Readers,
Happy tax day. As many of you are probably aware, today also has been inundated with “Tea Parties” across the United States. “Tea”, evidently stands for Taxed Enough Already. This movement is, by some accounts, a grassroots movement for Republicans to stand up against Obama’s tax increases, deficit spending, and bailouts.
…and it’s completely ridiculous.
Having heard about the parties brewing (pun intended) over the past few weeks, I was interested to see how the mainstream media would cover these events. Everyone at Fox News seems to think that the mainstream media is not paying attention to this GIGANTIC GROUNDSWELL of people who think that Obama’s socialist policies are ludicrous.
CNN currently has a story up about the “Nationwide ‘tea party’ protests blast bailout”. In the story, iReporter (the dumbest idea ever by CNN) Ed McQueen, a 44 year old “litigation consultant” (i.e. lawyer) says,
"I have no problem paying my taxes, but when no can tell us where this amount of money is going, no one can sketch it out for us, just seems like an injustice," he said.
"All I hear about [from the Obama administration] is how [it values] 'transparency, transparency,' but I don't see that. ... That's a joke… I did my taxes this year, and I noticed that I'm paying as much in taxes as I did the first year I got out of college."
OK, let me get a few things straight. You’re paying as much in taxes now, as a 44 year old with around twenty years in the job market as you did when you were fresh out of college? Sounds like a pretty sweet deal to me, especially if you’re pulling down “litigation consultant” cabbage instead of entry level legal assistant coin. When this guy got out of college, it was probably the Reagan years. I wasn’t paying taxes back then, but, if his legacy-polished rep is any clue, taxes were pretty low.
Secondly, he doesn’t see transparency? Evidently this “litigation consultant” doesn’t have a computer or the internet, because there’s this amazing site called www.recovery.gov which tracks and explains where every dollar of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is going.
But wait, they’re not complaining about that. They’re complaining about that first stimulus package, the one that bailed out the banks! Damn Obama for signing that and not having any method of tracking the money or any accountability from the institutions that received it! Let’s get him! Those tax and spend liberals must be stopped before they tax and spend us into commies! ANGRY REPUBLICAN TALK!!!
Wait… what? Bush did that?
…fuck.
To sum up my point, these things are the height of stupidity and ridiculousness. If the Republican right had so many problems with spending, they certainly didn’t voice any of them the past eight years when Bush & Co. were spending us to the poorhouse with programs that did NOTHING to help the state of Americans (*cough, cough* Iraq *cough, cough*). It’s only when a Democrat is in charge that they scream about Government spending and taxes, even though the extreme majority of Americans will be paying LESS in taxes now than they did over the past eight years.
As always, stay sane, for the world is not.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
I'm Not Dead Yet!
Readers,
Today I read a story from IMDB.com where Gabriel Byrne is quoted as saying, “Theatre is dead.” He further went on to say:
“I looked out into the audience and the theatre was packed with well-to-do, white-haired people.
"After the show I turned to one of the other actors and said, ‘Theatre is dead. There’s no one under 60 out there, they’re all white and they can all afford £200 for a night.' Seriously, theatre as we’re doing it now, is dead.”
OK, a few quick thoughts:
1) Theatre is NOT dead. Theatre is still the forum where the best stage/screen artists (writers, performers, designers) get their start. Look no further than “Doubt” being nominated for Academy Awards and the “rebirth” of the musical on film. These things wouldn’t happen without the popularity of the theatre.
2) Theatre costs “two hundred pounds a night” because of the pompous salary demands of actors LIKE GABRIEL BYRNE!
3) That last one might not be totally fair because the bloated cost of a theatre space is simply absurd. This is one area where the government should offer heavy subsidies. If the government would subsidize theatre space and give it the same tax advantages that are afforded to places of worship, theatre (and the arts in general) would be MUCH better off. This, however, will never happen, because the moment the legislation would even be spoken of, the neo-cons (See: Coulter, Ann – heinous, evil harpy and harbinger of pestilence and hate; Hannity, Sean - pompous, ill-informed, fear monger and leader of treasonous rebellion; and Beck, Glenn - insane person.) would jump all over it decrying it as government waste, pork, and sacrilege.
