35 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(01/26/06 5:00am)
Any political documentaries in the past few years have compromised their presentation of the truth in order to promote a partisan agenda -- most notably Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11." Thankfully, "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room" does what it can to avoid politics. Instead, it tells a story about morality, lost in a haze of unchecked ambition.\nJeffery Skilling was proud of Enron once. As the film tells it, Skilling believed he was a "fucking smart" man. He saw Enron as a company full of smart people. It seemed to be a symbol of how dreams can conquer the constraints of reality. All one needed to do was live by Enron's slogan: "Ask why."\n"Why" not exchange oil the same way as stocks? "Why" not buy and sell Internet bandwidth as a commodity, like oil? Enron was the one company brilliant enough to single-handedly revolutionize the way business is done.\nBut for all of Enron's ambition, there was little restraint. They dumped $1 billion on a plant in India that generated energy the nation couldn't pay for. Later, Enron worked on a system for delivering broadband video over the Internet -- that never actually worked.\nThe movie tells a story about people you and I probably know: people who have great fun dreaming up new ideas, but lack the discipline to work out the details.\nSome credibility is lost when one of the interviewees speculates about why federal regulators did not intervene when Enron sold electricity to California for several times more than to other regions.\nHowever, a viewing of the DVD's deleted scenes shows that the filmmakers had cut out a lot of material on California. Some of it would have further harmed the documentary's credibility if left in. On the other hand, it also would have distracted from the story the filmmakers really wanted to focus on.\nDeleted scenes and other bonus features do, however, make this DVD worth seeing for those who saw the film in theaters. They offer more details and more insight on the documentary's principle characters. In fact, the bonus features arguably make the story more complete than the theatrical released version.\n"Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room" is ultimately a cautionary tale. It's about three men whose ambition was uncontrollable. Their egos drove them to keep making Enron bigger and stronger. They could not see that they had built something that would ultimately destroy them.
(01/26/06 12:53am)
Any political documentaries in the past few years have compromised their presentation of the truth in order to promote a partisan agenda -- most notably Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11." Thankfully, "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room" does what it can to avoid politics. Instead, it tells a story about morality, lost in a haze of unchecked ambition.\nJeffery Skilling was proud of Enron once. As the film tells it, Skilling believed he was a "fucking smart" man. He saw Enron as a company full of smart people. It seemed to be a symbol of how dreams can conquer the constraints of reality. All one needed to do was live by Enron's slogan: "Ask why."\n"Why" not exchange oil the same way as stocks? "Why" not buy and sell Internet bandwidth as a commodity, like oil? Enron was the one company brilliant enough to single-handedly revolutionize the way business is done.\nBut for all of Enron's ambition, there was little restraint. They dumped $1 billion on a plant in India that generated energy the nation couldn't pay for. Later, Enron worked on a system for delivering broadband video over the Internet -- that never actually worked.\nThe movie tells a story about people you and I probably know: people who have great fun dreaming up new ideas, but lack the discipline to work out the details.\nSome credibility is lost when one of the interviewees speculates about why federal regulators did not intervene when Enron sold electricity to California for several times more than to other regions.\nHowever, a viewing of the DVD's deleted scenes shows that the filmmakers had cut out a lot of material on California. Some of it would have further harmed the documentary's credibility if left in. On the other hand, it also would have distracted from the story the filmmakers really wanted to focus on.\nDeleted scenes and other bonus features do, however, make this DVD worth seeing for those who saw the film in theaters. They offer more details and more insight on the documentary's principle characters. In fact, the bonus features arguably make the story more complete than the theatrical released version.\n"Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room" is ultimately a cautionary tale. It's about three men whose ambition was uncontrollable. Their egos drove them to keep making Enron bigger and stronger. They could not see that they had built something that would ultimately destroy them.
(11/10/05 5:00am)
We had it lucky growing up. The kid shows we had were truly great, like "The Tick" and "Pinky and the Brain." But before an invulnerable idiot in blue spandex foiled a chair-faced madman's plan to deface the moon, and before two albino lab mice tried to take over the world, there were two red-headed brothers with the same name whose epic suburban adventures became the stuff of cult legend.\n"The Adventures of Pete & Pete" blended together the anxiety, awe and adventurousness of "The Wonder Years," the over-the-top dramatics of Baz Luhrman (before he was even famous) and added in a dash of random crudeness from "You Can't Do That On Television" -- this was a Nickelodeon show after all.\nThere are plenty of people who just don't get it. "Pete & Pete" was melodramatic, but light-hearted; mundane but extraordinary; familiar but bizarre; geeky but cool; childish but insightful. And if the preceding sentence doesn't make sense, you can see why the show can be difficult to understand. But if you can grasp these ideas all at the same time, "Pete & Pete" provides compelling explorations of individuality, love, self-acceptance and brotherhood.\nDespite a few very weak episodes, season two had some of the show's best. In one of them, little Pete (Danny Tamborelli) gets grounded through the Fourth of July. Inspired by the American virtue of freedom, he uses a Statue of Liberty paperweight to dig an escape tunnel under his front yard.\nBig Pete (Michael Maronna), in another episode, faces one of those challenges of growing up familiar to many of us: to find out whether his long-time best friend, Ellen (Alison Fanelli) is just a friend, or romantic soulmate. Not content to explore a cliché at face value, the episode juxtaposes it against little Pete's scheme to become a riboflavin-saturated time traveler when the clock falls back an hour at the end of daylight savings time. In the end, the show wraps these chaotic, nonsensical themes together in a way that celebrates honesty, second-chances and just going with the flow when good things happen, even if you don't understand them.\nIt's difficult to describe this show to someone who doesn't get it. But I think the words of big Pete describe it best: for those of us who do get it, "The Adventures of Pete & Pete" offers us "a way of looking at the world... making everything in it a little bit stranger, and a little bit better"
