I was watching an episode of Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip instead of working on my Econ thesis, and I couldn't help but remember how I almost died (or received serious injury) on Interstate 91 this past summer.
I was coming back from watching The Dark Knight (for the third time! but that is another story lol) at the Enfield Mall Cinemas. Rolling with me was Steve, Jerry, Marlyn, and Justin. We were all riding in Justin's (his dads lol) ill fire red Mustang convertible. It was a pretty small car and I was packed into the back with Marlyn and Jerry. I can't exactly remember but I think we were all squeezed so tight that we didn't really bother with seatbelts. All I know is that on the way back home we were driving pretty fast and passing a lot of cars. Halfway home we ended up on the left (passing) lane, stuck behind a dark green van that must have been going 45 MPH. Well Justin started tailgating the van pretty badly and Jerry started vocally telling Justin to chill out. Next thing you know the green van switches lanes so Justin starts to speed up. Except, it turns out there was a car directly ahead of the green van which was blocked from our view. Justin had to veer into the shoulder lane to avoid hitting it. After that Jerry and Justin got into an argument over the lack of safe driving going on in the Mustang lol. I remember Marlyn whispering to me that she thought she thought we were all about to die.
Through all this time Steve and I had stayed relatively cool. We all just laughed off Justin's close call with car calamity. I remember thinking what is the big deal, there is a big difference between going to the edge of crashing a car to actually crossing that edge. Plus, Justin is a far better driver than I will ever be so who am I to attack his tactics. However, and now this goes back to the beginning of the story, while I was procrastinating and watching Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip on Hulu, every commercial break turned out to be a 30 second ad from the National Ad Council. This particular set of ads featured reckless car drivers up front and one person in the back who is silently worried, but not saying anything. Then all of the sudden a slick TV spokesperson pops up and tells everyone (in the style of winning a prize on the price is right) how great a deal they are getting by winning the all new, all great "Slow Down" which will prevent them from dying. The ad ends with the message that there is no TV announcer to save you and that you have to say something to stave off death from reckless drivers.
Reflecting on these ads I started to think about that incident last summer and how I probably should have acted differently. I should have said something which did not incite anger but instead was a constructive criticism of Justin's driving at that one moment. Tailgating is never a good idea.
Now reflecting on me changing my mind, I've realized that the National Ad Council's public service advertisements have actually affected my own thoughts and ideas. This scares me, I don't really know why, but it does. I consider myself a savy consumer of advertisments, and most of the time I discard the messages (I percieve are) in advertisements. But not this one. Being polite is good, but it's a bad idea to die out of politness, lol. "Nandhish, well he was a good one, he was polite till the end. Politeness ended him." LOOOOL I am dumb. peace
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009
2009 NBA Dunk Contest
when: Saturday Feb 14th. 2009, 8-11 pm
Who:
Dwight Howard (2008 Champion, 2007 3rd place) - Orlando Magic
Nate Robinson (2006 Champion, 2008 Runner Up) - New York Knicks
J.R. Smith (2005 3rd place) - Denver Nuggets
Rudy Fernandez (Fan Vote Winner) - Portland Trailblazers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay, for lame-0s like me who are doing nothing on Valentines day, we can look forward to the NBA dunk contest, I probably am more than most normal people. This years dunk contest has the potential to be pretty great, but it most probably wont be.
I can lay the blame square on two things: the infusion of props and gimmicks in the dunk contest in the last few years, and Rudy Fernandez.
Rudy Fernandez still makes me angry. Judging from YouTube videos he is extremely nonathletic, he barely gets his head to the net when he goes up for a dunk. He is only in the dunk contest because he won the fan vote. Of the three NBA players who were contestants in the fan vote contest, he was the least deserving candidate. Joe Alexander was clearly the best dunker out of the 3, he even hit his head on the rim in a video to try and drum up support. However, because europeans and other global NBA fans blindly went with the foriegn guy, we are stuck with sucky Fernadez.
