Thursday Night TV

It has been too long since we've sat in the TV's warm glowing warming glow long enough to get a deep, rich suntan from the gamma rays. A fluke Thursday night off helped to fix this, and we went straight to NBC for old time's sake. Now, we've been keeping up with The Office thanks to the magic of TiVo and Bittorrent, so the re-run last night didn't do much. Scrubs, too, seems dull in comparison to the Charlie Brown-Scrubs mash-up that made the rounds earlier this month.

But Tina Fey's show--dude! we've totally been missing the goddess's newest vehicle! forgive us, Tina, for failing you! Last night's re-run featured her in a Blind Date with Stephanie March after Alec Baldwin (whose talents are being wasted in this show; a cardboard cut-out would do just as well in his role) assumes Tina is a lesbian. Let's just pause there a moment and consider the possibilities...

Yes, yes, everyone else has seen the show. Two months ago, probably. And you have all rightly dumped on its writing. But Tina Fey. On a date with a hot blonde lesbian. This is what TV is SUPPOSED to be about, people!

Cop-Out of the Year

Time's Person of the Year is YOU?! What a steaming pile of horse shit.

Let's imagine the possible scenario at the Time editorial office that led to this, shall we?

Writer: "I fkn hate this time of year... I don't want to have to re-read a pile of fkn news articles to write up some Fkr of the Year. Can't we just recycle 'The Computer'? Or maybe 'The Internet'?"

Cover Design Artist: "Yeah, those abstract ones really get my creative juices flowing!"

Financial: "Speaking of which, we can't afford any new photography for the cover this year, so you are going to have to stick with whatever graphics you can steal from Google Images."

Public Relations: "Sales are down. The cover story needs to kiss the average moron's ass."

And so instead of you know, reporting on something, they just put a reflective piece of foil on the cover and blathered about how YOU are something else.

Warren Buffet gave something like 50 billion dollars to poor people--But hey, I gave some homeless guy a buck. Unranked FSU beat "No. 1" Duke--But I beat some half-drunk kids in a game of pool. Or look at the competition as TIME sees it: Hugo Chavez said what we've all been thinking and called a spade a spade (I've been saying it for years now, btw). The Pope was crucified for suggesting that we argue with militant Islamists rather than crusading against them. An alligator finally obliged Steve Irwin and bit his head off... Meanwhile, I've watched and re-watched all the funniest Daily Show clips about Bush, managed to not get killed in the War on Terror, and squashed a few really big roaches, which are kinda like alligators... You know, all in all, I have had a good year.

Left Behind is Left

You know those obnoxious Left Behind books? There's a whole shelf of them at Barnes and Noble, crowding out the interesting-sounding Faith/Theology/Spirituality section and encroaching on the Philosophy section, and this pulp is neither Faith nor Wisdom.

Now there is a video game based on the books--a blood-bath shoot-em-up in the style of The Passion of the Christ and Apocalypto with the simple goal of converting as many heathens as possible, or, barring that, killing 'em to let God sort 'em out. The battleground for souls is none other than a photo-real simulation of New York City. Not clear yet whether this was designed as a training simulator for Islamofascist terrorists or Pat Robertson wannabes...

Since Wal-Mart has made some filthy lucre from the Left Behind books, they are trying their damnedest to cash in on the game, too. But the game has come under fire from a slew of prostesters, ranging from Christian homeschoolers who consider Left Behind required reading to plain old "won't somebody please think of the children" wailers. That's right! Christian fundamentalism is bad for family values, and the Christians only partly disagree. It's beautiful!

Teach the Controversy

The New York Times on the Holocaust Deniers Orgy in Iran:

Among those attending from the United States was the former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, whose prepared remarks, published by the Iranian Foreign Ministry, asserted that the gas chambers in which millions perished did not actually exist. He said on Monday that the depiction of Jews as the “overwhelming victims of the Holocaust gave the moral high ground to the Allies as victors of the war, and allowed Jews to establish a state on the occupied land of Palestine.”

We have it on high authority that The Mississippi schools' history books will soon be edited to include this viewpoint, right alongside Creationism.

We don't mean to make light of the Holocaust, mind you. We're just saying that the same knuckle-headed thinking that makes "Christians" want to circumvent rational discussion of ideas like evolution that ought to inform our world makes "Christians" like David Duke want to circumvent rational discussion of events that ought to inform our world.

Also, we are sick, physically sick, at the idea that all Iran knows of America is George Bush and David Duke. I see why they want to nuke us.

Mayan Groups Angered by Apocalypto

According to the BBC, Central Americans who may or may not be Mayan have seen the trailer for and they aren't happy:

Activists in Guatemala - once home to a large part of the central American Mayan empire - said Apocalypto was unrealistic.

"The director is saying the Mayans are savages," said Lucio Yaxon, a human rights activist.

...

Only the film's trailer has been seen in Guatemala, but some Mayan leaders say scenes of Mayans with bone piercings sacrificing humans promote stereotypes about their culture.

"Gibson replays... an offensive and racist notion that Maya people were brutal to one another long before the arrival of Europeans and thus they deserved, in fact, needed, rescue," said Ignacio Ochoa, director of the Nahual Foundation that promotes Mayan culture.

If we took Gibson's movies seriously, we'd say:

1. Aren't the Maya extinct?

2. They should ask the Jews how THEY feel about Gibson.

3. Why do we have to attack every movie as racist, or sexist, or bigotted? Why don't we just make a movie about a bunch of people with no lives and no opinions, performed by actors with no distinguishing facial features and ambiguously tan skin coloring that expresses absolutely no views and ambiguously recounts a uneventful story? Would that make you happy?

But Gibson has made all that sort of discussion irrelevant all by himself.