-hitter.

What made this no-hitter drought particularly frustrating and perplexing is that the Mets have always had great pitching.  Former Cy Young Award winners like Pedro Martinez, Tom Glavine, Bret Saberhagen, and Frank Viola each spent a few years pitching for the Mets. Very good pitchers like Ron Darling, Jerry Koosman, Al Leiter, Jon Matlack, Mike Hampton, Sid Fernandez, Rick Reed, and Bobby Ojeda all helped the Mets win pennants and World Series, but failed to throw no-hitters while with the Mets ( Note: I was at Shea Stadium during a game in which Rick Reed retired the first 19 hitters in a row.  He then gave up a walk, hit, and a homer, and the Mets lost the game. ).  Most significantly, Mets pitchers Tom Seaver, Nolan Ryan ( Hall of Famers ), Dwight Gooden, David Cone, Mike Scott ( Cy Young Award winners ) and Hideo Nomo ( Rookie of the Year Winner ( before joining the Mets )) each pitched no-hitters ( in Ryan's case, a record 7 ) after being traded away from the Mets.

The most recent name added to the list of former Mets with no-hitters was Phil Humber.  Humber was the Mets first round draft pick back in 2004.  Mets fans had high hopes for Humber, but he never panned out.  He was traded away from the Mets before 2008 season started, then bounced around the league a fews years before landing with the Chicago White Sox.  This April, he pitched a Perfect Game.  When I read the story about his perfect game on ESPN, I noticed that somebody had written the following in the comments section under the story.

"How to pitch a no-hitter:

 Step 1: Pitch for the Mets

 Step 2: Pitch for any other team."

However, it's worth noting the trade that sent Phil Humber ( and a few other players ) away from the Mets in 2008, brought back ....

Johan Santana.

Back in 2008, Santana was a fine candidate to break the Mets no-hitter drought.  He had won the Cy Young award in 2004 and 2006, and was widely considered to be the best pitcher in baseball.  He didn't disappoint in 2008, leading the National League in ERA, setting a career high in innings pitched, and using his 95 mph fastball and devastating change-up to strike out 206 batters.

However, 2012 is a long way from 2008.  Johan had knee surgery after the 2008 season.  His 2009 season was ended by elbow surgery to remove bone chips, and his 2010 ended with surgery to repair a torn anterior capsule in his left shoulder.  He didn't pitch at all in the 2011 season, and many wondered if he'd ever pitch again.

To Johan's credit, after a year-and-a-half of hard work, he managed to get himself ready in time for the start of the 2012 season.  He even started on Opening Day.  However, it was clear that he was a shell of his former self.  His fastball was being clocked at about 88 mph ( it might hit 90 mph every once in a while, but certainly no faster than that ), and coming off the arm surgery, you knew that the Mets would rarely let him throw more than 100 pitches in a game in 2012.

Thus, while I would hope for a no-hitter at the start of every Mets game, I didn't really think that Johan was a realistic candidate anymore.  My hope rested more with young pitcher Jonathon Niese, and knuckleballer R. A. Dickey.  Neise had lost a no hitter in the 7th inning earlier this year, and Dickey had lost one in the 6th a few weeks earlier.  Back in 2010, Dickey had pitched a one-hitter in which the only hit was a single by the opposing pitcher in the 6th inning ( The Mets have had 35 one-hitters.  I don't know the odds of having that many one-hitters without a single no-hitter, but the odds must be ridiculous. ). 

So, I didn't think a Johan no-hitter was really possible, until he threw a complete game shutout on May 26, 2012.  In that game he only threw 96 pitches.  Surely, if he could pitch a shutout in only 96 pitchers, it was a least possible that he could throw a no-hitter in about 100 pitches or so.

Possible of course, but not likely.  Especially not on Friday night.  Back on May 26th, Johan was pitching against the last place Padres.  On Friday night, he was facing the defending World Champion Cardinals, the best-hitting team in the National League.