Howard, even though he has the potential to be a great dunker, even though he sometimes relies on the gimmick. His last two dunk contests have been half gimmick, half awesome. Overall, he is a very good contestant.
JR Smith is a straight up balling contestant. The two televised dunk contests he has previousley participate in showed him as a creative, ungimmicky, high jumping dunk powerhouse. He was the first ever to do a behind the back dunk in an NBA dunk contest (2005) and he even tried to do a 360 behind the back in the 2004 Mcdonalds dunk contest. However, this guy is like 6'6" and he isnt the super highest jumping guy ever so I really don't know if he has what it takes to d something truly insane in the dunk contest, we will see.
Nate Robinson is incredibly short, but he doesnt really rely on gimmicks either. In the two dunk contest he has been in, he has really brought it. He tried to do dunk I never thought a short person would ever do. He missed an amazing off the back board 2 foot take off east bay in the 2006 contest. In addition, there is a YouTube video floating around of him doing a 2 foot take off east bay 180 from out out of bounds (although there is disagreement on whether the rim is 10 feet).
CONCLUSION:
Fernandez is almost certainly a write-off contestant in this years contest.
We can only hope that Robinson and Smith don't feel pressured by Howard's past success to do very gimmicky, overly showey dunks.
Here is hoping that this contest is awesome.
Who:
Dwight Howard (2008 Champion, 2007 3rd place) - Orlando Magic
Nate Robinson (2006 Champion, 2008 Runner Up) - New York Knicks
J.R. Smith (2005 3rd place) - Denver Nuggets
Rudy Fernandez (Fan Vote Winner) - Portland Trailblazers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay, for lame-0s like me who are doing nothing on Valentines day, we can look forward to the NBA dunk contest, I probably am more than most normal people. This years dunk contest has the potential to be pretty great, but it most probably wont be.
I can lay the blame square on two things: the infusion of props and gimmicks in the dunk contest in the last few years, and Rudy Fernandez.
Rudy Fernandez still makes me angry. Judging from YouTube videos he is extremely nonathletic, he barely gets his head to the net when he goes up for a dunk. He is only in the dunk contest because he won the fan vote. Of the three NBA players who were contestants in the fan vote contest, he was the least deserving candidate. Joe Alexander was clearly the best dunker out of the 3, he even hit his head on the rim in a video to try and drum up support. However, because europeans and other global NBA fans blindly went with the foriegn guy, we are stuck with sucky Fernadez.
Howard, even though he has the potential to be a great dunker, even though he sometimes relies on the gimmick. His last two dunk contests have been half gimmick, half awesome. Overall, he is a very good contestant.
JR Smith is a straight up balling contestant. The two televised dunk contests he has previousley participate in showed him as a creative, ungimmicky, high jumping dunk powerhouse. He was the first ever to do a behind the back dunk in an NBA dunk contest (2005) and he even tried to do a 360 behind the back in the 2004 Mcdonalds dunk contest. However, this guy is like 6'6" and he isnt the super highest jumping guy ever so I really don't know if he has what it takes to d something truly insane in the dunk contest, we will see.
Nate Robinson is incredibly short, but he doesnt really rely on gimmicks either. In the two dunk contest he has been in, he has really brought it. He tried to do dunk I never thought a short person would ever do. He missed an amazing off the back board 2 foot take off east bay in the 2006 contest. In addition, there is a YouTube video floating around of him doing a 2 foot take off east bay 180 from out out of bounds (although there is disagreement on whether the rim is 10 feet).
CONCLUSION:
Fernandez is almost certainly a write-off contestant in this years contest.
We can only hope that Robinson and Smith don't feel pressured by Howard's past success to do very gimmicky, overly showey dunks.
Here is hoping that this contest is awesome.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Alternative Spring Breaks are Lame!
