Happy BEarth Day

   It's Earth Day.  A day to love your planet, and to feel bad about all the terrible, horrible things you've done to it during your lifetime.  Yes, my friends, we alone are responsible for the destruction of this lovely planet.  Forget the huge corporations that dump TONS of pollutants into the atmosphere.  Forget the scientists who can figure out how to give birth to a baby with three arms, but can't (or won't) figure out how to create a plastic that will biodegrade in 10 years (instead of 10,000).  Forget the vehicle manufacturers who know how to make cars with ZERO emissions, but because they get paid more to pollute they do.  Forget the energy companies who would rather keep things the way they are instead of working with new energy sources that don't pollute.  It's not THEIR fault, after all, it's YOUR fault.
   Earth Day should really be about protesting these assholes who run these corporations, who put the mighty dollar in front of what's best for the planet and for humanity.  The corporate jerks who say "I'm gonna be dead before the landfills overflow, so who cares?"  This day should be about telling them to stop being chumps and start doing the right thing.  And it should also be to protest the people in congress who will sit for days debating a bill about how many times you can legally pick your nose in public, but just let all kinds of regulations and rules about pollution get swept under the rug (while money is being swept into their pockets).  You and I could stop polluting 100% right this second, and we would have a very minor dent on the fate of the planet.  It's the big guys who need to stop, and yet it's the big guys who support Earth Day so much, mostly because it deflects the blame from them and puts it on you.
   Don't stop drinking bottled water.  Write Ozarka and tell them to use plastic that biodegrades after 5 years.  Don't separate your bottles and cans and paper.  We've got millions of prisoners watching cable tv behind bars, who could instead be manning assembly lines assorting the garbage and putting themselves to use.  Don't walk 10 miles to and from work in dress clothes, tell your congressman (who's partly in charge of America's biggest auto maker, don't forget) that you want cars that run on hydrogen and don't pollute, and don't run out of fuel.  THAT'S where the changes need to be made, because THAT'S where the biggest impact will be felt.
   Incidentally, today is also my brother's birthday.  So Happy Birthday, John.

Dogs Rule and Cats Drool
   Everyone with any amount of common sense knows that dogs are better pets than cats.  Listen... did you hear something?  Did it sound like a cat yelling?  That was probably a cat owner who read this and is now mad.  You can yell and scream all you want, cat owners, but the bottom line is that dogs are much better animals in general, and much better friends to mankind.  Some indisputable evidence:
   1.  You've fallen and you can't get up.  You're old and you're in the bathtub and you broke your hip or elbow or spleen or something.
   Dog - Will bark until a neighbor hears and comes to rescue you, or may even bring you the phone to call for an ambulance.
   Cat - Will sit there watching you suffer, and will probably start to get upset when you can't get up off your broken ass to feed him.
   2.  You're lost in the Yukon, hungry and dehydrated, desperately clinging to life and trying to find your way home.
   Dog - Shows up with one of those badass barrells around his neck full of whiskey to keep you warm and optimistic while you hold onto his tail and he guides you back to town.
   Cat - Takes one step into the snow and decides to "screw that."  Sits by the fire and gets upset when you can't get unfrozen enough to come home and feed him.
   3.  You're blind, trying to make your way through downtown during rush hour traffic.
   Dog - Guides you with pure confidence, stopping at crosswalks, making sure you don't bump into anything, and letting you get into places that don't allow pets because he's a seeing eye dog.
   Cat - Guides you to a sewer or another place that smells rancid, because for some reason cats like to eat stuff that smells bad, with no regard for traffic or other people or for your life, really... and will probably get upset when you can't find your way to the can opener to feed him.
   4.  You're walking along minding your own business when suddenly you fall down a flight of stairs, breaking several bones and knocking one of your eyes out of its socket.
   Dog - Will stay with you, trying to comfort you.  May even try to put your eye back in place.  Or will run to the fire station, Lassie-style, and get some firefighters to come help you out.
   Cat - Most likely pushed you down the stairs, especially if that's the direction you need to go to feed him.
   5.  You're a complete asshole who loves to abuse animals and is mean to them at every possible turn.
   Dog - No matter how big a jerk you are, no matter how mean you are to animals, a dog will love you the same every single day.
   Cat - Will kill you in your sleep.  Or after you feed him.
What's that?  You disagree?  Well, prove me wrong.  Show me one instance... just ONE instance, where a cat does something better than a dog does.  And "they're independent" doesn't count, because that's not really the point of having a pet, now is it?  If I wanted something that was independent, I'd get a paperweight or one of those garden gnomes.  Then at least I wouldn't have to clean up after it and feed it.

