IMUS be crazy, again.

"Who gives these two media 'ambulance chasers' the right to speak for black people, when the real issue is 'us' and our tolerance for the vile words spewing from the mouths and pens of black 'gangsta' rap artists, degrading women in the most baseless and cruel ways imaginable."

- Jason Whitlock, Kansas City Star columnist, in reference to "Reverend" Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton's predictable intrusion into the media frenzy surrounding Don Imus firing. Imus was fired after referring to the Rutgers University women's basketball team as "nappy headed hoes."

The following are some (sanitized) lyrics from Notorious B.I.G.'s song "Friend of Mine"

**********

I meet a b*tch, f*ck a b*tch, next thing you know you f*ckin'the b*tch.
You just pass it around and sh*t, pass the sh*t likea cold and sh*t.
F*ck'em.

And the only time I call her to hang
Is when me and Dee blunted up, pissy, schemin' on a gang-bang.
She should've used her intuition
Then she wouldn't be classified in that position, listen
She's sayin' I dissed her 'cause I'm f*ckin' her sister
A message to the fellas, that really gets'em pissed, uh
But she started that f*ckin' family
She f*cked my man Dee, so why she mad at me?
Plus your sister look better than you
Give head better than you, p*ssy get wetter than you
So break the f*ck out like a rash
I'm glad I ain't spend no cash to hit your nasty ass

**********

So to sum it all up

"Nappy headed hoes" - NOT ACCEPTABLE
"I meet a b*tch, f*ck a b*tch, next thing you know you f*ckin'the b*tch." - OTAY BUCKWHEAT

I don't get it. I don't thing either of these is acceptable, but I don't seen Al Sharpton or "Reverend" Jesse Jackson calling for Notorious B.I.G. dismissal. Hmmmm? Maybe Michael Richards and Don Imus can go on tour together.

Wicked Awesome!

Last month for Angie's birthday, I took her to see Wicked! If you think you know The Wizard of Oz, you don't. Forget about the shallow, preachy, original black and white- then color - then black and white movie. No, you need to see the full color, live action production at the Ahmanson. If you can make it through the first half, and some of the mundane musical numbers, like the opening "Nobody Mourns the Wicked," that ends with an ensemble shouting "Wicked, Wicked, Wicked," (in case you didn't know what you were there to see) the story is really good.

The set design was outstanding. The "curtain" is a giant map of Oz, and the set sides are constructed of giant gears. Gears seem to be a recurring theme in the set design, but it works. From the opening scene, when Elphaba's (the wicked witch, for the uninitiated) mother is drinking "green" elixer, to Oz, when the set is transformed into emerald green lights and twinkling illumination, to the forests and castle scenes, every part of the production tied indirectly into the original story, but with a modern brush of industrialization. Nothing is grey in this play.

The story is a little weak at first, remenescent of a high school drama, complete with popular (annoying) bubbly blond, and the outcast, misunderstood, diamond in the rough. The musical numbers don't do anything to help, either. None of the tunes were catchy, at least I didn't think so. During the intermission, I told Angie that I was not yet impressed. Even the sound seemed weak to me, whcih is shouldn't have been, seeing as there were 5 line arrays that I could see. But the production redemed itself in the second half, and we find out where the lion, tin man, scarecrow, wizard, and witches all come from, why they are all the way they are, why monkey's can fly in Oz, and what is so special about those stupid jeweled slippers. For me, it added a much needed layer of depth and explination to the original story, and if you are familar with the prequel to Wicked, you'll understand a lot more about this musical than the adoscelent crowd that was overrepresented on the night we went.

Overall, I would have to give it an 8. I got an outstanding ovation, but it my opinion, it was only for the actors' gumption of pulling it off.

http://www.wickedthemusical.com/

Whos Afraid of Virginia Woolf - my review

Greetings blogger community. As is my custom now, whenever I see a movie or other production, I post a review on my blog. Since my wife and I went to see "Who's Afraid of Virgina Woolf" last night, guess what...