Over the last few weeks, whenever I have approached the Foggy Bottom Metro here in DC, I've beden confronted with the chants, yells, and exclamations of overzealous, chirpy alternative spring breakers hitting up decent, hard working folk for money. "Alternative," meaning they are not going to be sucking jello shots off each others navels in Cancun. Instead, they'll be piously building homes for the less fortunate, cleaning up dirty parks, administering first aid, or teaching dirty little kids how to read...you get the picture. Because they have so generously decided to throw away their spring breaks and devote themselves to doing volunteer work they believe we should support their trip, because....damned if they'll spend any money on it.
Alternative spring breaks are a load of croc, they have no economic logic. If your goal is to make the world the best place it could possibly be, in the most efficient manner, you would never go on an alternative spring break. Just spending money on air fare to travel across the nation or to another country negates any benefit of your trip. Instead, you could do civic work locally, where there is no shortage of its need. In an case, it's alright to have a vacation guys and gals. People owe it to themselves to relax, unwind, and reflect. Further, I suspect, most alternative spring breaks aren't spent doing sanctimous civic construction 100% of the time. These trips are group activites, and friends probably spend their nights drinking or sight seeing. It's pretty lame to try and make yourself feel fulfilled by spending a quarter of your vacation inefficiently building a house at public sector pace, but it's even lamer to have used other people's money to do so.
Look, there are people who need help, and we should help them. But, even if this was 2005, going hundreds of miles to help rebuild homes after Hurricane Katrina for just a week is not worth it. If you want to be efficient, you have to totally dedicate yourself to that cause. You're not a carpenter or a construction worker. Building houses is not easy, it takes skilled labor. Going to New Orleans for a few days and doing some grunt work which someone else much closer to the area could do, maybe for a little money, makes no sense. You could instead become a part of, in whichever way is the most efficient, the overarching effort to rebuild New Orleans. Something like this would require taking a semester off from school, but invaluable experience would be gained, and it would be even better (and more efficient) if it somehow related to your educational and career goals.
Long story short, enjoy your one week reprieve from reading, quizzes, tests, and social drama. Don't feel like you're helping the world by putting up some vinyl siding, you're not. Be efficient, enjoy life, recharge.
Alternative spring breaks are a load of croc, they have no economic logic. If your goal is to make the world the best place it could possibly be, in the most efficient manner, you would never go on an alternative spring break. Just spending money on air fare to travel across the nation or to another country negates any benefit of your trip. Instead, you could do civic work locally, where there is no shortage of its need. In an case, it's alright to have a vacation guys and gals. People owe it to themselves to relax, unwind, and reflect. Further, I suspect, most alternative spring breaks aren't spent doing sanctimous civic construction 100% of the time. These trips are group activites, and friends probably spend their nights drinking or sight seeing. It's pretty lame to try and make yourself feel fulfilled by spending a quarter of your vacation inefficiently building a house at public sector pace, but it's even lamer to have used other people's money to do so.
Look, there are people who need help, and we should help them. But, even if this was 2005, going hundreds of miles to help rebuild homes after Hurricane Katrina for just a week is not worth it. If you want to be efficient, you have to totally dedicate yourself to that cause. You're not a carpenter or a construction worker. Building houses is not easy, it takes skilled labor. Going to New Orleans for a few days and doing some grunt work which someone else much closer to the area could do, maybe for a little money, makes no sense. You could instead become a part of, in whichever way is the most efficient, the overarching effort to rebuild New Orleans. Something like this would require taking a semester off from school, but invaluable experience would be gained, and it would be even better (and more efficient) if it somehow related to your educational and career goals.
Long story short, enjoy your one week reprieve from reading, quizzes, tests, and social drama. Don't feel like you're helping the world by putting up some vinyl siding, you're not. Be efficient, enjoy life, recharge.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Fear Of A Gay Man...
So many young men (and older men, but I won't focus on them) claim to be "disgusted" or "repulsed" by the thought of homosexual acts between two males. These men are from a variety of geographic and socioeconomic backgrounds.