In additional to the Cardinals formidable lineup, there was a lot of bad Mets history in the middle of the field for the Cardinals that night.  The Cardinals had Adam Wainwright pitching, Yadier Molina catching, and Carlos Beltran playing centerfield.  Back in 2006, Carlos Beltran was the Mets best player.  They had the best record in the National League, and were playing the Cardinals in National Championship series.  The Mets were heavy favorites entering the series, but the series wound up going to a decisive game 7 at Shea Stadium.  The game was tied late, but I never really believed the Mets were going to lose until Yadier Molina ( who hit only 6 regular season homers in the regular season ) launched a two-run homer in the top of the 9th inning to give the Cardinals a 3-1 lead.  The Mets rallied in the bottom the 9th, and Carlos Beltran found himself batting against Adam Wainwright with the bases loaded and 2 outs in a 3-1 game.  As every Mets fan knows, Beltran wound up striking out looking, and things have never been quite the same for the Mets.  They blew a 7-game lead with 17 games to play to miss the playoffs in 2007, had a similar collapse in 2008, and then suffered through injury-plagued seasons in 2009, 2010, and 2011, during which Bernie Madoff related financial woes led the team to get rid of most of their best players ( including Beltran last year ).

Before this season, I told Ruth that the Mets would not just be awful this year, but would be "God-awful".  I really expected them to lose at least 100 games this year, but something special has been happening under manager Terry Collins this year - something that I've started to call "Collinsanity".

Collinsanity would continue on Friday night.

To be honest, due to Johan's shutout in his previous start, I started think about a potential no-hitter while Johan was pitching to his first batter of the game.  When it took him 7 pitches to get the lead-off batter out, I was already worrying that his pitch count was going to be too high to pitch a no-hitter.  I was even more worried after it took Johan 41 pitches to get through 2 no-hit innings.  20 pitches an inning just wasn't going to cut it if Johan was going to break the no-hitter curse that night.

Neither team had gotten a hit yet when the Mets came to bat in the bottom of the 4th.  The Mets got a hit to lead off the inning and managed to plate 2 runs before the inning was over.  I let out a sigh of relief at that point, because one of my recurring nightmares regarding Mets no-hitters ( I don't literally have nightmares about it, but I've thought about it a lot ) is that a Mets pitcher will have a no-hitter through 9 innings, but the Mets will fail to score.

Still, I really didn't like Johan's chances to throw a no-hitter that night.  Johan's didn't have particularly great stuff that night, his pitch count was rising rapidly, and it was starting to rain lightly at the ballpark.  If there was any kind of rain delay, there was no way the Mets were going to let Johan continue the game after a rain delay.  I didn't really hold out any hope that this game would be THE GAME until something happened at the top of the 6th.

Carlos Beltran led off the 6th inning and hit a hard line-drive down the third base line.  For a split second, I thought that the no-hit attempt was over, but the ump called it foul.  Then I got a look at a replay.  The replay showed that the ball had hit the outside part of the foul line.  The ball should have been called fair.  The Mets had caught a break.  After all these years of bad breaks, the Mets had finally caught a break.  Perhaps this night would be the night.

My doubts subsided more in the 7th inning.  With one out in the 7th, Johan's no-hitter was still alive when Yadier Molina stepped to the plate.  He had already broken the hearts of all Mets fans 6 years ago.  How cruel would it be if he broke our hearts again?  Johan falls behind Molina 3-1, and on the 5th pitch, Molina rips a deep line-drive to left.  I don't immediately think the no-hitter is over, but it's going to take a nice defensive play to get this out, and the Mets left fielder this night is Mike Baxter.

Mike Baxter is a 27-year-old who has spent most of his career in the minors.  He's got a pretty decent bat, but there is usually only one reason why 27-year olds with decent bats don't get much time in the Major Leagues.  Mike Baxter isn't exactly what you'd call a slick fielder.