(11/10/05 1:49am)
We had it lucky growing up. The kid shows we had were truly great, like "The Tick" and "Pinky and the Brain." But before an invulnerable idiot in blue spandex foiled a chair-faced madman's plan to deface the moon, and before two albino lab mice tried to take over the world, there were two red-headed brothers with the same name whose epic suburban adventures became the stuff of cult legend.\n"The Adventures of Pete & Pete" blended together the anxiety, awe and adventurousness of "The Wonder Years," the over-the-top dramatics of Baz Luhrman (before he was even famous) and added in a dash of random crudeness from "You Can't Do That On Television" -- this was a Nickelodeon show after all.\nThere are plenty of people who just don't get it. "Pete & Pete" was melodramatic, but light-hearted; mundane but extraordinary; familiar but bizarre; geeky but cool; childish but insightful. And if the preceding sentence doesn't make sense, you can see why the show can be difficult to understand. But if you can grasp these ideas all at the same time, "Pete & Pete" provides compelling explorations of individuality, love, self-acceptance and brotherhood.\nDespite a few very weak episodes, season two had some of the show's best. In one of them, little Pete (Danny Tamborelli) gets grounded through the Fourth of July. Inspired by the American virtue of freedom, he uses a Statue of Liberty paperweight to dig an escape tunnel under his front yard.\nBig Pete (Michael Maronna), in another episode, faces one of those challenges of growing up familiar to many of us: to find out whether his long-time best friend, Ellen (Alison Fanelli) is just a friend, or romantic soulmate. Not content to explore a cliché at face value, the episode juxtaposes it against little Pete's scheme to become a riboflavin-saturated time traveler when the clock falls back an hour at the end of daylight savings time. In the end, the show wraps these chaotic, nonsensical themes together in a way that celebrates honesty, second-chances and just going with the flow when good things happen, even if you don't understand them.\nIt's difficult to describe this show to someone who doesn't get it. But I think the words of big Pete describe it best: for those of us who do get it, "The Adventures of Pete & Pete" offers us "a way of looking at the world... making everything in it a little bit stranger, and a little bit better"
(10/27/05 4:00am)
Playing the Angel begins with a loud, warbling, distorted noise that will make your neighbors wonder why they hear a bomb raid siren. It's sounding the alarm that Depeche Mode is back, and they're leading a 52-minute assault on good moods everywhere. The new album is much edgier, angstier and more aggressive than its sleepy, ironically-titled predecessor, Exciter. But does a little extra energy make a better album? You're damn right it does.\nSongwriter Martin Gore turns in his strongest set of songs in years. This album is destined to produce new favorites that rank among hits like "Policy of Truth" and "Enjoy the Silence," from 1991's Violator.\nThe first song, "Pain That I'm Used To" immediately dives into the classic Depeche Mode sound: moody fits of insecurity and depression you can dance to. It starts with something simple but catchy -- the bassline in this case -- but it only stays simple long enough to pull you in. Once the groove has you, it creeps up and down the scale in a minor key, taking your mood along for the ride. "Suffer Well" also follows this same tried-and-true formula and is bound to be popular with fans.\nA re-imagining of the classic spiritual, "John the Revelator," might be the best track on the album. It boasts a very danceable, aggressive beat, paired with David Gahan's rhythmic vocals that are at least quasi-soulful. But the melody itself is angry, and only seems to increase in intensity as the track progresses. Where this track is a radical departure -- both from the original song, and Depeche Mode's repertoire -- is the angry accusations made by the lyrics. "John the Revelator" is portrayed as a "smooth operator" pushing a "book of lies." It's sure to resonate with many Depeche Mode fans, offend the religious right and leave everybody in between wondering why any of this matters.\nIf Playing the Angel as a whole has one weakness, it's the consistently gloomy mood. The happiest-sounding track is the radio single, "Precious," which isn't exactly a ray of sunshine, it's more like a rainy day on an album otherwise filled with perpetual darkness.\nNot that all the tracks are great, either. "Macro," one of the two songs sung by Gore, just seems like filler. However, to Gore's credit, the other track he sings on, "Damaged People," though easy to overlook for many, is compositionally far more complex than anything else on the record.\nAlthough you won't want to listen to it on repeat all day, Playing the Angel will still make a great contribution to your music library. Mode fans: buy it now.
(10/27/05 4:00am)
It should've been obvious that "Danny the Dog" was doomed to fail in the American box office as soon as Jet Li was cast in the role of the title character. Most of the time, the only compelling reason to watch any of his movies is for the fight scenes. The crappy American name, "Unleashed," couldn't have helped, either. They did a great job hiding a good movie.\n"Unleashed" is the story of Danny (Li), a man who is quite literally a British mobster's attack dog: when his collar is on, Danny quietly follows his master around, but when the collar comes off, he brutally attacks anyone his master orders him to. But when his master (Bob Hoskins) is the target of a violent mob hit, nearly killing Danny, he seeks refuge in a warehouse full of pianos.\nHere he meets Sam (Morgan Freeman), a blind piano tuner who takes Danny home like an abused, stray puppy. Living with Sam and his stepdaughter, Victoria (Kerry Condon), Danny slowly comes to terms with the world, and his rightful place in humanity.\nScreenwriter Luc Besson dumped gallons of optimism into this film's mentor character, and Freeman faithfully conveys every ounce of it. Li is also compelling, both as a savage in his fight scenes and as a lost puppy in his dramatic scenes.\nIronically, this film's weakest link is one or two of its fight sequences. They are so over-the-top, they almost look like what would happen if David Fincher directed a Jackie Chan movie. Don't let the "unrated" tag fool you either. The fight scenes in this edition are no more intense than the theatrical cut. This is a less-Americanized cut of the film, which focuses slightly more on the characters and the story. It also drops the RZA track at the end credits in favor of a beautifully melancholic Massive Attack track called "Aftersun."\nThere are a few bonus features on the disc, but most of the time, they tell you what you already knew after just one viewing of the movie.\nAs a whole, the film is not perfect, but with the brilliantly feeble marketing this movie had, it might just be better than you expected.