That’s my quick rant. As always, stay sane, for the world is not.
Today I read a story from IMDB.com where Gabriel Byrne is quoted as saying, “Theatre is dead.” He further went on to say:
“I looked out into the audience and the theatre was packed with well-to-do, white-haired people.
"After the show I turned to one of the other actors and said, ‘Theatre is dead. There’s no one under 60 out there, they’re all white and they can all afford £200 for a night.' Seriously, theatre as we’re doing it now, is dead.”
OK, a few quick thoughts:
1) Theatre is NOT dead. Theatre is still the forum where the best stage/screen artists (writers, performers, designers) get their start. Look no further than “Doubt” being nominated for Academy Awards and the “rebirth” of the musical on film. These things wouldn’t happen without the popularity of the theatre.
2) Theatre costs “two hundred pounds a night” because of the pompous salary demands of actors LIKE GABRIEL BYRNE!
3) That last one might not be totally fair because the bloated cost of a theatre space is simply absurd. This is one area where the government should offer heavy subsidies. If the government would subsidize theatre space and give it the same tax advantages that are afforded to places of worship, theatre (and the arts in general) would be MUCH better off. This, however, will never happen, because the moment the legislation would even be spoken of, the neo-cons (See: Coulter, Ann – heinous, evil harpy and harbinger of pestilence and hate; Hannity, Sean - pompous, ill-informed, fear monger and leader of treasonous rebellion; and Beck, Glenn - insane person.) would jump all over it decrying it as government waste, pork, and sacrilege.
That’s my quick rant. As always, stay sane, for the world is not.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Smoke 'Em If Ya Got 'Em
Readers,
As I was perusing today’s headlines, I noticed that the national tax increase on tobacco went into effect today. The tax is going to fund SCHIP, the “State Children’s Health Insurance Program” which is going to provide health insurance to an additional four million uninsured children.
First of all, I think this is a GREAT program and am happy to see it finally getting done.
Secondly, I found this quote from the story on CNN.com absolutely hilarious:
"They're picking on us poor people, the ones that smoke," Jukes, a 65-year-old who has been smoking since he was a teen, said of the government. "They have been for years."
Yeah, that’s right, the government is picking on poor people, you know, the ones who are getting a major (proposed) tax cut from the current administration.
The government is picking on the poor people who’s kids are getting insurance through this program.
Remember the advice your mom may have given you if there was a bully picking on you on your way home from school or on the playground? “Just stay away from him… pick another path to get home.”
If you don’t like the government taxing your disgusting, carcinogenous habit that is going to eventually kill you and (most likely) someone you care about, then QUIT!
As I was perusing today’s headlines, I noticed that the national tax increase on tobacco went into effect today. The tax is going to fund SCHIP, the “State Children’s Health Insurance Program” which is going to provide health insurance to an additional four million uninsured children.
First of all, I think this is a GREAT program and am happy to see it finally getting done.
Secondly, I found this quote from the story on CNN.com absolutely hilarious:
"They're picking on us poor people, the ones that smoke," Jukes, a 65-year-old who has been smoking since he was a teen, said of the government. "They have been for years."
Yeah, that’s right, the government is picking on poor people, you know, the ones who are getting a major (proposed) tax cut from the current administration.
The government is picking on the poor people who’s kids are getting insurance through this program.
Remember the advice your mom may have given you if there was a bully picking on you on your way home from school or on the playground? “Just stay away from him… pick another path to get home.”
If you don’t like the government taxing your disgusting, carcinogenous habit that is going to eventually kill you and (most likely) someone you care about, then QUIT!
Monday, February 23, 2009
My Running Oscar Commentary
Readers,
Bill Simmons (aka “The Sports Guy” of ESPN.com) has often written a running blog of things that he thinks when watching sporting events. I’ve always thought this was a fantastic idea and am now stealing it for the Academy Awards. Tragically, the idea occurred to me a little after the red carpet broadcast started, so we’ll join the program already in progress.
8:15: Just firing things up now and Miley Cyrus is getting interviewed… why? Seriously, why is she at the Oscars? In a related matter, why were the two tweens from High School musical there and being interviewed together?