The line drive flies towards the fence, and Baxter runs awkwardly back and to his left.  He desperately throws out his left hand at the last possible second, the ball hits the glove, and he hits the wall HARD.  Baxter goes down, and stays down, but holds on the ball.  2 outs!  7 outs to go.

Eventually Baxter gets up and is helped off the field by the trainers.  He appears to be in quite a bit of pain.  It's later revealed that the collision displaced his right collarbone and fractured rib cage cartilage. He won't be able to play again for about 6 weeks, but I'm sure he thinks it was worth it.  Baxter grew up in Queens as a Mets fan.  A Mets fan from Queens sacrifices his body making a play to preserve a no-hitter.  You couldn't make this stuff up.

Johan gets the last out of the 7th, the rain has long stopped, and now even the most pessimistic Mets fan knows that things are starting to get serious.  However, Johan's already thrown 107 pitches.  Can he possibly get through the next 2 innings without permanently damaging his arm?  Perhaps not, but it doesn't matter at this point.  Unless Johan gives up a hit, there is no way he's going to come out of this game.

Johan hasn't had great stuff tonight, and tendons and ligaments just might be fraying in his left elbow and shoulder by now, but heck, with only 6 outs to go, all you really need to do is just throw it over the plate and hope to get lucky.  Heck, if you give *me* enough tries ( granted, it might take a few thousand tries ), I even think I could get 6 outs in a row in a major league game.  Even if guys are hammering each pitch you throw, there always a chance that they'll hit lines drives right at people.  Johan's not pitching great at this point, but all he needs is a little bit of luck.  Can the Mets actually get a little bit of luck in a no-hitter attempt?

I turn to my wife and tell her that I won't be upset if Johan loses the no-hitter, unless he gets as far as 2 outs in the 9th.  I've been burned too many times by Mets no-hitter attempts.  I'm not going to let myself get emotionally invested in this until there's only one out to go.

Johan has a few close calls ( a few bloops, and a few near collisions between Mets fielders ), but the next thing you know, we've gotten to 2 outs in the 9th.  By now, Johan has thrown 128 pitches, 3 more than he's ever thrown in a game before.  The batter is 2011 World Series MVP David Freese.  Johan quickly falls behind 3-0.  I decide that I would rather walk Freese than give him a fastball in the strike zone on 3-0.  Johan throws a 3-0 fastball in the strike zone, Freeze takes it, and I breathe a sigh of relief.  It's about then that I realize that Yadier Molina is waiting on deck.  Considering what Molina's done to the Mets in the past, and considering how hard Molina hit the ball his last time up, I really don't want Molina coming up with a no-hitter on the line.  Still, I don't want Johan to give Freese an easy pitch to hit in this at-bat.  Crap, this is getting hard to watch.  I honestly don't remember what kind of pitch Johan threw next, but I do remember that Freese pounded it into the ground toward third base. For a split second I thought it was going to be ground out to end the game, but the ball quickly rolls foul.  3-2.  Now we're one strike away.  At this point, I'm thinking of just one thing.

A change-up.

"Change-up!"

"Throw him the change-up, Johan!"

Of course, he can't hear me ( heck these games on TV are on about a 7 second delay, so he's probably already thrown the pitch ), but he just HAS to throw his change-up here.  The Mets are up 8-0, so they're in no danger of losing the game if Johan walks a few people this inning.  You simply cannot give in to the batter in a situation like this with a no-hitter on the line.  Molina or no-Molina, he just can't give Freese a pitch to hit here.  Johan winds up and lets the pitch fly.  A split second before the ball reaches the plate, it's clear to me that he has thrown the change-up and that it's not going to be in the strike zone.  It will be ball four unless ...

FREESE SWINGS OVER THE BALL!

STRIKE THREE!!!!!!!

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

June 1, 2012 was a good night.

It's actually been a great weekend overall.  The Mets won the next two games 5-0 and 6-1, and now sit at 31-23 one third of the way into the season.  They are tied for first place and are on a pace to win 93 games this year.