(10/27/05 2:07am)
It should've been obvious that "Danny the Dog" was doomed to fail in the American box office as soon as Jet Li was cast in the role of the title character. Most of the time, the only compelling reason to watch any of his movies is for the fight scenes. The crappy American name, "Unleashed," couldn't have helped, either. They did a great job hiding a good movie.\n"Unleashed" is the story of Danny (Li), a man who is quite literally a British mobster's attack dog: when his collar is on, Danny quietly follows his master around, but when the collar comes off, he brutally attacks anyone his master orders him to. But when his master (Bob Hoskins) is the target of a violent mob hit, nearly killing Danny, he seeks refuge in a warehouse full of pianos.\nHere he meets Sam (Morgan Freeman), a blind piano tuner who takes Danny home like an abused, stray puppy. Living with Sam and his stepdaughter, Victoria (Kerry Condon), Danny slowly comes to terms with the world, and his rightful place in humanity.\nScreenwriter Luc Besson dumped gallons of optimism into this film's mentor character, and Freeman faithfully conveys every ounce of it. Li is also compelling, both as a savage in his fight scenes and as a lost puppy in his dramatic scenes.\nIronically, this film's weakest link is one or two of its fight sequences. They are so over-the-top, they almost look like what would happen if David Fincher directed a Jackie Chan movie. Don't let the "unrated" tag fool you either. The fight scenes in this edition are no more intense than the theatrical cut. This is a less-Americanized cut of the film, which focuses slightly more on the characters and the story. It also drops the RZA track at the end credits in favor of a beautifully melancholic Massive Attack track called "Aftersun."\nThere are a few bonus features on the disc, but most of the time, they tell you what you already knew after just one viewing of the movie.\nAs a whole, the film is not perfect, but with the brilliantly feeble marketing this movie had, it might just be better than you expected.
(10/27/05 1:44am)
Playing the Angel begins with a loud, warbling, distorted noise that will make your neighbors wonder why they hear a bomb raid siren. It's sounding the alarm that Depeche Mode is back, and they're leading a 52-minute assault on good moods everywhere. The new album is much edgier, angstier and more aggressive than its sleepy, ironically-titled predecessor, Exciter. But does a little extra energy make a better album? You're damn right it does.\nSongwriter Martin Gore turns in his strongest set of songs in years. This album is destined to produce new favorites that rank among hits like "Policy of Truth" and "Enjoy the Silence," from 1991's Violator.\nThe first song, "Pain That I'm Used To" immediately dives into the classic Depeche Mode sound: moody fits of insecurity and depression you can dance to. It starts with something simple but catchy -- the bassline in this case -- but it only stays simple long enough to pull you in. Once the groove has you, it creeps up and down the scale in a minor key, taking your mood along for the ride. "Suffer Well" also follows this same tried-and-true formula and is bound to be popular with fans.\nA re-imagining of the classic spiritual, "John the Revelator," might be the best track on the album. It boasts a very danceable, aggressive beat, paired with David Gahan's rhythmic vocals that are at least quasi-soulful. But the melody itself is angry, and only seems to increase in intensity as the track progresses. Where this track is a radical departure -- both from the original song, and Depeche Mode's repertoire -- is the angry accusations made by the lyrics. "John the Revelator" is portrayed as a "smooth operator" pushing a "book of lies." It's sure to resonate with many Depeche Mode fans, offend the religious right and leave everybody in between wondering why any of this matters.\nIf Playing the Angel as a whole has one weakness, it's the consistently gloomy mood. The happiest-sounding track is the radio single, "Precious," which isn't exactly a ray of sunshine, it's more like a rainy day on an album otherwise filled with perpetual darkness.\nNot that all the tracks are great, either. "Macro," one of the two songs sung by Gore, just seems like filler. However, to Gore's credit, the other track he sings on, "Damaged People," though easy to overlook for many, is compositionally far more complex than anything else on the record.\nAlthough you won't want to listen to it on repeat all day, Playing the Angel will still make a great contribution to your music library. Mode fans: buy it now.
(08/04/05 1:05am)
Last week, U.S. News & World Report published an exclusive article with details of the Pentagon's new plan for the War On Terrorism. As I read it, I couldn't help but get flashbacks to David Rees' Internet comic strip, "Get Your War On."\n"Oh my God, this War On Terrorism is gonna rule! I can't wait until the war is over and there's no more terrorism," one office worker says.\n"I know," his coworker retorts. "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs any more? It'll be just like that!"\nWhen Rees wrote those words almost four years ago, he pointed out something important: we can win wars against countries -- the places where people live -- but we can't win a war against ideologies or practices -- the things people do.\nTo the Pentagon's credit, the new strategy fixes a couple gaping holes in the War On Terrorism.\nUnder the plan, they will establish a system to measure their progress against terrorism twice yearly. After all, you need some sort of success rate to get funding from the government. Why shouldn't the multi-billion dollar War On Terrorism get the same scrutiny as the K-12 schools that lose funding because they couldn't live up to the standards of the "No Child Left Behind Act?"\nOf course, we can't measure progress against an enemy without knowing what that enemy is: "Extremist Sunni and Shia movements that exploit Islam for political ends."\nRemember, there's a big difference between a Christian extremists in America and an Islamic extremist. America's idea of "Extreme Christianity" entails extreme sports like bungee jumping while listening to bands like the Newsboys at Festival Con Dios.\nTo attack radical Islam around the world, the Pentagon finally acknowledges that America cannot lead this fight alone. After all, there are plenty of extremists out there who aren't interested in targeting us.\nWhat the Pentagon intends to do, then, is equip other nations to lead their own battle against their own terrorists, by attacking eight "pressure points" that any terrorist cell needs.\nAdditionally, the U.S. will turn more to the State Department for ways to help fight the ideological appeal of extremism, such as humanitarian aid provided by the military. This strategy helped turn the tide of Asian public opinion of America in the wake of the tsunami.\nNot that humanitarian aid would have helped to build hundreds of thousands of apartment units needed in Algeria 10 years ago, amid a housing shortage that is partially responsible for a dramatic uprising in Islamic extremism in that country.\nYou should look up the article in the Aug. 1 edition of U.S. News in the library. Many of the details of the plan sound like an improvement over status quo, but there is still one glaring problem: we can't wage war on the things people do. The only success we have in that arena is slavery, but look at prohibition, or the War On Drugs. People do these things because they have a choice, and no war can take that away from anyone.
