Friday, February 25, 2005
Wiggidy-Wizzord!
Apparently Melvin the Barbarian thinks I'm the shit (who doesn't these days....)
Not to mention the fact that he kind of looks like Pablo Escobar.
Doesn't get much better than that!
Not to mention the fact that he kind of looks like Pablo Escobar.
Doesn't get much better than that!
Thursday, February 24, 2005
Work
I don't do button up shirts
or drive Maybachs
I got a 'Brat wit' an 8 track
give me an AK an' a crack vile
I'll be bringin' 88 back
When it comes to company policy, I like to think of myself as being pro-active - I'm more of a Leader than I am a follower.
It's not that I'm not a good worker - just because I have a few petty disagreements with management.
Such as what constitutes an acceptable workplace BAL. (Management: 0; Myself: <1)
Or the acceptability of snorting coke off picks in company restroom.
Well - somebody's got to do it.
And as I told my TL, $9.00/hr isn't enough for me to even pretend like I give a fuck.
I get people on the phones every day telling me that I'm the "best T-Mobile rep they've ever spoken to."
I never mention that I have only been working on the floor for three weeks.
The truth is - with bullshit jobs like this - the few quality workers who actually get hired will never stay around for long. So, as a customer, you're far better off trying your luck with a trainee than with a seasoned veteran - at least then you have a chance of getting decent service.
On a separate note:
50 Cent's new album SUCKS ASS! Fuck that pop-rap bitch.
I didn't like him as a rookie, except for the fact that his shit was so damn catchy. And now, his follow-up makes the by-product of a horse's ass look like a tasty breakfast.
I hope you get shot eight more times BITCH!
Total shit. Fuck off and die.
Monday, February 21, 2005
Shit
It will hit all the papers tommorow, and I just ran across it in my insomnia driven browse through the current headlines.
Hunter Thompson shot and killed himself.
Obviously I admire the man. Most of what I write is a cheap knock off of his style and prose.
I can't say that I am sad, but I am circuspect.
About a year ago in Phoenix, I was sitting at a bus stop in downtown Tempe - the Phoenix suburb where ASU is located - reading one of Thompson's books.
A twitchy, and slightly crazy middle aged man asked me what I was reading, and I told him it was "The Great Shark Hunt," a compilation of Hunter Thompson's magazine articles from the sixties and early seventies.
The man, whose name I don't remember, proceeded to launch into a lengthy and twacked out rant about how he had seen Thompson speak in the seventies, and how Thompson had shown up dishelved, and told the crowd - in essence - to fuck off and go do something better with their time than sit and listen to a fool like him.
This man, a street musician who gave lessons in guitar and flute, (he gave me his business card) proceeded to compare Thomson's style and philosophy to Ginsburg's (or maybe it was Kerouac, or some other period luminary) in a decidedly negative light. Apparently the unreformed hippie in him was unable accept the nihilism, and surrender to human falibility that Hunter embodied. Maybe that is why he was still a street musician.
Speaking in fast and crookedly rythmic phrases, the man meandered through this subject until his bus came, and just before he boarded, he paused, and then said to me - in a matter-of-fact tone - "You would have to be a horse to live like that - all the drugs and booze he did. You try that, and it will kill you."
Right now, I can't really argue that point.
I can't say that people will look back at Thompson's life and admire him for his accomplishments. Admire him for squandering his talent, for selling out, for turning into a hack and pedling horse shit under his good name, long after he gave up on himself and his work.
It is the fallacy of unachieved redemption that makes death, and especially suicide, so poignant. The myth of a satisfied life, which could have been achieved, if only the deceased had just had a bit more time.
Hunter S. Thompson did not leave the legacy of promise fullfilled, goals accomplished, or obstables surmounted. All he left was a rotted and broken corpse that is a monument to the folly and fallibility of even the most talented and brilliant among us.
This may give us pause, but it would be wrong to believe that it could have happened any other way.
Hunter Thompson shot and killed himself.
Obviously I admire the man. Most of what I write is a cheap knock off of his style and prose.
I can't say that I am sad, but I am circuspect.
About a year ago in Phoenix, I was sitting at a bus stop in downtown Tempe - the Phoenix suburb where ASU is located - reading one of Thompson's books.
A twitchy, and slightly crazy middle aged man asked me what I was reading, and I told him it was "The Great Shark Hunt," a compilation of Hunter Thompson's magazine articles from the sixties and early seventies.
The man, whose name I don't remember, proceeded to launch into a lengthy and twacked out rant about how he had seen Thompson speak in the seventies, and how Thompson had shown up dishelved, and told the crowd - in essence - to fuck off and go do something better with their time than sit and listen to a fool like him.
This man, a street musician who gave lessons in guitar and flute, (he gave me his business card) proceeded to compare Thomson's style and philosophy to Ginsburg's (or maybe it was Kerouac, or some other period luminary) in a decidedly negative light. Apparently the unreformed hippie in him was unable accept the nihilism, and surrender to human falibility that Hunter embodied. Maybe that is why he was still a street musician.
Speaking in fast and crookedly rythmic phrases, the man meandered through this subject until his bus came, and just before he boarded, he paused, and then said to me - in a matter-of-fact tone - "You would have to be a horse to live like that - all the drugs and booze he did. You try that, and it will kill you."
Right now, I can't really argue that point.
I can't say that people will look back at Thompson's life and admire him for his accomplishments. Admire him for squandering his talent, for selling out, for turning into a hack and pedling horse shit under his good name, long after he gave up on himself and his work.