Collinsanity continues ....

Rich

Hapapalooza

Keanu Reeves, Tiger Woods, Ann Curry, Olivia Munn, Maggie Q, Dean Cain, Russell Wong, Tommy Chong, Jennifer Tilly, Phoebe Cates, , Kelly Hu, Daniel Henney, Kristen Kruek, Apolo Anton Ohno, The Rock, me!

That's right.  I'm hapa baby!

For the those who are not familiar with the term, "hapa" is a Hawaiian term used to describe a person of mixed Asian or Pacific Islander ancestry.  The term has moved into the American mainstream in the last decade or so, and can be used to describe people like my half-Taiwanese sons, and apparently me.

How is this possible?  Well to be honest, I was as surprised to find this out as most of you probably are.  However, if you take a look at the photos of my maternal grandfather below, it's probably fair to say that I should have suspected this a while ago ( BTW, the little fellow in the stylish brown threads in the 3rd and 5th photos is me ).

My Grandfather was supposedly 100% German, but looking at the photos above, it's clear that his skin was a little bit darker than the typical German person.  Recently, one my cousins on my Mom's side of the family did a little research and found the birth certificate of my Grandfather's mother.  My maternal grandfather's mom was born in Jersey City, and her birth certificate listed her ethnicity as German/Filipino.  The birth certificate doesn't say what percentage Filipino she was , but I've got to imagine she was half Filipino.  My Aunt Barbara tells me that while all her German grandparents were born in the USA, her German great-grandparents were born in Germany.  I think it's highly unlikely that one of my German ancestors found a Filipino spouse in Germany, so I would think that my part-Filipino great-grandmother probably had a 100% German parent an a 100% Filipino parent who met in the USA.  The fact that she was born in Jersey City lends more credence to this theory.  There is a pretty big Filipino population in Jersey City these days ( BTW, Ruth and I lived in Jersey City from July 2002 until the end of September in 2003.  Our obstetrician was Filipino, and she delivered Michael in Jersey City in October of 2003. ), and apparently, the history of Filipino folks in Jersey City goes back to the time when my part-Filipino great-grandmother was born. 

  So, doing a little bit of math tells me that having a half-Filipino great-grandmother would make me one sixteenth Filipino.  So, taking this new information into account, I can now say that I'm ....

half Ukrainian

5/16th German

1/8th Irish

1/16th Filipino

  Considering that most Filipinos probably have at least a little bit of Spanish blood as well, I'm practically a one-man United freakin' Nations ( my kids even more so )!

Hmm, so I wonder when Keanu's going to invite me to the secret Hapa people dinner party?  Of course, they'd probably stick me at a table with painfully unfunny Filipino hapa Rob Schneider, so perhaps I should just lay low for a while.

Rich

Edit: Clearly, I couldn't list every famous hapa in the world in the list at the start of this post.  However, as a huge Mets fan, it's inexcusable that I left out Ron Darling.