Last night was one of those perfect nights out that you look forward to and remember long after it's over. We picked up my brother at the Metrolink station in Covina, and drove to the Music Center in L.A. Considering that it was Friday night, we made awesome time. We paid our $8 for parking, and by 5:45, we were enjoying the night air as we took in the sites of the Ahmanson, Mark Taper Forum, Dorthy Chandler Pavillion, and the Dinsey Concert Hall. As we waited for my brother's girlfriend to get off work and meet us there, my bro showed is his "secret" places around the Music Center, and we surprised him by showing him some of our own. He didn't know that Angie and I had been there a few times ourselves. If you've never been there - find a reason to go. An added bonus was that as he was showing us where his girlfriend works, one Ms. Kathleen Turner popped out of a small limo right under where we were standing. She's the headlining star of the production. After blowing off a few autograph seekers, she disappeared into the stage door. Most people my age would recognise her as Michael Douglas's lady in "Romancing the Stone" and the sequel that sucked.

Our tickets couldn't have been better. We were in Row AA right up next to the stage. In case you're wondering, if there had been an orchestra last night (there wasn't), we would have been sitting on the oboe player's head.

As the production opened, Ms. Turner, and her costar, Bill Irwin, entered from stage left to roaring applause. Ms. Turner has a lot of fans. They exchange some words, and it immediately becomes apparent that their characters, Martha and George, have a love-hate type of marriage. Their dynamic is tragic while at the same time filled with some of the funniest exchanges I have ever seen on stage. For example, when Martha tells George, "you make me puke," (audience laughs), George responds with "that's not a very nice thing to say, Martha." I know it comes off sort of dry, but in the dialog that leads up to it, it's as funny as two guys kissing over a Snicker's. The setting is the living room of George and Martha's in a small home near a New England university of which George is "in" the history department, and of whom Martha's red-eyed, white moused father is the president. The couple has just arrived home after a welcoming party for the new professor on campus. It's 2:00 in the morning.

As the evening wears on, they are joined by the new professor, Nick, and his wife, whom we know as Honey. The four drink and exchange insults, verbal and physical abuse, and relentlessly peel away each others layers until we learn the deepest, darkest, most intimate things about each of them. Overall, the play was outstanding, and while I do enjoy musicals, I really enjoy the dramatic productions with minimal characters and deep, meaningful dialog.

With that in mind, I have to give props to Bill Irwin, because I believe he is what made this production. Kathleen Turner, while outstanding in her own right, did an excellent job, but her character did not require any real stretch. I'm not saying I could do it, and given Ms. Turner's remarkable career and even more remarkable battle with various ailments, I don't know that she couldn't be replaced with any other actress in her post 40's and have the quality of the production reduced at all. But I do need to point out that it is Ms. Turner who deserves full credit for the revival of this production (it was originally performed in 1966), and for that, I am grateful.

The other two characters barely deserve any mention. Again, I'm not saying that I could do it, but I don't know that the roles really required any special talent, nor do I think Kathleen Early or David Furr brought anything special to the stage. However, David Furr did crack me up during the first act, when he and Irwin nearly broke character when discussing Honey's "false alarm" pregnancy when she "went up, then went down."

All in all, the performances of all four performers was deserving of the standing ovation they received at the end, and if you get the chance to see this while it is in town, please do. One last highlight for us was during the second act when George breaks a bottle on stage. The bottle breaking wasn't the highlight, but the little piece of glass I found for Angie was.

Take Care.

Bring Back the Frogs!

Yesterday was superbowl Sunday. As we usually do, we went over to some friends' to watch the game and eat junk food. While I don't follow football during the season, I do watch the superbowl every year (except last year, when we went to Disneyland with the Armstrongs).