(07/28/05 4:09am)
I wish that people immediately thought about sex when they heard my name, but I guess I'm not as lucky as John Roberts. When you're the man who has the power to potentially vote against Roe v. Wade, you're going to put sex on a lot of people's minds.\nRoberts is also more handsome than I am.\nWe all know that adding conservative judges to the court is the first step toward overturning Roe v. Wade. It's been a popular topic with the sex-obsessed religious right for years.\nThe problem with the current dialogue about Roberts and abortion, however, is that it is as generic as a script to a bad porn flick: A liberal activist says he's against civil rights, and would vote to overturn the case that legalized abortion; then a conservative says he's a good man; and then they get it on.\nWe'd be using the same script for any nomination Bush would have made to the Supreme Court. However, for the most part, many of the claims made about Roberts are unfounded.\nMoveOn.org is already mobilizing against Roberts, partially because he wrote in 1990 that Roe v. Wade should be overruled. However, an article in the July 23 Economist points out that Roberts wrote this while he was working as an advocate, not as a judge. He was paid by a client to argue against Roe v. Wade, and what Roberts wrote does not necessarily reflect his opinion.\nIn the meantime, it is the Senate's job to figure out just what Roberts' opinions are. They've requested thousands of pages of records from Roberts' career, and the right thing is for everyone in the Senate to examine them.\nIf the Democrats do not approve of Roberts, there is no way they would win out in a party-line vote. The Republicans have them outnumbered. The only option the Dems have would be a filibuster, a right which the GOP is pushing to eliminate.\nThe GOP has a reputation for supporting the President's agenda in congress. Since they're the majority, they've helped Bush push a lot of things through. However, congress is supposed to be a check on the President's power. If they blindly follow Bush wherever he goes, there is no point in even having a congress.\nInstead of Dems talking about a filibuster, the right thing is for Senate Republicans to scour Roberts' records just as thoroughly as their colleagues on the other side of the aisle.\nAn appointment to the Supreme Court lasts for life, and Roberts is 50 years old now; he'll be there for decades. And let's face it: he may just make that decision that tells Americans how or how not to get it on.\nI'm not arguing whether it's the right or wrong thing to approve Roberts; I don't have any solid evidence of what his views are. What I am saying is that if Senate Republicans don't examine solid evidence as thoroughly as the Dems are surely going to, they might as well write a Constitutional amendment to accompany the flag-burning amendment: one that dissolves a useless Congress.
(07/21/05 1:00am)
When Bush denied that anyone in his administration leaked the name of a covert CIA operative to the media, it turned out not to be true. Now he has to save face, so he's enlisting the help of his friends to try to cover it up. Sounds like a soap opera to me. In fact, I think it could be a very successful soap opera. It should be called "Desperate Politicians."\nAll the ingredients are there. You have a retired diplomat with his hot, blonde, secret agent wife. There's the president who has a tendency to make bad decisions and compulsively tries to lie about them. Don't forget the liberal media, that tends to misreport facts if it can make the president look bad. All of these different characters gossip about each other all the time.\nYou just need to add half a dozen skinny women with generous cleavage, who all have affairs with scores of stressed out politicians and you have a sure-fire Emmy-winner on your hands!\nFor the last two seasons of "Desperate Politicians," Bush gave his assurance to the media that no one in his administration leaked the name of the hot blonde spy, Valerie Plame, to the press. But everything is about to change in this week's episode, when Bush must explain why one of the leaks turned out to be his right-hand man, Karl Rove!\nQuickly, Bush and his team worked out a cover story; someone else talked to Rove about it first. But now, Rove has temporary amnesia, so he can't remember who this mystery person was. However, if someone else talked to the mystery person -- a journalist, perhaps -- they should be forced to reveal this mystery person or face jail time. Brilliant!\nJust to cover all the bases, they also had their friends tell the press that the retired diplomat, Joseph Wilson, is a liar.\nBut Bush worked so long and hard to keep the team coordinated, the stress started taking its toll on him. By the end of the episode, Laura walked in on him having an affair with an intern in the oval office.\nOK, so the last part is a bit contrived. But hey, cut me some slack. Do you really think "Desperate Housewives" doesn't recycle material from old shows we haven't already seen a million times?\nGetting back to my point: The administration is making childish efforts to cover its tracks instead of accepting responsibility. If it is true that someone leaked the name of Plame before Rove and Libby did, the administration should have testified to the grand jury before the finger of blame was pointed at them. It's too late for us to trust them now.\nThe administration originally brought up Plame in their conversations with the media as an attempt to discredit Wilson. They "planted" the information. Even now, after it's blown up in their face, the administration still feels compelled to call Wilson a liar, and it only makes them look desperate. If they want to keep this up, maybe they should move to Hollywood and consider a job in television.