8:16: I think Anne Hathaway just mentioned her lingerie when asked, “Are you wearing anything that you own?” I’m certain it’s the hottest moment of the night.
8:20: The accountants walk the red carpet… One looks like he’s frozen in a scary, dazed smile.
8:23: Jack Black is drinking at the bar… Awesome.
8:24: Back at the bar with Seth Rogan, Judd Apatow, and his wife. Why are all the cool kids at the bar? Because the bar is awesome and none of them are going to win tonight, so it’s a free party with fancy clothes.
8:33: I continue to not enjoy musical numbers of almost any kind.
8:38: Yep… still don’t like musical numbers.
8:40: Why does Meryl Streep always seem to get uplighting? Is it in her contract with life?
8:41: Curtain MISCUE and the faint sounds of “Open it… Open IT!!!” come through my speakers. Gotta love anarchy and discord. Let this be a lesson; don’t piss off the stagehands’ union.
8:45: It seems as if Whoopi Goldberg has escaped from a rehearsal of “The Lion King”.
8:46 Goldie Hawn is NOT aging gracefully at all.
8:48: “This is not going to be 45 seconds” - Penelope Cruz. Methinks I won’t be getting to bed until after one, if this is the precedent we’re setting.
8:50: The final, unofficial time on Cruz’s speech. 1:45.
8:54: “It has been said, that ‘to write is to live forever.’” - Tina Fey. “The man who wrote that is dead.” - Steve Martin.
9:10: The Asian director of “La Maison en Petits Cubes” has suddenly transported me back to college science lectures where I understand every third word. The only saving grace was this guy ending with “Domo Oritago Mr. Roboto”.
9:16: The designer who made a dress that managed to give Sarah Jessica Parker boobs deserves some sort of an award.
9:31: Ben Stiller as Joaquin Phoenix… Priceless.
9:38: Jessica Biel, one of the most attractive women on the planet, looks as if she’s growing a giant tumor on the front of her dress. Bad, bad choice.
9:53: Enough of this song and dance crap! Oh how I miss the days of Jon Stewart doing comedy.
10:13: Heath Ledger’s acceptance speech by his family is the one, and only one, that could have gone on forever, as no director in their right mind would ever “play off” a family like that.
At this point, I lost interest in the show, got drowsy, and only remember fleeting images… including the WORST TEETH EVER on one of the producers of a documentary… they made English people look good. Anyway, I’ll make sure to keep myself properly caffeinated the next time I attempt one of these.
As always, stay sane, for the world is not.
Bill Simmons (aka “The Sports Guy” of ESPN.com) has often written a running blog of things that he thinks when watching sporting events. I’ve always thought this was a fantastic idea and am now stealing it for the Academy Awards. Tragically, the idea occurred to me a little after the red carpet broadcast started, so we’ll join the program already in progress.
8:15: Just firing things up now and Miley Cyrus is getting interviewed… why? Seriously, why is she at the Oscars? In a related matter, why were the two tweens from High School musical there and being interviewed together?
8:16: I think Anne Hathaway just mentioned her lingerie when asked, “Are you wearing anything that you own?” I’m certain it’s the hottest moment of the night.
8:20: The accountants walk the red carpet… One looks like he’s frozen in a scary, dazed smile.
8:23: Jack Black is drinking at the bar… Awesome.
8:24: Back at the bar with Seth Rogan, Judd Apatow, and his wife. Why are all the cool kids at the bar? Because the bar is awesome and none of them are going to win tonight, so it’s a free party with fancy clothes.
8:33: I continue to not enjoy musical numbers of almost any kind.
8:38: Yep… still don’t like musical numbers.
8:40: Why does Meryl Streep always seem to get uplighting? Is it in her contract with life?
8:41: Curtain MISCUE and the faint sounds of “Open it… Open IT!!!” come through my speakers. Gotta love anarchy and discord. Let this be a lesson; don’t piss off the stagehands’ union.
8:45: It seems as if Whoopi Goldberg has escaped from a rehearsal of “The Lion King”.
8:46 Goldie Hawn is NOT aging gracefully at all.
8:48: “This is not going to be 45 seconds” - Penelope Cruz. Methinks I won’t be getting to bed until after one, if this is the precedent we’re setting.