While the game is usually okay, I get a bigger kick out of watching my friends make their commentaries about the action. I also like the commercials - or at least I used to. It seems that in the last few years, the commercials have gone from world class to mediocre, to just plain boring. In fact, the advertising agencies have become so incompetent, that they have resorted to what I will call "reality advertising," where viewers make their own commercials and send them in. This year, the best commercial, in my opinion, was a viewer piece for Doritos in which a guy driving a car, while eating Doritos, sees a hot girl, also eating Doritos, crashes, and then looks out the windows as the hot girl trips off the curb. There were a few others that made me smile, but no trend setters like the Budweiser frogs, or Michael Jackson setting his hair on fire. In the past 10 years, I only remember one commercial as really standing out. Maybe you remember the Wilson commercial that was a re-enactment of David and Goliath, shot like a Hollywood epic movie, and after David lobs the fateful stone into Goliaths cranium, a close-up of the stone reveals the Wilson "W" logo. That's a commercial worth spending $2.6 million on.

The one thing that I found particularly disturbing this year was that it seemed most of the commercials during the first quarter had a certain "queer eye" overtone. One commercial had two guys accidentally kissing over a Snickers. Another had a male sales executive passing on the opportunity to give a hot girl a ride in his new car, only to offer a ride to another dude in his office. What the crap? I don't want to see this. I don't ever want to watch dudes kissing, especially during a football game. I think I'm boycotting Snickers. The people on the other side of the fence can have them.

Discount-Mats.com Sucks

I was just reading the news, and came across a story that got my blood boiling. If you haven't seen this yet, a Sgt stationed in Iraq inquired about getting some mats from this crap hole of a business called discount-maps.com. Apparently they are an online business. Because the Sgt. is stationed overseas, the mats would have to be shipped to an APO address. When he asked the company if they shipped to APO addresses - here's the response he got:

"SGT Hess,We do not ship to APO addresses, and even if we did, we would NEVER ship to Iraq. If you were sensible, you and your troops would pull out of Iraq."

What the hell kind of response is that? It gets even better. The company is owned by a Pakastani Muslim. I worked for one of these guys for 8 years, and even though the place where I worked sucked, I don't think our sales people would ever have responded to a request like that. That's just rude. News reports say now that the company's webside is down (confirmed) and that the mailbox on the answering machine is full (confirmed). If anybody reading this wants to express their appreciation to the business, their contact information is below.

If I ever get in touch with these people, I am going to politely suggest that they take their business to Pakistan, since they apparently don't appreciate the fact that it is the troops who fight and die for this country that even make it possible for them to have a business here in the first place!

Bargain Suppliers
3259 S. 106th Street
West Allis, WI 53227
(414) 736-8394

Merry Christmas, Dammit!

Back in the glory days of Saturday Night Live, when Jim Belushi was a bumble bee and Steve Martin was wild and crazy, one of my favorite skit characters was Eddie Murphy's Gumby. These skits would crack me up, because the catch phrases Gumby would use were always something so out of character for a lovable clay figure. The first time I saw it, I so unexpected Gumby to let loose an "I'm gumby, dammit," that I couldn't stop laughing. My mom eventually came in and made me turn it off, because she didn't think SNL was something a 12 year old should be watching. She was probably right.

One of my favorite Gumby skits was the Gumby Christmas Special, "Merry Christmas, dammit," and this morning as I was browsing the online news, a came across an article by Lou Dobbs that made me reminisce about this skit and how applicable this phrase could be today. The article describes a situation where a Rabbi threatens to sue an airport because their holiday decor did not include minorahs. Last year, several retailers elected to use the politically correct "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" in their advertising and decorating campaigns. And every year, somebody in the city of Ontario tries to get the city to remove their Nativity story displays from the boulevard of Euclid Ave. This year, I've seen a lot of talking heads insisting that we need to get religion out of Christmas. And now it's time for me to chime in.