(07/14/05 6:37pm)
The highlight of my life as a teenage computer geek came when Chris Wilson, head of the Microsoft Internet Explorer team, told me he owed me a beer.\nDisclaimer: it was only a figure of speech -- he was not offering alcohol to a minor. Let me explain the context a little better.\nI've believed for years that the World Wide Web is the only mass medium that truly belongs to the masses. If it belonged to corporations, they wouldn't have screwed it up for us.\nWhat if 35 mm film was not always exactly 35 mm and it wouldn't always fit into your camera? This illustrates the frustrating problem with the Web as a medium: inconsistent implementation of specifications.\nVirtually every other medium has a strict set of specifications and standards. Compact discs have a specific size, and data is encoded onto them in a standardized way. If you look at CDs, film, print or other mass media, they are all implemented to rigid specifications to make sure you get the same picture, song or page, every time.\nNot so with the World Wide Web. The official specifications for the Hypertext Markup Language and Cascading Style Sheets are available to the public, but not all Web browsers implement these specs correctly. Because of this, a Web page can look radically different from one Web browser to another. Even Web designs with the cleanest HTML and CSS code can be mangled by a bad browser.\nOne of the worst browsers available today is also the most common one: Internet Explorer for Windows. Back in 1998, Microsoft had the best browser on the market, hands-down. The problem is that the Web has changed a lot in seven years, and Explorer hasn't.\nLike many Web developers, Wilson wanted to see a better implementation of HTML and CSS in Internet Explorer. Unfortunately, the list of priorities handed to him by his superiors made correct implementation impossible.\nMicrosoft had invented some proprietary features that would not work in any other browser. With later versions of HTML and CSS, Microsoft's proprietary features contradicted some parts of the official specs, making correct implementation impossible. They sold technology using these proprietary extensions to other businesses, mostly for use in their corporate intranets. Microsoft could not afford to drop these extensions -- and resulting revenue stream -- in favor of a correct implementation of HTML and CSS.\nWhen other zealous computer geeks started harassing Wilson in a mailing list I used to be on at the time, I stepped up and pointed out it's not fair to lash out at him for decisions he didn't make. Then Wilson said he owed me a beer.\nThis summer, Microsoft is set to finally release a new version of its flagship browser. Wilson has stated in a blog entry that there will be a lot of bug fixes for Explorer's implementation of HTML and CSS. If Wilson delivers, and helps finally fix the Web for all of us, I would gladly accept Internet Explorer 7 in place of that beer.
(06/30/05 5:09am)
Over the past few years, I've felt discouraged and angry at how often someone is called an America-hater. With Independence Day being next Monday, now is the perfect time to reflect on what America stands for, and furthermore, what it means to hate it.\nWhen the Dixie Chicks publicly expressed shame at coming from the same state as President George W. Bush a few years ago, conservatives immediately labeled them as America-haters. But what does it mean to hate America?\nIt's all a matter of semantics. As a word, "America" can mean a number of different things. It could be a sovereign nation located in the northern part of the western hemisphere, with its central administrative leadership centered in Washington, D.C. It could be a land where corrupt corporations and warmongering politicians reign free.\nBut traditionally, it has meant something else.\nAmerica's identity as a nation has a rich mythology of freedom from tyranny, rags-to-riches social mobility and justice for all. When we accuse someone of hating America, we usually allude to this mythic American identity.\nWho could have a problem with freedom? Social mobility? Justice? Dissenters certainly don't have problems with these things. But does anyone ever think about that before opening their mouths and calling dissenters America-haters?\nThe Dixie Chicks do not hate America. Michael Moore does not hate America. Dick Durbin doesn't hate it either. They're just disappointed that our nation's leaders do not always behave as they would in the great, mythic American vision we all want to believe in.\nAnyone can see there is a big difference between hating the virtues that America traditionally stands for and disagreeing with the decisions made by those in charge. What discourages me is how many people stubbornly choose not to see it.\nOur nation was founded on dissent. The first American patriots were those who dissented against the rule of the British Empire. Today's dissenters love the mythic vision of America so much, they actively participate in its heritage.\nThe people who hate America are terrorists. Radical Islamic fundamentalists believe nobody should be free to do anything forbidden by their rigid interpretation of the Quran. There is no gray area, no room for mistakes and no excuses. Their reaction toward anyone who does not live up to their standards is one of self-righteous anger.\nMake no mistake, these fundamentalists hate the concept of giving people the freedom to make their own mistakes. Of course, they have plenty of reasons to be angry at America's foreign policy, too. But the point is, if their own brothers and sisters started living with the same morals we associate with freedom, these fundamentalists would hate them. If our ideals were forced upon them, they would hate those very ideals.\nThat's what it means to hate America.\nWith Independence Day coming up, don't abuse these words. To silence dissenters is to deprive them of their freedom, and that, dear reader, is un-American.\nGod bless America.