Why I Love Phineas and Ferb

There are lot of reason why I love this show, but I just wanted to briefly highlight one reason why I've added this show to my personal pantheon of great cartoon shows.  That pantheon of shows now only consists of "The Simpsons", "Family Guy", "South Park", and "Phineas and Ferb" ( BTW, I still believe that collectively, the timeless comic brilliance of the Warner Brother Bugs/Daffy/Elmer/Road-Runner/Porky/Sylvester/Tweety shorts tops any of those shows, but I kinda consider those shorts to be a different category than cartoon TV series. ).  All four of these shows are brilliant in ways that are similar ( They all are great in terms of musical numbers and pop culture references ), and each have a quality which distinguishes them from the others.  I think "The Simpsons" is the smartest show of the 4, "South Park" is the most topical ( Trey and Matt sometimes release a South Park episode that parodies things that had happened earlier in the week.  I'm still amazed that they can put together a topical cartoon that quickly ( I guess the simple animation helps ) ), and Family Guy is the best at hitting that hilarious sweet spot right on the edge of bad taste ( Some might think this best describes "South Park", but I think "South Park" sometimes goes to edge of bad taste for the sake of going to the edge, while "Family Guy" almost always goes to the edge to be funny.  If you want good example of "Family Guy" hitting that hilarious sweet spot on the edge of bad taste, get yourself a DVD with the uncensored version of the "When You Wish Upon a Weinstein" episode. ).  I think what distinguishes "Phineas and Ferb" is heart.  Perhaps that shouldn't surprise me, considering that "Phineas and Ferb" is in the Disney stable, but this show is great at including little moments that can really touch your heart.  I was reminded of that when I was watching the end credits of a "Phineas and Ferb" episode today.  This particular episode ( It's one of the early ones, but I only got on the P&F train about a year or so ago ( thanks to an article in Wired magazine )) takes place in a Museum.  While the Flynn-Fletcher family was in the Museum, Lawrence ( Ferb's dad and Phineas'  step-dad ) had purchased an audio tour of the museum ( on an audio tape ).  In the end-credits, we find him in bed playing his favorite part of the audio tour over and over and again.  He repeats his favorite part out loud, and makes a "boop" sound each time rewinds the tape.  Just look at how his wife reacts when this wakes her up.



Rich

Edit: FYI, I just noticed that the director of the "When You Wish Upon a Weinstein" Family Guy episode is one of the co-creator's of "Phineas and Ferb".

Edit 2: Oh, and both "Phineas and Ferb" co-creators met while working on "The Simpons" together.
 

Material Guy

I haven't done a completely random blog post in a while, so here goes ...

Tonight, Peter asked me to play him the "real song" version of a song he was playing an instrumental version of on the Wii Music game.  The song turned out to be "Material Girl".  I found him the video online ( see below ) and watched along with him.  It's probably been about 25 years since I last watched this video, and I just noticed something about it that I had never noticed before.


Watch Madonna - Material Girl in Music  |  View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com

To put it bluntly - the dude in the beard is really creepy.

Now, he's not creepy because of the beard ( though I must admit, it does look a little bit creepy on him ).  He's creepy because of his actions.

Perhaps it's because I'm getting old and my memory of the 80's is getting a little bit hazy, but the "Material Girl" video isn't exactly  what I remembered.  Sure, the "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes" homage/ripoff was just as I remembered, but I always remembered this video as being a bit of counterpoint to the lyrics of the song.  In other words, while the speaker in the "Material Girl" song is an unapologetic materialistic gold-digger, Madonna's character in the video is a girl unimpressed by money who ends the video making out with a poor bearded schlep in a crappy pick-up truck.

There's just one problem with that description, however ...

The bearded dude wasn't poor!

In fact he was the opposite of poor.  He was apparently a rich and powerful Hollywood executive, as is evident by the way Arliss is kissing up to him in the opening scene ( BTW.  I don't care what Robert Wuhl is in.  Every role he plays is Arliss, even if it's something that was filmed a decade before Arliss premiered ( just like Danny McBride will now be Kenny Powers for the rest of his life ) ).

There nothing wrong with being rich, but there something creepy about a guy who misrepresents himself in order to get into a woman's pants.  Sure, he was pretending to be poor when he was really rich, which some might consider to be noble.  However, he was only pretending to be poor because heard Madonna character say she didn't like rich guys while he was eavesdropping on her ( The eavesdropping was only a small part of the bearded dude's constant stalking during the video.  It's also clear from the scene with Arliss, that this guy views Madonna's character as a possession rather than a woman.  Specifically, we see the following in the opening scene:


00:22 seconds: Creepy Bearded Dude ( CBD ) : I wanna meet her.


00:24 : Arliss: You got it. Anytime.  Name the place - name anwhere - any street - you got it!


00:27: CBD: Now!