8:50: The final, unofficial time on Cruz’s speech. 1:45.
8:54: “It has been said, that ‘to write is to live forever.’” - Tina Fey. “The man who wrote that is dead.” - Steve Martin.
9:10: The Asian director of “La Maison en Petits Cubes” has suddenly transported me back to college science lectures where I understand every third word. The only saving grace was this guy ending with “Domo Oritago Mr. Roboto”.
9:16: The designer who made a dress that managed to give Sarah Jessica Parker boobs deserves some sort of an award.
9:31: Ben Stiller as Joaquin Phoenix… Priceless.
9:38: Jessica Biel, one of the most attractive women on the planet, looks as if she’s growing a giant tumor on the front of her dress. Bad, bad choice.
9:53: Enough of this song and dance crap! Oh how I miss the days of Jon Stewart doing comedy.
10:13: Heath Ledger’s acceptance speech by his family is the one, and only one, that could have gone on forever, as no director in their right mind would ever “play off” a family like that.
At this point, I lost interest in the show, got drowsy, and only remember fleeting images… including the WORST TEETH EVER on one of the producers of a documentary… they made English people look good. Anyway, I’ll make sure to keep myself properly caffeinated the next time I attempt one of these.
As always, stay sane, for the world is not.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Communications Degree... Really???
Readers,
As I write this, I’m watching Countdown with Keith Olbermann and he’s interviewing a young man named, Julio Osegueda. Osegueda is currently enjoying his fifteen minutes of fame after asking President Obama a question at his town hall meeting in Fort Myers, Florida this morning. Feel free to watch him ask his question here.
First of all, the town hall meetings that Obama is going to are NOT full of prescreened people with preapproved questions. Unlike our previous president, he is not playing to partisan crowd who gets the vapors whenever he snickers.
Second of all, the instant this guy opened his mouth, I figured that he was a mentally unstable right-winger who was about to launch into some tirade at Obama, the stimulus package, or his policies in general.
Honestly, after watching Osegueda be interviewed by Olbermann, I don’t know if I’m glad I was wrong.
Judging by his interview, Osegueda is completely unwatchable at worst and incredibly awkward and ill-spoken at best. For someone majoring in communications, his communication skills are on par with a bag of broccoli. Next, Osegueda informed the audience that, since his question this morning, he’d already been offered an internship at a communications company AND a broadcasting job for a minor league baseball team in Florida.
The sound you’re about to hear is another one of the blood vessels in my brain exploding.
Now, I know some people with degrees in communications who are INCREDIBLY well-spoken, articulate, and intelligent. I also happen to know some people with communications degrees who cannot write a cogent sentence, place a comma in the correct position, or spell. It is becoming increasingly clear to me that the communications field is full Dom Perignons and Natty Lights.
Osegueda, it seems, is definitely the latter.
As always, stay sane, for the world is not.
As I write this, I’m watching Countdown with Keith Olbermann and he’s interviewing a young man named, Julio Osegueda. Osegueda is currently enjoying his fifteen minutes of fame after asking President Obama a question at his town hall meeting in Fort Myers, Florida this morning. Feel free to watch him ask his question here.
First of all, the town hall meetings that Obama is going to are NOT full of prescreened people with preapproved questions. Unlike our previous president, he is not playing to partisan crowd who gets the vapors whenever he snickers.
Second of all, the instant this guy opened his mouth, I figured that he was a mentally unstable right-winger who was about to launch into some tirade at Obama, the stimulus package, or his policies in general.
Honestly, after watching Osegueda be interviewed by Olbermann, I don’t know if I’m glad I was wrong.
Judging by his interview, Osegueda is completely unwatchable at worst and incredibly awkward and ill-spoken at best. For someone majoring in communications, his communication skills are on par with a bag of broccoli. Next, Osegueda informed the audience that, since his question this morning, he’d already been offered an internship at a communications company AND a broadcasting job for a minor league baseball team in Florida.
The sound you’re about to hear is another one of the blood vessels in my brain exploding.