(06/27/05 6:27pm)
Ten of IU's finest students and faculty members were honored for their extraordinary work in the classroom, campus groups and achievements during the Spring Recognition Banquet in April.\n"This occasion has always seemed to me one of the best illustrations of how a university works, because it gives the faculty an opportunity to acknowledge, and perhaps more crucially to say thank you to several outstanding seniors," said IU-Bloomington Chancellor Ken Gros Louis at the event.\nThe ceremony awarded five students the Elvis J. Stahr Award for earning excellent academic marks while also serving the campus as leaders in extracurricular student activities. Also recognized were five faculty members who won the Student Choice Award for Outstanding Faculty.\nWinners of the Elvis J. Stahr award were nominated by faculty members and selected by committee.\n"It was a really well-done ceremony," said alumnus Kieran Farr, one of the five winners. "It was really cool, because they took quotations from the people who nominated the winners."\nFarr, whose degree is in business marketing and telecommunications with a minor in French, is the founder of IU Student Television, and served as an IU Student Association senator. Gros Louis said in his speech that one of Farr's professors said, "Kieran is not just an excellent student and moral individual. Rather, Kieran is of the caliber I seek in my colleagues."\nAlso recognized at the event were alumni Sarah King, D'Andre May, Matt Mindrum and Scott Shackelford.\nKing, whose degree is in journalism and political science, was president of the Panhellenic Association, where she encouraged women in the Greek system to avoid fraternity parties and worked to see existing alcohol policies enforced, according to the chancellor's Web site.\nMay, an information systems and business management major, has led many student organizations, including the IUSAA and Board of Aeons, as well as acted as a chairperson of the Student Athletic Board.\nMindrum, whose degree is in vocal performance with a minor in business, has performed in eight operas in the past four years, and has also served as the customer relations manager at the IU Auditorium.\nShackelford majored in economics and political science, and minored in Spanish, international studies and psychology. He has served a wide variety of roles on campus, including a justice on the IUSA Supreme Court, writer for the Indiana Daily Student, president of Blue Key and director of community service at the Area 10 Agency on Aging.\nThe award is named for Elvis J. Stahr, the 12th president of IU, according to a press release issued by the IU Alumni Association. Stahr's presidency saw the formation of the joint IU-Purdue University, IU Northwest and the School of Library and Information Science, according to the IU Web site.\nAdditionally, the Student Choice for Outstanding Faculty award was bestowed upon five faculty members. They are: Phil Carspecken, professor of counseling and educational psychology; Mehmet Dalkilic, assistant professor of informatics; Zaineb Istrabadi, visiting lecturer in the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures; Michael Molenda, associate professor of education; and Irene Vlachos-Weber, lecturer in psychology.\nJason Russ, vice president of University relations for IUSAA, estimates about 675 votes were cast this year, the majority of them online. Much of the voting occurred at the close of academic advisement appointments, when students were asked if they wanted to participate. \n"Voting online only takes a minute," Russ said.
(06/23/05 1:17am)
I know I'm in love with someone when everything I see reminds me of that one special person. And if that's how affections work, it looks to me that a lot of people are in love with Adolf Hitler. Everything seems to remind someone of Germany's mass-murdering totalitarian dictator.\nMost of the time, it's President George W. Bush, his administration or the Republican party that draws all the Hitler comparisons. In issues related to the War on Terror, a lot of authority has been centralized, so the president can make decisions with less opposition.\nOn C-SPAN last week, I saw a witness at the Downing St. memo hearing testify that Bush said, in a TV interview he gave as the Governor of Texas, that if he could overthrow Saddam Hussein, it would give him the political capital to reshape our entire nation. I'm surprised the speaker didn't draw a comparison between this interview and "Mein Kampf."\nBut the GOP are not the only folks being compared to Hitler. Warren Jeffs, leader of a polygamy group, and Walt Hanline, a school district superintendent in Modesto, Calif., have both been compared to the genocidal German dictator. Both of these men have tight control over those under their authority and allegedly punish anyone who goes against their wishes.\nUnfortunately, the rhetoric of calling someone Hitler-like can start a debate over semantics. Some think of Hitler as someone who murdered six million Jews, but others think of him as the architect of a totalitarian government. It's as if there was more than one Hitler and calling someone Hitler-like leads to a disagreement over which Hitler is being talked about.\nIf we keep talking about Hitler in such childish, simplistic terms, we can find something Hitler-like in everyone. One of my friends used to have this cat that demanded territory and if you didn't give it your space, it attacked you. If you tried to appease it, as Neville Chamberlain tried to appease Hitler, the cat just demanded more. My friend has the scars to prove it!\nSaying that someone has something in common with Hitler doesn't really prove anything because there's probably a little of Hitler in all of us. With so many evil deeds, there's a whole lotta Hitler to go around. It's not what he did, but the way we keep talking about him that proves it.\nHas your girlfriend ever tried to punish you for disagreeing with her opinion? She's a little Hitler-like! Not very Hitler-like, mind you; only a little bit. But if you exert Hitler-like domination over the TV for every game of basketball or football, you have to admit the scales are even.\nIn the case of Bush and his administration, it's not fair to call them Hitler-like unless they really are a totalitarian regime, posing a threat to the constitution of the United States. If it can be proved that they do pose this threat, stop whining about it and do something productive, like, I don't know, initiate impeachment hearings!
(06/16/05 12:51am)
Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean told the press last week that the Republicans are a white Christian party. Thank you, Captain Obvious!\nNaturally, everyone is jumping on the Dean-bashing bandwagon. The seats are still warm from last time. Dems are saying that Dean's comments don't represent them, and Republicans are pointing the spotlight on both of its prominent members who are not both white and Christian. They've got a couple Jewish guys and some blacks, apparently. Not that you'd be able to spot them at an all-Republican ethnic diversity parade anyway.\nBash Dean all you want, but when you step back and look at it, has he really said something that isn't true?\nIt feels like only a few weeks ago, when I saw Ned Flanders say in an episode of The Simpsons that Christians and Catholics should "unite to fight against (their) common enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells!"\nWhat a coincidence! Those happen to be common enemies for the Republicans, too! In fact, that platform got a lot of Republicans elected to various political offices only nine months ago!\nI can't imagine that anyone out there didn't already know the GOP was a white, Christian party. But, just in case there were a few who didn't know, thank God for people like Howard Dean, who bring you yesterday's news today!\nOne news report quoted a Democrat as saying that Howard Dean, while some times flamboyant, is still important for the party because he is a "lightning rod." Let me translate that from political gibberish: It means Dean is willing to say what those who'd vote for him are already saying. He may be only nine months late, but at least he isn't plagued by the cowardice that prevents the other Dems from speaking their constituents' minds.\nUnfortunately for the entire American left wing, the fact that he's aired these sentiments is not productive. Jon Stewart said it best Monday night, in a mock-whisper as if in response to Dean: "Psssst. You're talking in a white Christian nation. They can hear you."\nAnd Stewart is right. In fact, we are more of a white Christian nation than we were five years ago. Public opinion polls on gay marriage in 2004 leaned more to the right than they did merely two years earlier. Everything from public opinion polls to election results shows that liberalism in America has become a minority.\nTalk about being screwed, too: liberals have little influence because they don't speak their minds. But if they do speak their minds, they tend to piss people off, so no one listens.\nNormally, I would suggest what could be done. I don't like people who simply point their finger at something and say, "that's not right," and then not do anything to fix it. But let's face it: the American left is caught in a catch-22. The only thing we can do is wait for the tide to turn.