I Dislike the Like
   Facebook, in its infinite wisdom has decided to make one of the most ridiculous, game-changingly stupid decisions I've ever seen.  You all know what Fan Pages are, right?  Or were, anyway?  Well, Facebook has decided to do away with the whole "Fan Page" concept.  They've replaced the "Become a Fan" button with a "Like" button, much like what you see when someone posts something especially witty on their wall, and while you're too shy or lazy to comment on it, you do agree with it.
   Facebook's theory here is that the "like" button is more acceptable than a "Become a Fan Button," because "Becoming a Fan" of something suggests that you will have to do work.  Becoming a fan means you're going to get posts on your wall, you will need to comment on their wall, it ties you down into all this stuff that you really don't want to be a part of.  By just clicking "Like," you're not committed to anything.  You're just telling the world that you like 11 News, just like you like stepping on crunchy leaves in the fall, or how you like dogs better than cats.
   The flaw here is that people on Facebook aren't stupid.  Well, okay let me clarify.  For the millions of people on Facebook who ARE stupid, there are also quite a few who are not.  And even the ones who are stupid aren't going to fall for this little trick.  It won't take any time at all for people to realize that clicking the "Like" button is exactly the same as clicking the "Become a Fan" button, and because of that, if you weren't going to "Become a Fan," you're not going to be any more likely to "Like" something.  Does that make sense?  My point is that this is a useless change, it will make no difference and it won't encourage any more user interaction than "Become a Fan" ever did.
    On the other hand, this little change by Facebook is making my life a living Hell.  Because they've switched their format, I now have to redo every single promo and every single piece of promo material (web, print, etc) that has anything about "Become a Fan of 11 News" on it.  And if you think I've got it bad, picture working for a company like Coca Cola.  Can you imagine how many Coke bottles, how much packaging is out there with "Become a Fan" plastered on it?  What are you gonna do now, recall all of it?  Repackage it?  You don't "Become a Fan" anymore, so what do you do? 
   The solution?  Well, it should have been to leave well enough alone.  I don't know what genius thought this change would be a good way to do things, but he/she was very wrong.  Actually, I can see why they might have done something like this.  There are so many Fan Pages out there, and so many of them are ridiculous, that having a "Like" clarification probably makes sense.  For example, if you were to "Become a Fan" of eating brownies, what does that do for you?  Does it subscribe you to "Brownie Weekly?"  Will you get status updates on different brownie recipes?  I  doubt it.  But if you want to "LIKE" eating brownies, well now that makes a lot more sense.  Okay, so why not create a separate category of pages?  Set up "Like" pages for the morons who can't sleep at night unless they know other people agree with their tastes.  But leave the Fan Pages alone.  The Fan Page is a different experience, and it should stay that way.
   The worst thing about this is that, knowing Facebook, they will decide that this whole "Like" thing wasn't such a good idea, and a month from now they'll go back to "Become a Fan" or something else entirely. It's easy for them to make changes... they don't advertise anywhere. But for those of us out there who DO advertise, and who basically provide them with FREE advertising, it's a nightmare.

Blandocracy
   I heard a shocking bit of news the other day: the FDA is now looking at regulating the amount of salt that can be in the food you eat.  I say this was shocking because it certainly was to people who I know... but it definitely wasn't a shock to me.  It shouldn't be to you either... but if it was, here's another shock: this is only the beginning.
   I hate to pull healthcare into this, I've been sober from healthcare discussions for a while now, but that's what this all ties back into.  If you want to live in a world with Universal Healthcare, you've got to be willing to put up with the consequences... and this is just one of the many we're going to have to put up with.  You could argue that too much salt is bad for you, just like too much trans-fat is bad for you and smoking is bad for you, and so it was in all likelihood going to be regulated anyway.  Sure you could say that, but you also can't deny the fact that there has been a lot more food regulation now that government is going to be in charge of your healthcare.  First restaurants were told they had to post nutritional information on their menus... now they're telling us how much salt we can eat... it's not TOO big a stretch to say that in the near future, we'll be told how much red meat we can eat or how many vegetables have to be included with every single meal we eat.
   You may or may not know this, but the food you eat is LOADED with salt.  Salt is what gives stuff its flavor.  If they start taking salt out of food, then restaurants are going to be hurting big time.  I promise you wouldn't like your hot wings nearly as much if they didn't have salt in them.  You'd hate your pizza, and you would DEFINITELY hate french fries.  Have you ever eaten french fries that someone forgot to salt?  It's like eating potato vomit.  Too much salt IS bad for you, okay, but it's one thing to say "hey look out there's a lot of salt in this food" and then let you decide whether you want to eat it.  It's another thing entirely to tell me what I can and cannot eat because it doesn't meet your standards for health.  But what's to stop them now?  If you don't eat what they tell you, you don't get healthcare.  Mark my words, that's where we're going.
   So to all you people out there who were surprised about this, stop and think: is this your fault?  Did you vote for this to happen?  If you voted for Obama (and I'm talking because you liked him, not because you didn't want a crotchety old man as president instead), if you voted for a democratic senate, if you supported the healthcare legislation, then yes, you had at least something to do with this decision.  Fine, that's your choice and it's your vote... but then you can't get mad when government starts to poke its nose into your diet.  You asked for it, you got it.  ...Toyota.