00:27 - 00:31 ( Creepy pause )


00:31 - 00:32 ( Really creepy look from CBD.  He looks at Madonna's character ( on the movie screen ) the way a starving lion might look at an injured antelope. )


)

If you still doubt that CBD is a creep, watch the scene starting at 4:16, specifically what happens at 4:21.  CBD gives a poor farmer a wad of cash to buy/borrow his crappy pickup truck, and then dismissively waves him away.  He practically shoos the farmer away, the way somebody might shoo away a fly.  He's basically saying, "Get out my sight you poor piece of crap, so I can use your truck to get me some Madonna pussy!".  So, this guy is not only creepy, he's a world-class douchebag!

So now I don't know what the hell the message of this video is, other than perhaps "Madonna likes to get it on with douchebags" ( paging Mr. Canseco ).

In any case, it's time for bed.  Hope this post was random enough for you.

Rich

How do you solve a problem like Mitt Romney?

( My sincerest apologies to Rodgers and Hammerstein )
( Sing to the tune of "How Do You Solve a Problem Like Maria". )

How do you solve a problem like Mitt Romney?
He's got positions so hard to pin down.


How do you find a way to beat Mitt Romney?
He's got chameleon skills
that never fail to ...
astound.


Many a politician tried to beat him.
Many tried to get him to take a stand.


But what can you make him say
to give himself away?


How do you get him to tip his hand?


Oh, how do you solve a problem like Mitt Romney?
He's made an asset out of being bland.

Hear that sound?

It's the sound of Mitt Romney moving to the left.

The closer he gets to the nomination, the more of a Moderate he'll become.

Those of you who remember John Kerry's 2004 campaign might not agree with the premise of the little ditty above.  You might think that Mitt Romney's flip-flopping tendencies would be a liability in the 2012 presidential campaign.  However, while his flip-flopping was certainly a liability in the race for the GOP nomination ( which he's pretty much has wrapped up ), I think it's actually going to help him in the general election.

I know that a lot of my fellow Liberals watch Romney struggle in the GOP primaries and think "Obama's gonna beat this guy easily".  However, the polls tell another story, as does common sense.

I think we're all aware that the election is going to be decided by a bunch of conviction-less dolts that the media charitably calls "Moderates".  These folks have been hearing Romney say a lot of scary Right-wing stuff lately, as Romney futilely tries tries to attract conservative GOP voters.  Considering that these Moderate voters would generally be scared off by such Right-wing positions, do you think it hurts or helps Romney that these Moderate voters can't sure if Romney really means what he's saying?

Furthermore, everyone knows by now that the Right-wing of the Republican party HATES Romney.  They hate him with a passion and they are not afraid to say so.  When lots of Moderate voters see the Right-wing attack Romney I'm sure they say to themselves "Gee, if the Tea Party and the Christian Right hate Romney so much, I guess he can't be that bad.".

And that in a nutshell, is Obama's problem with Mitt Romney.  Far-Right Conservatives in the GOP, despite their best efforts to shoot themselves in the foot and nominate an unelectable Conservative, are actually helping Romney by making him look like a Moderate.

Now, don't get me wrong.  I still think Obama is slightly more likely to win than not, but Democrats had better not get complacent, and Obama had better not try to run as a Moderate.  Obama's got to do everything he can to make clear distinctions between his positions and whatever positions Romney is adopting that week.

Let's face it - while American has made a lot of progress in race relations over the years, we still live in a nation were stuff like this happens.  We shouldn't forget that McCain was leading Obama in the polls in 2008 before the economy collapsed and McCain made the bone-headed remark "the fundamentals of our economy are strong".  America may not know exactly what to make of Mitt Romney, but if nothing else, they know that he's extremely white.  Obama had better make sure that enough people in the country understand that there is more that separates him from Mitt Romney than skin color.

I'll tell you this much - if Obama campaigns the same way he's governed, he'll lose for sure.  I'm going to be really worried if I don't hear the sound of Obama moving to the left real soon.

Rich