(06/06/05 12:15am)
Freshmen coming to IU this fall will be the first to arrive after a new federal recommendation that they be vaccinated for meningococcal meningitis.\nIn January, a new vaccine for the disease, Menactra, was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of patients 11 to 55 years old. Following this approval, the Centers for Disease Control recommended that all college freshmen living in dorms receive the new vaccine, according to a report by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.\nThe report also recommended that young adolescents, 11 and 12 years old, be immunized with the new vaccine, as well as 15-year-olds entering high school.\nMenactra is "new to the general population for now," said Anne Reese, director of Health and Wellness Education at the IU Health Center. Because the new vaccine has never been available before, freshmen arriving in the dorms this fall have not been treated with it. \nThe new vaccine is longer-lasting than the previous meningococcal meningitis vaccine, Menomune, Reese said. It is also more effective. The ACIP report says that patients treated with Menactra had more infection-fighting antibodies present after three years than those treated with Menomune.\nLast year, the IU Student Health Center administered about 440 doses of the old vaccine, according to Chief Pharmacist Cheryl Thomas. Currently, the health center has about 410 doses of the new vaccine, which Thomas expects to last through the fall semester, despite the CDC's new recommendation.\nAdditionally, there are still more doses of Menomune on hand, for patients treated at the health center who fall outside of the 11 to 55 year old.\nIn response to the new CDC recommendation, the health center is working to inform new students and their families about meningococcal meningitis. A new brochure prepared by the health center explains that meningococcal meningitis poses a threat to students living in dorms because the bacterium that causes the disease can be spread by coughing, sneezing, or sharing tableware.\nThe bacteria might also reside harmlessly in a host for months, according to the brochure. There could be a population in which 95 percent host the bacterium, but only 1 percent may became ill, suggesting an individual's overall immunity determines whether or not they contract the disease.\nThe majority of nationwide cases are in infants, whose immune systems have not yet fully developed, but the second-most common place to find these infections are in college dorms.\nAlthough the disease is rare, it is difficult to diagnose, because early symptoms are easily mistaken for a case of the common cold. By the time a diagnosis of meningitis can be made, patients often die, or survive with brain damage.\nReese estimates that there has been an average of less than one case of meningitis at the health center per year for the past decade. \n"Because the CDC has strengthened its recommendation, there is more interest"
(06/02/05 12:04am)
MTV has always been a perfect scapegoat for encouraging political apathy in America's youth. When Nine Inch Nails signed on to play "The Hand that Feeds" in front of a photo of President Bush at the MTV Movie Awards, the network seized a perfect opportunity to further disappoint its critics by asking the band to ditch the photo.\nAfter the controversy exploded, a network representative told the Associated Press MTV was "uncomfortable with their performance being built around a partisan political statement."\nWhat could MTV be afraid of? Nine Inch Nails auteur Trent Reznor said at www.nin.com that it would be "an unmolested, straightforward image of George W. Bush." They only want to sing their opinion, "What if this whole crusade is a charade / And behind it all there's a price to be paid / For the blood on which we dine / Justified in the name of the holy and the divine." That's just Reznor's way of asking Bush for a hug, right?\nI suppose it's still possible to "molest" the photo on stage. NIN guitarist Aaron North is reportedly about as controllable as the Tazmanian Devil. There wouldn't be anything to stop him from, let's imagine, gargling a swig of 151 proof rum, spitting it all over the photo and lighting it on fire. Hey, that sounds fun! Maybe I should be a rock star.\nWhen Nine Inch Nails canceled their appearance, it led many fans to believe the band had been censored for the political statement they wanted to make. After all, any hard-working, God-fearing, patriotic network like MTV would censor anyone who disagrees with Bush's policies, right?\nThere just might be more to this issue than liberal stalwarts are willing to see.\nFirst of all, I have "All the love in the world" for Reznor, but this is a movie award show. We've firmly established that movie award shows tend to be lousy places for making political statements.\nEven worse, if the music is not associated with a movie -- you know, maybe a movie that's nominated for an award on the show -- then it was downright daft for MTV to book Nine Inch Nails in the first place. It only proves that MTV shouldn't even do movie awards.\nMTV did give NIN the option of playing their song without the Bush photo. But anyone who's heard "Head Like a Hole" knows that Reznor would "rather die than give (them) control." It is no surprise that he made the decision to cancel his own appearance.\nIt's probably just as well the gig didn't happen. If they went on national television making an anti-Bush statement, Nine Inch Nails would have become the next Dixie Chicks.\nYes, liberal political protest has become cliché. This is ironic, considering there is a relative absence of popular protest music compared to other times of controversial wars. The sound of protest music is not nearly as cliché as the sound of the pop diva, or gangsta rap. So why is one cliché more popular than the other?\nPolitical protest has not been made cliché by our musicians. It has been made cliché by regular folks who turned liberalism into a bandwagon onto which they jumped just as blindly as those who supported the war. Even now, many of these liberals are blind to the fact that they are, in fact, a minority in this country.\nIt is going to take a much more intelligent approach to political discourse than singing rock songs in front of the President's photo in order to make a difference. It would be far better for Reznor to drop the angsty goth rock image and find something smart to tell TV cameras, in words regular people can identify with. Reznor is a smart man; he could be perfect for the job.