Personally, I think its not all bullshit, but that men should get over themselves. I can understand the male uneasiness towards homosexuality, but not its total extent and severity. When I was a child the thought of kissing another man made me squirm. Why? I'm still not sure. Maybe it was because I had never seen such an act before or that homosexuality was not at all talked about by my immediate or extended family. One reason for sure, had to be my heterosexuality. I was not wired to be attracted to the male gender. But before long, as I became a teen, the idea of homosexual sex stopped bothering me at all. I accepted it as readily as I accepted the idea of heterosexual sex. I reasoned that the two acts were really not so different mechanically, even if they were different in application.
This is where me and many males seem to differ. While my uneasiness with homosexuality was purely based on my own heterosexuality, there seems to be an additional conditioning element with many young men. They have never let go of that uneasiness with homosexuality and they have added on top of that the idea that homosexual behavior is "unnatural," "perverse," and "disgusting."
Why? Are these men prudes? Surely not. Although most of the men I know are pretty sexually inexperienced, presented with all sorts of kinky suggestions from any attractive women I'm sure they would jump at the chance (at least in private).
What does that mean? I'm not completely sure. Many who I have talked to, when asked to actually expand upon their repulsion of homosexuality, are unable to do so in any thoughtful or articulate manner. Their usual and banal response (if i may articulate it for them) is only to reiterate that the thought of two men having sex makes them physically and mentally shudder and that gay sex is not natural because only a man and a women can have a child.
I believe that, in truth, their communities are the author of their own beliefs. They believe what they are supposed to believe. They live (or grew up) in closed off societies, where gay people are not openly out in public. They belong to a boys club where "manliness" is put on a pedestal and any signs of homosexuality (synonymous with weakness) is totally frowned upon.
How did these communities form these beliefs? The source was probably fear. A heterosexual man's fear of a gay man coming onto him or his offspring. Fear of the stories they had heard of the stereotypically flamboyant gay man. Fear of anything different than the current order. Fear of the gay man borne out of a mix of ignorance and conservatism. Because gay people are traditionally so few in number relative to straight people, it is easy to see how straight men (who like the way things are) would single them out as a potentially subversive element to the local order.
However, those who fear the gay man. You must change your ways, you cannot keep your beliefs! Just as many racists from the 1950s and 1960s were not able to hold onto their own racism or pass it on to their children, you and your seed will be forced to change because that is the power of the tide! As gay people unify to increase their strength and rallying power, they cannot be ignored for much longer.
Don't fear gay people! Sure they make life more complicated, less uniform. But, they are just like us in the most important of ways. They too can be some of the most intelligent of human beings. And they too can be some of the most petty, ignorant, and callous. They too can love and care and grow and raise. They may be sexually different, but tis "no worse, than what's goin on in your parents' bedrooms." We must accept them just as they in turn, accept us.
Basically, accept. Don't be a bitch. Man up, you heterosexual sissies.
Personally, I think its not all bullshit, but that men should get over themselves. I can understand the male uneasiness towards homosexuality, but not its total extent and severity. When I was a child the thought of kissing another man made me squirm. Why? I'm still not sure. Maybe it was because I had never seen such an act before or that homosexuality was not at all talked about by my immediate or extended family. One reason for sure, had to be my heterosexuality. I was not wired to be attracted to the male gender. But before long, as I became a teen, the idea of homosexual sex stopped bothering me at all. I accepted it as readily as I accepted the idea of heterosexual sex. I reasoned that the two acts were really not so different mechanically, even if they were different in application.
This is where me and many males seem to differ. While my uneasiness with homosexuality was purely based on my own heterosexuality, there seems to be an additional conditioning element with many young men. They have never let go of that uneasiness with homosexuality and they have added on top of that the idea that homosexual behavior is "unnatural," "perverse," and "disgusting."
Why? Are these men prudes? Surely not. Although most of the men I know are pretty sexually inexperienced, presented with all sorts of kinky suggestions from any attractive women I'm sure they would jump at the chance (at least in private).