Defiance
   A group of Jews living in Russia decide that they've had enough of the Germans pushing them around, so they run into the thick woods near their town, a place where the Germans won't be able to track them.  What they weren't counting on is that there would be a ton of other Jews who followed them.  Now there's an entire community of people trying to survive in the wilderness, and most of these people have no knowledge of how to do this.  Three brothers take over the group and try to keep them alive, while at the same time defending them from German attacks and dealing with their own family problems.  Oh, and it's all based on a true story.
   I won't lie, I became interested in this movie because the publicity photo was Daniel Craig standing next to a tree with a giant gun.  I figured "this oughtta be good."  I had no idea that this was based on a true story, and that's important, because while the movie itself wasn't quite what I expected (or hoped), the story itself is pretty friggin' incredible.  My main problem with this movie was the use of Russian accents.  Some people had them, some people didn't... I get that, a Russian accent isn't easy to do.  But Daniel Craig needed a few more lessons, because try as he might, he just went back and forth between butchering a Russian accent and just giving up on it completely.  Use it or lose it, but don't let it become a distraction, which is what it became here.
   Maybe it's just me, but I sure don't remember learning a lot about the Russian part of World War 2.  I learned that the Germans bit off more than they could chew, and that Russia beat them back and really helped the Allies win the war.  I had no idea that Jews were persecuted in Russia, and I really had no idea they were persecuted to the extent depicted in this movie.  The story behind this movie is much more interesting than the movie itself, and to be honest I would have probably enjoyed it more as a History Channel documentary than in its dramatized version.  These were some insanely brave people up against some incredibly difficult odds... odds that I would bet most Americans can't even begin to understand.  Hell I talk like I get it, but I certainly don't.  None of us can guess how we would have acted in this situation, we can only hope that we would be as bold and courageous as these guys were.
   The one saving grace of this movie, to me, was the cinemetography.  Shooting in the forest, especially one this dense, is no easy task.  And yet they had some incredible shots set up.  Dolly moves, sweeping pans, and some long-distance shots that still looked like they were shot in a heavily wooded area.  And this movie was shot on location in Lithuania, no studio stuff going on here.  My favorite shot of the whole movie was one from overhead, looking down at some perfectly still water.  Suddenly there's a ripple, and then from the bottom of the frame enters several characters trying to flee the Germans.  Beautiful, beautiful stuff.
   So how can I recommend this movie?  It's not enjoyable to watch except for from a technical standpoint.  It's a tough story to swallow, and the film doesn't shy away from the brutality these people faced.  But it's one of those that I think everyone needs to see, not only so you can respect what these people went through to survive, but also so that you can sit back and look around you and think about how good you have it today, partly due to their resiliance.  Their DEFIANCE!  NICE!

Revolutionary Road
   A young couple decides to move to the suburbs in 1950s america, and to live out the stereotypical lives of the average American family.  The one problem is that neither of them was planning on living this lifestyle, so they find themselves unhappy and just going through the motions.  They try to save their marriage, only to find themselves sinking deeper and deeper into misery.
   I ordered this movie on Netflix because of the soundtrack.  Thomas Newman, who is one of my favorite composers, did the music for this film, and it was good enough that it spurred me to check it out.  Lesson learned.  Don't do what I did, don't watch a movie because you liked the music... sure it might be good, but there's a better chance (especially if it's a movie you've never heard of) that it will suck and might even ruin the music you loved.  Luckily this movie didn't ruin the music (I barely recall hearing any of it, actually)... but this movie was certainly not good.
   Kate Winslet and Kathy Bates were both nominated for awards because of their roles in this movie, but I think they were crap compared to Leonardo DiCaprio.  And I'm definitely not a DiCaprio fan, so you can imagine how bad the women's performances must have been.  DiCaprio actually wasn't too bad in this movie... he wasn't "Catch me if you Can" material, but then again he wasn't playing alongside one of Hollywood's greatest (Hanks).  Still, he held his own and he definitely out-acted everyone else in this movie.  Though I guess you gotta hand it to Winslet: she did a nice job of playing someone who is batshit crazy.
   The biggest problem with this movie is that I couldn't figure out what it was about.  Was I supposed to feel bad for Winslet's character?  Because I didn't.  That chick was absolutely insane, and she made life miserable for everyone else.  Was I supposed to feel bad for DiCaprio?  I did, but only in the "you poor wimp" sense... because he couldn't stand up to a crazy person.  The cinematography, while not offensive, wasn't anything to write home about either... and as I said before, the music was almost non-existent.  This was one of those movies where you get to the climax and you're not sure if it's the climax... partly because it happens so late in the movie, and partly because you just don't give a shit anymore.
   Don't waste your time with this movie.  It's not enjoyable, it's not entertaining, it's not even educational.  It's two plus hours of your life that you will never get back.  Buy the soundtrack, that's about the only good thing to come out of this whole fiasco.

   Here comes sweeps... everybody watch Channel 11 okay?  Thanks.