If you've been reading my blogs of recent, you know that I've done some research into the history of Christmas. If it needed to be summarized into one thing, it would be this - Jesus probably was NOT born on December 25th. We really don't know when he was born (Read the Bible if you don't believe me). Sometime in the history of the Church, it was decided that this day would be when we CELEBRATE the birth of Christ, something that I personally think should be celebrated with wild abandon. The fact that thousands of year of prophesy of a coming savior for all mankind came true that night, whenever it was, is cause for celebration that far outweighs any other reason. And since this time of the year already included so many celebrations, most centered around pagan traditions and the winter solstice, why not? And if the main reason for your personal celebration is the birth of Christ, then why not use "Merry Christmas" as your greeting of choice? There is no reason anybody should be offended by it. Just like any Christian should not be offended by "Happy Hanukkah," "Happy Holidays," or "Seasons Greetings." Unfortunately, "Merry Christmas" is under attack, and I felt the need to defend it. Understand that I am not in any way advocating that we go around telling each other "Merry Christmas, dammit," although I imagine after a few loaded egg nogs this could certainly happen, but we should be free enough in this country to use "Merry Christmas" without fear of being sued. So if you see me on the street, then know that I will probably greet you with "Merry Christmas," because this is why I'm happy and joyous this time of year. And even if you return a "Bah, humbug," I will try to not be offended, and find some comfort that at least your greeting is seasonally appropriate.

Merry Christmas

A link to Lou Dobb's article is below.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/12/Dobbs.Dec13/

The Cosmos

Let me start off by stating that this post may be offensive to some. After reading it, you may want to label me a racist. If your criteria for using that label are so indiscriminate, so be it, but you would be wrong in more ways than one. I have never, do not currently, and never will judge any person by the color of their skin, nor by their ethnicity. I believe that God created all people, and I love them all. So there.

Anybody who keeps up on current event knows that Michael Richards, the actor/comedian best known for his role as Cosmo Kramer on the show Seinfeld, suffered a serious lack of control and judgment when he unleashed a string of insults that included several uses of the "n-word." The media hype surrounding this episode has focused on the word more than any other part of the story, and I read today that the "Rev" Jesse Jackson is now on a campaign to end the use of the word completely in all media. I support the effort, even though, like many of the crusades on which R. Jesse has embarked, I expect sometime in the near future he will clarify that that only applies to non African-Americans, who apparently can use that word, and other words like "honkey", "cracker," and "white bread," without consequence. But before I distract from my mission, I want to bring up some other parts of the story that are being glanced over at best.

1) The video that broke the story - How is that this recording ever came to be, except that somebody blatantly violated copyright law and used a recording device during a live show? I've been to a comedy club or two, and distinctly remember signs, and print on the back of the ticket, explicitly prohibiting the use of any recording device during the show. In the US, copyright infringement can result in punishment including 5 years in prison and $250,000 in fines. But nobody seems to want to bring this up. The recording is illegal, and the person responsible for making it is a criminal and should be prosecuted. And don't give me any crap about the person wanting to capture the episode for the media - the camera was rolling well before he went nuts!

2) Dictionary.com defines "racists" as the following:

1. A belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. A policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. Hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Each of these seem to require a PATTERN that demonstrates these qualities. I have not seen this pattern in either Michael Richards or Mel Gibson, both of whom have been branded with this label recently. I think the media is quick to use that label, and they are quick to quote any un-educated joe blow off the street who uses it because they know that it will generate hype. Get off it. Save the label for people like Chris Rock and anybody involved with the Klan.

3) One of the "protests" is that people are advocating boycotting "Seinfeld," including not buying the 7th season DVD set that was recently released. What the (insert profanity) is that supposed to prove? The way I see it, it only shows that people are too stupid to differentiate the actions of one individual from something that happened years before. It also punishes Jerry Seinfeld, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Jason Alexander, and everybody else who profits from the sale for something they had nothing to do with. I don't get it. If you need to protest something, don't go see Michael Richards.

4) The R. Jackson has stated publicly that the "n-word" is not protected under the 1st amendment. WRONG! If somebody chooses to use that word, they are protected...but there are obvious consequences. Personally, I choose to not use the word, and I am in no way advocating it. My point is that the R. Jackson doesn't seem to understand what freedom of speech really means.

Vote for Pedro

If you've ever seen the movie Nepolian Dynamite, you saw Pedro's campaign to run for student office. One of the elements of the campaign was a shirt that said "Vote for Pedro." I think we should make a law that the only campaign propoganda allowed are shirts like this.