What does that mean? I'm not completely sure. Many who I have talked to, when asked to actually expand upon their repulsion of homosexuality, are unable to do so in any thoughtful or articulate manner. Their usual and banal response (if i may articulate it for them) is only to reiterate that the thought of two men having sex makes them physically and mentally shudder and that gay sex is not natural because only a man and a women can have a child.
I believe that, in truth, their communities are the author of their own beliefs. They believe what they are supposed to believe. They live (or grew up) in closed off societies, where gay people are not openly out in public. They belong to a boys club where "manliness" is put on a pedestal and any signs of homosexuality (synonymous with weakness) is totally frowned upon.
How did these communities form these beliefs? The source was probably fear. A heterosexual man's fear of a gay man coming onto him or his offspring. Fear of the stories they had heard of the stereotypically flamboyant gay man. Fear of anything different than the current order. Fear of the gay man borne out of a mix of ignorance and conservatism. Because gay people are traditionally so few in number relative to straight people, it is easy to see how straight men (who like the way things are) would single them out as a potentially subversive element to the local order.
However, those who fear the gay man. You must change your ways, you cannot keep your beliefs! Just as many racists from the 1950s and 1960s were not able to hold onto their own racism or pass it on to their children, you and your seed will be forced to change because that is the power of the tide! As gay people unify to increase their strength and rallying power, they cannot be ignored for much longer.
Don't fear gay people! Sure they make life more complicated, less uniform. But, they are just like us in the most important of ways. They too can be some of the most intelligent of human beings. And they too can be some of the most petty, ignorant, and callous. They too can love and care and grow and raise. They may be sexually different, but tis "no worse, than what's goin on in your parents' bedrooms." We must accept them just as they in turn, accept us.
Basically, accept. Don't be a bitch. Man up, you heterosexual sissies.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Saigon: Album Was It's Own Prophecy?
Saigon the rapper is most famous for acting as a fictionalized version of himself in the television show Entourage. But in the rap world he has probably had the most REAL buzz of any rapper in the last 3 years (although that buzz has died down considerably now).
Anyways, Saigon has released a new song called "trans-atlantic slave deal." The song details the trials and tribulations of attempting to release his album "The Greatest Story Never Told" on Atlantic Records before he was dropped from the label in May 2008. The song is in the format of a radio interview with the verses consisting of Saigon's answers to the questions posed. This is especially hilarious to me because I once heard a Hot 93.7 interview with Saigon (probably one of a hundred he has done) that was very similar to the format of this song (except without the answers being rapped).
No one can deny that Saigon has talent as a rapper, he is probably better than most who release records these days. However, his claims in this song seem pretty dubious. All of his forays into making "conscious music" like he claims his album is all about have been overly simple and pretty disastrous (see "Pain in My Life" and "Believe It"). Joe Budden just released a random diss track aimed at Saigon called "Letter to Saigon" where he brings up a lot of good points. Sidebar: Jay-Z on "Come On Baby" (Saigon's feature track) did a pretty classic verse. Saigon was not bad either...but Jay-Z made that song...actually they complemented each other pretty well but that song with just Saigon on it is not nearly on the same level. Also, Just Blaze (the producer) KILLED THAT TRACK.
http://www.imeem.com/people/8pppM_/music/uHOcBRWc/saigon_come_on_baby_remix_feat_swizz_beatz_jayz/
It seems to me that Saigon has hit upon a great idea. Put out a couple good mixtape tracks and just hype up your album saying its the best thing ever and then never release it and call yourself a victim of the game. You go down in history as one of the greatest rappers who never got a chance and people will always give you some modicum of respect. Saigon may even have been thinking of this plan from the start with his super ironic title "The Greatest Story Never Told" which has (will?) not (never?) be told.