It is the fallacy of unachieved redemption that makes death, and especially suicide, so poignant. The myth of a satisfied life, which could have been achieved, if only the deceased had just had a bit more time.
Hunter S. Thompson did not leave the legacy of promise fullfilled, goals accomplished, or obstables surmounted. All he left was a rotted and broken corpse that is a monument to the folly and fallibility of even the most talented and brilliant among us.
This may give us pause, but it would be wrong to believe that it could have happened any other way.
Wednesday, February 02, 2005
For Many Killed in Iraq, the Future Was Bright, and Near
Headline across the bottom half of A12 in yesterday's New York Times, set beneath photos of 36 members of the U.S. armed services who died last Wednesday. (1/26/05)
Including the front page, which was almost entirely Iraq, the Times had six pages devoted to the election story. I didn't read much of it, but it was pretty easy to catch the general drift from the headlines.
What can I say? Until now I hadn't known that Dan Bartlett was a member of their staff.
The total willingness of the media - even the old school print - to act as mouthpieces for administration propaganda may not be shocking anymore, but in this case the arrogant extremes to which they have gone - in promoting the Iraqi Election as some kind of epic achievement - are dumbfounding in both their scale and their ineptitude.
First, let me ask this: How much print is typically devoted to foreign elections?
Seriously, they didn't give this kind of coverage to the U.S. elections. The very fact that this P.R. event is being taken seriously enough to write six pages about it is nothing but irresponsible pandering to the administration.
Why do I call this a "P.R." event?
Well, I can give a few reasons - ones that I didn't see mentioned in any of these gushing oratories about the triumph of democracy.
1) Turnout
It was high! 60%! Maybe. At least that's what they said. Even though they hadn't counted any ballots yet. And since nobody could travel by car - except for the U.S. military and the Iraqi Security Forces - there was no independent reporting of Sunday's vote.
Well, 60% is high by American standards... right?
Am I dripping in skepticism - or is that just more cold sweat?
Even if turnout actually proves to have been 60%, that is 60% of registered voters. A very nasty little caveat indeed. Curious parties may want to pay close attention to the final vote tallies, and see how they compare to Iraq's population figures.
2) Legitimacy
Free Elections = Legitimate Government (or so it's claimed)
Anyone with two bits of common sense can see that there was nothing free or fair about Iraq's elections.
From the highly contrived party systems, and geographical power allotments, to the pervasive lack of security, and the fact that the elections were conducted under a state of martial law, the elections were a farce. Which should come as no surprise to anybody who remembers that they were originally put in place for the benefit of voters in America, not Iraq.
3) Impact
None.
The only benefit to holding elected office in a country that is serving as a battle ground for 150,000 foreign soldiers pitched against a heavily armed resistance, numbering in the tens of thousands, is that the U.S. Embassy might provide you with an attachment of civilian contractors to serve as body guards.
The downside is that even a highly trained body guard can't exactly throw himself on top of a car bomb.
Maybe it's the insight of a hardened heart, but last i checked, the willingness of Iraqis to die for their beliefs wasn't exactly a wellspring of optimism for the future of that country.
Including the front page, which was almost entirely Iraq, the Times had six pages devoted to the election story. I didn't read much of it, but it was pretty easy to catch the general drift from the headlines.
What can I say? Until now I hadn't known that Dan Bartlett was a member of their staff.
The total willingness of the media - even the old school print - to act as mouthpieces for administration propaganda may not be shocking anymore, but in this case the arrogant extremes to which they have gone - in promoting the Iraqi Election as some kind of epic achievement - are dumbfounding in both their scale and their ineptitude.
First, let me ask this: How much print is typically devoted to foreign elections?
Seriously, they didn't give this kind of coverage to the U.S. elections. The very fact that this P.R. event is being taken seriously enough to write six pages about it is nothing but irresponsible pandering to the administration.
Why do I call this a "P.R." event?
Well, I can give a few reasons - ones that I didn't see mentioned in any of these gushing oratories about the triumph of democracy.
1) Turnout
It was high! 60%! Maybe. At least that's what they said. Even though they hadn't counted any ballots yet. And since nobody could travel by car - except for the U.S. military and the Iraqi Security Forces - there was no independent reporting of Sunday's vote.
Well, 60% is high by American standards... right?
Am I dripping in skepticism - or is that just more cold sweat?
Even if turnout actually proves to have been 60%, that is 60% of registered voters. A very nasty little caveat indeed. Curious parties may want to pay close attention to the final vote tallies, and see how they compare to Iraq's population figures.
2) Legitimacy
Free Elections = Legitimate Government (or so it's claimed)
Anyone with two bits of common sense can see that there was nothing free or fair about Iraq's elections.
From the highly contrived party systems, and geographical power allotments, to the pervasive lack of security, and the fact that the elections were conducted under a state of martial law, the elections were a farce. Which should come as no surprise to anybody who remembers that they were originally put in place for the benefit of voters in America, not Iraq.
3) Impact
None.
The only benefit to holding elected office in a country that is serving as a battle ground for 150,000 foreign soldiers pitched against a heavily armed resistance, numbering in the tens of thousands, is that the U.S. Embassy might provide you with an attachment of civilian contractors to serve as body guards.
The downside is that even a highly trained body guard can't exactly throw himself on top of a car bomb.
You'd have to be pretty hard hearted not to be moved by the courage of the millions of Iraqis who insisted on turning out to vote yesterday despite the very real threat that they would be walking into mayhem and violent death at the polls. -Bob Herbert
Maybe it's the insight of a hardened heart, but last i checked, the willingness of Iraqis to die for their beliefs wasn't exactly a wellspring of optimism for the future of that country.