Now, I know some people with degrees in communications who are INCREDIBLY well-spoken, articulate, and intelligent. I also happen to know some people with communications degrees who cannot write a cogent sentence, place a comma in the correct position, or spell. It is becoming increasingly clear to me that the communications field is full Dom Perignons and Natty Lights.
Osegueda, it seems, is definitely the latter.
As always, stay sane, for the world is not.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Kids Aren't Puppies
Readers,
By now, you’ve probably heard of Nadya Suleman, the mother of the California octuplets. If you haven’t here’s the thirty second skinny.
Suleman is 33, unmarried (and never married), unemployed, and already the mother of six young children (all from a sperm donor). The octuplets were conceived with the help of in vitro fertilization and fertilization treatments, from the same sperm donor as her six other children. She lives in a house that her parents bought her… parents that, soon after, went bankrupt and moved in with her. You can read of her first interview on CNN.com here.
And now here’s my take.
I know I may draw the ire of some for saying this but, this woman is delusional and, in her current state, unfit to care for fourteen children.
I don’t want to begrudge ANY woman the right to have children, but FOURTEEN? That is completely and totally ridiculous.
Here’s a few excerpts from Suleman’s interview:
"I know I'll be able to afford them when I'm done with my schooling. If I were just sitting down, watching TV and not being as determined as I am to succeed and provide a better future for my children, I believe that would be considered to a certainly degree selfish,"
OK, yeah, sure… but what happens until then? What HAS been happening to the other SIX KIDS you’re caring for while you’re trying to get your degree? Perhaps she expects her parents (who disapprove of her decision to have octuplets) to care for her litter. And what kind of a job can you get that will allow you to support fourteen children? I don’t think Fortune 500 CEO is an entry level position, and I’m hearing those jobs aren’t so secure anymore. PLUS, what kind of care can you provide for your FOURTEEN kids while you’re going to school (and then working full time), even with the help of your parents.
And this “determination to succeed”… what parent DOESN’T have that? Every single parent in the world wants to succeed for the betterment of their children. The unemployment rate in this country is hovering around double digits right now, many of those people are parents, who have degrees, job experience, AND a mortgage. These parents are already fighting for jobs for their families with just as much “determination to succeed”, a head start, and ten to thirteen FEWER mouths to feed.
Her spokeswoman says that she, "has no plans on being a welfare mom”
Um… right. She may not have plans for it, but I don’t see any other way it’s going to work. I’m actually shocked that her spokeswoman even brought this up, because it’s simply not feasible in her current state.
Another quote:
"I'm providing myself to my children… I'm loving them unconditionally, accepting them unconditionally, everything I do. I'll stop my life for them and be present with them and hold them and be with them. And how many parents do that? I'm sure there are many that do, but many don't. And that's unfortunate. And that is selfish."
OK, so by that rationale, you’re going to be able to make a living that allows you to provide for all of these kids AND do everything you just said? Unless you’re some sort of weird, Dr. Moreau-ish hybrid of Wonder Woman, Carol Brady, and Martha Stewart, it just isn’t happening.
On top of that, you’re SLAMMING parents who can’t put their lives on hold to be at every single moment of their kids’ lives. Lady, you’ve got fourteen kids now. You’re going to have scheduling conflicts because I’m pretty sure out of the fourteen you have, they’re all going to want to do different extracurriculars and little Janey’s recital is probably going to conflict with little Timmy’s ballgame at least once. No parent can be there ALL of the time… even with one or two kids… it’s just not possible.
Here’s another gem:
Suleman, in the NBC interview, complained that she is being judged differently from how couples are judged, because she is a single mother. "I feel as though I've been under the microscope because I've chosen this unconventional kind of life. I didn't intend on it being unconventional. It just turned out to be. All I wanted ... was to be a mom. That's all I ever wanted in my life."
Let’s pull that crazy truck over to the side of the delusional turnpike for a second…
Lady, calling what you have an “unconventional lifestyle” is like calling a quadruple heart bypass an outpatient procedure. You are NOT a hard-working, single mom who really wants a child (ala Tina Fey in “Baby Mama”) you are NOT a committed gay or lesbian couple who wants a child (ala Melissa Etheridge). You’re a single woman who already has SIX kids, all of whom you already have trouble supporting.