Of course, Joe Budden (as far as I know) has no reason to go and diss Saigon other than to try and create some buzz for his new album. Joe Budden is a good rapper, he even makes some good existential rap but he just can't get any traction with mainstream audiences. Sucks for him. Really.
Both Saigon and Joe Budden ain't no Lupe Fiasco, so oh well for them.
Trans-Atlantic Slave Deal: http://www.xxlmag.com/online/?p=34250
Letter To Saigon: http://www.xxlmag.com/online/?p=34449
Anyways, Saigon has released a new song called "trans-atlantic slave deal." The song details the trials and tribulations of attempting to release his album "The Greatest Story Never Told" on Atlantic Records before he was dropped from the label in May 2008. The song is in the format of a radio interview with the verses consisting of Saigon's answers to the questions posed. This is especially hilarious to me because I once heard a Hot 93.7 interview with Saigon (probably one of a hundred he has done) that was very similar to the format of this song (except without the answers being rapped).
No one can deny that Saigon has talent as a rapper, he is probably better than most who release records these days. However, his claims in this song seem pretty dubious. All of his forays into making "conscious music" like he claims his album is all about have been overly simple and pretty disastrous (see "Pain in My Life" and "Believe It"). Joe Budden just released a random diss track aimed at Saigon called "Letter to Saigon" where he brings up a lot of good points. Sidebar: Jay-Z on "Come On Baby" (Saigon's feature track) did a pretty classic verse. Saigon was not bad either...but Jay-Z made that song...actually they complemented each other pretty well but that song with just Saigon on it is not nearly on the same level. Also, Just Blaze (the producer) KILLED THAT TRACK.
http://www.imeem.com/people/8pppM_/music/uHOcBRWc/saigon_come_on_baby_remix_feat_swizz_beatz_jayz/
It seems to me that Saigon has hit upon a great idea. Put out a couple good mixtape tracks and just hype up your album saying its the best thing ever and then never release it and call yourself a victim of the game. You go down in history as one of the greatest rappers who never got a chance and people will always give you some modicum of respect. Saigon may even have been thinking of this plan from the start with his super ironic title "The Greatest Story Never Told" which has (will?) not (never?) be told.
Of course, Joe Budden (as far as I know) has no reason to go and diss Saigon other than to try and create some buzz for his new album. Joe Budden is a good rapper, he even makes some good existential rap but he just can't get any traction with mainstream audiences. Sucks for him. Really.
Both Saigon and Joe Budden ain't no Lupe Fiasco, so oh well for them.
Trans-Atlantic Slave Deal: http://www.xxlmag.com/online/?p=34250
Letter To Saigon: http://www.xxlmag.com/online/?p=34449
Sunday, November 2, 2008
(Dicks and Christians) What The World Needs I Don't Know but Honey It Does Need Something Let Me Tell You So!
This post is not about anything. ilove has fizzled out for the time being, it'll be back. I still have footage lock stock and loaded. Well, not loaded...but at least locked and stocked.
I've decided that I'm not sure about the point of anything anymore. Of course, I believe, everyone comes to that conclusion at least some of the time and accepts how nothing in life has meaning and just slogs on trying to be the "best" human being they can be (at least as they see it). Actually that's not true, there are two exceptions to this scenario: dicks and Christians.
Christians believe life is about serving god and dicks believe life is all about themselves.
LOL. that was an incredible over simplification. the line between being a dick and a normal person is not that thick. people who may not think life has no meaning may decide that they then should just become a yuppie. I mean, why not?
I've decided that I'm not sure about the point of anything anymore. Of course, I believe, everyone comes to that conclusion at least some of the time and accepts how nothing in life has meaning and just slogs on trying to be the "best" human being they can be (at least as they see it). Actually that's not true, there are two exceptions to this scenario: dicks and Christians.
Christians believe life is about serving god and dicks believe life is all about themselves.
LOL. that was an incredible over simplification. the line between being a dick and a normal person is not that thick. people who may not think life has no meaning may decide that they then should just become a yuppie. I mean, why not?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)