Every Novemeber, our city turns into a deposit for all manner of florescent sign, each rudely blaring a message on who I should vote for. My first problem is that these signs are an eyesore. Seriously! Do you need to put 15 of the same sign on a street corner to get you message across? My second issues is that the city seems to turn a blind eye to the laws about sinage. A couple of years ago, our church was advertising an Easter musical. Part of our advertising strategy was to use lawn signs, not unlike the campaign signs that are littering our city this month. Our signs were black and white and they had an image of Jesus and the productions web site. The day after our signs hit the streets, the City Hall called us and told us to take our signs down. The only reason they gave was "there is just something about that man." They could just as easily quoted us chapter and verse from the city ordinacen regarding signage, because in beautiful Rancho Cucamonga, lawn signs are not permitted on public property, or in any area considers "public space," like street corners. Yet this month, I can't drive 2 block without seeing hundreds of these ugly signs. Lastly, I seriously think putting these signs up is envirnmentally irrespinsible. When the campaigns are over, these signs all end up in the trash. I mean can you really reuse one of these for anything except a distress signal or flagging down passing space ships? In addition, the wind starts blowing in our city usually sometime in October, and lets up in about January. So a lot of these signs just end up blown all over the place. Let's start a movement to rid our country of these things. They suck! Let the candidates go house to house, so at least we have the option of slamming the door in their faces.

Cedar Glen

My friend Brent and I hiked to Cedar Glen on friday. Cedar Glen is a trail camp along the Chapman Trail in the San Gabriel mountains, that is accessed through Ice House Canyon near Mt. Baldy. The purpose was to check out the camp to see if it would be a candidate for family oriented over nite backpacking trips.

Starting at the Ice House Canyon trail head, you head north along the stream for about 3/4 of a mile. Eventually, you will get to a point where two signs are posted, one for the Ice House canyon trail that leads to Ice House Saddle (2.6 miles) and another on the west (left) side of the trail that marks the trial head for the Chapman trail. Chapman trail was named after John "Johnny Appleseed" Champan. This trail also gets to Ice House Saddle, but adds 1.7 miles to that trip. Approximately 1.8 miles up that trail is Cedar Glen Trail camp.


The trail was relatively easy, although I was sick when I did it so it seemed harder that it really was. Most of the trail is through sparcely vegitated forest of mostly sugar pines and chaparrel. Occassionally you will see a cedar or white fir. Not too far up the trail you will come to the 1 mile marker, at which you will find a curious open space that could easily be used for a group trail camp. Between the 1 and 2 mile markers, there is a small stretch, less than 1/4 mile, of exposed south facing trail. This part can be hot in the sun, so bring protection. After the 2 mile marker, you will encounter a lot of greenary, vines and berries, and some poison oak. You will come to a small brook, which is the only source of water on the trail. If you are staying overnight at the camp, then stop here and filter some water. Continuing up the trail you will get to a sharp right turn marked by a sign at the apex. This is the entry to the well protected and comfortably located Cedar Glen trail camp. The camp itself is nothing special. There is no water, no facilites, and no campfires allowed, although we did find a fire ring that was large enough to roast a wild pig. From the camp, you can continue up the trail toward the saddle, but you will need a wilderness permit for any part of the trail after the camp, as the camp sits just outside the wilderness boundary.


Comments welcome.

My New Blog

Okay, so this is my blog. This is where I put my stuff. My family stuff is at rcpikes.blogspot.com, so if you're looking for pictures of this kiddos, look there.

I like blogging. I feel like it gives me the "out" I need to vent my frustrations, and tell the world how I feel about things. Not all bad. I put good stuff up here, too. But since I had melded my "out" blog and my family blog, I don't want my extended family to complain about having to wade through pictures of the trashy political campaign signs to get to the kidos. So I'll put that stuff here.

That's it. Stay tuned to be entertained, offended, and stimulated (in the intellectual sense, nothing perverted.)