To put it succinctly, this woman makes me sick; especially when there are couples who have trouble having ONE child and are ecstatic and blessed when that miracle happens. To make the decision to have this many kids on her own, with no income, is downright insane and completely unfair to each and every one of the children. Kids aren’t puppies, you can’t have eight (nee’ fourteen) of them and expect everything to turn out fine. I feel sick to my stomach at the thought of what’s going to happen to these kids and how “the system” is going to have to pick up the pieces of this incredibly bad and irresponsible decision.
As always, stay sane, for the world is not.
By now, you’ve probably heard of Nadya Suleman, the mother of the California octuplets. If you haven’t here’s the thirty second skinny.
Suleman is 33, unmarried (and never married), unemployed, and already the mother of six young children (all from a sperm donor). The octuplets were conceived with the help of in vitro fertilization and fertilization treatments, from the same sperm donor as her six other children. She lives in a house that her parents bought her… parents that, soon after, went bankrupt and moved in with her. You can read of her first interview on CNN.com here.
And now here’s my take.
I know I may draw the ire of some for saying this but, this woman is delusional and, in her current state, unfit to care for fourteen children.
I don’t want to begrudge ANY woman the right to have children, but FOURTEEN? That is completely and totally ridiculous.
Here’s a few excerpts from Suleman’s interview:
"I know I'll be able to afford them when I'm done with my schooling. If I were just sitting down, watching TV and not being as determined as I am to succeed and provide a better future for my children, I believe that would be considered to a certainly degree selfish,"
OK, yeah, sure… but what happens until then? What HAS been happening to the other SIX KIDS you’re caring for while you’re trying to get your degree? Perhaps she expects her parents (who disapprove of her decision to have octuplets) to care for her litter. And what kind of a job can you get that will allow you to support fourteen children? I don’t think Fortune 500 CEO is an entry level position, and I’m hearing those jobs aren’t so secure anymore. PLUS, what kind of care can you provide for your FOURTEEN kids while you’re going to school (and then working full time), even with the help of your parents.
And this “determination to succeed”… what parent DOESN’T have that? Every single parent in the world wants to succeed for the betterment of their children. The unemployment rate in this country is hovering around double digits right now, many of those people are parents, who have degrees, job experience, AND a mortgage. These parents are already fighting for jobs for their families with just as much “determination to succeed”, a head start, and ten to thirteen FEWER mouths to feed.
Her spokeswoman says that she, "has no plans on being a welfare mom”
Um… right. She may not have plans for it, but I don’t see any other way it’s going to work. I’m actually shocked that her spokeswoman even brought this up, because it’s simply not feasible in her current state.
Another quote:
"I'm providing myself to my children… I'm loving them unconditionally, accepting them unconditionally, everything I do. I'll stop my life for them and be present with them and hold them and be with them. And how many parents do that? I'm sure there are many that do, but many don't. And that's unfortunate. And that is selfish."
OK, so by that rationale, you’re going to be able to make a living that allows you to provide for all of these kids AND do everything you just said? Unless you’re some sort of weird, Dr. Moreau-ish hybrid of Wonder Woman, Carol Brady, and Martha Stewart, it just isn’t happening.
On top of that, you’re SLAMMING parents who can’t put their lives on hold to be at every single moment of their kids’ lives. Lady, you’ve got fourteen kids now. You’re going to have scheduling conflicts because I’m pretty sure out of the fourteen you have, they’re all going to want to do different extracurriculars and little Janey’s recital is probably going to conflict with little Timmy’s ballgame at least once. No parent can be there ALL of the time… even with one or two kids… it’s just not possible.
Here’s another gem:
Suleman, in the NBC interview, complained that she is being judged differently from how couples are judged, because she is a single mother. "I feel as though I've been under the microscope because I've chosen this unconventional kind of life. I didn't intend on it being unconventional. It just turned out to be. All I wanted ... was to be a mom. That's all I ever wanted in my life."
Let’s pull that crazy truck over to the side of the delusional turnpike for a second…
Lady, calling what you have an “unconventional lifestyle” is like calling a quadruple heart bypass an outpatient procedure. You are NOT a hard-working, single mom who really wants a child (ala Tina Fey in “Baby Mama”) you are NOT a committed gay or lesbian couple who wants a child (ala Melissa Etheridge). You’re a single woman who already has SIX kids, all of whom you already have trouble supporting.
