Archive for April, 2008

Earth Day

Posted in Bulletproof Diction on April 23, 2008 by mb007bpd

Via the brilliant Sweetness + Light:

Sorry to ruin the fun, but an ice age cometh
Happy Earth Day!
Advertisements

Obama: Archuleta

Posted in Bulletproof Diction on April 9, 2008 by ad007bpd

From the Trailhead over at Slate:

Barack Obama: David Archuleta

Archuleta is that baby-faced wunderkind that Idol has always been waiting for. He’s young yet poised beyond his years. His rendition of “Imagine” elevated Lennon’s words beyond the ‘60s and transcended the generation gap. His performance of “The Long and Winding Road” echoes Obama’s patience with Clinton’s sentry position in the battle for the nomination. Archuleta attracts a rabid, delirious group of screaming fans called the “Arch Angels” that vote without fail for the cherubic contender. Obama’s rabid, delirious fans are simply called “idealists.”

Archuleta, just like Obama, is presumed to be the front-runner—but he still has to knock off the remaining contenders first. Naturally gifted, uncharacteristic gaffes—like Archuleta’s brain fart during “We Can Work It Out” or Obama’s Rev. Wright imbroglio—are the only things that stand in both contenders’ ways of reaching the finals.

 

During Tutorial today I asked my group if they watched ‘Idol’ last night.
“Oh I love David!” one of the younger students said.
“Which one? David Cook or David Archuleta?”
“Umm, I don’t know.”
“The young one?”
“Yeah, yeah, yeah. I love him. He’s soooooo good.”
So I guess the comparison between Obama and Archuleta is pretty apt.

That being said. David Cook was simply awful last night, and every bit as pompous as Simon said. But I still like him better than Archuleta. Last night in general just kind of played flat for me. Inspirational songs? Whatever. I am really waiting for them to do a night out of the Great American Song book. Also, I really think that this season is going to go to one of the older contestants. Sure, Archuleta will probably be in the top three, but next to David Cook and Micheal John.
My personal picks for the bottom three (not necessarily a reflection of who I think actually will be on the bottom):
1) David Cook: Dude, definitely your worst performance. Love the hair, but stop changing it every week. The jacket was so-so. Who do you think you are, Julian Casablancas? The vocal was hoarse and diluted. That being said. You shouldn’t leave yet, and if you bring back the intense style and vocals of ‘Eleanor Rigby’ and ‘Billy Jean’, you have a strong chance of winning.
2) Kristy Lee Cook: You’re just so vanilla. Hated the white pants (the bottoms to David Cook’s jacket perhaps?), loved the top. The vocals were fine. ‘Anyway’ is kind of a whiny song though.
3) Syesha Mercado: You would have done better with Stevie Wonder’s ‘I believe.’

I’ll be back later tonight to talk about the Candidates appearances on tonight’s show (Idol Gives Back!)

The Daily Blurt

Posted in Bulletproof Diction on April 8, 2008 by mb007bpd

“I had guards, because, you know, [Chris Matthews] manhandles me every night.”

–Hillary Clinton on Ellen today, talking about an April Fool’s joke she played on the Press Corps

Absolut-ly Estupido

Posted in Bulletproof Diction on April 8, 2008 by mb007bpd

The Absolut vodka ad controversy, which has been brilliantly covered and acted upon by Michelle Malkin, raises a question for vodka drinkers.  If not Absolut, then what?

Well, as most discerning vodka drinkers know (not that I am one,) the #1 and #2 are consistently Grey Goose (Franco-American) and Stolichnaya (Russian.)  However, if you want to buy a truly American vodka (which the Swedish Absolut is undoubtedly not,) then SKYY is worth a second look.
All-American Vodka + Congener-free distillation = A way to support an American company, hangover-free.  

The China Conundrum

Posted in Bulletproof Diction on April 8, 2008 by mb007bpd

This week is set to be an interesting parade of protests over the 2008 Beijing Olympics.  As far as other countries go, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, Czech President Vaclav Klaus, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel have stated their intentions to not attend the games.  French President Nicholas Sarkozy has left the door open, with possible conditions.  British Prime Minister Gordon Brown intends to attend, but has established a sort of “wait-and-see” policy.  President Bush is allying with the French and British on this one, in the wake of Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton calling for an opening ceremony boycott.  If, in fact, the US boycotts the 2008 Olympics, it will have been the first of the sort in 28 years.  

 

The torch protests in London and Paris and Golden Gate protests in San Francisco are likely to trigger increased protests in other torch-bearing countries.  However, these protests are less about China’s human rights record and more about the old “Free Tibet” caper.  If these left-wing protesters want something to protest about, how about China’s communist, oppressive government?  It’s suppression of civil liberties?  Pollution problems in large cities like Beijing and Shanghai?  It’s destruction of archaeological sites and murder of stray animals in Beijing in the building process of Olympic stadium?  The rights of the workers building the complex?  Chinese spying on America, especially the Pentagon?  

 While I don’t agree with most of the premises in this article, I did find something interesting.  Last fall, in Shanghai, the Special Olympics were held.  Where were the protestors then?  Even though the Paralympics are held simultaneously with the Olympics, I still find it odd that, as far as I know, nobody protested the idea of China holding the Special Olympics.

 Considering all of the facts, and China’s repeated violations (including national security,) China had better have a darned good reason why President Bush should attend the opening ceremony.  The “spirit of Olympic unity” is not enough.  China needs to clean up its act, and fast.   I would have to rule that Sarkozy has the right idea in this situation.

Quiz!

Posted in Bulletproof Diction on April 4, 2008 by mb007bpd

It’s pop quiz time!

If Naomi Campbell were a Spice Girl, which Spice Girl would she be?

A. Posh Spice
B. Ginger Spice
C. Scary Spice
D. Baby Spice
E. Sporty Spice
If Naomi Campbell could be the leader of any country in the world, which would she choose?
A. Belarus
B. Venezuela
C. North Korea
D. Iran
E. Nicaragua
Time’s up!  If you guessed C for number 1 and B for number 2, you’re right!  You have now qualified to apply to become Naomi Campbell’s assistant.  Remember to wear the flak jacket!

Free Speech

Posted in Bulletproof Diction on April 3, 2008 by ad007bpd

There is a man in the free speech area on campus preaching. He sounds like he belongs in a mega-church, under fluorescent lights, and with intermittent hearty applause from the already converted. He is young, and is wearing a button-up and tie. He is shouting (“Has God sanctioned Alcoholism? Fornication?”) and the sound is violent and desolate–like swearing loudly in an empty room. The free speech area is mostly empty though, and the few that pass by are indifferent. Except for me. I am acutely embarrassed. I want to turn on the mute button and send him back to the late-night TV satire he came from. I want to stamp him with a huge disclaimer: “This is not what I believe. I am not one of those Christians.” (Honestly, I am a terrible and ambivalent Christian, but that’s another post.)
He is a Christian of some sort. A few people near him are packing up signs plastered with the name of Jesus. I didn’t stop to investigate, but the truth of the matter is so probable that it hurts.
I am embarrassed because I abhor this rhetorical style. I don’t think it does much good. I think that it gives the worst possible impression of God. I know that it hurts, offends, and angers people.
As much as I dislike what he is saying and how he is saying it, I would never question his right to do so. He does not represent the best argument, but he still has the absolute right to speak. If he were some righteous Imam, crying for Jihad–I still would not question his right to speak.