(05/19/05 12:43am)
You and I have known for years that advertising is so annoying, it rarely inspires us to buy anything. But apparently, someone let the secret out.\nAccording to the Mar. 31 issue of The Economist, the Internet has taken away the corporations' power to influence purchases, and put it into the hands of the consumers. The world might just be coming to an end.\nFord has found that 80 percent of their customers already know what car they want to buy, and for how much money, before they throw themselves at the mercy of sales representatives on the showroom floor. The customers did their homework on the Internet.\nMcDonald's chief marketing officer, Larry Light, told The Economist: "The days of mass marketing are over." If that's their attitude, it might explain why a recent batch of McDonald's TV commercials were so bland, it made me wonder if they've just given up.\nTraditional advertising is an insult to the public's intelligence. Don't get me wrong, I laughed really hard at that Toyota commercial where the guy has "adrenalitis," and because his lack of adrenaline, he doesn't even flinch when a snarling dog lunges right at his face. But Toyota must think I'm stupid if they believe laughter will make me buy a truck.\nWhat the public wants is advertising that doesn't look like advertising. They want to feel as though they've been informed about their \npurchases.\nConsider, for example, the way Amazon.com first hooked me up with Thievery Corporation. It's a method called behavioral targeting. The Web site noticed that I like Massive Attack, winning my nomination for "Understatement of the Year Award." Because of this, Amazon.com told me to try Thievery Corporation. I heard songs from "The Richest Man in Babylon" online. Once the music samples informed me of the fact that Thievery Corporation is mind-numbingly awesome, I made my purchase. Now this is the future of advertising!\nBut herein lies a paradox. Traditionally, advertising and content have been two separate things. Furthermore, content is only affordable because it has been paid for largely by advertising. However, this new trend of "informing purchases" only seems to work when the content and advertising are both the same thing. What could this mean for the future of mass media?\nIf analysts agree that traditional ads are ineffective, why should advertisers keep paying for them? It causes one to wonder if there is a "media bubble" about to burst.\nBut The Economist seems to think this won't happen any time soon. Companies are predicted to increase their advertising spending again this year, despite growing skepticism that traditional advertising doesn't work.\nInstead of a bubble burst, I see TV starting to imitate the "informative" nature of the Internet. I see the return of the infomercial, and this time, it's evolved some new enhancements for survival in today's world.\nOne kind of new infomercial is the typical 30 second pharmaceutical spot. It tells you the indications for use, list of side-effects, and tells you to ask your doctor. But "ask your doctor" is the ad's secret hypnotic message that's supposed to make viewers run to their doctor and demand the pills from the ad -- after all, they already feel informed about what the pill does.\nAn even more dangerous cousin of this infomercial is something both President Bush and Michael Moore have done: published skewed, biased presentations of facts in order to sell ideology. Whether it's through the use of fake TV news pieces mailed to local stations, a "town hall" meeting with a screened audience or a "satiric documentary," all these things are designed to make us feel informed.\nDon't let them fool you. They're not informing you. They're trying to sell you something.
(03/29/05 4:20am)
Last time I went home to Orange County, Calif., I said something that stunned my friends: "I'm probably the only person in Indiana with an O.C. T-shirt who's actually from O.C."\n"What, you say?" they asked. "You mean people actually wear O.C. T-shirts in Indiana?"\nYes, they do. A big thank you goes to the fashion Nazis at Hollister, which once put its Orange County T-shirts on mannequins in front of its store at College Mall. Big thanks also go out to everyone else who jumped on the bandwagon.\nNot since the hype for the invasion of Iraq have I seen something make suckers out of so many people. They think O.C. is cool, but believe me, donning the T-shirt is like branding a symbol of shame onto your chest.\nSince most of y'all have never been to the Golden State, let me explain something: Orange County is not very popular with those who actually live near it. I generally try to be pretty quiet about where I grew up when I meet people from other parts of California. You just don't want to talk about being from behind the Orange curtain.\nYou'd think it's obvious something is wrong with a place when the two most famous people to ever come from it are Gwen Stefani and Richard Nixon.\nBut if that doesn't convince you, let me paint you a clearer picture. People from Orange County are infamous for being rude and inconsiderate. All you have to do is book a flight to John Wayne Airport on a Sunday night. This is when all the natives are flying back home so they can go to work the next day.\nMy favorite story involves a young child who sat behind me once and watched the baggage handlers. The kid couldn't have been more than 12 years old. But even at that tender age, he said, "Look at them. You see that? That's what happens when you don't go to college."\nAnd apparently, it's just too much to ask an O.C. native to carry less than three items on the plane and store one of them under the seat in front of them. On my last flight home, the ticket-takers made special announcement at the gate, before the passengers even board the plane, asking them to leave enough space for everybody's carry-on items in the overhead bins. I've only heard this announcement on the connecting flight to Orange County.\nThe image we see on the Fox TV show "The O.C." fools people into thinking O.C. is cool enough to put on a T-shirt and display on our torsos. But it's foolish to brand yourself with something because it's on a TV show -- especially when it's Orange County.\nIt's like that urban legend of the guy who wanted a tattoo that said, "brave warrior," in Japanese, but the cruel tattoo artist instead wrote "I have a small penis." The poor guy had no idea until he saw a group of Japanese people laughing and making crude gestures at him.\nNow, I know what you're thinking: "Wait, Dan said at the beginning of his column that he wears an O.C. T-shirt. Did anyone else catch that? Is Dan a hypocrite?"\nYou have a sharp eye. Go get yourself a cookie.\nMy mom got me an O.C. shirt for Christmas as a joke. I can wear it out here because most people here still think Orange County is cool. But when I'm at home, I avoid sporting the shirt in public. I only wear it when I'm going to be around people I know I can trust. Having an O.C. shirt is my dirty little secret. Don't tell anyone, OK?