To put it succinctly, this woman makes me sick; especially when there are couples who have trouble having ONE child and are ecstatic and blessed when that miracle happens. To make the decision to have this many kids on her own, with no income, is downright insane and completely unfair to each and every one of the children. Kids aren’t puppies, you can’t have eight (nee’ fourteen) of them and expect everything to turn out fine. I feel sick to my stomach at the thought of what’s going to happen to these kids and how “the system” is going to have to pick up the pieces of this incredibly bad and irresponsible decision.
As always, stay sane, for the world is not.
Monday, January 26, 2009
"Former Child Stars"
Readers,
Today, I saw a headline on Yahoo that made me almost scream.
"Former child star offered big 'Twilight' role."
Before you go clicking on the link, think about the phrase "Former child star". Off the top of your head, who do you think of?
Here is my quick list:
Jodie Foster
Ron Howard
Michael Jackson
Drew Barrymore
Danny Bonaduce
Corey Feldman
Josh Brolin
Ralph Macchio
Macaulay Culkin
Tatum O'Neal
That's my quick list. (Feel free to comment with any egregious omissions.)
Now Denis Leary's quick rule about child actors is that they all turn out either drug addled (Barrymore), dead (River Phoenix), in jail (O'Neal), or bitter, no-longer-famous, and pissed at their parents for thrusting them in the spotlight (pick a Culkin).
Anyway, that was a quick side-rant into one of the many reasons why Denis Leary is my guru.
The point is, the phrase "Former child star" carries with it a stigma and (with a few exceptions) the general stench of "public failure" and "adult".
Back to the story... Assuming you haven't read it yet... the "former child star" mentioned here:
Dakota Fanning
Dakota "Crazy, Coked-Out Eyes on Every Talk Show with the Scariest 'Natural' Laugh this Side of Vincent Price" Fanning
Take a quick guess, how old do you think she is?
I'll answer it for you; she's 14.
14!!!
New rule: You are a child until you reach 18.
Wait, that's not new, that's the FREAKING LAW IN AMERICA!
...
Sorry... I think part of my brain just hemorrhaged out of my ear.
In summary, you are a "child star" until you reach 18. You are not a "former child star" until you have several, successful, adult roles and avoid death, drugs, and bitterness towards parents.
As always, stay sane, for the world is not.
Today, I saw a headline on Yahoo that made me almost scream.
"Former child star offered big 'Twilight' role."
Before you go clicking on the link, think about the phrase "Former child star". Off the top of your head, who do you think of?
Here is my quick list:
Jodie Foster
Ron Howard
Michael Jackson
Drew Barrymore
Danny Bonaduce
Corey Feldman
Josh Brolin
Ralph Macchio
Macaulay Culkin
Tatum O'Neal
That's my quick list. (Feel free to comment with any egregious omissions.)
Now Denis Leary's quick rule about child actors is that they all turn out either drug addled (Barrymore), dead (River Phoenix), in jail (O'Neal), or bitter, no-longer-famous, and pissed at their parents for thrusting them in the spotlight (pick a Culkin).
Anyway, that was a quick side-rant into one of the many reasons why Denis Leary is my guru.
The point is, the phrase "Former child star" carries with it a stigma and (with a few exceptions) the general stench of "public failure" and "adult".
Back to the story... Assuming you haven't read it yet... the "former child star" mentioned here:
Dakota Fanning
Dakota "Crazy, Coked-Out Eyes on Every Talk Show with the Scariest 'Natural' Laugh this Side of Vincent Price" Fanning
Take a quick guess, how old do you think she is?
I'll answer it for you; she's 14.
14!!!
New rule: You are a child until you reach 18.
Wait, that's not new, that's the FREAKING LAW IN AMERICA!
...
Sorry... I think part of my brain just hemorrhaged out of my ear.
In summary, you are a "child star" until you reach 18. You are not a "former child star" until you have several, successful, adult roles and avoid death, drugs, and bitterness towards parents.
As always, stay sane, for the world is not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
